Forum:Project M coverage: Difference between revisions

From SmashWiki, the Super Smash Bros. wiki
Jump to navigationJump to search
(→‎Support full deletion: Should probably clarify that lol. We aren't deleting Project M/)
Line 18: Line 18:


==Oppose any deletion==
==Oppose any deletion==
Deletion is ridiculous. For many people, it's the only source of information. Considering how much content Project M has, and the impact it's had overall in Smash history, it would be unwise. Why fix something that's not broken? That's like deleting all information on Brawl because it's old and unpopular.


==Neutral==
==Neutral==


==Comments==
==Comments==

Revision as of 22:28, March 3, 2017

Forums: Index Proposals Project M coverage
Proposed.png This discussion is in regards to a proposed change on SmashWiki. The discussion must first meet with a consensus before it is implemented.

Here's the fact: Project M is becoming less and less relevant. The PMDT has disbanded, VGBC is no longer streaming it, and the last PM national was held on January 21st, 2017, over a month ago. As PM tournaments become more scarce and our PM character articles fall more and more out of date, I think it is finally time to declare PM old news. That is why I propose that the PM character articles be removed. Two ways we can do this:

  1. Delete and never look back.
  2. Condense all articles to a [Project M/Characters] article. Each character would get a brief description, changes from vanilla Brawl, and maybe the alts. Revision sections, moveset tables, notable players sections, and trivia would not be included. Currently existing links (e.g. Mario) would redirect to their relevant section on this article.

Now obviously this would be a major change for SmashWiki, so before any decisions can be made, we must first deliberate. Serpent SKSig.png King 21:03, 3 March 2017 (EST)

Support full deletion of PM character pages

Support condensed [Project M/Characters] article

  1. This is probably the best compromise choice. I never thought the separate character pages were even remotely justified, but this leaves us the ability to give a somewhat more verbose description of each character than would be feasible on a single page. Miles (talk) 21:09, 3 March 2017 (EST)
  2. Yeah I think this is probably our best bet. It would be easy enough to change the {{PM}} template to link to these sections, and this option does give us something to link the head icons to, as well as the smasher infobox. Serpent SKSig.png King 21:14, 3 March 2017 (EST)
  3. Quite honestly, PM was popular, giving it a legitimate reason (in my book) to have its character pages. With that being said, if you ask me, having this one follow suit with Brawl- with its own subpage for character changes is probably a good idea. AidanzapunkSig1.pngAidan, the Irish Dragon WarriorAidanzapunkSig2.png 21:17, 3 March 2017 (EST)
  4. The only reason we allowed separate character pages in the first place was the mainstream popularity and ongoing development. Now that both those are toast, let's cut it down to Brawl Minus's size. Toomai Glittershine ??? The Free 21:20, 3 March 2017 (EST)
  5. Never liked PM, but why bother with full deletion? Own PM character articles should not be significant to this wiki, but changes should still be mentioned on its own page like Brawl- should. Dots (talk) 60% tech skill, 30% crazy, 10% you name it. :P The Scout 21:23, 3 March 2017 (EST)

Oppose any deletion

Deletion is ridiculous. For many people, it's the only source of information. Considering how much content Project M has, and the impact it's had overall in Smash history, it would be unwise. Why fix something that's not broken? That's like deleting all information on Brawl because it's old and unpopular.

Neutral

Comments