Jump to content

Talk:Mario & Sonic at the Olympic Winter Games

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The printable version is no longer supported and may have rendering errors. Please update your browser bookmarks and please use the default browser print function instead.

Flags represent playable characters, right?

Well, then Silver the Hedgehog is confirmed:

http://sonicstadium.org/news/more-new-msatowg-screens-silver-confirmed —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.253.7.99 (talk) 02:32, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Blogs are not considered reliable sources. TJ Spyke 02:41, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Plus that site also points out the "flag issue". Magiciandude (talk) 20:51, 12 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Nintendo Channel reference?

I just checked out the game info on the Nintendo Channel, and it has the following info: The use of Mii's, Online connectivity, and supporting WiiConnect24. Is Nintendo Channel a reference or will another reference be needed? Magiciandude (talk) 03:13, 13 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see where its possible to cite software with the templates. « ₣M₣ » 17:53, 15 February 2009 (UTC)
Alright thank for the input, I'll look for an alternate source. Magiciandude (talk) 01:00, 24 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Why are no character lists allowed?

Since the article has been locked due to the conflict of including a character list or not, I will clarify why we do not use a character list. This issue has been brought up before. We do not use character list as discouraged per Article Guidline for Video Game articles. It's the same reason we do not have a character list for the games predeccesor. Magiciandude (talk) 15:12, 12 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'd also like to suggest that we don't need to make a big deal out of every new character that is revealed to be in the game. I think mentioning just Donkey Kong and Metal Sonic would have been quite enough (seeing as they were in the first proper trailer). CBFan (talk) 17:09, 12 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, List of sports games in the Mario series gives all that info. trainfan01 —Preceding undated comment added 03:42, 25 June 2010 (UTC).[reply]

Or at least it did, I don't understand why all the character tables were deleted. trainfan01 19:08, July 5, 2010 —Preceding undated comment added 02:08, 6 July 2010 (UTC).[reply]

Reception

Okay, there's been a small dispute on the reception. On one hand, you have users stating that the game is mixed to positive while the others have just "generally positive". Which one is it and why? Magiciandude (talk) 03:43, 21 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The reviews were pretty much mixed due to a lot of 5, 6, and 7 scores. Geoff B and TJ Spyke says they are positive, but I deny it. Any change from "mixed to positive" to "generally positive" will be reverted. StevenMario (talk) 13:31, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Editing as an IP address and then coming on here and stating that you won't compromise. Nice. Unfortunately for you, the statement is sourced. I'd think seriously about your auto-revert stance before it becomes a matter of sockpuppetry or vandalism and you get reported. Geoff B (talk) 20:37, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Steven, a 7 is a positive score, I would even say a 6.5 is positive. 5 to 6.5 is mixed. While there have been some mixed scores, they only make up a small amount of the total scores. TJ Spyke 22:02, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
A 7 is not a positive. If it was, then it would be "great", not "good". An 8 or 9 is positive, and therefore the majority of the reviews were mixed! The review might praise the game, but the review may criticize the game a lot. Like I said, any change from "mixed to positive" to "generally positive" will be reverted. StevenMario (talk) 14:37, 26 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with Steven that a 7 is mixed, and that it should be listed as mixed to positive, because out of all the reviews that are listed on this article, only 3 of them gave the game a 9, and the rest are all below an 8. Mokoniki | talk 15:19, 25 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
'Mixed' means exactly that, a mixture of review scores of considerable difference. As for A 7 is not positive this is your POV, but if in fact a 7 is not positive, please A) Cite a source saying so and B) Provide an example of a score of 7 being negative. Geoff B (talk) 19:45, 25 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I told you, any change from mixed to positive to generally positive will be reverted. If you continue to undo, you and TJ Spyke will be reported edit-warring. StevenMario (talk) 12:25 PM EDT, 26 November 2009 —Preceding undated comment added 17:26, 26 November 2009 (UTC).[reply]
Steven, you are the one edit warring. Stop now or you will be reported. A 7 is a positive score, you may not like that but it's your opinion. If I had to define it: 0-4 is negative, 4.1-6.9 is mixed, 7-10 is positive. Stop reverting while this issue is being discussed. TJ Spyke 17:38, 26 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Prepare to be punished. User:StevenMario (talk) 18:00, 26 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Stop making false threats. I removed your little vandalism to my talkpage (accusing me of being close to violating 3RR despite the fact that I have only made 1 edit in the last 24 hours and only 2 in the last 2 days). You, on the other hand, have made 2 reverts and threaten to report anyone who disagrees with you. If you are not gonna try and engage in a conversation without making false threats, maybe you should take a break from editing for a few hours and enjoy Thanksgiving. TJ Spyke 18:35, 26 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Fine then, but we are going to still fight until this debate is settled (NOTE: YOUR grading scale is an opinion, not a fact). StevenMario (talk) 19:06, 26 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
'Prepare to be punished?' WTF? Seriously, how are we supposed to reach a compromise with him acting like this? He's stated from the outset he won't tolerate any disagreement, and thinks he is 100% correct. The problem is not the wording of the article, which we can hash out in short order, but StevenMario's behaviour. Geoff B (talk) 21:40, 26 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The majority of the reviews were mixed. Just because the reviews were 6.9 ot 7 doesn't mean that they are positive! If they were, then there would be more 8s or 9s. If you agree with me, please put how many people agree with either me or TJ and Geoff.

Steven - 2 TJ and Geoff - 2

Poll set to expire Monday 4:00 EDT. The person that has more numbers is right. DO NOT COMPLAIN OVER THIS, PLEASE! StevenMario (talk) 23:33, 26 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is not a democracy. Geoff B (talk) 22:59, 26 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Mononoki told me something that's right. If I see ANYTHING that is without a reliable source (Not Metacritic or any other reviewer), it will be reverted and that is final (NOTE: Both of your conclusions are opinions, not facts (seriously)). Anyone that continues to do it will be blocked (seriously). StevenMario (talk 24:13, 26 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Steven, stop acting like you have any authority or know what you are talking about. You act like your opinion is fact (it's not), you make BS threats at anyone who disagrees with you (despite you being the one on the edge of violating rules and guidelines), you dismiss reliable sources when you don't agree with them (like Metacritic and GameRankings), and you openly threaten to edit-war. Stop your threats now. Me and Geoff are being civil, you don't seem to understand the guidelines and rules of Wikipedia. You are a newbie, if you want to improve as an editor I can provide you with links that will help you, and then you can't stop making hollow threats at people who disagree with you (it's like a snake that has been de-fanged hissing at someone). 23:37, 26 November 2009 (UTC)
Then change the so-called "positive" stuff to "mixed" (it IS a fact)! 23:54, 26 November 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by StevenMario (talk • contribs)
No, it's your opinion. Stop acting like your opinion is fact, that's why the article has been protected from editing. TJ Spyke 00:00, 27 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It's your opinion, too. StevenMario 00:08 27 November 09 UTC —Preceding unsigned comment added by StevenMario (talk • contribs) 00:08, 27 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Steven, I think you are taking this a little out of hand. You need to respect that the other users think that it should be positive, I think it should be mixed to positive as well, but putting that in would be against Wikipedia guidelines, as that's my opinion. I think you should settle down, and try to handle this without acting like you own the page. Mokoniki | talk 00:25, 27 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
We will all just have to cease and desist then. More professional users (excluding us) can find the truth then. StevenMario (talk) 01:50, 27 November 2009 (UTC) StevenMario (talk) 01:51, 27 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The problem is, Steven, you're not only outnumbered, but your attitude is such that we don't really want to listen to you. I personally would agree with the other two. CBFan (talk) 11:17, 27 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
All right! All right! ...very well then, but the false information is that the reviews were positive, but they were not. If only someone else (except all of us) would really tell us the truth and stop this arguement, then they would give the truth of what the scores really were (they weren't positive) just to be nice. StevenMario (talk) 14:41, 27 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Steven, stop acting like your OPINION is fact. Your OPINION is that the reviews were mixed. Most games have some scores lower or higher than the rest. I could take a game that got mostly bad scores and find a couple of good scores for it (like Tony Hawk: Ride). TJ Spyke 16:41, 27 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
After some thought, I have decided to agree with TJ Spike and Geoff B. It should be listed as generally positive, so disregard my earlier comment. I was thinking of it as how they grade things in my school. 70% in my school is a C, so that's why I thought it should have been mixed. Mokoniki | talk 17:14, 27 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Well umm, if someone more smarter than us (excluding TJ Spyke or Geoff B (note: both of your facts are opinions too, so you should stop thinking your opinion is a fact.)) finds out what the scores really should be, then they would add a chart of the scores and they will decide what it should say when we and I should cease and desist. StevenMario (talk) 20:54, 27 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
No, StevenMario, as they have already told you, what you're saying are opinions, what THEY'RE saying are FACTS, because they have posted PROOF. You haven't tried. Post proof, or get out. Seriously, I'm surprised you haven't been banned yet. CBFan (talk) 18:49, 3 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
What you're saying is an opinion too, because your edits are out of order. I had sources of my revision, and Metacritic did give a mixed to average review of the game. See the page and find those words.

StevenMario (talk) 23:30, 3 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I added SOME positive reviews, and they have more sources too. StevenMario (talk) 23:54, 3 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Epic fail, go away. All you're doing is taking our criticism against you and using it as your own weapon. That's not the point. It's not like we're insulting you or anything. CBFan (talk) 20:53, 5 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
According to Metacritic, it clearly states in the Wii version that it has "Mixed or average reviews". DO NOT CHANGE OR DO NOT TELL ME TO DO ANYTHING, EVEN TELLING ME STOP, OR YOU WILL BE BLOCKED FROM EDITING. StevenMario (talk) 14:12, 25 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Very well then, you'll be banned real soon. You do NOT deserve to be here. CBFan (talk) 18:13, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
First, stop with the BS threats. You have ZERO power to Wikipedia and no one will get blocked if they change it back (or you will be the one to get blocked). Stop acting like you have say over what goes in the article u. TJ Spyke 15:12, 25 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: I have a source, and it is NOT about the consensus, the source states "MIXED OR AVERAGE REVIEWS". StevenMario (talk) 20:30, 30 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Your opinions no longer count, StevenMario, you had your chance and you blew it. Just because you hate the game (and it's obvious you do) DOESN'T mean the game automatically sucks. We are going by the OFFICIAL views, not your bogus opinion. You've been BANNED for your aggresive action, why aren't you learning? CBFan (talk) 23:09, 30 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Mario & Sonic at the Olympic Winter Games. 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:

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: 5 June 2024).

  • 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) 16:06, 9 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Mario & Sonic at the Olympic Winter Games. 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:

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: 5 June 2024).

  • 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) 22:27, 2 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Mario & Sonic at the Olympic Winter Games. 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:

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: 5 June 2024).

  • 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) 17:43, 17 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The releases are wrong. Expect Japan

NA: October 13, 2009

EU: October 15, 2009

AU: October 16, 2009

Are the releases for the game — Preceding unsigned comment added by Benjaminkirsc (talk • contribs) 12:48, 29 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Mario_%26_Sonic_at_the_Olympic_Winter_Games&oldid=1208810850"