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 have not actively played the TCG in a very long time, and have not kept up with current rulings. 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.

Manga cards lore
Well, you know the lores of the manga cards tend to use different terms of the TCG/OCG, right? And sometimes even non-Yu-Gi-Oh! terms, like that card of Asuka's whose lore was something like "Two ice pillars appear on the field". So, in the cards' articles, should we keep the official English lore or our TCG-like lore? E.g., in the case of "Underworld Dragon Dragonecro", we should keep "This monster does not destroy enemy monsters in battle. It steals the soul of monsters it battles." or "If this card battles with an opponent's monster, that monster is not destroyed by battle. After damage calculation, that monster's ATK becomes 0. Then, Special Summon 1 "Underworld Token". The ATK of the "Underworld Token" is equal to the original ATK of the monster this card battled. If an "Underworld Token" battles with an opponent's monster, that monster is not destroyed by battle."? LegendaryAsariUgetsu (talk • contribs) 01:39, October 20, 2012 (UTC)


 * Use whatever the manga actually says. In that case, it sounds like an "Underworld Token" isn't even a thing that exists. Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 09:09, October 20, 2012 (UTC)


 * Even in cases like "Two ice pillars appear on the field"? I wonder if it isn't confusing for who didn't read the manga, and that is not even a Yu-Gi-Oh! card lore. :| Although I don't think we should just ignore the actual non-sense lore of the card, so, dunno. :/ LegendaryAsariUgetsu (talk • contribs) 16:13, October 20, 2012 (UTC)

Tribute
"Tribute is the act of sending a monster from the field to the Graveyard, either for a Tribute Summon, a cost, or an effect." This is not a good definition \=, if a monster you control "destroyed" by your card, then you can't call that a "Tribute". We can only call it "Tribute" if the card said that, using this term in its text. and I mention that in the article. About "Sending" card to the Graveyard, I open a talk page about it, because I think Tribute is NOT "the act of sending" its something other than that. the sending happen as a result. --Dlamash (talk • contribs) 15:06, October 20, 2012 (UTC)


 * I'm not sure I understand what the issue is. The definition that's there does not imply that a destroyed card counts as a Tribute. It states that a Tribute can happen for a Summon, a cost or an effect. That's it. And that's true, isn't it? As for it not being the act of sending, if you have a better way to word it, by all means change it. Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 18:45, October 20, 2012 (UTC)


 * If you have "Macro Cosmos" on the field, can you tribute 3 monster to summon "Destiny HERO - Plasma" ? Yes, you can. But you cannot "send" them to the Graveyard, they will banished instead. Thats why you cannot summmon "Arcana Force EX - The Light Ruler" because you cannot pay the cost of summon, the cost will not happen as no card will be sent to Graveyard. If "Tribute" = "Send" then you cannot summon Plasma too. But you can, way? In One sentence, because it's not the act of sending. Sending happens as a result of Tributing, thats way you can still Tribute as a cost to summon or to activate cards or effects even if "Macro Cosmos" is on the field. If you say "Tributing is the act of sending" anyone will think that "Tribute" is "another way of sending card to the Graveyard", and that is WRONG. Tributing is an act, it doesn't mean "Send to the Graveyard", it means "make the monster leave the field". Sending is another act happens Immediately after Tributing, it's something else, NOT the Tribute itself. --Dlamash (talk • contribs) 07:18, October 25, 2012 (UTC)


 * Yes, it does send it to the Graveyard. The only instances where its NOT is when a card effect like "Macro Cosmos" changes that. I understand what you're saying, I just don't understand how its an issue at all (and the TCG is not really my department, so if you do say its an issue, I'll believe you). If you want to change it, please try to use better grammar. That's my main issue with your changes. Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 16:47, October 25, 2012 (UTC)

RE: Shark Drake Vice
Fixed. -Falzar FZ- (talk page|useful stuff) 23:12, October 20, 2012 (UTC)

Re: NAC
Unfortunately not. The site won't load at all. :/ -- The Goblin  20:57, October 21, 2012 (UTC)

Talk page message
I put a note on "Cyber Barrier Dragon's" talk page, but I need to find people that will talk on the talk page. Can you join in with the discussion. On another note, the new errata has now made it clear on the difference between 'this card can only be Special Summoned by/with' and 'this card cannot be Special Summoned except by/withCardsknower (talk • contribs) 01:42, October 22, 2012 (UTC)Cardsknower


 * I saw the topic. I didn't respond because I have no comments besides "I don't know". Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 14:18, October 22, 2012 (UTC)

Three notes
One note on "Jam Defender". After Yugi used "Lightforce Sword", "Buster Blader" went in for a counterattack, but "Jam Defender" nullified the damage. Despite this, "Slifer" was not destroyed. I would assume this was a ruling in the anime about monsters not being destroyed if Battle Damage was negated(just for Battle City). According to two episodes I just went through, it seems that a effect sometimes counts as an effect, but it appears to apply to effects that destroys monsters or effects that decrease ATK(this was in Yugi's Duel with Strings and his Duel with Yami Marik). Also after "Card of Safe Return" resolved, Strings illegally attacked twice in one turn. Under normal conditions, this can't be done unless through a card effect(unless "Slifer" has an effect that can attack more than once, this is an error). Reply when possible.Cardsknower (talk • contribs) 01:32, October 24, 2012 (UTC)Cardsknower


 * Another note I have on is the number of known Numbers Quattro had. He is supposed to have at least 10 collected Numbers which should include his "Number 88" card(the Number 32 card was given to Trey who gave it to Shark upon defeat). Vetrix took all those Numbers away after Quattro lost to Shark. However the Number card page states there are six unknown Number Cards Quattro obtained, suggesting that Number 32, Number 15, and Number 40 also count as Numbers that Quattro took from other Number holders.Cardsknower (talk • contribs) 22:16, October 24, 2012 (UTC)Cardsknower


 * There is no evidence to suggest the "Gimmick Puppet" "Numbers" were originally his. He could have gotten them from someone else and decided to switch to a "Gimmick Puppet" Deck so he could get some use out of them. Fact is, we don't know if they were originally his or not. So it's just a general count. In regards to your other question, I really don't know. Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 00:11, October 25, 2012 (UTC)


 * Well after "Jam Defender" destroyed "Revival Jam" in order to nullify the Battle Damage between "Buster Blader" and "Slifer", the latter wasn't destroyed despite it being weaker. This probably means that in Battle City, a monster can't be destroyed if no Battle Damage, but that is just my assumption as I don't know another instance prior to season 4 where more real life game instances are placed in. It was also stated that Slifer's second mouth counted as some sort of attack as its effect didn't activate while "Nightmare's Steelcage" was active. A similar thing applied to Yami Marik's Duel with Yami Yugi as he was able to activate "Surprise Attack from Beyond" even though "Ra" didn't attack. I will make note of the last note a bit later, so you can read this part.Cardsknower (talk • contribs) 00:24, October 25, 2012 (UTC)Cardsknower


 * I would personally chalk it up to "the God cards are allowed to screw the rules". Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 00:26, October 25, 2012 (UTC)


 * After all this, I would agree now because the Egyptian God cards probably have a lot of strange effects and rulings that they can bypass some rulings under certain conditions. That was probably just for Battle City though because after that, the God cards had to follow a couple of regular rulings.Cardsknower (talk • contribs) 00:30, October 25, 2012 (UTC)Cardsknower


 * And Seto wanted those Gods so he just let them screw the rulings until he get them in his hand (which unfortunate had failing to do so) -- i  F  r  e  d  C  a  t  09:30, October 25, 2012 (UTC)

The Pyramid of Light movie discrepancy
I found a huge discrepancy in Yugi and Kaiba's Duel. Yugi appeared to have 41 cards in his Deck instead of the standard forty in a player's Deck. This is so far one of the few known Duels in the anime or movies where a character is shown to have more than forty cards in their Deck(Others include the Duel with Dartz and the Ceremonial Battle). If Yugi had forty cards in his Deck, Yugi would have lost after Anubis ended his turn which was after his two monsters destroyed Yugi's two monsters.Cardsknower (talk • contribs) 04:08, October 26, 2012 (UTC)Cardsknower


 * I don't have an explanation for that. The movie had a lot of errors in it with card art the like (Yugi had two copies of "Ra" at one point), so I think it was just that, an error. For what's it worth, the novel gives an exact forty-card readout of Yugi's Deck (along with Kaiba's and Pegasus's), which can be found on Yugi's Decklist page. Doesn't appear to help here though. Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 12:07, October 26, 2012 (UTC)

Pegasus in the GX manga
The infobox on the Maximillion Pegasus page says that he appears in the ''Yu-Gi-Oh! GX'' manga. Is this true? -- Deltaneos (talk) 18:44, October 27, 2012 (UTC)


 * I vaguely remember a flashback scene he was in, but I could be misremembering. I'm short on time right now, but I can check it later tonight. Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 18:48, October 27, 2012 (UTC)


 * He appears in one panel in chapter 61. When Tragoedia extracts his heart from "Winged Kuriboh", he views its memories. He sees it as a stone tablet in Egypt, the physical card's creation by Pegasus (which presumably tied the spirit to the card), its memories of Koyo and its memories of passing the Feather of Ma'at to LADD. I can upload an image if you like. Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 22:55, October 27, 2012 (UTC)


 * Thank you. Nah, you don't need to upload it, unless you think it's needed for an article. -- Deltaneos (talk) 11:22, October 28, 2012 (UTC)

Better Than TBA>?
I Really Like How its Much Better to put ? on The Duel Results This is An Example How if ? If This Was Added instead of TBA What Do You Think

Yu-Gi-Oh! ZEXAL II
Did You Even Watched Episode 77 of ZEXAL The Student Council President is Under Barains Control

5D's 150
Should I change the wording in Misty's (and others if the same) article a bit? I ask because we see everyone cheering him on as an image (Yusei was in space, so wouldn't it be speculation to say she returned to Domino city when we only saw their image?). Shardsilver (talk • contribs) 19:37, November 2, 2012 (UTC)


 * Yeah, I would remove the mention of her returning to New Domino City. Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 22:15, November 2, 2012 (UTC)

TCG/OCG
Should these terms be written in italics or not? I see both a lot so I really don't know for sure which's the correct one. :/ LegendaryAsariUgetsu (talk • contribs) 23:11, November 3, 2012 (UTC)


 * Yes. Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 23:13, November 3, 2012 (UTC)

A question about Alit
Why would Alit be interested in Tori and which episode showed Alit falling for Tori(which led to him to try and claim her heart)?Cardsknower (talk • contribs) 22:29, November 4, 2012 (UTC)Cardsknower


 * One of the recent previews mentions this. I think its episode 80 or 81. As to why, I dunno. Because the writers are stupid? Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 22:30, November 4, 2012 (UTC)


 * It's episode 80. It's not probably because of how intelligent the writers are. It's probably something that would probably be elaborated on in episode 80. We should wait until the episode airs in Japan.Cardsknower (talk • contribs) 22:35, November 4, 2012 (UTC)Cardsknower


 * I'm sure there will be an explanation. I just don't have high hopes that it will be a good explanation, though I'm very cynical, so w/e. Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 22:37, November 4, 2012 (UTC)

Zubaba Archetype
Hi I saw you deleted the last page that was the Zubaba Archetype for having just 2 cards should I make it now since Zubaba General has been confirmed.--Veriteo (talk • contribs) 09:20, November 5, 2012 (UTC)


 * Restored. -Falzar FZ- (talk page|useful stuff) 10:38, November 5, 2012 (UTC)

"Reconstructed effect|anime"
Why is that template box necessary? According to the words, they say "This card's effect in the anime was never shown fully and/or directly..." It seems incorrect, as Schroeder fully "showed" the effect (by using it and explaining it). I have the feeling you mean "This card's effect text in the anime was never shown fully and/or directly." In that case, is there some way you can change the text box's wording to reflect this? --UltimateKuriboh (talk • contribs) 17:12, November 5, 2012 (UTC)


 * If you can't see the full text, it's needed. By "shown", it does mean the written text. I'll edit the template to clarify, I agree the wording needs work. Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 17:23, November 5, 2012 (UTC)


 * I changed "effect" to "written lore". Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 17:26, November 5, 2012 (UTC)

5D's MC Images
Should that RexGoodwin guy be editing them? I've seen in several places that images should be centralised images of a character's face, but GX + 5D's had those great images of the MC + their aces, so I was wondering whether or not I should revert his edits (Plus he adds new images without overriding the old ones...) TheScarecrow14 (talk • contribs) 18:40, November 5, 2012 (UTC)


 * Agreeing with Scarecrow, the others did actually have their aces too. I want to revert them as well, but I'm not sure what to do. Shardsilver (talk • contribs) 18:47, November 5, 2012 (UTC)


 * I personally love the character images with the ace cards. For me, using them instead of one that gives a slightly better view of the character's face is a case of ignoring the rules because I think it's better. You can revert him if you like, mention why in your edit summary. Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 22:49, November 5, 2012 (UTC)

Damage Calculation
I only have one question about this topic. If you alter the ATK and DEF of a monster during Damage Calculation, will it affect the amount of Battle Damage that is inflicted. For example, if you use "Hedge Guard" on a monster that would be destroyed, will its new ATK and DEF affect the amount of damage you will receive during Damage Calculation? I know you haven't play the game in a while, but this got me confused for a couple of days.Cardsknower (talk • contribs) 04:59, November 6, 2012 (UTC)Cardsknower


 * That is how I would assume it would work if I was still playing - you would calculate based on the new value. Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 15:00, November 6, 2012 (UTC)

Magical Hats (anime)
In the anime, "Magical Hats" was very tricky and versatile (and had unique stuff that the TCG/OCG couldn't do). What do you propose to do for the anime effect? Eventually people will wonder why it doesn't have an anime effect... --UltimateKuriboh (talk • contribs) 18:14, November 7, 2012 (UTC)


 * I would propose getting someone to translate what this image says (which I'm going to go do right now) and then using that, since that's what the card actually does. Its a Duelist Kingdom anime card. It does not have what could be called a valid lore for the card game. Also, in the interim, I would assume users would check the manga effect I did add and assume it was somewhat similiar. Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 18:19, November 7, 2012 (UTC)

Live Chat
Get on the Live Chat thing for this wikia ASAP; reading through Ryusui's page has given me MANY questions. In case I am there, but don't respond, just wait a little bit. --UltimateKuriboh (talk • contribs) 01:44, November 8, 2012 (UTC)

RE: PSCT
It could, but making it check that it is a card page would be a problem. Edit notices should be a better option, assuming SMW can be used on them, which I haven't tried before. If the manga itself was written before PSCT, then it shouldn't have PSCT, why would the release date of the card affect it? -Falzar FZ- (talk page|useful stuff) 03:15, November 8, 2012 (UTC)


 * [ edit the sandbox] to see it working.
 * Edit the source by editing [ MediaWiki:Editnotice-4-Sandbox].
 * -Falzar FZ- (talk page|useful stuff) 11:42, November 10, 2012 (UTC)


 * What I am supposed to do? Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 00:32, November 11, 2012 (UTC)


 * Just throw it at post's face and see it in the Preview butt-on? -- i  F  r  e  d  C  a  t  00:34, November 11, 2012 (UTC)


 * At [ MediaWiki:Editnotice-4-Sandbox]. The first two just show that it is working. They will be removed if/when it will be deployed.
 * You don't really need to do anything to it, I'm just saying that it seems to work.
 * Maybe you can edit the "Do not apply PSCT (edit this)" part, which is the message to display. Keep it short though.
 * -Falzar FZ- (talk page|useful stuff) 03:32, November 11, 2012 (UTC)

Dragon Nails?
Do you think that old anime cards such as "Dragon Nails" should follow the Japanese lore (as translated) exactly? Personally, I think it's fine if it doesn't follow the exact wording (such as "Equip only to a DARK Dragon-Type monster. It gains 600 ATK."), so long as the proper Japanese text is there, and the English lore follows the spirit of the Japanese lore. On Ryusui's talk page, GoldenKey found out from Ryusui that the word "DARK" could be translated as "Dark". So... at a bit of a loss as what to do here. My opinion: Keep the lore as it was before GoldenKey changed it, but I don't know what to do about the word "Dark". Thoughts? --UltimateKuriboh (talk • contribs) 16:27, November 8, 2012 (UTC)
 * Tricky stuff... Not sure what to do... if we "standardize" the lore for "Dragon Claws" in the pre-PSCT lore fashion, we would have to apply this to ALL old anime cards. Take this into consideration before you reply. --UltimateKuriboh (talk • contribs) 16:34, November 8, 2012 (UTC)


 * If it was still referring to the DARK Attribute, I would change it back. If it was referring to some other random early-DK game mechanic, then it should stay as "Dark". I'm not seeing anything in Category:Alignments that would it, so I can't see what else it would refer to besides the Attribute. I would ask Deltaneos if he knows of anything else it could refer too, I've not read most of the original manga, but what I have read of it tells me there's often remnants of it in anime card lores. Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 17:04, November 8, 2012 (UTC)


 * What I mean is, should it have that old wording, or should it be like "Equip only to a Dark Dragon-Type monster. It gains 600 ATK." --UltimateKuriboh (talk • contribs) 17:40, November 8, 2012 (UTC)


 * It doesn't really matter to me, honestly. Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 17:55, November 8, 2012 (UTC)

Accidental Post--Supratim1986 (talk • contribs) 11:18, November 11, 2012 (UTC)

Reply
Actually i don't have a NAC account. A person on Pojo Forums usually posts the card info from NAC, which i post in here. As for writing the summary, well if i am able to i would write it but only when all the card effects are known (usually within 12 hours to the airing). It isn't actually much difficult to write the summaries if all the card effects are known and how the game was played (except if the duel is like ZEXAL - 077, then i can't help) with only a limited knowledge of the Japanese language (like i do, because i am still in the beginners stage of learning the language).--Supratim1986 (talk • contribs) 11:17, November 11, 2012 (UTC)

Old Manga Lores
Just want to let you know, old manga lores should be capable of having the phrase "Spell or Trap Card" changed to "Spell/Trap Card". The precedent for this comes from "Ally of Justice Cyclone Creator". Do you agree with this or no? --UltimateKuriboh (talk • contribs) 15:43, November 12, 2012 (UTC)


 * If the English manga says "Spell or Trap Card", that's what we should use. If it doesn't, I have no problems with using Spell/Trap. That and stuff like target doesn't concern me much, since it had limited use beforehand. Banish is the main term I feel we should stay away from. Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 15:47, November 12, 2012 (UTC)

I've come across a discrepancy in the English and Japanese dubs, regarding "Amulet Dragon". In the Japanese version, Yugi said (or at least the subtitles said) that when Summoned, the Dragon can "absorb" all Magic Cards in the Graveyard. He then took the 8 cards out of his Graveyard and showed the backsides of the cards to Rafael. I (and 1 other Japanese website I came across on the web) interpreted this as being "removed from play". However, in the English dub, Yugi just said the Dragon "gets 300 points for each Magic Card in my Graveyard," and pulled out the 8 cards from his Graveyard for dramatic effect. What one should we go with? I have my opinion, but I wish to see your POV on this first. --UltimateKuriboh (talk • contribs) 02:32, November 13, 2012 (UTC)


 * Absorbed doesn't necessarily have to mean removed from play. Given that he actually took them out of his Graveyard though, I find it more likely than them staying there. So if you must go with one, I'd go with removing them from play. Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 05:29, November 13, 2012 (UTC)

Spammer

 * sorry to waste your time but there is a spammer with this ip (189.110.94.63) who is writing bad words on the pages of characters and I gave him a warning for that. Themaster1915 (talk • contribs) 16:40, November 13, 2012 (UTC)

I get what he meant by this. That's not only bad word, but also in other language, like some bunch of the spanish names. Also warning him because of his summary. -- i  F  r  e  d  C  a  t  16:44, November 13, 2012 (UTC)


 * He appears to have stopped now, so no need for a block. He was warned and he actually stopped. Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 16:48, November 13, 2012 (UTC)


 * I noticed, at least I pointed out what 1915 meant for. I even warned him to not swearing at other user like that. At least the banning taught me couple of the virtue lessons. -- i  F  r  e  d  C  a  t  16:50, November 13, 2012 (UTC)


 * Regarding the anon who just commented on Vivians talk page, shouldn't you block the ip (It's a user Falzar has currently blocked)? Shardsilver (talk • contribs) 17:14, November 13, 2012 (UTC)


 * How do you know its the same guy? Even if it is, he's done nothing wrong with this IP yet besides failing to read a note and removing it, which was quickly reverted. Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 17:17, November 13, 2012 (UTC)


 * Shard pointed to this user, I don't think that's same user that 1915 caught and cursed on. -- i  F  r  e  d  C  a  t  17:19, November 13, 2012 (UTC)


 * Don't get me wrong or anything, but you aren't suppose to evade bans (wether you did something wrong or not with the current ip). Guess I'll ask Delt if it's the same user. Shardsilver (talk • contribs) 17:25, November 13, 2012 (UTC)

Turbo Warrior and Gate Defender
Does "Gate Defender's" effect target a monster? "Turbo Warrior's" second effect only applies to monsters whose effects target monsters. If this is not the case, I think an anime lore will need to be created. This has created a lot of confusion for me, so I want this solved quickly.Cardsknower (talk • contribs) 00:47, November 15, 2012 (UTC)Cardsknower
 * "Turbo Warrior" negated Level 6 or lower Effect Monster that target him so in the case, both Anime and TCG/OCG effects are same. -- i  F  r  e  d  C  a  t  00:54, November 15, 2012 (UTC)


 * Yeah, that sounds right. Even if it's not, there is no clear shot of the card for "Gate Defender" to know for sure. Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 02:03, November 15, 2012 (UTC)


 * It's probably similar to the effect of "Negate Attack"(not completely). It targets the opposing monster before negating the attack.Cardsknower (talk • contribs) 02:26, November 15, 2012 (UTC)Cardsknower


 * Still same, no matter which one went first, it just jammed in the end. -- i  F  r  e  d  C  a  t  17:31, November 17, 2012 (UTC)

RE: Mamoru
There doesn't seem to be any other cases of that happening. That's the only one. -Falzar FZ- (talk page|useful stuff) 02:17, November 16, 2012 (UTC)

Nephthys
Seemed like a good idea at the time. Garunix and Barong share similar effects with Nephthys, so I thought all of them would. Mad Rest 18:30, November 16, 2012 (UTC)

Editing Mistakes =/= Dub Edits
Should we list editing mistakes in deck lists too? Seeing as the dub edits are merely poor editing but are listed (which could possibly be put into a page titled 4KIDS card edit mistakes or something?). An example would be like Dragan having 2 Tanngrisnir or Crow having 2 Vayu's. TheScarecrow14 (talk • contribs) 16:51, November 17, 2012 (UTC)


 * We do have one page for a particularly egregious example. I'm not convinced its poor editing. I honestly think they intentionally do it because they think they're being clever. I like the idea of having a page where we can just list them. As far as listing them in Decklists, we do that, don't we? Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 19:14, November 17, 2012 (UTC)

Episode 175 problem
If "Celestial Sword Eatos" wasn't destroyed until the end of the Battle Phase, shouldn't "Kuribandit" have 700 ATK, not 1000(I read "Kuribandit's" page and it says it has 1000 ATK). Also if "Eatos" removes all monsters in the opponent's Graveyard until the player reaches a Spell/Trap, shouldn't "Electromagnetic Turtle" be banished along with the three monsters that Rafael forcibly banished via the effect of "Eatos"? If so, it would be hard to figure out how Yami Yugi could have activated its effect if it was banished from the Graveyard before it could be used.Cardsknower (talk • contribs) 21:54, November 17, 2012 (UTC)Cardsknower


 * For the first point, the card for "Kuribandit" wasn't ever shown right? So yeah, that's fine. For the other point, I don't really know. Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 16:32, November 20, 2012 (UTC)

Dark Assailant
I thought if a monster's lore mentions the name of a series/archetype, it is treated as related. --Golden Key (talk • contribs) 13:45, November 19, 2012 (UTC)


 * But its obviously not referring to the "Assassin" archetype at at all since that archetype didn't exist when the card was printed. Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 15:11, November 19, 2012 (UTC)


 * Well alright then. --Golden Key (talk • contribs) 15:16, November 19, 2012 (UTC)

ZEXAL II episode count
I think it'd be a good idea to add, in the articles for the ZEXAL II episodes, the number of the episode in both ZEXAL (the whole thing) and ZEXAL II, as, well, we count everything as one series 'cause TV Tokyo does so, but many websites count ZEXAL II from 1, and it is "another series" after all. So, I think we should write, for example, ""Shark's Rage!! Save The Captured Lil' Sister!" is the seventy-eighth episode of the Yu-Gi-Oh! ZEXAL anime and the fifth episode under the Yu-Gi-Oh! ZEXAL II subtitle." or something like that. LegendaryAsariUgetsu (talk • contribs) 22:44, November 19, 2012 (UTC)


 * Eh, I don't know. Yeah, some websites are starting the numbering over, but I'd argue that those websites are wrong. Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 16:32, November 20, 2012 (UTC)

Effect?
In the anime and manga cards articles, one should to write "|effect =", and under it "|anime/mangalore =", and just there write the lore. What exactly should be written in "|effect ="? LegendaryAsariUgetsu (talk • contribs) 15:39, November 20, 2012 (UTC)


 * That parameter is for activation stuff like Ignition, Trigger, etc. I usually add it as a blank parameter because I don't know which is which since its primarily a real game thing (though there's no reason an anime/manga card can't also use it). On the occasions I've added something to it, I'm usually wrong. Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 16:32, November 20, 2012 (UTC)


 * Also, Manga version of those effect are very oddly writing, like for "Power Tool Mecha Dragon", it has "You can steal your opponent's Equip Card and equip it to this card." line, which is very different from "Chthonian Polymer" when those effect are worded. I know that the latter card said to sacrifice monster in order to gain a control of the Summoned Fusion Monster while Mecha Dragon just eyed at the Equip Card's action. If that was me, I would saying that "Once per turn: You can target 1 activating Equip Cards that your opponent activated, and if you do, equipped that target to this card." instead of that manga ridiculous... -- i  F  r  e  d  C  a  t  16:38, November 20, 2012 (UTC)


 * I've already talked to Cheese 'bout this, Fred. It's not that we describe the effect like that, it's that the lore is written like that in the manga. Despite I also don't like the fact that the manga still uses such lores, those are the official lores, and if it's official, we add it. Although I suggested something like adding the official lore and an additional lore explaining the effect, 'cause some cards just... ugh. Like a GX manga's spell whose lore read "Two ice pillars appear in the field." and 5D's Dragonecro's "This monster steals the souls of the monsters it battles.". LegendaryAsariUgetsu (talk • contribs) 17:30, November 20, 2012 (UTC)


 * Yea, that's the whole reason why Cheesy just decided to put in a naked list of "|effect =" instead of filling them up like a foolish clown. -- i  F  r  e  d  C  a  t  18:37, November 20, 2012 (UTC)

Discussion About Curse Network
You don't necessarily know the tone TwoTailedFox is taking... I interpreted the succinctness of his reply as respectfulness. I think it is best not to directly accuse Fox of not caring, but to rather say "It sounded like to me that you..." You get the point. --UltimateKuriboh (talk • contribs) 06:48, November 22, 2012 (UTC)


 * Respectful? Sure. But it still warrants more of a response given the nature of what's being talked about. If he was busy and had to throw off a quick reply, I understand. To me, it seemed like he was dismissing the whole point. Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 06:51, November 22, 2012 (UTC)

Genex Gaia
Hey Cheesedude, did you happen to catch the comment Ryusui made in regards to this monster? --Golden Key (talk • contribs) 17:13, November 23, 2012 (UTC)


 * Yup, one-card archetype for "Genex Controller", right? Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 17:16, November 23, 2012 (UTC)


 * Gotta love those one-card archetypes. Heh, maybe they'll make a WATER "Genex Controller 1" on in the vein of "Harpie Lady 1/2/3", to give Atlanteans/Mermails a boost. I'm dreaming. --Golden Key (talk • contribs) 17:24, November 23, 2012 (UTC)

NAC discussion

 * Cont' from http://neoarkcradle.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=2275&p=117123#p117123


 * Oh, you meant what Fox had planned for the Sets pages, not Delt? And that Hamon page seems to be the only Card Sets page I'm even seeing in existence. So now I'm confused.

Aah, you thought Delt was the one responsible for the Card Sets namespace. That wasn't clear from your post. Nope, apparently it was TTF that got it set up; none of the rest of us have any idea what he had/has in mind for it. And it's not just your imagination, that is the only Card Sets page on the wiki. 「 ディノ 奴 千？！ 」? · ☎ Dinoguy1000 21:09, November 23, 2012 (UTC)


 * You were discussing Trivia Pages on NAC, so I thought i'd throw this in. Is there any way to prevent people from adding "X card is similar to X because..."? It sounds tacky and trivia should be what the card is based off of (if anything) and if it's featured in artwork. It's especially annoying on cards which are revival-based when they said "X card is a "Monster Reborn" for (insert archetype, type or attribute). TheScarecrow14 (talk • contribs) 22:31, November 23, 2012 (UTC)


 * Oh, ok. That makes more sense now. I don't really think it's needed by any means though. It probably wouldn't hurt to ask him though.
 * Yeah, that is some trivia that's pretty pointless, even by the standards of trivia. Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 01:00, November 24, 2012 (UTC)


 * There's no way to prevent it, but we can make removing it a point of policy, so to speak. "X resembles Y" has no place on trivia pages, nor does "X is Y for Z". 「 ディノ 奴 千？！ 」? · ☎ Dinoguy1000 04:08, November 24, 2012 (UTC)

On a side note, is it possible to integrate a "search" part to the new format for card pages, so they wouldn't take up space on the Card Tips sections of those pages? "Search" would have cards that could search the card out, like "Sangan" and stuff. I was a bit offended after reading what NeoArkadia said about those particular tips, but I realize that they were only put there as an attempt to help people. --UltimateKuriboh (talk • contribs) 07:46, November 25, 2012 (UTC)


 * As I mentioned somewhere in the NAC thread, Falzar and I were working on a template a while back to completely automate the search tips, which will hopefully resolve Ark's problems with said tips (once we get back around to finishing it up and actually sticking it in a template and deploying). His problem with them, as near as I can tell, boils down to him not liking the fact that people have to spend their time maintaining these tips (though if you're reading this, Ark, I'm *not* trying to put words in your mouth, and you should correct me if I'm laboring under a false pretense here ;) ), so hopefully replacing the hand-maintained tips with a fully-automated template will get him to back off a bit. =) 「 ディノ 奴 千？！ 」? · ☎ Dinoguy1000 08:31, November 25, 2012 (UTC)


 * No, his issue seemed to be that they existed in the first place. Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 12:13, November 25, 2012 (UTC)

ZEXAL episode 34
I can't seem to find "Number 15: Gimmick Puppet Giant Grinder" in episode 34. Where was it? On another note, I noticed you reverted edits in 5ds episode 47. I altered it slightly to make it have a bit of old style and new style, but I mostly kept the latter in for the most part. Reply when possible.Cardsknower (talk • contribs) 15:31, November 24, 2012 (UTC)Cardsknower


 * In the Japanese version, it is shown at the very start of the episode (briefly though). Shardsilver (talk • contribs) 15:33, November 24, 2012 (UTC)

Problems with episode 48 and movie
In episode 48, Devack Tributes "Morphtronic Magnen Bar" to summon "Ape Fighter". The former then went to Leo's Graveyard. In Yu-Gi-Oh! 3D Bonds Beyond Time, Yusei was able to revive "Stardust Dragon" through its own efffect, even though it was Paradox's card for the Duel. This would make me assume 3d Bonds Beyond Time uses the rulings from the second series anime instead of the 5ds rulings. This is just my assumption however.Cardsknower (talk • contribs) 02:15, November 25, 2012 (UTC)Cardsknower


 * For the first point, what exactly is the problem? I don't get it. For the second, it's just way it worked in the anime. I wouldn't worry about it. The term "owner" isn't necessarily the same in the anime. Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 02:53, November 25, 2012 (UTC)


 * Well "Morphtronic Magnen Bar" was Tributed to summon "Ape Fighter". When "Ape Fighter" attacks Leo directly, Leo activates "Remake Puzzle" to destroy "Morphtronic Magnen" and summon "Morphtronic Magnen Bar" in its place. Given the lore of "Remake Puzzle", it became apparent to me that "Magnen Bar" was sent to Leo's Graveyard. In the movie, Yusei gained control of "Stardust Dragon" thanks to Yugi. When Paradox tried to inflict damage via the effect of "Malefic Truth Dragon", Yusei Tributes "Stardust Dragon" to negate the effect and destroy "Malefic Truth Dragon", however Paradox saves his monster before it could be destroyed. On Paradox's End Phase, "Stardust Dragon" was revived onto Yusei's side of the field. In reality, that can't happen because "Stardust Dragon" was Paradox's card at the timing. This was explained in the Notes section of the movie page.Cardsknower (talk • contribs) 03:04, November 25, 2012 (UTC)Cardsknower


 * I'm still not understanding the first point. For the movie, that was the "bond between Duelist and card" motif in full effect. It wasn't rulings thing, it was "Stardust" actively deciding to come back to Yusei. Paradox was the card's "owner" in game terms, so yes, it should have revived to his side of the field. But Yusei owned the card otherwise and "Stardust" came back due to their "bond". It's just something that's going to happen in the anime sometimes. Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 12:13, November 25, 2012 (UTC)


 * That may be, but this isn't the first time something like this happened. In the Duel between Yami Yugi and Yami Marik, the former took the latter's "Monster Reborn". Yami Yugi then activated "Monster Reborn" to revive "Queen's Knight". "Monster Reborn" then went to Yami Yugi's Graveyard despite the fact it was Marik's card. Marik later took back the card via "Zombie's Jewel". Marik then activated "Monster Reborn" to bring back "The Winged Dragon of Ra". When that happened, "Monster Reborn" went to Marik's Graveyard like it should have been. This Duel did happen in Yugi's time, so I guess the Duelists had to follow those rulings for the most part.Cardsknower (talk • contribs) 15:47, November 25, 2012 (UTC)Cardsknower

Episode 181 and Critias
I noticed that Yami Yugi was able to remove "The Fang of Critias" even though it was in Kaiba's Graveyard. However this could imply to me that all the cards in Kaiba's Graveyard went to Yami Yugi's after Kaiba lost. This was probably just something exclusive for the second series anime for simple dramatic effect.Cardsknower (talk • contribs) 05:03, November 25, 2012 (UTC)Cardsknower


 * You could argue that they shared a single Graveyard, even though there were two Graveyard Zones. Something similiar happened in the final chapters of the GX manga. I wouldn't worry about it. Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 12:13, November 25, 2012 (UTC)

Masked Doll?
I forget... Did our long conversation do anything to change the status of the English anime lore of "Masked Doll"? I ask this because it might mean that all anime-exclusive cards might need direct translations from what the Japanese lore says. --UltimateKuriboh (talk • contribs) 07:26, November 25, 2012 (UTC)


 * I asked Ryusui to translate that one a while back. What's currently there should be accurate. Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 12:13, November 25, 2012 (UTC)

Regarding Nac
Few days back you asked me if i had a NAC account. Well i decided to make one after that and my username there is "Neo Ray Veiss".--Supratim1986 (talk • contribs) 07:38, November 26, 2012 (UTC)

Fire King Beast Yaksha
how come only this card has its name changed and not the other Fire Kings: Quilin and Barong? They have similar names. 70.79.84.206 (talk) 06:28, November 28, 2012 (UTC)


 * Because I didn't notice they had also been moved, since they weren't on my watchlist (incidentally, I have no idea why Yaksha was on my watchlist) Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 13:04, November 28, 2012 (UTC)


 * If they're wrong about this archetype too, I suggest we stop using them as an official source. Mad Rest 17:56, November 29, 2012 (UTC)


 * Not the eventual TCG name =/= unofficial. Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 18:14, November 29, 2012 (UTC)


 * Any source, official or not, would lose its credibility if it's wrong 70% of the time. Just because they say so doesn't mean that we should immediately take it for true, considering they've been wrong so many times. Mad Rest 20:23, November 29, 2012 (UTC)


 * They are an official source. That's the end of the discussion. Just because they're wrong [PERCENTAGE] of the time doesn't change it. 「 ディノ 奴 千？！ 」? · ☎ Dinoguy1000 20:27, November 29, 2012 (UTC)


 * Even if they're official, if we know they're going to be wrong, there's no reason to follow what they say. Mad Rest 20:31, November 29, 2012 (UTC)


 * OMG, Konami is wrong! Kevin's right, let's get effect activating from Sangan when he detached from Xyz Monster! Let's not activating Dandylion's effect when detached or threw from the Deck into the Graveyard! Oh, shut the heck up, Sénior D and accept the fact. You're act like Fi from Legend of Zelda: Skyward Sword. -- i  F  r  e  d  C  a  t  20:35, November 29, 2012 (UTC)


 * But we don't know that they'll be wrong. They've been right more often than they've been wrong, first off. Them having been wrong int he past does not automatically mean they'll be wrong in the future. Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 23:59, November 29, 2012 (UTC)


 * I was sarcasm. -- i  F  r  e  d  C  a  t  00:17, November 30, 2012 (UTC)


 * I was talking to Master D, but screwed up the indentation. Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 00:36, November 30, 2012 (UTC)


 * Fix'd, better now, Cheesy? -- i  F  r  e  d  C  a  t  00:43, November 30, 2012 (UTC)


 * Can you offer some examples? I don't remember them being right. Mad Rest 16:03, November 30, 2012 (UTC)


 * I repeated what I said once, "I was sarcasm"! -- i  F  r  e  d  C  a  t  16:05, November 30, 2012 (UTC)


 * On what examples were they wrong? I can recall Gustav Max and Heaven's Strings. I don't recall them having any other card names, wrong, though I could be misremembering. The fact is, when a name that might be wrong from an official source is all we have, that's what we should go with. There are some cards that use different names in the dub and then get a new name in the TCG. We don't ignore the dub just because "they might be wrong". We can't ignore this site either. Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 16:20, November 30, 2012 (UTC)


 * Adding in Cheesy's explanation, they were just a translation that they can change, like the one I did in my own talk page. That was just common knowledge before Konami's official printed names releasing. It happened all of the time, just chill down, Sénior D, k? -- i  F  r  e  d  C  a  t  16:23, November 30, 2012 (UTC)

Photon Thrasher
Since its japanese name can also mean its TCG Name as well as its Translated name, I'm wondering, should that translated parameter be changed to "Alternate" instead? I asked Ryusui about the translated name and he came to the same conclusion I did, that Photon Slasher and Thrasher are both valid translations. The name cannot be translated into any other names from what I'm aware of. I'm not familiar with how these parameters work, so I'd rather consult someone to avoid doing something stupid. Neos01 (talk • contribs) 17:27, November 28, 2012 (UTC)
 * If "Thrasher" is valid and that's what the TCG went with, I would say it was the intended translation and the parameter can simply be removed altogether. We shouldn't use "altname" for unofficial names. Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 17:36, November 28, 2012 (UTC)


 * Ok, I'll remove the parameter. I just hope I can avoid a war with Master D. Neos01 (talk • contribs) 17:40, November 28, 2012 (UTC)


 * When it enters the field, there is a slashing animation on a black screen in the anime... Mad Rest 17:52, November 29, 2012 (UTC)


 * And? Could you not "thrash" while slashing something? Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 17:56, November 29, 2012 (UTC)

Stupid Viz
So, I just bought some English volumes of Yu-Gi-Oh! manga, including volumes 7, 8 and 9 of GX. Viz just messes everything up. In one single volume, for example, they call Johan by 3 names: Johan, Johann and Jesse. The same happens to other characters and the worse for us: cards. For example, Amon's "Sealed Beasts". In volume 7, when he Tag-Duels Asuka and Misawa, they are called "Sealed Beasts", but when he later duels Judai, they're called "Forbidden Beasts". So, what should we do? We name 'em "Sealed" or "Forbidden"? :/ LegendaryAsariUgetsu (talk • contribs) 17:48, November 29, 2012 (UTC)


 * Leave them at Forbidden. One, its less work moving all the stuff again and it was used later. Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 17:56, November 29, 2012 (UTC)


 * Like with Kalin still called them "Purgatory" while their card counterpart still used the TCG name "Infernity". Manga are all non-sense like that, so I would better let them going to "Forbidden" unless further evidence are adding. -- i  F  r  e  d  C  a  t  18:52, November 29, 2012 (UTC)


 * Awright. And for exceptional cases, I just add "|manganame =" (if the manga name differs from the TCG name) or "|altname =" (if it has multiple names or a mistaken name), right? Just to be sure. LegendaryAsariUgetsu (talk • contribs) 23:05, November 29, 2012 (UTC)


 * Yes. Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 23:59, November 29, 2012 (UTC)

New User, I guess...
Would you mind moving the post on this page to the Forums, and informing User:Otokoshiro what Talk pages are for? I would try to move the page myself, but idk how. Or is it just a matter of simply deleting the page (or removing content and placing deletion request template, in my case) and copy/pasting the content to the Forums? --UltimateKuriboh (talk • contribs) 22:17, November 29, 2012 (UTC)


 * You should be able to move the page just as you would any other. I'll look into it though. Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 23:59, November 29, 2012 (UTC)


 * Thing is, I don't know how to move pages. The closest thing I know is "renaming." Would you mind telling me how, or referring me to page that explains how? Anyways, Falzar kinda resolved the situation, but I'm still interested if it comes up again. --UltimateKuriboh (talk • contribs) 00:04, November 30, 2012 (UTC)


 * Moving and renaming are the same thing. Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 00:05, November 30, 2012 (UTC)


 * And also to moving the article without making a redirect; unmarked "Leave the redirect behind" line so all other Admins would not have an issue to strangling the fake one off. -- i  F  r  e  d  C  a  t  00:19, November 30, 2012 (UTC)

Duel
Hello! I am PhoenixRa1237! You want to duel? Contact me on my page if you do. PhoenixRa1237 (talk • contribs) 00:43, November 30, 2012 (UTC)


 * I don't Duel. Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 00:45, November 30, 2012 (UTC)

Spell Transfer
The text beforehand is also supposition. You can't prove either lore as correct. Mine, however, is closer to how the card would work, as there has been consistency on when cards of that category have been activated.--TwoTailedFox (My Talk Page) 02:20, November 30, 2012 (UTC)


 * Yes, we can't actually see the text. But gameplay simply does not work that way in Battle City. We should not act as if anime card effects work the same as in the real game. Especially back in DM, they didn't. A card effect worded as if it was a real card has no place there. Yes, the effects are retroactively negated, but we should not have to say that - that's just how it worked in Battle City. Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 02:25, November 30, 2012 (UTC)


 * Why not put up the banner about the one that you don't get the exact lore, like the one in Anime? -- i  F  r  e  d  C  a  t  02:29, November 30, 2012 (UTC)


 * Didn't even notice that wasn't there. Added. Thanks, Fred. Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 02:31, November 30, 2012 (UTC)


 * Can we at least agree that, as the original text was based on it being a Quick-Play Spell Card (information to the contrary wasn't available at the time, I suspect), that we should at least modify the activation conditions to ''Activate only during a turn where your opponent has activated a Spell Card"; I'm happy for it to be assumed the negation is retroactive.--TwoTailedFox (My Talk Page) 02:33, November 30, 2012 (UTC)


 * Glad to helping. ^_^ -- i  F  r  e  d  C  a  t  02:36, November 30, 2012 (UTC)


 * I have no problem with that part. For the record, we've significantly changed how we handle anime card lores since you were last really active. If we can get a translation of the actual text, that's what we go with. Manga cards in particular have been changed quite a lot. I can dig up some of the old discussions that resulted in the changes if you want more info. Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 02:38, November 30, 2012 (UTC)
 * Would be appreciated. I'd already seen the template used, and assumed without the text, the closest guess based on gameplay would be used.--TwoTailedFox (My Talk Page) 02:39, November 30, 2012 (UTC)


 * Right, the template helps out a lot. There's some discussion on the subject here and here and then another exchange here here and here. There's probably some more around somewhere, but those are the discussions I recall off the top of my head. Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 02:50, November 30, 2012 (UTC)


 * I can see where the confusion has come from, they were formatting changes I used when I was still a heavy editor, but I made no formal written observation of it. My original intention would be to maintain the original anime and manga lores (including old deprecated terms, as they would have still been in use in the media in question), and have a separate English lore, detailing how the card lore would look following today's format changes. I regret not making a formal note of that.--TwoTailedFox (My Talk Page) 02:54, November 30, 2012 (UTC)


 * I personally don't mind documenting an "updated" version somewhere, but I'm not sure it should go on the actual card article pages, since that kind of implies its the "real" version. The deprecated terms are a particular pet peeve of mind. As far as I'm concerned, the words "Extra Deck" should be nowhere near DM and GX articles and the term "banish" should be nowhere but ZEXAL. However, I don't like the idea of maintaining "TCGished" versions of really old Duelist Kingdom anime/manga cards anywhere at all. As I said in one of those links, those card don't have valid YGO lores, we shouldn't act like they do. Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 03:00, November 30, 2012 (UTC)
 * I'm actually in agreement with you on the first point. We can use the Card Lores namespace to list a "Here's what X's Lore would look like in the modern game". How many Duelist Kingdom cards would be affected by your second point?--TwoTailedFox (My Talk Page) 03:04, November 30, 2012 (UTC)

(arbitrary indent reset) I've suggested that myself, but others seemed to disagree. My second point would affect any card played in DK, not just anime only cards. The anime/manga lore parameters of released cards shouldn't act as if the cards were the same either. So really, it would be most DK-era Spells and Traps and the few monsters that had effects. Fusion Monsters are of particular concern - they were not cards in DK (or BC, as far as I know. Doma did show actual Fusion Monster Cards). They were just fused forms of monsters. Toon monsters were also not cards. Just "transformed cards". There are literally zero occurrences of a Toon monster card appearing in Duelist Kingdom. Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 03:09, November 30, 2012 (UTC)


 * We can probably iterate this in a forum post, it should just be a case of deciding on a layout that we would use to document these entities. We can use " (DK)" as a suffix for the articles themselves, and they can be linked to on cards that saw OCG/TCG iterations of aforementioned entities.--TwoTailedFox (My Talk Page) 03:12, November 30, 2012 (UTC)


 * You mean restricting the anime/manga lores to separate articles? I really don't like that idea at all. Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 03:15, November 30, 2012 (UTC)


 * In that case, it would then be a matter of deciding how to word the "non-card" entities on their existing pages.--TwoTailedFox (My Talk Page) 03:35, November 30, 2012 (UTC)


 * I'm not quite sure I'm grasping what you're saying. Can't we just use the animelore and mangalore parameters like we are now. Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 03:42, November 30, 2012 (UTC)


 * If I may interject, I'd like to point out that the card article redesign will see the anime/manga info split out from the OCG/TCG info (and from each other), which will give somewhat more freedom in handling this stuff, I think. =) 「 ディノ 奴 千？！ 」? · ☎ Dinoguy1000 05:29, November 30, 2012 (UTC)


 * True, and I'm quite looking forward to that, though it would be nice to get his hammered out in the interim nonetheless. Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 13:34, November 30, 2012 (UTC)

"Treasure Cards"
Today, when I saw the artwork "Charm of Lamentation" and saw it was similar to the artwork of "Card of Sanctity". Eventually, I realized there are at least 5 cards out that have "Treasure Cards" included in their Japanese names. (I'm not sure if the kanji is different though, but that's what the literal translations of the names provide.) They are "Charm of Lamentation", "Card of Sanctity", "Card of Sacrifice", "Card of Safe Return", and "Card of Demise". There may be more, but I don't know how to search up cards based on the kanji in their Japanese names (like DinoGuy1000 did when he created the page for the "Hand" archetype). Anyways, I think "Treasure Cards" qualifies as a series, as they all revolve around drawing cards. Wondering if you could create it? Feeling a bit unsure of myself on how to make such a page. --UltimateKuriboh (talk • contribs) 00:17, December 2, 2012 (UTC)


 * There are instructions on how to do so somewhere on Dinoguy's userpage. Yes, that does sound like a series to me. There's also "Treasure Cards of Adversity", "Treasure Cards of Magic Sealing", "Card of Variation" and "Card of Reversal". Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 00:24, December 2, 2012 (UTC)


 * Specifically, here, though Delt pointed out a simpler way to search on my talk page:  in the "Query" box on Special:Ask, and be sure to stick a   in the "Additional data to display" box so you can actually see and compare the Japanese names of the cards it turns up. You may or may not want to also include the relevant kana in the query, or additional data in the "Additional data" box, to help narrow results faster - e.g. in this case. 「 ディノ 奴  千？！ 」? · ☎ Dinoguy1000 09:35, December 2, 2012 (UTC)

Manga Image Policy
The Image Policy page doesn't say how to name files of cards from the original manga, and as there are 2 anime series based on it, I'm not sure on how to name the files. Should they contain "-DM" after "Manga", or just "Manga"? For example, "EyeofDeception-JP-Manga" or "EyeofDeception-JP-Manga-DM"? LegendaryAsariUgetsu (talk • contribs) 00:04, December 4, 2012 (UTC)


 * No one knows. Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 00:06, December 4, 2012 (UTC)

English doubt
I've always had this doubt when writing summaries. What's the right one: "He replies saying that XXX" or "He replies XXX"? I guess it's the first one? :P LegendaryAsariUgetsu (talk • contribs) 21:19, December 5, 2012 (UTC)


 * Both are correct as far as I know, though I would change the first to "he replies by saying that XXX". Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 23:51, December 5, 2012 (UTC)

Images on chapter articles
So, I'm now starting to add images to the articles of the manga chapters (although I'll do it slowly due to lack of free time, but anyway). So, I started with Yu-Gi-Oh! ZEXAL - Rank 002, which also still needed a full summary, so I added both the summary and the pics, but... the outcome wasn't very good. *__*' Maybe it's too crowded in the end, but I personally find all those pics important, so dunno. They also make the text get all together, like, killing the paragraphs. Any tips to improve that? :P If I'm not mistaken we already talked 'bout this a while ago, but I'm still stupidly bad on it, sorry. *__*' LegendaryAsariUgetsu (talk • contribs) 23:10, December 5, 2012 (UTC)


 * I've had problems with images in episode/chapter articles in the past and continue to have them today. It's difficult to get the images in the right way without killing the paragraphs, as you said. For the specific chapter you're talking about, I have only two suggestions. One is to remove the image of Yuma losing hope, I don't think that's too important. The other is to make the summary longer, which can be particularly difficult for manga articles since we have full text readouts for them. Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 23:51, December 5, 2012 (UTC)


 * Guess I'll remove the image you said then. There's no way I can make the summary longer 'cause, as you advised me once, I write down every word a character says. :P Well, guess it can't be helped. I'll let 'em as they are, it's not as if this damaged the article considerably. LegendaryAsariUgetsu (talk • contribs) 00:07, December 6, 2012 (UTC)

Summary needed
Can you input an episode summary for episodes 48 and 81 of Yu-Gi-Oh! ZEXAL?

On another note, there was something about some of the anime card lores. Because of how they are shown, some of them don't say certain things that occur in the anime itself. UltimateKuriboh has been going around the pages and literally translating the lores if possible. The only problem is that this eliminates a couple of things that the anime characters clearly do with the card(s). Even though he made small notes on the cards that tell users not to add or change anything on the lores, I don't think all users will follow this. I think we need a new template that says that one part of the card's anime lore was not actually written in the anime lore and what was written was what occurred in the anime. Reply when possible.Cardsknower (talk • contribs) 01:05, December 6, 2012 (UTC)Cardsknower


 * I'm sort of burned-out doing summaries right now. I'm taking a break unless a new episode airs that I really want to watch again. Misael's episodes may just be that, but I don't know yet. All told, it takes about two and a half hours to do a full summary for one episode.
 * I think the issue is that the words "lore" and "effect" have always been used interchangeably, when they are not the same thing. A "lore" is what the card says, an "effect" is what the card does. The lores should document just that - what the card says. The episode articles can document what the card does - which would be the lore plus anything else the card did that wasn't written. Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 01:16, December 6, 2012 (UTC)

ZEXAL
Cheesedude I like how you fix my sentence in the errors of Yugioh! Zexal Episode 79 so that it makes more sense. I was watching episode 79 when I noticed that Chaos Xyz: Furious Flower Battleship, Taoyame had 2 overlay units instead of 3. Signed Six Sam Xyz--192.248.248.215 (talk) 04:39, December 6, 2012 (UTC)

Also Cheesedude thanks for pointing out my mistake on my edit in Yugioh Zexal Episode 1. I understand now why the cards I edited shouldn't be in itlaics. Signed Six Sam Xyz--192.248.248.215 (talk) 04:46, December 6, 2012 (UTC)


 * No problem. Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 04:48, December 6, 2012 (UTC)

Glitch
Odd stuff... when editing the "Amazoness Arena" and "Amazoness Trainer" pages, I deleted the "Hide Factbox" template, not knowing its use. It ended up glitching the whole right side of the page, shoving it underneath the card article. I fixed both pages, but am also wondering if there is some old stuff on the card pages that could be fixed, so the "Hide Factbox" template doesn't need to exist there anymore. --UltimateKuriboh (talk • contribs) 02:16, December 7, 2012 (UTC)


 * Dinoguy can tell you more, but Hide Factbox has to used when the Japanese name is long enough that it would end going outside the factbox on the bottom of the page. When that happens, the whole page glitches a bit. There is no known way to fix it, at all. Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 03:04, December 7, 2012 (UTC)


 * Probably been discussed before, but is it possible that the image size of the picture could be reduced? Or is it just a matter of the card table's limits? (P.S. I left you a message on the "other" wikia, and I'd appreciate if you could do it right away.) --UltimateKuriboh (talk • contribs) 03:15, December 7, 2012 (UTC)


 * It's got nothing to do with the image, its the Japanese text. It typically happens with cards that already have long names that then have to include Ruby. Got your message and responded there, its been handled. Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 03:22, December 7, 2012 (UTC)


 * As Cheesedude said, Hide Factbox hides the SMW Factbox that appears at the bottom of any page with SMW properties, and is used specifically when the Japanese name contains Ruby markup that causes page breakage. The breakage itself is caused because SMW automatically shortens property values over a given length in the factbox, but does so without working around markup, and when this is done with Ruby markup, it can result in invalid markup that breaks the whole page (this is the same thing that you might occasionally see on forums where the software is poorly designed/tested and someone does something wonky with the [quote] tags, or where the forum software supports [table] markup but again this functionality isn't handled properly). There's nothing we can do short of hiding the whole factbox to fix this breakage when it happens, though Delt has brought up the idea of hiding the factboxes on all pages, since most readers don't need that information in that form; if we do this (and I agree that we probably should), it will obviate the need for Hide Factbox.
 * The size of any individual card image can be reduced via the "width" parameter, but as Cheesedude said, the image size has nothing to do with the page breakage. In addition, the maximum size was already reduced from 400 to 300 pixels after the deployment of the Wikia skin; it won't be getting reduced further, and may in fact be increased a bit in the course of the card article redesign. 「 ディノ 奴 千？！ 」? · ☎ Dinoguy1000 03:33, December 7, 2012 (UTC)

Judai in Ra Yellow
This was the reason why Judai was in there for "temporary". But I agreed with ya, he never pick up Yellow overcoat nor ever placed his foot in that dorm at all so it's just an unnecessary notice. -- i  F  r  e  d  C  a  t  03:17, December 7, 2012 (UTC)


 * Oh, that. No, that doesn't count. I also managed to read "episode" as "season" somehow, which is why episode 4 didn't even occur to me. Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 03:22, December 7, 2012 (UTC)


 * I know, at least I give you an evidence of why it was listing. Though it's there, it's still wrong - Judai never go there anyways. Enjoy the good sleep night! -- i  F  r  e  d  C  a  t  03:38, December 7, 2012 (UTC)

Re:Changes to The English Version
Hey Cheesedude How Come We Dont Add Changes to The English Version Anymore And Let All The Episodes Remain Without It Anymore We Dont Need it anymore or What? Confuse Me? (ZombieLionel (talk • contribs) 15:28, December 8, 2012 (UTC))


 * It should be in the actual summary in parenthesis, not in a separate section. If there is no summary, putting it in a seperate section suffices until a summary is added. Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 00:10, December 9, 2012 (UTC)

The effect of "Earthbound Immortal Ccapac Apu"
The rulings for this card say it's the original ATK of the destroyed monster, but in the anime when this card's effect activated, it was about to inflict 2500 damage to Yusei(when Yusei activates "Burst Synchro Summon" to nullify the damage, he summoned "Stardust Dragon" to the field, making it apparent that the damage was going to be 2500). Shouldn't the anime lore say total ATK instead of just ATK? Reply when you can.Cardsknower (talk • contribs) 17:07, December 8, 2012 (UTC)
 * Rulings were ignored in this case, and I think Konami will later update the lore to PSCT standards, saying "Inflict damage to your opponent equal to the original ATK of the destroyed monster." If the anime lore was ever updated to PSCT standards, it would look something like "Inflict damage to your opponent equal to the destroyed monster's ATK on the field." The anime lore is vague enough for it to be interpreted as the latter interpretation. (Note: The latter interpretation was based on "Catapult Turtle".) --UltimateKuriboh (talk • contribs) 19:13, December 8, 2012 (UTC)
 * Actually I just noticed a difference the TCG/OCG effect of "Ccapac Apu" was similar to the effect of "Elemental HERO Flame Wingman"(it says 'destroyed monster's ATK, meaning their original ATK). You are right the anime effect of "Ccapac Apu" was similar to the effect of "Catapult Turtle" as it says 'to inflict damage to your opponent equal to that monster's ATK' which would make it current ATK as "Catapult Turtle" has done in both the real card game and the anime. Because the anime effect doesn't say destroyed monster, it inflict "Junk Warrior's" total ATK instead of its original ATK.Cardsknower (talk • contribs) 21:32, December 8, 2012 (UTC)

Yu-Gi-Oh! BAM
Would it be possible to get the information on Yu-Gi-Oh! BAM cards included in the card article itself via CardTable2? That way, we can just run a query on the cards, instead of just continually adding to a very long article.--TwoTailedFox (My Talk Page) 19:29, December 8, 2012 (UTC)


 * That idea's already been kicked around some; the main BAM editors agreed to wait for the card article redesign instead of having me pile ever more complexity on top of CardTable2 (I'm also waiting on the redesign to add support for the old Japanese DM games that aren't currently supported). My current work on supporting BAM in the redesign is at BAM card article, though it's currently broken since I haven't updated it to work with the latest version of Card table yet. 「 ディノ 奴 千？！ 」? · ☎ Dinoguy1000 19:34, December 8, 2012 (UTC)


 * I've come up with concept that works, it doesn't add *too* much complexity, since it just uses the video game section at the bottom. SMW Property names might need working on, though.--TwoTailedFox (My Talk Page) 20:13, December 8, 2012 (UTC)


 * So I saw. That will probably work well enough as a patch until the redesign is ready to be deployed (especially since we don't have any sort of timeline for that to happen yet), though I'm kind of leery about ending up more-or-less locked in to parameter/property names (the parameter names aren't so bad, since the redesign deployment will require a more-or-less complete rewrite of all card pages anyways, but it's still problematic if people get too accustomed to the temporary parameter names - at the least, BAM card article will have to check for the parameters and add a tracking category if they get used; property names are much worse because we have to track - or track down - all uses of a given property in queries anywhere on the site (as a result, I've been generally pretty cautious about renaming properties in general)). 「 ディノ 奴 千？！ 」? · ☎ Dinoguy1000 20:55, December 8, 2012 (UTC)


 * I have no idea why this was posted here, I know nothing about BAM at all. However, feel free to continue to use my talk page for this conversation if you wish. Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 00:09, December 9, 2012 (UTC)

Arc question
This is starting to bother me enough that it's becoming annoying, but shouldn't we change the Divine Temple headors in character articles to Ark Cradle. What the Ark Cradle itself was called in the dub doesn't matter, the Ark itself is still the same (it was not dubbed, just as GX season 4 wasn't, so the heador shouldn't be saying Divine Temple). It doesn't help when users revert with no reason ether. I would have brought this on the Ark Cradle Arc talk page, but it doesn't seem to work) Shardsilver (talk • contribs) 19:44, December 10, 2012 (UTC)


 * Yes, it should say "Ark Cradle". I've changed them back in the past, but I haven't kept on top of it if Divine Temple is cropping up again. Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 22:14, December 10, 2012 (UTC)

Polymerization Card Appearances
I noticed the editing on Polymerization and it relates to the "Polymerization" Rebecca had in her hand. How I can write this edit in a way that it will not be deleted?Cardsknower (talk • contribs) 01:16, December 11, 2012 (UTC)


 * You can't. If it wasn't shown being discarded, it doesn't count, even with process of elimination. Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 01:17, December 11, 2012 (UTC)


 * Okay, but I had this thought of just saying 'discarded at an unspecified point' or 'unknown means' because we know it left her hand, but it didn't show so. I just made this thought since it would be a neutral point(I was reading the Card Appearances page of "Elemental HERO Clayman" and noticed the part about "Clayman" being sent to the Graveyard through unknown means during the Supreme King's Duel with Axel is still there.). This is just a thought, so it might not be agreeable with you or Fredcat.Cardsknower (talk • contribs) 01:40, December 11, 2012 (UTC)


 * That sounds fine. Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 01:43, December 11, 2012 (UTC)


 * I placed it in, but Fredcat100 because he claimed there is no source required. I don't what to do that will convince him into showing that edit was a bit more neutral than the other edit.Cardsknower (talk • contribs) 03:03, December 11, 2012 (UTC)


 * Like I told him in my own talk page - does Judai won the duel against Yugi in this episode? The result is conflict and unclearly so we couldn't prove his victory or defeat, it just cut off as Neos jump and kick Osiris in the face. So to confirm this, I am put that reason on this part - the card that Rebecca discarded was not showing, therefore never confirm to be "Polymerization" or other card, it is still unknown since the duel ended before we got a chance to see her hand at that time. So better off just "discard a card", rather than threw the stink towel by say that it was "Polymerization". -- i  F  r  e  d  C  a  t  18:09, December 11, 2012 (UTC)


 * He changed it to "it was discarded at an unknown point". And we can confirm that much - it was discarded, we just can't confirm when. Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 18:17, December 11, 2012 (UTC)


 * Still, Not confirmed = not post. -- i  F  r  e  d  C  a  t  18:19, December 11, 2012 (UTC)


 * No, part of it is confirmed and we can document that part - and only that part. Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 18:21, December 11, 2012 (UTC)


 * Did she said "Polymerization" any time after she drew it? -- i  F  r  e  d  C  a  t  18:26, December 11, 2012 (UTC)


 * I don't know. The point is that it was shown to be in her hand and it later was not in her hand. Therefore, it was discarded, we just don't know. Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 18:27, December 11, 2012 (UTC)


 * Exact, you don't know, so don't bother put it in unless source proved it. I am repeat what Goldy always say; Speculation Information, no need to add it in. What happened to her hand afterward don't matter as long as it don't show. If it does show second time after that point you mentioned, then we can put it in. I am not repeat myself for 500th times! -- i  F  r  e  d  C  a  t  22:58, December 11, 2012 (UTC)


 * Her hand actually was shown briefly after. This was when she ordered her "Diamond Head Dragon" to attack Leon's "Globerman" in episode 193. The original version incorrectly showed "Diamond Head Dragon" instead of "Dragon's Rage". The dub got it right though. When Rebecca activated "Rope of Life", she revealed she had no cards in her hand, so she didn't have to discard anything. By the time she set "Dragon's Rage" face-down, she had no cards in her hand again.Cardsknower (talk • contribs) 23:09, December 11, 2012 (UTC)


 * Then that made a sense, why not do that in the first place? The early explanation was terrible - horrible as poop. -- i  F  r  e  d  C  a  t  23:27, December 11, 2012 (UTC)


 * Despite it making sense now to you now, I want to wait for Cheesedude's say so on this. I am outmatched by two votes to one for the moment and even though that's enough proof for you to show "Polymerization" left Rebecca's hand, I want to wait till everyone here comes to a full agreement.Cardsknower (talk • contribs) 23:35, December 11, 2012 (UTC)


 * Well, my instinct was like a spider-sense, it knew that you had a trouble make the explain clearly enough to prove it. My sixth sense was waiting for you to give an enough explanation of the reason why Rebecca threw "Polymerization" out with more details than just "Meh! I guess she discarded it via this trap card's effect! Bah!" example. The recently respond of your (which was set on time [23:09]) was much better summary than the old one. You're welcome to put the new, full summary of Rebecca and her "Polymerization" discarding in there instead. -- i  F  r  e  d  C  a  t  23:41, December 11, 2012 (UTC)


 * Wait was this, the 'unknown point' summary or the other one? Because you confused me on this. There is also one more thing to mention. The two cards Rebecca drew on her last two Draw Phases were "Tribute to the Doomed" and "Stamping Destruction"(though exactly when is unknown to me). By the beginning of episode 193, the only card remaining in Rebecca's hand would be "Adamantine Sword Revival"(as that was in her opening hand in episode 192).Cardsknower (talk • contribs) 00:25, December 12, 2012 (UTC)


 * I was still pointing to "Card Appearance:Polymerization", which was mistake of your. Your most recently comment was little... off from the rest of the topic. Please get back on the topic if you can. You can read again and again to see if your brain arranged right. -- i  F  r  e  d  C  a  t  00:32, December 12, 2012 (UTC)

(reset indent)If you word it the way it was worded before FredCat reverted, I have no problem with it. Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 01:10, December 12, 2012 (UTC)


 * Oh because I was going to make a mention of "Tribute to the Doomed" in that page since I was able to get into an agreement on Fredcat about that card. I assume you wouldn't want that because the card discarded for the cost of "Tribute to the Doomed" wasn't shown despite some of the proof I had given out.Cardsknower (talk • contribs) 01:59, December 12, 2012 (UTC)


 * No, that shouldn't be there. I was still talking about "Polymerization". Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 02:08, December 12, 2012 (UTC)


 * There ya go, we are still talking about "Polymerization" - where are your brain when it come to "Tribute to the Doomed"? -- i  F  r  e  d  C  a  t  02:18, December 12, 2012 (UTC)


 * Let me rephrase this so it makes sense. I was actually rereading the revision history of "Polymerization" when I was doing this. I was going to write that "Polymerization" was discarded for the cost of "Tribute to the Doomed" on the Card Appearances page part relating to the events in episode 192. However since the card discarded for "Tribute to the Doomed" was not shown, I am afraid of Cheesedude will revert that edit when I try to edit it. However, in my own opinion, I think I have found enough proof that the card discarded was "Polymerization".Cardsknower (talk • contribs) 02:30, December 12, 2012 (UTC)


 * I wouldn't revert it, but I do disagree with it. That said, I can seen where you're coming from. There is evidence, I'm just convinced its enough. Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 02:45, December 12, 2012 (UTC)


 * I am agreeing with that, my instinct seemed to calming down because he stretched the explanation. That's what is the matter now. Next time, if you put up the details of the card's "unknown" location or appearance, do the same way as you had done with this thread - not "Derp She threw it away Hurr". -- i  F  r  e  d  C  a  t  02:46, December 12, 2012 (UTC)

Episode 56 and "Junk Barrage"
Did "Junk Barrage" appear in this episode because I can't seem to find it. Reply when you can do so.Cardsknower (talk • contribs) 00:26, December 12, 2012 (UTC)


 * I don't know. I'll check in a bit. Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 01:10, December 12, 2012 (UTC)


 * ZingerZheng added it. It would ask him, he's usually pretty good at card identification, right? Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 01:26, December 12, 2012 (UTC)


 * ZingerZheng hasn't been online since early November. I suggest we go to Winternightmare since he probably is much better at card identification. Just my suggestion though.Cardsknower (talk • contribs) 05:17, December 12, 2012 (UTC)


 * That's fine. Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 14:02, December 12, 2012 (UTC)

Crashsnake and his newer edits
Crashsnake is still editing pages the way he usually does for the most part. I know this is a very old issue, but he is still doing it. I don't think reasoning with him will help anymore. What do you think we should do.Cardsknower (talk • contribs) 01:17, December 13, 2012 (UTC)

Thor and Granal Top's anime effect
Should we add in Thor's anime lore that monster effects cannot be activated in response to it's effect? Scar-Red nova dragon and Shooting Star dragons remove effects are the same, but Jack didn't do it when Brave used Thor's effect to negate Scar Red nova's (if he was able to remove Scar-Red nova dragon at the time, he would have). Another thing is Jack actually did remove his dragon in 132, yet Jose still negated it with Granal Top (when he had already removed it off the field). I know anime kind of jumps the gun sometimes, but should something be added to those two lores, or a simple note in those two episodes? Shardsilver (talk • contribs) 01:56, December 13, 2012 (UTC)


 * Episodes yes. Cards, no, unless the Japanese lore supports it. Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 01:59, December 13, 2012 (UTC)

Main page
UltimateKuriboh said that i have to tlak to you before i made edit to main page so this is my work, http://yugioh.wikia.com/wiki/Main_Page?oldid=2272242. what do think should that be layout of main page. Avatarr (talk • contribs) 06:39, December 13, 2012 (UTC)


 * I think you should start a topic about this at Talk:Main Page. It's not just my opinion that matters. That being said, I like the banner at the top and the character box layout, but I'm not fond of the scrolling bar thing. Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 16:07, December 13, 2012 (UTC)


 * It seems you've already done that. I've responded there as well. :) Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 16:12, December 13, 2012 (UTC)

Effect
I will leave them in-place, then. Just a habit back when I used to see them a lot more.--TwoTailedFox (My Talk Page) 23:34, December 13, 2012 (UTC)

"Overlay"
Meh... I knew that already =/. Thing is, I'm a bit hesitant about creating such a page, because all the "Overlay" cards I'm seeing seem to have effects involving Xyz Materials all over the place. Some have effects that detach Xyz Materials, effects that detach Xyz Materials as a cost, effects that rely on the Xyz Monster having no Xyz Materials, effects that rely on the Xyz Monster having Xyz Material, etc. In other words, they are very loosely based on Xyz Materials, and their artworks generally have either Xyz Material or an Xyz Monster featured in them. It doesn't seem consistent enough (as of now). --UltimateKuriboh (talk • contribs) 00:01, December 14, 2012 (UTC)


 * Yeah, I'm not sure how we'd word it on the page. I'm not really interested in creating the page myself either. Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 00:12, December 14, 2012 (UTC)

Duel Summaries
I need help here. There is some 24.5.186.140 who is changing the Duel summaries. An example is shown here. He/She seems to be capitalizing the word "draw" and adding stat changes similar to the Life Point changes. In my opinion, this is an old style of episode summaries, since they are no longer used in future episode summaries in the ZEXAL and 5Ds eras. Is there a policy thing that can be presented to this user to stop him/her? Or should there be one constructed? -_- I understand he is somewhat known for his edits to card appearances (and possibly Duel summaries). --UltimateKuriboh (talk • contribs) 00:16, December 14, 2012 (UTC)


 * The stat changes are a personal thing that I don't do because I think they're unnecessary. I don't see a problem presenting them in parenthesis instead of prose if that's what whoever writing it wants to do. Draw shouldn't be capitalized though. I went ahead and just linked him over to the Manual of style. Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 00:19, December 14, 2012 (UTC)


 * I already got your message. It won't happen again when I edit another Duel Summary(I will input the word 'draw' in lowercase letters next time).24.5.186.140 (talk) 00:37, December 14, 2012 (UTC)


 * If you feel like it, I would like to discuss this over the live chat. Cardsknower should be coming (and hopefully that other user), and I would like it if you came, but if it disinterests you too much, it's okay. --UltimateKuriboh (talk • contribs) 01:15, December 14, 2012 (UTC)

Small message
I was following some of the way the anonymous contributor was editing the Duel pages, but it wasn't that frequent. Occasionally players may play the card they just drew. In my opinion, I think UltimateKuriboh is taking this issue a bit too seriously, but I will try to reply to him about this issue soon.Cardsknower (talk • contribs) 01:01, December 14, 2012 (UTC)