Talk:Source Gaming

Deletion
I agree with the tag. Now, I'll say: it's absolutely fantastic that they translate Sakurai's stuff. But that doesn't mean there needs to be an article here about them. Couple that with how the site isn't totally supposed to be devoted to Smash, and how when they're not translating stuff, they're opinioning and fanboying away on Smash things that don't say anything relevant or substantial (examples: the case for ___ to be in Smash/Sakurai is an artist/etc.) I don't really see much of a reason to have an article about them here. It doesn't mean the site is necessarily bad (if highly underwhelming / redundant without the translations), it just doesn't seem to have anything that warrants mention here besides references. Kinda feel like this page was made for the hell of it. MuteSpittah (talk) 07:00, 23 February 2016 (EST)

Upon inspecting the site, I support this page's deletion for the reasons above. Serpent   King   07:14, 23 February 2016 (EST)
 * Support echoing MuteSpittah. AidanzapunkSig1.png Aidan, the Wandering Dragon Warrior AidanzapunkSig2.png 08:32, 23 February 2016 (EST)
 * Support PoultrysigSSB4.png Poultry PoultrysigSSBM.png( talk ) the Pumpkin Pie 09:34, 23 February 2016 (EST)
 * Weak support. They are fairly significant in the community, but nowhere near as much as, say, SmashBoards. Nyargleblargle.png Nyargle blargle'''  (Contribs) 10:24, 23 February 2016 (EST)
 * Support. While I check the site everyday and find it really good, it's still not as relevant as, say, SmashBoards. Maybe when the site becomes more relevant, but it's still a little too early for it to be considered notable enough. [[File:TepigSprite.png]]Tepig (talk) 23:36, 23 February 2016 (EST)


 * Weak oppose Well, since I created this article I'll weigh in (If tl;dr essentially I think it should stay but doesn't really have to). OP is pretty much correct when he said it was wrote for the hell of it. If you haven't noticed, as of late I've been writing fairly random articles about various website/YouTube-related smash subjects that seem to be of some relevance. I thought to myself about when someone, say, a commentator, brought up info referenced from a direct source: "What on Earth that one guy was talking about" or "I've heard that of that thing before, but what is it?" one listening might ask. Unable to tech? Search for Beefy Smash Doods. Bowser's new upthrow hoo hah KO percentages? Smash Corner. Sakurai personally wanting Geno as a character? Source Gaming. Make sense? Every subject I've made an article for thus far have made notable contributions to the community and will most likely continue to do so. Now while this site in particular is kinda fanboyish, most of their articles are accurate, neutral in tone, and articulate. Not to mention just plain interesting. But I'm not one to cry over spilled milk. If it gets deleted that's just fine. Isn't completely necessary nor notable. Rob Sir   RobSir-sig.jpg  zx  23:51, 23 February 2016 (EST)

Weak oppose, regardless of everything else I feel their translation work is pretty significant. -Menshay (talk) 05:42, 24 February 2016 (EST)
 * They are not the only ones who translate things Sakurai has said. Past Famitsu columns have been translated via other groups of people. I don't understand why they, while they seem to have been very prolific and I personally am very interested in what Sakurai has to say and thus have been in the loop as far as their translations are concerned, are significant enough to warrant a page here. They've been good for their namesake: being a source of information. Define significant. MuteSpittah (talk) 06:25, 24 February 2016 (EST)
 * In addition, SG is still a baby. Regardless of whether they're "significant" or not, they aren't yet very developed or well-established. Smash 4 development is over, and SG needs to grow for a bit. I think it'd be best to wait it out and not jump to giving them a page just yet. MuteSpittah (talk) 06:31, 24 February 2016 (EST)


 * Strong oppose I might as well weigh in (as bias as I am). I think we've made a significant impact on the community. Source Gaming has been the only group to really go through and talk about the development of Smash. There has been people here and there, but none have made as much of an effort as we are doing.

We are also the first and only group of people to really go back, and properly source everything. Before our research, people thought that Pit was planned for Smash 64, or that Wolf was planned for Melee. We essentially fixed a ton of misinformation and misconceptions that existed within the fanbase. We not only translated a significant number of older and newer interviews, columns, ballot responses (from Melee/64), all of the Melee character introductions but we had to research to figure out what articles warranted translation too (and in a lot of cases track down sources).

Furthermore, we have provided high quality translations, that are either checked or translated by professional translators. Comparing our translations to other sites makes this very apparent. Source Gaming does have opinion articles, and we always mark those as opinions from the start of the article. The majority of the opinion articles are issues or debates that are present within the Smash community. Lastly, we've also broken an incredible amount of Smash-related news in this past year. I can't think of another site that broke more Smash news than us. We are still growing but everyone on the staff is obsessed with the Smash series and when the next game is announced, we'll be ready for it. For the time being we are still working on some older translations, and providing full breakdowns on characters (Such as we've done with Wario and Ganondorf). Again, obviously I'm bias. --PushDustIn (talk) 06:50, 24 February 2016 (EST)


 * Hm. I'm not really in the know of individual people's misconceptions, but I tend to think that misconceptions regarding things you'd likely only know via the Internet (such as the information you've helped put out) are totally on the individual. But that's not really important.


 * Hmmmm...I think my wording sucks. I would say that SG has had significance to the community thanks to the translations. It's just that I don't think SG is fitting and/or qualified to have its own article in Smashwiki? We use sources and cite them, and I think SG is credited for a decent amount of trivia and development info at the very least. I'm not sure it's necessary to go as far as to give it its own page. MuteSpittah (talk) 07:01, 24 February 2016 (EST)


 * It wasn't just individual, it was very much a community thing. Even if you go back on this Wiki, the information sourced was from an individual on Neogaf who made a lot of claims several years ago. The information was accepted as truth, and no one bothered to research it until we did. I really think if you are going to have pages for individual Smashers on this Wiki, SG fits in as well. --PushDustIn (talk) 07:18, 24 February 2016 (EST)


 * Supplying misinformation is on the supplier, believing misinformation is on the believer. I'm not sure if the sources of claims years ago were given their own pages, or if they were just mentioned on pages, or sourced.


 * I really hope I'm not coming across as wanting to discredit all that you've and all the other people at SG have done. Like, the translations are fantastic work and I love reading them. But, for this wiki, I think we should wait and see how you develop SG and maybe consider giving it a page later depending on what it turns into. SG not having a page on Smashwiki isn't disregarding your work; it just doesn't seem to be a fitting thing to add. At least not right now. MuteSpittah (talk) 07:25, 24 February 2016 (EST)


 * I think the best thing we can do is wait it out, see what you do with SG, and we'll keep citing SG on SW whenever it needs to be cited, and then consider giving SG a page later. Does that sound good, PushDust1n? MuteSpittah (talk) 07:37, 24 February 2016 (EST)


 * Several pieces of misinformation were used as sources and referenced on multiple pages. This is also in addition to us providing a lot of new information (Like Wario being considered in Melee, finding the source for Sonic's consideration in Melee, etc)

Nah don't worry about it I'm not taking it personally. It's just that...I've been working really hard lately to get recognition for just how much work we've done for the fanbase. I really don't think it's an exaggeration to say that we've been responsible for supplying the majority of Smash related news this past year and a half. We've spent a lot of time, effort and money in order to increase the amount of information there is to Smash fans for arguably not a lot of credit. Chibo recently admitted that he never heard of us before I wrote the reddit post a couple days ago (Source Gaming). In the end, it's your guys' Wiki. I just wanted to make my case! --PushDustIn (talk) 07:38, 24 February 2016 (EST)


 * I think you've made a very valid case here, and I will change my vote to a solid Neutral. Before we go too much further here, we should see what Miles has to say, seeing as he was the original tagger anyway. Serpent  SKSig.png  King   07:43, 24 February 2016 (EST)


 * Hm. I understand you. Well I appreciate your input PushDust1n. I'm not sure how SW goes about websites like yours that seem to be gaining some momentum and have solid, legitimate work behind them and have put out. I personally don't see a reason within the wiki to give you guys a page, but at the same time, I do want to see more translations and research, so I also have a desire to see you guys succeed in that respect. It's a weird call and I'm not really in a position of authority to make this one thank goodness. For me, right now, if I had the power, I'd give SG a page to help, but I would also see that as opening the door for other sites to exploitively appeal for the same thing and that creating a mess. Seeing that I'm not actually making that call, and that I don't think SG having or not having a page would help much right now, and after reading what you've had to say, I've changed to neutral as well. Within SW I think the best I can do is cite SG when needed. Thanks for discussing this with us, man. MuteSpittah (talk) 07:57, 24 February 2016 (EST)

I'm not sure I have a strong opinion on this one and could kind of go either way on it; hence why I tagged my concerns in the interest of hearing more viewpoints. Miles ( talk)  13:47, 24 February 2016 (EST)

Okay, I'm changing my vote to an oppose then. Tepig (talk) 18:47, 24 February 2016 (EST)

Well then, if you don't mind, Miles, I think we'll keep this for the time being. Could use a bit of cleanup though. Serpent   King   10:19, 26 February 2016 (EST)