Forum:Articles on universe creators
Recently it's come to my attention that not everyone is quite on the same page when it comes to our scope on real people (specifically developers). Instead of arguing about this one at a time, I believe it more beneficial to come to an agreement on what our scope is when it comes to real people. Here's what we can do
- OPTION 1: Only create articles for developers who have directly contributed to the Smash series. List of developers significant to Super Smash Bros. gets deleted.
Any developer article we currently have that does not fit this bill will be deleted.
- OPTION 2: Only create articles for developers who have directly contributed to the Smash series, and other developers get listed on List of developers significant to Super Smash Bros.
Articles who do not fit the bill will be merged into the list article and deleted.
- OPTION 3: Only create articles for developers who have directly contributed to the Smash series, and List of developers significant to Super Smash Bros. gets renamed to "List of developers related to Super Smash Bros." or similar.
Articles who do not fit the bill will be merged into the list article and deleted, and the major Smash developers get taken off the list.
- OPTION 4: Create articles for any developer responsible for the creation of a universe featured in Smash. List of developers significant to Super Smash Bros. gets deleted.
- OPTION 5: Leave it alone.
Your votes here
You may vote for more than one. Please be sure to bold your votes.13:57, 6 April 2018 (EDT)
- 2, 3, or 4 14:01, 6 April 2018 (EDT)
- 4 or 5. I honestly think that doing this on a case by case basis (which none of the options other than 5 actually allow for) would be best, as some character developers (such as Shigeru Miyamoto) are much more deserving of an article than others (such as Shigesato Itoi). However in the event that 5 is deemed unsatisfactory, I would much prefer 4 be implemented than any other option, as after all part of our duty as a wiki arguably should be to provide information on as many figureheads relevant to the Smash series as we can in order to truly be an encyclopedia on all things Smash. Alex the Jigglypuff trainer 14:06, 6 April 2018 (EDT)
- I see what you are saying, but this is an issue of scope, and scope should, in my opinion, be hammered out and applied across the whole project instead of just here and there. 14:10, 6 April 2018 (EDT)
- 2 or 3. Either way, important figures to Smash's development should be given emphasis. All developers, regardless of how major or minor, should be mentioned on the page as well. MHStarCraft 14:17, 6 April 2018 (EDT)
- 3. I don't think it'd be right to give devs who haven't worked on the Smash games directly their own articles, but at the same time I don't think it'd be fair to delete their presence from the wiki outright. Moving the "not directly involved" devs to a more generalized list would be sufficient enough I feel. Aliks-Odev (talk) 15:18, 6 April 2018 (EDT)
- Support 2 If you're a major figurehead of the series, you get a page. If you helped out a bit mostly on stuff related to your home series, you get put in the list. If you own content but haven't actually contributed anything, go be an interwiki link.
By that token, explicitly oppose 4. I don't want to see us go back there. Toomai Glittershine The Honcho 18:11, 6 April 2018 (EDT)
- 4 or 5. Iron Reggie, the Fearsome Warrior 18:57, 6 April 2018 (EDT)
- Support 2, oppose 4 I've stated my opinion on this topic more than once, and I don't feel the need to repeat myself. (That, and Toomai kinda summed up what I was going to say anyways) Aidan, the Rurouni 19:24, 6 April 2018 (EDT)
- Support 2, oppose 4 and 5 Pretty much in the same boat as Aidan, but I'll go ahead and post my opinions here. They simply aren't relevant enough. Most if not all the articles would be "X created Y who is playable in Z." A lot of people on the Miyamoto talk page seem to be biased towards him because he's created so many great gaming icons. While that is true, he has almost zero relation to Smash. This is the case with all other character creators. In addition to this, you also have to take into consideration the other co-creators of the character/universe. Wouldn't they deserve the same treatment should option 4 come into fruition? In the end, if option 4 passes, we'd be seeing a lot of small low-effort articles on lots of mostly irrelevant figures. A mention on the significant dev page and a crosswiki link would be the best option here. Pokebub (talk) 20:15, 6 April 2018 (EDT)
- 3 UltraNessDX (talk) 14:01, 23 April 2018 (EDT)
- 2 Leave a message if needed 16:15, 29 April 2018 (EDT)
- 1 or 2. John HUAH! 13:07, 13 June 2018 (EDT)
- 2/3 Menshay (talk) 12:48, 15 June 2018 (EDT)
- 2 or 3, preferably the latter, per Pokebub. Nyargleblargle (Contribs) 19:23, 16 June 2018 (EDT)
- 4 or 2. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Aykrivwassup (talk • contribs) 18:17, 20 June 2018 (EDT)
- 3. Nokii ε (T · C) 19:56, 25 June 2018 (EDT)
- 1 or 3. F0rZ3r0F0r (talk) 01:52, 3 July 2018 (EDT)
Ok so I am seeing 2 and 3 as the popular opinions here, so it comes down to this: Do we need to list the big contributors on the list or not? 2 is yes, list them; 3 is no, don't list them.19:43, 22 July 2018 (EDT)
- Number 2, yes. Also gdi I missed on the voting :c -- Beep (talk) 19:56, 22 July 2018 (EDT)
- Yes Still firm to my vote. Leave a message if needed 20:01, 22 July 2018 (EDT)
- Gonna stick to number 2. Pokebub (talk) 04:04, 25 July 2018 (EDT)
- I'll go with option 2. MHStarCraft 21:36, 31 July 2018 (EDT)
- Number 2. For sure. F0rZ3r0F0r (talk) 04:55, 7 August 2018 (EDT)