Quote:==Description==
斬 is a symmetrical Gachi Chip with three hexagons, one in the center and smaller ones on each side. This distribution of metal makes 斬 balanced with the weight concentrated on two points, creating high Outward-Weight-Distribution and subsequent Stamina potential. Furthermore, this weight distribution also increases the movement speed of Mobile Attack combinations, granting 斬 high Attack potential as well.

(Mar. 14, 2019  3:27 AM)ThaKingTai Wrote: Can this please stop? Can we wait until we get some actual information that’s useful from people actually holding it? I understand what you are trying to do, but please, a least wait until the part is released. For all anyone knows, these “leaks” could be fake or have different information from what is actually released.

(Mar. 13, 2019  8:48 PM)MonoDragon Wrote:

Quote:==Description==
斬 is a symmetrical Gachi Chip with three hexagons, one in the center and smaller ones on each side. This distribution of metal makes 斬 balanced with the weight concentrated on two points, creating high Outward-Weight-Distribution and subsequent Stamina potential. Furthermore, this weight distribution also increases the movement speed of Mobile Attack combinations, granting 斬 high Attack potential as well.

Is this early? Yes

Will that stop me. [CENSORED] NO

(Mar. 14, 2019  3:41 AM)instaburst13 Wrote:

(Mar. 13, 2019  8:48 PM)MonoDragon Wrote: Is this early? Yes

Will that stop me. [CENSORED] NO

Aren’t you the same guy who said Xt+ was gonna suck?

(Mar. 14, 2019  3:29 AM)Adarsh Abhinav Wrote:

(Mar. 14, 2019  3:27 AM)ThaKingTai Wrote: Can this please stop? Can we wait until we get some actual information that’s useful from people actually holding it? I understand what you are trying to do, but please, a least wait until the part is released. For all anyone knows, these “leaks” could be fake or have different information from what is actually released.

Name has been Published In Corocoro, with images

(Mar. 14, 2019  3:46 AM)ThaKingTai Wrote:

(Mar. 14, 2019  3:29 AM)Adarsh Abhinav Wrote: Name has been Published In Corocoro, with images

Listen, that’s fine and all, but what does this do? Absolutely nothing. No one knows how the part performs and making a hypothesis is not good enough for an article. We do not need pages just for the sake of them being there. That’s not the reason for the Wiki. A general and SIMPLE page is fine. Not this.

(Mar. 14, 2019  4:17 AM)Dt20000 Wrote: You’re right. However, some people would like to know a logic-based guess about how well each part works, and if it’s wrong, we can edit it, but if it’s right, you can just add more detail. This is how things have usually been run, and very few people have had problems until now.

(Mar. 14, 2019  5:21 AM)DeceasedCrab Wrote: Well, you heard em MD; don't give em anything. They'd rather have no data instead of data that has to be amended.

(Mar. 14, 2019  3:46 AM)ThaKingTai Wrote:

(Mar. 14, 2019  3:29 AM)Adarsh Abhinav Wrote: Name has been Published In Corocoro, with images

Listen, that’s fine and all, but what does this do? Absolutely nothing. No one knows how the part performs and making a hypothesis is not good enough for an article. We do not need pages just for the sake of them being there. That’s not the reason for the Wiki. A general and SIMPLE page is fine. Not this.

(Mar. 14, 2019  5:59 AM)ThaKingTai Wrote: This whole “you don’t do it so you can’t criticize it” argument is dumb. People critique stuff they can’t do or don’t do all the time in hopes of making it better. So I’m going to critique this because I’m tired of seeing this. Don’t make guesses until or unless you know you will have the opportunity to prove it or you have enough data from others to.

(Mar. 14, 2019  5:17 AM)KingSpin Wrote:

(Mar. 14, 2019  4:17 AM)Dt20000 Wrote: You’re right. However, some people would like to know a logic-based guess about how well each part works, and if it’s wrong, we can edit it, but if it’s right, you can just add more detail. This is how things have usually been run, and very few people have had problems until now.

This is called speculation. Publishing speculation has lots of repercussions.

Can you imagine if reporters publish news purely based on speculation? You give people the wrong impression of things, and kill reliability and trust in the process.

Sure, you can go back and amend whatever you wrote. But can you ensure that the people who absorbed the wrong information be updated with the new one?

The Beyblade wiki is one of the most unreliable wikis amongst all the gaming wikis I frequent. These antics are just exacerbating the situation.

(Mar. 14, 2019  6:40 AM)Dt20000 Wrote: You’ve missed a few key points while creating this statement. The first thing you missed is the fact that it is stated many times throughout the articles in question that this is speculation and a draft. These drafts are not being published until after reliable information has been gained and when multiple other people have approved that it is correct.

The second thing you missed is that this is the WBO, not the Beyblade Wiki. A few articles and things it say are inaccurate, but people are constantly trying to fix it or warn others. If the WBO is wrong about something, that does not mean that the false information in question will spread to the Beyblade Wiki. A well-trained eye will catch the mistake and fix it. Sure, many mistakes have gone through, but the WBO’s articles are living documents. They are constantly being improved and updated when new information is procured. For example, if the Beyblade Wiki was never updated and very unreliable, it would say Valkyrie was a top tier attack layer that you would need multiple copies for. However, someone updated it when it became outclassed.

You do make a strong point, but is it strong enough?

(Mar. 14, 2019  11:28 AM)KingSpin Wrote:

(Mar. 14, 2019  6:40 AM)Dt20000 Wrote: You’ve missed a few key points while creating this statement. The first thing you missed is the fact that it is stated many times throughout the articles in question that this is speculation and a draft. These drafts are not being published until after reliable information has been gained and when multiple other people have approved that it is correct.

The second thing you missed is that this is the WBO, not the Beyblade Wiki. A few articles and things it say are inaccurate, but people are constantly trying to fix it or warn others. If the WBO is wrong about something, that does not mean that the false information in question will spread to the Beyblade Wiki. A well-trained eye will catch the mistake and fix it. Sure, many mistakes have gone through, but the WBO’s articles are living documents. They are constantly being improved and updated when new information is procured. For example, if the Beyblade Wiki was never updated and very unreliable, it would say Valkyrie was a top tier attack layer that you would need multiple copies for. However, someone updated it when it became outclassed.

You do make a strong point, but is it strong enough?

Good points, let me clarify -

Difference between "Speculation" vs "Draft"
1) Speculation is a strong, precise word with a deep meaning and implications. Speculation is when you claim/say something about a subject matter that you do not have a reasonable grasp of knowledge. A draft does not imply that the contents are speculation, nor does it imply that the contents are verified/trusted. Stating that something is a draft doesn't point to a possibility of speculation - which is what these articles are doing.

Initial Perceptions Skew the Truth
2a) When you make a speculation on the first draft, it skews people's perceptions towards whatever that's written. People will become biased after reading it, making their subsequent comments/posts about it less objective. This ultimately skews the direction of the article away from where it truly should be.

Inertia to Change
2b) It is a lot of extra work and inertia to correct a wrong claim after it is made. A careless claim made on the first draft has a decent chance of making it into the final one. Spewing a lot of wrong claims in the first draft will make a lot of time/posts wasted in correcting it. Why not wait for some people to actually get their hands on it, listen to their thoughts, then make the first draft?

Doesn't Hurt to Wait
It would be much better for these articles as a whole if you took the time to actually review the product yourself, or hear the thoughts of people who actually have it before you make a draft.
If you *really* want the "prestige" of being the person who creates the thread on the product, go ahead. The imaginary internet points are all yours. But there's no need to write an inaccurate draft, for the reasons I mentioned above. Just write something like "To be written". No one will steal your thunder now.

If you guys still want to do this, here's what I think would be a really great compromise for both sides -
Instead of speculating the performance of the parts, why not make the draft based on what's actually being *marketed* by TT? For example, for Power (the new Valkyrie driver), you can write something like "It is advertised to be really good for attack, due to the speed caused by the huge flat tip".

(Mar. 14, 2019  4:24 PM)Dt20000 Wrote: Many times on the WBO I have had an argument between somebody else since we have different opinions, and people rarely ever come up with compromises or convince me to believe their opinion, but I agree with you now. I agree with the compromise and think that it is a good idea.

(Mar. 14, 2019  5:31 PM)KingSpin Wrote:

(Mar. 14, 2019  4:24 PM)Dt20000 Wrote: Many times on the WBO I have had an argument between somebody else since we have different opinions, and people rarely ever come up with compromises or convince me to believe their opinion, but I agree with you now. I agree with the compromise and think that it is a good idea.

Great! Hope MonoDragon sees where I'm coming from and agrees