Forum:Project M coverage

Forums: Index → Proposals → Project M coverage

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 As PM tournaments become more scarce and our PM character articles fall more and more out of date, I think it is finally time to declare PM old news.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 King 21:03, 3 March 2017 (EST)

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 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. Aidan, the Irish Dragon Warrior 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) The Scout 21:23, 3 March 2017 (EST)
6. I don't have much to add of my own accord, but there's not really much of a downside to having an article like this, even considering the info we'd have to remove. Since the mod is basically dead, a loss of the Notable Players section would mean nothing, and there's honestly not much in the way of character trivia with PM anyway that isn't already present in Brawl. Nymbare and his talk 21:57, 3 March 2017 (EST)
7. I support this for reasons already stated. There is some... messiness associated with PM and mod related content on this wiki, so this is a good first step. RobSir zx 21:59, 3 March 2017 (EST)
8. As much as I love PM, I never quite understood why each character had their own individual page. Ragnarok320, The Toa of Fire (talk) 00:50, 4 March 2017 (EST)
9. I agree with the rest that many PM articles in particular are quite messy and outdated. Yet there are not too many people interested on fixing them anymore. Some characters in the mod are barely any different from their Melee iterations anyway, so people could just look at their Melee pages for reference. Therefore, I support the second proposal. (The first proposal is going overboard if you ask me, we still need to let everyone know at least what the mod did.) DracoRexKing, Creator of the Land 09:59, 4 March 2017 (EST)
10. With something so...dormant and uncertain as P:M is (spin-offs and unofficial versions could spring up within a moment's notice), it might be best to have a wiki dedicated to the game. I'd be up for deleting all character pages, but I think having condensed info in a single page would also work very well. Even if details like lists of moves and whatnot wouldn't be present, having a quick overview of how characters are different in P:M is a highly informative way of showing what the community thinks of the series as a whole in terms of balance, fun, competition, themes, etc. — {Espyo^T} 13:08, 4 March 2017 (EST)

Oppose any deletion

1. 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. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.160.61.86 (talk • contribs) 21:31, 3 March 2017 (EST)

   Except Brawl is an official game in the series; Project M is not. Aidan, the Irish Dragon Warrior 21:55, 3 March 2017 (EST)

2. I agree with the post above. Project M, like it or not, was still a huge part of the Smash community for a long period of time and it is very much a separate game in terms of mechanics from Brawl. It is unique in that it is a syncretism of Brawl, Melee, and SSB64, and it is a very much unique game. I don't think that relegating such a complex game to a character page is doing the game justice. As said above, this Wiki is pretty much the only source of reliable information on this game, and the frame data and differences from Brawl/Melee help people understand the characters on a much deeper level. Unless some other resource starts supplying frame data (kind of like how Kurogane Hammer supplies this for SSB4), I think it's good to have this as a nice source of information, albeit even if the topic matter is slipping into obscurity. Thevictorystar (talk) 00:22, 4 March 2017 (EST)
3. I think this would be bad precedent. If you'll forgive me for quoting Wikipedia policy, notability is not temporary. "It's not popular anymore" is not cause to delete something. Perhaps the character pages could still use some condensing, but not for this reason, and I don't think they should be deleted. Zyrac(talk•contribs) 10:32, 4 March 2017 (EST)
4. Project M is picking up again, there's a circuit this year just like last years, PMRank, Zyrac is right, And just because it losing popularity Dosent mean it should be deleted and it is nowhere obselete Poultry(talk) the God-Slayer 15:29, 4 March 2017 (EST)

Neutral

1. PM is still significant at regionals, and Legacy TE was just released (very tournament friendly build) which might rekindle some popularity. I don't think we should delete PM information, because we already have it laid out perfectly. Even if it no longer has a major tournament presence, it still has historical relevance. I wouldn't be opposed to it being shrunk to the same size as other Brawl Mods, or being kept as is.DekZek 21:59, 3 March 2017 (EST)
2. Looks like Miles is finally going to get his wish. xD Project M is now irrelevant and at this point I personally don't care what happens to its pages on this wiki. HOWEVER - the information that we have is probably valuable to someone. If we get rid of it we could lose some potential Smashwiki audience/editors. John PK SMAAAASH!! 00:07, 4 March 2017 (EST)

Comments

The last PM national was actually The Flex Zone 2 on February 18th, but a page hasn't been made for it yet. PokemonMasterJamal3 (talk) 21:49, 3 March 2017 (EST)

What is it that you guys actually think we're losing by going to the subpage method? Literally, all the useful information is still there. We don't need revisions because who seriously cares about old versions. The moveset table is literally just the same thing as each characters' Brawl counterparts, only incorporating the new changes (which will be included in the subpage), rendering it mostly moot. No one cares about the notability section in PM pages, and trivia is just as useless. Serpent King 00:51, 4 March 2017 (EST)

The only thing I completely oppose is getting rid of everything PM related in this wiki. Regardless of how it's doing now, the fact remains that it had a huge impact. Ragnarok320, The Toa of Fire (talk) 01:26, 4 March 2017 (EST)

Assuming that the proposed changes are going to look like this, shouldn't we do the same for the Brawl- characters page? Miles' setup is much cleaner and then the page won't have walls upon walls of text that don't really show anything like they do now. John PK SMAAAASH!! 10:08, 4 March 2017 (EST)