User talk:NumbersHunter02

From Yugipedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Welcome, NumbersHunter02![edit]

Wiki.png
Before we start, I would like to begin by welcoming you to Yugipedia!

As a new user, you may want to learn a few things that will be useful in your contributions:
Getting started
Common Categories

Characters

Other helpful links

Wanted Pages

Helpful tips

☆A list of administrators that you can contact in case of a problem can be found here.
☆On talk pages, please sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).
☆To upload images, please use Upload image/file.
☆If you would like to create a page for yourself that is not related to Yu-Gi-Oh!, please do so at User:NumbersHunter02/Name.

Thanks for contributing, and I hope you'll have a great time here! I look forward to working with you!!

Preview button[edit]

Please make use of the preview button (shown as "Show preview" next to the "Save changes" button, when editing a page) to preview what your edits will look like. Otherwise your multiple consecutive edits can make it difficult to track the changes made to a page, as seen here. --UltimateKuriboh (talkcontribs) 15:16, 27 March 2021 (UTC)

Ok, thanks. Even I was surprised to see so many changes in the link you gave, so I'll try to better organize the edits, especially in a page such as that. NumbersHunter02 (talkcontribs) 15:39, 27 March 2021 (UTC)

Reminding you of this again. 69 edits to your sandbox in a single day is ludicrous. Even 10 edits to the same page in a single day is way too many. --SnorlaxMonster 10:17, 26 January 2022 (UTC)
69 nice • Falminar (talkcontribs) 10:23, 26 January 2022 (UTC)
NumbersHunter managed to make another 5 edits between me noticing and saving this message, so the final total was 74 before I protected the page. --SnorlaxMonster 10:28, 26 January 2022 (UTC)
74 nice • Falminar (talkcontribs) 10:31, 26 January 2022 (UTC)

Sandbox[edit]

I strongly suggest you use a User:NumbersHunter02/sandbox to preview your page. Just copy/paste the contents of the 4 Dimensional Dragons page into that sandbox, and make all the changes you want there, because I don't think you're going to be done anytime soon. Furthermore, I would not make any further edits to the actual 4 Dimensional Dragons page until you can go a month without editing your sandbox. --UltimateKuriboh (talkcontribs) 17:14, 27 March 2021 (UTC)

You're still editing the Four Dimensional Dragons despite being told not to. UK told you to make a sandbox to preview your changes before you go on ahead. ChaosGallade (talkcontribs) 17:34, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
I did use the preview button to see how the page would have come out. I was told me to reduce the number of edits and to clear the process, which I definitely did by adding detailed summaries while also upgrading the quality of related pages (such as trivias). Aside from creating a new section - necessary to include Darkwurm in a decent way - all the other edits were just re-arrangements of the columns. As I read on the help page, the first rule is to be bold and go ahead, make the changes. And I think that now, finally, with the inclusion of Darkwurm, the page (the section) made up for everything that did not include precedently for whatever reason. NumbersHunter02 (talkcontribs) 18:18, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
In that case, let UK's suggestion be a lesson on what to do in the future if you're planning on making big edits to a page before committing to them. ChaosGallade (talkcontribs) 19:16, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
Next time I'll try the sandbox, if this can further help at keeping track of the page. NumbersHunter02 (talkcontribs) 19:46, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

You never gave your rationale for Persona/Mirage Dragon. Also, please give this a read. Some of these trivia/characteristic lists are getting too bulky with unnecessary information, so be prepared for the fact that your content will be trimmed at some point. --UltimateKuriboh (talkcontribs) 16:54, 4 April 2021 (UTC)

  • For Mirage/Persona, I wrote that in the summary but guess I exceed the limit, so I will repeat that now. They are related in terms of names. A phantom can be upgraded to a phantasma or be downgraded (or, in this arguable case, related) to mirages (illusions) or a persona (like a physical person). That's the thing that keep them at least related to Phantom Dragon. About the second point, I think the main issue is Odd-Eyes' section. If it really isn't worthy claryfing that (about Advance being stronger and them being weaker) it can be erased. A bit of explanation can be kept regarding why Wizard is not the DARK version. NumbersHunter02 (talkcontribs) 17:08, 4 April 2021 (UTC)
  1. I already stated that Persona/Mirage were similar to "Neo Space Pathfinder" (and "Neo Space Connector"): related, but not necessarily a de-evolution of the core member (E-HERO Neos). This is especially the case since "Persona" and "Mirage" have frequently been used to P-Summon Phantom Dragon, and frequently feature alongside it. This is not comparable to situations like "Utopia", where they make a point of going "wow, it's all their forms together!"; they're just sidekicks/enablers. Yes, I know they're related to "Phantom"; no, this does not necessarily mean they're de-evolutions. I don't remember that well, but I believe the manga Dragons don't even have any special "otherworldly" plot significance - they're just the ace cards of the Yuya brothers, and only Odd-Eyes gets augmented with the Adam Factor, but I don't remember how they explain Pendulums (the only possible "otherworldly" factor).
  2. Stating that "Advance Dragon" is stronger is very biased, and a very unnecessary comparison. It does not matter what arguments you make for it; there is no objective way of saying "it's stronger", unless all of them were Normal Monsters.
  3. Since you made the point that the "Odd-Eyes Dragon" evos are representative of Summoning methods (and not card types), the "missing link" for "Saber Dragon" does not need to be a Normal Monster; it could easily be an Effect Monster. Personally, I feel "Wizard Dragon" was the victim of a recycled/rejected artwork, and was meant to fill that role.
  4. Items of a single nature do not merit a table all to themselves, such as "Wizard Dragon". At best, they merit a statement above or below its related table, whichever is more appropriate. The same applies for columns with only 1 item in them, especially when that item is in a separate row from the others (where the other rows have "n/a", "(blank)", "-", etc. in them for that specific column).
    1. With that being said, I feel "Silver Claw" is different enough that it can be placed below the table, due to its visual disparity, even though its stats match the other Fusions.
  5. These changes should be made in your sandbox. --UltimateKuriboh (talkcontribs) 19:31, 4 April 2021 (UTC)
1) Odd-Eyes evolutions are based on card types AND summoning mechanics, as stated in the table. It is clear that there are opposites: Ritual-Fusion and Synchro-Xyz, so it should be a Normal Monster. That's it. Wizard Dragon might be a recycled idea, its connection with Saber is appreciated, but Normal Monsters are what came before Effect Monsters, the type of Saber.
2) Advance Dragon statement is based on LV and ATK/DEF, but if needed it can be deleted, like I said before.
3) Persona and Mirage can be listed under the table, if the "related" status isn't enough to keep them in it, ok. But G.O.D. evolutions should be kept: it's an important monster, just like the Supreme King Odd-Eyes series.
4) For Metal Claw, I still disagree. I mean, in the evolution column we included Lancer: it is not a normal evolution like Requiem and Co., since it breaks the naming pattern, but Metal Claw is different. All we can see is a Fusion Monster with the same stats as other Odd-Eyes Fusions. At least it should be noted, as it is clearly an evolution of Pendulum Dragon. You would guess it is a Beast, but it's a Dragon, because it is the manga counterpart (spin-off): you don't have Z-ARC, you have Revolution. You don't have Odd-Eyes Fusions, you get a Performapal instead. It still counts.
5) Changes will be made in the sandbox once decided.
I'm now putting the section in my sandbox, and applying the changes. NumbersHunter02 (talkcontribs) 07:24, 5 April 2021 (UTC)

I think the best solution is the one given in my sandbox: all your statements applied, except for Metal Claw (which can be considered a sort of counterpart, it's just the Pendulum Dragon part isn't visually as relevant as the Fusion trio) and G.O.D.-Eyes, whose importance is too big to only be listed under the table and not in it. With that being said, I guess a good time to make those changes effective will be after the reveal of "Arc Wing Synchro Dragon" or whoever that new Yugo's monster from Duelist of Whirlwind is. NumbersHunter02 (talkcontribs) 10:12, 6 April 2021 (UTC)

Repetitive edits[edit]

I see you've already been told to preview your edits before saving, and pointed to your sandbox to develop content before posting it to articles, and despite those you've still been repetitively editing on the same page enough to be blocked, so I'm going to offer one suggestion and make one stipulation: the suggestion is to start making edits offline, in your text editor of choice, and when you finish them, to leave them for a while (at least a few hours) before coming back and going over them to see if you think of anything else to change or add. Repeat this as many times as you need before you stop spotting or thinking of things to change, and then you can copy your changes over to the live article and save them. Now, the stipulation: once you've edited an article, you are not allowed to edit it again except to correct obvious typographical or markup mistakes or to revert obvious vandalism, until someone else has edited that article. This stipulation only applies to you (since it's usually not a consistent problem for other editors), and if you fail to follow it, you will be blocked again. ディノ千?!☎ Dinoguy1000 20:59, 1 May 2021 (UTC)

pointed to your sandbox to develop content before posting it to articles
I applied that for new pages that otherwise would have required massive editing.
despite those you've still been repetitively editing on the same page enough to be blocked
I mainly edit from my mobile (as the tag says), however, I noticed that you cannot modify the entire page in a single time, unlike with the PC, but you can only edit a section at time. Even though it is not the big problem here, is there a way to modify the pages entirely or should I always use the pc?
start making edits offline, in your text editor of choice
I can do that. Anyway, I understand the situation and starting from the next week, I'll do my best to organize the edits. I always use the preview button to see if there is a column/line error (as I mainly edit tables documenting card series). I'll try to condense everything in one single big edit, like I originally did to massively update the Signer Dragons page. NumbersHunter02 (talkcontribs) 08:33, 2 May 2021 (UTC)
start making edits offline
In these week of block, I prepared new edits that I'll publish starting from today. The pages are:
  • Signer/Duel Dragons (Crimson Dragon's new section)
  • ABC evolution of Hot Red Dragon Archfiend and their card artwork pages
  • Chronicle/Assault/Charge and their card artwork pages
  • Earthbound Immortals (Red Nova needs a mention at the very least)
  • Evolving Numbers (minor fixing)

NumbersHunter02 (talkcontribs) 17:36, 8 May 2021 (UTC)

What do you mean by the card artwork pages? Also, be wary of using curly quotation marks (“sample”) when copy/pasting your edits, as we only accept regular quotation marks ("sample"). --UltimateKuriboh (talkcontribs) 17:52, 8 May 2021 (UTC)
What do you mean by the card artwork pages?
Pages that compare the manga and the TCG/OCG artworks. I recently noticed they lack a bit of informations.
we only accept regular quotation marks ("sample")
Understood. My keyboard has already "sample" as a preset, and notes did not change that. NumbersHunter02 (talkcontribs) 18:07, 8 May 2021 (UTC)
Gonna point to this again: if you're developing content by adding a bit at a time instead of all at once, do it offline, and only save it to the wiki when you've got it done to your satisfaction. If you go on another editing spree of making repeated edits to a single page in a short time, you will be blocked again. ディノ千?!☎ Dinoguy1000 10:37, 26 January 2022 (UTC)

Proof[edit]

Having proof is pretty important. For example, this edit. I didn't look to see who inserted the title of "King of Numbers", but since you changed it to "True King of Numbers", do you have a source for that? It's important to include sources, otherwise people can doubt its veracity and delete that information. If you do have a source, you can provide it here, and I can include it on the page for you to follow for future cases.
As for claiming "All-Eyes Phantom Dragon" has parts of the 4 manga Dragons, did you actually take the time to verify that independently? Or did you just take a passing glance at the artwork and assume it was true? Never mind the fact we avoid looking at Fandom wiki for content, because we don't want them copying us in return. --UltimateKuriboh (talkcontribs) 20:59, 19 May 2021 (UTC)

do you have a source for that
Astral's Summoning chant in Rank 53 or Yu-Gi-Oh! ZEXAL - Rank 054 title.
As for claiming "All-Eyes Phantom Dragon" has parts of the 4 manga Dragons, did you actually take the time to verify that independently? Or did you just take a passing glance at the artwork and assume it was true?
I looked at the manga pictures and noticed the following, as it was written on Fandom: the tail is similar to Anthelion's one (except it has not two ends, just one), Phantom's core is present (kind of obvious), the wings and arms reminds of Fast Dragon, while Venemy gave his horns (4, 2 upper and two lower). Plus, the manga lore itself implies it is the combined form: it was Summoned by tributing the above monsters. Phantasma Dragon too has some similarities with the other three, but I think it can be viewed as just a token for their bonds: like Yuya's influence made the other Yu boys' monsters becoming Pendulum, his 3 brothers did the same with his evolved Dragon. NumbersHunter02 (talkcontribs) 05:18, 20 May 2021 (UTC)
You would think that if the designs were meant to be intentional, that there would be some identical features. Phantom Dragon (understandably) has identical features, but seems to be the only one. The tail-prong attachment is similar, but not 2-pronged. I see 0 signs of design similarity with Starving Venemy and Clear Wing. What we're looking for is exact-same-design features, similar to what "Scarlight Red Dragon Archfiend" has.
As 1 preemptive warning, your "Equipped Union" page (idr the name) is going to be deleted, since we don't allow series pages to exist unless it has 3 members or more.
As another preemptive warning, I'm getting tired of having to check over your edits. It takes a great deal more effort to refute someone's claims (with evidence) than it is to churn out these claims. I respect what you did for the Evolving Numbers, but there's also too much unnecessary detail you put into some of these pages, not to mention the constant stream of edits some of these pages are receiving. --UltimateKuriboh (talkcontribs) 19:06, 29 May 2021 (UTC)


I respect what you did for the Evolving Numbers, but there's also too much unnecessary detail you put into some of these pages
Thanks. If there is too much text, it might be condensed.
As 1 preemptive warning, your "Equipped Union" page (idr the name) is going to be deleted, since we don't allow series pages to exist unless it has 3 members or more.
Fine with that: I'll keep it into my sandbox, so when Chimera Utopia Ray V or Asura Utopia Ray will appear, it'll be ready. On a side note, Leo Utopia Ray should be renamed to Ultimate Leo Utopia Ray to keep up with the other's TCG name.
You would think that if the designs were meant to be intentional, that there would be some identical features
Does Z-ARC share similar features with his parts? I mean, lore-wise, it is a combination, so I think that God-Eyes should be kept there too, as it was Summoned by Tributing the 4 Dragons. NumbersHunter02 (talkcontribs) 19:37, 29 May 2021 (UTC)

Unofficial names and lores[edit]

Please do not add unofficial names or lores to card pages. We've already removed all such names and lores in languages that the card game is not printed in, and it's almost certain we'll be removing all remaining ones sometime in the near-ish future; in either case, the addition of new ones is no longer wanted (with the sole obvious exception of English names and lores, since we're an English-language wiki that caters to a primarily English-speaking audience). ディノ千?!☎ Dinoguy1000 11:42, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

Understood NumbersHunter02 (talkcontribs) 17:18, 8 June 2021 (UTC)
Kinda ironic that now I'm the one who removed all of them, not only regarding the upcoming cards, but even the older ones.
Speaking of lores, does the wiki really need the card lores pages? As much as I can tell, I saw only unofficial lores there, and languages that I do not recall being in the TCG or OCG, for example: Greek, Croatian, Arabic and Turkish (although I think Arabic dub exists) NumbersHunter02 (talkcontribs) 08:07, 22 June 2021 (UTC)
Honestly it would've been preferable for you not to remove them; as likely as their removal is (/was), it hadn't actually been generally discussed yet, and in any case, the removal could be done automatically with a bot.
The card lores (and card names) pages are probably going away as well; as you've noticed, most of their content is unofficial translations (though there's also some anime/manga/video game stuff on some of them). ディノ千?!☎ Dinoguy1000 09:08, 22 June 2021 (UTC)
The card lores (and card names) pages are probably going away as well; as you've noticed, most of their content is unofficial translations
That's cool
/was
I focused mainly on IT and SP lores/names (by using Template:Unofficial lore). Now I'll stop and let the bot do the rest. NumbersHunter02 (talkcontribs) 12:26, 22 June 2021 (UTC)

Stardust[edit]

I think the main problem I find with your trivia is you trying to make sense of everything, when in reality, not everything is relevant and/or has enough proof to be defined one way or another. I think my argument for "Stardust Phantom" is best summarized as, ignoring everything else, you're trying to make a case similar to saying "Kaibaman" is actually "Blue-Eyes White Dragon". At best, there is no solid proof one way or the other (the name usage is ambiguous, who knows what the Japanese had in mind when creating the name), which is why if you check Phantom's trivia page, the happy medium/balance is simply noting the details and not making guesses at interpreting the details - or at least keeping the observation(s) very broad, such as "these similarities indicate a relationship between the 2". If you want further context, check the edit history for "Stardust Phantom" and read my edit summary. --UltimateKuriboh (talkcontribs) 07:08, 22 June 2021 (UTC)

the happy medium/balance is simply noting the details and not making guesses at interpreting the details
So this only applies to Phantom's case? Because in the Stardust archetype we also have the Warriors (Synchro) and the recently released Stardust Trail. (The latter is surely a different monster, based on the woman from Converging Wishes.)
If you want further context, check the edit history for "Stardust Phantom" and read my edit summary.
I checked it. My reason to include Phantom (and Xiaolong...) was that, going by name, you have the Ra's Disciple (a different monster than Winged Dragon), but the Creator Incarnate and the ghost of Stardust (This might be a weak connection, I know). Xiaolong, as it was stated on the upgraded cards page, is (supposed to be) a puppy form of Stardust Dragon. At first, I could not see any resemblance between the two, but looking closely I realized this Xiaolong (a Chinese word which translates as "little dragon", so we literally have the Little Stardust Dragon) has some similarities to adult Stardust: mainly, the face (kinda) and the plates(?) on the legs. It might not be so similar to Stardust, compared to the appearance of Debris Dragon, but Stardust Little Dragon is kind of interesting as a name.
Aside from Phantom & Xiaolong, I don't understand why you removed "Shooting Riser Dragon" from the list on Stardust trivia. At first I thought it was because it was not a direct "evolution" (more like an involution) of Stardust, just like "Red Wyvern" and HRDA's evolutions were removed from Red Dragon Archfiend's page, but then I noticed Shooting Majestic was kept. If the problem is how to list it, I suggest, instead of "1 evolved form", this:
Or
Saying "Kaibaman" is actually "Blue-Eyes White Dragon"
Well... there are different levels of similarity when we talk about these monsters:
  • Back Jack is just based on Jack Atlas
  • Kaibaman was portrayed as a different character from BEWD in GX, but still, it is based on Kaiba, whose soul technically carries Blue Eyes.
  • And then we have Numbers Hunter, which seems to have been advertised as a combination of Kite and GEPD, or possibly as a human form of Photon Dragon. It is even showing doing the same work as Kite in the cards Photon Hand and Transformation.

-- NumbersHunter02 (talkcontribs) 07:55, 22 June 2021 (UTC)

I am very tired of having to stoop to your level of analysis. Thankfully, "Stardust Xialong" has 4 digits on its hind leg, rendering all your pseudo-analysis pointless. That's either very "convenient" of you to overlook (since you were looking for similarities, that's a pretty easy starting point, wouldn't you think), or very irresponsible. That's not a detail I'd normally have to look up, since it is very obviously a Chinese dragon (of different origin than Stardust Dragon), and its effect pretty much goes against its alleged lore of being a baby version. This is a waste of my time having to stoop to your level, and type all this out. Give it up.
HRDA is a different incarnation of RDA, so you list all those forms on HRDA's page, not RDA's page. Same for Scarlight.
Shooting Riser is a younger form of Shooting Star. It's Level 7 and not Level 8, 9, or 10 which is weird (probably intentional from a gameplay perspective), so at best, you say it's a younger version of Shooting Star. You do not try to form some sort of relationship with Stardust Dragon. Not everything has to have a 'canon' role, and it is best (and easy) for people reading the trivia page to make their own conclusions/canon, once they see the connection to Shooting Star.
It seems you misunderstood what I was saying with "Kaibaman". My point was for you to look at "Kaibaman" without any knowledge of its lore/background, and judge it solely by its appearance and effect. It would be difficult to objectively say it's actually a human form of Blue-Eyes, or some sort of human worshipper. Therefore, you only list the similarities and connection to Blue-Eyes and leave it at that. Provide the objective information and let people draw their own conclusions. Trying to interpret details is not objective - you need quite a bit of contextual evidence (or just strong evidence).
From this (and "Hand of Nephthys"), we can tell that just wearing a costume based on the monster, and Special Summoning the namesake monster, is not enough to be considered an incarnation of the monster itself (unless you're literally named something like "Avatar of The Pot" or "The Creator Incarnate"). "Stardust Phantom" is odd, and at least its name seems to be referring to how it resurrects "Stardust". The details are already provided for "Stardust Phantom", let people draw their own conclusions. Even the JP wiki knows enough to not comment on it possibly being an incarnation of "Stardust Dragon". --UltimateKuriboh (talkcontribs) 18:10, 22 June 2021 (UTC)
"Stardust Phantom" is odd, and at least its name seems to be referring to how it resurrects "Stardust". The details are already provided for "Stardust Phantom", let people draw their own conclusions. Even the JP wiki knows enough to not comment on it possibly being an incarnation of "Stardust Dragon".
Fine.
"Stardust Phantom" is odd, and at least its name seems to be referring to how it resurrects "Stardust".
I have to tell that might be right. Odd, indeed.
My point was for you to look at "Kaibaman" without any knowledge of its lore/background
I at least know it is a character in GX, then I made my statements about it and the others, but this is a side question and I am certainly not going to add it to Blue-Eyes forms here.
HRDA is a different incarnation of RDA, so you list all those forms on HRDA's page, not RDA's page. Same for Scarlight.
That is completely right. I love to document all 14 forms of RDA/other counterparts.
Shooting Riser is a younger form of Shooting Star. It's Level 7 and not Level 8, 9, or 10 which is weird (probably intentional from a gameplay perspective), so at best, you say it's a younger version of Shooting Star.
True. So further evolved forms (like Shooting Majestic Star Dragon) count on Stardust's page, but not involved form of upgrades.
I am very tired of having to stoop to your level of analysis. Thankfully, "Stardust Xialong" has 4 digits on its hind leg, rendering all your pseudo-analysis pointless.
Sorry, I certainly expressed myself in a wrong way. I meant arms. Anyway, I suggest to leave Xiaolong out, if these similarities are really these weak.

NumbersHunter02 (talkcontribs) 21:37, 22 June 2021 (UTC)

Insignificant edits[edit]

Stop making edits which do not change the visible appearance of a page, e.g. rearranging template parameters. These edits serve no useful purpose and only clutter page histories. ディノ千?!☎ Dinoguy1000 12:50, 27 June 2021 (UTC)

Please do not create non-English versions of incomplete set lists. --XBrain130™エックスブレーン130」 20:03, 7 July 2021 (UTC)

You're just wasting your time tagging Card Names and Card Lores pages for deletion. We're planning to scrap the namespaces to begin with for the same reasons you cite, we've just not gotten around it yet. --XBrain130™エックスブレーン130」 19:55, 10 July 2021 (UTC)

That's cool, thanks for the info NumbersHunter02 (talkcontribs) 20:18, 10 July 2021 (UTC)

What the hell, why are you removing non-English names of anime-only cards now? We want those! --XBrain130™エックスブレーン130」 12:34, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

Now hopefully it should have been fixed. I reintroduced every non-english language that was in the main box (not the unofficial lore one). But hr_name, ar_name and tr_name were just too OOP to be kept, that's why I started to remove them. After all, they were already made invisible(?). Anyway, now, only those languages with no IRL card game are gone. Additionally, some weird things like spanish lores - on an anime-only page and with LINKS, too - or a greek lore on Cicada King's page have been removed too. NumbersHunter02 (talkcontribs) 14:10, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

With regards to your recent edits: This is a reminder, yet again. Please do not make insignificant edits, such as solely adding hyperlinks on a Card Tips page (or repositioning sentences), unless you're adding actual information to that page or making necessary removals. This is adding unnecessary revisions to edit histories.
Don't get ahead of yourself either by finding an excuse in adding unnecessary information, if a wikipedia link already can provide that same information, or adding insignificant info. --UltimateKuriboh (talkcontribs) 05:40, 28 October 2021 (UTC)

If you don't start inserting edit rationales for your trivia edits, you're going to find yourself on very thin ice in terms of being allowed to edit here. It's most likely your lack of edit summaries that are resulting in these lengthy back-and-forth edits. --UltimateKuriboh (talkcontribs) 18:09, 12 November 2021 (UTC)

Supreme King Odd-Eyes[edit]

As you can see here, I created a draft for a new page that should document the monsters that are hybrids between OEPD and another Dimension Dragon. Could it be useful as a real page? They are kinda different compared to the other "Supreme King" monster (assuming they even count as such due to the TCG messing things with the names). Plus there are 5 of them, enough to make a series. I also tried to introduce some kind of variables X and Y, like the Number C10X, to give them a JP name that does not make the normal "Odd-Eyes" sound like Z-ARC (haouryuu Oddoaizu, I mean). And i would not call them "Supreme King Odd-Eyes Dragons" either, because the name is already too similar to SKSD Odd-Eyes (see the distinguish). NumbersHunter02 (talkcontribs) 14:23, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

I do not think we need it tbh. --XBrain130™エックスブレーン130」 15:16, 25 July 2021 (UTC)
https://w.atwiki.jp/aniwotawiki/pages/36555.amp
What about this? NumbersHunter02 (talkcontribs) 13:06, 28 August 2021 (UTC)
1) You should normally not expect answers by posting questions on your own Talk Page, especially if you're not in an active discussion (XBrain last replied a month ago).
2) No one is excited about adding yet another group to a card page ("Odd-Eyes Raging Dragon") that is already part of at least 9 groups: "-Eyes Dragon", "Supreme King", "Odd-Eyes", "Pendulum" (archetype), "Pendulum Dragon", "Rebellion" (archetype), "Xyz" (archetype), "Xyz Dragon", and Four Dimensional Dragons. Ask User:Cheesedude if you want. --UltimateKuriboh (talkcontribs) 16:56, 28 August 2021 (UTC)


Feel like I should know you from the before-times, but I don't remember you too well. --Lord G. matters. Talk to me. 19:17, 10 October 2021 (UTC)

I joined Yugipedia last year, and just recently I started this all-trivia editing, improving the grammar of pages other users edit, sometimes even creating other pages, especially based on anime references, so you probably do not remember me unless you worked on trivia pages of new cards NumbersHunter02 (talkcontribs) 19:37, 10 October 2021 (UTC)

Table[edit]

As funny as I think it is that the table currently on your talk page claims that Roken hails from the anime "Penguin", I should point out that the reason it looked the way it did was because you misspelt "rowspan" as "roswpan".

TheycallmeBrick (talkcontribs) 13:31, 11 October 2021 (UTC)

Thank you. Ryoken from the famous Yu-Gi-Oh! Penguin anime will now be fixed. NumbersHunter02 (talkcontribs) 13:40, 11 October 2021 (UTC)

Old Normal Monster names and lores[edit]

Older Normal Monsters have appeared in video games, where they are given official names and lores in languages other than English. I do not think we should be removing those from pages, although it might be worth adding hidden comments next to them to indicate the games that they come from. Additionally, names/lores that come from official video games are not unofficial names/lore, so it is incorrect to call English names/lores that come from those games "unofficial". --SnorlaxMonster 23:10, 31 October 2021 (UTC)

... I thought they were released in English only. I checked the gallery page and saw that the official lores were from videogames, so I cancelled the unofficial English lore & name template from those pages. Were jp prize cards like Yasushi the Skull Knight also leaked in english? EDIT: Seems so... NumbersHunter02 (talkcontribs) 09:00, 1 November 2021 (UTC)

Unofficial names/lores[edit]

I told you a while ago that a bot run can be done to remove all unofficial names/lores. I said this specifically because doing so will require thousands of edits, which individually don't carry much information and for the most part just clutter feeds such as RecentChanges, and using a bot to do it instead prevents the edits from being broadcasted in those feeds. So, I'm going to tell you once: stop removing these. The rest will be handled by a bot. You do not need to remove them yourself. ディノ千?!☎ Dinoguy1000 01:20, 8 November 2021 (UTC)

This is your last warning. Unofficial names/lores, and links in non-English lores, are all things which will be removed via a bot run. You do not have to remove them yourself. If you do so again, you will be blocked. ディノ千?!☎ Dinoguy1000 20:29, 9 November 2021 (UTC)

Insignificant edits No. 2[edit]

Your behavior on trivia pages is a little odd, as it seems you barely leave any Trivia page alone (once someone else edits one), and the changes you make are insignificant formatting changes or insignificant wording changes.
Normally this wouldn't be a problem if done in moderation (aka once in awhile), but since you make it a primary editing behavior, it's an unproductive fixation.
Adjusting the formatting/wording would also be "okay" if you contributed relevant new content - but as a forewarning, that shouldn't be an excuse to look for unnecessary information to add, just because you don't like the wording/formatting of a trivia page. --UltimateKuriboh (talkcontribs) 20:20, 17 November 2021 (UTC)

On a related note, reverting a user's problematic edits without contacting that user, or without contacting an admin, is useless if the user keeps editing pages in the same fashion. It shouldn't take you reverting 10 separate pages (maybe even more...?) to change your tactics of getting the user to stop. Can you explain yourself? --UltimateKuriboh (talkcontribs) 20:33, 17 November 2021 (UTC)

Redlink redirects[edit]

Please don't create redirects to redlinked pages. The pages should be created before the redirects. --SnorlaxMonster 23:53, 21 December 2021 (UTC)

Surely an odd way to start 2022[edit]

First of all, I feel like I should explain the situation that led to my 3 days block in November. I do not remember the trivia page in question, but that situation involved one user randomly reverting my edit on said page with no explanation left. As my version was objectively better, I repeated said edit, this time adding a reason trying to explain why: "I don't like the term "Sufficiently-Leveled"". A few minutes later I was blocked for "adding personal touches", and I feel like this odd situation was the cause. But it wasn't just me disliking the term. Maybe I should have said that "Sufficiently-Leveled" and similar grammatical monstrosities are so cringy and convoluted that whoever added them in the first place should ask themselves "why did I do this?". Changing it with A monster with a sufficient Level may have been a personal touche, but also a necessary thing to do.

This is what I am trying to do on Card Trivia pages: rewording some points and the outdated ones, especially if added by IP users. And I keep revisiting pages already edited by someone else (appearing in the Recent Changes special page) because Card Trivia is a huge category, but that does not mean I can edit some by myself, and this only applies to the TCG/OCG pages (I always verify whether I'm editing a page of a card belonging to the soon-to-be past series, and if the answer is "yes", immediately close the page, so I indeed leave a bunch of trivia alone).

This leads to the point of this section, and I do not know if asking this will make things worse, but I think that reopening Yugipedia 4 days ago only to find myself blocked for 30 days block is not so right (in my opinion), given that my contribution here is not limited to Card Trivia. My Edit count reveals that more than 10 000 of my 16 555 edits belong to the (Main) category. Even barring the "hunt" for Unofficial Names/Lores, that contribution is significant. During these months, I've been trying to expand my work here, and that includes providing ASAP redirects, jp names/lores of newly revealed cards, checking and reverting vandals (sometimes) and updating Set Card Lists and set pages. Important: I'm not questioning the block itself, but the duration. I do not know if what I said above is a mitigating factor or not.

Anyway, I explained my reasons on this question. Since the more I look at this talk page, the more I'm sad about it, I am not expecting an answer here, i.e. if someone is tired/annoyed by this section, they do not have to necessarily reply. The answer - by demonstration - will be understood in any case. NumbersHunter02 (talkcontribs) 15:22, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

This is just my input as a peer, but even at a glance, you're very excessive when it comes to editing others' Trivia contributions. 9 times out of 10, when I see that someone edited a Trivia page, I see that you followed up on correcting it. From what I can tell, many of the more unsightly grammar "issues" aren't necessarily incorrect; they're just not written in a way that you prefer. If it's objectively incorrect or it conveys wrong information/meaning, then it would be necessary to change it. Otherwise, such edits are unnecessary. Of course, if the grammar is glaringly unpleasant, then such unnecessary edits are welcomed. However, don't mistake these edits as "necessary" and do them in moderation. I can see on this Talk page that you've been warned multiple times over the year about such "insignificant edits."
Also, on the topic of the ratio of your contributions: just because your contributions outnumber your insignificant edits, doesn't mean your edits are at a negligible amount. The number of good deeds doesn't justify the number of bad acts. Of course, I'll reiterate, this is all my input as a peer. I have no idea the exact cause or reason for your suspension. My advice is that, rather than treat a singular incident as the main cause, you think of this as a culmination of multiple incidents and the most recent one was simply the "straw that broke the camel's back."--KyoPa (talkcontribs) 18:51, 7 January 2022 (UTC)
Hi. I wasn't going to ignore you, I was just waiting for a response, as I felt a basic explanation of the block was already provided in the block summary. Before I go into anything though, I'd like to ask at least 1 other user their opinion first. --UltimateKuriboh (talkcontribs) 22:55, 7 January 2022 (UTC)
I'd like to chime in here, and I second wha KyoPa said. If the point is being conveyed in a way that can be understood, there isn't much of a point to edit it further. From personal experience: from time to time, after I make an edit, someone like SnorlaxMonster would come along and reword it in a way that was described a bit better than what I put out, and as long as the main idea was there, I didn't mind that. My point is, there's a fine line between elaboration and pointlessly rearranging words. ChaosGallade (talkcontribs) 04:47, 8 January 2022 (UTC)
I'd also suggest one key difference is "occasionally" vs "always". I will occasionally edit trivia pages when I spot something that I think could be improved. Conversely, if I edit a Trivia page, I feel like it's guaranteed that NumbersHunter02 is going to find something to change on that Trivia page too, even if that change doesn't make much difference—or even if I edit a card page, it seems like you edit the trivia page of that card. The changes you make are usually fine, they just usually don't improve anything, just reword it slightly. Perhaps if you used edit summaries more often to explain exactly why your edit is an improvement, they wouldn't feel so arbitrary. --SnorlaxMonster 05:04, 8 January 2022 (UTC)
In no way does your edit-count inherently (aka, by itself) give you some authority. Especially since you've been observed needlessly clogging up edit histories (particularly Trivia) with minute edits to impose some unknown standard of yours on those pages. Judging by your editing behavior with Trivia (as other people have mentioned above), it seems as if you're claiming some ownership over all trivia pages, which is not tolerated. User:KyoPa covers trivia as well, but there's no problem there (compared to this situation), and he seems to have a good handle on what relevant, valid trivia is. I've tried discussing this with you before on stuff like Zera, but it doesn't seem to be sticking. It is very tiring, and I'd like to make contributions here with what little time I have to spare, instead of writing essays trying to convince you on why X trivia details are irrelevant / baseless. After all that, enough is enough.
The easiest suggestion is to avoid Trivia entirely, or only to make very simple edits such as "X appears in this artwork", but I feel like you won't be able to help yourself if you do edit there.
It's nice to have new, helpful editors, and your edits in other spaces are greatly appreciated. If you're looking to gain some sort of respect or authority however, you usually get it when it isn't your main goal. --UltimateKuriboh (talkcontribs) 20:36, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
Ok, so you can all ignore my point about the edit count. It does not matter, but thankfully it has now been clarified.
some unknown standard of yours
If what I applied can be defined as a standard (and I think it can), it was definitely not decided by me, at least not arbitrarily: I simply tried to uniform these pages, but this can be seen under different POVs. I think what trivia is missing is this: a standard like all the other categories. I would not like to cite others in this issue, but this "standard" was "defined" by looking at their edits at least a year ago (edits which consisted of rearranging, but that are details).
it seems as if you're claiming some ownership over all trivia pages, which is not tolerated.
At this moment, I cannot think of a full answer about this one, but I would not call this an "ownership". It does sound a bit totalitarian.
The easiest suggestion is to avoid Trivia entirely, or only to make very simple edits such as "X appears in this artwork", but I feel like you won't be able to help yourself if you do edit there.
This would imply that literally all of my trivia edits were so meaningless that I had to avoid the category. When adding points, I feel like they were at least on point. And I mean recently, not when I would write down a complete essay of a speculative video about Zera or similar.
It's nice to have new, helpful editors, and your edits in other spaces are greatly appreciated.
This is for once reassuring.
I'd also like to point out that maybe many of those reworded points were outdated: perhaps if I joined in the ZEXAL era I would not have question them.
This is my answer as I can think of now. I may edit it over the next days, though. NumbersHunter02 (talkcontribs) 21:30, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

ok ultik (and hunter too) if you were waiting on me im rlly sry about how long it took to respond!
so the stated reason for the block is the hunter rapidly making minor subjective edits to many trivia pages in a row. but i dont really think minor edits are an offense worth a block
tho, on the hunter's side. up til now, you havent really responded to any of ultik's warnings about trivia pages have you? im pretty sure youve read them, since youve responded to a lot of other messages on the page; and when ultik asked you to start adding edit summaries, you did that immediately. but you havent responded at all to ultik's warnings about insignificant edits - not on the talk page, or by changing much how you edit. immediately before the 30-day block you were still making pretty similar mass-edits with pretty similar changes as you were before the first warning, and even after the first short term block. making some kind of interaction on the talk page wouldve helped your case a lot, it shouldnt have taken this long
(tho back on ultik again, you didnt actually give a warning on insignificant edits; the first time you suggested admin action (about the back-and-forth edits without edit summaries), the hunter actually did immediately start doing what you asked and that problem was resolved pretty quickly. it wouldve helped to give an actual insignificant edit warning, rather than the "warning" being a 3-day block; the original warning didnt apply anymore)
but in any case, thats the real big thing leading up to the block - if people think your editing is harmful, but you disagree and are trying to make useful edits, then youve gotta respond and explain. or stop making the kinds of edits mentioned.

other than that, all i can say is why i dont think minor edits should be blocked over, like the stated block reason. tho with that stuff ^, i think that ends up being the less important point
id compare it to for example, how me and the metaman and anyone else involved in localizing sevens were clogging edit histories way worse than the hunter could, while making extremely minor changes. (h*ck dinoguy is doing that right now!) but nobody really complains since those edits are all objectively correct - wiki policy says so. the hunter's mass-edits are pretty similar to any other kind of mass-edit - just that theyre more subjective than objective. but really, most edits to the wiki are subjective, save for ones like adding a set release to a card page, and if its intended to read better and improve the page then i dont think being subjective should count much against it. (if you dont think it improves the page, then that loops back to needing to use the talk page to say so, and the hunter needing to respond to talk page messages. but these arent the same kind of unhelpful and unnecessary as things which do get warnings, like edit warring or edits that add spaces in templates without changing the page at all)
(altho there is maybe one other notable difference between an "acceptable" mass-edit and hunter's trivia changes - hunter basically never tags edits as minor. but who uses the minor edit filter anyway? :p)
most of those edits, without any context, would be harmless and would likely be taken to improve the page, if only a little bit - i cant really argue against linking to the Mythyrian Numbers page, simplifying "utilizing Contact Fusion to do so" or fixing a grammar mistake. those small edits are very common by many users, and do make the page at least a little better (or at least are meant to). if theyre meant to improve the page, then there being a lot of edits shouldnt be a bad thing
(plus a decent number of the hunter's trivia edits are more major changes too... altho ultik clearly doesnt like those changes either, but thats a separate issue)
but again, the big thing leading up the block isnt just that theres a lot of small edits, its also that the hunter hasnt responded to ultik saying that they dont think the edits improve anything, and you kept making the same edits anyway

tl;dr, the hunter needs to use talk pages more. subjective and/or minor edits arent a bad thing, even when theres a lot of them, but if you disagree on whether an edit improves the page then use the talk page for that. but while the block might feel excessive i also cant really contest it, if thats what it takes for the hunter to finally respond - lots of edits that are also against consensus are a bad thing • Falminar (talkcontribs) 22:44, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
Sorry for the late response, but here it is.
altho there is maybe one other notable difference between an "acceptable" mass-edit and hunter's trivia changes - hunter basically never tags edits as minor. but who uses the minor edit filter anyway? :p
That is because the hunter usually edits from mobile, as the tag marks. Some functions are apparently missing from it, including the minor edit button.
tho, on the hunter's side. up til now, you havent really responded to any of ultik's warnings about trivia pages have you?
You are right: I should have answered at the time of the short term block (the 3 days one) about the thing. Indeed, I felt like a mention was needed for that, linking back to this issue, and I added the explanation at the beginning of this section.
Saying I have not been monitoring trivia for the past two weeks would be a lie, and here is something that went unnoticed for too long: Card Trivia:Naturia Bamboo Shoot is the second case of an IP user randomly asking about the creation of a page, by creating themselves the page with just the question in its text. The answer would be "yes, if and when there will be valid info about that monster". NumbersHunter02 (talkcontribs) 14:16, 20 January 2022 (UTC)
wait mobile doesnt have the minor edit button? wack
i use desktop view when mobile editing so i didnt realize • Falminar (talkcontribs) 18:11, 20 January 2022 (UTC)

I don't mind unblocking you now, since it seems the message has gone through. Just please be cautious when editing Card Trivia, preferably avoiding any nuanced takes and instead focusing on simple stuff. --UltimateKuriboh (talkcontribs) 18:22, 20 January 2022 (UTC)

Thanks NumbersHunter02 (talkcontribs) 18:45, 20 January 2022 (UTC)

Card number redirects[edit]

Hello there,
I see you've been creating lots of card number redirects. If you spot sets that need these to be created, please leave me a message on my talk page and my bot will do it. There's no need for a user to manually create them. Seeing your talk page, I realize there have been some issues in the past. Let me be clear: feel free to contact me about it; don't do them yourself. If it's, like, one or two redirects (like promo sets or something), it's fine. But for long sets, especially with the various regions, please alert me about it. Just to be clear again; even if it's just one region, like the Simplified Chinese SD39 you've been doing, please alert me about it. Even if I don't reply within one day or two, just leave them be; they'll be taken care of.
For cases when you are not sure if you should poke me or do it yourself, please poke me. If you have any questions, please feel free to ask.
Cheers! Becasita Pendulum (talkcontribs) 11:34, 29 January 2022 (UTC)

Hello,
I think what you noticed the most were those of the TCG sub-regions of FR, DE, IT, PT, and SP, given that for every card in BACH these are 5 redirects so that is 99x5=495 redirects done in 2 days, compared to 99 of English TCG. I usually do not do this on such a larger scale of redirecting every spot of every card of every region (which is also very difficult from mobile, compared to just one or two redirects). I usually do redirects when for example, a Japanese set like DIFO gradually reveals card in two months, and so I gradually do those redirects at the same rate, a few ones each time an archetype or card get revealed.
Anyway, I understand that 495 redirects in 2 days may be a bit too much, and the next time I will let them be created automatically, or I will contact you, if I see that they have not been done yet.
On a side note, if I can ask again, this page has been around for too much time; could you or another admin delete it, since there is no reason for it to exist (I tried to search valid trivia to add but nothing was found). NumbersHunter02 (talkcontribs) 14:04, 29 January 2022 (UTC)
It's fine to create the redirects one at a time when a new card is revealed. For the other situations, feel free to contact me.
Thanks! I've removed it. Becasita Pendulum (talkcontribs) 20:42, 29 January 2022 (UTC)
Thank you again for the deletion NumbersHunter02 (talkcontribs) 20:46, 29 January 2022 (UTC)

Edit-warring[edit]

You need to correct your silent editing behavior. The simple solution: Give edit rationales. This has been a recurring issue with you, being a major contributing factor why most of the trivia pages' edit histories are being clogged with your repetitive edits.
Specifically, if an editor removes/rewords some of your content, and you restore some/all of that content, you explain why you disagree and are reverting those changes. You do not silently revert, as you have been doing.
I expect you to leave an edit rationale for the changes you reverted on Card Trivia:Crystal Clear Wing Synchro Dragon, here on your Talk Page, now, and I expect you to leave one for all future changes you revert (that are recently made before you revert something) since your editing behavior has been too prolific for you to remain mute when making such changes.
If you do not comply with these edit rationales in the future (to a reasonable standard), you will be blocked considerably longer than the last time I blocked you. I drew specific attention to this problem of yours on November 12, 2021, and I am not going to repeat myself.
[The cold edit-war with WrestlerHelper1 did not help. Kudos to you for creating a Talk Page for the trivia page and attempting to communicate with WrestlerHelper1 via edit summaries, but since you 1) didn't contact anyone to view that page, and 2) waited until you got in an edit war to leave edit summaries, these efforts were ultimately unhelpful.] --UltimateKuriboh (talkcontribs) 04:43, 15 April 2022 (UTC)

Card Trivia talk:Crystal Clear Wing Synchro Dragon
I left my reason here, but maybe I should've pointed it out in the summary.
and I expect you to leave one for all future changes you revert (that are recently made before you revert something) since your editing behavior has been too prolific for you to remain mute when making such changes.
I'll make sure to explain those questionable changes in the future NumbersHunter02 (talkcontribs) 06:54, 15 April 2022 (UTC)
The cold edit-war with WrestlerHelper1 did not help. Kudos to you for creating a Talk Page for the trivia page and attempting to communicate with WrestlerHelper1 via edit summaries, but since you 1) didn't contact anyone to view that page, and 2) waited until you got in an edit war to leave edit summaries, these efforts were ultimately unhelpful.
I tried to reason with them on the talk page, but they did not reply, nor I've ever seen them leaving a message on a talk page. I also tried to use the 3 reverts rule, but I did not consider that this "cold edit war" started months ago. NumbersHunter02 (talkcontribs) 06:54, 15 April 2022 (UTC)

"name is based on"[edit]

...is really awkward wording, but you always write that when editing trivia pages and switch out more natural sounding ways to write it like "named after"

but like, why, it sounds weird??

and kinda related i also feel like you prefer using standard template wording? even if it makes the trivia less accurate or less specific, which isnt good (like changing a lot of different ways to describe cards being related to "upgraded form"). eg this page and this one

plz dont do that, it doesnt need to always be written the same as other pages if it says what its trying to well • Falminar (talkcontribs) 17:15, 19 April 2022 (UTC)

...is really awkward wording, but you always write that when editing trivia pages and switch out more natural sounding ways to write it like "named after"
my idea is that "this card's name is based on" should be used when the name is slightly different, while "this card is named after" is used when it is identical. that is how I interpreted it
and kinda related i also feel like you prefer using standard template wording? even if it makes the trivia less accurate or less specific, which isnt good (like changing a lot of different ways to describe cards being related to "upgraded form"). eg this page and this one
many monsters can be described as being upgraded/evolved/combined/downgraded/counterpart forms: I try to choose the best option but sometimes this does not go well. Aratron and cards like it can easily be defined as transformed, while Suma (and Crusadia Krawler) are clear examples of me denoting monsters in a wrong way, so thank you for pointing out them. NumbersHunter02 (talkcontribs) 17:30, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
dont think it necessarily has to be, but also i dont remember ever seeing you use anything besides "name is based on" even if its identical (also suma in particular is org being a derp not the name being actually different)
cards dont always have to be described as x counterparts or forms or versions either, in the case of suma again i think something more like the original wording "visually resembles a combination of crusadia krawler and blue sky" is best - "upgraded form of crusadia krawler, and also its similar to blue sky" downplays blue sky's part in it while "transformed version" implies something that might not be lore accurate (we dont know exactly where it fits into the lore, but its probably a post-scratch crusadia krawler in the avidaverse? cant really say that on wiki, but its probably not a physical transformation of crusadia krawler) • Falminar (talkcontribs) 18:07, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
this user's name is based on kite tenjo's title in the yugioh zexal anime
Not necessarily. While Kite is and always will be THE Numbers Hunter in ZEXAL, it later became a profession, with everyone working on the hunt. My name refers to how I originally worked mainly on ZEXAL's page (SXyz, Proto, the deleted summaries, Number C39: Utopia Ray Neo are my earliest creations in January 2021). Eventually, I moved to the other series, except, of course, SEVENS and any RD offspring. You may have noticed this already: my SEVENS-related presence =~ 0% (the infinitesimal percent is made up of edits on OCG cards that have SEVENS points). Just a small precisation. NumbersHunter02 (talkcontribs) 17:47, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
and thats your obligatory numbershunter trivia edit ;3
y dont you like rush tho, rd is good :v • Falminar (talkcontribs) 18:08, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
dont think it necessarily has to be, but also i dont remember ever seeing you use anything besides "name is based on" even if its identical (also suma in particular is org being a derp not the name being actually different)
"Heroic Champions" should have "named after", especially the DIFO ones.
cards dont always have to be described as x counterparts or forms or versions either, in the case of suma again i think something more like the original wording "visually resembles a combination of crusadia krawler and blue sky" is best - "upgraded form of crusadia krawler, and also its similar to blue sky" downplays blue sky's part in it while "transformed version" implies something that might not be lore accurate (we dont know exactly where it fits into the lore, but its probably a post-scratch crusadia krawler in the avidaverse? cant really say that on wiki, but its probably not a physical transformation of crusadia krawler)
well, in this case, new version arriving. These are the borderline cards, difficult to document.
y dont you like rush tho, rd is good :v
Oh I have no doubt on it: after all, who does not like to play with rules they used during their childhood? SEVENS and Rush are not for me, I prefer the wonderful support and lore we received and keep receiving from the Official Card Game. NumbersHunter02 (talkcontribs) 19:14, 19 April 2022 (UTC)

Newly-releasing OCG cards[edit]

Since you took over filling out the details of upcoming Japanese cards (from me), please do one of the following:

  • do not copypaste Japanese card texts from whichever site you're using before cards come out
  • overwrite those texts with the ones from the database when the card comes out

In case you haven't noticed, your source's texts frequently have typos and mistakes (and sometimes they're missing entire sentences), meaning that after you're done I have to re-check every card to ensure the JP texts are correct. If you could that yourself I'd grateful for actually having one less duty instead of it being simply replaced with looking after someone else who beats me to it. --XBrain130™エックスブレーン130」 16:13, 23 April 2022 (UTC)

well...
do not copypaste Japanese card texts from whichever site you're using before cards come out
I think that I'll choose this; thank you for informing me that the texts frequently have typos and mistakes: I thought the site had the correct texts uploaded, but clearly this is not the case. Some of them (like the first to be revealed, such as Neos support) are from official sources like yugioh.jp (though everyone can make a typo), but the majority was from this site, which happened to be one of the first sources I found, that uploads jp texts ASAP. But now, since they seem to not care about accuracy, I think that the cards of a newly Core Booster (basically those released on twitter) can easily stay with no Japanese text until they are released, and those card texts can be added from the official database, along with the codes and passwords. However, I may also try for once to copy a text and see if it is the right one, or if it misses even an entire phrase. NumbersHunter02 (talkcontribs) 17:07, 23 April 2022 (UTC)

layno/raino/reyno/reino[edit]

like with kyopa. be consistent with the card's name when writing, even if you think the card's name should be something else. dont write "reyno heart" when the page is currently named "rainoheart", change it only after the page is renamed • Falminar (talkcontribs) 00:57, 24 April 2022 (UTC)

layno/raino
These two are complete nonsense. And even if they had some meanings, they would surely be unrelated to the storyline. I dont know if we follow YGOrg's translation or not, but in this case we should've listened to them. However, sometimes it is best to think of your own, like with "Abyssal Dragon Alba Renatus": logic says that it should be named "Alba Renatus the Abyss(al) Dragon", according to the naming scheme of the Albaz Dragons. Luckily, soon we are going to find out the TCG names, as DIFO is coming. Speaking of renames, you forgot Lifobia/Reiphobia, but I think that the TCG is clearly going to mess up with the Scareclaw names, especially since one of them is named Reich Heart. With that being said, I can easily change back the pages as they were, but at this point I'd suggest to rename those pages and provide our readers with more reasonable names (I'm not saying that Rainoheart is a bad name, and if someone can explain to me how it beats Reyno in relating to Reich I will accept it). After all, it's not that I suggested horrendous names (well, except for Perlreino and Perreino, those candidates were really bad). My hope is that, in the future, translations will be decided based on previous cards. If the next card is apparently called "[Archetype] Regno Heart" (Italian edition) or something else that reminds to "realm", then there is no reason to rename it as something nonsense.
change it only after the page is renamed
I would do it myself, if only I I could move pages. There is quite a bunch of pages that need to be renamed or deleted (though I think the second one is for admins only). NumbersHunter02 (talkcontribs) 07:48, 24 April 2022 (UTC)
uhhhh i already did rename everything (including reiphobia i didnt miss it).
but anyway, doesnt matter if the page name is nonsense, dont call the card a different name from the page name
"I dont know if we follow YGOrg's translation or not, but in this case we should've listened to them."
we generally follow ygoorg's initial translations - but org often stealth-changes their translations in the next day, and the pages dont often get renamed to match since its way more work for us to rename the cards than for them. the tearalaments are a case like that, pedia did use org's translations on them • Falminar (talkcontribs) 08:10, 24 April 2022 (UTC)
::uhhhh i already did rename everything (including reiphobia i didnt miss it).
Yeah, I saw that and was going to write a message to thank you again.
pedia did use org's translations on them
Well, in this case, they did it: they stealth-changed, as the names that I saw were the revised ones, but I did not know at the time. Adding a note explaining the relation to Reich would have been appreciated, but regardless, now we have the closest translations.
dont call the card a different name from the page name
Understood. NumbersHunter02 (talkcontribs) 08:15, 24 April 2022 (UTC)

Problematic editing behavior[edit]

Knock it off. This was an unnecessary edit. Taking ownership of the Card Trivia namespace has made you very annoying in the eyes of various editors here, because you're maintaining some sort of weird, personal formatting that barely improves on the trivia pages (if these could be called improvements). I've mentioned this to you on at least. Three. Separate occasions.
This is it, I'm done trying to accomodate your behavior; I've gone through enough explanations already and you still (unknowingly?) persist. I'm sure you have good intentions here, but we've gone through a year of this - I've granted you enough patience and "benefit of the doubt". I'm establishing a month-long edit-block, but after it expires and you make another "infringing" edit, the block will be brought back and doubled in length.
I'm sure you want to ask, "Why? What can I do to change this situation?", but we have done this many, many times on your Talk Page, and it's a fruitless endeavor to try to explain any further at this point. Don't be surprised if I don't reply here, because of this. At this point, I strongly suggest you move on from this wiki, and go to another community or pick up a different hobby. --UltimateKuriboh (talkcontribs) 05:33, 3 May 2022 (UTC)

At this point, I strongly suggest you move on from this wiki, and go to another community or pick up a different hobby.
Well, you know what? I think the same. I think it is time to call this experience over: for what I can say, it was funny being a member of Yugipedia for 1 year and 5 months (4 if you count the various blocks).
has made you very annoying in the eyes of various editors here,
Surely this was not my goal, but at this point...
I'm establishing a month-long edit-block, but after it expires and you make another "infringing" edit, the block will be brought back and doubled in length
And so, as my last request, I ask to be blocked for infinite time, since an account cannot be deleted (for what I know). I already saw someone who requested it and their wishes were granted (that someone still being on the block list).
I hope that some of my edits were at least appreciated, I leave with no grudge. Bye bye, and keep up the good work NumbersHunter02 (talkcontribs) 06:30, 3 May 2022 (UTC)