Talk:Super Smash Bros. Brawl/Archive 5

message: In early June, there was a little mini-war over whether the "Confirmed characters" section should have headers or not.  Right now each character is presented like so: ===Mario===.  I changed it to ;Mario : but that was changed back twice.  On the second time  recommended that I take it to the talk page.  So why not.  The question: Should the confirmed characters be changed to lists?
*Headers - how the article currently looks
*Lists - see User:Hbdragon88/Temp
Pros for lists:
*Discourages anons and other users from editing each individual section one-at-a-time; result is a cleaner edit history
*Not as much as an eyesore on the TOC (there are more "confirmed characters" headers on that section than there are in the entire TOC)
Cons for lists: 
*It looks "daft" HighwayCello
*Harder to edit (HighwayCello)
Hbdragon88 22:40, 9 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Add *Support or *Oppose followed by an optional one-sentence explanation, then sign your opinion with ~~~~
*Oppose Since my point has been POVed, why bother. Voting is evil. Highway Batman! 23:07, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

text: Add any additional comments
*I personally think that the fact that individual sections are edited is a PRO, not a con, of headers. It makes it more clear what the user is editing, and actually makes the history easier to read because you can browse each individual edit more efficiently. This one of the reasons why we encourage people to leave the automatically produced section header in the edit summary. I do understand your point about cluttering up the TOC. However, once the confirmed list gets expanded more, it'll probably be worth it to move the confirmed characters to its own subpage, and make the confirmed characters section a single paragraph of prose. EWS23 (Leave me a message!) 23:17, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

text: *I've seen many instances (not specifically in SSBB) where new users or anons rack up a ridiculous amount of edits because they're making changes to each individual section (sometimes 2-3 edits per section) since they don't know that it's easier and cleaner to go up to the main section header.  This is why I consider it to be a pro to simply remove the edit sections and make them make all major edits under major header and not each individual one. Hbdragon88 23:23, 9 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: *Having anons "rack up a ridiculous amount of edits" because they edit each section individually doesn't do any damage. Also, at the moment, we have the header, then a link to the main article of that character. With these link things, the header is the link to the main article, which in my opinion is confusing for the casual reader. -- Steel 23:27, 9 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: *Well, of course it doesn't do any damage - it just makes the history more cluttered up.  Re: the links - confusing?  It's a blue link...blue, underlined links have been the default since the inception of the World Wide Web.  On the flip side, I think the current way it looks - I think naming the character three times - header, main, and in the actual text - is overkill. Hbdragon88 08:49, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: *The history thing is really a non-issue. We're not in charge of the history, nor is it our responsibility to ensure it doesn't get "cluttered" (whatever that means). Also, about the overkill business, we could easily rephrase the beginning of each paragraph so the character is only named in the header and the main article link. -- Steel 10:05, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

text: *Presumably, we are supporting or opposing a change.  Supporting no change would be opposing a change, the latter of which makes a clearer sentence.  But it would be better to clarify.--The Ninth Bright Shiner talk 21:06, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Headers vs. lists 

message: :Add *Support or *Oppose followed by an optional one-sentence explanation, then sign your opinion with ~~~~
*Oppose Since my point has been POVed, why bother. Voting is evil. Highway Batman! 23:07, 9 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Survey

message: :Add any additional comments
*I personally think that the fact that individual sections are edited is a PRO, not a con, of headers. It makes it more clear what the user is editing, and actually makes the history easier to read because you can browse each individual edit more efficiently. This one of the reasons why we encourage people to leave the automatically produced section header in the edit summary. I do understand your point about cluttering up the TOC. However, once the confirmed list gets expanded more, it'll probably be worth it to move the confirmed characters to its own subpage, and make the confirmed characters section a single paragraph of prose. EWS23 (Leave me a message!) 23:17, 9 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: *I've seen many instances (not specifically in SSBB) where new users or anons rack up a ridiculous amount of edits because they're making changes to each individual section (sometimes 2-3 edits per section) since they don't know that it's easier and cleaner to go up to the main section header.  This is why I consider it to be a pro to simply remove the edit sections and make them make all major edits under major header and not each individual one. Hbdragon88 23:23, 9 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: *Having anons "rack up a ridiculous amount of edits" because they edit each section individually doesn't do any damage. Also, at the moment, we have the header, then a link to the main article of that character. With these link things, the header is the link to the main article, which in my opinion is confusing for the casual reader. -- Steel 23:27, 9 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: *Well, of course it doesn't do any damage - it just makes the history more cluttered up.  Re: the links - confusing?  It's a blue link...blue, underlined links have been the default since the inception of the World Wide Web.  On the flip side, I think the current way it looks - I think naming the character three times - header, main, and in the actual text - is overkill. Hbdragon88 08:49, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: *The history thing is really a non-issue. We're not in charge of the history, nor is it our responsibility to ensure it doesn't get "cluttered" (whatever that means). Also, about the overkill business, we could easily rephrase the beginning of each paragraph so the character is only named in the header and the main article link. -- Steel 10:05, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

text: *Presumably, we are supporting or opposing a change.  Supporting no change would be opposing a change, the latter of which makes a clearer sentence.  But it would be better to clarify.--The Ninth Bright Shiner talk 21:06, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Discussion

message: Name Change! the official site now lists it as Super Smash Dojo —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.162.147.208 (talk • contribs) 
:I, in fact, have no idea what this person is talking about. I am, however, plopping it into its own section so it isn't confused at part of the above discussion. -- Consumed Crustacean | Talk | 06:06, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: There was a discussion here talking about Brawl's name being changed to Super Smash Bros Dojo. He's just confusing the site name for the game name. - Zero1328 Talk? 11:27, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, this is pretty common from people who don't take a good look at what they're talking about. Even though the smashbros.com website clearly refers to the game as "Brawl" many times over, the name of the site itself is the "Super Smash Bros. Dojo". No name change for this article necessary. --HeroicJay 19:58, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: "Dojo" is the name of the official site, and "Brawl" is the name of the game itself. they wouldn't change the name after making the logo and releasing the trailer under that name. FyreNWater 21:08, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: This page was on Nintendo.com, but it got pulled (this is a mirrored version): http://wii.nintendo.com.nyud.net:8080/wifi.html. Scroll down to the section labeled "Fun", and you'll see this: "Join the Nintendo worldwide community! Play the coolest titles around with gamers from around the world via Nintendo Wi-Fi Connection. Whether you're thrashing with your friends in Tony Hawk's Downhill Jam or hammering the competition in Smash Bros. Dojo, Wii opens up a world of fun through online play!" What does that mean? Who knows. Max22 04:52, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: ZOMG!  It couldn't mean that maybe the authors of a site containing a small note about SSBB's online play which no longer exists (the mirror doesn't work either) made a mistake or something...or could it?  Let's take a look at the official site:
From the opening paragraph:
"As for future updates to Smash Bros. Dojo... What should I do? I haven't given it much thought yet.
From the latest update:
"When Super Smash Bros. Brawl is completed sometime in 2007, I plan to post more information for you. "
Case closed. Xubelox 05:20, 20 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Super Smash Dojo 

message: Supposedly, it will be rated B in Japan, T for Teen in the U.S., and 12+ in Europe. --PJ Pete
:Could you provide a source, please?--The Ninth Bright Shiner talk 01:21, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Considering he said supposedly, it's probably not a very good one. Xubelox 21:15, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

text: While those ratings sound plausible (I think it'll be E10+, but whatever), it's not confirmed, so don't add it. RememberMe? 01:24, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Ratings

message: I heard this and was going to add this to the article, but then decided that it might not be true.
I have just found out that three new characters--Young Wind Waker LInk, Ridley(is that spelled right?), and Bowser Jr.-- were added to Brawl, and two character--Ice Climbers and Mr. Game and Watch-- were cut from Brawl. I have no idea if this is credible or not, so I wanted to ask if anyone knew.
I found this on Youtube(just search for "three newcomers"), and, if you watch the video, you can understand my doubts.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Superbub (talk • contribs) 
:Exactly why we're going to go ahead and not include it. This rumours has already been passed around the article repeatedly, it's pretty dumb. -- Consumed Crustacean | Talk | 01:17, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I thought this rumor was a foruminsh comment. --DcPimp 15:20, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: *Backs away from Xubelox* Let's all hope. The Sonic fake shot has been the best fake so far, this is just dire now. Highway Batman! 16:15, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh, come on. Not only is this rumor all but proven false, but the video in question involved scenes from Wind Waker, Super Smash Bros. Melee (for Ridley), and Super Mario Sunshine in its "NEWCOMER" intros. --HeroicJay 23:24, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

text: "According to the French-based site LiveWii". -- Consumed Crustacean | Talk | 14:01, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That sight is getting a little annoying. Highway Batman! 14:04, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

text: Any honest person maing a fan video (ie not trying to trick someone) should put a warning at the beginning saying it's fake. I made a video and I did that. RememberMe? 01:40, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Arnt the vast majority (if not all) the fan videos blatantly fake? No offence intended Topic Creator but pay some more attention to the source.Qwerasdfzxcvvcxz 12:23, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

text: It's fine that you want to keep Wikipedia up to date, Superbub, it's just that this topic has already been thrown around before, including YouTube.  I mentioned that site before, but that section of the talk page has already been archived.  I don't think that people were purposely trying to be mean, and I'm pretty sure that no one really wants you to die.  So even though you meant well, talk of those characters has become annoying now and no one wants to talk about it until they appear on the Dojo page (that is, if they even do at all). -SaturnYoshi 14:25, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

text: And I apologise if my first comment there insulted you. I was talking about how dumb the rumour itself is; badly faked, unsourced, etc. -- Consumed Crustacean | Talk | 15:11, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I didnt mean to insult you either (I said it in my message) I was just saying that people that blindly beliieve those things are not the brightest people. bye the bye I'm QwerasdfzxcvvcxzDooD 12:52, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

text: I'm curious as to whether the YouTube person got the "info" from 1Up or vice-versa (or neither).  Either way, I can think of two things to quell any rumors about this that might remain.  First, Ridley gets around by flying and never seems to need to stop, which would give him more than a slight advantage in a game where the only way to lose is to fall off the ring.  Second, IGN, Gamespot, and Nintendo are all devoid of the news. -Unknownwarrior33 06:17, 13 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Ergh, it really is too bad that Sakurai's site had decided to be defunct right after being opened. We have to wait until 2007 when the game is released instead of updating regularly along with the site and actually giving this page some action. I would've sold Highway's cello for that. And remember that we most likely still have several months of this "dire" torture to wait through until something happens in the news. Erik Jensen (I appreciate talk!) 17:48, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Three new characters? 

message: I don't think we should have sections on stages, items and abilities at this point since all we have to go on is an early trailer for a source. Dread Lord CyberSkull ✎☠ 07:47, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Even at this early point, there is still enough info for these sections. We known they will have "Super Smash Atacks", that there are new stages, and that new items will be used. Those things were shown in the trailer, so unless they drastically change the game (which there is no evidence of) the sections can remain. It would just start an edit war if you try to remove them, and the sections are going to be there when the article reaches a "finished" state after the game is released. JQF 14:13, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I have no problem with them in the article when the game is releaesed or even before then, but at this point we have no info other than a few announcements that take up 6 paragraphs between them, much of which concerns analysis of the trailer, not a report of what is in the game. Dread Lord CyberSkull ✎☠ 06:10, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: We can reorganize it or make it shorter without getting rid of it. -Unknownwarrior33 06:18, 13 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Stages, Items and Abilities. 

message: I'm noticing that a LOT of people as of late are constantly vandalizing several of these Nintendo pages.  The comment I read on this article really annoyed me.  I'm thinking that this page should be locked from outside users from editing it because it seems that reverting the page just isn't enough.  I know Wikipedia is supposed to be user friendly but all these unknowns think that it's just some joke site or they don't care that a lot of editors spend most of their editing reverting dumbass comments made by stupid people on the main articles.  Maybe Wikipedia should change it's policy so that only registered users can edit any pages and any users caught maliciously vandalizing any articles should be booted off forever. - SaturnYoshi 06:58, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It's just something Wikipedians have to put up with, at least for the moment.  It could be a good idea to semi-protect this page again, but... well, any Internet site will get its fair share of trolls, and to my mind it's too much effort to be annoyed by any but the most persistent.  Don't sweat the vandals too much - just think of them as the village idiots.  That's what I do, anyhow; laugh and revert all their 'hard work' with three mouse clicks. --Sparky Lurkdragon 07:58, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: if you had to be a member to edit, it wouldn't be the "Encyclopedia anyone can edit" now would it? --DcPimp 03:09, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Expect anyone can become a member.  If a=b and b=c, then a=c.—ウルタプ 04:48, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It's supposed to be casually editable and inviting. The only reason I created an account was so that my opinions would be respected more in AfDs, and I now use it because of the watchlist and being able to be contacted by people and whatnot. If I wasn't one who liked to vandal patrol and such, I probably would have remained an anonymous editor. -- Consumed Crustacean | Talk | 07:52, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: What if only people in the Wikiproject Nintendo could edit it? Is it possible to do that? I see that as a viable solution, as people in WP Nintendo are probably extremely up-to-date on the topic. And I doubt they would vandalize the page. --Belugaperson 13:43, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That's not possible with the wiki software, and even if it was, that feature would never be used. At any rate, the level of vandalism to this article is not actually that high. -- Steel 13:57, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

text: I mean real vandalism, not good faith edits. -- Steel 13:57, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Indeed. In addition, anyone can join the WikiProject, so the feature would not be effective for persistent vandals. Thank you, though, for the suggestion, Belugaperson. --Gray Porpoise 03:00, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I remember having somewhat of the same thought process with vandalism and protection as SaturnYoshi a while ago. What I had concluded is that once the game is released (who knows how long that's going to take), the vandalism should tone down, or at least switch from speculation to cruft. Erik Jensen (I appreciate talk!) 05:08, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: True enough, although I can't say that switch is much of an improvement.  Nintendo is a topic that creates a lot of flaming on message boards (and I should know; I've been insulted, made fun of, and threatened for being an avid Nintendo fan) and a look at some edit histories will tell you that it's carrying over to Wikipedia.  I don't know if there's any viable solution that wouldn't violate the definition of a wiki, and there hasn't been enough as of late to warrant locking it.  We just need to keep an eye on it. -Unknownwarrior33 06:27, 13 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: As long as those who consistantly edit the page continue to watch out for vandals, we'll be fine. There's really nothing else anyone can do, annoying or not. Jjam189 19:01, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vandalism 

message: Why is information on Snake's symbol being treated as "fan information"? All the other new characters have descriptions of their symbols, and Snake's being left out for this reason doesn't make any sense. Could someone please explain to me how this could even be considered "fan information" when it clearly shows that his symbol is the FOX symbol on the official Brawl website? I'd just like to get this cleared up. Comrade Pajitnov 15:50, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Personally, I don't think anyone pther than a fan would find the information particularly interesting. I can see it have minor notability, but their only use is to group characters in the game, which we're not even describing. I wasn't singling Snake out, I just saw it being added and didn't realise all the new characters had it. And I was trying to avoid another edit war. Highway Return to Oz... 16:04, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Ok then. Could we add the fact that it's the FOX logo, and leave out the whole Kojima bit? Comrade Pajitnov 16:27, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It's not the FOX(HOUND) logo.  Looking at its article, you can see that Snake's symbol doesn't match either of FOX(HOUND)'s logos.--the ninth bright shiner talk 19:35, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I never said it was the FOXHOUND logo, I said it was the FOX logo, which is also the logo of Kojima Productions: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Kojima_Pro_Logo.jpg Comrade Pajitnov 19:49, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh, alright.  I don't know squat about Metal Gear Solid, anyway.  It would seem reasonable to leave out the bit about Kojima Productions; the characters' symbols are based on their franchises, not who made them.--the ninth bright shiner talk 21:49, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Solid Snake's Symbol Fan Info? 

message: No longer are Super Smash moves reffered to as "Super Smash". Most forums have switched to calling them "Brawl" moves. Now, normally forums are full of specualtion and BS, but one in particular caught my attention: Nintendo's NSider forums. with the regular updating, and the fact it often recieves info well before other sites, their may be some stock in this. At the very least, we should say they are being called Brawl moves for the time being. --DcPimp 15:57, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't feel like sifting through that, care to provide the direct mention of it?Thursday Postal 06:41, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I can't give an exact link at the moment, so for now you'll kind of have to trust me. However, I should have a few links, or at least quotes from the pages, sometime tonight. --DcPimp 23:12, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Got some links here.
Brawl Attack Idea
Newcomer: Ike Fan page containing numerous refferals to "Brawl" attacks.
I'll try to find some others while I'm on the forums. I'm there a lot, so it shouldn't take too long. --DcPimp 23:22, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

text: In my eyes, it's a fan term one way or the other. I, personally, prefer "Super Smash". Calling them "Brawl" moves implies that they won't be in the fourth game. --HeroicJay 02:41, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Regardless, I've primarily heard it called "Brawl" as of late. If nothing else, can we mention it in the "Items and Abilities" section? You know, put it in parentheses and say that many fans and forums are calling them that? --DcPimp 02:46, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I've attempted to integrate it into the article. --Sparky Lurkdragon 18:20, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

text: Thank you. --DcPimp 21:19, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

text: I dunno. --DcPimp 22:11, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Super Smash Move Name Change 

message: I added to the introduction that this game is ranking extremely high in anticipation. I figured this was newsworthy as it was #1 on an IGN list. If somebody wants to add a referance/footnote for the comment to this link (http://games.ign.com/topgames/), then that would help it seem more lagitament.
Tbkgm79 22:31, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Anticipation 

message: What the hell is going on between Sukecchi and tj terrorible?  It takes up almost an entire page of history.  Since it's incredibly counter-productive to improving this page, I ask, no, I plead, even though it seems somewhat futile, that Tj terrorible stop editing until he comes here to explain why he thinks his edits are useful. Xubelox 23:22, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: He kept saying the Japanese was useless, and that the notices and stuff weren't needed as well. He said he would still follow them, but they're there for everyone and not just him. >_> Even when his edits were reverted as a Good Faith edit he still did it. I appologize for the edit war. I asked him many times to stop and he just kept going. -Sukecchi 23:43, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Ah well.  No worries.  Looks like he stopped for good.  Or maybe he'll be back... Xubelox 00:12, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Ridiculous edit war

message: They're a waste of space and make the page look ugly. They're useless. That's why the wikipedia home page has different languages to select from. The translations might be helpful to someone who's bilingual that can speak English and Japanese, but for the rest of us, its just confusing. Again I ask why?
::Perhaps you should focus on the Zero Suit Samus section question first. -Sukecchi 16:56, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: And there was discussion about the Japanese, it was decided to keep it to make it look profesional. -Sukecchi 17:05, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

text: Short answer: Because the game and characters originate in Japan.  And Tj (assuming it's you, as you don't sign your comments), PLEASE stop with this annoying edit war.  It's extremely disruptful. Xubelox 23:14, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why do we need Japanese translations?

message: We should have pictures of regular Samus and Wario from the trailer.
::Please sign your posts. The article has Zero Suit Samus, and Samus and Wario's articles have their Brawl images in them already...so ::it's not really necessicary. We had a problem with too many images before and we've brought it down to this. -Sukecchi 02:54, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I still think if it can be done without the section being a mess we should go for it.Tuesday42 16:53, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  character pictures 

message: http://www.cubed3.com/news/5734
The official Nintendo boards are the source of the magazine’s text, which reads:
"Nintendo hopes that Snake's appearance in Super Smash Bros. Brawl will encourage other publishers to allow their characters to join the Smash Bros. line-up, and is already actively negotiating for the rights to include at least one other non-Nintendo character. Both Sakurai and Mario creator Shigeru Miyamoto have stated that Sega's Sonic the Hedgehog is the character that Smash Bros. fans have requested the most and... well, it's hard to type these words with our fingers crossed!" MetalBladeX4 16:35, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, reading the boards this info came from, it was from an article from Tips&Tricks magazine.  --SaturnYoshi 16:38, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  As someone who posted alot this summer on Nintendo's boards, let me just say that 95% of the info they come up with there is usually unnfounded or in the worst case, made up. Cosmic Larva 19:07, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Which? Tips and Tricks, or the Nintendo forums? :P --Shadow Hog 21:53, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Nintendo Rumour | Sonic Does Smash Bros. Brawl?

message: Um, new Smash Bros Brawl screens were posted on IGN from GC. if you want to put them in the article.--Nimrod1234 04:59, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: They're all from the existing trailer; nothing new there. --Shadow Hog 21:04, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

text: I have every single screen in that gallery. I downloaded them from Nintendo's press site in May. Yeah, they're just reposts. --70.141.140.63 04:38, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  New Screens 

message: Since it'll probably be a good deal more time until something new actually occurs in Smash Bros Brawl-related news, and the page itself has practically run out of content to improve, I'm posting a reminder that all of us should continue focusing on developing and fixing the articles on all the characters themselves while we're waiting. (Articles like Marth (Fire Emblem), Roy (Fire Emblem), Mr. Game & Watch, Falco Lombardi, and Pichu, not to mention the previous two games' pages, probably can be improved article-wise) That way, we won't have as much work to go through for those articles when Brawl is about to be released. I assume that's what many editors who've worked on this page have been doing the past couple months, but this is more of a message towards new editors and anonymous IP addresses; For the time being it's best if you all focus on improving those other articles because clearly this page won't be getting much better until Sakurai unloads a bunch of new Brawl content for us to write about. Thanks. Erik Jensen (I appreciate talk!) 21:05, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Smash Article Multi-Focus?