User talk:Clarinet Hawk/Archive 8

Vandals
'''Please list the names/IP's of potential vandals here. Also, if possible, tell me the page(s) they vandalized so that I can verify the claim and assess the damage. Clarinet Hawk (talk · contributions) 02:20, 28 June 2008 (UTC)''' I don't know but I have gotten messages of snake's codec messages changed i'll check it out. Darkness studios Help desk (talk) 04:47, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

84.86.247.17 Yet another vandal! I pity you, Chawk, having to ban all of these. He's just adding in all completely stupid comments on the "Did you know?" template. ' ~Teh Blue ' Blur~ ~You're too slow!~ 18:23, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

This guy's been messing up a random smasher page for no reason, insulting him and calling him a Jew. ' ~Teh Blue ' Blur~ ~You're too slow!~ 10:58, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

This guy's removing all content from the Tier list for no apparent reason. ' ~Teh Blue ' Blur~ ~You're too slow!~ 15:43, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

This Guy's been vandalizing Snake's Codec Messages page and swapping quotes with ridiculous words that are completely unacceptable. So, please ban him. (I'm working on undoing his damage.) Thanks. :) --' ~Teh Blue ' Blur~ A revolution begins. 19:30, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

Special:Contributions/2good = vandal of smasher pages.  Gutripper Speak 

I do not know if you would call this vandal or not, but some of the articles 98.148.154.211 has made do not seem relevant to the wiki.  Cloned Pickle  04:31, 11 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Well, 98.148.154.211 made another irrelevant article: Best falco on the west coast.  Cloned Pickle  07:31, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

If you look at This user's contributions, the only kinds he has made is editing his userpage saying "smashwiki and its mods fail, kthanxbai."  Cloned Pickle  06:06, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

Ban this guy.--Bek The Conqueror (talk) 22:20, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

Special:Contributions/70.18.154.160. Another sockpuppet. This is far beyond annoying now.  Mario Galaxy  May Guthix be with you... 21:50, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

This really should be obvious, but User:African American Ninjakoopa just owned/vandalized the wiki. Hard. 13375poolR (talk) 07:16, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

Set phasers to maximum. Bek The Conqueror (talk) 19:58, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

99.135.34.204. This guy is inserting false information on SSB4.-- Bek  (talk)  16:58, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

Hey look, it's a vandal! He's doing work on Smasher pages such as changing their names and mains. Toomai Glittershine eXemplary Logic  The Stats Guy  The Table Designer  01:47, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

A vandal!212.178.0.51 The article about smashboards/Smash World Forums/SWF User:Firewario User talk:Firewario 17:10 9th April 2009 (UTC)

Ban and ban. The second "ban" is for his extremely disrespectful and offensive message on his talk page. Happy banning. -- Bek  (talk)  18:04, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

This guy's stuff has all been reverted thus far, but he hasn't been banned yet. Happy blocking.-- Bek  (talk)  15:09, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

Vandal and my first time using my rollback muscle on this wiki. Expect to see even more vandals dumped here by me in the future.-- Bek  (talk)  00:51, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

Vandal. You know the drill.-- Bek  (talk)  22:47, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

This dude is an obvious one. Toomai Glittershine eXemplary Logic  The Stats Guy  The Table Designer  18:26, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

. – Defiant Elements   +talk  04:12, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

RfR
Shouldn't both of BNK's RfR's be together. I mean, KP's are, and so are ParaGoomba's. It saves article space.  Toon Ganondorf    (t    c) 
 * Then do it and I'll delete the redirect. Clarinet Hawk (talk · contributions) 16:01, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

68.221.89.226 has vandalised SSBM article. User:Firewario talk 17:21 26th April 2009 (UTC)

Dedede
King Dedede's forward smash does actually a max of 35%, not 33%(that's on training move if you didn't know, training mode attacks does slightly less damage). The same goes for Bowser (max of 48-49% and not 46%) and Ike (max of 32%). user:Firewario February 3rd 21:24 UTC +1
 * I'm not questioning the facts, but when your grammar and syntax are so bad that no one can make heads or tails of your writing, it usually gets reverted. Clarinet Hawk (talk · contributions) 21:19, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

Sockpuppets
Almost all of the sockpuppets in the past few days have left a message on my page saying what obvious contribution they added to an article. Here are a few of them: Special:Contributions/64.5.158.130 Special:Contributions/141.152.185.173 Special:Contributions/65.169.203.196 The last one admitted it's the same one as an old IP who brawled me before (don't ask, long story, a month or two ago). Can you semi-protect my talk page so I don't keep getting messages like the ones these IPs (all the same person) gave me?  Mario Galaxy  May Guthix be with you... 23:41, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Protecting pages is not to be done lightly, and especially not something like user talk pages. Especially when the comments are about wiki. So, at best I see this request as unnecessary. --  Shadow  crest  00:09, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Sky already blocked some of these IPs, apparently realizing that they were sockpuppets. C. Hawk seems to be tired of this too, as seen on one of the IP's talk pages.  Mario Galaxy  May Guthix be with you... 00:12, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
 * And what if I disagree with any or all of those bannings? -- Shadow  crest  00:24, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Well, since you're a sysop, I can't do anything about it. Either way, I got to go. It's sysops' call, not mine.  Mario Galaxy  May Guthix be with you... 00:26, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

Uh..
This  Fried beef  1    Love   22:21, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

Vandal Attack
I just thought I'd let you know that there was a vandal attck yesterday (to the SSBB fighter info pages). I have reverted all of the vandalism single handedly and I have got the IP adresses that were the cause of it:


 * 82.198.250.69‎
 * 212.85.24.35‎

If you could block those IP addresses that would be great. Just so you know the things that were done was mainly names of characters being changed for example: Ike was changed to Ike th F***ing retard, and zero suit samus was changed to SEXY BOBBIE LADY, and that is only 2 examples of at least 8-10.-- MỸŠŦЄЯỸ ЊӘҒҒ   TALK  02:02, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

THat's fine Heff, but you don't have to tell them what the vandals did, just who they are, CHawk can find out for himself.  Gutripper Speak 

Image difficulties

 * Yeah, sorry to be kind of demanding, or whiny, but would you please delete Image:Bracket Platinum Blade Tournament.gif, (couldn't really place a link to the page without having the whole thing on your talk page)? I tried to upload a new version, but something messed up, and it didn'twork right, then I tried to name it something new, but I was told it was a duplicate, so If you would just get rid of it, and from now on I guess I'll only post final versions of stuff like that to avoid trouble like this from happening.

IrvThaSol a.k.a Ungod (talk to me) 23:05, 6 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Marking it for deletion will be enough. Admins regularly check the candidates for speedy deletion and deletion. Also, placing around an images name will put the link but not the picture.  Gutripper  Speak 


 * Thanks, IrvThaSol a.k.a Ungod  (talk to me) 23:10, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

Ahem...
I gotchya. By the way (I've mentioned this many times in summaries whilst adding D tags to spam talk pages), we need to make a similar policy to QDV about stuff like that, but I don't have a good name for it. The point of it is to encourage users not to add discussion to spam/vandal/flame pages so that gives the Admin less to delete. You have to admit, it must be really annoying deleting the article then the talk page with comments from users like "We don't need this page", treating it like it deserves a chance to stay at all. So what do you say?  Blue  Ninjakoopa  03:15, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I don't think a full fledged policy is needed. I think QDV is good enough to include that.  If you want to add it in and/or ask people not to put stuff on the talk pages that would be a good solution.  Clarinet Hawk (talk · contributions) 06:57, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

"video namespace"
This is a new extension activated by default on Wikia wikis. I personally don't appreciate it, and I've noticed that you've deleted more than a few; i.e. that it only invites the videos we don't want. You should have gotten a message about it through WikiaMessages. Can I contact Wikia and ask them to turn it off? --Sky (t · c · w) 03:16, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I'll just throw in my opinion: either turn it off or create a very strict policy about uploading them, i.e. only for mainspace, and then more specific requirements. Miles ( talk)   03:18, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I don't know why we need people to be able to upload videos. Nine times out of ten, we don't need any videos and the rest of the time they can just be embedded.  Clarinet Hawk (talk · contributions) 04:43, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Completely agree. You have my blessing to contact Kyle whenever. -- Shadow  crest  19:53, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

irc
Sorry I wasn't there... I am now if you need me. -- Shadow  crest  01:18, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

Regarding Fragbait.JPG
I have never uploaded this picture before and it is being used on my Smasher Page. Pages such as Affinity's and Steeler's are using similar pictures, so why did mine get deleted? A revert would be appreciated, or at least a decent explanation. Doadrin (talk) 00:51, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

What, you are an all powerful admin so you don't have to respond to users? Thats cool man, I'll reup it my damn self. Doadrin (talk) 05:45, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I didn't respond because I haven't been on in the last five hours... I do have a life besides this wiki.  As for the image, it's a personal image of a borderline smasher page.  I'm not sure if it really constitutes being needed, but if you want to upolad it, go ahead.  Just don't be surprised if that whole page gets judged not notable.  Clarinet Hawk (talk · contributions) 05:59, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

SA
Um... not to be a bitch again, but why did you delete the main page for SA? Squallinoa 08 (talk) 21:58, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Sorry, it was linked to as the list of past fights page. I didn't realize that it had been changed.  Clarinet Hawk (talk · contributions) 21:59, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
 * That's alright, no foul no harm done. (whew, no wondered why Miles or Gutripper put it in the front page). Squallinoa 08 (talk) 22:01, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

Adminship
Hey Clarinet Hawk. I've got a request. In case you didn't know, Wikia recently allowed it so that b'crats can now remove sysop status (but not b'crat status). So what I was wondering if you could remove my admin status. The main reason is I'm not active here and I haven't played any SSB game since April 08, so I can't really help out the community. I'm still a helper though, so I would still be able to do things that admins can do, though like I said I'm not active here so if someone was to ask me to get involved in something I probably wouldn't be able to because of not knowing what's going on. So if you could remove my sysop status that would be sweet, thanks.--Richardtalk 23:35, 24 February 2009 (UTC)
 * And could you do the same on Mischievous Makers? Thanks.--Richardtalk 23:42, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

Survey link
Hey Clarinet Hawk. I wanted to bring your attention to this forum topic I just made regarding a link to a survery I had to add. I posted it in the forum, instead of here, since SmashWiki has such a large and active community. JoePlay (talk) 23:38, 24 February 2009 (UTC)


 * There's been a change in plans. =) We would like to ask for permission to add a link for a gaming survey on the wiki until March 2nd. Obviously, the more people that see it, the better. We would like a small link on the main page, but if you can suggest another placement, we would love to hear it. Please reply on my talk page at your earliest convenience. Thanks. JoePlay (talk) 20:20, 25 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Street Fighter Wiki and Soulcalibur Wiki already link to SmashWiki in the Related Communities section on the sidebar, but Mortal Kombat, Dead or Alive and Tekken do not, so I'll put a link on those wikis. Plus, we will add a SmashWiki spotlight image to the Wikia Spotlight rotation. Is that cool? JoePlay (talk) 23:03, 25 February 2009 (UTC)


 * I noticed you've been logged in yesterday and today after I posted my last message, so I'll take your non-response to mean that you're OK with the deal. I just added the survey link to the News section on the main page. Again, it only runs through March 2nd, so you guys can take it down at the stroke of mignight that day. =) As per our agreement, I added a link to SmashWiki on all the fighting game wikis that didn't already link here. I also made a Wikia Spotlight for SmashWiki that will be added to the rotation today. Thanks for your cooperation! JoePlay (talk) 16:59, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Sounds great. Sorry about not getting back to you.  Clarinet Hawk (talk · contributions) 18:08, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

Quick question
Hey. So, you nailed a machinima article I wrote recently on the premise of advertising. I'm just wondering, what set that article apart from, say, Smashtasm to make it an advertisement? I'm not contesting your decision, it's just that I'm relatively new to wikis, so I'm not entirely sure of all the regulations yet...--Meta-Kirb (talk) 18:02, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
 * The problem with that article was that it wasn't about a notable machinima, and to be frank, it wasn't even a machinima. It was mostly some scrub trying to tell everyone they're cheap if they play to actually win the games.  We don't have articles on each and every strategy guide, and even if we did, that wouldn't get an article because it was less of a strategy guide and more of someone trying to impose their artificial rules into the game.  Clarinet Hawk (talk · contributions) 18:56, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
 * K, makes sense. To be honest, I never actually thought of it as a "serious" strategy guide, I just thought it was a good laugh. Thanks!--Meta-Kirb (talk) 23:10, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

Maki Maki: I emailed you a quick question about the DHC page, couldnt find much contact information here. please write back soon.--User:Makimaki (talk) 11:48, 25 February 2009

Taunt
I have to say, I'm constantly unimpressed with your actions, especially considering that you're an admin. Regardless of anything else, the information you deleted from "custom taunt" had merit, and should've been merged with taunt, as was suggested on the page, and in SW guidelines. Please recover and merge the information; as I am now no longer able to do so.

-Rather than simply retorting, I would ask that you actually do the right thing in this instance. -If not, you could at least be a little nicer about it, for once. Zixor (talk) 16:15, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

The information there obviously wasn't going to merit it's own page. There also was not anywhere near enough information for it to be problematic to expect someone to recreate as a foot note on the taunt page. I can practically remember word for word the entire page as it is, and I looked at it once and deleted it. Also, if you thought it should be merged, go ahead and do it. On the whole, I'm getting tired of you going onto talk pages and saying "Shouldn't blah happen?" Go ahead and do it. If people don't like it, it will get reverted, no harm done. And if you don't have the time to do what you are proposing (which I doubt is the case), then why do you expect everyone else to jump right on it. Clarinet Hawk (talk · contributions) 16:20, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Because unilateral decisions, especially large ones, are fail. The template says suggest for a reason- it's there to incite discussion. Maybe this case is minor enough that discussion wasn't necessary, but the principle is still there. And then, after you've deleted the page, there's nowhere else to go except to other admins, which doesn't make sense, since you deleted the page. Assuming that people will remember what was in the page is dumb, and if it wasn't a problem to move the note why didn't you when you deleted the page? :/ --  Shadow  crest  20:10, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

supporting is wrong now??
I'm trying to support you and Rita. Zixor seems to think everything should go his way, and I could have sworn that that is unacceptable here. He keeps bothering her about the image even though a conclusion has already been met. Come on, you can't not be annoyed by his actions.  Blue  Ninjakoopa  16:58, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
 * I wish everything would go my way and frequently see to it that it does. Is that a crime? -- Shadow  crest  21:08, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
 * I know slashing that comment was inappropriate, but hear me out. This helps me ignore Shadowcrest so I won't react violently and/or troll him. He's been doing things like that since my ban in January ended.  Blue  Ninjakoopa  22:43, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
 * I have removed the striking, as you have pretty much no grounds to support it with.
 * That was a pretty direct response to "Zixor seems to think everything should go his way, and I could have sworn that that is unacceptable here." I think everything should go my way. He is free to argue about it as long as he wishes, as long as he can actually argue the points and not just bring up old ones or go "no ur rong lolqq". As long as actual argument continues, a conclusion hasn't been met. (Note: This may or may not apply directly to this case, but I'm arguing on principle.)
 * "Come on, you can't not be annoyed by his actions." That should not factor into anything logical, pretty much ever. Appeals to emotion = fail.
 * It's true that Zixor should not reupload the image or any such until the argument is settled. But somehow, I don't think that's what you're getting at. -- Shadow  crest  23:10, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Isn't that all you needed to say, instead of making me look stupid? Oh, and you could have left out the part about "fail". I can call Gargomon a genius and it's counted as a PA but you can tell me that I fail? That's loldumb.  Blue  Ninjakoopa  23:12, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
 * It was not my intention to make you feel stupid. I thought that my first reply was clear enough to get my point across.
 * Incompatible comparison. You called gargomon a 'genius' (though it is still unsure whether you actually meant such a thing), I called appeals to emotion (which are a logical fallacy anyway) fail. You said someone was fail, I said something was fail. --  Shadow  crest  23:25, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Internet emotion is fail in general :\  Blue  Ninjakoopa  23:28, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

Unnecessary Comments
Can anyone delete a rude statement made by vandals? I want to make all the pages "clean" (if that doesn't offend you).  SapphireKirby  777 ~Behold! -.-  20:49, 5 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Censorship is bad, and evidence is never a good thing to remove. If a vandal creates a page with just a mean comment then it'll probably be deleted, but if they just post on someone's talk page I don't think we should go out of our way. You're welcome to do it on your own talk page if that's what you're asking about, but as far as other's talks are concerned you should leave that up to them. --  Shadow  crest  20:52, 5 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Oh...I see. I should INFORM an admin about this instead of deleting it (due to the fact that an admin will have a tough time finding the original evidence of a vandalism in a page if a non-admin user erased it). I get it. Sorry about that, I went stupid...  SapphireKirby  777 ~Behold! -.-  20:59, 5 March 2009 (UTC)
 * It has nothing to do with being an admin :/ --  Shadow  crest  21:03, 5 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Does his mother watch everything he does or something? :(  Blue  Ninjakoopa  21:17, 5 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Er...no BNK. However, LOL on the comment. I just want to know what to do without getting in trouble on this wiki.  SapphireKirby  777 ~Behold! -.-  13:58, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

On 216.54.120.67
I suspect that we have a bot on a proxy, which would explain the recurrence, though I can't explain why it would target only one or two users. Either that, or a complete idiot... --Sky (t · c · w) 02:31, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

That IP has been used for that exact kind of vandalism before. I have a feeling that our friend either has a limited number of IPs, or there's some problems finding a new one. I recommend that we perma every last one of them that he's used. It's getting seriously old. Semicolon (talk) 05:15, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

NOTE
Which doesn't make him notable. He needs to have placed very well at a high quality tournament. --Sky (t · c · w) 01:09, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

irc
do want -- Shadow  crest  19:04, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

Severely tempted
...to ban the "Wikia" user. I don't like the auto-welcome is does for IPs, and it also signs its comments automatically as a random sysop, not as itself. What do you think? Miles ( talk)  21:02, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
 * I already mentioned it to him on IRC. He said he'll deal with it... --  Shadow  crest  21:11, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

On a side note, Smoreking's waited quite a while... Miles ( talk)   02:03, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Frankly, considering the comments/votes I've gotten, it won't be an easy decision. I'm fine with waiting another month as long as it's an honest decision by CH and not rushed. Smoreking (T)  (c)  22:16, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

character page vandal
Who keeps adding stuff to the character pages. He's reusing the same IPs. If we perma them all, we could end him for good. Check the contributions of the IPs he's done it with. I'm sick of it, and we could put an end to it. What do you think? Semicolon (talk) 02:08, 20 March 2009 (UTC)


 * What if they're public computers though? That prevents good faith users from using them.  Toon Ganondorf    (t    c)  20:25, 20 March 2009 (UTC)


 * The short answer is that I don't care tbh. The long answer is that those computers have never made a good-faith IP edit, so I doubly don't care. Semicolon (talk) 20:54, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Then wtb a long answer, because I don't like the short answer. Conservapedia is the place to ban those liberal IPs, not SmashWiki. l2agf --  Shadow  crest  22:24, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
 * no u  Blue  Ninjakoopa  22:36, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

I don't care if you don't like the short answer, tbh, and I don't know what 'wtb' means, so I'm just going to put it this way: It doesn't matter if they're public computers. They may not be public computers. They are being used for consistent, repeat, and disruptive vandalism. This is grounds for banning, in fact, it may be grounds for permanent banning, but I want to run it by the powers that be first. We don't ban accounts because of the possibility of vandalism, and likewise we don't unban accounts because of the possibility of good faith edits. We ban accounts and IPs because of what they do. In this case, these IPs have never done anything good, and have always done the same sort of vandalism. I don't understand why you're fighting me on this, Shadowcrest. To defend this vandalism is just plain ridiculous. Semicolon (talk) 22:57, 20 March 2009 (UTC)


 * No one's defending vandalism, Semicolon. If you perma-ban the IP's, then unblock them at a later date, it will convince the vandal to drop the idea, because he thinks he has been perma-banned. However, unbanning him later, without giving an inclination of the unbanning, will still allow good faith users in the future. That is, of course, providing that they are public computers. Just an idea.  Toon Ganondorf    (t    c)  23:22, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Perma-banning then unblocking is a stupid idea. They, like the retard at my school, will just keep coming back for more punishment. I understand that you're assuming good faith about these IPs, but I'm not sure how many people actually use Wikia nowadays... especially somewhere public.  Blue  Ninjakoopa  23:58, 20 March 2009 (UTC)


 * I don't understand this idea that these are public computers. They are far more likely to be proxies than public computers, and even more likely computers at personal disposal. If they were proxies, it stands to reason that the vandal would continue to cycle through different proxies, never using the same one to be completely unpredictable/catch-able. If they're public computers, and there's no way to prove that, then I honestly don't care about perma-banning them.  The wiki can still be viewed, just not edited, and tbh, I think we can live without IP edits from 3-4 public computers.  It's most likely that these are IPs at personal disposal, in which case permabanning them is a really, really good idea.  Now, I'm actually pretty lenient with vandals. Most of them are one-timers out for a laugh. Whatever. 6 or 7 clicks and it's over for good. I have zero patience for vandals with this persistence, and this wiki shouldn't either. One of the hallmarks of being human is being able to spot patterns and thus predict based on these patterns. Our vandal waits until our menial 1-2 week bans are done, and then vandalizes again. It's quite impressive, his persistence, and we ought to learn from that by predicting his vandalism and ban him and his IPs forever.  I don't see what's objectionable about this--at all.  It's completely irrational to predict that next time our fuzzy little friend will all of a sudden have a change of heart and start contributing positively, yet that's what some people seem to think here.  I've had enough of it, really, I have, and unless I see a good reason I'm going to permaban all of his IPs, and I don't see a reason to unban them at any date. Nobody's unbanned Willy on Wheels hoping he's forgotten...there's a pattern here. Semicolon (talk) 00:05, 21 March 2009 (UTC)
 * On a similar note, my school's IP is blocked from editing Wikipedia. Why? Because the idiots there like to vandalize.  Even if I found a typo on a featured article, I couldn't fix it.  Sometimes, even if the IP is public, it's still safer generally to have it blocked if it's a source of vandalism.   Miles ( talk)   00:59, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

Please respond
I've been ignored by every sysop that I've asked and on every page I've asked it, and it's getting rather annoying. Are Smasher:Shade and Papercut safe from being deleted according to NOTE? I understand if they aren't, and once you let me know I'll make haste in copying the info for use elsewhere before they're deleted. I just want to have peace of mind in whether the articles are legit or not. Shade 487  z  02:49, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

Sorry we've been unable to respond. You're perfectly safe. Clarinet Hawk (talk · contributions) 02:51, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

Whew! Thanks a lot. Shade 487  z  02:53, 22 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Papercut doesn't look safe at all to me, and Shade is tiptoe-ing the line. --Sky (t · c · w) 05:19, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

Regrettable yet understandable. Um...you guys can settle this, I honestly don't know who's right but I can understand if it's deleted. No need in waiting around for me to copy the info before you delete it, I have a photographic memory with stuff like that ^^. Shade 487  z  05:41, 22 March 2009 (UTC)


 * From what I've seen over there, their tournaments are pretty well established on All is Brawl. Clarinet Hawk (talk · contributions) 14:24, 22 March 2009 (UTC)
 * 40-50 entrants a week nowadays...so yeah. Shade  487  z  17:36, 22 March 2009 (UTC)


 * That's impressive. Good job, guys. Semicolon (talk) 17:50, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

Welcome tool
Hi Chawk -- I saw that you disabled the welcome tool last week. We recently upgraded the tool to allow for some more customization, so it's possible that something that you didn't like about it may have been fixed. Can you tell me what you thought about the welcomes? What made you want to turn it off? It's not a problem; I just want to see if there's a way I can help. -- Danny (talk ) 03:04, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

irc
can you go there? I just want to have a general discussion. Smoreking (T)  (c)  15:59, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Can't, got class in 10 minutes and have to drive there today. I'll be back tonight.  Clarinet Hawk (talk · contributions) 16:03, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Can you perma-ban BNK please?? N33B (talk) 16:04, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
 * No, unless you can provide me a very convincing argument. (This is technically just my own personal decision, but I would hope that the other admins would abide by it unless you at least consult with me first.) --  Shadowcrest  18:53, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

Biased for Jigglypuff?
Hi. I have looked at this user's contributions, and maybe it's because I absoultely HATE Jigglypuff, but it seems to me that he/she is biased for Jigglypuff. I wouldn't call him/her a vandal (that's why I didn't put this on the vandal section) because he/she doesn't replace articles with "GAY GAY GAY" or anything like that, but I do think this user needs a warning or something like that to quit making Jiggly seem like the best character ever no matter what it takes. However, he/she may just be a normal user. I can't tell because I'm biased against YOU FAIL!. That's why I wanted a second opinion. Enigmatic Mr. L (talk) 00:05, 1 April 2009 (UTC)
 * I'd agf that one. Maybe explain to him that reverting the same comments over and over again isn't allowed, but otherwise he looks like a good-faith editor. --  Shadowcrest  01:59, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

King
Hello, oh my glorious emperor, I do oh so hope to apply for the jester-hood job?264Y - (Discussion •  W h o Cares? )  17:16, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

Excuse me, your majesty
But I'm lovin' this April Fool's Day shenanigan you guys came up with lol. It doesn't beat Youtube though, they flipped all the video players and text upside-down. :O Shade  487  z  21:24, 1 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Littlekuriboh (the guy who makes Yugioh The Abridged Series) made a Naruto special and made his website look like he hates Yugioh more than he already did.  Cheez person  { talk } stuff ''' 00:28, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

Problems
A guy (216.100.215.5) is destroying Smash Wiki, please stop him. user:Firewario user talk:Firewario 2nd April 2009 18:25 (UTC)

Sysop
Here is the code for those Microsoft Points that you wanted:

RVQFD-B2M8H-83HTF-GBWVF-3DJJW WFC44-HXD42-RPR4R-V7DXX-RJD2J R3F9T-FH8DR-9HFPH-9TT2Y-47C48 VQHFC-KRQCC-D98T3-BTHDR-7BB8W M9FVC-C8BR9-939WH-8PH2F-9PC48 XGCHD-99C2K-836V9-R7Q8R-M6RWW VX2KC-WDCVT-GVJPK-MMJBW-TMGR8 MCVM4-XVX8H-3FBWJ-2HDBM-7HHPJ B9YCX-467WJ-RR6JF-8YBH9-MWVPJ VH7TX-3FQ96-9FP6R-F9THV-6F7PJ KKW2F-H4FPD-VJXR2-FJPK2-829F8 PQRCK-8XC3K-WTXTJ-HFGPK-2K7PJ W4698-9YFMC-MGCRJ-V6K9K-WV9F8 BMWW4-679YF-3C2TB-9Q8X7-WCC48 QHGDP-MB29B-PXWCB-3YMQR-JT8JW G2DDF-PBBHW-BRTH7-42D8C-K68JW WP9C6-22V3Y-Q7CXQ-X4X8W-TX7PJ K9V6F-32BCJ-X9K78-JQMCY-Y9Q2J JC3YY-QFYC7-2PTWH-3WH9V-8TRWW

This guy...
So there's this guy, 13375poolR. You've heard of him before, and he's doing crap again. Example: he uses an attitude on a new user, going so far as to call him "The Slug King" (which I removed as it's a personal attack, old edit here). I can't really call him a vandal (hence why I didn't put him at the top of this page), but he has few good-faith edits (in my opinion), he's already been warned for doing crap, and his attitude is not acceptable. Toomai Glittershine eXemplary Logic  The Stats Guy  The Table Designer  21:50, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

Someone noticed your sunken pushes
Your innovation has had an impact on the pro scene. Check this video, at 15:34.

Also, I saw the TSCC episode...wtf...Semicolon (talk) 20:17, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

Rollout
Ok, I understand that as soon as you start charging, they know what move you are goin to do. However, surely the fact that u can continuosuly hold it, change direction, or release early, means they still have to be cautious. I mean the one negative thing i think that could be put there, is that it is easily punishable by projectiles. However, I still don't see how u can ALWAYS know what a spinning Jigglypuff is going to do - which is what predictable means. (I have not changed the page ........yet. lol!). Phayz (talk) 16:50, 19 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Jump or go to a platform. Smoreking (T)  (c)  17:43, 19 April 2009 (UTC)
 * (edit conflict) The problem is that even though you can change the time when you release it, you're still locked into one move that makes you stationary while charging and then moves in a determinant fashion. Even after jiggles releases the charge, there's ample time for the opponent to shield, counter, etc. Clarinet Hawk (talk · contributions) 17:44, 19 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Fine, i was just pointing out that often (on stages with no platforms) when i use rollout, my opponents may shield, before i release - then i do release - depending on distance, i either hit them, or they shield again, causing me to pass through them, but then i turn around, and they have often dropped their shields. As with jumping, i release - they jump, i do a double turn, and as long as they don't have multiple jumps, I often catch them landing. Moreover, because of its speed, whenever i see an enemy coming into land - with no jumps left (or helpless) - becuase of rollouts speed - u can time it perfectky to hit them just as they land - so they can't counter it.

...However, I do understand what you mean now, and if u use rollout when the opponent is "at the ready" then in its predictable. I believe what I have put now is ok? Phayz (talk) 18:34, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

sort of wondering...
...why you didn't bother to discuss this with me- or anyone- first. I didn't block him because his posts look like something a toddler wrote, I blocked him because he's deliberately acting like a moron in order to troll. And that is something we block for. -- Shadowcrest  22:07, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

54321 seconds? Smoreking (T)  (c)  12:07, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Is that some kind of joke?! -- ~The Blue  Blur~ '''New main in training! 12:17, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Just a stab in the dark...
You got Brawl+. Is it legit or is it legit? Shade 487  z  02:27, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

I don't even bother to play regular Brawl anymore. Brawl+ is what the game should have been all along. So naturally, instead of releasing the patch themselves, Nintendo is trying to make it impossible for people to get it. Clarinet Hawk (talk · contributions) 02:42, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Until they kill that group of people in the Brawl+ IRC (see link I posted here), they'll never stop it. I'd only play B+ as well but I can't do that since I have no local opponents and online B+'ers are few and far between. Shade 487  z  02:51, 30 April 2009 (UTC)