User talk:Randall00/2008

This is an archive of closed discussions from User:Randall00's talk page in 2008. To start a new conversation, please see the current talk page.

Template

I need help creating Template:Crewbeta. can you help? --—Preceding unsigned comment added by Pikazilla (talk • contribs)

It's on my to-do list, yes. But it would be at Template:Crew, more likely.--RJM ^Talk 20:13, January 5, 2008 (EST)

That was one of my ideas, it is in thr pool room section, at least someone listent to me.--Fandangox 14:26, January 5, 2008 (EST)

I moved it to Template:Crew. Feel free to continue dev there. =) --Sky (t | c | w) 03:00, January 23, 2008 (EST)

Hippochinfat still at it

Still vandalizing and flaming despite your warning. Magiciandude 16:20, January 11, 2008 (EST)

He's also banned at SWF... time for him to go bye-bye. Also, don't forget about Special: Contributions/Hutsetsugen!. – EP (Talk • Edits) 18:55, January 11, 2008 (EST)

User: Billy Kong

He have been replacing the Tier List article with == Tier List Don't exist!== I thing we should warn him, or if he do it again, ban him, Oh and yiu have something in your "to do list" that I can do? Its been quite a while since I really helped this wiki.--Fandangox 18:43, January 11, 2008 (EST)

No use warning him, take a look at his contributions page. He's obviously only interested in vandalizing SmashWiki so away he should go... – EP (Talk • Edits) 18:56, January 11, 2008 (EST)

Wiki issues

I think the site have some connection problems and issues, some users cannot upload images and take to much time to load the site, Two weeks ago my pc didt let me enter to the site. is this happening to everyone?--Fandangox 17:23, February 2, 2008 (EST)

Yes. This is related to the very same lag issues they are suffering at SmashBoards, as the two websites are hosted on the same server. Due to the anticipation of Brawl's release, there's been extremely high traffic at the boards and it's been putting a lot of stress on the servers. That's actually a big part of the reason why I haven't been doing as much wiki work as usual. The boards are working well today, but I haven't heard as to whether or not they've found a permanent fix quite yet. --RJM ^Talk 11:13, February 3, 2008 (EST)

Thanks, I didnt know that the servers could suffer the same issues.--Fandangox 13:21, February 3, 2008 (EST)

Email change?

I'd like my email address changed, please.

From John_93@dbzmail.com

To wolfdonnell@yahoo.com

(Lavaris 02:55, February 4, 2008 (EST))

Hi there! Actually, your SmashWiki e-mail address and account are all tied to your SmashBoards account. To change your e-mail, go to your User CP at SmashBoards and choose "Edit Email & Password" from the column on the left. If you're logged in already, just click here! --RJM ^Talk 09:51, February 4, 2008 (EST)

MediaWiki:Newarticletext

It eems to be some problem with the special pages Newarticletext and Template:Namespace number MediaWiki. Can you fix it? King M (talk•contribs•logs) 17: 41 (GMT +01) 7th February 2008

Was this all fixed before I noticed it? I don't really understand what the problem is. Where did all those templates come from anyway? Is there still an issue? --RJM ^Talk 22:21, February 8, 2008 (EST)

Email

I did what you said to do. However, my email is still the undesired one. Even after I changed it. Could you please edit it here for me? (Lavaris 22:49, February 8, 2008 (EST))

Please

Please change my email Randall..I did at SWF already, and my email is still the unprefered one at SmashWiki.

(Lavaris 03:34, February 13, 2008 (EST))

I'm still looking into that one, sorry man. It's not actually within my power; I'm pretty sure I would need to have access to the raw files on the server which is still well above me. I've left a message with the administration to look into it and haven't heard back yet, but I'll stay on top of it and let you know. :^) --RJM ^Talk 23:02, February 13, 2008 (EST)

Thank you Randall. (Lavaris 00:04, February 24, 2008 (EST))

Layout?

Do you mind if I use the layout on your userpage for my page? (Lavaris 00:05, February 24, 2008 (EST))

User Block

A user named Hippie Nixon vandalized a major page (he put "Your Mom" as a playable character). I feel this user should be warned, or perhaps blocked. --Oxico 23:33, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Tech VS Ukemi

How come you changed it back? I figured we went by official Dojo names for moves and techniques. (When there are official names, anyway.) FyreNWater - (Talk • Contributions ) 05:53, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

It was a double-redirect. --Randall00 23:10, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Yes, YOU re coming back

OK I also didnt like the merge, but I'm getting used to it, dont tell me you will never comeback.--Fandangox 01:27, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

oh wait I got confused, you were quoting someone else?--Fandangox 01:31, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Yes. I agreed. This merge is the most insulting thing Smash World has ever done to me, and that's saying something. --Randall00 12:46, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Maybe you are exagerating??? that cannot be the worst thing. This is just a stupid merge, if you are never comingback that's your (stupid) choice.--Fandangox 13:02, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

That is my comment <.<' Now I'm kinda embarrased...Sorry I don't know how to spell if embarrased is spelt wrong... --User:Crystal_lucario 11:37, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

Your comment is valid, I don't see why you would be embarrassed. I can remove it if you like, but it expresses my sentiments pretty well. --Randall00 21:14, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

No it's fine...~Crystal 15:27, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

awwww come here let me hug you guys (>'.')>. Hey you guys are acting like if they would have somewhat insulted you, is just a merging of two wikis, that's it, if you ask me, the only downside to the merge is that everyone can edit it now (more vandalism) the wiki is just as always.--Fandangox 19:27, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

All you're doing by saying these things is proving that you have no concept of what SmashWiki was and what went into it before this merge. It is inarguably insulting to the creators. --Randall00 03:15, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Hug back (^'.')^ lol. And the merge did insult me. It is so insulting with all the Spam and me hating wikia(Mainly because of Spam) (no offense(DONT BANZ MEZ! ^(0.o^) lol. Wikia is not the gov.)) and all that...~Crystal 19:53, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

There's no point in trying to convince you more, its obvious that you guys wont change your mind. (thanks for hugging back :))--Fandangox 21:19, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Would you please get all this "hug me, hug back" crap off my talk page, please? It's great that you don't take this seriously, but you didn't lose half the crap I did and I don't appreciate people who don't know what they're talking about coming on here and telling me that I'm exaggerating and everything is just as it was but with MOAR. --Randall00 03:15, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Petition to unmerge! Sign!~Crystal 21:08, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

That's nice and all Randall, but the problem is that you just left a quoted and no explanations, people will get the wrong impressions you should atleast give a reason.

I'm not going to sit and write a multi-page diatribe explaining why this was a bad idea. It is very clear to me that I've already wasted an awful lot of my writing on SmashWiki and my participation from here on out encompasses little more than ensuring that the competitive community's articles are not destroyed and that my own contributions remains relatively intact until I reserve some time to port them off the wiki.

Randall, if I might enter, KingKirby was able to salvage the watchlists from SmashWiki, so if you're still concerned about that, leave him a talk page message or a pm. --Sky (t · c · w) 21:31, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, Sky, the wiki is yours (if this really is what you call a "dream come true"). Smash World does not deserve my skill set. And before we get some more randoms coming in here telling me "it's just a merge!", please note that this is only one administrative folly in a series of them that have continually pushed me further and further away from Smash World over the last two years, despite my steadily increasing level of support and input. --Randall00 02:47, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Heh, I wasn't asking for opinions, only telling you that you can get your watchlist back, as I was fairly certain that was one of the items you were mad about. I'll leave you to yourself now. :) --Sky (t · c · w) 04:20, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Wazzup dude!

Just seeing how you doing. Zmario 21:35, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Hehe, interesting time to ask, so in the interest of not giving you more information than you need to know, we'll just say I'm doing better than I was two days ago. --Randall00 02:47, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Random...~Crystal

What's up, Randall? I know we've had some rough times since I first created my account, but I just wanted to let you know that I'm sorry for anything I could've done to offend you or anybody else. I'm usually not that obnoxious, but these last few days have been a little stressful. Anyway, I'm just hoping that you can forgive me for any wrongdoings. Hopefully, we can leave all that tension behind us and move on. What do you say? Truce? - GalaxiaD 01:10, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Don't worry about it, dude, I don't even really remember exactly what you did because nothing that I do on SmashWiki is personal by any means--if there's no war, there's no need for a truce. Moreover, I admire that despite anything wrong that you feel you may have done wrong, you are still willing to contribute and make this the best it can be. Showing the initiative to improve and contribute is very valuable and although you shouldn't feel the need to apologize to me, I recognize that as a respectable trait nonetheless--it sure is better than the hoards of people I've had to work with who refuse to even admit when they are wrong. I apologize if what I've said across the board in the last little while comes off sounding a little bitter and angry, but that's generally how I feel about this merge in the first place. I never would've been making this many unintentional enemies if it didn't happen. Keep at it! --Randall00 07:27, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Cool. I'm glad we were able to clear all that up. I'm not the type who goes out trying to make enemies out of everybody, and holding grudges can get nasty, so I just wanted to make sure you didn't hate me or anything. Now that I know that you don't, I won't have to watch my back anymore when I'm walking the streets at night (LOL). Anyway, I just wanted to say that you are a very knowledgable person, and despite what the merge may have done to you, you should keep doing a great job here at SmashWiki as well. Keep up the good work, Randall! - GalaxiaD 00:48, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

What's Up?

How are you doing, Randall? We haven't spoken in a while, so I decided to catch up on a few things with you. I'm doing fine. Just hanging around and doing my thing, you know? Keep on smashing and keep it real. - GalaxiaD (talk) 05:26, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

Ike and Galaxia

I didn't realise that we weren't allowed to disuss sysop nominations on talk pages, or hold long conversations on talk pages. And I'm not gonna nominate myself, I thought i made that pretty clear...Ike6481 (talk) 18:14, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

I didn't say anything of the sort. What I said was, you have your conversation fragmented across two talk pages instead of leaving it on one (like this). ALL of your conversations are like that, which makes them very confusing to read. Read the heading that I have at the top of this page. Using your watchlist keeps discussions all in one place instead of having to bounce across a bunch of different talk pages trying to piece together a conversation. --RJM ^Talk 18:20, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

Right, I see. So have all our convos on one talk page. I then asume it would be illegal to creat apage just for the prpose of our conversation? Right, I'll bear your comments in mind. Sorry, for making it confusing, for you and whoever else may decide to read it. Ike6481 (talk) 18:26, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

Well, you don't need to create a page just for the purpose of your conversation--that's what the talk page is for in the first place! Your entire conversation with Galaxia should just be on one talk page under its own heading, just like this one, that's all. --RJM ^Talk 18:29, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

Convos

On GalaxiaD's talk page, you noted that the important conversations should not be fragmented. In what way is our conversation important? All the current Sysops post unimportant things on other talk pages. There is no need to become so angry because you are struggling to read our conversation. It is ours, and we should be able to talk how we like. If this were in person, it's be like you eavesdropping and then making fun of our accents. Ike6481 (talk) 23:18, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

Yeah you should really calm down.It is not that big of a deal. Zmario (talk) 23:22, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

I'm not attacking anybody, actually. I'm trying to teach you all how to use a wiki so that when (or perhaps "if") you actually do decide to contribute something more useful to the back end community, you won't be left in the dark. In the same respect, standardizing the way a talk page is used sets a proper example for new users who actually do want to contribute.

Don't get me wrong, you can post all the "unimportant" stuff that you want. I think it's good to have trivial conversations in order to establish a community-like environment and encourage people to want to spend more time here. However, it would be best if that same positive energy and encouragement could be expressed in the methodology as well. It will make things easier for everyone. --RJM ^Talk 23:26, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

Now what will make it easier is that if you would speak English instead of using your enhanced vonacular so peopel can understand you. Zmario (talk) 23:30, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

English is the only language I speak. It's not my problem if you only understand half of it. --RJM ^Talk 23:43, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

And when we discuss a character, for instance, we will talk in the character talk page. Since our convos do often drift away from the Smash Bros universe, we have nowhere to put it but on the talk page. And we don't care if it's fragmented, we just post on the other's talk page so that it saves room on our individual talk pages. And if we were to put it all on one talk page, who's would we put it on? And since we don't care, you shouldn't. I mean, it's our convo, and now that i'm talking to you, i'm putting it on your talk page since that's what you like. It's a matter of preference really. Ike6481 (talk) 23:35, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

What are you talking about? If your conversations about characters drift away from the smash universe, then you put it on your talk page, it's very simple--it doesn't matter which one of your talk pages it goes on--just pick one! The only justification I'm hearing for splitting them between TWO talk pages is because it "saves space." Which it doesn't. It's the same amount of text either way, people--what good is saving space on a talk page anyway? You can archive them when they get too long--wikis are built for this sort of thing! Just because you don't care doesn't mean that a fragmented conversation is the right way to do it and it doesn't mean that I shouldn't care because this isn't your website. SmashWiki is not free webspace--it has a purpose and it has conventions built around that purpose; if you choose to ignore those conventions, there's no guarantee that the community will support what you choose to do with this webspace. --RJM ^Talk 23:43, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

Yes, and your only argument is that it's what's meant to happen because it makes things 'Easier to read'. What will the community fail to supprt us for? Our runs for Sysop? Like I ever would. So that doesn't bother me. Our talk pages are sort of, well, ours. And we should be able to chat however we find simplest. Why should we do things how Sysops want them to be done, just so that it makes it easier for other people to read. We prefer to talk over the talk pages, so that we get the new message template. Yes, there's a watchlist, but that's VERY DIFFICULT to see! And what if one of us went away for a bit, as we often do. The watchlist wouldn't show our edits. Yes, we could just check the page we were talking on, but why make things more difficult and timewasting? Which is all what your argument is about. Difficulty. How hard is it to just not care about what we're putting. It is of no real importance to the smash community. It's of importance to us. We've been doing it for ages, and I don't see why we should change because one sysop is finding it difficult to read! In what way does it concern you? It's not like it is imperative for our convos to be on one page. It's not like it takes up more room on the wiki. There is no need for concern. Ike6481 (talk) 23:52, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but your argument is just transparent. There is nothing difficult about maintaining a watchlist. You click "my watchlist," it shows you the changes since you last logged in bolded and sorts everything chronologically. You speak as though you want your talk page to behave like a chatroom, flashing at you every time a new message comes in. But that's not what it's for, it's for keeping a record of conversation as it pertains to the article it is associated with in the main namespace. I obviously can't convince you that it's the better way to do things, but what I'm saying is, you can't go making a run for SysOp status and simultaneously support fragmented discussion. The two concepts have to jive with one another if you hope to make a case. --RJM ^Talk 00:04, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

Alright, there's nothing difficult about maintaining a watchlist. That's great. We understand OUR conversations. And this is what you seem to be failing to get. They are OUR conversations. Why should we make it easier just so that some SysOp wants to read them? And then complain about every tiny error. And since when did you see me making a run for SysOp? Never, cos i wouldn't be good at it. So don't tell me off for attempting to do something i've not yet done, or planned to do. These fragmented discussions, it seems to be your biggest pet hate, but why? When me, Galaxia, Zmario and Kperfekt are talking, why are you getting annoyed? I don't look down your talk page and note down ever error in order to build up an argument, and then comment upon it in a massive speech. You are not a better person than me. You have no right to comment on how I do things that have no negative impact on anyone or anything. You think that being a SysOp gives you ultimate power. While it may make you more 'important' on this Wiki, it does not make you right. Look at people in power around the world. Brown, Bush, Mugabe, power does not equate to rightness. If you wanted to complain because i'd been swearing all over the place that'd be fine. But you are complaining because you don't understand a conversation that never concerned you. And i'd have to say that swearing is a greater offence that a discussion over several talk pages. After all, this is a Wiki for all ages. In future, please try to refrain from breaking the Wiki conventions. Ike6481 (talk) 00:14, 22 June 2008 (UTC) PS: Looking over more than one page is a bit tricky.

Don't nitpick my words or my intentions. This entire thing has been blown out of proportion by GalaxiaD's insistence that my opposition of his SysOp nomination is the sole reason he won't get selected. That opposition involves an objective analysis of how a talk page should be handled in the wiki community for constructive purposes. Building a constructive community is built up of many smaller working parts, including an efficient framework for back end discussion. It's not as though fragmented discussion is my most passionate hatred and I lose sleep over it at night--no, it's just one of those smaller working parts to build a larger functional machine. I have no interest in reading the fragmented conversation in question, I'm only concerned with suggesting a superior way of laying it on the page (especially when there's a potential SysOp in question). It's not important to you, but it just happens to be important to the SysOp nomination process.

The second half of your post here is very confusing to me. I don't know where you get the notion that I believe that SysOp status gives you ultimate power--it absolutely does not and it probably gives you a whole lot less power than most of the current nominees think it does. But then you start talking about politics and swearing and telling me not to "break the wiki conventions" as though there's a list somewhere. I'm not sure what it's all for, but I've endured enough abuse by trying to help for one day, I think. No more personal attacks on this issue, please. My patience is tried and I will punish as ruthlessly as my petty SysOp status allows. --RJM ^Talk 00:34, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

Please stop talking to me about Sysop nominations. I never planned to run. Being helpful? You think that banning someone who has, in actuality, made NO personal insults, and is staating his opinion just as you state yours. If i get banned, it would only be fair that you got banned, as I have done nothing worse than you. And i'm not talking to you abot GalaxiaD's nomination. I'm talking to you about this droning insistence that i've broken some kind of law, by stating my opinion and having fragmented discussions. No other Sysop got mad at us. No other Sysop posted long speeches at us. And why is it a superior way? So that we can what, go back to it? It's not difficult at the time. And quite frankly, if anyone is trying to read our conversations, then why should we make it easier for them? There are Wiki conventions, you know that as well as I do. No personal insults, no swearing, no joke pages. I never said Sysopness gave you ultimate power. It gives you the power to block me. Even though I have done nothing worse than me. So deny that banning me would be an abuse of power. If a non Sysop had done what you did, they'd get moaned at in a second Haha, i've not responded to your points in order.Ike6481 (talk) 00:44, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

That's enough. I am talking about SysOp nominations because that is the ONLY thing that this is about, so please stop insisting that I'm here to abuse power and put words into my mouth trying to make it look like I'm here to control your speech and dictate your lives. I have accused you of NOTHING, said NOTHING to deserve such a convoluted outburst and seen NOTHING from you that indicates that you are coming on to my talk page to do anything but start a fight. You are as uninvolved with the original issue as I was; the difference is that I owe the wiki a certain responsibility in terms of maintaining a quality standard throughout the community and when a SysOp candidate (remember: the ONLY issue at hand) is splitting conversations between two talk pages, I consider it beneficial to him and his potential nomination to understand how that methodology works against the community effort in an administrative role. A very minor issue that he chose to turn into a hissy internet war about ruining his chances at SysOp and playing it up as though I was trying to control the way he thinks. Then all his friends jump on board and I suddenly look like the bad guy because half of them can't understand a word I'm saying and the other half have such a volatile temper on the internet that even the gentlest of sarcastic remarks against them turns them all into a rabid, hundred-man coalition of angry rebels trying to overthrow the system all in the name of human rights and patriotic free speech. Please, concentrate this energy on improving the wiki, or arguing somewhere else, whatever--just stop the warmongering and continued vilification of what I do here. I know how much it would fire you up to get banned for this and it would be fun to watch your army of freedom fighters march demandingly up to SmashWiki administration with a copy of the constitution in hand, but just because you say you're stating your opinion and doing nothing wrong doesn't mean it's not harassment when you continue to push an accusatory issue on me that has nothing to do with you. This kind of attitude is deconstructive to the community at large--no more, please. I'd much rather be convinced that you're a worthwhile user to have around than to act on the opposite. --RJM ^Talk 05:36, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

Alright alright, cool it Pyro. I was never getting mad. We understand what you're saying. All talk on one page. We heard, we just chose to respectfully disagree. On the forums, we talk on one page, on character pages, we talk on one page. Why does every user have a talk page if we are supposed to talk on one? As you previously said, each to his own, and on talk pages, we just find it easier to go to and fro. You don't, we get that. So when we talk to you, we talk on your pgae, as you prefer, when we talk to eachother, we go to and fro, as we prefer. When it comes to important issues, we will not talk in such a haphazard fashion. As it does not concern you really, as you said, I see no need for you to comment on how we do stuff. We're not getting fired up, well, i'm not. Do I sound(look) angry? Just accept that everyone has their own preferences, and when it comes to something that does not negatively affect anyone, keep out of it. No other Sysop had an issue. Clarinet Hawk has never had an issue with it, so why do you? Since clearly, neither of us is going to give up, let's just agree, to diasgree. Ike6481 (talk) 19:54, 22 June 2008 (UTC) Ps: I do like your imagery.

Don't make an attempt to pass this off as though you're winning this argument by trying to claim that you're not the one getting worked up about it when you've just littered my wall with all kinds of sarcastic commentary about elitist SysOp power and blanketing the entire thing with return accusations that I'm the one "getting mad" when from the very beginning, I have asserted that I am not attacking anyone and intervened only in the interest of educating a potential SysOp (and hopefully other members of the community as well) as to the common practice of using the talk pages in a more communal and constructive manner. However, no matter how many times I have tried to explain this, I am still met with more sarcasm and more coy remarks like "cool it Pyro" from people who have nothing to do with the original issue. And THAT is what pisses me off--don't confuse my rebuttals and the aggression behind them with the original issue. How about instead of agreeing to disagree, you agree to take your own advice and keep out of issues that you have nothing to do with instead of coming on here and telling me how to do my job as though you know what does and does not negatively affect a wiki community. We are done here, understand? Good. --RJM ^Talk 23:05, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

Alright alright. I apologise. My cool it Pyro remark was just because I was watching the Xmen. And the only reason I'm on your talk pahe is because you don't like fragments. However, I am sorry, and in future I will not be as sarcastic, and nor will I get confused oer your points. Sorry. Ike6481 (talk) 23:11, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

Threats/Friends-For-Hire/General Incoherence

Rubs temple with fingers* ehhh... I have a short temper. If you would like to know how short ask Ike. I am TRYING to keep it under control, but I don't deal with ahem *people that annoy me* that well. SO WHAT I AM GOING TO DO is tell you to mind your convorsation with galaxiaD & whoever else you have been pissing off, and NOT to get me angry. OH AND BY THE WAY, I DON'T RECALL IKE or GALAXIAD BEING BANNED. This is why I DO NOT LIKE 1/2 THE ADMIN ON THIS SITE. BECAUSE THEY THINK THEY ARE HIGH & MIGHTY, AND BECOME INCREDIBLY STUCK UP, FOR SOME EVEN MORE SO THEN ME. Kperfekt722 (talk) 23:47, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

Kperfeck he has been annoying me as well. Zmario (talk) 23:50, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

Who are you, what is your bearing on the situation and what do you hope to accomplish by making a general statement about admins being stuck up and threatening me to "NOT" get you angry? Please try to use less capital letters--it doesn't help convince me that there is either passion or logic behind your words. I'll give you a chance to re-phrase all of that and help you if I can, but if you're just coming here to defend your buddies, I don't think this is the place to be. --RJM ^Talk 00:04, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

RJM just leave us along and we will leave you alone. This bickering will not stop otherwise. When the little guy tries to stand up to the bigger guy the little guy always loses. Thi page is way to long to continue the bantering. Thats another good reason we switch talk pages there is to much kilobyte memeory and causes computers to slow down. Zmario (talk) 23:56, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

Well I did stay out of this until you left a... Wait for it... STUCK UP (i know how much you love capitals) comment on my page. In anycase, it appears the person that you decided to cause trouble with in the first place (galaxiaD) has decided not to stoop to your level. I on the other hand, am one of those people who does not take kindly to having people put that CRAP on my talk/user pages. oh and the way you have been talking to my "buddies" doesn't bother me as much as the way you talk in that upper class tone. deal with it. your not going to get anywhere by insulting me and/or my "BUDDIES" (capitals again, just for you) Kperfekt722 (talk) 00:11, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

Unwanted commentary is the price of fragmenting conversations across multiple talk pages, I suppose. But as Charitwo pointed out below, you're asking for administrative action by coming out of nowhere and immediately launching an attack against me with respect to a situation that you have no involvement in. Strike two. --RJM ^Talk 00:19, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

I'll say this, if this argument continues, there will be harassment blocks, and they will be long. And that goes for both of you, stop harassing Randall. --Charitwo 00:08, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

Just to prove that we're serious about this not continuing, I hit Kperfeck with a 10 min. warning ban, since he thought it was a good idea to post some comments here two min. after Charitwo told them to stop. Clarinet Hawk (talk · contributions) 00:22, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

Am I in trouble? Or are you just referring to Zmario and Kperfekt, I think i've refrained from anything personal Ike6481 (talk) 00:24, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

Furthermore, it is not any way for RfA nominee's to be acting to begin with. --Charitwo 00:25, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleting Bomb Barrier

Ok this is probably a question that stems solely from my inexperience but why would the Bomb Barrier article be deleted for using a personal nickname if no official name exists? That was the name used by the person who developed the technique, so isn't that the official name? Sorry if this is a noobish question. Shade487z (talk) 22:17, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

Well, for starters the technique was "developed" by the actual game developers, they just never published a name or perhaps never gave it one in the first place. However, I didn't actually delete the article because it was a personal nickname for the technique (that's just why it was tagged for deletion). The thing is, for a personal nickname of a technique to warrant a SmashWiki article of its own, that terminology has to be widely used throughout the smash community. The term has to be recognized as one of (if not the only) way to describe the technique you're describing.

The best example is the wavedash article. The word "wavedash" caught on back in 2002 when it was originally discovered by a smasher known as Toadbanjoconker. This was right around the time when SmashBoards was slowly turning into the best online community to go to for smash information and the community began to use the boards as a resource to discover more about the game. With players from all over the world working together to unlock the mysteries hidden beneath the physics engine, more and more techniques that they didn't have names for were discovered and so the players named them themselves. Even the word tech was a product of the community and wasn't officially named until Brawl began posting its DOJO updates.

In the intervening years, SmashBoards became easily the largest Smash Bros. community on the internet and became the home of over 60,000 smashers from all over the world. They all came to the same place to learn the same things that those original core members were working to discover and give names to. That's why a wavedash is called a "wavedash" and no matter where you go in the entire world, that's what it's still called. The terminology really has to catch on in the community for it to warrant an article with that title. SmashWiki is supposed to be an easy way to find all that information that is now buried deep within forum posts on SmashBoards and other areas of the internet, so if someone new to smash hear's a term like "double shine" being used at a tournament, they should be able to come here, type it into the search bar and learn what it is everyone was talking about.

The reason that doesn't apply to "bomb barrier" is because it just isn't a frequently-used term. It might be used in a local area and maybe some smashers might have picked up on it, but just because someone posts claiming to discover the technique and gives it a name of its own doesn't make it the official name. Official names are either dictated by Nintendo, or by widespread popular usage. Who knows, maybe "bomb barrier" refers to some sort of Samus technique in Europe--but we don't know for sure because neither definition is popular enough to be recognized amongst the national or international smash community.

Besides, all that bomb-dropping, bomb-laying goodness was covered a long time ago in Melee and is well-documented under various names of its own by [NJ'zFinest] in Bombs Away! ~ A Guide on Young Link's Bombs.

All that said, I still think that the technique (but not the name) deserves to be mentioned on Toon Link's page under the "Strategies & Tips" section, so I would recommend adding that information to the character page instead of creating an article for it anyway. Besides, if someone wants to look for more information on what you can do with Toon Link, they're going to search for "Toon Link" not "bomb barrier," right? :^) --RJM ^Talk 23:31, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

ooooooooh I got ya. Ok thanks for clearing that up. I was actually considering just putting it under Toon Link's strategies and tips, but I guess now it's the only option. On that note, what about my Double wielding article? Just want to make sure that everything there is ok, as well. Shade487z (talk) 00:57, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

That should be deleted as well. There's nothing notable about trying to use two controllers at the same time. I will say that you do write articles very well, though. Your knowledge of the correct formatting and proper categorization is great and should be spent on more relevant information. --RJM ^Talk 06:03, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

Well, all the stuff I did while on the yearbook staff at my school helped. Thanks. Shade487z (talk) 15:04, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

Goomba Mafia

Uh, I know it's not really a crew, but I don't really to see them upset if it gets deleted, can it be turned into an online clan or something? (Wolf O'Donnell (talk · contributions) 02:03, 26 June 2008 (UTC))

You turn it into whatever you like, except an article. :^) Online clans don't get articles either--though I'm sure there's still a few kickin' around that haven't jumped out at me enough to purge quite yet. --RJM ^Talk 04:53, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

Uh, yeah.. There are acouple, I've come across them. (Wolf O'Donnell (talk · contributions) 06:34, 26 June 2008 (UTC))

Online Moguls and the Goomba Mafia

I understand your desire to keep this site free of unnecessary articles, but was it really necessary to delete the articles about the online crews of the users on this wiki. The ability of online play has made it possible for these users to play regularly and communicate about Smash Bros. While the definition of crews that you gave worked well for Melee, now that users need not live near each other to play regularly, why must they live in close proximity to be a crew. They meet all the other definitions of being a crew. The do play regularly, they are a close group of friends, and they even post videos of their matches. Again, I understand that you want to keep this site free of random pages about nothing, but these are some of the most active users, even if they can get out of hand at times. What harm can truly come from allowing them to publicize their crew? Clarinet Hawk (talk · contributions) 01:30, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

It's about article notability. This should be a wiki free of spam and full of legitimate smash information. Even the crew article needs revising, because a crew that doesn't compete is nothing more than a bunch of friends that smash together and have given themselves a name but otherwise have no impact on the community at large. If the article doesn't tell you anything about smash or the smash community, there's no reason for it to be publicized. I give an awful lot of time, effort, travel mileage and money into making the competitive community a legitimate sporting following and to have groups of hot-tempered, attention-seeking teenagers creating abstract "crews" and "joining" up to ten of them at a time is a bastardization of the efforts of smashers whose allied tournament play makes a real impact on the history of smash at large. Crew members have never needed to live in close proximity in order to compete as a crew, but they'd better turn up at a tournament and better have some idea of what a crew battle is if they're going to try and lump themselves in the same category as the real crews. I recognize that a good number of people around here have very little concept of the widespread influence of competitive smash since the merge with Wikia, but don't let their angry tirades get the best of you. We are trying to make an encyclopedia here (at least I assume we share that objective) and it's important to bear in mind that there's plenty of garbage on the internet that doesn't cause any harm, but that doesn't mean it isn't garbage. --RJM ^Talk 03:11, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

Alright, that's a good point. I hope I didn't make you think that I don't value your opinion. I know we may not see eye to eye on every policy on this wiki, but I do think that you are a great editor and have it's best interests at heart. I look forward to working with you to continue taking it in the right direction. Clarinet Hawk (talk · contributions) 17:46, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

Is this spam?

There was a State Locator page containing the typical info of a smashboards Locator thread, but more organized. This was marked for Speedy Deletion with the reason given Spam/Advertisement, which a sysop did delete claiming that the Locator page was spam. Is this the correct policy?

I've always thought of spam to be something like a page full of gibberish, or an unwanted email. Not a page with useful information. So was it spam? South Carolina Locator | Here's where the page used to be, and here's my discussion with the deleting sysop. If that is spam then the Speedy Deletion Policy page needs to reflect this.

On a side note, is there a central place that links to all this wiki's policies? It's tedious searching for the right way to do things here. Ryzol (talk) 15:07, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

Well, she's right to delete it from this wiki because something like a "locator" is much better suited to an interactive forum community rather than an encyclopedia which is really just a one-way street for information. More often than not, there should be external links to locator pages, tournament thread discussions, etc. as cited references within an article, but for an article to have place here, it has to have ties to a smash community elsewhere that helps fuel the community at large. We certainly don't disapprove of starting pages like that--rather, we just know that there is better and more effective places to do so than SmashWiki.

You make a valid point about the lack of policies, though. SmashWiki was [SmashWiki:Merge|merged] with the Super Smash Bros. Wikia awhile back and it created a very unusual mixture of content and clash in existing policies. It has yet to be resolved but there is now a push to get things going in terms of sorting out the administrative framework. I apologize that no concrete list of policies is available at this point and sympathize with your frustration. --RJM ^Talk 12:41, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

Broken

It just may be a regional thing, but "broken" is a pretty common Smash term where I play. I'd say it's even more common than "No Jonhs" or "Sandbagging." If it's just my area, I can understand why you deleted it, so I thought I'd ask about that. Clarinet Hawk (talk · contributions) 20:53, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

Reconsider

Look man, I know you don't care much for Kperfekt or myself, but we're only "bashing" you because of the stress you've been causing for us. You called us degenerates and basically deleted our crew page for no reason. If someone did this to you, wouldn't you be ticked? Also, calling us hot-headed, attention-seeking teenagers was a little uncalled for. Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't those personal attacks as well? If Kperfekt and I get banned for personally attacking you, then it's only fair that YOU get banned as well for personally attacking us. I just want you to leave us alone. We, in turn, will leave YOU alone. I just want this to be over. I just want us to move on. Do you want an apology? Fine. Kperfekt and I are sorry for disrespecting you. I respect your intentions for this site, as well as your intentions to lead the wiki in the right direction. I know you mean nothing but good for this site, but some things you do just aren't agreeable to other people. I again apologize, and I hope you find it in your heart to forgive me and my friends. - GalaxiaD (talk) 22:31, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

Honestly, you guys should take your club to a personal website, or possibly to Smash Boards PMs, unless you plan to actually contribute to the encyclopedia. Even then, you should reduce the amount of myspacing you're doing.

This, I'm sure, is part of Randall's frustration; you seem to think this place is MySpace. It is not. Either you need to help fix the things wrong with it, or you can/should go. I hate to ban/block non-vandals, but am willing to take the same steps Randall is considering. --Sky (t · c · w) 03:01, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

IP adress

There is an IP adress user that has vandalized the Mr.G&W twice. I have reverted the edits but I have a feeling this person needs to be blocked or warned.--Oxico (talk) 17:45, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Hello

I just wanted to archive your talk page. It was getting very cluttered. Zmario (talk) 17:48, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Please don't do that again. --RJM ^Talk 21:51, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

First, Randall's right: Don't mess with users talk pages unless they ask you to.

I have to say, however, Randall that this page is getting pretty long. I've got a broadband connection (and have used T1) and still have longer load times on this page than most others. And there are people with dial-up that could have some major problems loading this page. It's your talk page, so it's completely up to you whatever you do. Clarinet Hawk (talk · contributions) 21:58, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, it wouldn't be an issue if it weren't for the Wikia garbage that has to load with it now. A plain text page on the old server could've gone three times as long without any issues. It's part of my continued quiet rebellion against the executive decision, that's all. It's still considerably smaller than List of SSBM Trophies and just twice the size of The Subspace Emissary, all without images. I will trim it down once the oldest of the conversations die out, but until then, I expect most people will be able to put up with it. --RJM ^Talk 22:24, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Vandalisim

There is a lot of it in in the Mr. Game & Watch SSBB page in the Trivia section. I cleaned some of it, but there is just so much...Amycats2 (talk) 18:50, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Yeah someone has been having a hater streak against Mr.G&W. Can you PLEASE block him/her? They are IP adress 66.30.184.164. --Oxico (talk) 18:55, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

I had to revert 2 edits from that page. Zmario (talk) 19:19, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

I took care of it. Clarinet Hawk (talk · contributions) 19:37, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

The month-long protection is probably a good length. I don't like to have to protect character pages since they attract so much attention and often are worthwhile recipients of anonymous editors, but that should be enough to keep the vandals out of the pot for a bit. Or at least give him enough time to make an account that we can ban properly if he's that passionate about hating on 2-D chaps like my buddy Game & Watch. --RJM ^Talk 21:51, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

I don't like having to protect them either, but things can get out of hand when we just let any random IP put stuff on them. For example, someone kept adding under Sonic's pros that "His back throw can kill the opponent at above 300%." And we get a lot of people that have just removed legit cons from the section because, as they say, s/he's my main, how could s/he have so many cons. It's really unfortunate that we have to protect so many character pages, but I really don't see a way around it. I will keep an eye on Mr. G & W and any account that vandalizes it will be shown no mercy. Clarinet Hawk (talk · contributions) 22:04, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Not COol

I have Windows Vista -.-. The least you could of done was thank me for atleast TRYING to help you. Noooooooo........Archiving is for people who has adial up connection. Puh-lease. Zmario (talk) 21:57, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

You've done nothing but make more work for me since the day you came on to this wiki. Take your attitude elsewhere, please. Thank you. --RJM ^Talk 22:16, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Why Thank you. Your comment has been noted and will be ignored. Thank you for purchasing the Bad Comment Sniffer 3.0. Zmario (talk) 22:20, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Er, I'm gonna have to agree with Randall here. Mainly because it is his talk page. Also, you're chasing an issue that needs not be chased. And lastly, I was reading through our argument, was I a dickhead! Yes. Please, don't argue. Ike6481 (talk) 22:25, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Delete Template

I know that we both made some changes to the delete template in the past week. However, articles that are marked for deletion no longer appear in the category:Candidates for Deletion, even though each of their pages' still says that they are in that category. I know, and agree, that we should do the discussion on the talk page, but it is near impossible to even find the pages marked for deletion if they are not added to a list in a category. Do you know what happened to the template to prevent it from adding the pages to the category? Or is is a problem in the category? Clarinet Hawk (talk · contributions) 14:04, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

It was a technical conflict between the <includeonly> tags and the [[Category:]] versus [[:Category:]]-style links. Should be fixed now! *thumbs up* --RJM ^Talk 17:04, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Well, the pages are being added to the category again, but now the whole template page is being added, including the all the code text. I took a look at the source, and all the <includeonly> and <noinclude> codes looked to be right. I'm not great with templates myself, but I'll take another look and see if I can fix it. Could you check it also, however, to make sure I don't screw things up. Clarinet Hawk (talk · contributions) 17:57, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

That's very strange, it worked fine when I changed it and now that a few other changes have been made it seems to be working still. I wonder if it's related to how different internet browsers handle the source code. I know that has caused some issues in the past. Let me know if there's any other problems--I'm just not seeing any. --RJM ^Talk 20:01, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

I'm really not sure what caused it, but I talked to Sky and he took care of it. Clarinet Hawk (talk · contributions) 21:51, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Crew Namespace

It think it's time that we close that discussion. You, Sky, and I are opposed, and Erik is somewhat opposed. The other sysops haven't weighed in, but I think there's more than enough of a administrators' consensus there already. I'll let Charitwo and Rita know that we're looking into ending it in case they have any huge objections, but it doesn't look like it's going anywhere and we could use the community discussion on much better topics. What do you think? Clarinet Hawk (talk · contributions) 15:29, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

New Brawl

I see the Post-Merge Cleanup page has something on everything that belongs on a character page...somethings have been taken out, like the Special Movements sections I worked so hard to put on the pages. Can those be kept?--Oxico (talk) 00:58, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Link me to specific articles or else I'm not sure what you're referring to. There's thousands. --RJM ^Talk 23:23, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Here are some, just to name a few: Bowser's, Jiggly's, Snake's, etc. The section is on every Brawl character's page.--Oxico (talk) 13:51, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

Ahh, like the victory poses and all that, gotcha. Yeah, I could tell that a lot of effort went into those and expected some sort of comment about it. While I think the information that you captured was valuable, I guess I was just looking for a way to "reduce" the amount of trivial information that appeared as a major header so there's no question as to what is and is not useful to the widest audience. The thing is, there's already articles for fanfare and victory pose and on-screen appearances. Those little pieces of information are better compiled into a page about that feature of the game instead of cluttering up the fighter info pages. And since most of it is already captured elsewhere on the wiki, all that was really left from your sections was the "Wii Remote Choice" and credits music. By themselves, those two are even less likely to justify a section of their own on a fighter page. However, I would encourage you to include the quirkiest information in the Trivia section of certain articles. (i.e. "* If you beat Subspace Emissary with Sheik, Young Jeezy's dirty-south hip hop track "Gangsta Music" will play behind the credits.") --RJM ^Talk 02:41, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

OK I can live with that. LOL nice one with the example. Well, so long as there are movesets for me to do intimate and deep research into on the character pages I am happy :P --Oxico (talk) 12:25, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

Wait wait wait where will the credits musicm wii remote choice and Idle Stance be put? They don't really attribute to gameplay but quite frankly even Idle Stance affects gameplay more than "Victory Pose".--Oxico (talk) 12:33, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

Proboards

Why did you come onto my Proboards just to start trouble? Seriously, I did nothing to deserve your presence. - GalaxiaD (talk) 02:22, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

I do not take kindly to people posting things under my name; it's a mild form of identity theft. Remove that user from your message board and don't come on here pretending I'm the bad guy for defending myself. We are working on this wiki now and I'm tired of the crap continuously being brought up by you and your army of talk page adversaries who have done next to nothing to help the project and nearly everything to slow it down with petty and childish internet drama. I can't make myself any clearer than that. We're done here. --RJM ^Talk 13:20, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

LOL, I should've expected a response like that. Typical you. THAT is why my friend is going by your name. You're far too predictable. Not to mention that you have a very short fuse. Whatever, keep complaining about our convos all you want. And please, have fun with your boring little project. Meanwhile, me and my friends will be getting outside to see the world in all its beauty. Have a nice day! - GalaxiaD (talk) 17:16, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

Galaxia, now is a good time to shut up and drop this thing. Clarinet Hawk (talk · contributions) 18:14, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

Honestly, I would consider "identity theft" of any sort as a blockable offense, even if it occurs off-wiki. --Sky (t · c · w) 21:49, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

Don't have to tell me twice. --RJM ^Talk 00:03, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Er, I really don't see the harm just calling one of them Randall is doing. If, they were doing this on-wiki, then sure, block. But off-wiki, how far did they go to make it blockable there? Ike6481 (talk) 14:43, 16 August 2008 (UTC)