Talk:List of Director's Room Miiverse posts/Archive 2

Regarding speculation

This isn't so much a proper mainspace article, as it is just an archive of Sakurai's posts, we don't need to be absolutely anal here about no speculation. Reporting common speculation on what Sakurai's often vague posts mean is fine and helps makes this archive more interesting and informative, while also giving us a written record of what people thought at the time, to compare to what actually happened in the final game.

This is even backed by our no speculation policy, which states "there is a certain amount of tolerance for reporting speculation that is widespread throughout the Smash Bros. community (such as documenting the most well-known rumours)".

Of course we won't just allow random users to add their own personal speculation that no one else believes (such as saying Skull Kid may attack with a tantrum). And it'll always be made clear when something is fan speculation and when something is pure fact. Omega Tyrant 22:38, 28 February 2014 (EST)

It doesn't belong here. The policy also says "This policy strictly applies to articles about content from unreleased games", which is exactly what this is about. The notes column should focus strictly on what is confirmed from Sakurai's posts, not what is speculated as a result of them. Miles (talk) 22:48, 28 February 2014 (EST)

Yes it does here, actually read what I wrote. Omega Tyrant 22:50, 28 February 2014 (EST)

This is an archive of confirmed statements. That is all that belongs here. I fail to see how that's unclear. Miles (talk) 22:55, 28 February 2014 (EST)

"This isn't so much a proper mainspace article, as it is just an archive of Sakurai's posts, we don't need to be absolutely anal here about no speculation. Reporting common speculation on what Sakurai's often vague posts mean is fine and helps makes this archive more interesting and informative, while also giving us a written record of what people thought at the time, to compare to what actually happened in the final game."

This was not refuted. This is an archive of Sakurai's posts and what they or what people think they could mean, not of "confirmed statements"; we have that already in the mainspace articles. Reporting on what people think Sakurai's posts means is absolutely needed. Trying to be 100% anal about speculation and treating this as a normal mainspace article makes it a hell of a lot less interesting and informative, and especially weakens it's capability to be interesting down the line after the game is released. Omega Tyrant 23:04, 28 February 2014 (EST)

This is a timeline of what Sakurai said and when; what makes you think it's not "a proper mainspace article"? And this is not, nor should it be, an archive of "what people think they could mean". That's a kind of speculation that has no place in the wiki's mainspace, period. Miles (talk) 23:11, 28 February 2014 (EST)

"This is a timeline of what Sakurai said and when"

And it's additionally a timeline to show what people thought Sakurai's often vague statements mean (which you know, causes a lot of fucking rumors, which this wiki explicitly covers as stated even in the speculation policy). If people want a bland archive of just "Sakurai said X", they can find that on other sites already. If people want to see what Sakurai's posts mean or potentially hint at, then this archive will be informative to them.

"what makes you think it's not "a proper mainspace article"?"

It's an archive of Sakurai posts and a time capsule of sorts. It's a special type of article that's more of a Wiki project, and doesn't have to adhere to standard Wiki procedure. Don't treat it like it's a bog standard mainspace article.

"And this is not, nor should it be, an archive of "what people think they could mean". That's a kind of speculation that has no place in the wiki's mainspace, period."

Stop being so fucking anal and actually read what I said. I already refuted this, and you just ignore each of the points while just shouting "NO SPECULATION!". That is not a refute.Omega Tyrant 23:22, 28 February 2014 (EST)

"It's a special type of article that doesn't have to adhere to standard Wiki procedure. Don't treat it like it's a bog standard mainspace article."

Do you have any justification for this statement, or are you just inventing it out of nowhere? There's a standard set of expectations for mainspace articles, and you're claiming this as an exception without any sort of valid reasoning. This is "List of Director's Room Miiverse posts", not "List of Director's Room Miiverse posts with fan reactions". I wouldn't consider it "anal" to hold a mainspace page to the standard for mainspace pages. Miles (talk) 23:31, 28 February 2014 (EST)

"and you're claiming this as an exception without any sort of valid reasoning."

You're just being dense now, you are just going to completely ignored everything I said? I already explained how it adds to the article, while you just kept going "NO SPECULATION!". I additionally already pointed out how our own speculation policy that you keep trumpeting makes provisions for allowing the mention of notable rumors and speculation, which certainly fall in that line here. You're the one with no valid reasoning here.

And it's an archive of Sakurai's posts and what they could entail, not an article. The mainspace is just where it's convenient to put it. Don't treat an archive like it's a bog standard mainspace article. Omega Tyrant 23:40, 28 February 2014 (EST)

Not that I disagree with minor speculation here (though less than what the previous revert had), but how is an archive of posts not an article? It's not really much different from the Brawl version, and that's pretty much an article. Toomai Glittershine The Cloronic 23:46, 28 February 2014 (EST)

I view the Dojo archive the same way, it's just in a less organised manner. Also, the Dojo archive reported on some speculation relevant to Sakurai's updates. Omega Tyrant 23:54, 28 February 2014 (EST)

Miles, do not revert if you're not going to bother responding here, and don't especially claim the other side "failed to defend their point" when you don't even bother responding and another significant user posted agreeing with the other side's main point. That is some blatant bullshit right there. Omega Tyrant 07:11, 1 March 2014 (EST)

He disagreed with your main point, which claimed that this page was an exception to mainspace article standards, and you have continued to provide zero justification for that claim. You are the only one claiming this page as an exception to our accepted standards, and therefore the burden of justification is on you. Miles (talk) 14:15, 1 March 2014 (EST)

"Not that I disagree with minor speculation here"

What is this whole thing over? The reporting of common speculation. That's the main point. And zero justification?

"Reporting common speculation on what Sakurai's often vague posts mean is fine and helps makes this archive more interesting and informative, while also giving us a written record of what people thought at the time, to compare to what actually happened in the final game."

"This is even backed by our no speculation policy, which states "there is a certain amount of tolerance for reporting speculation that is widespread throughout the Smash Bros. community (such as documenting the most well-known rumours)"."

"This is an archive of Sakurai's posts and what they or what people think they could mean, not of "confirmed statements"; we have that already in the mainspace articles."

"Reporting on what people think Sakurai's posts means is absolutely needed. Trying to be 100% anal about speculation and treating this as a normal mainspace article makes it a hell of a lot less interesting and informative, and especially weakens it's capability to be interesting down the line after the game is released."

"And it's additionally a timeline to show what people thought Sakurai's often vague statements mean (which you know, causes a lot of fucking rumors, which this wiki explicitly covers as stated even in the speculation policy). If people want a bland archive of just "Sakurai said X", they can find that on other sites already. If people want to see what Sakurai's posts mean or potentially hint at, then this archive will be informative to them."

"It's an archive of Sakurai posts and a time capsule of sorts. It's a special type of article that's more of a Wiki project"

"I additionally already pointed out how our own speculation policy that you keep trumpeting makes provisions for allowing the mention of notable rumors and speculation, which certainly fall in that line here"

Fucking seriously dude? Are you that fucking dense? I got all this here, and you're just gonna keep going "LOL you have provided zero justification no defense for your point NO SPECULATION!". You're the one here with no fucking argument. You keep parroting " NO SPECULATION!" over and over, initially violate SW:1RV, and then keep reverting and reverting when you don't even bother to respond. And then you have the audacity to claim I "put up no justification", when I typed all this out? This is the type of shit for why I say you're such a terrible admin, and why the majority of other users agree with that sentiment. Step off the fucking high horse, and put up a real argument that isn't a blind stating of Wiki policies you clearly don't grasp. Omega Tyrant 14:36, 1 March 2014 (EST)

• The point of this article is to be informative about what's actually confirmed, and speculation is inappropriate in this context.
• That sentence refers to things like the List of rumors page, not to articles that are supposed to be factual archives. And this article is a factual archive (see Toom's post).
• You're inventing the claim that this article somehow is exempt from the ordinary rules about speculation, and without any valid basis. You are willfully misunderstanding that section of SW:NOT.
• I'm not really in the interest of caring what you think is "a hell of a lot less interesting and informative". It would also be "interesting" to report every bit of fan speculation everywhere. But not beneficial to the functioning of the wiki as a reliable, factual encyclopedia.
• Who cares if it's on other sites already? That's like saying we shouldn't list the DOJO posts because anyone could go read them on their own, but we still list them to give a factual timeline of reveals for Brawl. In this case you need an account, making it doubly important that we stick to the facts to make sure those without access on their own get just the facts.
• "It's a special type of article that's more of a Wiki project" is presented again without justification.
• "I additionally already pointed out how our own speculation policy that you keep trumpeting makes provisions for allowing the mention of notable rumors and speculation, which certainly fall in that line here" Those exceptions are strictly for pages about said subjects, as I mentioned above. Not for pages like this.

Are you satisfied now with a wall of text back? It's getting tiresome to have to explain this to you. And it's not only rude to turn this into an ad hominem style attack, it's also not helping your case. Miles (talk) 14:48, 1 March 2014 (EST)

Both of you calm down. All I want is the list to be completed. Maybe you can fill out the June and July sections on Archive 1, and then decide on what you want to do with the speculation. The notes don't have to be filled out, so let's not touch them until we make a decision. By the way, Omega, you just gave me an edit conflict! SeanWheeler (talk) 14:42, 1 March 2014 (EST)

Uh, Miles, you just posted over my previous comment. And Omega, I think I'm starting to side with Miles. Speculation just starts fights like this. SeanWheeler (talk) 14:58, 1 March 2014 (EST)