Talk:Event 41: The FINAL Final Battle
Right
The article says that Sonic will hardly ever knock your character out during this match. Well, please explain why about half of my deaths were due to Sonic using one of his smashes on me? He is not only annoying; he can give you a quick kill if you turn your back on him to fight Giant Mario or Snake! LOAP
- Well, it could have happened to you, but the article's information isn't about a single player. It is about the average of players. For example, an article about another event might say: "This is an easy event" but it doesn't mean that it is easy for everyone. Or some players say that event 40 is harder than event 41, but I think event 41 is harder. See what I mean? Xeze (talk) 15:55, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
Strategies
Should we include them on our pages? It seems more like the kind of discussion that would happen on a forum. I mean, we should only mention strategies that have use in proffesional play, besides that, its unproffesional and unencyclopedic. Paradox Juice (talk) 01:26, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
The FINAL Final Showdown?
If this is a name somewhere, we need to put that down.--MegaTron1XD
23:27, 2 December 2010 (EST)
The info about the reception in the community
Why do you want it removed, or want a citation? Awesome Cardinal 2000 15:40, 30 July 2013 (EDT)
- It's a question of highly subjective fan reaction, and thus would definitely need a citation in order to merit being in a mainspace article like that. Miles (talk) 15:42, 30 July 2013 (EDT)
- Any such citations would be lost by now, buried in SmashBoards's search feature or deleted by AiB's pathetic attempts to recoup server space. That said I am certain that at one time this was widespread common knowledge, having vanished from easy research due to people not caring about Brawl's events in general (in fact, I think this was considered the posterboy event for how Brawl's events suck compared to Melee's). Toomai Glittershine
The Cloronic 16:52, 30 July 2013 (EDT)
- That's exactly the problem with information regarding fan and community knowledge into factual articles. When I was on Zelda Wiki (my username was K2L), whenever I wrote a Reception section for a game article, I had provided a sub-section for Fan Reception, citing the reader reviews of IGN and GameSpot. Since those are recorded within the site, they helped me build up a proper section summarizing the likes and dislikes of the majority of consumers. Maybe the same could be done in this wiki's game articles. Even the most common and noticeable knowledges have to be addressed via external references. Also (and keep in mind this a very friendly advice, not a provocation), reasonings like "I think this was considered the posterboy event for how Brawl's events suck compared to Melee's" don't help at all. It's already bad enough that any kind of reception is put unsourced (to not say shoehorned) in most articles just to deliberately give readers the impression that a game did absolutely everything wrong, when not everybody agrees with that vision. --186.88.91.189 17:04, 30 July 2013 (EDT)
- "just to deliberately give readers the impression that a game did absolutely everything wrong"
- That's exactly the problem with information regarding fan and community knowledge into factual articles. When I was on Zelda Wiki (my username was K2L), whenever I wrote a Reception section for a game article, I had provided a sub-section for Fan Reception, citing the reader reviews of IGN and GameSpot. Since those are recorded within the site, they helped me build up a proper section summarizing the likes and dislikes of the majority of consumers. Maybe the same could be done in this wiki's game articles. Even the most common and noticeable knowledges have to be addressed via external references. Also (and keep in mind this a very friendly advice, not a provocation), reasonings like "I think this was considered the posterboy event for how Brawl's events suck compared to Melee's" don't help at all. It's already bad enough that any kind of reception is put unsourced (to not say shoehorned) in most articles just to deliberately give readers the impression that a game did absolutely everything wrong, when not everybody agrees with that vision. --186.88.91.189 17:04, 30 July 2013 (EDT)
- Any such citations would be lost by now, buried in SmashBoards's search feature or deleted by AiB's pathetic attempts to recoup server space. That said I am certain that at one time this was widespread common knowledge, having vanished from easy research due to people not caring about Brawl's events in general (in fact, I think this was considered the posterboy event for how Brawl's events suck compared to Melee's). Toomai Glittershine
- Don't strawman, no one is trying to "deliberately give the impression that Brawl sucks at everything", they're simply reporting on an aspect of the game that got criticised. And "not everyone agreeing" is completely irrelevant; if we were to have information on the wiki on the basis of "everyone agrees", there would be no information for us to place on the Wiki. Omega Tyrant
17:15, 30 July 2013 (EDT)
- Don't strawman, no one is trying to "deliberately give the impression that Brawl sucks at everything", they're simply reporting on an aspect of the game that got criticised. And "not everyone agreeing" is completely irrelevant; if we were to have information on the wiki on the basis of "everyone agrees", there would be no information for us to place on the Wiki. Omega Tyrant
Bump, if no farther comment is made, I'll readd the reception note, since no one refuted what Toomai stated. Omega Tyrant 
12:31, 1 August 2013 (EDT)
