SmashWiki:Featured content

The next featured article gets chosen on October 1, 2016. The current vote leader is Fox (SSBM) with a total of +8.

Featured articles are considered to be the best articles on SmashWiki, as determined by our editors. Before being listed here, articles are reviewed at featured article candidates for accuracy, completeness, and style. A small, stylised Super Smash Bros. logo with a star on an article's page indicates that the article is featured, or has been featured in the past.

You can view all featured article snippets on SmashWiki:Featured content/Full.

Rules and regulations

• Feature articles will be chosen quarterly: on the first of January, April, July, and October.

• New suggestions may not be added in the month leading up to the next featured article (e.g. no suggestions in December because it's a month before January).

• Feature articles will be chosen based on vote count alone.

• The article with the highest vote total (supports being +1, opposes being -1) will be chosen.
• In the event of a tie, an admin picks which article gets used.

• Suggestions expire:

• a year after they are given, should they not be chosen.
• quarterly if they have a score of less than 0.

• There may be no more than 10 suggestions at any one time.
• All suggestions will be archived when they pass or fail (see here).

Things to consider

The following is a list of things to consider, both when nominating and voting on an article

1. Quality and completeness of the article: Does the article sufficiently cover the topic at hand? Is it comprehensible and easy to follow? Are images used effectively and not excessively? Is the article lacking in grammar and spelling errors?
2. Relevance to Smash: Is the article directly related to the Smash series, or is it more tangential?
3. Requirements: Does the article have a sufficiently lengthy opening paragraph that it will fill out the featured article space on the main page? Does the article have an identifying image to accompany this description? Has the article been featured before (we do not accept articles that have already been featured)?

How to request that an article be featured

To propose an article be featured, please do the following:

• Create a heading under "Proposed featured articles" that looks like this: ===Article Name===, where "Article Name" is the full name of the article you believe is worthy of being labeled as a featured article.
• Briefly explain why this article merits featured article status.
• Be sure to sign your proposition with ~~~~

Proposed Featured Articles

Palutena's Guidance

A fun and detailed page on one of the elements of Smash that really makes it unique. ---Preceding unsigned comment added by you. Or maybe DatNuttyKid. 13:24, 27 January 2016 (EST)

Support: I don't see why not. Serpent King 22:45, 27 January 2016 (EST)

weak oppose its a great article, just that it is to minor to be a FA in my opinion Poultry(talk) the fluffy 17:01, 7 February 2016 (EST)

But like, it's not about the topic of the article? First of all, Palutena's Guidance isn't really minor. Secondly, even if it was, if it's a "great article" it deserves to be featured whether or not it's a major one. ---Preceding unsigned comment added by cupid♥. Or maybe DatNuttyKid. 20:29, 7 February 2016 (EST)

I would like to hear a response to this, given that it's currently hindering this page's chances of being featured for a reason I believe is false. ---Preceding unsigned comment added by cupid♥. Or maybe DatNuttyKid. 20:54, 13 February 2016 (EST)

Yes, the major flaw of going by vote count alone...I agree with DNK, though. If you are going to oppose an FA, you should at least have a semi-valid reason for doing so. Serpent King 21:07, 13 February 2016 (EST)

sorry for this late response but i think that if codec wasnt featured, why should PG be (codec for the win!) plus codec is much more detailed about all the metal gear references Poultry(talk) the Pumpkin Pie 16:49, 28 February 2016 (EST)

That's... not a better reason. Besides, PG doesn't have nearly as many references as the codec does, so it can't be more detailed. It has all of the relevant information listed. Besides, you can re-nominate Codec if you want. But judging this one based on the fact that an article you liked wasn't seems unfair. ---Preceding unsigned comment added by you. Or maybe DatNuttyKid. 13:04, 1 March 2016 (EST)

i said that i think that codec is a better article in all qualities, i dont think this one should be featured if a completely better article was not featured. Poultry(talk) the Pumpkin Pie 18:38, 5 March 2016 (EST)

Support. I love her Guidance. -- The 70's called. They said BeepYou was here :v (talk) 17:30, 7 February 2016 (EST)

Weak oppose. Not quite enough prose SmashWiki editors actually wrote. Nyargleblargle (Contribs) 18:35, 2 March 2016 (EST)

Weak support Honestly pretty interesting subject but somewhat minor. Dots (talk) The Greninja 19:13, 2 March 2016 (EST)

Support. It's funny, which is fitting, considering the feature will start on April Fools' Day. RickTommy 22:46, 2 March 2016 (EST)

Weak oppose. Doesn't have much written other than quotes. Codec Conversations has more notes even though Brawl has less characters. -- Ethan(Discussion) 23:21, 2 March 2016 (EST)

Oppose. While it's accurate, complete, and has good style, the majority of it isn't "written" by us, as it is mostly direct quotes from the game. MuteSpittah (talk) 18:53, 6 March 2016 (EST)

Support: Palutena's Guidance is my favorite Smash Taunt, and my overall favorite taunt. (Luigi's down taunt is a close second.) Green Machine (talk) 11:30, 16 March 2016 (EDT)Green Machine

Support The taunt is nice in this game so, I will agree! Dragonfirebreath25 (talk) 18:40, 12 April 2016 (EDT)

Support Because why not? Also, it's a neat article in my opinion and very detailed as well. So yeah. Pika, Poyo poyo poyo 12:32, 12 June 2016 (EDT)

Weak oppose I have to agree that it's really just a list of quotes ripped directly from SSB4. Not that it's not an interesting article all the same. BaconMaster 16:27, 1 July 2016 (EDT)

Fox (SSBM)

He is notorious for his waveshine combos. He is also one of the fastest characters in the series. He is also EXTREMELY popular competitively. Swagman, the Green Swordsman 08:42, 2 April 2016 (EDT)

Look, we do not make pages featured articles because of the thing they are about (the subject, which in this case, is Melee Fox), we make them on the quality of the article (how clean it is, how much info it has, etc.). This article is rather good in my opinion after looking at all the information it has in the introduction, "Attributes" and "In competitive play". It could have more in "Changes from Smash 64 to Melee", though. -- Ethan(Discussion) 11:41, 2 April 2016 (EDT)

Support 20XX featured article Poultry(talk) the Team Liquid 12:34, 2 April 2016 (EDT)

Support. Covers everything it needs to in a surprisingly concise manner. Nyargleblargle (Contribs) 17:58, 3 April 2016 (EDT)

Super Strong Support Very nice article and good details. Dragonfirebreath25 (talk) 18:15, 3 April 2016 (EDT)

Considering how Fox is Competitive Melee's mascot, this won't be a bad idea although maybe push Fox as a whole. It isn't just Melee that he's beloved, he's a favorite among all smashers and although in my opinion he kinda gets more annoying within sequels (seriously Fox's voice in Smash 4), you have to admit that he's an awesome character to use in any Smash game. Dots (talk) The Justice 19:31, 3 April 2016 (EDT)

Some wording issues here and there but overall good article, would support this or Fox in general. MuteSpittah (talk) 22:52, 3 April 2016 (EDT)

Support This is the kind of article that needs featured at some point, especially since it only changes every 3 months. To outsiders, this may well define competitive smash. It is well written, gets to the point, and is fairly unbiased, which can't be said about most Brawl character pages. (There are straight up opinions in those articles someone should clean it up lol). RobSir zx 23:49, 7 April 2016 (EDT)

WOMBO COMBO level of support because that ain't Falco :V -- BeepYou, a user with no grammar at all :v (talk) 00:10, 8 April 2016 (EDT)

Support Very clean and well-written. Penro 19:51, 10 April 2016 (EDT)

Support This is a very good article indeed! Good enough for me! Dragonfirebreath25 (talk) 07:40, 1 July 2016 (EDT)

You voted twice... lol Poultry(talk) the God-Slayer 10:56, 1 July 2016 (EDT)

Support well-written and well detailed, not to mention the subject matter. BaconMaster 16:27, 1 July 2016 (EDT)

Robin (SSB4)

A well-written page that covers the character in a clear and concise manner, also very clean and demonstrates everything a fighter page should be. MuteSpittah (talk) 22:46, 3 April 2016 (EDT)

Support This is good indeed. I like it so much. Dragonfirebreath25 (talk) 07:20, 4 April 2016 (EDT)

"Victory poses" has an incomplete tag in it. -- Ethan(Discussion) 14:42, 7 April 2016 (EDT)

Yeah. That's pretty minor though. Marth also had an incomplete tag while it was featured for a time as well. MuteSpittah (talk) 14:47, 7 April 2016 (EDT)

Just saying (no one really voted for Marth anyways). -- Ethan(Discussion) 14:57, 7 April 2016 (EDT)

Weak support. Great, but a bit too long, especially the opening paragraph. Nyargleblargle (Contribs) 15:50, 14 April 2016 (EDT)

Oppose: really starting to get tired of always featuring fighters. Serpent King 20:25, 26 June 2016 (EDT)

Strong Oppose It's missing Japanese in one section. TabuuandMasterCore 11:58, 29 June 2016 (EDT)

Weak support Though it is a superb article, 2/3 of the past 3 featured articles (including the current one) have been FE characters. However, as this one is a game-specific page, I feel it is a bit more of a change. BaconMaster 16:27, 1 July 2016 (EDT)

Link

Has a lot of info, is clean and has many nice images. -- Ethan(Discussion) 23:38, 3 April 2016 (EDT)

Support A good one indeed. Dragonfirebreath25 (talk) 14:01, 14 April 2016 (EDT)

Weak oppose Solid, but could be more concise. Take, for example, the Smash 64 section. Nyargleblargle (Contribs) 15:50, 14 April 2016 (EDT)

Support! I mean, come on! It's Link! He is a good fighter and the theread is clean, very nice, and has (like any other thread or whatever you call it. ∆_∆) much info! Hello! (talk) 12:22, 2 June 2016 (EDT)

Oppose: really starting to get tired of always featuring fighters. Serpent King 20:25, 26 June 2016 (EDT)

Strong oppose Same reason as Serpent King. TabuuandMasterCore 14:07, 2 July 2016 (EDT)

The 46 featured articles so far have consisted of 11 characters, 12 stages , 3 game mechanics, 3 games, 3 game menu areas (SSE, My Music, and Stickers), 2 bosses, 2 items (counting the Final Smash), 2 cosmetic items (music and costumes), 2 techniques, 2 fan creations (Smashtasm and tier list), 1 special move, 1 about AI, 1 about glitches, and 1 about stage aspects (platform). At a 11:12:23 ratio of characters:stages:misc, you have a 23.9%, 26.1%, and 50% featuring proportion, respectively. For a game based heavily on the stages and fighters, these ratios are pretty much expected. If you're getting tired of us recently having featured character articles (which is a whopping number of 2 if you go back to the Master Hand glitch), you need a different voting system. MegaTron1 12:34, 4 July 2016 (EDT)

Stale-move negation

Describes everything in full detail and tells it in a very clean way. Plus, very well known, and somewhat detailed. Penro 20:14, 5 April 2016 (EDT)

Support per Penro. Nyargleblargle (Contribs) 15:50, 14 April 2016 (EDT)

Support for this reason. Dragonfirebreath25 (talk) 16:18, 14 April 2016 (EDT)

Bump. This page really is very good, and I'd hate for it to be missed out on it's chance to shine. Penro 16:43, 1 July 2016 (EDT)

History of competitive Melee

It really shows how a game designed to be non-competitive can become a competitive scene where people can win up to 15k, shows ups and downs of a important part of this Wiki, it also shows how much the competitive scene, and Smash Bros. as a whole advanced from its early days. That's including SmashWiki too. It is written in a way that many people wouldn't imagine doing, many people don't even think there was a platinum age. It also is written in long and informing paragraphs that definitly tells us a great our community is to put in that much time into one article. I can go on and on about how good this article is and how much it deserves to be featured, but i cannot make up your minds. You, and the rest of the SmashWiki community, will judge this article wisely Poultry(talk) the God-Slayer 10:53, 1 July 2016 (EDT)

Weak support. A bit lengthy towards the end, but overall well-written and has just the right amount of images. Nyargleblargle (Contribs) 17:36, 2 July 2016 (EDT)

Downloadable content

Aside from being kinda lengthy and list-y, this article is well structured and has nice visuals\images. Covers important info well while being as concise as possible. Since the DLC days are finally over it might be nice to reflect by the time a new FA is needed. It certainly isn't one of the most interesting out there but I think it can warrant a feature. RobSir zx 17:55, 1 July 2016 (EDT)

Weak oppose. As you said, most of this is lists, and I'd prefer to feature articles with more prose. Nyargleblargle (Contribs) 17:36, 2 July 2016 (EDT)

Distant Planet

Some minor wording issues, but hits the sweetspot in terms of detail, uses images well, and is almost entirely well-written. Nyargleblargle (Contribs) 17:36, 2 July 2016 (EDT)

It has already been featured, though. -Menshay (talk) 18:08, 2 July 2016 (EDT)

It was eight years ago (before Brawl was released, I think), so I think it's okay to feature it again. Nyargleblargle (Contribs) 18:46, 2 July 2016 (EDT)

oppose I'd really rather not feature something twice. It also lacks length in the opening paragraph, which will make the image awkwardly outsize the text (like the FA we have now) Serpent King 21:37, 2 July 2016 (EDT)

Oppose I will love to have it again but, I like it when it was here once. Dragonfirebreath25 (talk) 00:11, 3 July 2016 (EDT)