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)

"The point of this article is to be informative about what's actually confirmed, and speculation is inappropriate in this context."

It is not inappropriate at all, when many of Sakurai's statements have caused speculation that is widespread throughout the community. Reporting that speculation is information, and provides a written record of what people thought at X time to compared to what actually happened in the final game.

"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)."

And what do you fucking know, many of these statements cause rumors. Again, how dense are you? Reporting that stuff is exactly what the sentence refers to.

"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."

Except I have explained it over and over? Must I copy paste it all down again? Or is that skull of yours just too thick to comprehend? I'm not willfully misunderstanding anything, as already covered above.

"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."

Blatant strawman. Did I say anything about "reporting every bit of fan speculation"? What did I actually say in my very first post? Of course we won't just allow random users to add their own personal speculation that no one else believes. We are reporting the common speculation and rumors stemming from Sakurai's posts. When you have a bunch of people going "Ridley!" at the "Smash doesn't stay true to scale" comment, then yes, that is something notable that should be reported. When it's just one user going "Skull Kid may attack with a tantrum", then yes, that shit gets taken down. And there's always a clear distinction on what is speculation and what is confirmed information.

"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."

It does matter, because there's no point of doing it if we can't offer anything over them. And those DOJO updates we archived? You know we reported on the common speculation then? And it made it a hell of a lot more interesting to read, knowing what people thought at the time and comparing it to what we known happened.

""It's a special type of article that's more of a Wiki project" is presented again without justification."

Lets see. One, it's an archive for the updates of the new game, and of Sakurai's statements and what they entail, it's not a written article. Two, the archives will not be continually edited and cannot be continually improved, once the final update comes along and we got what we need down, all real editing on the pages will cease. Three, these pages exist within themselves, and won't have use being linked elsewhere on the Wiki beyond the relevanct Miiverse page, serving to time capsule the period before Smash 4's release. You can't just treat this as some bog standard mainspace article, when it has all of these qualities.

"Those exceptions are strictly for pages about said subjects, as I mentioned above. Not for pages like this."

Which, as I pointed out above, is completely relevant to this page.

"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."

Says the supposed admin who right away violated SW:1RV, reverts while not responding on the talk page, and just brushes off the opposition as "making zero justification". It's not an ad hominem, it's calling you out on your shit. Omega Tyrant 15:18, 1 March 2014 (EST)

It's pointless to argue with someone who clearly has no interest in holding a civil discussion; I've made my points clearly. Continuing to re-add this content is in violation of the wiki's standards and policies. I advise you to talk to Toomai if you want this content that badly, because it is not permissible. Miles (talk) 15:26, 1 March 2014 (EST)

"It's pointless to argue with someone who clearly has no interest in holding a civil discussion"

Again, who violated SW:1RV first? Who reverted without responding? Who kept brushing off the other side as "putting up no argument", even though they have typed like 10K characters on here? Don't tell me that I "have no interest in holding a civil discussion", when you have been a belittling ass the whole time who can't even abide by the Wiki policies they're trying to trump so hard.

"Continuing to re-add this content is in violation of the wiki's standards and policies."

Dude, you reverting me was a violation. Lets see, you remove a bunch of information, I revert, and do you go to the talkpage to "discuss it civilly"? No, you undo the revert. That right there is a blatant violation of SW:1RV. Then, after Toomai's post where he states he didn't disagree with the reporting of certain speculation, you don't respond farther, when you posted on other Wiki pages after. So I then rerevert you as it seems you conceded, and what do you do? Undo the revert yet again, claimed I "made no argument", and still never bothered to respond back on the talk page. Don't you dare throw this "violation of Wiki standards and policies" and "civil discussion" shit in my face when you have blatantly violated them this whole time you hypocrite.

You don't respond back in an hour, you show you have no refute, and have thus conceded. You don't get to go "oh I'm not going to respond to your argument, but don't add it back or that's a violation!". You want to keep this information off so badly? You refute then. Your behavior here is completely impermissible. Omega Tyrant 15:42, 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)

This needs to be settled, dropping a dispute for something that can be easily done later is completely counterproductive.

"Speculation just starts fights like this."

That's a really shit reason you know and against the spirit of a Wiki. "Oh someone might dispute this, guess we're better off without it regardless of its actual value". That kind of thinking would result in the tier list and all the competitive information being taken down. Actually, pretty much everything on the Wiki would get taken down except for the stuff you find in the instruction manual, if you weren't going to add something because "it could start arguments". Omega Tyrant 15:24, 1 March 2014 (EST)

Yeah I'll just stay out of this until you both agree that the other is correct, because guess what, that's what's up. Toomai Glittershine Le Grand Fromage 15:45, 1 March 2014 (EST)