Talk:Roy: Difference between revisions
TheNuttyOne (talk | contribs) |
ScoreCounter (talk | contribs) |
||
| Line 15: | Line 15: | ||
==Coding mention== | ==Coding mention== | ||
It's not a rumor that the coding exists. We know it's there, we have more than five trustworthy sources (idk who they all are but I have two sources saying there are five sources, so :P). The "rumor" is what it's for. We have mention of Brawl's unused coding, why can't we mention the Smash 4 coding? You haven't supplied a reason besides "no". And I believe a reason is supposed to always be supplied. <small>---Preceding unsigned comment added by [[Special:MyPage|you]]. Or maybe [[User:Nutta Butta|Nutta.]] </small> 16:18, 28 April 2015 (EDT) | It's not a rumor that the coding exists. We know it's there, we have more than five trustworthy sources (idk who they all are but I have two sources saying there are five sources, so :P). The "rumor" is what it's for. We have mention of Brawl's unused coding, why can't we mention the Smash 4 coding? You haven't supplied a reason besides "no". And I believe a reason is supposed to always be supplied. <small>---Preceding unsigned comment added by [[Special:MyPage|you]]. Or maybe [[User:Nutta Butta|Nutta.]] </small> 16:18, 28 April 2015 (EDT) | ||
:Whilst it may be true that the code exists, it is not then assosiated that those characters will be in the game - noting them outside of the rumours page will be inferring their confimation, which will just end up with the rumor being needlessly spread further. In other reason, it comes down to the fact that "It's better to err on the side of caution.". That's how I see it anyway. Score[[Special:Contributions/ScoreCounter|C]]o[[User:ScoreCounter|u]]n[[User Talk:ScoreCounter|t]]er 16:26, 28 April 2015 (EDT) | |||
Revision as of 16:26, April 28, 2015
Super Smash Bros. Brawl?
The bottom article is not needed. Simply put, people only say that because he is low tier, and they are biased, and hate low tiers. Hint: No Diddy Kong in Melee because of DK's low/bottom tier status. It has to do with tier status, that is why no one wants him. No one on the SWF has probably even played his game. Johnknight1 1:21, 7 October, 2007 (PCT)
Roy in Smash 4
This was probably discussed elsewhere, but should we mention that the latest update for Super Smash Bros. for Nintendo 3DS had data indicating that Roy might be playable down the line? - BrawlMatt202 (talk) 12:43, 18 April 2015 (EDT)
- Covered on List of rumors; we should avoid mentioning it elsewhere unless that data is confirmed to represent real DLC. Miles (talk) 14:09, 18 April 2015 (EDT)
Request for protection
This edit war is going to just get bigger if we don't do something to stop it IMO. Nyargleblargle (Talk) 16:05, 28 April 2015 (EDT)
- ...I hardly consider it an edit war. I added something, he removed it, I changed it to be better, he removed it again. It's four actions, and none of them were overly war-y. ---Preceding unsigned comment added by you. Or maybe Nutta. 16:18, 28 April 2015 (EDT)
Coding mention
It's not a rumor that the coding exists. We know it's there, we have more than five trustworthy sources (idk who they all are but I have two sources saying there are five sources, so :P). The "rumor" is what it's for. We have mention of Brawl's unused coding, why can't we mention the Smash 4 coding? You haven't supplied a reason besides "no". And I believe a reason is supposed to always be supplied. ---Preceding unsigned comment added by you. Or maybe Nutta. 16:18, 28 April 2015 (EDT)
- Whilst it may be true that the code exists, it is not then assosiated that those characters will be in the game - noting them outside of the rumours page will be inferring their confimation, which will just end up with the rumor being needlessly spread further. In other reason, it comes down to the fact that "It's better to err on the side of caution.". That's how I see it anyway. ScoreCounter 16:26, 28 April 2015 (EDT)
