Talk:Clone/Archive 3: Difference between revisions

*'''Luigified/Luigification is a totally valid and common term'''. It even had its own article here quite some time, as well as http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/Luigification . Also 50 results on SWF for Luigification, and 429 for Luigified. This is not some random jargon some guy took it upon himself to throw around like he owns it.

*'''It's already mentioned that most of this article is based on opinion'''. HOWEVER, just like tiers, they are still notable to the community, even if they don't exactly impact tournaments. Oh and about your "I'm right everyone's wrong"...yeah that's what they all say. And it's not going to change anyone's mind. I've backed up my position with facts and detailed analysis whenever possible, I've even tried to be as open ended as possible on this article, even to the point of vagueness and inconsistency. You can't just clear-cut it and say everyone who doesn't agree is wrong. - [[User:Gargomon251|Gargomon251]] ([[User talk:Gargomon251|talk]]) 02:49, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

*Toon Link is not a clone. You're judging mostly on animation rather than mechanics.  For starters, his aerial game is quite different, and that constitutes about a quarter of a character's moves.  His neutral special is very different from Link's.  His up special is also different from Link's in terms of mechanic.  His up and down smashes are considerably different from Link's.  He is lighter, faster, and has higher priority than Link.  So, if his aerial game, with one exception, is different from Link's, half his smashes are different, and half his specials are different, then he's basically about 50% similar with Link, making him a semi-clone.

*I just think it's a dumb term. It can be mentioned in passing, but I think it's stupid. I don't care about how prominent it's use is; technical terms are more precise than jargon, thus technical terms>jargon.

*Of course I can say everyone else is wrong. Doesn't mean I'm right, necessarily, although I am. [[User:Semicolon|Semicolon]] ([[User talk:Semicolon|talk]]) 03:04, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

PEOPLE! You can't try to define clones by saying "Well if they only share 3 attacks..." because it's a fan term, so if 1 person (Just for example) said Luigi was a clone of Mario, and 3 other people say no he isn't, BOTH ideas have to be mentioned because they're both fans, and clone is a fan term. So even if more people think Luigi isn't a clone, there's a handful of fans who do, and we have to mention the opinions of ALL fans in a fan term article. And please don't respond to this comment by arguing about Luigi being a clone of Mario, because it's just an example, (I could have used Wario being a clone of Captain Falcon and it would have gotten the princible across.) [[Special:Contributions/74.73.142.163|74.73.142.163]] 21:03, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

:While it is fan-defined, that doesn't mean we have to represent every opinion.  Mario and Luigi have been clones, semi-clones, etc., and that has logic behind it.  Wario and C.Falcon, however, have nothing in common that an argument about a clone relationship could be based off of.  So let's be clear: there has to be substance to an argument beyond "I THINK THIS SO ITS TRUE" to merit representation. [[User:Miles.oppenheimer|<font color="forestgreen"><span style="font-family:Comic Sans MS;">'''Miles''']] <font color="lime">([[User talk:Miles.oppenheimer|<font color="lime">talk]])</font></font></span></font> 21:14, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

:Just because one person says something doesn't make it true or even notable. In fact, usually it turns out to be vandalism. It has to be known and accepted by a large amount of players, like chaingrabs.- [[User:Gargomon251|Gargomon251]] ([[User talk:Gargomon251|talk]]) 00:30, 4 March 2009 (UTC)