Talk:Shin Shoryuken / Shinku Hadoken

From SmashWiki, the Super Smash Bros. wiki

Separate Final Smashes[edit]

Should we separate these two? They are two very different final smashes. Gpev96 (SHAZAM!) (talk) 11:26, 14 June 2015 (EDT)

It's going to be messy either way. The most urgent thing right now is to get the name of the FS trophy from SSBU. I've heard people saying it's something generic, like "Double Ultra Combo", which would make covering both on one page under a unified name a much preferable alternative to splitting them or having one name take precedence. Miles (talk) 11:29, 14 June 2015 (EDT)
Hopefully we luck out that the name is all inclusive, otherwise I'm not sure what the solution would be. Gpev96 (SHAZAM!) (talk) 11:31, 14 June 2015 (EDT)


At least one person seems to dislike how the slash in the page's title results in fooling the wiki into thinking it's a subpage. Is this enough of a problem to warrant naming the page differently, perhaps with a less common slash character (like ⧸ or ⁄)? Toomai Glittershine ??? The Yoshi 17:16, 14 June 2015 (EDT)

Or rename it and use {{DISPLAYTITLE:Shin Shoryuken / Shinku Hadoken}}. Amiibae signature image.pngLuke Talk::: 17:23, 14 June 2015 (EDT)
Yeah, sorry for the sudden move. It just doesn't look or feel professional having "< Shin Shoryuken" in the upper corner of the screen at all. I should have just started this topic, rather than moving it my self. But I figured it wouldnt be a problem doing so, I was apparently wrong. I would like to properly nominate we change the "/" into an "&" instead. And then do as as luke sugested when it comes to quick links.
Ixbran (talk) 17:35, 14 June 2015 (EDT)
Why can't we just separate the two Final Smashes? SeanWheeler (talk) 19:40, 14 June 2015 (EDT)
Because they are both executed the same way, the only way to trigger each one differently is based on the distance between Ryu and his opponent, that seems like a pointless reason to separate them.
Ixbran (talk) 21:55, 14 June 2015 (EDT)

Okay apparently we've had this problem before, with the Start/Pause button page, which resides at "Start-Pause button" and uses DISPLAYTITLE to look like "Start/Pause button". The catch there is that instead of there being a subpage link at the top, it looks like you were redirected from X to X. Would that be better or not? Toomai Glittershine ??? The Boss 19:42, 14 June 2015 (EDT)

I dont care what we do, so long we can get rid of the "< Shin Shoryuken" in the corner.
Ixbran (talk) 21:55, 14 June 2015 (EDT)
Eh, we can change the links in the worst case scenario. Support. Nyargleblargle (Talk) 21:59, 14 June 2015 (EDT)
I wouldn't be opposed to just naming the whole title after whichever Final Smash is the name of the trophy. Toast Wii U Logo Transparent.pngltimatum 22:07, 14 June 2015 (EDT)
The name of the trophy is "Shin Shoryuken / Shinku Hadoken", hence the problem. Toomai Glittershine ??? The Keymaster 22:11, 14 June 2015 (EDT)
FFFFFFFFF, wwwhy?! guh, nintendo ... would it be possible to do a name change to the article, and then put in the description why the title name is as is? Is it possible to make a code that disables the "< Shin Shoryuken" in the corner?
Ixbran (talk) 22:19, 14 June 2015 (EDT)

I thought it was officially named Ultra Combo Double? VinSymbol.pngVinLAURiA (talk) 01:11, 16 June 2015 (EDT)

I still don't see why we can't have separate pages. Sure, they are both executed with the Smash Ball and B Button, but they are two totally different moves. One is a giant energy ball while the other is three powerful uppercuts. The two moves has their own sections in the article. I think that would be a good start when separating them. Many fighters from Brawl had their Final Smashes changed, and we documented both Final Smashes. So to get rid of the dash, I would suggest splitting the article. So what if they are executed the same way? They are too different to share an article. I don't care if we later get a character with a randomized Final Smash. Better to separate the moves than to have a dashed article. That would be like having a "Mario/Luigi" article describing the Mario brothers. SeanWheeler (talk) 17:57, 19 June 2015 (EDT)
Late, but I have to agree with this proposal. It makes the most sense in the short term. Nyargleblargle (Talk) 22:03, 3 August 2015 (EDT)

USFIV reference[edit]

Is it really a reference to USFIV specifically? Street Fighter characters had multiple super combos in the Alpha series, as well as many of the crossovers (Marvel VS Capcom, Capcom VS SNK, Tatsunoko VS Capcom). Ryu was able to use both Shinku Hadoken and Shin Shoryuken in battle in those games. --NinjaCoachZ (talk) 20:53, 16 June 2015 (EDT)

Game crash? (1.0.8)[edit]

I remember I once tried a 9.0 Classic run with Ryu in version 1.0.8 of Smash 3DS, and when I used Shin Shoryuken on Metal Little Mac, the game crashed. Anyone know the reason? I don't know if this still happens in 1.1.0 either. 034.png DracoRexKing 22:00, 3 August 2015 (EDT)

3DS Classic is seemingly rather prone to freezing if the system is overworked. I've had it happen too many times with explosive items in the Fighting Mii Team battle, as well as once when using Mii Gunner's Full Blast. So whatever the issue is, it's not specific to this move. Zyrac (talk) 03:33, 4 August 2015 (EDT)

Rename suggestion[edit]

With the advent of new special moves having two names depending on certain circumstances (such as Egg Firing/Breegull Blaster, Gun/Gun Special, and Burning Knuckle/Crack Shoot), I noticed that every single one of those pages is only named after the first one. Except this page and Ken's equivalent. Also, having the two names be listed in the main title looks like it makes the redirect appear on top of the page. 00:45, December 3, 2019 (EST)


I am opposed to moving both this and Shippu Jinraikyaku / Shinryuken, mostly because this has been previously discussed before. However, the IP who posted the move tag does bring up an interesting point - moves that are completely different (and not just a slight upgrade/difference from the original move, like Heel Slide or Gun) should be treated the same as both Street Fighter Final Smashes, no? Aidan, the Festive Rurouni 00:43, December 3, 2019 (EST)

From the discussion above, it looks like the name was kept because of it being the name on the trophy. Thing is, the Mega Evolution final smash pages for Lucario and Charizard are named after the form instead of simply "Mega Evolution", despite the latter being the actual names on the trophies. Also, renaming some pages to accommodate this but not others sounds good on paper, but Egg Firing/Breegull Blaster is a weird gray area that ultimately it's better to stick with one system. 01:13, December 3, 2019 (EST)
Mega Evolution was separated because the two forms are different, and that SmashWiki isn't official to begin with. Aidan, the Festive Rurouni 02:54, December 3, 2019 (EST)

I support based on 2 things: 1. Like the other person said, there may or may not be a fine line between alternative special moves that are different enough and ones that aren't, and 2. That thing on the top of the page just looks terrible. 01:42, January 12, 2020 (EST)

What "thing" at the top of the page? Aidan, the Rurouni 01:47, January 12, 2020 (EST)
The redirect to Shin Shoryuken (without Shinku Hadoken) at the top of the page. Sorry for the confusion. I should have been more specific. 01:50, January 12, 2020 (EST)

Bump. Again, this and Ken's equivalent Final Smash should probably be moved for consistency with similar pages, as well as removing the link at the top of the page. 20:16, April 10, 2020 (EDT)

I support moving this article to Shin Shoryuken. Regarding the previous discussion about moving this article which occured during the age of SSB4, it would have made more sense to just split this article in two per Final Smash, seeing as how the double-move property was unique to Shin Shoryuken/Shinku Hadoken at the time. However, as mentioned by Aidan, an IP user brought up a point which is much more relevant to the current state of Smash: if we don't rename this article accordingly, we wouldn't be maintaining consistency with other double moves (see examples above). It's been established with those examples (and Ken's Final Smash) that this is a mechanic we could possibly see more of in Ultimate via DLC. Since this is the case, consistent naming of these articles, be they moves or Final Smashes, just seems to make more sense - especially if we continue writing about each move/Final Smash in separate sections of their articles anyway. Acgamer28Acgamer28SignatureHead.png 11:58, May 16, 2020 (EDT)

First of all, the IP sure did make a good point. On the other hand, moving it would seem that we're belittling Shinku Hadoken. Another thing is that, it's also removing the emphasis of Ryu's Final Smash's uniqueness. So, I'm Neutral, but slightly more to opposing it. SonDanielSonDanielSignatureHead1.pngSonDanielSignatureHead2.png (talk page) 12:56, May 16, 2020 (EDT)

But then is Egg Firing belittling Breegull Blaster? And what about Burning Knuckle and Crack Shoot? It isn't a matter of one move being "superior" or "more significant" than the other. It's just about having an easily manageable and accessible title for the article. In the earlier SSB4 discussions about this, it was mentioned that to some users the presence of "/" in the name may seem to similar to where a subpage may reside - even though I personally wouldn't have many problems with that, the issue it presents isn't necessarily invalid or trivial. And once again, if we do decide to keep this nomenclature, we'd need to change all the other special move articles to "emphasize" their other versions. The other versions of these moves aren't necessarily emphasized any less by this. Look at Burning Knuckle for example: even though it seems to be the only one of the double-move bunch to have the following format, Burning Knuckle and Crack Shoot are mentioned separately - but also immediately, so that both moves are equally emphasized. Acgamer28Acgamer28SignatureHead.png 15:33, May 16, 2020 (EDT)

I just realized that I never responded to the IP's comment about the link at the top of the page: it's not there, and there's something in place to prevent it from being there. There is a portion of code in MediaWiki:common.css, the wiki-wide cascading style sheet (CSS), that reads (albeit in a proper format):

/* Hide subpage link for non-subpages */ .page-Counter_Reflect_Barrier .subpages, .page-Super_Smash_Bros_for_Nintendo_3DS_Wii_U_♪—A_Smashing_Soundtrack— .subpages, .page-Super_Smash_Bros_for_Nintendo_3DS_Wii_U .subpages, .page-Shin_Shoryuken_Shinku_Hadoken .subpages, .page-Shippu_Jinraikyaku_Shinryuken .subpages, .page-Zelda_Sheik_disambiguation .subpages, .page-Zelda_Sheik .subpages, .page-Zelda_Sheik_SSBM .subpages, .page-Zelda_Sheik_SSBB .subpages { display: none; }

I don't know why you're seeing it, IP, but it's flat out not there at all.
Now, on the topic at hand, I propose the idea of instead moving the others that are inconsistent with Shin Shoryuken (Burning Knuckle, Egg Firing, and any other future possibilities) to have both names in the title, as both moves are significant, and I will immediately clarify, again, that moves like Heel Slide and Gun do not hold any significant changes to lead to anything other than a mention on the page. Aidan, the Rurouni 15:49, May 16, 2020 (EDT)

The reason the IP is seeing it is because, as shown in his edits, he's using the mobile CSS, which doesn't have that snippet at all, and consequently shows the title as a subpage. NokiiSig.png Nokii — 16:06, May 16, 2020 (EDT)

I Support as shown above.S3AHAWKS3AHAWK Signature icon 1.pngS3AHAWK signature icon 2.png (talk) 15:55, May 16, 2020 (EDT)

I concur with SonDaniel and agree with Aidan about renaming all the aformentioned moves: I don't really like the idea of shortening the names for the sake of making things "manageable" and "accessible". It's already clunky as is having to deal with moves that are actually two moves, and not conveying this in the page title is in my opinion a huge loss. Not to mention that there is technically no getting around emphasizing one move over the other since one has to be typed out first (this is obviously silly). Now perhaps that might change if in the future if we start getting commands that are actually seven or eight moves or some shit (Command Selection doesn't count), but I think at that point the devs might conjure up a better solution. - EndGenuity (talk) 16:00, May 16, 2020 (EDT)

I support that we move all the other moves that are actually two moves. Awesomelink234, the Super Cool Gamer (talk) 16:10, May 16, 2020 (EDT)

But then is Egg Firing belittling Breegull Blaster? And what about Burning Knuckle and Crack Shoot? Well, in some ways, yes.
It isn't a matter of one move being "superior" or "more significant" than the other. It kinda does matter, because including the other special move in the name could make the article more interesting to our readers. You don't see that a character has two different side special moves (someone like Terry) every reveal, right?
For the rest of your comment: I understand where you see the emphasis. You may have thought of including the other version in the same name as redundant. But like EndGenuity said, "I don't really like the idea of shortening the names for the sake of making things "manageable" and "accessible". It's already clunky as is having to deal with moves that are actually two moves, and not conveying this in the page title is in my opinion a huge loss." And like I wrote, I'm neutral. I'm not trying to oppose you, I am simply telling you what I'm thinking. I am not saying I oppose the move. I apologize if you feel that I was opposing you. Like all opinions with good reasoning, I respect yours. SonDanielSonDanielSignatureHead1.pngSonDanielSignatureHead2.png (talk page) 16:31, May 16, 2020 (EDT)
No worries brogod, you're good. The more I hear both sides of this discussion, the more I start to feel that either choice of nomenclature has its pros and cons. I think that I'm honestly feeling a bit more neutral than before on the whole matter: I'll roll with whichever choice is determined by consensus. Acgamer28Acgamer28SignatureHead.png 21:38, May 16, 2020 (EDT)
Sure! As for me, I’m more to opposing it now. (By the way, what’s brogod?) SonDanielSonDanielSignatureHead1.pngSonDanielSignatureHead2.png (talk page) 22:46, May 16, 2020 (EDT)
For legal reasons I cannot elaborate, brogod. Acgamer28Acgamer28SignatureHead.png 23:24, May 16, 2020 (EDT)

(Indent restarted) Alright, brogod! SonDanielSonDanielSignatureHead1.pngSonDanielSignatureHead2.png (talk page) 23:54, May 16, 2020 (EDT)

Bumping this, because if this discussion does continue its trend in the opposite direction it implicates changes for multiple other articles. It's also comparable to a proposal because it'll change how we do things for future move articles.

I think I figured out a solution on which articles to name Move A/Move B. Essentially, the only ones that maybe should stay unchanged are Hero's specials, as they are nothing more than charge differences not all that different from Robin's neutral special. The rest should be renamed to be more similar to this page, rather than splitting it or naming the page after the first one. 08:38, June 12, 2020 (EDT)

Bumping again. At this point, I feel as if it isn't worth it to move or split this article. Each double-move's name format is its own independent case, and I feel that this article's name should not be changed. The official name for this final smash incorporates both variations, and we have redirects for both variants to this article so searching for either one is simple. Furthermore, this article is not particularly crowded, so it can feasibly left as an article for both without splitting them apart. We should not be looking to move this article, or Shinryuken's article, for the sake of consistency with the other double-moves - the merit of moving those articles should be discussed independently, and as things stand I don't see much merit in moving this one. I'd like to see more editors revisit this discussion before we can close it and remove its move + split tags. Acgamer28Acgamer28SignatureHead.png 16:15, June 19, 2020 (EDT)

Since a handful of other doublemove articles are now being moved to match this article's name format, if the discussion about what to do here doesn't progress soon, I'm just going to remove the move + split tags because at that point the article should just be left as is. Acgamer28Acgamer28SignatureHead.png 15:07, July 10, 2020 (EDT)


Okay, what exactly are we doing with this article? SonDanielSonDanielSignatureHead1.pngSonDanielSignatureHead2.png (talk page) 15:31, May 26, 2020 (EDT)

Hold on, hold on, I don't think we ever agreed to split this in our previous discussion. We went from deciding to move this to a single-name format, to moving all other double-move articles to a double-name format, but we never mentioned anything about splitting them into different articles. The previous discussion became convoluted enough with time. Whatever decision we're advocating for should be decided on and then, in my opinion, put to vote as a general proposal. As far as I know, we are choosing between double-name format for other double-move articles or single-name format for this article and Ken's final smash, and we were collectively leaning towards the former? Acgamer28Acgamer28SignatureHead.png 17:37, May 26, 2020 (EDT)
I’m just not sure why this was proposed. SonDanielSonDanielSignatureHead1.pngSonDanielSignatureHead2.png (talk page) 19:46, May 26, 2020 (EDT)
Me neither, we never discussed splitting the articles. I'm going to go ahead and remove the tag for now. Acgamer28Acgamer28SignatureHead.png 23:01, May 26, 2020 (EDT)
Afterword: I'm going to actually leave it up for now, even though I'll edit it to remove mention of the talk page... as our discussion here is not about splitting it just yet. Acgamer28Acgamer28SignatureHead.png 00:57, May 27, 2020 (EDT)
I am the one who originally added the tag. I admittedly may have misread some of the arguments above, but I still stand that splitting the page is worth discussing. --Rdrfc (talk) 11:52, May 27, 2020 (EDT)
This is why I think that we need to bring this whole discussion to to a general proposal. We've got a few different courses of action here. If we move everything to a double-name format, then there's no point in splitting this and Ken's articles up. It only becomes feasible as another way of adopting single-name format. Acgamer28Acgamer28SignatureHead.png 12:38, May 27, 2020 (EDT)

I would much rather just rename other pages according to this one and find a way to get rid of the redirect at the top of the page for mobile (I know now that it's coded not to show up on desktop) than split it. Otherwise, that'll be another argument in itself with much more obvious results. 02:12, June 2, 2020 (EDT)

I think we should split this article and other Special Moves that have two different moves. SeanWheeler (talk) 21:39, June 25, 2020 (EDT)