Forum:The Project M debate

It has come to my attention that this Project M thing is getting pretty big: it already has recognition and equal standing to the three real games on SmashBoards and in tournaments. And now, multiple people are requesting that we do the same here.

At present, SW:NOT defines that we should keep away from fanon and fan games due to the impossibility of defining a notability criteria. However, Project M has a few properties that make it hard to fit into this generality:

It defines its own notability criteria by being the only Brawl hack to reach widespread public recognition and tournament participation.
It is only ambiguously a fan game, as it is a hack and not a bottom-up recreation. Highly notable hacks do have a place on-wiki.

The current policy on notable hacks (including Project M) is to contain all info about the hack on a single page and refrain from mentioning it on other pages. This debate is to determine whether we should change this policy, and in what way.

Process

This page has several sections. Read every section before you vote in any of them; some are mutually exclusive. The rules of voting are as follows:

Place your vote in each applicable section. Make sure to sign your votes.
You may include a reason with your vote, or you may not. If you do choose to include a reason, do not argue with what others have already said, as this is sure to be a controversial subject and arguing doesn't help anybody. Instead, put your entire opinion on the table. Express your reasoning as completely as possible, preferably without referring to anyone else's reasons, so that you will not need to elaborate in the future.
If what you want to see has no option, vote in whatever's closest and state what you want to see as your reason. If enough others decide to side with this option it may be added for real.
You may change your votes and/or reasons at any time, ensuring that it still conforms to the above.
Votes that are unnecessary (a "no" in a subtopic where the user already voted "no" in the parent topic) will be deleted. Unsigned votes will be deleted, as will those with incorrect formatting. Reasons that break the given guidelines will be removed; the vote itself will remain. You can re-vote later if you do it properly.
As with everything on the wiki, winning the vote does not guarantee winning the decision. Weight is given to arguments and voters' on-wiki experience. Recruiting new users from offsite to vote for your side will not help.

Topic: Allow Project M to have independent character pages

Note: A "Yes" decision here implies that relevant images, templates, and categories will also be allowed.

TCP: Yes

Place your vote here if you would like to see Character (PM) pages that go into just as much depth as those for the real games.

I would be okay with this. Scr7(talk · contribs) 13:04, 16 October 2013 (EDT)
While I'm uneasy about giving some of these characters pages (as Toomai said below, "like Melee but a little bit like Brawl too" isn't very good) some characters (such as the Melee-exclusive veterans, who have character renders) I think are deserving of a separate page, and the metagame is vastly different in Project M from any other game as well, which makes pages slightly more interesting. IIRC there's a separate tier list as well, and that fulfills another part of the article. I would be okay with this, but not particularly saddened if the proposition fails. Jigglypuff the Magic Dragon (talk) 13:59, 16 October 2013 (EDT)

TCP: No

Place your vote here if you think Project M character info should remain on the hack's main page.

Not needed. Miles (talk) 13:18, 16 October 2013 (EDT)

Subtopic: Allow Project M to have moveset subpages

Note: If you voted "No" for individual character pages, do not vote here (your vote here is assumed "No").

STMS: Yes

Place your vote here if you would like to see the moveset subpage project extended to PM.

...

STMS: No

Place your vote here if you think the effort required to extend the project is not worth it.

Should the individual character pages notion pass I do NOT want to have to deal with doubling the project workload for minimal gain. Toomai Glittershine The Eggster 12:44, 16 October 2013 (EDT)
Absolutely no need to go /that/ far. Scr7(talk · contribs) 13:04, 16 October 2013 (EDT)
Way, way beyond unnecessary. Miles (talk) 13:18, 16 October 2013 (EDT)
I'm in agreement with the above; it's not noteworthy enough as a distinct entity or worth it, either. Jigglypuff the Magic Dragon (talk) 13:59, 16 October 2013 (EDT)

Topic: Allow Project M to have other independent pages

TOI: Yes

Place your vote here if you would like to see pages for other things that are PM-exclusive, such as stages and techniques.

...

TOI: No

Place your vote here if you think Project M stage and technique info should remain on the hack's main page.

I do not believe relevant info is substantial enough to warrant this. Toomai Glittershine The Eggster 12:44, 16 October 2013 (EDT)
Per Toomai. Scr7(talk · contribs) 13:04, 16 October 2013 (EDT)
It should remain on the hack's page. Miles (talk) 13:18, 16 October 2013 (EDT)
I do not think that Project M has enough relevant, separate info for each stage to warrant individual pages, and techniques would fall under 'Melee' or 'Brawl' for the most part. The only possible exceptions would be stages such as Dracula's Castle, as it is entirely unique to P:M, but even that's a stretch. Jigglypuff the Magic Dragon (talk) 13:59, 16 October 2013 (EDT)

Topic: Give Project M equal standing with the real games

Note: "Equal standing" does not mean "part of the Smash Bros. series". The series itself will always be only the official games; the phrase "the Smash Bros. series" does not and will not refer to PM.

TEQ: Yes

Place your vote here if you would like to see things like PM information in game-agnostic articles and PM links in infoboxes.

...

TEQ: Partially

Place your vote here if you are okay with PM information in potentially any article, but only as a subset of Melee or Brawl information.

I can't say I have a problem in principle with PM info, but it really irks me to think of having "In Project M" sections on every page that don't have much to say other than "In PM, it works like Melee with a minor difference". I would much prefer seeing this under "In Melee" or "In Brawl" sections. Toomai Glittershine The Eggster 12:44, 16 October 2013 (EDT)
Per Toomai. Scr7(talk · contribs) 13:04, 16 October 2013 (EDT)
As long as the information is easily accesible, I'm fine with any option. I do say I don't want to dig through a long and tedious P:M article that covers everything. However, if P:M info were possible to be in any article, it should only be reserved in cases of extreme changes or noteworthy, special things, e.g. Mewtwo's added float capabilities. Jigglypuff the Magic Dragon (talk) 13:59, 16 October 2013 (EDT)

TEQ: No

Place your vote here if you think info about Project M should not be visible on any page that is not directly related to the hack.

The only place it should be mentioned outside of its own article is on tournament result pages. Miles (talk) 13:18, 16 October 2013 (EDT)

Subtopic: Usage of Project M article icon

STAI: Everywhere

Place your vote here if you would like to see the PM article icon on any article that mentions it.

...

STAI: Limited

Place your vote here if you think the PM article icon should only be on PM-exclusive pages.

Only needs to be on PM-exclusive pages. Though, I would be okay with it being on pages of tournaments with PM. Scr7(talk · contribs) 13:04, 16 October 2013 (EDT)

STAI: None

Place your vote here if you think PM should not even get an article icon.

Not needed. Miles (talk) 13:18, 16 October 2013 (EDT)

Votes: Delete notable hacks such as Project M from the wiki

Finally, there will be those who do not believe that even the most notable of hacks deserve representation on a wiki whose mission statement is to document the Smash Bros. series as unbiasedly as possible. This section is for those people to post their votes. If you intend to vote here, do not place a vote for the other topics.

...