Talk:Super Smash Bros./Archive 15

Archive 10

←

Archive 13

Archive 14

Archive 15

Semi-protected edit request on 3 February 2016

On the character table, please make the following adjustments.

• Change "Mii Sword fighter" to either "Mii Swordfighter" or "Mii Sword Fighter", as the variation using two separate words and a lower case "f" is not used in any version of the game; the former would be preferred, as we've already set a precedent for using NSTC-version names with "Duck Hunt". (per character table note 3, "In 3DS/Wii U, there are slight name variations between NTSC and PAL versions. For the NTSC characters 'Duck Hunt' and 'Mii Swordfighter,' PAL versions list them as 'Duck Hunt Duo' and 'Mii Sword Fighter.'")
• The downloadable characters' individual release dates are already denoted on the 3DS/Wii U page, and really don't contribute much to this article. Furthermore, Lucas, Mewtwo and Roy have these notes, but fellow downloadable characters Bayonetta, Cloud, Corrin and Ryu do not. We should maintain consistency by removing the following notes:
  • [4] In 3DS/Wii U, Lucas is a bonus downloadable character. Lucas was released alongside Roy and Ryu on June 14, 2015.
  • [5] In 3DS/Wii U, Mewtwo is a bonus downloadable character. Mewtwo was released on April 15, 2015 for Club Nintendo members who registered both versions of the game, and was available later for purchase on April 28, 2015.
  • [8] In 3DS/Wii U, Roy is a bonus downloadable character. Roy was released alongside Lucas and Ryu on June 14, 2015.

Whether that means adding a generic "Character added via downloadable content following the game's launch" note in their place to all seven characters makes no difference to me; I'll leave that up to the discretion of the other editors.

136.181.195.25 (talk) 15:47, 3 February 2016 (UTC)

I've taken care of the sword fighter one--probably a result of someone using WP:AWB. No comment for now on the second request. --Izno (talk) 15:55, 3 February 2016 (UTC)

Partly done: by Izno. The second request is not done, because it may be just as good to add notes to those characters that do not have them as it would be to erase existing notes. Either may be done in the future to improve this article.  Be prosperous! Paine  00:07, 4 February 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 13 August 2016

1. Near the start of the page, it says '...that primarily featuring characters from...'. This isn't correct. It should be '...that primarily FEATURES characters from...'.

2. Also, '...by aiming to knock opponents out of the stage...'. You're rarely IN the stage, so it should be 'off of'. It even says this: '...players seek to launch their opponents off the stage...' later in the page, so no matter what it should be, the page is inconsistent.

3. 'Gameplay using competitive Smash Bros. rules is usually played in stock mode and with a timer.' Usually? I get that that's being safe, but I honestly don't know if a single competitive tourney has been held in history that has not used stock mode with a timer.

(Also, sorry, I know this isn't formatted correctly, I tried my best, but it seems complicated.) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.190.178.240 (talk) 07:26, 13 August 2016 (UTC)

Partly done: The first two requests are done. The third request I did not do because it is not supported by reliable sources. I added numbers to your request to make it clearer which ones I did as well. -- Dane2007 ^talk 04:18, 23 August 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 22 August 2016

The page say there is five games but there is only four games in the series.

Supermcawsomevill (talk) 17:57, 22 August 2016 (UTC)

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. -- Dane2007 ^talk 04:18, 23 August 2016 (UTC)

Classic, Melee, Brawl, Sm4sh for Wii, and Sm4sh for Gameboy. That's a count of five. --Izno (talk) 12:07, 23 August 2016 (UTC)

No more players

On any stage, where you can get star or screen KO'd, what happens when no players self-destruct, and they all get star or screen KO'd? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.104.133.215 (talk) 16:58, 22 October 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Super Smash Bros.. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070421003854/http://www.the-magicbox.com/Chart-USPlatinum.shtml to http://www.the-magicbox.com/Chart-USPlatinum.shtml

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:08, 12 November 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 19 December 2016

Turn Fighting Game FGC Buttons (talk) 03:48, 19 December 2016 (UTC)

Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. JTP ^{(talk • contribs)} 04:13, 19 December 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 24 January 2017

Remove the following notes from the Character table:

• [4] In 3DS/Wii U, Lucas is a bonus downloadable character. Lucas was released alongside Roy and Ryu on June 14, 2015.
• [5] In 3DS/Wii U, Mewtwo is a bonus downloadable character. Mewtwo was released on April 15, 2015 for Club Nintendo members who registered both versions of the game, and was available later for purchase on April 28, 2015.
• [8] In 3DS/Wii U, Roy is a bonus downloadable character. Roy was released alongside Lucas and Ryu on June 14, 2015.

Here's my reasoning: the characters' individual release dates aren't really that important to the franchise as a whole or the article itself; they're more relevant specifically to the 3DS/Wii U game, and as such are already noted on its page. Furthermore, Lucas, Mewtwo and Roy have these notes, but fellow downloadable characters Bayonetta, Cloud, Corrin and Ryu do not, creating a lack of consistency.

I made this proposal a year ago (see #Semi-protected edit request on 3 February 2016), but it was rejected because "it may be just as good to add notes to those characters that do not have them as it would be to erase existing notes. Either may be done in the future to improve this article." However, nearly a year later, no one has actually done so, and it's cluttering an already lengthy Notes section. There's no reason to make individual notes for each character when the existing "DLC" marker for their playable status already conveys all the necessary information, namely that these characters are not part of the base game and were as added as post-launch downloadable content. I'd appreciate it if someone would go in and remove these to help clean things up a bit, or at least replace the individual notes with a single generic "Character added via downloadable content following the game's launch" one that we can re-use whenever Sma5h gets announced. -- 136.181.195.25 (talk) 19:52, 24 January 2017 (UTC)

Wouldn't it be optimal to simply conflate all of these into one note saying "In 3DS/Wii U, these characters were later released as a bonus downloadable character"? I agree that the exact dates are not relevant to this article. It definitely makes no sense for Roy, Ryu, and Lucas, to each have a separate note. ~Mable (chat) 21:07, 24 January 2017 (UTC)

I'm not opposed to the idea of a generic DLC note (see my last sentence), but at that point, doesn't it make the "DLC" marker on the table kind of redundant? It's like "Bayonetta is DLC in Sm4sh (Note: this character was added to the game via downloadable content)". It just seems a little silly to have both when they essentially say the same thing. If it was just the DLC cell, or their cell was marked as "Yes" with a DLC note, that would make more sense IMO. At the very least, I'd suggest such a note be tied to their SSB4 cells instead of the characters themselves. -- 136.181.195.25 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 21:24, 24 January 2017 (UTC)

Not done: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit semi-protected}} template.  ^B E _C K ^Y _S A ^{Y L} E _S  03:46, 4 February 2017 (UTC)

So what you're saying is that another year is going to go by and it's still not going to get done, despite the one other person here agreeing that it needs to be changed in some way. Thanks, very helpful. -- 136.181.195.25 (talk) 13:23, 6 February 2017 (UTC)

What they're saying is that edit requests can't be use for suggestions and discussions for some reason that is probably listed in WP:Edit requests, but I have 0 interest in looking into that, so..... ~Mable (chat) 20:15, 6 February 2017 (UTC)

Non-edit request discussion on using notes in the character tables

Because I guess it's not allowed to discuss this topic in the preceding section. It seems like the following two options are available, though I'm all-ears for alternative ideas:

• Removing the above mentioned notes entirely.
• Conflating the notes into one generic note.

The issue for the latter option is that there currently already exists a stylization for DLC (rather than simply 'included' and 'not included'). If we pick this option, we'd probably have to either get rid of that stylization or move the location of the note. I quite like the latter option myself. Does anyone have any thoughts on the issue? @Becky Sayles: You're free to join the discussion, if you have an interest in reaching consensus for this issue. ~Mable (chat) 20:15, 6 February 2017 (UTC)

I don't particularly care which of the two we go with, as long as it's consistent and uncluttered, but if I had to choose, I'd opt for the latter, but with very specific language. In the event that the long-circulating rumors of a "complete" version for Switch that includes all DLC are true, akin to Mario Kart 8 Deluxe, it would be better to list the DLC characters as "Yes" with a note in their SSB4 cell explaining the difference (i.e. "This character appears as downloadable content for 3DS/U, and is included in Switch"). Of course, this is all based on speculation, but it never hurts to future-proof. -- 136.181.195.25 (talk) 16:06, 7 February 2017 (UTC)

I think the 'DLC' note gives a good amount of clarity myself, and I shouldn't want to give it up, but I'd like to hear some more opinions, honestly... Maybe I should drop a note at the WikiProject. ~Mable (chat) 18:01, 7 February 2017 (UTC)

It's been a month now; I don't think you're going to get any more opinions. Can we just pick an approach and commit to it? -- 136.181.195.25 (talk) 14:52, 6 March 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Super Smash Bros.. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081207184903/http://uk.cube.ign.com/articles/097/097950p1.html to http://uk.cube.ign.com/articles/097/097950p1.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080328131143/http://uk.cube.ign.com/articles/098/098158p1.html to http://uk.cube.ign.com/articles/098/098158p1.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20141011183600/https://miiverse.nintendo.net/posts/AYMHAAACAADMUKl3TMQjFQ to https://miiverse.nintendo.net/posts/AYMHAAACAADMUKl3TMQjFQ

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:02, 27 December 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 7 January 2018

In the future section it says "The recruitment page consisted of a listing for programmers for Super Smash Bros. 6" it should be changed to "The recruitment page consisted of a listing for programmers for Super Smash Bros. 4 " 2600:1700:13B0:6480:BD21:AF46:D843:942A (talk) 18:22, 7 January 2018 (UTC)

Done AdA&D 20:06, 7 January 2018 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Super Smash Bros.. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110611021542/http://gonintendo.com/viewstory.php?id=160176 to http://gonintendo.com/viewstory.php?id=160176
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20141011021017/https://miiverse.nintendo.net/posts/AYMHAAACAABnUYoGBjiK1g to https://miiverse.nintendo.net/posts/AYMHAAACAABnUYoGBjiK1g
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150403085413/https://miiverse.nintendo.net/users/SakuraiMasahiroA to https://miiverse.nintendo.net/users/SakuraiMasahiroA

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:36, 10 January 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 8 March 2018

Can we change Inklings to Inklings or Inklings since they don't have an official page yet? 2600:1700:12F0:97B0:E911:4088:6A14:B572 (talk) 23:57, 8 March 2018 (UTC)

 Done Spintendo      00:04, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

SMASH Switch characters

Only Link, Mario, and Inkling are confirmed characters. The rest are speculation. I went ahead and reset it all to TBA on the playable characters diagram. JJsCat (talk) 17:17, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

• Technically they aren't confirmed either, but changing that would just start an edit war. ~ Dissident93 ^(talk) 21:19, 9 March 2018 (UTC)
• Nintendo's Twitter account mentioned them by name so I'd say that's confirmation. JJsCat (talk) 11:39, 12 March 2018 (UTC)

The ones that are very easy to identify in the flame pic teaser is Yoshi, DK, Peach, Mario, Link, Luigi, Fox, Bowser, Samus, and Pikachu. OperationGaming (talk) 11:00, 23 April 2018 (UTC)

• That's still up to debate and every speculation video you watch will give a different list of characters. JJsCat (talk) 11:36, 23 April 2018 (UTC)
• Unless it's officially confirmed, it shouldn't be included in an article. For example, in the latest Nintendo Direct, in its segment showcasing Mario Tennis Aces, they showed off 12 playable characters by name, but they stated that there would be "unlockable characters" and showed a silhouette of Koopa Troopa. As that's not official confirmation (it didn't explicitly say "Koopa Troopa is in the game"), it's not included in the article, and won't be until it's actually confirmed. ~ P*h3i (📨) 11:46, 23 April 2018 (UTC)

Should there be an orange tick or something to show (Likely, but not confirmed) or nah OperationGaming (talk) 16:25, 24 April 2018 (UTC)

Nah. It's either confirmed or not. -- ferret (talk) 16:40, 24 April 2018 (UTC)

I know this is late, but as a representative of the SmashWiki, I'd like to point out that we have identified Bowser's horns, Donkey Kong's hair, and Samus Aran's shoulders and helmet, and are setting the limit at that, as they are the only ones that are truly identifiable in this image. Aidanzapunk (talk) 00:54, 7 May 2018 (UTC)

That's not an official confirmation, sorry. We cannot add information based on personal analysis of an image. --ThomasO1989 (talk) 02:38, 7 May 2018 (UTC)

3DS and Wii Uboth Smash 4 or Smash 4 & 5?

I believe Mr. Sakurai refers to them as Smash 4 and 5 respectively making the new game coming in 2018 Smash 6. https://sourcegaming.info/2018/02/11/smash-switch-will-be-smash-6/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by JJsCat (talk • contribs) 11:39, 12 June 2018 (UTC)

They are treated as the same release here on Wikipedia. The above is definitely not a reliable source though. -- ferret (talk) 11:49, 12 June 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 19 June 2018

Add this image and caption to the "Super Smash Bros. Ultimate" subsection under the "Games" section as a representative screenshot. 136.181.195.25 (talk) 18:21, 19 June 2018 (UTC)

 Done L293D (☎ • ✎) 00:00, 20 June 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 3 July 2018

Please edit the table of playable characters to add a data-sort-value element to the table cells containing the fighter numbers of echo fighters, such that when sorting the table by number, the echo fighters will appear after the regular version of the fighter. I suggest a data-sort-value of 13.1, 21.1 and 28.1 for Daisy, Lucina and Dark Pit respectively. 88.97.28.55 (talk) 06:24, 3 July 2018 (UTC)

• Makes sense,  Done. Lordtobi (✉) 07:18, 3 July 2018 (UTC)

Edit Request on 15 July 2018

One of the notes on the Playable Characters table reads "In Super Smash Bros. Melee, Zelda can transform into Sheik using her down-B attack and vice versa." Using unofficial terminology instead of official terminology gives the page a sense of unprofessionalism. Rather than saying "Zelda can transform into Sheik using her down-B attack" it should use the official term from the games themselves, which would be "Zelda can transform into Sheik using her Down Special attack (or just 'Down Special'). 121.44.55.157 (talk) 08:44, 15 July 2018 (UTC)

• I agree, although it can be even less WP:gamecrufty by just saying using an ability. No need to point out any controls here. ~ Dissident93 ^(talk) 15:46, 15 July 2018 (UTC)

Character numbers in the roster table

Do we really need to include this? It was only added as a marketing thing for Ultimate, and looks strange out of numerical order. ~ Dissident93 ^(talk) 15:53, 15 July 2018 (UTC)

I think these should be added back and ideally organised numerically instead of alphabetically. Alt (talk) 14:55, 8 August 2018 (UTC)

But it's just a marketing thing for Ultimate, I don't see how it helps Wikipedia. ~ Dissident93 ^(talk) 16:26, 8 August 2018 (UTC)

I wouldn't say that it's just a marketing thing though. The character numbers do indeed match when they were first revealed to be part of the series, excluding echo fighters. If you look up older reveal trailers for the previous games, the numbers do indeed match when they first appeared and Ultimate is simply acknowledging this order. Alt (talk) 19:09, 8 August 2018 (UTC)

Not saying they are inaccurate, I just don't personally think its a fit for Wikipedia. I'd like to get other opinions on this first, because my opinion could be in the minority here. And if they do return, they should be sorted by them; the previous way (which somebody else removed, by the way) wasn't ordered and just looked messy. ~ Dissident93 ^(talk) 01:04, 9 August 2018 (UTC)

I'd have to agree with Dissident. When judging this, you have to ask yourself, "Would an ordinary reader, perhaps not familiar with the Super Smash Bros. series, find this information to be of value? Would they necessarily care about the exact order in which these characters were revealed?" Personally, my answer would be 'no'. It is likely information only hardcore fans would be interested in (fancruft). Plus, when you have a really large table like this, you should eliminate as much bloat as possible. Wani (talk) 14:13, 9 August 2018 (UTC)

Why can't numeric be a search term? As Sakurai has established, the numbers represent their order of arrival in the franchise, which is a legitimate sort category, in my mind. The primary sort function can and should be their alphabetical names. --McDoobAU93 14:59, 9 August 2018 (UTC)

We could have done this unofficially years ago, but always sorted by series/general reveal timings instead. Is this detail really fit for an encyclopedic? Does it really matter what character was revealed 32nd? As helpful as it might seem to some, it just seems more fan-crufty than anything. ~ Dissident93 ^(talk)

It's kind of ironic that the people over at SmashWiki (a wiki solely dedicated to SSB "fan-cruft") are having this exact same disscussion about whether to include the character numbers. Many of the arguments for and against are similar, if not identical to the ones here. Check it out. 46.127.26.206 (talk) 17:26, 30 August 2018 (UTC)

Interesting. Usually, stuff that isn't a real fit for Wikipedia (such as fancrufty/trivial content) gets added to fan-wikis without any opposition (and is normally directed by people here to do so), so I'm surprised to hear there are similar arguments being used against it there. ~ Dissident93 ^(talk) 20:52, 30 August 2018 (UTC)

Just throwing in my hat that I also agree numbers don't belong. I don't like the argument that it help people understand when fighters were introduced because that's not exactly true, for example, Donkey Kong is 2 and Samus is 4 but they were both introduced in the same game at the same time. It's easy to tell when they were introduced by filtering on which games they were included in. The number doesn't matter for our purposes. TarkusAB^talk 09:59, 31 August 2018 (UTC)

Not quite. Look at this video; it contains every game reveal trailers up to smash ultimate. You can clearly see that DK and Samus were not introduced at the exact same time as you stated; beginning at 0:25, Mario is introduced first (1), then DK (2), then Link (3), and then Samus (4). Also the latest nintendo direct confirms that the character's order is indeed by number and that this order consists of when exactly each character joined the series (told in the video at 6:44). -46.127.26.206 (talk) 20:18, 1 November 2018 (UTC)

That's only how they were revealed in the trailer. What I'm saying is, it's not representative of how they were revealed since 1999. Since this article is about characters across the series, and the numbers were not included in previous games, it doesn't make sense to include them. They are just a marketing thing for Ultimate. TarkusAB^talk 20:47, 1 November 2018 (UTC)

The trailers are representative of how they were revealed since 1999. Just because they were not used in previous games does not remove their validity as the order of the character's introduction, and again, it's not just a marketing thing for Ultimate, unless you could tell me why you think it is. 46.127.26.206 (talk) 23:13, 1 November 2018 (UTC)

The trailers are representative of how they were revealed since 1999.

Not true. In the days of 64 and Melee, there was no reveal order. The games shipped without all the characters revealed. We're talking pre-internet.

it's not just a marketing thing for Ultimate, unless you could tell me why you think it is.

There were no numbers prior to Ultimate. Show me where characters had numbers associated with them for the previous games. TarkusAB^talk 23:49, 1 November 2018 (UTC)

More importantly, give a single example of how it's important or encyclopedic to have this trivial information. -- ferret (talk) 23:51, 1 November 2018 (UTC)

"Not true. In the days of 64 and Melee, there was no reveal order. The games shipped without all the characters revealed."

Sorry, but did you the video? 0:00 through 1:20 is the reveal order for Smash 64, and 1:20 through 2:50 is the reveal oder for Melee. Furthermore, for Smash 64 all characters were revealed within that video, and the videos themselves came included with their respective game for Smash 64 and Melee; they would play once the respective game was started.

The reveal order then breaks up as the following:

1-8: Smash 64 The starters are in CSS order of the game's roster table, left to right, first row then second row

9-12: Smash 64 The secrets (the characters that you said were not revealed), also left to right, first row then second row.

13-17: Melee The newly introduced characters (that were also starters) are in the order in which they appeared in the opening FMV, which also doubled as the announcement trailer during E3 2001

18-26: Melee The unannounced secret character's order are in the order of their VS. match count unlock order (e.g. Pichu (19) could not appear before Dr Mario (18) no matter what)

27-31: The first batch of Brawl's newly introduced characters are in the order in which they appeared during the E3 2006 announcement trailer

32-40: The rest of Brawl's newly introduced characters (which were also starters) and Sonic are ordered as they were announced by Dojo

41-44: The unannounced Brawl secret character's order are in the order of their VS. match count unlock order (e.g. R.O.B. (42) could not appear before Lucario (41) no matter what.

The rest of the new character's order were by Smash 4 and Ultimate (obiously) trailer release order

"We're talking pre-internet."

Um, what? Here is a review article by IGN that was released a day after Smash 64 was released in North America. The article even mentions all characters in the game by name. Also, a very similar video from parts 1:20 through 2:50 was shown in E3 2001 for Melee, which was shown on the internet on websites such as IGN at the time. Honestly, I have no idea what you mean with pre-internet, but do explain more if you get a chance.

"There were no numbers prior to Ultimate. Show me where characters had numbers associated with them for the previous games."

A few things that I find wrong with this statement. Let me break it down:

"There were no numbers prior to Ultimate" So what if there weren't? The reveal order still existed. You are also making the Burden of proof fallacy here; just because the numbers weren't used before the announcement of Ultimate doesn't mean that the order itself didn't exists before, and therefore is not "just a marketing thing" as you kept labeling it.

"Show me where characters had numbers associated with them for the previous games." Here you are making another fallacy called denying the antecedent. You are saying the following:

1.If the characters have a number, then the reveal order I mentioned exists

2.Characters in previous games have no numbers

3.Therefore, characters did not have the reveal order I mentioned before Ultimate

"More importantly, give a single example of how it's important or encyclopedic to have this trivial information."

The Chronicles of Narnia is my example. A series that was originally not numbered, similar to the character numbers here, but then adopted a publishing order and the Harper Collins order (a chronological order that was originally internal), and. In that article there is an entire sub section dedicated to why the two orders exists. The numerical order of the characters deserves importance int the character page because it is how Masahiro Sakurai would like players to view the roster. 46.127.26.206 (talk) 21:23, 2 November 2018 (UTC)

Suggesting that character roster numbers is on par with the importance of the reading order of a large narrative is silly. It holds zero significance to the game itself, how it's played, or how players interact with the game. -- ferret (talk) 22:15, 2 November 2018 (UTC)

What I mean by "pre-internet" was it being a time when the internet was not as sophisticated as it is now compared with all the Smash promotion we see today. I know the internet existed then. Sorry for the confusion.

Yes I watched the video, I understand where they derived the numbers. I still don't consider that a "reveal order".

We disagree on the weight the numbers carry. On Wikipedia, content must demonstrate real world importance through discussion by multiple reliable sources to establish notability. The concept Smash characters having associated numbers carries no real world importance as it is not discussed enough by sources to establish that notability. The order of The Chronicles of Narnia is written about on Wikipedia because sources discuss it. TarkusAB^talk 22:38, 2 November 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 9 August 2018

In the 6th footnote on the character table, please change "In 3DS/Wii U" to "In 3DS/Wii U and Ultimate. The continued inclusion of Alph as an alternate appearance for Olimar has already been confirmed via his official website profile (seen in the third gameplay screenshot) and his character trailer (highlighted at the 0:10 and 0:19 timestamps). -- 136.181.195.25 (talk) 17:07, 9 August 2018 (UTC) 136.181.195.25 (talk) 17:07, 9 August 2018 (UTC)

• He isn't considered an echo fighter (either in Smash 4 or Ultimate) like some of these others, so I don't think we should consider him a separate fighter here either. EDIT: Nevermind, I misread. Fixed. ~ Dissident93 ^(talk) 17:27, 11 August 2018 (UTC)

Edit request, Aug 8 2018

A sentence in the section on Brawl reads: "There are also significantly more multiplayer modes and a tournament mode allowing for 64 different competitors whom can all be controlled by a human player, although only up to four players can participate at the same time."

This is misleading; the article should be removed and an "s" should be added, to indicate that the characters can be controlled by human players, plural, not that a player can use 64 characters simultaneously.

Jack Vermicelli 2warped@gmail.com 24.127.238.196 (talk) 01:36, 11 August 2018 (UTC)

 Done, but I don't know what article you want removed. ~ Dissident93 ^(talk) 17:28, 11 August 2018 (UTC)

Split proposed

I propose splitting out the characters section into its own article. It is getting too long and breaks the flow of the article. TarkusAB^talk 22:19, 23 August 2018 (UTC)

Support: I can see that. There will have to be some stipulations. Look at the articles for List of Street Fighter characters, List of Mortal Kombat characters and List of Tekken characters. I know they probably cannot be that detailed story or character-wise, but there can at least be detailed descriptions for their move sets and history within the franchise. I would be delighted to work on such an article. Also, we can maybe add descriptions for the non-playable characters as well.Voicebox64 (talk) 04:29, 29 August 2018 (UTC)

@Voicebox64: I started a draft you can work on if you wish. Draft:Characters in the Super Smash Bros. series TarkusAB^talk 13:40, 29 August 2018 (UTC)

@TarkusAB: Thanks!Voicebox64 (talk) 16:36, 29 August 2018 (UTC)

On second thought, I would probably vote against having a section for each fighter, as the information is available elsewhere on wiki. TarkusAB^talk 19:36, 29 August 2018 (UTC)

Support in principle, but what else would the split page have beside a table? ~ Dissident93 ^(talk) 04:38, 29 August 2018 (UTC)

There is more than a table to the character section here. Enemies, assist trophies, other NPC details and perhaps the characters can each have their own section like Voicebox said. TarkusAB^talk 11:33, 29 August 2018 (UTC)

So that would be split as well? In that case, I fully support the proposal. ~ Dissident93 ^(talk) 19:58, 29 August 2018 (UTC)

• Support as long as it isn't too crufty. JOEBRO64 19:13, 29 August 2018 (UTC)
• I fully support the idea of splitting off the characters section as it exists now into its own article, and summarizing the content here in a much shorter section without a table. ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 12:47, 4 September 2018 (UTC)
• No opposition to this, any reason why this hasn't been done yet? ~ Dissident93 ^(talk) 17:20, 18 September 2018 (UTC)

Because I'm a lazy bastard. :) Sometime soon. Not that simple because the section on this page will need some rewriting. TarkusAB^talk 17:26, 18 September 2018 (UTC)

Well, as long as it's still planned, that's fine. ~ Dissident93 ^(talk) 17:44, 18 September 2018 (UTC)

 Done TarkusAB^talk 15:42, 19 September 2018 (UTC)

Cheers. On a side note, can someone update the character page link on Ultimate? It must have gotten missed when updating the others. -- 136.181.195.25 (talk) 16:58, 19 September 2018 (UTC)

 Done Thanks, I somehow missed it. TarkusAB^talk 17:24, 19 September 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 18 September 2018

Under Characters, change "Mecha Ridley" to "Meta Ridley", as this is the character's actual name (seen here and here). -- 136.181.195.25 (talk) 15:15, 18 September 2018 (UTC)

 Done TarkusAB^talk 15:29, 18 September 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 21 October 2018

Very minor, but change the reference after the series' title to a more correct Efn template. 109.225.98.60 (talk) 17:35, 21 October 2018 (UTC)

•  Not done "Nihongo foot" is just as acceptable for how its being used (if not moreso). WP:JFN doesn't say EFN has to be used. ~ Dissident93 ^(talk) 18:16, 21 October 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 10 November 2018

Edit the December 2018 to December 7th, 2018 Elijah D. Jones (talk) 05:37, 10 November 2018 (UTC)

 Not done Full dates are not needed in the lead. Month/year is acceptable. The full date is later in the body of the article. TarkusAB^talk 12:52, 10 November 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 3 January 2019

Edit text above aggrigate review score table to current date, as it still reads a 2015 date despite the inclusion of Ultimate's score. I.e. change February 6 2015, it should read January 4 2018. Gobungogo (talk) 01:04, 3 January 2019 (UTC)

 Partly done: Honestly this should just be removed from them template. Look at the citation's access date. Removed the out of date date. -- ferret (talk) 01:15, 3 January 2019 (UTC)

Agreed. No reason for this, as it should be assumed it's up to date anyway (and the access date should show this as well). ~ Dissident93 ^(talk) 02:18, 3 January 2019 (UTC)

Something interesting

Probably not worth mentioning, but I just found some sources ([1][2][3][4][5]) that say the longest piece of fiction ever written (yes, you read that correctly) is a fanmade sequel to The Subspace Emissary JOEBRO64 02:20, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

Originally Japan-only? Doubt it

In the opening paragraph, someone wrote, "as originally a Japan-only release, but its domestic success led to a worldwide release." with no sources and I highly doubt it was made for only the Japan-market. Someone clarify, cheers. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 42.101.65.144 (talk) 10:24, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

• I also agree. Just because it was released in Japan first doesn't mean it was never planned to release outside of it. At least, none of the sources actually state this, unless it was miscited or something. ~ Dissident93 ^(talk) 16:25, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

the number of installments in Super Smash Bros.

techincally speaking, Masahiro Sakurai stated that he considers SSB Ultimate the sixth installment in the series. So I would like SSB for 3DS & Wii U to be considered separate installments. Minemaster1337 (talk) 23:15, 31 July 2020 (UTC)

 Not done: This has been discussed multiple times, and unfortunately for Sakurai, secondary reliable sources group them together. -- ferret (talk) 00:02, 1 August 2020 (UTC)

I have a question, is Super Smash bros available for game boy advance? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.117.102.31 (talk) 00:57, 10 August 2020 (UTC)

NES Zapper template?

Should we add the NES Zapper (seen here) template to the list of related games?(Oinkers42) (talk) 14:56, 14 August 2020 (UTC)

No. None of the Smash articles mention the NES zapper and it's unclear why they would. Removed the other two from the template, there's no obvious connection. -- ferret (talk) 16:45, 14 August 2020 (UTC)

It might have been listed due to Duck Hunt.(Oinkers42) (talk) 22:00, 14 August 2020 (UTC)

That's not a close enough relation to matter. -- ferret (talk) 23:45, 14 August 2020 (UTC)

Question

Is it ok if I add Smashwiki as the “Offical Wiki”? It needs to be approved before I can add it Im a shoe2 (talk) 05:30, 7 February 2021 (UTC) Ok, adding it. Remove it if necessary Im a shoe2 (talk) 05:39, 7 February 2021 (UTC)

It's not official. I personally am not a fan to linking to fan wikis. But if others want it, the key thing is it is NOT official. -- ferret (talk) 15:11, 7 February 2021 (UTC)

Shared Universe

I think that at this point, it's fairly safe to say that the Super Smash Bros. franchise counts as a Shared Universe.

(161.29.246.205 (talk) 21:57, 10 November 2021 (UTC))