Forum:Making a template for talk pages mentioning SSBWIKI were in the media

From SmashWiki, the Super Smash Bros. wiki
Jump to navigationJump to search
Forums: Index Proposals Making a template for talk pages mentioning SSBWIKI were in the media
FailedPolicy.png This is a closed discussion about a failed proposed change on SmashWiki. It remains for archival purposes.

News sites[edit]

I've said this in Zero's talk page but I just realized there was a discussion page for this: Basically, because I've seen Wikipedia mention in the talk pages of some articles that the media has explicitly referenced said article, I reasoned maybe "why not do the same here?" Maybe have a template for it? The Smash community still isn't that big, and for several gaming news sites to mention us as a database is pretty big.

(Also, not to try and show off, but my own edit made me proud that I'm contributing to society: Kotaku straight off this site said "According to his SSBWiki entry, this was ZeRo’s worst finish since 2011, spanning all the way back to the days of Super Smash Bros. Brawl." This goes on to show that your edits do matter to the world, and that by accurately editing this Wiki the media will find this useful as reference to Smash culture)S+ Tier (List) | Look what I've done!!! 01:03, 12 April 2017 (EDT)

I mean I don't know if this is exactly going to be more than a "SENPAI NOTICED ME" sorta thing, but it seems like a neat little idea. And considering Wikipedia does it and we're smaller than Wikipedia...weak support. Ganonmew, The Evil Clone 17:00, 12 April 2017 (EDT)
I don't really see the need to create a template, point blank. Mentions are cool, but do we really need to make a point of showing them off? Nyargleblargle.pngNyargleblargle (Contribs) 18:53, 12 April 2017 (EDT)
Oppose We're not Wikipedia, for starters. We won't always follow another wiki's lead. Putting that aside, I don't quite like the idea because it could make us look conceited, which is not a rep we need. On Wikipedia, it does make some sense with how large it is, but SmashWiki's still much too small scale to even consider something like that. Disaster Flare Disaster Flare signature image.png (talk) 13:57, 13 April 2017 (EDT)
Strong oppose i don't know how to put it but, it just seems like were inflating our ego PoultrysigSSB4.pngPoultryPoultrysigSSBM.png(talk) the God-Slayer 17:42, 13 April 2017 (EDT)
For one, Kotaku isn't the most reliable news network, so I'll take that comment with a grain of salt.
For two, Wikipedia is Wikipedia: you literally get any and all info there (most of the time). It's no surprise that their articles would get mentioned over us, so I fail to see your point. I echo previous opposes.
For three, the Smash community is huge, so I have no idea what you're talking about.
AidanzapunkSig1.pngAidan, the Springing Dragon WarriorAidanzapunkSig2.png 19:03, 13 April 2017 (EDT)
The community is still considered to be in its grassroots stages, just saying. —S+ Tier (List) | Look what I've done!!! 00:35, 14 April 2017 (EDT)

Maximum oppose

  1. I do not see what there is for SmashWiki to gain by doing this
  2. I doubt anyone actually cares enough about this to actually look up the list
  3. I agree that it makes us look conceited more than anything.

The way I see it, doing this would bring forth all bad results and no good ones. Serpent SKSig.png King 22:14, 13 April 2017 (EDT)

Bump Serpent SKSig.png King 00:19, 17 April 2017 (EDT)