User talk:Hiccup

Comment on Manky Kong Article
I wouldn't add speculation into articles, it's unprofessional and you could end up with a warning if this kind of behavior continues. 14:44, 25 February 2014 (EST)
 * What specific speculation are you referring to? --Hiccup (talk) 14:48, 25 February 2014 (EST)


 * Please don't do stuff like this: http://www.mariowiki.com/index.php?title=Manky_Kong&curid=16503&diff=1633206&oldid=1615607. It's rather offensive to some people. 16:16, 25 February 2014 (EST)


 * I definitely support correcting the sort of inane shit statement like the one linked to above, but "repair, don't respond" is definitely a principle that applies to the wiki. --Glowsquid (talk) 20:38, 25 February 2014 (EST)
 * Yes, I was poking fun at the sentence which I thought was thoughtless. I agree I should have just corrected it properly rather than having the article "comment on itself". --Hiccup (talk) 11:49, 26 February 2014 (EST)

"Beta" pages
Speaking of which, you're looking to improve the beta pages? Cool! I went on an one man(child) crusade a bit over a year ago to organise the pages into the "Early ideas/builds/Unused content/misc" structure that's used now, but I haven't had as much time as I'd like to to throughously rewrite and source non-ridiculous claims. Do you feel the beta ___ namespace has any particularly galling issues beside writing and sourcing? --Glowsquid (talk) 20:38, 25 February 2014 (EST)
 * I think the name "beta" is ridiculous, since betas rarely have cut content. I'm currently making a prerelease article for TCRF.net (The Cutting Room Floor: a wiki about unused, debug, prerelease (cut) content and version differences (including prototypes). But I am perfectly happy to contribute here as well in some way. If you want some idea of how I think "beta" articles should be done, you might want to look at TCRFs (in my opinion, great) guidelines (here and here). You may also want to look at some articles. --Hiccup (talk) 11:49, 26 February 2014 (EST)


 * I kinda dislike the "beta" name myself, but while there has been some periodic grumbling to get it changed, it hasn't gained much traction since no one's been able to provide a name that encasuplates all the info (rejected production ideas/games that switched platform or changed radically throughout development/prerelease stuff/unused content still on the media... etc) without being vague or clunky as hell to use. That, and "beta" has inadvertently a sort of shorthand for "early" stuff among a fair number of Mario fan communities. The name's kinda grandfathered in at this point, which isn't the most ideal arrangement, but well. That being said, using "beta" as a shorthand for "stuff that changed during development" is discouraged, so feel free to edit out any instance of the word you see on articles.


 * I love TCRF (and had to clean more than one instance of plagiarism of it from this wiki, lol)! I'm reasonably satisfied with our current header structure, but I'm still undecided about how the information should be organized within the headers, so I might just take some inspiration from TCRF's method.


 * Also, just as an head-up, editing message by other users (which you kind of did by splitting my previous verbiage into two headers) in the Talk: and MarioWiki: namespaces is sorta frowned upon, even if it's minor alterations like correcting links or fixing typos. I absolutely don't mind having my messages edited like this, but other wiki users may, so I'm telling you this to avoid potential headaches down the line. --Glowsquid (talk) 12:45, 26 February 2014 (EST)

Re: Source
I don't remember that nor am I contributing to the wiki anymore. There is a possibility it's from the E3 2011 press website, which is now down (this used to be the url: )
 * Thanks for the link. Too bad it's offline, do you happen to have a local folder of anything you haven't uploaded to MarioWiki? --Hiccup (talk) 13:55, 6 July 2014 (EDT)