I don't really want menu buttons to be the main images for pages, that's why I actually removed them from some pages. An actual screenshot is better. BTW, can you upload a new one for sound (under the same file name) with all the values set on 70?
Also, always make sure to categorize every image you upload, if you have any questions let me know them.
The first was a petition of TSON, he didn't really wanted them (sprite theft aparently), but, then again, that wasn't my concern. However, a button as the main image doesn't look to professional for a wiki, if you are talking about the menu, then, you show the menu. I mean, it's not a logo.
A lot of pages don't have a pic on the top, so that wouldn't matter anyway.
Oops! I may have missed that, but that won't be trouble anymore. The ones on Multiplayer and Classic (that weren't uploaded by you) got deleted a while back in order to avoid that. Don't think this is personal.
And BTW, there's no need to post thrice, you can edit your message, not that you will be punished for doing that, but I would recommend you doing that.
That'd be breaking te standards because user pages are not meant to be used as regular pages (pages you look out for information). That also means we couldn't create a page for a player if they don't have a Wikia profile.
Byll wrote: That'd be breaking te standards because user pages are not meant to be used as regular pages (pages you look out for information). That also means we couldn't create a page for a player if they don't have a Wikia profile.
We may want to wait a while as lots of competitive players are joining the wiki. Plus, it's a good temporary substitute for those who have joined the wiki.
But you make a valid point, at some point, Flasher pages for people will be needed.
As a substitute it works, but at this point we shouldn't be using prototypes, I mean, we have a community, some names have resonated on competition, some edit the wiki, we have the templates ready, etc.
Well that wouldn't be great because it will seem like it just another article on a certain subject instead of it being on a certain individual. However, it might work so go to the sandbox and test it out.
You all seemed to forgot that you couldn't named the pages Flasher because it is not file type. Also what's up with you guy capitalizing the first letter of each word in headers and categories? If you claim to be professional, the page really needs your real name.
OK guys I have found the way to create the namespace (what I've been incorrectly referring to as a "file type") for Flasher, I need to contact someone from the Wikia Staff to add it. Before I contact him/her so we can have the namespace there are some things I need to know: First: do you really want a namespace? Because I think having a namespace will prevent that page from incrementing our page number, they currently do because there is no namespace. Second, do you think we need a namespace for Developers so we can give them the same trait? Third: do you really want the namespace to be called "Flasher"? I have always thought Flasher is a really cheesy name and a blatant rip-off of the term "Smasher" the SmashWiki uses. I was considering something less "ethnical", like Player or Fighter, even if they sound boring.
Flasher does sound chessy, but we can't just call ourselves players. Also most people who play Smash flash might also play a lot of other flash games or watch a lot of flash videos. So that's where I conied the term from and I am sticking with it.
Hmmm I am not sure about having the name space for devs since we can just seperate between dev and flashers pages.
Are you planning an adding a detailed listing of every character moveset from the original SSF? I already seen you did Fox. If you do, there are some things you need to know, the first is the fact that there is no set damage integers in SSF1, saying things like "dealing up to 75%" is not completely true due to the constant damage input of how the hitboxes are programmed, you see, whenever an attack is landed in SSF1, the damage counter passes through all the number units until it stops when the hitbox has ended, the attack didn't truly dealed a set of 75% of damage but stopped at that number, unlike is the Smash Bros. games or SSF2. The second is that listing the moves twice renders the moveset box useless, therefore needs to be removed. The third consists on also detailing the attack's descritpion on the corresponding page, if there's is one of course (Blaster has a page, so you could detailed the attack's function there). Did you understand it?
One must add those templates on the articles that are included within the same box, not just in every page related to the universe, whom the category needs to be added manually. Do me a favour helping me removing them.
Yeah man you are doing a wonderful job. I'm glad you came, but ask me what certain images you can add to certain pages because the iamges you uploaded to fast falling speed and weight were unnecessary.
Still don't see what the problem was with the "weight gif" since it helped illustrate better what the article is about; since it had a "clean up" or "stub" notification (can't remember which one) thought it would make the article a lil better.
I mean, it's not like "less is more" applies when giving out information; the clearer the message is to the receiver, the better.
If you still think it should be removed, can't see how the gif in the Air speed article is any better for example: it too explains a really basic concept and the gif isn't even that clear.
Hope this is well received and also hoping for a response.
It clearly showed that DK went less far than Jigglypuff. And you didn't "clearly say that" it was "more for falling speed than weight", you just said both gifs were "unnecessary", which its subjective btw. Then you went on to retract saying that just for the falling speed one, not the other; didn't say "it was more for falling speed" but once again that it was uncessary because never before that article had a gif.
And I know what the gif in Air speed is about; mine was to "make people notice the difference in how far Jigglypuff is launched compared to DK", what's so different? Also the gif is very low quality, has an intrusive watermark and doesn't ilustrate well the concept; a side by side comparison would be better.