User talk:Cheesedude

Welcome to my talk page. Feel free to leave any messages below. However, do not ask me for help with your Deck, I am a very casual player and probably won't be able to help you. If you leave me a message, I will put your talk page on my watchlist. You may respond on my talk page or your talk page. I will check both.

Some Decks
Should we really list the Decks of Ponta and Abyss on Girag's and Rio's pages? The Decks don't belong to either and they were possessed during the Duels, so they were merely there as hosts. At most, i'd say to list it in their Duel list e.g. Lose (possessed; using Abyss' Deck) with "Abyss' Deck" linking to the Decklist on his own profile page. What do you think? TheScarecrow14 (talk • contribs) 19:38, May 8, 2014 (UTC)


 * Sort of neutral either way. I prefer to keep them listed on both pages, but if we only do one, then yeah, it should be the one who was in control. Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 19:49, May 8, 2014 (UTC)


 * That's cool. Well just thought i'd propose the idea to you anyway. Also, could you delete Rex's Deck page since i've moved the Decks to their own pages. Thanks. TheScarecrow14 (talk • contribs) 13:28, May 11, 2014 (UTC)


 * Done. Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 15:49, May 11, 2014 (UTC)

Genryu aren't related to serpents... but too late.
As to your edit... it removes the point to put it in the description, and makes it a bit misleading. I was indicating how the obviously poor naming of "Wyrm" is indicative of the exact opposite of what we are seeing the archetype to be (Wyrm becomes Serpent in Old English; being half-right in the wrong language doesn't help it at all), in the same manner as "Fairy". It's certainly a bit of trivia, and not something that needs hidden from knowledge, if not should be blatantly noted to make it clear from the get-go (especially with the site's wonderful new approach of adding the Japanese wording of many things to show how they really relate despite the poor translation jobs).

As for your question (rhetorical as it may be), I would say "It should simply have been left as "Genryu". Considering that they are being a variant of Dragon, but distinctly Eastern in design, it would obviously be quite fitting both for description and theme to do so. But, as it's already got an official name, I can only do as I already do with the Angels: be glad I only collect the real cards: Japanese-language.

Thanks for being polite about it at least. Sorry I talk a lot; I just always get all of my mind out at once, so it becomes quite a bit. Jarie スイクン 03:03, May 12, 2014 (UTC)


 * Some things need to be localized. All things considered, I'm happy with "Angel" becoming "Fairy", especially given that there are many monsters of that type that do resemble fairies far more than angels. It also works the other way around. As to "Wyrm", I would note that we may see the same thing. We only have what, six or seven examples for the Type so far. All of them save the Armed Dragon variant resemble Eastern dragons. But we've had regular old Dragon-Types in the past that also do. In future sets, we may very well see non-Eastern looking dragons be Wyrm Types. Konami's localization staff would know that before hand and could take it into account when choosing the English Type name. Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 11:38, May 12, 2014 (UTC)

New problem with images
Although I uploaded newer versions of old images, they still show the old versions (at least for the ones that I overwrote). Will the new mover rights I got from Golden Key help correct this problem? If so, how do I use it?Cardsknower (talk • contribs) 16:50, May 13, 2014 (UTC)


 * Its a caching problem that will fix itself eventually. There's nothing we can do but wait. Don't worry about it. Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 16:53, May 13, 2014 (UTC)

ARC-V manga
So, you know about the one shot chapter which will be published this month, right? I've been adding the info we know already in the character pages and stuff, but... Since it's just a special chapter and not an actual manga series, should we already consider creating an article for "Yu-Gi-Oh! ARC-V (manga)" (the DD (archetype), for example, only appears in this one shot) and articles like "Yuya Sakaki (manga)"? For the time being I added the info in Yuya's and Akaba's anime articles. LegendaryAsariUgetsu (talk • contribs) 16:03, May 17, 2014 (UTC)


 * Just keep them on the anime pages for now, yes. When and if a proper manga is confirmed, we can move them. Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 20:37, May 17, 2014 (UTC)


 * So for now, how do I cope with the DD (archetype) page? (regarding the "appears in") Do I put it just "| manga = Yu-Gi-Oh! ARC-V"? LegendaryAsariUgetsu (talk • contribs) 23:05, May 17, 2014 (UTC)


 * That's fine. If I get a better idea, I'll let you know. XD. Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 23:10, May 17, 2014 (UTC)


 * Done. I made a brief clean-up in the Yu-Gi-Oh! ARC-V and added a section for the manga. We leave this special chapter's stuff together with the anime articles for now, then. LegendaryAsariUgetsu (talk • contribs) 23:32, May 17, 2014 (UTC)

But you see... Adding "manga_av =" to a card automatically puts a "ARC-V (manga)" link in the article... LegendaryAsariUgetsu (talk • contribs) 00:45, May 20, 2014 (UTC)


 * I would suggest you activate the Dinoguy signal. Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 01:36, May 20, 2014 (UTC)

Custom Videos
Hi Cheesedude,

I wanted to reach out to see if we could produce some cool custom videos for you this summer. You've probably noticed the new 'Must Watch' video module in the right rail. These videos come from our library on http://video.wikia.com. We can produce some videos for you on whatever topic you think would resonate, and then they will show up in that module. I was thinking we could make a few about some of the bigger events listed in your upcoming calendar http://yugioh.wikia.com/wiki/2014 For example, a video about "Duelist Alliance - What You Need to Know!", based on http://yugioh.wikia.com/wiki/Duelist_Alliance

Let me know what you and others here think about all this. Thanks. Peter 18:28, May 17, 2014 (UTC)


 * This is pretty intriguing. I'll need some time to gather ideas and talk it over with some others, but I'm certainly interested. Thank you. Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 01:38, May 20, 2014 (UTC)

"ryuusei" translation
When you said "It has the same connotation as "Dragonstar" without being as literal.", you meant this Dragonstar? What's the point in that (fyi, I don't really understand what you said)? How does that have anything to do with the translation as "Dragon Star"? How come "Cosmic Dragon" is accurate? It sounds kinda cool and somewhat suits the TCG name patterns better and is good for the English naming, but that doesn't make it accurate. If only you could tell me "ryusei" is an actual word, and it means "Cosmic Dragon"! But it is not! Except for it being a Japanese proper name, of course, it is a PUN.Take Fumikô (talk • contribs) 03:16, May 18, 2014 (UTC)


 * "Sei" can mean more things than just "star". "Ryu" can mean more things than just "dragon". "Cosmic" and "star" have more or less the same connotation, ergo "Cosmic Dragon" is perfectly acceptable translation. Stars are cosmic objects. Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 09:18, May 18, 2014 (UTC)


 * Agree that a Kanji letter can have different meanings, but that's not an excuse. Considering the Kanji order, "Cosmic Dragon" could only be perfect for "Seiryuu" or something like that, not "Ryuusei". I could give you a simple example: "神風" would mean "divine wind", but "風神" would be more likely "god of wind". I know the Organization have tried to pick up the best names that is most likely to turn official, and "Cosmic Dragon" DOES sound cool and all, but in regard with accurate translation, it's not so brilliant an idea. Take Fumikô (バカアキ) (talk) 10:25, May 18, 2014 (UTC)


 * I'm inclined to agree. "Cosmic Dragon" is synonymous with "Dragon of Stars", while "Ryuusei" means "Star of Dragons". As in, the name doesn't seem to refer to the dragons themselves, but rather a celestial object related to them. "Dragon Cosmos" might be a workable translation. Emmic (talk • contribs) 10:42, May 18, 2014 (UTC)

Incorrect Text
On the page of http://yugioh.wikia.com/wiki/Pendulum_Summon there is a discrepancy with the text written of: A Pendulum Summon cannot be negated by cards like "Solemn Warning", if more than one monster is summoned, as "Solemn Warning" and cards similar to it, specifically say to negate the summon of one monster. However, if they only summon one monster, then it can be negated by the effect of "Solemn Warning".[5]. However, you can "Bottomless Trap Hole" the monsters summoned, due to the card saying monster(s), not monster, thus being able to deal with multiple monsters at once. Note 5's link has nothing on solemn warning at all and is not a proper citation. Also in the OCG content it states the negation of 1 summon in the text which would allow the use of solemn warning against a mass pendulum summon and where pendulum summoning is currently in OCG territory only solemn warning should be able to work against a pendulum summon where its text again states 1 summon. Also in due part on that same page of: http://www.ygorganization.com/ocg-pendulum-summon-mg04-starter-deck-2014-rulings/

It states under pendulum summoning: Q: If 2 or more monsters are Special Summoned by a Pendulum Summon, are they considered to be Special Summoned simultaneously? A: In that case, those monsters are considered to be Special Summoned simultaneously by a single Special Summon.

And where Solemn Warnings OCG text states 1 summon warning should be able to negate the summon of a pendulum summon of 2 or more monsters. Which would mean that last edit was incorrect. If you could please take another look at this and change the text if needed it would greatly be appreciated. Josephxppc (talk • contribs) 22:31, May 18, 2014 (UTC)


 * I am not the admin to go to for card ruling related stuff. I would try UltimateKuriboh. Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 01:36, May 20, 2014 (UTC)

Re: Yuma, Shark and Kaito
They certainly are quite large. Yeah, I think we should split them up for now until we come up with something else. TheScarecrow14 (talk • contribs) 15:07, May 26, 2014 (UTC)

Blank
In 5D's Ride 58, the Duel Dragon cards of Rua, Ruka and Kiryu appear, but only blank (Jack's is the only one who appears normally AND becoming blank). Does that count as a card apparition? LegendaryAsariUgetsu (talk • contribs) 23:52, May 29, 2014 (UTC)


 * I would say yes for Jack and no for the rest. Assuming that by blank you mean Mark of the Dragon (card). Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 00:06, May 30, 2014 (UTC)


 * Yes, I do. LegendaryAsariUgetsu (talk • contribs) 01:19, May 30, 2014 (UTC)

Thank you for the information me and my friends are trying to freeze frame at the exact right moments to piece together the frames we need to complete the cards picture. The text may not be completely saveable but were sure the picture of Gagaga Samurai on it is! :)

Fatalfox (talk • contribs) 07:46, May 30, 2014 (UTC)Fatalfox

Gagaga Samurai Thanks you!
Thank you for the information me and my friends are trying to freeze frame at the exact right moments to piece together the frames we need to complete the cards picture. The text may not be completely saveable but were sure the picture of Gagaga Samurai on it is! :)

Fatalfox (talk • contribs) 07:48, May 30, 2014 (UTC)Fatalfox

Dark Dust Spirit missed in the List of Zombie-Type monsters
i tryed to add that card to the list, but i didin't find a way of editing it. Can you do it, please? --OnePiece (talk • contribs) 22:11, June 1, 2014 (UTC)


 * Its an SMW glitch. Try clearing your cache and then refreshing the page. If it doesn't appear after that, there's not much to be done aside from waiting. Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 22:14, June 1, 2014 (UTC)

Content Removal
You forgot to remove the manga info from Jesse's article. --  The Talk Goblin 15:36, June 6, 2014 (UTC)
 * Could you delete this page? Its content has been moved to corresponding character articles. --  The Talk Goblin 11:51, June 8, 2014 (UTC)
 * Done. Missed that one. Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 16:12, June 8, 2014 (UTC)
 * BTW, what are we going to do with episode 8 duel summary? You stated in a edit summary that the duel doesn't begin until the next episode. Should we therefore remove the duel summary from episode 8 and incorporate it into episode 9? --  The Talk Goblin 16:42, June 8, 2014 (UTC)


 * Nothing. That part was shown, it can be kept, I think just find it misleading to otherwise imply that the Duel started. Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 17:11, June 8, 2014 (UTC)
 * Could you also delete this leftover redirect? --  The Talk Goblin 18:23, June 11, 2014 (UTC)
 * This redirect needs to be deleted too. --  The Talk Goblin 17:53, June 18, 2014 (UTC)

Archetype Navboxes
Hey Cheese, I noticed that a few of the navboxes aren't defining cards as part of or support for an archetype, such as Des Imp Scissor for Furnimals and some members of the Superheavy Samurai and Fantasia archetypes. I checked on both Chrome and Safari to see if it was just the browser I used, but it was the same for both. Is it for you? I thought that these sort of things took a few days to resolve, but it's been like it for weeks (and I have never seen Des Imp Scissor classed as support for the Furnimals in their navbox). TheScarecrow14 (talk • contribs) 11:52, June 13, 2014 (UTC)


 * Yeah, something is wonky with SMW. Wikia has mentioned they plan to upgrade to use use LUA (I don't actually know what that is, but Dinoguy says its a good thing, xd). Hopefully, the issues were will be fixed soon. If you've cleared your cache, there's naught to do but wait, unfortunately. Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 15:23, June 13, 2014 (UTC)

Character Heading Addition
Hey Cheese, the wiki navigation bar at the top of the pages needs Arc-V added to the character's area. Screenshot. -- Dark Ace SP ( Talk ) 23:45, June 20, 2014 (UTC)


 * Dinoguy got it. Thanks for pointing it out. Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 01:13, June 21, 2014 (UTC)

Future Visions
I'll admit that I haven't seen the episode, but there appears to be an inconsistency between pages if that is the case. The Card Appearances page only mentions it sending them from his Deck to the Graveyard. Since Divine Neos can Special Summon itself using Neo-Spacians from the field and Graveyard (in the anime) anyway, it would seem unnecessary to use that card to send Panther to the Graveyard from the field. Anyway, having not seen the episode, I can't really say, so if it is the Card Appearances page that is wrong, please fix that then. -- Snorlax Monster  12:17, June 23, 2014 (UTC)


 * Actually, I'm not quite sure how Future Visions and Divine Neos interacted. I'll get someone to check both translations, then edit the pages accordingly. Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 15:44, June 23, 2014 (UTC)


 * Ok, turns out the duel summary was completely wrong and I was crossing the effect listed there in my head with the actual effect. The Card Appearances pages had it 100% right though. Corrected everything now. Thanks, Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 16:30, June 23, 2014 (UTC)

Regarding Aster
Hey, sorry to bother you with this, but I've been in a minor (emphasis on minor) edit war with MaxMicster regarding Aster's page (though for the sake of peace, I kept it minor), but we just can't come to the same conclusion regarding the structure of the following sentence.
 * "Aster is stated by Maximillion Pegasus the creator of Duel Monsters as one of the best duelists he has ever seen, listing him along with Yugi Muto, the previous King of Games and Seto Kaiba as the greatest duelist."

I've changed it properly twice now and it's been reverted. I'm also concerned that the article itself has too many images that both shouldn't be there and mess up the structure, but that just seems to be me. Again, sorry to bother you with this. Sanokal K-T (talk • contribs) 20:17, June 23, 2014 (UTC)


 * Don't apologize for asking me. Its one of the reasons I'm here.
 * Is it just the wording of the sentence that's the problem or some of the content. Need a little more info here.
 * The article does indeed have too many images for the amount of text it has. Rather than remove images though, I'd prefer to see the article expanded to accommodate more images. Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 00:23, June 24, 2014 (UTC)


 * The sentence basically (and redundentally) states the same thing twice (it's a bit painful to look at), so it's the wording rather than the content. As for the images, though, many of them don't even feature Aster in them, which leads me to believe that they shouldn't be there (I haven't changed them based on how defensive he's been getting.) I might note that he also added in that Aster was "a child prodigy and Doctor" (I think he tried renaming the page to "Doctor Aster Phoenix" once), after it had been stated that Aster was never called as such in the show as thus shouldn't be in the article proper.
 * Yikes. Now I feel like I'm nitpicking.

Sanokal K-T (talk • contribs) 01:32, June 24, 2014 (UTC)


 * In that case, the stuff after Kaiba's name can be dropped, then. Redundant for sure.
 * The images don't always have to feature the character. There's little reason an image wouldn't have him in it, but it depends on the article. A pic of some of his monsters strikes me as fine. I'll look though.
 * I recall that rename, yes. That was...yeah... Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 01:35, June 24, 2014 (UTC)


 * Thanks. Sanokal K-T (talk • contribs) 01:49, June 24, 2014 (UTC)


 * Sure. Let me know if he starts up again. Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 02:03, June 24, 2014 (UTC)

M-HEROes
Say, which image do you think it's better for the Masked HERO article, the current one or this one? (without the text, of course) LegendaryAsariUgetsu (talk • contribs) 17:40, June 25, 2014 (UTC)


 * I prefer the current one. The other one has more members, but the current shows the two that it does much clearer, which I think is more important in this case. Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 17:41, June 25, 2014 (UTC)

Regarding Sanokal and edit
I agree with a lot of the stuff you did to Phoenix's page like some of the stuff you did with some of the the subsections.

First, looking back at the sentence it was simply trying to state how Pegasus finds his top listed duelist as the greatest duelist.

The only thing is that the sentence says "best"     then   "greatest"  confusing the poor guy, when admittedly it probably should've just said "greatest" as "best" isn't really the specific word to use.

Second, I didn't start any edit problems, it was that guy that started constantly rearranging things, not the other way around. Thats how this all began. The guy has been on my ass ever since his first edit there has not stop haunting me since, almost like hes on a mission from god or something.

I dont get why you named one of the sections Jaden vs Aster 2 ...          I mean couldn't you at least named it something a bit better, no offense or anything, I understand if the previous title was a bit long but the new one sounds ... well pretty darn lame.

Finally cheese, lets get this thing Doctor thing straight. Looking at what you said on your recent revision it looks like you were trying to say that I said that Aster didn't have two PhD's. I never said he didn't ... so ...

You are definitely right about removing "Doctor" from Phoenix's occupation, hes most likely not a medical doctor, it doesn't seem to be related to anything that he does for a living. Putting it in occupation was definitely a mistake on my part.

On another note even you have to admit cheese theirs no denying these pages

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doctor ~ the personal titles section

and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doctor_%28title%29

While not seeming to be his occupation, he personally deserves the "title" as doctor for achieving doctorates as such people are automatically granted the titles.

Although, its not up to me, its up to you. This action needs your approval, should we put Dr. or Doctor in Aster's name or will you just leave it as it is?

Well yeah, that was pretty much it for now, just clearing air and things up.MaxMicster (talk • contribs) 04:48, June 28, 2014 (UTC)


 * The sentence was redundant, that's all. Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 11:29, June 28, 2014 (UTC)
 * Change the section header if you want, doesn't matter.
 * Yes, he is technically a doctor. It does not matter. He is said to have two PhDs in an off-hand remark that has no bearing on the plot or even on his character. Mentioning he has the PhDs should suffice, there is no reason to refer to him as "Doctor Aster Phoenix". Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 11:29, June 28, 2014 (UTC)

Ok, that's fine.MaxMicster (talk • contribs) 14:17, June 30, 2014 (UTC)

"All video game lores should be on each page when possible"?

 * Not sure if this policy is a good idea. There's at least 24 different video games that have available sections; for most early cards, wouldn't that mean bloating the section and stacking up 25 completely identical lores just to show that it exists and hasn't changed? We don't list anime lores when they're identical (my go-to example is "Stardust Dragon") and I don't see why we should; why not apply the same for video games? Blueapple128 (talk • contribs) 16:36, July 6, 2014 (UTC)

"All video game lores should be on each page when possible"?
Not sure if this policy is a good idea. There's at least 24 different video games that have available sections; for most early cards, wouldn't that mean bloating the section and stacking up 25 completely identical lores just to show that it exists and hasn't changed? We don't list anime lores when they're identical (my go-to example is "Stardust Dragon") and I don't see why we should; why not apply the same for video games? Blueapple128 (talk • contribs) 16:37, July 6, 2014 (UTC)


 * Eventually, we'll have video game card articles split out, so the lores would be displayed there instead. The CardTable revamp is still pending though. Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 18:27, July 6, 2014 (UTC)

DDD
Yo, sorry for always recurring to you, but it seems people don't usually check Talk Pages... *___*' Would you check Talk:DDD please? LegendaryAsariUgetsu (talk • contribs) 22:34, July 10, 2014 (UTC)


 * Sort of waiting for the Org to decide. I'll bring it up when I can, as we most definitely do need to standardize them. Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 00:44, July 11, 2014 (UTC)


 * Oh, I see. LegendaryAsariUgetsu (talk • contribs) 18:36, July 11, 2014 (UTC)

Re
Regarding your edit summery. For Mizael, well it was the first time we have someone imply that the teleport and dimension travel was their own tech and not something they got as a Barian. I looked at the series end, and everyone flying was actually just the Emperors key letting them. I really did question why Alito could still produce a red glow when he's suppose to have lost his Barian powers (materializing a Duel Disk he could have done in his past life at one point). On the other hand as you said, they were rather vaque in how they said, they always say lose their powers, but they never say all of it, so I suppose they could retain some abilities, just not the Barian Morph or Number use (I think Astral probably just took out Don Thousand's power from their Numbers with the Numeron code, so they don't have to have Barian power to use them). Shardsilver (talk • contribs) 13:05, July 12, 2014 (UTC)


 * I'm not saying that flying wasn't a Barian power. I'm saying that it just wasn't part of what Thousand was talking about in that instance. The Over-Hundreds and Bariamorph were directly tied to Thousand's power, apparently. The rest of the Barian powers, while still Barian powers, exist independently of him.
 * I assumed the Over-Hundreds just ceased to when Nasch died, but I suppose them still existing without Barian power makes just as much sense, actually.
 * Ultimately, I don't think we need to mention it at all in the articles, sense any explanation just causes us to speculate. Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 20:56, July 12, 2014 (UTC)


 * I wasn't trying to imply that I was going to insert guesses in the articles (I'm against that). I always strive to put what is true but not go beyond (though I do like adding an extra point to further prove some stuff, the points being true ones of course). In this case, I have to agree with not mentioning the Mizael thing given they all retained their other powers even after they lost in a match after getting their memories back. Have you ever wondered if the Yuma part of Astral thing was too rushed? I mean why wait until the last 3 episodes to tell us that (what does it make his family, are they not his actuall family and just adopted him? It's something to really think about. And even then there's the question of how Yuma existed this long given the battle with Don Thousand happened far far years before the current Zexal events; that includes the Seven Barian Emperors growing up in their previous life)? I will dare say I think Zexal ll may just be my favorite in the entire franchise though (though I love 5D's a lot too). Shardsilver (talk • contribs) 00:18, July 13, 2014 (UTC)


 * I didn't think you would, but just making sure. The end of ZEXAL was very rushed, yes. I could easily think up an entire arc's worth of additional duels that were hinted it (lack of another YumavVector, another YumavKite for starters). I felt the bit with Yuma being a piece of Astral was sort of a pointless addition. It seems meant to tie back in with Kazuma's comment to Mirai in episode 121 - "Yuma chose us". But its still very vague and I would have preferred it to not be there. Did they think it was needed to explain Shining Draw? If so, there were better explanations. The best theory I can think up is s that since the Numbers are pieces of Astral/his memories, that Yuma is literally Hope in human form. Or something, I dunno. Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 00:24, July 13, 2014 (UTC)


 * I always felt the Tron send off wasn't so good. His sons got great send off Duels with their Numbers and Chaos forms, yet all Tron does is hault the worlds (which is still big). It would have been so much better if they had Tron find out his sons were gone, and then he showed up and fought Don Thousand, angry for losing his sons while Yuma returned his Numbers. It felt like a missed opportunity. Tron would have lost, but he would have still put up a good fight (this is the guy who brought Yuma to his knees pretty much, it took 3 Zexal weapons to finally beat Tron. No other time did Yuma exert that many in one Duel, though he didn't need to of course). Shardsilver (talk • contribs) 00:44, July 13, 2014 (UTC)


 * Oh, yeah. Honestly, when the Fearsome Four Duels were going on, I half expected Tron to show up and team with Faker against Heartland or something. Or even against Vector. That would have been cool. Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 00:48, July 13, 2014 (UTC)


 * Forgot to ask this, but aren't V lll and IV's Chaos Numbers not in Astral's posession? Those were man-made cards, so they aren't a part of Astral like the base form ones (they created their own Rank-up and had man-made cards for their specific Chaos Numbers). Yuma created his own Rank-up and Number with the Astral power/Shining Draw so it wasn't simply man-made like the 3 Tron family brothers ones (though Future Number 0 is Yuma's own Number and not a part of Astral either). That said, how should this be handled, should those Numbers actually be changed to Nasch since we don't how those 3 ones work with Astral, and I don't see Astral with them (in fact did Nasch even take the Chaos ones?)? Also it is impossible for Yuma to have even had those before the Tron Family used those ones, because he only had the base forms (the chaos ones didn't even exist until the Tron Family made them, or created them via the man-made Rank-up Urgent Chaos force's that V created). Shardsilver (talk • contribs) 16:58, July 14, 2014 (UTC)


 * I don't think of the method of Rank-Up makes a difference. I don't think possession of Chaos Numbers was ever really clear though. We know Vector got some from other people, but he and Nash aer the only ones that ever showed it. I wouldn't really worry about it. Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 19:06, July 14, 2014 (UTC)


 * Yeah I guess. I don't think it is a big deal either, it's just something I always wonder here and there and question if Astral has their Numbers or not. Zexal is a whole lot better in the area of less plot holes (5D's had so many plot holes it was painful, such as Ruka never bringing up that Crow's Dragon was not the one from her dream, nor why Z-one's group would use Rudger if he was already going to be a Dark Signer anyway and cause Zero Reverse without them doing anything. There's also the big question why Life Stream Dragon got turned into Power Tool Dragon. There's also why Aporia didn't get warned by Z-one about Rua possibly becoming a Signer given he was one in the original time-line). Shardsilver (talk • contribs) 19:23, July 14, 2014 (UTC)

Pretty funny
I thought i'd compile Yusei's Standing and Riding Decks into individual Decks and lets just say, if you thought Kaito's, Ryoga's and Yuma's Decks were huge, you'll be in for a nice surprise xD: http://yugioh.wikia.com/wiki/User:TheScarecrow14/Sandbox#Turbo TheScarecrow14 (talk • contribs) 00:50, July 13, 2014 (UTC)


 * Hahahah. Honestly, I thought there would be even more traps. Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 00:55, July 13, 2014 (UTC)

Move
Yo, I'm not able to rename "Diary Exchange of Youth" into "Exchanging Diary of Youth", could you do that for me please? :p I researched a bit and this seems to be a more accurate translation. LegendaryAsariUgetsu (talk • contribs) 17:03, July 13, 2014 (UTC)


 * We've been having lots of move problems recently. I'll give it a try later, but I'm doubtful it will work (Entermate Mufflio and One to Jump are still at the wrong names from last week, actually). If it doesn't work, I'll submit another ticket to staff. Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 18:53, July 13, 2014 (UTC)


 * Wow, I noticed the Wikia was going crazy lately but I thought it was just for me. Are you doing some revamp in the Wikia or something? LegendaryAsariUgetsu (talk • contribs) 20:43, July 13, 2014 (UTC)


 * No idea what the problem actually is. I attempted to move Friendonkey, but no dice there either. There have been no successful card page moves in the last week. Galleries and files seem to be fine. I also haven't seen reports of this going on over at an other wikis. I'll submit a bug report to staff. The other admins are just as stumped. Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 21:28, July 13, 2014 (UTC)

If you remove all the offending templates and SMW queries on a page or just blank the page to ensure it's totally cleansed, you should be able to move it afterwards. You can unblank it then. Disclaimer: It takes ages and might not work every time. -- Deltaneos (talk) 20:54, July 17, 2014 (UTC)

Sartorius
I was under the impression that season decks were supposed to be merged into a single deck if they were technically one and the same deck. Did i miss something? --  The Talk Goblin 16:31, July 15, 2014 (UTC)


 * In this particular case, I don't consider them to be the same. He identifies Dark Ruler as a new card and his entire strategy rested on Judai having The Fool. Though I suppose the same argument could be made for Vector, so yeah, maybe we should merge them. Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 16:55, July 15, 2014 (UTC)

NavBar at Top
Hey Cheese, just wondering but do you know why the navigation bar at the top of the wiki was modified? I think the old layout was fine personally. -- Dark Ace SP  ( Talk Page ) 04:21, July 17, 2014 (UTC)


 * I do not. Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 16:45, July 21, 2014 (UTC)

Entermate -> Performapal?
I'm basically wondering if I should rename Entermate Cheermole to Performpal Cheermole (3 subpages already exisit for the Performapal version, even though the actual card page doesn't exist yet. To be completely honest though, I'm been having issues when trying to create card number redirect pages for quite a few of the cards, namely Block Spider. -- Dark Ace SP  ( Talk Page ) 14:27, July 17, 2014 (UTC)


 * Also, the renaming seems to be taking too long after I try to rename a card page. -- Dark Ace SP  ( Talk Page ) 14:29, July 17, 2014 (UTC)


 * Renaming stuff is not working right now. Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 16:45, July 21, 2014 (UTC)

Cookmates
Since it seems renaming pages it's taking a week, I guess it's the perfect timing. Cookmate Eggman and Cookmate Jagajaga must be renamed (I added the template, but I don't get why my explanations don't appear :p). Also, since you're better with words than me (and is more native speaker XD), it doesn't hurt to check it first; In the first case, its name is "tamagongu"; "tamago" = "egg", "gongu" = "gong", I'd go with "Eggong" (absolutely nothing near "eggman"). The second case, "jagajagā": "jagaimo" = "potato", "jagā" = "jaguar", I'd go with "potatopard". Cookmate Chickwheat is a correct translation, but if you by chance find words for "chick" and "wheat" that can form a perfect portmanteau, that'd be even more accurate. I guess it's better to create their trivias after they are renamed to avoid link frenzy, right? LegendaryAsariUgetsu (talk • contribs) 00:28, July 21, 2014 (UTC)


 * UltimateKuriboh mentioned a workaround. Try talking to him. Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 16:45, July 21, 2014 (UTC)


 * It seems X-Metaman was able to move Eggman to Eggong. o.O I'm still not able to move Jagajaga to Potatopard though. Guess I'll talk to Kuriboh then.

Regen
This card. It's the same name and effect as Overlay Regen. I think it's just a case of alternative artwork like this one. But Viz was able to give it another name in English. *___* What should we do? Maybe leave it as an alternative artwork and add "Overlay Regeneration" as the manganame? LegendaryAsariUgetsu (talk • contribs) 13:52, July 22, 2014 (UTC)


 * I would do the same as was done for "Reload" when the card was used in the ZEXAL manga. Its just an alternate manga artwork, with VIZ deciding to be VIZ on top of it. Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 21:02, July 22, 2014 (UTC)


 * Okay, I'll transfer the stuff to Overlay Regen's article, can you delete Overlay Regeneration then? LegendaryAsariUgetsu (talk • contribs) 01:31, July 23, 2014 (UTC)

Galilei & Kepler
Any objection in renaming DD Magical Sage Galilei and DD Magical Sage Kepler to "DD Prophecy Sages"? The rename template has been there for a while and they weren't moved yet, is the organization discussing about their names or something? LegendaryAsariUgetsu (talk • contribs) 00:01, August 4, 2014 (UTC)


 * Raising Masters isn't out for another week, so no finalized names yet. I highly, highly doubt the Org will end up going with "Prophecy Sage" though. There are no support cards that would be relevant to them, since "Stoic" only affects Level 3 monsters. Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 02:15, August 4, 2014 (UTC)


 * I don't think that's enough reason. "Prophecy" was already an archetype before the DD Sages debuted. They are legit targets for cards that support "Prophecy" cards, even if there's none so far. If they ever release a card that, let's suppose, searches for a DARK "Prophecy" monster, the DD Sages would be searchable by it, so I'm pretty positive they will be named "Prophecy" in the TCG, unless they add a "This card is always treated as a 'Prophecy' monster" flavor, which doesn't seem appropriate. The TCG is being very strict with archetype names lately. LegendaryAsariUgetsu (talk • contribs) 00:59, August 5, 2014 (UTC)


 * Strict when its relevant. The fact that there are so many monsters that WOULD be Prophecy monsters if they made support is reason enough not to make that support. For lack of a better way to put it: its not going to happen unless the OCG deliberately does it to fuck with the TCG. Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 01:02, August 5, 2014 (UTC)


 * I see your point, but as I said, my uneasiness is about the possibility of a card that supports "Prophecy" monsters including the DD Sages come to exist in the future. That'd be Summoned Skull/Harpie's Brother all over again. And let's be honest, it's the TCG that fucks itself, renaming cards and archetypes with no need to. (insert cookie monster emoction here) LegendaryAsariUgetsu (talk • contribs) 01:37, August 5, 2014 (UTC)

Renaming, again
Say, how are we doing with the problems on renaming pages? Do we just have to rename the page once and wait some time for the change to be done, or there is a trick or something to rename a page properly? Both of Yuya's next opponents, Eita Kyuandou and Mieru Houchu, need renaming due to their strong "o"s. :P I've already tried renaming Eita and it didn't work. LegendaryAsariUgetsu (talk • contribs) 22:34, August 10, 2014 (UTC)


 * Still hit or miss. I managed to move an article yesterday and it worked right away, but the next move I tried failed three times in a row. Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 13:47, August 11, 2014 (UTC)


 * I see. On another note, sorry for always appealing to you, but people really don't seem to check talk pages (and I guess you're the admin who's most involved in "working" with the latest episodes' articles). I think this is a kinda important issue. LegendaryAsariUgetsu (talk • contribs) 17:07, August 11, 2014 (UTC)

Shadow of Mordor versus tournament
Hi Cheesedude! I'm Mark, from Wikia's Community Development Team.

I'm reaching out to see if your community would like to be a part of a versus tournament we're hosting on the Shadow of Mordor wikia. It would go live in September, and we would be pitting Yuya Sakaki against Talion from Shadow of Mordor. The voting would live in a blog on Shadow of Mordor and we would post a button on Yuya Sakaki's page here encouraging your community to vote for them. On the voting blog we would link back to your wikia, and we'll be promoting the tournament around Wikia. If your community would like to be a part of the tournament, which would include the button on Yuya Sakaki's page as well as a link back to your community from the voting blog, please let me know by 8/29.

Thank you! Mark ( talk ) 21:21, August 25, 2014 (UTC)


 * Hey, hopefully I'm too late. I talked it over with some other admins, then waited to see if there were any objections, then...forgot to respond. If its not too late, Yuya would be fine to put in. Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 02:41, August 30, 2014 (UTC)


 * No worries, you're still on time! I appreciate you taking the time to discuss it with the other admins. I'll add the Yu-Gi-Oh! Wikia to the list. Thanks! Mark  ( talk ) 04:02, August 30, 2014 (UTC)

Duel summary
The style I have been using has received no complaints up until what you said just recently. If an effect activates multiple times and we know which cards are used or affected by it, I will just mention those cards (so that it applies to what you have shown). I just feel that the word "letting" should apply when it states that an effect has activated. The statement of a monster destroying another monster after a card or effect interrupts the attack was created by myself after I felt the sentence "the attack continues, destroying ?" could have been a better sentence. I will apply a bit to your styling, but only when an effect activates more than once in an episode or a Duel (since I just remembered there was a similar thing you did for the GX episodes that you edited after I did so).Cardsknower (talk • contribs) 15:03, September 13, 2014 (UTC) http://yugioh.wikia.com/wiki/User_talk:Cheesedude?action=edit#http://yugioh.wikia.com/wiki/User_talk:Cheesedude?action=edit#

A Better Understanding
Hey, Ive come across a message you left recently stating that subsections weren't done anymore, which now I feel now is a bit confusing.

Are you meaning that "Mini Sections"(the subsections under the main titles) aren't done anymore?, a response to clear things would be much appreciated.MaxMicster (talk • contribs) 21:16, September 13, 2014 (UTC)


 * Its not necessarily that they're not done. You definitely don't need so many though. Generally,, one subsection per arc is used, but there are exceptions in some cases, such as Vector. Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 22:55, September 13, 2014 (UTC)

Hmmm, well then
Well I can understand not using subsections, I don't use them either, yet Vector, characters from zeal, and most definitely the main characters from 5ds were expanded upon to include mini arcs, side stories, and other events which wasn't really done for Gx characters besides maybe Jaden. What is a decent number of sections, I currently work on Gx character pages ?MaxMicster (talk • contribs) 19:13, September 15, 2014 (UTC)

Yes, when the articles get longer, subsections become more appropriate. Aster's article could perhaps use a few subsections. Just not anywhere near as many as were previously there. Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 20:30, September 15, 2014 (UTC)

Archrelation
If I may ask, why don't cards related to archetypes show up in archetype boxes anymore? (BetterThanYou92 (talk • contribs) 07:59, September 14, 2014 (UTC))


 * Its a glitch with SemanticMediaWiki (SMW), which is the program that displays those. Nothing we can do to fix it, unfortunately. It should right itself eventually and/or staff will get around to fixing it. Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 09:16, September 14, 2014 (UTC)

ZEXAL 123
It's been a while since I did an episode summary, to be honest. Mind if you look over what I did for ZEXAL episode 123? Also, on a random note, they kept Heartland's death by burning in the dub, though they removed a few shots of him burning up. ChaosGallade (talk • contribs) 04:42, September 17, 2014 (UTC)


 * I can look at it at some point tomorrow. Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 04:53, September 17, 2014 (UTC)


 * Okay, thanks. ChaosGallade (talk • contribs) 05:15, September 17, 2014 (UTC)


 * Made a few minor fixes, nothing major. Good work. One of these days, I'll get around to adding more images to it. Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 02:12, September 18, 2014 (UTC)


 * Oh, BTW, if you could give me a list of episodes you've done those summaries for, I'll try to get images into them. Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 02:47, September 18, 2014 (UTC)


 * I did the summaries of ZEXAL episodes 112-117 and ARC-V episodes 5-6. Sanokal-KT did some of the later ARC-V episode's summaries, but I'm too lazy to check, atm. ChaosGallade (talk • contribs) 03:24, September 18, 2014 (UTC)

Newer edits
I am okay with the Life Point change edits you've made, but I have mixed feelings over how you show the stats of monsters. My versions usually apply when a monster's ATK, DEF, or Level is changed. This has been applied to most episode Duel summaries, but nobody had an issue previously. Originally, it was (ATK: ?) or (DEF: ?) I inputted before I felt it was too vague for me to understand what was going on. Is there any agreement we can put through this new problem.Cardsknower (talk • contribs) 02:21, September 18, 2014 (UTC)


 * Well, when the sentence is saying "the ATK of X increases", I see no reason the parenthesis need to then specify ATK as well. If I'm interpreting your question right. Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 02:24, September 18, 2014 (UTC)


 * Partly. After seeing some of the other Duel summary pages, I put ATK and DEF in the same parenthesis and I used this method for a majority of duel summaries I have modified even though by the third season of DM the show only show the stats that are actually modified (though no cared mostly at those points). I usually put the name of the monster in to specify which monster(s) are having their stats changed, which was again inputted in without a problem previously. User:Blueapple128's problem with my duel summaries was that some turns are written as too long and those should be separated into paragraphs, which I complied with immediately.Cardsknower (talk • contribs) 02:29, September 18, 2014 (UTC)


 * I'd like to point out that all newer duel summaries do not use that style. Your style is not a problem, but my main goal here is consistency. I'd like to have all the duel summaries reading the same fashion. My general rule is this: If the monster is mentioned in the same sentence, you don't need it in parenthesis. If its not, then yes, add it in parenthesis before the difference. Can you agree to that? If not, I suppose I don't have a real problem with adding that to the newer duel summaries. My main goal is once again, to have a format we can stick to. That doesn't mean I have to like 100% of it. Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 02:45, September 18, 2014 (UTC)


 * I choose to go with my style, which I am trying to make consistent in each episode page as possible. You should try and input this into the newer summaries. I was going to change the episode duel summaries of Yu-Gi-Oh! 5D's (only episodes 1-143) to match up to this as soon as I finish the GX Duel Summaries. I also plan to input my style in Yu-Gi-Oh! ZEXAL Duel summaries once that is all wrapped up with, but it will take a while to get there. Hope we can make this an agreement!Cardsknower (talk • contribs) 02:56, September 18, 2014 (UTC)


 * I can agree with thatCardsknower (talk • contribs) 03:49, September 18, 2014 (UTC)


 * That's fine. However, a few caveats. Please do try to stop specifying who is being directly attacked when there is only one opponent. And if a number is mentioned and it is not a stat, please spell it out. Can you agree to those? And I would be happy to put the ZEXAL articles back in order once we've decided. Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 03:14, September 18, 2014 (UTC)