Forum:The dilution of the "Notable players" sections

Forums: Index → Watercooler → The dilution of the "Notable players" sections

When these sections on character pages were conceptualized, they were meant to include only "historically significant" players, i.e. the very best players of the characters on a national level, or players who in the past had a huge impact on the character's competitive presence. They were explicitly not to be used to list just any pretty good player who uses the character, nor any big-name player who just occasionally messes around with the character (i.e. stop listing Mew2King on every single character he used once in a tournament). They were to provide a handy reference for readers on the most important players for that character; if readers wanted to see all the other players who competitively used the characters, that is what the character-specific categories were for. When I was around I was strict about enforcing this, but as my activity here wavered, I see these sections have become absolutely bloated, especially on the Smash 4 character articles. I made some attempts here and there when I was around to clean up some of them, but as I see those efforts did not stick and they just bloated back up.

I don't see myself fully inserting my hand into the wiki again anytime soon, but something concrete has to be decided about the exclusivity of these sections, and then proper enforcement must be followed through. Omega Tyrant 10:29, 15 April 2016 (EDT)

Cleanup really does need to happen Oh Jamal, Where art thou Poultry(talk) the Team Liquid 10:50, 15 April 2016 (EDT)

I will try to assist in the cleanup as much as I can, but it's going to be extremely difficult to look through 58 pages. It has definitely gotten out of hand, though. PokemonMasterJamal3 (talk) 13:30, 15 April 2016 (EDT)

Bumping this as it got knocked out of the recent changes pretty quickly. Omega Tyrant 18:37, 15 April 2016 (EDT)

Yes, I too have been trying to keep some of the bloating down by requiring proof of notability for anyone adding smashers to the list, but I don't have the competitive background to properly fact-check any of it (aside from looking at their article if they have one...but as you said, these are supposed to be smashers of the utmost notable). Serpent King 20:48, 15 April 2016 (EDT)