Talk:Top 100 Smash Bros. Players of All Time

Notability

Ranks such as RetroSSBMRank, and ones by EventHubs and Cloudhead are arguably more notable than a redditors project that just started a couple weeks ago. This isn't bagging on the person nor even their rank, but the notability of the rank itself. For example, EventHubs is a popular site and so when they compile a rank, it's worth mentioning as opposed to one person's project. Another example would be how Wikipedia has an article for Rolling Stone's 500 Greatest Songs of All Time, and, yes, while that list is entirely subjective and just their opinion as much as any other persons', it being compiled by the Rolling Stone makes it noteworthy to mention. Now imagine if a guy on reddit decided to make his own top 500 songs list? Would that rank be notable enough to have an article on Wikipedia? Very likely not. Now whether this rank gains popularity and acceptance amongst the community in the future is something we don't know yet, and I just think the gun might've been jumped on giving it an article. VoqéoT 19:58, December 4, 2019 (EST)

It's not like the person who is putting together the list has not done their research, they mention in their methodology post (https://old.reddit.com/r/smashbros/comments/dz5hbh/top_100_smash_players_of_all_time/) that they have been working on the project for many months and we already have a page for their RetroSSBB Rank (https://www.ssbwiki.com/RetroSSBB_Rank). Also it's important to note that this is one of the first big rankings that sets to rank players between multiple-games which definitely should make it notable. The only thing I would suggest is to change the title so that it shows that only 1999-2019 were counted. JFMV763 (talk) 20:42, December 4, 2019 (EST)

Oppose, as per reason above. If we get rid of this page, we'd also have to get rid of RetroSSBB Rank. Crazy456Rhino (talk) 14:24, December 16, 2019 (EST)

Oppose for the reasons above as well, unless RetroSSBB Rank is removed as well. The methodology is very legitimate and could potentially make waves in how we rank players in the future. --Plague von Karma 09:58, December 24, 2019 (EST)

This article's notability is extremely dubious. As far as I can see, this is basically just one random reddit user's opinion, and the oppose reasons here do nothing to convincingly say why this ranking should be treated legitimately by the wiki. It doesn't matter if they have a "methodology", it's one person's (of questionable authority, who even is "orange_ssbu"?) extremely subjective opinion, and it's not like the "methodology" is some objective arbiter (besides the subjectiveness of what to factor, how the hell do you measure "metagame impact"?). And it's not like the Smash reddit was in huge approval of this ranking; the initial post only got 215 upvotes, while the final post peaked at 419, decent numbers but nothing to show this as having some mass approval that could be argued as notability. If we accept this article, you might as well make an article for anybody's rankings that made a long reddit post for it.

Delete this shit Omega Tyrant 08:01, February 16, 2021 (EST)

Delete: Permanently subjective article, the fact that this article is basing it off of one reddit user's opinion just makes the notability even more questionable. Omegα Toαd, the Toαd Wαrrior. (BUP) 09:03, February 16, 2021 (EST)

Delete: No matter the methodology a cross-Smash ranking is bound to be subjective and filled with flaws, especially a PR from a rather unknown player. CookiesCreme 10:46, February 16, 2021 (EST)

Gonna elaborate on this point. I know all PRs are subjective, but for the major PRs they're usually run by people who have experience in creating PRs and have a pretty good methodology. I honestly don't know what orange_ssbu's credentials are. Furthermore, he's ranking 100 players using his own judgement and methodology, the latter which I believe is rather questionable. CookiesCreme 16:00, February 16, 2021 (EST)

Delete it: Thegameandwatch The Nerd 10:50, February 16, 2021 (EST)

Delete: As per above. VoqéoT 14:04, February 16, 2021 (EST)

Delete: Would be more trustworthy from Panda Global or OrionRank Dick Johnson (talk) 15:00, February 16, 2021 (EST)

Keep: Probably not going to change anyone's mind with this but, even though it is one single person's project, I don't think that should stop it from being removed. It's not like their are a large amount of multi-game rankings out there that attempt to do the same thing and keeping this up shows a good perspective of how a member of the scene viewed it's top 100 players at the 20th anniversary of the series. If we restrict pages on this wiki to only PR's from organizations with large backings and larger public support, we forget the grassroots nature that the Smash Bros. scene formed in and how in many instances it does come down to one person's interpretation of things that in turn make up future perceptions of history. Also PR's are subjective no matter how many people work on them, if we remove one we might as well just remove them all JFMV763 (talk) 15:42, February 16, 2021 (EST)

We aren't deleting this page because it's not from an organization (heck OrionRank is mainly run by 2 people). Notability is the issue here: it's from someone who doesn't have that many credentials when it comes to making power rankings, and we can't just have random Reddit PRs on the wiki. CookiesCreme 15:54, February 16, 2021 (EST)

Like I said before, there's nothing that differentiates this ranking from any other random person making their own personal ranking and then having an article here for it. This isn't remotely similar to other rankings, which are A: created by a panel of people with known legitimate authority in the ranking's subject, and B: are accepted by the relevant community as legitimate and used for the various purposes that rankings serve (such as seeding, Arcadian eligibility, sponsorship opportunities, etc.). If any other random person created their own personal ranking and posted it to reddit or twitter or whatever, it wouldn't have any less notability to it than orange_ssbu's, and well surely you can see how ridiculous it would get at that point when other randos start making their articles for their personal rankings and use this article's existence as precedent for their article's validity.

I don't know why you have such a stake in an article for this guy's rankings, are you orange_ssbu or their friend? Omega Tyrant 19:26, February 16, 2021 (EST)