Talk:Super Smash Bros./Archive 9

message: I know this is gonna happen, so I'm gonna make this clear since it's already proven.
The following picture, , is fake. If you notice, the text on the botton of the page is EXACTLY tat of the text on the image with Lucario and Jigglypuff . Therefore, this is fake, ergo, Geno and Luigi have NOT been confirmed.
Thank you :) Dengarde ► Complaints  02:13, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I know that what you showed us is fake put who is the person next to Bowser?--DarkFierceDeityLink 03:16, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm guessing it's Geno, but who's Geno, is he a Nintendo/Mario character? (sorry to ask here)  Doktor  Wilhelm  03:29, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

text: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geno_%28Super_Mario%29#Geno .--DarkFierceDeityLink 03:30, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Geno is not a Nintendo character, unfortunately - in his cameo in Mario and Luigi: Superstar Saga he is credited as Square Enix's property. As such, he would be a third-party character. -Jéské (Blah v^_^v) 03:37, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Geno and Luigi 

message: Except for that section concerning the edit war, I believe this is ready for a new Archive. --haha169 (talk) 04:41, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Holy crap, 133000bytes?! I'm on it...Dengarde ► Complaints  04:49, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Done. Dengarde ► Complaints  04:53, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

text: Ya. I saw that too. I was quite surprised! :P --haha169 (talk) 04:59, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Archive

message: I saw this discussion in the archives, but I was unable to find whether or not they reached a decision. If not, I Support. Could someone please clear that up for me? Thanks. --haha169 (talk) 05:28, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Is the discuss you refer to the one where unlockable characters have a padlock icon () as opposed to a tick () from archive one? I think it was either no consensus or either a consensus to not put them there. I believe one argument was that people could be confused by the meaning of the padlock also I believed that it was argued it was unnecessary and that wikipedia is not a gameguide so I assume that padlocks will again be rejected. The Light6 (talk) 05:44, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

text: Further, padlocks are used to denote a protected article. -Jéské (Blah v^_^v) 06:09, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: True. However, does anyone have a good idea for showing unlock able characters? I understand how it could seem like a game guide, but it is also informative. --haha169 (talk) 00:36, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

text: I think marking characters as secret is unnecessary. Marking them as such could be confusing, as new people might not understand what the padlock means. There could be problems with characters that are unlockable in one game and in the starting roster of another, like Ness and Captain Falcon. It's not game guide info, I just don't think it needs to be mentioned.Satoryu (talk) 00:50, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: What about this image: (). It denotes an open padlock, which means unlock able. It will need to be enlarged in order to see the opening. --haha169 (talk) 06:31, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

text: That means is locked not opened.--Lbrun12415 06:33, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Padlock

message: In the UK part of DOJO, there is the footage for the Tokyo/Kyoto test battle, like with the other regions. I haven't looked at footage for other regions (though I presume they are different) but in the UK one a sandbag (like that of the home-run) appears on the lower left corner of the stage. If anything, what should be added to the article now, or should we wait until SSBB is released? Sandbag appears approximately 2/3 to 3/4 of the way through the footage, and is knocked off the stage reasonably quickly by what I think is a pokeball. To me, this shows that he works the same as in home-run mode, but if moving at a decent rate can likely damage characters (similar to tossing an item). The footage is here: .
--kami.inu (talk) 00:19, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The footage is the same for all regions except the Japanese. And there really nothing to add to the article about that. Dengarde ► Complaints  00:20, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Sandbag was confirmed as an item at at least one of the events that had the demo version.Satoryu (talk) 00:52, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sandbag 

message: I found a video on gametrailers.com called Challenger Approaching Pt. 2. 12 seconds in that video, they show the full roster of characters. The link is here. --Ryu-chan (Talk | Contributions) 19:20, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: As  much as we all wish the full roster was already revealed, we can't make any changes until it is absolutely confirmed and is public knowledge. One video can't confirm that, especially since there is a chance that it is fake. --haha169 (talk) 19:35, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Very possible.  So, it's best to wait a day or two for confirmation on this.  In the meantime, this is some great speculative material. KyuuA4 (talk) 03:46, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

text: Batman...LOL. Yeah, I see it. That's definitely fake. --haha169 (talk) 21:57, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: That's not Batman. It's Black Shadow from F-Zero. -Sukecchi (talk) 21:59, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: In any case, it's still fake, as it uses old character art for several of the characters, Wind Waker Link being the most obvious offender. --tktktk (talk) 22:12, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

text: Its only 4 more days some one with no life will unlock all of them in one day.--Lbrun12415 05:07, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

text: We haven't debunked anyone or anything over the last 8 months; we're not about to start now. I've got a roster that's 99% confirmed but you don't see me posting it here. Of course, as soon as the game is released and we've got screenshots of the final unlocked roster, those 8 months of unconfirmed edit reversion will be a moot point. --Coreycubed (talk) 02:59, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Roster Leaked

message: In the characters table, I am switching from  to , unless there is an alternative to the question mark, as just having one does not appear aesthetically correct with the checks and cross-marks.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 21:30, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Question Marks look at lot better than Unknown with the check marks and Xs. InsaneZeroG (talk) 21:45, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I like the look of the unknowns more than the question marks, they looked smaller and out of place to me.--kami.inu (talk) 21:48, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  I actually preferred the ? symbol rather than "Unknown", but like you said, it's a minor change, not earth-shattering. It can stay the way it is unless others chime in with disagreement. Coreycubed (talk) 21:52, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

text: I also prefer the ?s per AR's reason above.Satoryu (talk) 22:22, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

text: I also prefer the ? marks better. It just seems better-looking. --haha169 (talk) 23:30, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

text: -- ReyBrujo (talk) 04:31, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Minor stylistic change during protection 

message: :I'm pretty sure we can all trust the E for all testing of SSBB last year. If you check the video on Youtube, you will see the official start screen though not confirming anyone I say it should be mentioned in the playable characters section. BaconBoy914 (talk) 14:57, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Mentioned how? We already have a starting roster; it's somewhat irrelevant to the article as we do not have a complete roster yet. Coreycubed (talk) 15:33, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

text: We do? We have the starting roster for SSBB?BaconBoy914 (talk) 16:20, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: ...yeah. Seriously though, what difference does it make to the article? Coreycubed (talk) 16:25, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Start Screen 

message: Wouldn't it be useful if we put under the note of Pokémon Trainer that it is possible to set which pokémon you would start with or set it to random? The same goes for Zelda and Sheik where if you want Sheik to start the game, you'll have to hold the A button? Well, it's just a footnote addition, does it deserve to be in the article? deecee (talk) 02:47, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, if this is the Brawl Wikia site. Wikipedia has much higher standards, and we can't afford to include every tiny detail. Wikipedia is for educational purposes, not a game guide on how to select your pokemon or how to start as Sheik. That's what Gamestop and Game FAQ is for. --haha169 (talk) 03:46, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pokémon Trainer 

message: Some screens of Brawl have shown up today. More specificly, One with Marth, and one with Ness.
Any thoughts? Dengarde ► Complaints  03:48, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: A Video that confirms it all! Dengarde ► Complaints  03:53, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

text: Can an admin soon add Marth and Ness to the character table? Unknownlight (talk) 04:02, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  Ness is currently on the table due to an earlier leak (along with the Pokémon Jigglypuff and Lucario). --HeroicJay (talk) 04:30, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  Weeeeeeeeeeeeeeeell. It doesn't show him as playable, that's a CG scene. But, that is the intro to the game. It's already in the hands of gamers over there, so I don't see what the harm is, he'll be confirmed playable within hours. Coreycubed (talk) 04:34, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

text: So I suppose you've already confirmed that the SSE isn't going to feature any non-playable characters in CG cutscenes? That's cool, I'll go let Sakurai know. Coreycubed (talk) 04:37, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm sorry but how can that NOT be proof?  Yes, I know it's on YouTube, but come on.  That vid screams confirmed.  I think you might just be gatting a bit to picky at this point.  Neo Samus (talk) 05:13, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: It's not that, I was just making a point. Marth is a vet, enough for me. But...uh, YOU be the one to request the edit. :D Coreycubed (talk) 05:20, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Marth and Ness TRULY confirmed? 

message: I think a compromise could be achieved here. How about we only confirm the characters seen in this video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZYlGy7V3H3o. It shows Marth and Ness, the other characters even though they are seen in the videos, could be fake. For example, in the character selection pictures, each character is in a different spot per picture. We can add Ness and Marth as confirmed, but the rest will have to wait about 40-something hours.AlexanderLD (talk) 20:19, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: A YouTube video is not a reference. With the references I put above (there was no need to add this section at all) we can verify Lucario, Falco, R.O.B., Luigi, Ness, Mr. Game & Watch and Captain Falcon, plus appearances of Ridley and Ganondorf. We can even verify Bomberman. I know everybody is really excited, but lowering ourselves to use images and videos (which are copyright violation, since nobody has the rights to upload those images or videos), is pretty sad. 3 days are that long? -- ReyBrujo (talk) 20:23, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: IGN now hosting the vid  JQF • Talk • Contribs 20:27, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: That is different, because IGN, contrary to YouTube, is a reliable source. Although Insiders can upload their own videos there, not sure if to that section, though. -- ReyBrujo (talk) 20:36, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: It is their own. This can be indeed used. -- ReyBrujo (talk) 20:37, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  Then get an admn. to add Marth as playable.69.121.102.73 (talk) 20:47, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  >_> he IS an admin. Rey, if you wouldn't mind:
Would an administrator please add the confirmation of Marth as a playable character, per gameplay footage and IGN's source of the intro video correlating with known info. No other characters need to be adjusted at this time. Thank you. Coreycubed (talk) 20:49, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

text:  I'll do it. As a side note, I'm adding something to the FAQ regarding the roster that's been floating about. -Jéské (Blah v^_^v) 20:51, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: (ec) Nevermind, was entranced watching the opening again :-) -- ReyBrujo (talk) 20:52, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Compromise

message: :The following discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it.  Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.  No further edits should be made to this discussion. 
----
http://img148.imageshack.us/img148/2488/ssbbfinalrosteruh5pc2.jpg Spoilers beware PS, as long as a thing is on topic, you can't deleate it off a talk page. That is vandilism :P Lego3400:  The Sage of Time (talk) 20:50, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The game isn't officially out in Japan, Lego.  It will be out in a few hours, however.  It isn't Jan. 31 over there yet. -Jéské (Blah v^_^v) 20:52, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm reporting this second hand. The person who passed it to me said it actully got out early.Lego3400:  The Sage of Time (talk) 20:55, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: That picture of Wolf O'Donnell looks oddly familiar... Photoshop, anyone? Also, where's Bomberman? oobugtalk/contrib 20:56, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Wolf's face comes from a Star Fox Command promotional image, the font doesn't match, there's a white border around his slot that no other character has, and the hand's in the same position as this image.  While I don't doubt Wolf could be the final character, this is a blatant Photoshop. Arrowned (talk) 20:58, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

text: The above discussion is preserved as an archive.  Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Changed from Faked to edited. Everything but wolf seems to match up with other images I've seen.Lego3400:  The Sage of Time (talk) 21:17, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Japanse screen shot of Charcter Select 

message: Lucario, Falco, R.O.B., Luigi, Ness, Mr. Game & Watch, Captain Falcon - Computer and Video Games
Marth - IGN
Bomberman - Computer and Video Games
Please update this list with links to Wikipidia-verification-approved websites.  The only characters that have not yet been confirmed by an official publication, but have been confirmed by pictures, are Ganondorf and Young Link, so be on the lookout for these articles. oobugtalk/contrib 20:53, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I've already done Marth's, but given as I don't spend too much time looking through game sites, is C&VG truly a reliable source? -Jéské (Blah v^_^v) 20:56, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, wait till these sources are reliable.  IGN is definitely reliable.  But the other source does not appear to be so. KyuuA4 (talk) 20:56, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

text: I'd hold off on Bomberman. I've been reading that it's a faked shot. Equally unverifiable, but futher confirmation should be required, seeing as he's not mentioned by other sources, be they legitimate for Wikipeida or not. --LordHuffnPuff (talk) 20:59, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Computer and Video Games is backed by 26-27 years of experience. However, since exceptional claims require exceptional sources, you can wait until more sites pick that information up as well. -- ReyBrujo (talk) 21:00, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Ah, alright. Thank'ee, Rey. -Jéské (Blah v^_^v) 21:02, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

text: Updated the list.  It now looks somewhat bleak... oobugtalk/contrib 21:04, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

text: why can't we add C.Falcon or Luigi?--Lbrun12415 21:15, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Until they're confirmed by a notable, verifiable publication, we can't say that they've been confirmed by Wikipedia's policies. Although I'm convinced by the pictures, it goes against Wikipedia policy to solely use anonymously uploaded pictures of an unreleased game as a source. This list is for characters confirmed by official, reliable sources. oobugtalk/contrib 21:20, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Characters officially confirmed according to Wikipedia's policies

message: how are we going to add the new Link we can't put a check on young link b/c this link is not the same also what is the name of this new Link(toon Link).--Lbrun12415 21:03, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: We'll have to wait until it comes out in America before we know the English name of the character. oobugtalk/contrib 21:05, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

text: well its 10:00pm in japan now so we have to wait one more day for them to get it.--Lbrun12415 21:08, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Toon Link would still be a Young Link. He's still a young child (and thus needs to stay away from Quahog). However, we need hard and incontrovertible proof that Y/T Link is actually going to be in Brawl and not just speculation. I'd say that check Young Link when and iff he's confirmed, and put a footnote explaining that Melee's Young Link is modeled off of Ocarina of Time/Majora's Mask, and that Brawl's is modeled off of Wind Waker/Phantom Hourglass. -Jéské (Blah v^_^v) 21:09, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

text: Say if he has a different name like toon link or wind waker link, then what do we do put an X on young link? and add the new one?--Lbrun12415 21:12, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: No, check Young link and use a footnote explaining that Young Link is called Toon Link in Brawl (IFF he's confirmed). -Jéské (Blah v^_^v) 21:12, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

text: OK that works I was a lil confused about him.--Lbrun12415 21:13, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  About young link 

message: Do any of these seem legitamite (I know they're from photobucket, but still)? Most but the character roster image appear to be straight from the game itself, but I can't be quite certain myself. 76.104.78.25 (talk) 21:11, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm near-certain that the images are legitimate, but we're not going to use pre-release images as sources for the article. oobugtalk/contrib 21:14, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, they are legit, its just we decided not to add any more characters (unless they were either; A) Revealed on the DOJO!!!! or B) Shown on a reliable source such as Nintendo.com, Wii.com, or IGN.com) until the game has been released and we have definate proof of their confromation by NintendoAlexanderLD (talk) 21:31, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Legitamite??