Forum:The Project M debate
It has come to my attention that this Project M thing is getting pretty big: it already has recognition and equal standing to the three real games on SmashBoards and in tournaments. And now, multiple people are requesting that we do the same here.
At present, SW:NOT defines that we should keep away from fanon and fan games due to the impossibility of defining a notability criteria. However, Project M has a few properties that make it hard to fit into this generality:
The current policy on notable hacks (including Project M) is to contain all info about the hack on a single page and refrain from mentioning it on other pages. This debate is to determine whether we should change this policy, and in what way.
This page has several sections. Read every section before you vote in any of them; some are mutually exclusive. The rules of voting are as follows:
Topic: Allow Project M to have independent character pages
Note: A "Yes" decision here implies that relevant images, templates, and categories will also be allowed.
Subtopic: Allow Project M to have moveset subpages
Note: If you voted "No" for individual character pages, do not vote here (your vote here is assumed "No").
Topic: Allow Project M to have other independent pages
Topic: Give Project M equal standing with the real games
Note: "Equal standing" does not mean "part of the Smash Bros. series". The series itself will always be only the official games; the phrase "the Smash Bros. series" does not and will not refer to PM.
Subtopic: Usage of Project M article icon
Votes: Delete notable hacks such as Project M from the wiki
Finally, there will be those who do not believe that even the most notable of hacks deserve representation on a wiki whose mission statement is to document the Smash Bros. series as unbiasedly as possible. This section is for those people to post their votes. If you intend to vote here, do not place a vote for the other topics.
As of this time it appears the community's opinions have become mostly clear:
Should the discussion close now, this is what would happen:
If you have a serious problem with going forward with this as written, and you feel like you need to say something you haven't said above, speak now. Remember to only state your full opinion and not argue with others'. Remember that like all wiki policies, this can change in the future if enough support arises, but as of this time this is what would happen. Toomai Glittershine Le Grand Fromage 12:26, 3 November 2013 (EST)
Point number two: As long as there are people willing to write the moveset subpage articles (which there will be), I don't see what's wrong with having them, and the information can be changed as the game is developed (which shouldn't be hard to do). Awesome Cardinal 2000 18:07, 3 November 2013 (EST)
Point #3 - I don't think we should always put P:M notes onto pages if it's not important. If it's something new that P:M adds, like input buffer control, there could be a mention of it on a related page that discusses how Brawl has the 10-frame buffer. However, for spikes, it's already assumed that P:M reverts it back so we don't necessarily need that information. --Timson622222 (talk) 00:02, 9 November 2013 (EST)
Hello? It's been a while. Not to sound impatient, but can we have a deadline or something, as in 'we will be moving forward with the above specifications at XX date'? The above section has been up for 16 days and the last additions were a member going through the debates on the 12th and a Timson622222's comment on the 9th. Again, I apologize if this seems impatient. Jigglypuff the Magic Dragon (talk) 18:12, 19 November 2013 (EST)
As nothing major has really changed since the preliminary verdict was issued, I think it's safe to say that it can be implemented pretty much as-is. To sum it up:
Within the next day or two, I will be creating relevant templates and three stubs: Mario (PM), Mewtwo (PM), and Charizard (PM). Once the stubs are up, use their format to create other character articles and fill them in. I ask you not create any new pages until then, though you can add minor PM notes to existing articles.
Finally, I will reply to some specific posts in this page that caught my attention:
I hope this edit isn't out of place, but since we have had time to view the results of the verdict for PM information, I want to bring up a few things:
About Custom Stages
I think each stage available in Project M (Except for the ones that have only received minor edits) should be mentioned on the stage's specific page, as well as its actual Tournament status in PM. Of course this would mean creating all new pages for the three Project M exclusive stages: Dracula's Castle, Training Room and Skyloft. Project M in-game snapshots should also be uploaded rather than using the N64 or Melee images.--Wolfy76700 (talk) 16:57, 13 September 2014 (EDT)