16,272
edits
Talk:Professionals: Difference between revisions
m
Removing red links to old deleted categorys
m (Text replacement - "(\[\[:?[Cc]ategory: ?[^\|\]\n]+) professionals" to "$1 players") |
Omega Tyrant (talk | contribs) m (Removing red links to old deleted categorys) |
||
| Line 61: | Line 61: | ||
==Obselete== | ==Obselete== | ||
:: I think that we definitely need a definition of a Pro Smasher. However either with or without one, this page remains obselete, and in fact, ugly and unappealing. We already have | :: I think that we definitely need a definition of a Pro Smasher. However either with or without one, this page remains obselete, and in fact, ugly and unappealing. We already have [:Category:Pros]], and these two pages have few similarities. I think this page should be done away with, while the Back Room takes up the issue in the meantime. -- [[User:Delphiki|Bean]] 01:04, December 5, 2006 (GMT) | ||
==Clean up!== | ==Clean up!== | ||
Every time I click onto this page, I keep seeing this ugly, terribly designed page. So I plan on cleaning it up, make something easier to look at and look up for reference. Although I do believe the topic above this one is very important, I still plan on making this thing pretty. Maybe we could just slap a label on this thing. The "neutrallity of this page may be questionable" or some such thing. I'd like to talk about it in the Back Room, but I really don't go on SWF that much, so I'm really not noticed. Case in point: I will make it a project to clean up this page and make it more practical. [[User:Oddeven2002|Oddeven2002]] 04:09, December 17, 2006 (GMT) | Every time I click onto this page, I keep seeing this ugly, terribly designed page. So I plan on cleaning it up, make something easier to look at and look up for reference. Although I do believe the topic above this one is very important, I still plan on making this thing pretty. Maybe we could just slap a label on this thing. The "neutrallity of this page may be questionable" or some such thing. I'd like to talk about it in the Back Room, but I really don't go on SWF that much, so I'm really not noticed. Case in point: I will make it a project to clean up this page and make it more practical. [[User:Oddeven2002|Oddeven2002]] 04:09, December 17, 2006 (GMT) | ||
:Did you note what I said? We do not need both | :Did you note what I said? We do not need both [:Category:Pros]] and this Professionals page. I think that if this page is to be cleaned up, it should instead be deleted and merged with [:Category:Pros]]. -- [[User:Delphiki|Bean]] 09:39, December 17, 2006 (GMT) | ||
::So how do you recomend we merge pages? How can we best represent the pros in a category, easy to find by character they use, and by country like how an encyclopedia should? Or is even reference by country necissary? [[User:Oddeven2002|Oddeven2002]] 17:55, December 17, 2006 (GMT) | ::So how do you recomend we merge pages? How can we best represent the pros in a category, easy to find by character they use, and by country like how an encyclopedia should? Or is even reference by country necissary? [[User:Oddeven2002|Oddeven2002]] 17:55, December 17, 2006 (GMT) | ||
:::We could do subcategories for the character specific pros, like [[:Category:Ice Climbers Pros]. Then if enough people thought that region is important enough, we could also do things like <nowiki>[[:Category:NorCal Pros]]</nowiki> or [:Category:Europe Pros]. These would be subcategories of | :::We could do subcategories for the character specific pros, like [[:Category:Ice Climbers Pros]. Then if enough people thought that region is important enough, we could also do things like <nowiki>[[:Category:NorCal Pros]]</nowiki> or [:Category:Europe Pros]. These would be subcategories of [:Category:Pros]], that way everything would be automatically updated with the addition of new pros. | ||
::::I like the idea that the guy above said. It's sounds simple and clean.--[[User:OMNIVECTOR|Simna ibn Sind]] 21:51, December 17, 2006 (GMT) | ::::I like the idea that the guy above said. It's sounds simple and clean.--[[User:OMNIVECTOR|Simna ibn Sind]] 21:51, December 17, 2006 (GMT) | ||
:::::I think the idea sounds anything BUT simple and clean. We'll have too many categorys for a single article. Which, although by Wikipedia standards, is not out of the ordinary, I just think it's very messy and can be difficult due to the fact that actually finding the category themselves can be quite a task in itself. So I object it, but I don't deny it. Majority rules. Now, if it WERE to be put into play, would there also be a <nowiki>[[:Category:SoCal Smasher]]</nowiki> as well as <nowiki>[[:Category:SoCal Pros]]</nowiki>? [[User:Oddeven2002|Oddeven2002]] 22:03, December 17, 2006 (GMT) | :::::I think the idea sounds anything BUT simple and clean. We'll have too many categorys for a single article. Which, although by Wikipedia standards, is not out of the ordinary, I just think it's very messy and can be difficult due to the fact that actually finding the category themselves can be quite a task in itself. So I object it, but I don't deny it. Majority rules. Now, if it WERE to be put into play, would there also be a <nowiki>[[:Category:SoCal Smasher]]</nowiki> as well as <nowiki>[[:Category:SoCal Pros]]</nowiki>? [[User:Oddeven2002|Oddeven2002]] 22:03, December 17, 2006 (GMT) | ||
| Line 148: | Line 148: | ||
-- [[User:Randall00|Randall00]] 23:35, January 31, 2007 (GMT) | -- [[User:Randall00|Randall00]] 23:35, January 31, 2007 (GMT) | ||
:We've started to address this page in particular, and it will soon be done away with. The more correct pros list is in | :We've started to address this page in particular, and it will soon be done away with. The more correct pros list is in [:Category:Pros]]. For now leave this page alone, as many of the players here are being transferred into the [[:Category:Character specific players]] page. There has already been talk of limiting this to the [[Smash Panel Power Rankings]] who along with common MLG entrants can be surely said to be pros. What about the [[NorCal Power Rankings]] and [[SoCal Power Rankings]]? I personally also consider these players pros. -- [[User:Delphiki|Bean]] 23:46, February 1, 2007 (GMT) | ||
::Who are you and where is this "talk" you speak of? The Smash Back Room that they didn't let me back into for some reason? I'd just like to see someone working on this and there's so many Talk pages spread across this wiki that it's hard to keep track of what's going on. The discussion needs to be localized somewhere if any progress is to be made. | ::Who are you and where is this "talk" you speak of? The Smash Back Room that they didn't let me back into for some reason? I'd just like to see someone working on this and there's so many Talk pages spread across this wiki that it's hard to keep track of what's going on. The discussion needs to be localized somewhere if any progress is to be made. | ||
| Line 171: | Line 171: | ||
:::What you are saying is that although we can easily assign the label to those who fit the criteria, we still maintain the ability to make our own judgemnts outside of the criteria which will add and remove players according to the discretion of, I assume, a number of chosen community members whose opinion can be counted on. I think this is a good idea. So, who are we to choose for this group of members? The committee can then evaluate those players in the | :::What you are saying is that although we can easily assign the label to those who fit the criteria, we still maintain the ability to make our own judgemnts outside of the criteria which will add and remove players according to the discretion of, I assume, a number of chosen community members whose opinion can be counted on. I think this is a good idea. So, who are we to choose for this group of members? The committee can then evaluate those players in the Pros Category and add and remove according to their decisions. As for this page, I have been moving many of the players here into their respective [[:Category:Character specific players|Character Specific Pros pages]]. Once that task is done, I will put the page up for deletion. -- [[User:Delphiki|Bean]] 23:46, February 1, 2007 (GMT) | ||
::::Well, I don't really think it's necessary to come up with all kinds of committees and decision-making groups in order to maintain a fairly accurate list of Pros. Again, because this is a community-edited compendium of information, anytime that someone whose deserving of Pro status comes into question, the issue would just be brought up on the discussion page, opened up for voting and cleared up in that fashion. Maybe I'll even make a little template we could tag on to certain pages specifying that this "may not represent a worldwide view of the subject. ([discuss]])". :^) | ::::Well, I don't really think it's necessary to come up with all kinds of committees and decision-making groups in order to maintain a fairly accurate list of Pros. Again, because this is a community-edited compendium of information, anytime that someone whose deserving of Pro status comes into question, the issue would just be brought up on the discussion page, opened up for voting and cleared up in that fashion. Maybe I'll even make a little template we could tag on to certain pages specifying that this "may not represent a worldwide view of the subject. ([discuss]])". :^) | ||