Talk:Super Smash Bros. Brawl/Archive 18

message: I know someone already asked about the purple robot in the most recent addition, but I have to wonder if we should do something about the Friday update. 
"In this world, tropheys fight. They know nothing but fighting, fighting is the sole reason for their existance. Being turned back into a trophey, being unable to fight, is much like death. These are the rules of this world. But, if someone or something breaks these rules, the world will pay a terrible price."
We should give a little mention about this to the article. Like saying 
"The site on july 19 the site gave a very confusing update stating 'In this world, tropheys fight. They know nothing but fighting, fighting is the sole reason for their existance. Being turned back into a trophey, being unable to fight, is much like death. These are the rules of this world. But, if someone or something breaks these rules, the world will pay a terrible price.' There is no answer to this confusing statement, but it seems as if not only will Brawl be explaining the purpose of Super Smash bros, it will be changing it entirely."
::Sign your posts please. We can't really say anything about it because most of it would be baseless speculation. We know nothing about this thing. -Sukecchi 14:18, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: This really looks more like a setting. If a plot comes out of it, it'll be given its own section. You Can't See Me! 19:55, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  "This World" update 

message: That all 8 original starter characters from the first Smash Bros. have been confirmed? Or is this too trivial? --Kenny2k 09:27, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Why though? Why is that important to make a note in the article about it? -Sukecchi 16:26, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Good point. magiciandude (Talk) (review) 16:45, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

text: No trivia sections. -Sukecchi 17:24, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

text: That's unnecessary as well; the character article already covers that. Arrowned 22:18, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Plus that that is along the lines of trivia or fancruft as well. -Adv193 22:36, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Should we note in the article... 

message: The people who keep speculating on this game should stop. They have no real idea what arenas are included. To see what arenas are confirmed look here.(http://www.smashbros.com/en_us/stages/index.html)Feared One 19:44, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: No. The article will be rewritten when the game comes out. — Malcolm (talk) 23:51, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Stages 

message: The article sucks. Everything is just thrown together in a mess of paragraphs! What happened to the original, more neat article? Dark Ermac 03:42, 25 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Isn't the talk page for discussing how to improve the article? It's better he asks here first than completly changing the article without saying anything. --Kenny2k 04:16, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

text: I agree with Dark Ermac. It does need a rewrite. What happened to all the stuff on development and music? --Pezzar 07:03, 25 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  There's a whole section on development. The article is fine as it is for now. Wait for the game to be released. --AgreeneyedFox 07:23, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

text: We do keep speculation and rumor out. That's one of the main things we look out for. -Sukecchi 10:54, 25 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: This article needs a rewrite

message: Can anyone say how this section is necessary? 1) It already says the kinds of controls and the custom names in the infobox and gameplay section respectively, in the infobox 2) They may be listed as "modes" on the site, but how the heck could "Four kinds of control" and "names" be modes? — Malcolm (talk) 23:50, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: it's not priority, seeing as there aren't really any confirmed modes yet. i say sit and wait. FyreNWater 07:59, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Any other catagory would make even less sense (Zojo 17:01, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Game modes 

message: I'm new and I have some interesting things about this game that I got from the website, but I'm not allowed to edit the page, just wanted to ask if I could be allowed to edit it. Thanks. Danziink 20:43, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Anything from the website we have already. -Sukecchi 20:59, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Assist Trophies are mentioned in the Brawl article. We do not need a list of any kind for either Pokeballs or Assist Trophies. If people want that information they can go to the site. -Sukecchi 21:45, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

text: Not nearly all information is encyclopedic. — Malcolm (talk) 22:32, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Maclom said it best. This is supposed to be an encyclopedic article. If we put everything in the article, then whats the point of having an article at all? It would just be a copy of the site. --Kenny2k 05:15, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I see your pointThe Wii Guy 15:46, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Adding info on pokemon, assist trophies, etc 

message: I noticed that the Pitfall item is out of all the other (normal) items in the game to have the Animal Crossing leaf icon. Sorry, kinda new to this wikipedia thing and I'm not this was the place to discuss such a thing (Btw I know it's not a forum, don't hurt me)66.133.192.156 07:24, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: hm, well first of all, the talk page is generally used for discussion of the improvement of this article, not for general questions, however, its pretty much used for that anyway. and, now for an actual response. The reason why it has the animal crossing leaf, compared to the other items that dont, is because that item is specifically from a game, and not an original creation from smash bros. the other symbol, the circle with two intersecting lines cut out, is the symbol for smash bros native objects. i hope this answers your question. C. Pineda 07:43, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: You sir are wrong. Dr. Wright has the HAL circle symbol, yet he is not "native to smash". However, this isn't the place to discuss such things. RandomGuy42 12:21, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

text: Ok, thats the ONE exception, but that's only because Dr. Wright, really has no other home, since SimCity for SNES was never really that big, nor did it have a lovely little symbol like all other games have. Check everything else, they all have symbols from their native game. C. Pineda 07:13, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Regarding the pitfall and it's icon 

message: I noticed that the article says that it will definitely be online. When I came here to discuss this, I read the FAQ and the FAQ confirmed online functionality from two sources: the first, a two year old article that states Brawl was to be a release game for the Wii, and the second, a year+ old article that shows Sakurai "plans" to have online. The point is, Wi-Fi is by no means confirmed. It's planned, and will probably happen, but there's still room for doubt.75.67.206.173 15:58, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, there's room for doubt, but until Nintendo or Sakurai plainly say "There will be no online", we go by what has already been said in the past. Arrowned 16:00, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I go by what the website states, and no where on it does it say that WiFi play is possible. So until it states that on the Dojo website, I don't think it should be included in the article. C. Pineda 17:52, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: So a direct quote from Sakurai in an interview that another website hasn't confirmed or denied (not to mention a website in which we get new updates daily, so there's clearly a load of things they haven't yet discussed) is automatically wrong? Arrowned 18:26, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The point is, things change. Online play hasn't been mentioned in a long time. A long time ago, everyone thought the Wiimote and Classic Controller wouldn't be compatible with Brawl, but now we all know they are. I am in favor of removing mention of online play from the article, until we get some up-to-date information about it. -- PowerslaveTC 20:06, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: No need to change it.  Brawl's online possiblity has been a hot topic between fans and Nintendo's power players.  The article kind of needs it.  And, trust me, you'll get a lot of people complaining in here if there's no mention of online play (not me)  Zojo 22:24, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Online Functionality 

message: Smash Bros.com didn't update today, what gives? 84.13.114.229 08:23, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: No, its just late. Monday's update was also late (1 hour and 3 minutes, to be exact.) Sakurai must of lost his password again. --Kenny2k 08:47, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, it was just late. It's Ike, from Fire Emblem. --Guess Who 09:51, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

text: Maybe we should just stick a mention of him with the other newcomers. Teamrocketspy621 12:06, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: But if we do that, then I'll bet that people will try to add every other new character that shows up on the Smash Bros. website into the article, making it long and ugly. Disaster Kirby 17:40, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Remember, article can't be perfect until the game's released and we have ALL the facts.  (Zojo 17:52, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  No update? 

message: http://www.gameinformer.com/News/Story/200708/N07.0802.1741.54921.htm
ChozoBoy 03:32, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: That's awesome. But still, there's not much we can do until they're formally announced on the Dojo.. -- PowerslaveTC 04:11, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

text: If its not on Dojo, it dosn't exist. --Kenny2k 04:13, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

text: Let me reword that. If its on Dojo, it is 100% fact. If its from anywhere else, there is room for doubt. --Kenny2k 05:33, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

text: Unfortunately, it's not an official source. Reliability =/= Official-ness. InsaneZeroG 06:04, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It's an interview with Eiji Aonuma, director of the Zelda series. Interviews with high-ranking Nintendo employees are reliable and official sources. Jesus, do you people know how to read? --Guess Who 07:26, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

text: It doesn't actually say they're going to be included; it says he submitted designs. Until they are actually confirmed on the official site, that's all they are; designs. - Jishmeister 11:32, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh, right, and Sakurai would ask for character designs because he's not putting the characters in. Teamrocketspy621 13:30, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Where does it say he asked? The way I see it, they were submitted for his consideration; & until he says otherwise, he's assumed to still be "considering" them. - Jishmeister 13:48, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

text: GameInformer is an actual credible magazine you know, I have four issues of it in my room right now. -Sukecchi 16:35, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: But unless it comes directly from the keyboard of Sakurai himself, it's not "official." - Jishmeister 16:37, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, I disagree with this.  While the only way we'll know for sure is to wait on Sakurai, GameInformer fits all the requirements by Wikipedia of being a reliable, third-party published source.  And there are hundreds of other video game articles on Wikipedia (more than a few for games not yet released) that similarly cite print magazines or gaming websites for information.  I'd suggest adding a note saying where the info came from and that it's not absolutely confirmed, but since it showed up in a magazine/professional website, this isn't original research or anything, meaning there's not really a good enough reason to leave it out of the article. Arrowned 16:41, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Perhaps, but until they appear "in the flesh (or "in the pixels" as the situation may warrant)" they're not officially "confirmed." - Jishmeister 16:51, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Entirely true.  But I'm not arguing over its truthfulness or not; I'm arguing over whether its notable enough to go in the article.  The GameInformer article is a valid secondary source, and as WP's article on verifiability mentions, "the threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth." Arrowned 18:24, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: C'mon, ease up a bit.  Seems like we can check Peach, Shiek, and Ganondorf as playable on the list.  (Zojo 22:26, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Peach, maybe, but not Ganondorf and Sheik, because for all we know, they could be background characters or Assist Trophies. magiciandude (Talk) (review) 22:28, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd have to disagree with you there.  The only character I wouldn't stamp as confirmed is Palutena.  Might not be Palutena, might just be part of the story, and she wasn't even there (she was transparent).  (Zojo 22:40, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

text:  Peach, maybe, but not Ganondorf and Sheik, because for all we know, they could be background characters or Assist Trophies. magiciandude (Talk) (review) 22:28, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

text: No personal attacks. It's likely Ganondorf will be a PC, and maybe Sheik. The thing is, we don't know, and won't put it in the article until we do. — Malcolm (talk) 16:26, 12 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Shiek and Ganondorf 

message: I removed a few fair use images from this article and Super Smash Bros. Melee. Please note that images should be informative, not decorative. Also, the situation on the image must be covered in the article. In this case, the article merely showed four of the characters with a pink background, so I removed the image. Please review WP:FUC. Melsaran (formerly Salaskаn) 15:52, 4 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use images

message: i noticed that this website hasnt put sheik and ganondorf confirmed when in a interview the designer of the zelda series he said that he was called in to design ganondorf and sheik75.16.35.106 03:06, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  confirmed characters 

message: I saw the new item from the Mother universe. Is this something in which we can be more sure about Ness's appereance??  Jeff Silvers  13:39, 10 August 2007  (UTC)
:Nope, at this point anything Mother-related character-wise is speculation. Remember, they were going to replace Ness with Lucas from MOTHER 3 in Super Smash Bros. Melee, but didn't because MOTHER 3 ended up being delayed. Now that MOTHER 3 is out in Japan, it's hard to guess what Nintendo is planning to put in Brawl that is MOTHER-related. Disaster KirbyTalk 15:33, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Don't forget about the Flipper item in Melee. It was there, but Balloon Fighter was not. Granted, they planned on his presence, but in the end, he did not show up. The same thing might happen with the Mother Series here. You Can't See Me! 18:23, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  MOTHER 

message: Now, CoroCoro is a very reliable magazine (which can be confirmed by most Pokemon fans). Should we consider this news? -Setherex 06:59, 12 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: never heard of the site nor the mag. how do we know whether if it's true? at this point it's still speculation. just wait- Dojo!! will eventually release info. FyreNWater 08:16, 12 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: What I mean by the reliability is that during the beginning of most of the Pokemon games, CoroCoro announced release dates / new mechanics / new Pokemon before anyone else. Should it be considered a reliable source in this situation? Setherex 16:44, 12 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Release dates should wait for official confirmation, imo. Nifboy 17:07, 12 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: If it's run in a magazine, it's pretty much official. CoroCoro's no less reliable than Famitsu, whom none of you would dispute.—Ｌｏｖｅはドコ？ (talk • contribs) 18:23, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

text: So, are we agreeing it's legit or... Setherex 17:05, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Japanese Release Date and Wifi Battling 

message: It's really pretty likely that Sora is developing this game. Otherwise why would Masahiro-san be credited with (Sora, Ltd) next to his name on the DOJO site if Sora had no involvement? Probably better if we label the developer as either Sora or Nintendo rather than "The Studio" (w/c is likely Sora anyway.) Nintenboy01 01:31, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: We've been over this enough. Sora could be developing the game, but it's not confirmed. — Malcolm (talk) 01:33, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I know, but it just seems rather awkward to have the sinister-sounding "The Studio" as the developer... Well, that's just my opinion. Nintenboy01 01:39, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: This has been argued out, and plenty of reasons have been given as to why he would put his name with sora. It's in the archives. But after lengthy discussion, we arrived at what it is now. DurinsBane87 02:25, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

text: No, it gives HAL Labs copyright credit because HAL Labs created Smash Bros. --Guess Who 12:52, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sora Ltd. 

message: Does the Category, Super Smash Bros. fighter fit under Red (Pokemon) or Pokemon Trainer? Also, where does the fighter info go? magiciandude (Talk) (review) 07:49, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: What do you mean by "fighter info"? I think it should go under Pokemon Trainer. The design shown is definitely Red, but the site refers to the character simply as "Pokemon Trainer". If labelled under Red, we're implying that it's that specific character from Red and Blue. - Zero1328 Talk? 07:55, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

text: Oh, well, I would say Pokemon Trainer again, for the same reasons, mentioning that the design is similar to Red's design. - Zero1328 Talk? 08:05, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

text: Alright I can agree with that. :) Case closed. magiciandude (Talk) (review) 08:07, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  What if his costume changes allow him to become Lucas? or Gold? or the pokemon could change?Shouldn't go under Red untill release of alt costumes/release of game and he could have no other costumes. Beating a dead horse but still. Pine27 13:40, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

text: He needs what? His own subsection? I'm sorry, but I highly doubt that anyone would agree to the article having a section for a single character in the game. A sentence describing how the character is controlled, maybe, but not a whole section. Disaster KirbyTalk 17:18, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

text: Technically, the player is controlling the Pokémon (attacks, jumping, etc.), but from a visual in-game standpoint, the Trainer is giving the Pokémon commands. In a sense, the player is effectively controlling the Trainer, who is controlling the Pokémon. Disaster KirbyTalk 18:42, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

text: About the topic but more about Ivysaur really. Ivysaur is the first strictly quadrupedal character(sub-character whatever). Pikachu and pichu will occassionally run on all fours in Melee but only when running. Should a mention be put somewhere about this?Pine27 13:21, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: That's not really important enough to mention...-Sukecchi 14:04, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

text: There's a difference between the Pokemon and the Trainer. The trainer is the one (sorry for speculation technically) who will be involved in the plot not his pokemon. THAT IS LIKELY BUT IS SPECULATION. At any rate, If the site lists him as 1 character he should be one character. Besides it is Pokemon Trainer. Name suggests more pokemon maybe/costumes maybe?(Speculation again, but there's really no other way to get the point across) Pine27 22:51, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: He's still a NPC.  You can't run around and jump with the trainer.  You can with the pokemon.  Anyhow, if I can't convince anybody this section will end with this comment.  (Zojo 22:59, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

text: If you read the note at the very top, it says that this is not the place to talk about that kind of stuff. Go to a forum or something for that, this is a place to talk about improving the article. - Zero1328 Talk? 03:19, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: And this is also not the place to post speculation theories on anything including things that haven't been revealed yet. -Adv193 03:48, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Regarding Pokemon Trainer  

message: Wikipedia says that long lists of links are not appropriate and that they should be kept to a minimum. Wikipedia also says avoid linking to multiple pages from the same website, and there are multiple links to the Dojo in the Reference section of this article. Instead, Wikipedia says to find an appropriate linking page at the website, so the main page of the Dojo is sufficient.Tj terrorible1
:Except that the info in each specifically linked page contains its own specific information that needs cited? A single reference to the site as a whole wouldn't cut it, because people might not know where exactly to look for the specific information that they are trying to find. Disaster KirbyTalk 19:41, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: To clarify, those count as citations rather than external links. When it comes to citations, regular restrictions to external links do not apply, since citations need to be accurate and frequent in order to verify nearly every fact on the article. You Can't See Me! 19:43, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

text: No, see Wikipedia:Templates for deletion/Log/2007 June 11#Template:Scrollref for specific reasons. — Malcolm (talk) 22:25, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: There are too many external links to Dojo