Editing Forum:Recategorizing tournament series pages
From SmashWiki, the Super Smash Bros. wiki
Jump to navigationJump to search
|
You aren't logged in. While it's not a requirement to create an account, doing so makes it a lot easier to keep track of your edits and a lot harder to confuse you with someone else. If you edit without being logged in, your IP address will be recorded in the page's edit history. | |
 Log in
|
Create account
| |
The edit can be undone. Please check the comparison below to verify that this is what you want to do, and then publish the changes below to finish undoing the edit.
| Latest revision | Your text | ||
| Line 30: | Line 30: | ||
:'''Option 5''': Categorise series by the pot size of its richest member, e.g. "Four-figure tournament series". Logically this should have a correlation with its prestige. The complication would be assigning a base currency (probably US$ just for being the most common) and dealing with exchange rates. | :'''Option 5''': Categorise series by the pot size of its richest member, e.g. "Four-figure tournament series". Logically this should have a correlation with its prestige. The complication would be assigning a base currency (probably US$ just for being the most common) and dealing with exchange rates. | ||
[[User:Toomai|Toomai]] [[User talk:Toomai|Glittershine]] [[File:Toomai.png|20px|link=User:Toomai/Bin|???]] The Sphere 07:42, January 2, 2024 (EST) | [[User:Toomai|Toomai]] [[User talk:Toomai|Glittershine]] [[File:Toomai.png|20px|link=User:Toomai/Bin|???]] The Sphere 07:42, January 2, 2024 (EST) | ||
An issue I have with Option 1 is that it could be hard to discern which category the series should go in, especially in series' that span multiple games and have changed in size over time. Once upon a time a series may have been considered a "Major" for one game, but currently it isn't. Or, a series was mostly Regional except its most recent iterations have become majors. I think that overall '''Option 2''' is just easier and more practical, however I think it could still be useful and easy to add just the Weekly and Premier categories since there are fewer and they would hold less debate. [[User:Levii|Levii]] ([[User talk:Levii|talk]]) 13:28, January 2, 2024 (EST) | An issue I have with Option 1 is that it could be hard to discern which category the series should go in, especially in series' that span multiple games and have changed in size over time. Once upon a time a series may have been considered a "Major" for one game, but currently it isn't. Or, a series was mostly Regional except its most recent iterations have become majors. I think that overall '''Option 2''' is just easier and more practical, however I think it could still be useful and easy to add just the Weekly and Premier categories since there are fewer and they would hold less debate. [[User:Levii|Levii]] ([[User talk:Levii|talk]]) 13:28, January 2, 2024 (EST) | ||
:'''Lean Option 1''': I think there's value in categorizing the page for something like Genesis differently than something like MSM, we should think of good ways to deal with ambiguous cases like series that are majors for one game but not others or series that fluctuate between major and regional (eg Sumabato) but I don't think that invalidates the value provided in differentiating the unambiguous cases. [[User:Stuart98|Stuart98]] ([[User talk:Stuart98|talk]]) 13:20, February 7, 2024 (EST) | :'''Lean Option 1''': I think there's value in categorizing the page for something like Genesis differently than something like MSM, we should think of good ways to deal with ambiguous cases like series that are majors for one game but not others or series that fluctuate between major and regional (eg Sumabato) but I don't think that invalidates the value provided in differentiating the unambiguous cases. [[User:Stuart98|Stuart98]] ([[User talk:Stuart98|talk]]) 13:20, February 7, 2024 (EST) | ||
