Forum:Project M mentions: Difference between revisions
Aidanzapunk (talk | contribs) m (→Support) |
Serpent King (talk | contribs) (English!!) |
||
| Line 7: | Line 7: | ||
Should this proposal pass... | Should this proposal pass... | ||
*Any mention of PM in the middle of prose or even in a table would be allowed. | *Any mention of PM in the middle of prose or even in a table would be allowed. | ||
*Infoboxes, navboxes, and similar templates would remain '''not''' be permitted to have PM listed (except for competitive ones). | *Infoboxes, navboxes, and similar templates would remain '''not''' to be permitted to have PM listed (except for competitive ones). | ||
*"In Project M" sections would remain '''not''' be permitted. | *"In Project M" sections would remain '''not''' to be permitted. | ||
*Screenshots of PM would remain '''not''' be permitted outside of the PM specific articles. | *Screenshots of PM would remain '''not''' to be permitted outside of the PM specific articles. | ||
*In general, PM would continue to be not treated like an official game, but it also would not be ignored. | *In general, PM would continue to be not treated like an official game, but it also would not be ignored. | ||
Revision as of 16:53, March 19, 2017
|
This discussion is in regards to a proposed change on SmashWiki. The discussion must first meet with a consensus before it is implemented. |
So here's the deal. 4 years ago, a poll was created to decide how much coverage Project M was going to get. It has been pointed out to me that one topic of this in particular is currently not having its consensus followed in the least: TEQ. Consensus clearly says that PM is allowed to be mentioned in any article it would make sense in, yet we have more or less banned its mention in any non-PM related article. After a bit of research as to why that could be, I found that we never explicitly mention in any policy that this was allowed. In fact, the only mention of PM in any policy is in SW:NOT#SmashWiki is not official: "...pushing for the removal of information with the argument that it's not approved/endorsed by Nintendo (such as the Brawl mod Project M) will not be acceptable."
So the only logical choice is to re-vote on this topic, taking better care to explicitly define what mentions would be allowed, and what wouldn't.
Should this proposal pass...
- Any mention of PM in the middle of prose or even in a table would be allowed.
- Infoboxes, navboxes, and similar templates would remain not to be permitted to have PM listed (except for competitive ones).
- "In Project M" sections would remain not to be permitted.
- Screenshots of PM would remain not to be permitted outside of the PM specific articles.
- In general, PM would continue to be not treated like an official game, but it also would not be ignored.
In the future, it may be a good idea to actually make a content model policy in which this stuff would get moved to, but that's another day. For now, let's figure out what we are doing with PM. Serpent 
King 16:33, 19 March 2017 (EDT)
Support
- Project M is a mod, so therefore it's not official. I don't see why we'd need to merge it with the official stuff anyways.
Aidan, the Irish Dragon Warrior
16:46, 19 March 2017 (EDT)
