User talk:MasterMarik

OCG-TCG card image
The template has since been updated. All you need to do know is insert the card's name, and that's it. Example:

--UltimateKuriboh (talk • contribs) 16:42, August 18, 2016 (UTC)

Hi. I'm confused: What is the card tips page for?--Dnahelix (talk • contribs) 01:20, January 19, 2018 (UTC)
 * Adding tips for using a card that is more specific to that card but not so complicated that it's unlikely to be successful. --MasterMarik (talk • contribs) 01:22, January 19, 2018 (UTC)

Ok........ Today I put 2 tips on the page of lee the world chalice fairy, and I'll give you that the first tip is not the easiest to pull off, simply because it hinges on drawing 2 specific cards, and one of them is at limited status. But the revival combo is like one of the best gimmicks of the archetype, aurum is a generic premature burial, and lee feeds aurum's effect by sending monsters from the hand to the GY. Better yet, in the typical flow of a world chalice combo, far more often than not, you will find yourself with this exact set-up: Aurum in the extra monster zone, pointing to at least another world chalice monster, and lee in grave. The perfect set up for my(well....not MY) combo. I play this deck, I'm not just trying this out. I know it works, and use it on a regular basis, irl and online. But don't take my word for it, just check out world chalice combos on YouTube and Reddit and others, this is one of the simplest and most obvious ones, mostly with the suggestions that I mentioned. --Dnahelix (talk • contribs) 01:59, January 19, 2018 (UTC)


 * It's not that they're difficult to pull off but that they're too generic. They can work in a lot of Decks so they're not good tips to add. --MasterMarik (talk • contribs) 02:54, January 19, 2018 (UTC)

Editor
Hey Marik. Have you checked Forum:Proposal to Fork to Yugipedia? Becasita Pendulum (talk • contribs) 22:34, January 20, 2018 (UTC)


 * I've heard about that. I don't understand why this is necessary. --MasterMarik (talk • contribs) 22:41, January 20, 2018 (UTC)

Hi, i'm confused: How well are you familiar with the game?--Dnahelix (talk • contribs) 13:51, January 23, 2018 (UTC)
 * Quite. Why?--MasterMarik (talk • contribs) 13:59, January 23, 2018 (UTC)

Well.........every single time I put a new tip, you strike it down, and I'm not coming up with those tips you know......I just try to build these decks and try to figure out what works and what doesn't. I put up the interaction between "yazi evil of the yang zing","destrudo" and "mare mare", and every modern zefra/yang zing control deck uses exactly the combo that I did put like 4 months ago, but you removed it. Then I put a simple world chalice combo the other day, and you strike it too. Now I put a combo to add consistency to dark magician decks, and you don't like it, so it's gone. I'm sorry if I seem a bit triggered, but I don't see why you keep so many dumb and irrelevant combos that can't be even used anymore because of master rule 4, but every time I put up a popular combo that I tried irl and online and streamlined it so it's not too wonky, fringe, or inconsistent, it gets removed......and only by you! Other moderators removed some of my tips, I talked to them, and they put them back, or at least a simpler version of them. or at least, they gave me an objective reason as to why it's not good enough for the tips page. You are the only one that has to have the last word, and with little more reason than what appears to be an arbitrary opinion... --Dnahelix (talk • contribs) 14:37, January 23, 2018 (UTC)

I like to discuss cards and tips, that's why I come to these pages, you know.....--Dnahelix (talk • contribs) 14:43, January 23, 2018 (UTC)


 * Your tip doesn't make it any easier to bring out Dark Magician the Dragon Knight. In fact, it takes more effort than just using Dark Magician and a vanilla Dragon-Type monster. Heck, using Eye of Timaeus is better still. --MasterMarik (talk • contribs) 14:52, January 23, 2018 (UTC)

let me explain how this combo works: in a DM deck, everyone plays "magicians navigation", I use it to summon DM from hand, and a "trump witch" from the deck, then tribute the witch by its own effect to get a copy of polymerization from deck or grave, /THEN I summon "imduk" from the extra deck, using the DM on the field as material, because DM decks don't have Dragon monsters that mesh naturally in the main deck/ then I either resummon DM from the geave with "eternal soul", or use a DM in hand as the other material to fusion summon "Dark Magician The Dragon Knight". the whole point is to avoid using "the eye of timaeus", because it cannot be searched for I an a standard DM deck, whereas all the card I mentioned in the combo are either readily searchable, or are usable in this combo without affecting the consistency of the deck, unlike "timaeus" which is a bad card to draw multiples of, and hence hinders the consistency.

"witch" can also be used as a scale, or used as a fusion card if drawn, either by tributing it or using it's pendulum effect. polymerization is a standalone card that can fusion summon from the hand, unlike other fusion cards in the deck

DM, eternal soul, and navigation are all staples, and are consistently used in every single DM duel.

you have to try this combo to figure out it's benefits. I give you that they may not be that obvious at first sight. but many people are suggesting running "link spider" in the deck just so the can resummon DM another time and trigger "dark magical circle" one more time, I wanted to point out to anyone considering link spider that imduk does mostly the same thing, plus it has this bonus interaction with the deck.--Dnahelix (talk • contribs) 15:32, January 23, 2018 (UTC)


 * That's a strategy you're unlikely to pull off in a given Duel. Link Spider sucks too. You're better off with just Eye of Timaeus and Dark Magician. Running 3 Eyes increases your chances you'll draw it, plus you can search Dark Magician more generically with Summoner's Art and bring it out for free with Ancient Rules. --MasterMarik (talk • contribs) 15:44, January 23, 2018 (UTC)

and we return to my original question: do you actually play the game? ;)--Dnahelix (talk • contribs) 15:57, January 23, 2018 (UTC)


 * I have played the game, just not recently. I keep up with the cards as they're released. --MasterMarik (talk • contribs) 15:59, January 23, 2018 (UTC)

well, if you'd like, i'll send you an actual picture of my irl deck. it's built to be as fast and consistent as possible, I acutally use summoner's art in it, to improve consistency, but cards like ancient rules and timaeus drag consistency down severely, because they cannot be searched, so you cannot use them when you want them, and probably not see them when needed forcing the player to rely on the luck of the draw instead of picking the actual cards they need from the deck directly regardless of what they draw. in my DM deck I use many other unpopular techs, that bring different, and more importantly, unexpected aspects to the deck that make hard for my opponent to deal with or even follow.

i'm not a fanboy that found out some cards work together and got excited!, i'm an actual player who uses these combos to win.

plus, let's for argument's sake say that my combo is bad, don't you think that each player has the right to decide if they want to give it a try or not? I don't think that everyone's deck should be the same, trust me, some people are doing crazy things with DM out there, mixing and matching it with other archetypes, and I think they should all come here and present their tips, and share their experiences with the deck too.

as a player, I come to the wikia to find out the potential of every card I play, to find out different, and unexpected ways to use them, that may turn out to serve my purpose, and I believe others come here for the same reason. and I wish that you at least ask for the opinion of someone with knowledge of the current DM deck, to try this and tell you if it's a good or bad tip.

and that, my dear friend, is the last i'll say about this subject, hopefully, my next contribution won't be removed......... :,(--Dnahelix (talk • contribs) 16:26, January 23, 2018 (UTC)

explain necro
Hi, you removed my post from Talk:Banish.

I have heard the term "necrobumping", but did not think it applied to Forum:Temporary banished. Again, I am new to wikia and the explanations of protocol are not intuitive.

Shall I make a new ruling page called Temporarily banished, which is the similar to Kukuhangoh's post?

Also, shall I delete my response to Kukuhango on the talk page, if you consider that necro?

Finally, my post mentioned a rules contradiction between a line from Banish and the rulebook. Does that belong on a different forum post, or the same forum post?

Thanks for your patience. --Vitesse0 (talk • contribs) 17:48, January 25, 2018 (UTC)


 * The discussion hadn't been updated in quite a while, several months at least. That's a necrobump/necropost. You also shouldn't make a rulings page unless it contains official info. --MasterMarik (talk • contribs) 18:03, January 25, 2018 (UTC)


 * Thanks for advise. For my query, should I delete and make a new query, or wait a month and then bump? not trying to necro, just wanted some feedback.--Vitesse0 (talk • contribs) 21:10, January 25, 2018 (UTC)


 * Well personally, gameplay rules are going to differ to the TCG so you shouldn't really use them as a source for rulings. --MasterMarik (talk • contribs) 21:41, January 25, 2018 (UTC)
 * oh. I guess that makes sense. thanks. --Vitesse0 (talk • contribs) 03:59, January 26, 2018 (UTC)

Artifacts
I noticed that you undid my addition to the Trivia section on the Artifacts archetype page, because there was "no evidence it was intentional."

You did read the first three words of my addition, right?--Garr9988 (talk • contribs) 23:00, January 26, 2018 (UTC)


 * Those three words are irrelevant because as I said there's no evidence that Konami intentionally based the design on Warehouse 13. --MasterMarik (talk • contribs) 23:05, January 26, 2018 (UTC)


 * Even if there's no evidence it's intentional, I think it's still worth mentioning considering how obvious the (at the very least) coincidence is. There's no denying there's some sort of connection.--Garr9988 (talk • contribs) 23:26, January 26, 2018 (UTC)


 * The fact is, we only mention it IF there's evidence it's intentional. Otherwise, it's a matter of opinion. --MasterMarik (talk • contribs) 00:24, January 27, 2018 (UTC)

--Ryjack500 (talk • contribs) 19:32, January 27, 2018 (UTC)Sorry, removed Witch of the Black Forest from the Traditional Format section on Wulf, Lightsworn Beast--Ryjack500 (talk • contribs) 19:32, January 27, 2018 (UTC)

Yugipedia fork
The fork to Yugipedia officially happened. Since you're a frequent editor, how about you import your account from Wikia to there? The account import is rather buggy at the moment, so just be patient if it happens to you. ChaosGallade (talk • contribs) 20:27, January 27, 2018 (UTC)


 * How is editing/creating pages over there compared to here?--MasterMarik (talk • contribs) 20:27, January 27, 2018 (UTC)


 * It should be relatively the same as here. Unlike here, the new site allows anonymous editing, though that may change eventually. ChaosGallade (talk • contribs) 20:32, January 27, 2018 (UTC)


 * Well am attempting to import but so far no luck. Hopefully it gets resolved soon. --MasterMarik (talk • contribs) 20:43, January 27, 2018 (UTC)


 * Keep trying everyday. ChaosGallade (talk • contribs) 20:54, January 27, 2018 (UTC)

Hey! Regarding your edit on the Rafael page: How exactly is that a matter of opinion? He basically blackmailed Yugi, by threatening him to jump off the cliff if he attacked. If not for that, Yugi would have won. It is certainly not a clear cut win like Rafael's. Forenperser (talk • contribs) 18:23, January 28, 2018 (UTC)


 * Anyone could've said that it was fair so yes it is up to opinion. --MasterMarik (talk • contribs) 19:21, January 28, 2018 (UTC)

F.A. Pit Stop
Hi: Yes it does, because chain link 2 resolves first, sending pit stop to the grave, then chain link 1 resolves(pit stop) that lets you draw cards equal to the number of pit stops in the grave +1, which equals draw 2 cards. it's an official ruling. there are many similarly silly effects in the game, where you can modify the board state during the chain links so that you get a different effect, like "night beam" ruling, that lets you activate the targeted card if it's not activated as a direct chain link.--Dnahelix (talk • contribs) 21:08, February 4, 2018 (UTC)

It's not an official ruling because the TCG HAS no rulings anymore, plus the card is't in Japan yet. You're just making this up. Also, Night Beam prevents the targeted card from being activated in response so that's wrong too. --MasterMarik (talk • contribs) 21:32, February 4, 2018 (UTC)

you draw equal to the number of "pit stop"s in the grave +1, this means, the first one you activate get's you to draw & card, the second gets you to darw 2, and the third one gets you to draw 3. it's like when an odd-eyes absolute dragon detaches an odd-eyes pendulum dragon as a material, it can summon it back even though not only it's not another chain, it's not even a different chain link, it just so happens that the odd-eyes pendulum dragon is in the grave at the right time, not at the activation. similarly, pit stop would count itself because when its effect resolves, the card would have already left the field because of mystical space typhoon, and at the time of resolving, there is actually one pit stop in grave[the same one that started the chain. I don't know how to make it clearer, and I have real life judges at my locals that gave me this ruling, so idk if it's official enough for you, but this is how this card works, just read the text.....--Dnahelix (talk • contribs) 22:00, February 4, 2018 (UTC)


 * Your combo only activates 1 so you're drawing 1 card. When it resolves, it's basing on what was in their at the time of resolution, which is 0. Thus, 0 + 1 = 1 card drawn. Also, that scenario with Odd-Eyes absolute isn't the same thing, especially since Odd-Eyes will go to the Extra Deck not the Grave. --MasterMarik (talk • contribs) 22:04, February 4, 2018 (UTC)

When you detach a material from an xyz monster it goes to the grave even if it's a pendulum monster, you are showing a remarkable ignorance of the rules of the game. also, when resolving a chain, the last chain in the link will resolve first, it says so in the rule book, and the lower chain links are still not considered to be resolved, they're only considered to be activated. and pit stop doesn't say that you count the number of pit stops in grave at activation. as for night beam, not only am I sure of the ruling, because it was used as said in duels streamed by konami itself, it's even on the wiki page for the card!!!--Dnahelix (talk • contribs) 22:22, February 4, 2018 (UTC)

Alright so you're right about Night Beam vs the targeted card but not about Pit Stop. It says draw cards equal to the number of copies + 1. You activated it when there were 0 so you draw ONE. --MasterMarik (talk • contribs) 22:39, February 4, 2018 (UTC)

and i'm right about odd-eyes absolute, and i'm also right about pit stop, some cards have a clause in the text like "this card must be face up to activate and resolve it's effect", or "even when this card leaves the field". nowhere on pit stop does it have a stipulation that says that it should count pit stops at activation, and cards with similar effects count at the resolving of the effect, which happens in the chain after pit stop has already been sent to the grave, and at resolving. if nothing was chained to pit stop, you only draw one card because at resolving, the activated pit stop is still on the field, so there is none in grave. with this trick, the same rule applies count pit stops, draw +1. look at call of the haunted, it says" activate this card by targeting one monster in your graveyard", the targeting happens at activation, so if your opponent banishes your target from the grave as a chain, call of the haunted resolves with no target. if it was like pit stop, and the choice wasn't by text at activation you could bring back a monster different than the one your opponent banished. i would strongly recommend you review the timing rules of cards activation and chains, because this shouldn't be so hard to understand--Dnahelix (talk • contribs) 23:03, February 4, 2018 (UTC)


 * DNAhelix is correct on all points. It's worded such that it counts the cards while resolving the relevant effect. In addition to that, as I've noted earlier in my own edit, the combo in question has already had precedent for some time under the similar Good Goblin Housekeeping. Aeron Solo wuz here  (If you wanna talk)  07:24, February 5, 2018 (UTC)

The Borreload Dragon vs Bottomless Trap hole is not untrue because priority still technically exists as far as Fast Effect Timing is involved.. You still have to go by the Fast Effect Timing flow chart and it states that when the turn player does something that doesn't involve a chain like a Link Summon, they can activate a fast effect before the opponent can activate a fast effect unless it's something that negates the summon like Solemn. Go look at the flow chart at http://www.yugioh-card.com/en/gameplay/fasteffects_timing.html

10:39, February 22, 2018 (UTC)FoxEnigma

re: clara rushka, you lack understanding of what this card does, specific to ABC, it does not matter that you do not understand, there is now clear evidence of it's use, not only is it now beyond ABC deck theory discussed between ABC players but it's in the deck profile of an ABC deck which has Won a regional, & not only that but it's usefulness was specifically referenced during that deck profile as helping towards a win. Look at any Pendulum list, the deck which plays Zefra Metaltron, do you see Clara & Rushka ? No. Perhaps you should consider removing an irrelevant tip if you believe the page needs to be kept to a minimum. Look at the recent ABC deck profile here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ew0tZRsQFwo. Do you see Clara & Rushka. Yes. Leave my added tip alone. --Evol Kard (talk • contribs) 19:34, March 7, 2018 (UTC)

Cockadoodledoo combo tip
Cockadoodledoo can Special Summon itself under 2 conditions: If neither player controls a monster, or if only your opponent controls a monster. In case 1, it will be Special Summoned as a Level 3 Tuner Monster. In case 2, it will be Special Summoned as a Level 4 Tuner Monster. The level of Cockadoodledoo does not matter; Crystron Needlefiber does not care what level its Tuner requirement is. However, after playing around, I realized the combo is more related to Phantom Skyblaster than Cockadoodledoo, therefore I will post a corrected/updated version there.

Clara and Ruska Tips
RE : Clara & Rushka Tips : I apologize if I'm off the mark on your position in this case but please be aware that I've been dealing with the stated situation since I first added the tip (moved to top of post). The reason for the auto revert is it takes copy & pasting, editing & adding 4 Links to reinstate the full tip, it takes highlight & delete to remove it, & I'm yet to see any reason for the tip not to be included other than blind ignorance & personal opinion, my position is the one backed by evidence & actual card theory clearly shown in writing prior to that evidence becoming available, the tip is additionally succinct & well formatted, there is no reason to remove it other than X person feels like removing it & can, that seems less legitimate editing or oversight and more something close to vandalism though not quite at that level, it seems appropriate under the circumstances to simply revert the change, reasoning for the tip being added is posted in parts both on your talk & on the other person's who's been repeatedly deleting the tip, & additionally in a forum post & through the editing history, all of which are available to read if anyone would wish to spend the time doing, if they do not spend the time doing so I additionally question their position of from an uninformed state deleting the tip seemingly with little more reason than what seems to boil down to 'I think this card is so worthless it doesn't deserve this small additional text despite evidence to the contrary which I'm choosing to ignore, belittle or simply not look into in the first place' I'm frankly now of the opinion that there is nothing more to say on the matter, as it's now been ongoing for some time without any clear resolution & an increasing lack of reasoning behind the continued deletions, & will continue simply reverting what appears to me to be the very easy & thoughtless deletion of the new tip so long as that option is available or until a person with the authority to do so rules on what to do concerning the tip. short final recap of card's use: clara & rushka provides a unique role within the ABC deck, it does this by providing access into ABC Dragon Buster in a number of circumstances where that would previously be impossible, these include under skill drain like effects with no special summon from hand & with only hangar & a piece in hand without an additional playstarter, the requirement being simply union hangar + any piece beyond going 1st turn 1, something which has been termed a 1.5 card Buster Dragon & has been noted to have synergy with the card Evenly Matched, the tip simply states that Clara & Rushka can be used to trigger 2 abc pieces & outlines the basic circumstance of doing so not going into the outlying deck & tech specific circumstances to keep it as succinct as possible. -other than the card's use in conjunction with Mind Control specific almost entirely to the True Draco match up with some small additional use vs stun(Inspector Boarder ect) this use in ABC is the singular use to which Clara & Rushka is CURRENTLY being put & so should clearly be included in this card's tip page more so than any other. Given the difficulty of adding the card's single most relevant tip & the one most proven to have actual relevance it seems pointless to add the other use to which it's being put, & through which it's also topping events, however that does go to show that the single most generic Link 1 we currently have access to clearly is not a worthless card despite it's restrictions & does have enough worth to have it's most relevant tip featured, the one where in it isn't simply being used for circumstantial removal but for triggering multiple GY effects to provide extension into a boss monster, a tip similar to but more relevant than the one already existing on the page, apologies for the length of this additional section & the length of this post in general. --Evol Kard (talk • contribs) 18:41, March 14, 2018 (UTC)

The card's effect does not matter because it is not used for it's effect, it is used to send things to the GY while providing Link material for further extension, the card's attack does not matter because it is only ever summoned in main phase 2 & is then commonly used as Link material, even use of the attack stat as an argument against a cards relevance shows a rather glaring lack of understanding of modern yugioh, if attack was all that mattered Blue Eyes would be the best deck, I am fine with tips I add being removed if there is actual valid reasoning behind doing so, so far the reasons I have been given show only a lack of understanding of the card's use. It has now seen use in yet another regional winning ABC deck & is becoming standard within ABC, the 1st person's reasoning for deletion was both highly flawed & derogatory of any opinion to the contrary, adding the opinion of someone blatantly in the wrong to your own is not an addition that backs any persons point. --Evol Kard (talk • contribs) 20:19, March 15, 2018 (UTC)

additionally ABC is unique in that it gains 2 effect activations through the use of Clara & Rushka due to it being a Union monster deck with GY effects & has both monster searcher & a union equip built into 1 card. --Evol Kard (talk • contribs) 20:22, March 15, 2018 (UTC)


 * Regardless, it's too generic a tip to be on the page so it doesn't matter. Lots of cards can make use of the effect. There's nothing special with ABC Decks. --MasterMarik (talk • contribs) 21:45, March 15, 2018 (UTC)

see the text immediately above what you just wrote --Evol Kard (talk • contribs) 18:54, March 16, 2018 (UTC)

okay, I'm going to spell this out, step by step, this, only ABC, can do, union hangar searches a monster which has a GY trigger effect & can be normal summoned, that monster is normal summoned, which triggers union hanger, equipping a union which also has a GY trigger effect, clara & rushka then gains the highest value it can get from it's summon in any deck, triggering 2 effects at once just by being summoned, those effects then allow further extension with 1 more monster special summoned from hand via those effects, which in combination with clara & rushka makes a Link 2, lastly with 3 pieces now in the GY, ABC Dragon Buster is summoned. this play functions under skill drain like effects, which one of the formats top decks plays multiple of, No other deck gets as much out of Clara & Rushka as ABC does, & Clara & Rushkas role is unique in what it provides the deck, & the circumstances under which it's provided, so much so it's became a standard include, & as more time passes, more and more clear evidence of that is going to build as it has been doing up to this point, it's had a place in now 2 Regional Winning ABC decks, where when the tip was first added it was only sound theory, it's now very clearly much more than that. --Evol Kard (talk • contribs) 19:24, March 16, 2018 (UTC)

Zarc dubbed image
I put that picture in when I seen it on Just Some clips that I took a picture, and put it on there. Who cares what it's called it's the same thing if you look at really. Bopdog111 (talk • contribs) 20:31, March 18, 2018 (UTC)
 * That's not the attitude for this wiki. There's a rule in place that if it's not a well-named png, it's going to get deleted. Either accept the rule and follow it or don't upload those types of images. --MasterMarik (talk • contribs) 20:38, March 18, 2018 (UTC)

Dude stop.Bopdog111 (talk • contribs) 20:57, March 18, 2018 (UTC)
 * I'm just following the rules. YOU need to stop breaking them. --MasterMarik (talk • contribs) 20:58, March 18, 2018 (UTC)

User Skulblaka98
Hi can you help me with User talk:Skulblaka98 he should stop to delete templates and category texts. --hanmac (talk • contribs) 07:09, April 4, 2018 (UTC)


 * The best I can do is revert his edits. I'm not an admin. --MasterMarik (talk • contribs) 11:38, April 4, 2018 (UTC)

RE: Uploads
Hello there:

Thanks--glad you like them! :) All of the DP08 cards (minus "Battle Mania", which I got offa CoolStuffInc) are cards I actually own (as well as the "Wildheart" in the Starter Deck).  The other cards are from Ebay.

I actually "archive" all the cards I own in the form of scans. However to reduce digital clutter, I am actually able to fit nine cards on my printer's scanning bed @ a time. Thus, I have to crop the ones I'd like to upload here. I actually re-uploaded the "Speed Warrior" card because I overly compressed it as a jpeg before making it a png when I didn't have to. I use ABBYY FineReader to do the conversions and I just found out that whenever I open an image onto it, it "preprocesses" the image. If I cancel this process and go to save it, the .png ends up being well over 10MB. Otherwise, when I do in fact, allow the preprocessing to conclude, the image usually falls below this quota and I can thus, upload it.

Somehow, I noticed the "dimmed" white space you mentioned after uploading it and that may have been a result of first using Microsoft Office Picture Manager (2010 version) to initially compress it? Nevertheless, I'll be sure to try and better double-check negative space around the card(s) before uploading them.

Thanks again and take it easy! --EcksaboobiatedItalian72 (talk • contribs) 21:29, April 5, 2018 (UTC)

Please do not unedit tip pages if you do not understand how the combo listed works. Topologic Bomber Dragon in the Extra Zone, with a Knightmare Cerberus co-linked with it and a Trickstar Black Catbat co-linked to Cerberus create an FTK combo with Samsara Lotus in which Lotus Special Summons itself during the End Phase, Bomber Dragon triggers and attempts to destroy all monsters in the main zones, but Cerberus' effect prevents co-linked monsters to be destroyed by card effects, so only Samsara Lotus is destroyed, making Black Catbat's effect apply. This process can repeat itself indefinite times, effectively resulting in an FTK combo. Check this video for reference. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rsFn_StXF04

Proof
Page 125,uppermost, furthest paragraph. I have dual art. (7th Ki&#39;oon (talk • contribs) 01:53, April 13, 2018 (UTC)) 7th Ki'oon

So first first you call me a lier, then you you demand my evidence, that embarrasses you be deleted even through its uploaded to the wiki, and you yourself could've simply renamed the caption appropriately. What is your problem. Also it states that Takahashi designed ALL the signer dragons, thats trivia. --7th Ki&#39;oon (talk • contribs) 16:33, April 13, 2018 (UTC)


 * 1st of all, the image was a poorly named jpg file. 2nd, it wasn't being used anywhere specifically so it was basically against the rules of the wiki. You'd have been better off uploading it elsewhere and linking it here. --MasterMarik (talk • contribs) 16:53, April 13, 2018 (UTC)

You couldn't you do that?! I'll also take a much better picture, if needs be, also you were the one whom demanded evidence, and now your sitting on it, even thorough I've provided the citation required. --7th Ki&#39;oon (talk • contribs) 00:17, April 14, 2018 (UTC)

I don't have the ability to rename files. Besides, this wiki specifically advises not to re-upload the image when it'll get renamed on its own. --MasterMarik (talk • contribs) 00:19, April 14, 2018 (UTC)

Well, outside of my twitter account, I don't have access to access third party site to host, so secondly you can now restore the trivia, that you deleted, because there is now post proof that it was in dual art, you could quote if necessary. It is, all I ask. --7th Ki&#39;oon (talk • contribs) 02:18, April 14, 2018 (UTC)

Thank you, also could you add that Kazuki designed all the signer dragons as trivia, and thank you ever so kindly. I also apologise, I I was passive aggressive, but I shouldn't have been posting at night. If you need anything else cited from dual art or checked, please let me know. --7th Ki&#39;oon (talk • contribs) 14:23, April 14, 2018 (UTC)

Rainbow Dragon Text
(1)：自分フィールドの、元々のカード名が「究極宝玉神 レインボー・ドラゴン」または 「究極宝玉神 レインボー・ダーク・ドラゴン」となるモンスターが効果を発動したターンに発動できる. デッキから「宝玉獣」モンスターを任意の数だけ特殊召喚する（同名カードは１枚まで）.

(1)：自分フィールドの、元々のカード名が「究極宝玉神 レインボー・ドラゴン」または 「究極宝玉神 レインボー・ダーク・ドラゴン」

(1): If your original card name is "Rainbow Dragon" or "Rainbow Dark Dragon"

So that is pretty self explanatory. If you need more info lets go with a card we know says "Ultimate Crystal", Advanced Dark.

お互いのフィールド上・墓地に存在する 「宝玉獣」と名のついたモンスターは闇属性として扱う. また、「究極宝玉神」と名のついたモンスターが攻撃する場合、 バトルフェイズの間だけ攻撃対象モンスターの効果は無効化される. 自分フィールド上の「宝玉獣」と名のついたモンスターが戦闘を行うダメージ計算時、 自分のデッキから「宝玉獣」と名のついたモンスター１体を墓地へ送る事で、 その戦闘によって発生する自分への戦闘ダメージを０にする.

また、「究極宝玉神」と名のついたモンスターが攻撃する場合、

Also, if a monster named "Ultimate Crystal" attacks,

I will leave you to fix your error.

LLLeyna (talk • contribs) 11:35, April 21, 2018 (UTC)

The card doesn't exist yet in English but when it does, it'll more-than-likely come close to what was written. You obviously haven't seen the changes that were made to Rainbow Dragon and Rainbow Dark Dragon with their latest reprints or the print of Rainbow Overdragon, which specifically mentions "an Ultimate Crystal card". So while it isn't what the card says in Japanese, it's likely what it will say in English. No error here. --MasterMarik (talk • contribs) 11:40, April 21, 2018 (UTC)

So you are guessing based on a bad hunch? And that the TCG will make another card difference to the OCG? This card is only meant to work with Rainbow Dragon and Rainbow Dark Dragon. Surely translating the text from the OCG currently would be the correct way to do this rather than making things up? How do I contact an Admin on here? LLLeyna (talk • contribs) 11:43, April 21, 2018 (UTC)
 * There'd be n point in changing the text for Rainbow Dragon if they didn't intend on changing all cards that mention them to reflect this change. Besides, "an Ultimate Crystal Beast" monster is much shorter and is still the more-likely case. I didn't write that card's text but there's no reason to change it just because it's not out in English yet. --MasterMarik (talk • contribs) 12:10, April 21, 2018 (UTC)

They did do that change, except for "Rainbow Path", who isn't up to date on cards now? So you don't want to change it to match the OCG text, the only factually accurate evidence currently, because the text is shorter and someone changed it to the shorter one and it isn't out in English so it could be anything? So if a new card reveal comes out and I change that card to say something shorter but not accurate that is fine? The current text is wrong with the current facts, unless you have facts that this is going to be a different card in the TCG why did you change my edit? My edit is factually correct with our current evidence. LLLeyna (talk • contribs) 12:19, April 21, 2018 (UTC)
 * Rainbow Path isn't out in English yet and the database hasn't made any changes to reflect it. What you speak of isn't the same thing. If a card is revealed in English, then we use what text it has in English. If the card is in Japanese, we anticipate what the card will likely say in English using PSCT because we know full well the TCG doesn't follow Japan's card text format. It was changed because you are wrong in this regard. They're not going to use "that is named Rainbow Dragon" or "Rainbow Dark Dragon"". They're going to encompass both with "an Ultimate Crystal" monster because both cards have gotten an erratum that states they're treated as such (though RDD has yet to be printed with this erratum). --MasterMarik (talk • contribs) 12:41, April 21, 2018 (UTC)

Oh my god, did you even read my first post? We currently have a card in TCG called "Advanced Dark". This card uses the new TCG archetype "Ultimate Crystal", this helps match up with the OCG which uses "Ultimate Gem God" for their cards. Now by reading the TCG and OCG text for "Advanced Dark" we can see they both reference the Archetype(TCG) and Name(OCG) so this means that when the OCG references the name "Ultimate Gem God" the TCG can reference "Ultimate Crystal". But if you look at the text for "Over the Rainbow" it does not use the name "Ultimate Gem God" it states it has to be the original names "Rainbow Dragon(Ultimate Gem God Rainbow Dragon in the OCG)" or "Rainbow Dark Dragon(Ultimate Gem God Rainbow Dark Dragon in the OCG)". So this means it does not interact with the new Fusion card "Rainbow Overdragon". But what you are saying, is that the TCG will ignore the fact is has been trying to get up to par with the OCG on this Archetype and will use the new phrase "Ultimate Crystal" which means it will not work the same as in the OCG? Please explain with FACTS how I am wrong. What FACTS do you have that the TCG will have a different card effect to the OCG, because it will not "encompass both" as there are 3 monsters in the "Ultimate Crystal" archetype. LLLeyna (talk • contribs) 12:51, April 21, 2018 (UTC)
 * That doesn't mean it won't in the TCG. We've been doing it this way for a long time now. Don't see why you have to make such a fuss over one card. The fact that Rainbow Dragon and Rainbow Dark Dragon have an erratum that say they count as Ultimate Crystal monsters isn't enough proof to you that the card will say "an Ultimate Crystal" monster? The TCG has been known to write the card such that it does change how the card works so in that instance, yes, you're wrong. --MasterMarik (talk • contribs) 12:57, April 21, 2018 (UTC)

That is not proof, I have proof as I can read Japanese and I know what the card does, you are guessing that the TCG will change things because reasons. I am trying to improve the wikia, you are making custom cards. I guess that is why the wikia is dying and people are moving to pedia. Well I expect my apology when the card comes out. Peace out, continue the slope down. LLLeyna (talk • contribs) 13:02, April 21, 2018 (UTC)

https://www.facebook.com/italianygo/photos/a.419955734708219.81399.297994916904302/1640423589328088/?type=3&theater https://www.reddit.com/r/yugioh/comments/87s0mr/fyi_over_the_rainbows_tcg_name_will_be_rainbow/ Do you believe me now? Or want to ride that horse off the cliff? LLLeyna (talk • contribs) 22:17, April 21, 2018 (UTC)
 * Why didn't you provide that in the first place?--MasterMarik (talk • contribs) 23:00, April 21, 2018 (UTC)

sorry --Princess shoting star (talk • contribs) 14:29, May 2, 2018 (UTC)

Ghost Kaiba vs. Yugi
Hi ! Watching the Italian version of the episode, Yugi and Ghost Kaiba talk about this (BEWD vs. Dark Magician) at least twice; however, I thought that it was impossible due to the difference between ATKs (which was 500, while Yugi has 1.000 LP). I did not think about "Defence Paralysis" but I judge an error the fact that Yugi would've lost in a single attack. As he has 1.000 LP, Ghost Kaiba should destroy at least 2 monsters to win the Duel. I hope to have been clear. Elso Pezzolesi (talk • contribs) 19:19, May 3, 2018 (UTC)


 * Well still, Yugi didn't stand a chance either way unless he destroyed Defense Paralysis, which was preventing Yugi from keeping his monsters in Defense Mode. The Dark Magician was only his 2nd strongest monster in his Deck at the time next to Gaia the Dragon Champion but he really didn't have a monster capable of winning the Duel so once DM was destroyed, Yugi was pretty much defeated. --MasterMarik (talk • contribs) 19:24, May 3, 2018 (UTC)

why you change yusie fudo page yusie did lose to kalin episode 33-35 Mohamed13 (talk • contribs) 19:21, May 4, 2018 (UTC)
 * I said why. It also says in the duel summary what happened. Yusei was knocked unconscious and thus couldn't finish the duel and take the remaining damage that would've cost him the duel. Thus, it ended without result. Otherwise, there'd have been no point in the rematch since Kalin was the one that wanted to have the rematch in the first place. --MasterMarik (talk • contribs) 19:22, May 4, 2018 (UTC)

Hi, about ib: First of all, making 2 is the easiest thing in the world, weather it's in a dedicated, or a random deck. Any link focused deck is able to put 2 link 2 monsters on the field, or else link 4 monsters are impossible to summon. Fyi, in a world chalice deck, like the one that won YCS Bochum 2018, the standard combo is to link summon Ningirsu on the second main monster zone, with Ib in the 3rd, and Aurum in the extra monster zone, and a monster in the first main monster zone, allowing Ningirsu to draw 3 cards. And the link summoning doesn't stop there. Go check out the featured matches and the finals on youtube.

Btw, are you actually a moderator? or just some random person who likes to delete stuff on the wiki?--Dnahelix (talk • contribs) 07:39, May 6, 2018 (UTC)


 * Mods actually have a status listed in their profile. I don't have that. I'll believe that when I see it in person. Even as you say it, it's pretty situational to me as you're assuming your opponent won't or can't stop it. --MasterMarik (talk • contribs) 11:16, May 6, 2018 (UTC)

ok, so first off: please back off my tips, only YOU delete them. and I refuse to believe that no mods are reading them before you, yet no one but you deletes them. secondly, this is not only a common move, it's an easy one too. third, if you have to factor in the opponent reaction, you should delete every and all tips pages, because with the variety and numbers of hand traps in the game today, there is no move that cannot be countered by the opponent.

as for proof, I already mentioned that this is based on the decklist of YCS Bochum winner of 2018, which is the most common decklist for the world chalice archetype, and the final match is actually featured by Konami itself on youtube, just go there and watch.

Whether this is a good move or not, worthwhile or not, it's up to the player using the deck to figure it out. And because of text issues, people might not realise the interaction that 2 copies of this card might have when placed next to each other. Frankly, if you even played the game at all, in the current meta, you would have understood the value of the combo I describe. especially in the light of the newly released FLOD card set.

and as a matter of fact, I checked the rules for what can and can't be put on the tips pages, and this is definitely an allowed tip, and beyond that, your personal opinion about the combo shouldn't matter much....--Dnahelix (talk • contribs) 11:47, May 6, 2018 (UTC)

Yugi vs. Mako
I was thinking about the Duel between Yugi and Mako, in which the former plays "Full Moon": as a result, the moon rises the level of tides. However, once the moon is destroyed, the tides disappear instead returning to the original level (before the moon was played): I don't understand the reason of that. Elso Pezzolesi (talk • contribs) 11:52, May 9, 2018 (UTC)


 * This is the anime. They don't have to follow real life. Take for example Giant Soldier of Stone destroying the moon. IRL, it's much too far away for that to work. --MasterMarik (talk • contribs) 11:53, May 9, 2018 (UTC)

"Petit Moth" and TEI ("Thousand-Eyes Idol")
Hey, how have you been--hope you're having a good weekend so far. :)

If I could ask, about the "Dancing Elf"/"Skull Servant" Trivia, I was trying to cross-compare the two as being monsters with similar stats and infamous reputations as being weak monsters (though "Skull Servant"'s is in the past--its vitriol long permanently sullied thanks to its new support over the years). While I missed noting "Petit Moth" at the time, it didn't matter because I also am aware that the card supports the Moth archetype. And of course, "Idol" is Fusion Material for arguably the most oppressive monster in the game (and one of my personal favorites too.)

Could we make a note between the two cards in question in terms of their reputations (whether past or present) or is any bias known in the OCG/TCG fanbase for multiple cards not notable?

Thanks and take it easy!--May FORZA be with you, your loved ones and friends! (talk • contribs) 13:19, May 12, 2018 (UTC)


 * It's not a matter of bias. It's that multiple monsters met the criteria. In this case, Skull Servant, Petit Moth and Dancing Elf. This is true for a LOT of monsters out there and thus it's not notable. --MasterMarik (talk • contribs) 13:24, May 12, 2018 (UTC)


 * That is true--and wasn't it just "Skull Servant" the only one of these three cards that was the recipient of its criticism back in the day? Looking back, guess its surprising Konami (slowly) gave it the hella support it has now.  Maybe "Dancing Elf" will follow someday?  Plus with "Petit Moth", this card pretty much relieved it of its duties.


 * As I've learned throughout the card game (and anime) over the years (having been a fan of YGO since seventh grade--and I'm 27 now,) a card's "usefulness" is really in the eyes of the beholder!--May FORZA be with you, your loved ones and friends! (talk • contribs) 13:39, May 12, 2018 (UTC)

Crimson Dragon
Well it's at least 10,000 years old, we know that from 5'ds. Wheres the proof its millions of years old. Also what proof is there that it's omnipotent. If anything the only omnipotent entity in Yu-Gi-oh would be the Numeron Dragon.--StargateFanBB (talk • contribs) 23:05, May 26, 2018 (UTC)
 * Where in 5Ds is it's age stated? I never gave proof of its age at all. --MasterMarik (talk • contribs) 00:15, May 27, 2018 (UTC)
 * You can extrapolate it's mininum age based on the dates the battle between the Signer Dragons and Earthbound Immortals(3,000 BC) and the battle between Crimson Dragon and the Crimson Devil(8,000 BC) occured in comparison to present day 5D's. If it battled Crimson Devil in 8,000 BC it's at least 10,000 years old in present day 5D's, hence I put it's age as at least 10,000 years old.

--StargateFanBB (talk • contribs) 19:54, May 28, 2018 (UTC)

Historic Forbidden and Limited Lists
I understand that you may disapprove my new Historic Forbidden and Limited lists as being unnecessary, but I am just here to cleanup the old Historic Forbidden/Limited Chart since it is both out of date, and the formatting is very poor. Especially that it is not to scale and that for later dates it alternates between OCG and TCG columns, giving the card an impression that it is swinging between two statuses (especially Forbidden and Unlimited). It is also very difficult to edit.

The main historic statuses chart has a long cleanup notice.

"Reason: Current staggered OCG/TCG list columns are confusing, stretch the page, and do not intuitively make sense; columns and rows (especially columns) arguably should be the same width/height for better visual presentation. Optimally there should be two rows per card, one for OCG and one for TCG, that merge if their status is the same during a particular set of months, so that moving horizontally always represents proper changing between chronological lists (e.g. Shock Master looks like it's swinging erratically between 3 and 0; it should split into a TCG row and an OCG row where the TCG row is consistently red and the OCG row consistently green)."

As a result, around the time the new TCG May 2018 Lists came out, I worked to create a new Historic Foribdden/Limited chart because the old one needs to be reformatted. It is done through a Python program I programmed where I created text files for each format date, and processed it into a big datastructure to determine the card status record. There are separate tables for OCG and TCG, but the width of columns are proportional to the length of the format, and the widths of each year is uniform. Unfortunately, it is not perfect as of now, especially that I need to add the dates for each card, and the program is rather rough at best. As a result, I temporarily marked gray cells as cards that never appeared on the banlist at all from that point.

I am intending to let the historic banlist charts to be more readable, so that the cleanup notice is met. However, the old table itself is also very large, around 300 KB, so for my new charts I have to split it into several pages to reduce load times as well as avoid hitting the template limit. Right now it seems that only the recent years (when TCG and OCG banlist became substantially different) are considered the most necessary.

Current new Historic Forbidden and Limited Lists

 * Historic Forbidden/Limited Chart/Historic OCG Forbidden & Limited Chart
 * Historic Forbidden/Limited Chart/Historic TCG Forbidden & Limited Chart (you marked it as "We don't need this")

Can you please clarify why we don't need the new formatted forbidden and limited lists even though the old table is already out of date and poorly formatted? Is it that we don't really need the old table itself?

a mulligan. (talk • contribs) 07:35, May 28, 2018 (UTC)


 * Yours isn't any better. It's a jumbled mess and is pointless because the other pages already have the Forbidden and Limited Lists from years past. They're much more simple too. --MasterMarik (talk • contribs) 11:11, May 28, 2018 (UTC)

Are the "other pages" the individual banlist pages, such as May 2018 Lists? If not, which pages are they? The current Historic Forbidden/Limited chart (not my version) is out of date and even harder to read, and maybe that should also be removed, or replaced with a table of links to individual banlist pages. I am using my efforts to revive that chart. a mulligan. (talk • contribs) 11:28, May 28, 2018 (UTC)


 * Yes they are, though I doubt the old one is going to be removed given the lack of admins here. --MasterMarik (talk • contribs) 11:32, May 28, 2018 (UTC)

I understand that you are criticizing my new historical banlist even though I am intending to fix the issues of the previous banlist, and I appreciate your viewpoint. As of now it isn't entirely finished, as the program mainly processes through the individual banlist files I completed, so the banlist is generated semi-automatically. The only major issue now in my view is that I haven't completed the release dates. It is also in the early stages of development, as it has to do with a database project I am doing.

I removed the links to the new historic forbidden and limited charts, since it isn't really needed, but it is sort of a work-in-progress.

As of now, how would you rate the quality of the old banlist tables, and if it is poor, what is the best way to deal with the old banlist? Is the old banlist generated automatically or manually? It is seriously out of date and requires horizontal scrolling to read, and it is very hard to read or edit now. a mulligan. (talk • contribs) 11:39, May 28, 2018 (UTC)


 * Both historical banned lists are poorly designed and should be removed. There's also just no need for it at all. The individual lists are much easier to read and only include the relevent info. --MasterMarik (talk • contribs) 11:42, May 28, 2018 (UTC)

Sure. I will continue working on the banlist program, though my "large" banlist taking up large amount of space can just be kept as work affiliated with myself as of now. I would suggest transforming the old banlist into a table listing all the historical banlist pages, OCG on the left column, TCG on the right column, and keeping track of analogous years. I also suggest making the Statuses and status lists template better formatted. Thanks for providing criticism to my work and the obsolete banlist. I have made a modification to the cleanup notice suggesting that the obsolete banlist is to be removed and archived.

I have also updated the info regarding erratas and emergency banlists. The code to my automatic banlist table generation program can be found in my github, though as of now it is pretty damn rough. a mulligan. (talk • contribs) 11:49, May 28, 2018 (UTC)

Post-Fork Personnel
As you are one of the most active and notable editor, I suggest you visit Forum:Post-Fork Personnel to discuss what's next for this wikia.

0123456789 The Great (talk • contribs) 11:15, June 9, 2018 (UTC)

per cent
per cent is the formal spelling of the preferred American spelling of percent, used by the Financial Times. It is short for per centum, meaning per hundred. Source: http://grammarist.com/spelling/percent-per-cent/Jonneyboy99 (talk • contribs) 10:13, June 12, 2018 (UTC)
 * That makes your change even more pointless because it's the same thing. --MasterMarik (talk • contribs) 11:15, June 12, 2018 (UTC)

Fair enough Jonneyboy99 (talk • contribs) 11:52, June 12, 2018 (UTC)

Re:Combo
No. Doomcaliber knight is notable because it's normally a minus 1 in exchange of either turn negation since Doomcaliber Knight is a quick effect monster, furthermore it a negation card that upon fulfilling it's purpose would replace itself with Darkest Diabolos, Lord of the Lair.

thus NO, your Exile Force example isn't interchangeable with Doomcaliber Knight.furthermore your argument isn't a reason for which it should be listed as a tip. 

Yes it is because it can just as easily trigger Darkest Diabolos' effect as Doomcaliber, whom I might add can't do it on its own. It has to wait for a monster effect to resolve whereas Exilded does not. So tell me again why your tip is valid and mine isn't. --MasterMarik (talk • contribs) 00:40, June 28, 2018 (UTC)

BeastialThunderDragon Image
File:BeastialThunderDragon-SOFU-JP-OP.png need to be renamed please. i think you can just move it. --hanmac (talk • contribs) 17:05, June 28, 2018 (UTC)


 * I don't have the ability do that. --MasterMarik (talk • contribs) 18:20, June 28, 2018 (UTC)


 * I have the ability, what should it be.0123456789 The Great (talk • contribs) 16:13, July 4, 2018 (UTC)


 * No you don't. Otherwise, it'd say so on your profile. --MasterMarik (talk • contribs) 16:15, July 4, 2018 (UTC)


 * The Mover position is hidden from profile. See IgorThunderMaster. 0123456789 The Great (talk • contribs) 01:50, July 5, 2018 (UTC)


 * Regardless, it's already been fixed. --MasterMarik (talk • contribs) 11:23, July 5, 2018 (UTC)

Content Moderator Request
Deltaneos was on today, and he questions your desire whether you need mover or Content Mod. I think you should clarify that you need the Mod. I don't see any difficulty in using the delete and protect page tool you will be granted, but do you know how to rename something, and to what name, right? 0123456789 The Great (talk • contribs) 16:30, July 4, 2018 (UTC)


 * Honestly, I'd rather be content mod. Not much to do as a mover. I am an admin on another wiki, albeit because the original admin isn't on often and just gave it to me but I can rename files, yes. --MasterMarik (talk • contribs) 16:34, July 4, 2018 (UTC)

Reply
I thought you knew that I can't block people; I don't have such user rights. Probably for the best to report to VSTF the next time that happens. ☺ Energy X ☻ 15:53, July 11, 2018 (UTC)


 * Would've thought "councilor" would've had at least that. Not sure what the point is of that status then. --MasterMarik (talk • contribs) 15:56, July 11, 2018 (UTC)

It doesn’t matter whether or not someone used the special effect of the card or not. The Winged Dragon of Ra was still in his deck and he could have used it whenever he wanted. Oh and if we want to get technical, he used the form of EGP during the Dark RPG and if your going to say that wasn’t a card, when Atem found out his name he pulled the monsters from Yugi’s deck which makes them one and the same. It’s not like they are different just because it wasn’t a duel. To think that just because a duelist hasn’t activated an effect means they don’t have that cards ability even though they have the card itself is absurd. Atem also used the EGP in the Pyrimad of Light and argue about it being canon all you want, it’s just another example. Yugi has the Winged Dragon of Ra card and all that comes with it, if he wanted to activate that specific effect he could because it is in his deck. EGP is not a separate card meaning that Yugi does indeed have it in his deck. Please stop removing it because your incorrect in this situation.



Discord
I wonder if you use Discord. If yes, let's set up a channel for wikia discussion. 0123456789 The Great (talk • contribs) 11:48, July 16, 2018 (UTC)


 * Never used it before. --MasterMarik (talk • contribs) 11:56, July 16, 2018 (UTC)

It's not always easy slaying hydras (NEW VANDAL ALERT!?)
Greetings again, MasterMarik--it's been a bit but hope all is well with you! :)

First, apologies in advance because I do not fancy being a tattletale. However, I've also seen some of that trollrat (yes I made that word up) user Exodius5680's vandalistic path that user chose to take. Really sucks there aren't really any admins @ the moment to keep cretin like them in check but I just noticed the user's LONG OVERDUE comeuppance @ last in the block log.

But (hope I'm not too jumpy with this) after perusing through some of this Wikia's recent changes, I think Exodius5680's second coming came quick! Second verse, similar as the first! As Captain Obvious here knows, us Yu-Gi-Oh! devotees don't need mischief for the sake of mischief so I'll just leave this all @ that and hope an IP block is in this soul's future!?

Take it easy and have a great weekend! --May FORZA be with you, your loved ones and friends! (talk • contribs) 18:57, July 27, 2018 (UTC)


 * I had told Delternos to block him indefinitely because of this very reason. --MasterMarik (talk • contribs) 18:59, July 27, 2018 (UTC)


 * That's what's up--and as long as any admin pokes their head(s) in here every now and then. Doesn't matter who but it's extra nice that in this instance, it happened to be one of the "originals".--May FORZA be with you, your loved ones and friends! (talk • contribs) 19:29, July 27, 2018 (UTC)
 * I've reported them to the VSTF Wiki for vandalism. Hopefully they'll be quick to take action. --MasterMarik (talk • contribs) 20:02, July 27, 2018 (UTC)

Because Gx has more dubbed episodes than 5ds there has to be a way. (frank barrera1320716fb (talk • contribs) 02:42, August 6, 2018 (UTC))
 * That makes no sense at all.--MasterMarik (talk • contribs) 11:13, August 6, 2018 (UTC)

Re Show Ending
We would you say that arent you disappointed about this i mean gx has more dubbed episodes than 5ds maybe well talk to one of there actors and see about this.

They cant move on unless they make a 5ds movie that takes place after the events of possible dub series. (1320716fb (talk • contribs) 14:56, August 8, 2018 (UTC))


 * They're not continuing the series. Why do you think they skipped episodes of 5Ds and GX? They wanted to get to the next series. --MasterMarik (talk • contribs) 15:02, August 8, 2018 (UTC)