SmashWiki talk:Creating new articles

Here's a new proposal I've been thinking about for the past few days. I feel this is needed, as people need to know when and what to create pages about. Also note that if this passes, I plan to merge Help:New page with this one. So, what do you think about this new policy; yay or nay? And yes, I did just say "yay or nay". Rtzxy Reflect! 20:25, 15 November 2014 (EST)

Hmmmmmmm. It's not a bad idea to codify in a policy exactly why this page gets deleted while that page gets kept, but I have this nagging feeling we have something similar somewhere already. Toomai Glittershine The Steppin' 22:32, 15 November 2014 (EST)

I checked. I found nothing, but I could've missed something. As of now, however, I found nothing, and this is original. Rtzxy Reflect! 22:34, 15 November 2014 (EST)

I actually checked well before creating this page, so I think we should be fine. Rtzxy Reflect! 22:35, 15 November 2014 (EST)

All right, I checked userpages, official policies, failed and repealed policies, the help pages, and the forums and found nothing similar to this, so your nagging feeling, Toomai, is false. Rtzxy Reflect! 22:45, 15 November 2014 (EST)

Yeah I suspected as much, I found pretty much the same nothing. I'll read it over more carefully in a bit (there are a few wording changes I'm considering), but no reason not to support it. Toomai Glittershine Le Grand Fromage 22:51, 15 November 2014 (EST)

I generally quite like this proposal, but I believe that it would make our policies a bit less cluttered if we somehow merged SW:NOTE into this; I actually intended to put in a request to expand SW:NOTE, but I feel that this does a good job of addressing my main problems with the old policy.

--- Monsieur Crow, Author Extraordinaire, 17:43, 16 November 2014 (EST)

That doesn't sound like a bad idea, actually. I might think about that, and give some updates when I get the chance to. Rtzxy Reflect! 17:52, 16 November 2014 (EST)

All right, Monsuier Crow, I took up your suggestion. How about something like this:

"Articles about competitive smashers and crews: A smasher or crew can only have his/her own article if he or she is notable enough. What considered a "notable smasher/crew" is as follows:

• The smasher or crew participated in or organized an offline tournament that is run by standard tournament rules or a reasonably similar variant, and has some level of regional or national recognition.
• The smasher or crew contributed high-level content to, or administrates at, recognized websites pertaining to Smash Bros. other than this wiki.
• The smasher or crew prove legitimate regional or national fame otherwise not covered by these guidelines.

If a smasher or crew does not follow any of these three guidelines, don't make an article about them. Also note that if a smasher is notable enough, the new article must be put into the "Smasher:" namespace. This does not apply to other competitive articles."

Reword as you please, because I literally just copy-pasted this from SW:NOTE, so if you don't like it, it's not final. Rtzxy Reflect! 18:13, 16 November 2014 (EST)

All right, Monsieur Crow. I added your suggestion to the policy. Thanks for the idea, and reword it if you feel like it needs to be reworded. Rtzxy Reflect! 18:49, 16 November 2014 (EST)

Support. We pretty much enforce this already, so a policy regarding new articles is a good idea. Qwerty (talk) 19:04, 16 November 2014 (EST)

Support for reasons allready put forward. That, and Prevention is better than cure! ScoreCounter 14:46, 17 November 2014 (EST)

I actually like this policy as well. I do think however that this might be unnecessary since maybe new users might already know what to create and not but this policy is something to consider. Dots (talk) The Zerg Rush 19:24, 17 November 2014 (EST)

It's best to have something written down than have nothing at all. Plus, it details things that some might think is acceptable to make when in reality it isn't, so not everyone would know everything about what to make or not. Well, at least thanks for considering this. Rtzxy Reflect! 15:52, 18 November 2014 (EST)

I recommend putting a link to Special:WantedPages somewhere. PikaSamus (talk) 18:04, 20 November 2014 (EST)

Done. It's under "How to make a new article", because that's the only place I can think of to put it. Rtzxy Reflect! 18:11, 20 November 2014 (EST)

I've also been thinking of putting something about article icons on this, but I don't know if I should. Rtzxy Reflect! 22:58, 20 November 2014 (EST)

I put something about redirects on this. Do you like it or would you like me to remove it? Rtzxy Reflect! 20:27, 21 November 2014 (EST)

Any more thoughts on this policy proposal? Rtzxy Reflect! 19:20, 2 December 2014 (EST)

Small problem

Users cannot create pages at all, I can't even edit my user page or talk page, and I am e-mail confirmed.--Richard (talk) 20:51, 28 November 2014 (EST)

You need to be autoconfirmed in order to create new pages; it says it right here, on this page itself by the way. Rtzxy Reflect! 20:53, 28 November 2014 (EST)

What makes an minor character?

It says you shouldn't make pages for minor characters, but what exactly qualifies a character to be minor? Obviously characters like Bronto Burt (pre-Smash Run) are undeserving, because all they do is fly in the background without any effect. But would Kraid and K.K. Slider still be deserving under this policy? Or Nabbit? It should be more specific, otherwise people will decide on their own definitions of "minor character", which will cause arguments. ---Preceding unsigned comment added by you. Or maybe Nutta. 23:51, 30 December 2014 (EST)

The current criteria for background characters I'm trying to standardize are:

• Is it a named character that appears on a stage in a role that affects the fighters in the playing area or does something other than just appear in the background visually? Does it possess a trophy or other role (e.g. Smash Run/Tour)? If the answer to both of those is yes, it deserves a page.
• Is it a named character with a notable voice-acting role in Smash that wouldn't qualify under the previous criteria? If so, it deserves a page.
• Is it a named character that is part of a character's moveset? If so, it deserves a page.
• Is it a named character with multiple roles too small to warrant a page (e.g. visual-only background character plus trophy)? If so, it deserves only a disambig page with links to its roles and an interwiki box if appropriate.

Does that clarify things? Miles (talk) 00:00, 31 December 2014 (EST)

All right, I added to this page, and I think I solved a few problems here. I should say, however, that this isn't my page, and I don't give a s—t about you editing this page, so if you think I missed something or you want to add something, feel free to add to this; I'm not stopping you. Rtzxy Reflect! 01:37, 31 December 2014 (EST)