Forum:"Other characters" inflation in smashers' infoboxes

Forums: Index → Watercooler → "Other characters" inflation in smashers' infoboxes

This discussion is in regards to a proposed change on SmashWiki. The discussion must first meet with a consensus before it is implemented.

This is a known problem on the wiki that has been discussed in the discord, where the "other characters" sections in the infoboxes on smasher articles have been getting ridiculously inflated. These sections are supposed to be for characters the players don't main but have used in tournaments, have busted out as a serious counterpick in actually competitive tournament sets, or at least uses in serious side events such as Squad Strike, they are not for sandbagging characters the top players use to beat up scrubs in pools, and they are definitely not for whatever random character the player fooled around with on their stream one time. The information in the infobox is additionally supposed to be reasonably up-to-date, so a character shouldn't be listed in a player's other characters section if they never play them anymore even if they used to main them, like Bowser Jr. shouldn't be listed among Tweek's characters and Jigglypuff shouldn't be listed among Mango's characters. Information about old characters the player no longer seriously plays should be within the article itself. As a rule of thumb, if the player hasn't used a character in any reasonably competitive tournament sets within the last six months of their career in the relevant game (or say last six tournaments if their tournament activity is sparse), then the character absolutely should not be listed.

Covid and the predominance of online tournaments do make this situation murkier, as for online tournaments, only character usage in major online tournaments should be considered (as people do mess around with their character choices far more often in lesser free-entry online tournies), and if a player did have an established main pre-covid that they generally don't use online (such as MKLeo with Joker), then it's acceptable to keep the character listed as the player's main despite the aforementioned six months baseline unless the player announced they have officially switched their main.

This isn't a proposal, just a PSA to get the non-discord userbase aware of this problem, and to start making cleaning this up an active collaborative effort; it is a ton to clean up, but if a few of us handle a few smasher articles a day, the problem will get resolved. This page can be used to discuss more grey area cases (such as if a top player has a character they tried to counterpick another top player with but always lost with), as well as anything else related to this issue. Omega Tyrant 00:59, February 23, 2021 (EST)

This is definitely something that should be considered. These sections shouldn't be used for just random fighters the player happened to have used, a line needs to be drawn to what would be considered an "other" fighter rather than just a random fighter they never used in a serious match. I'm not sure about the last 6 month part but whatever helps clean up these sections is welcome in my opinion. Omegα Toαd, the Toαd Wαrrior. (BUP) 01:23, February 23, 2021 (EST)

As someone who had to repeatedly revert and change edits made by new users because they keep adding random characters, I definitely support this. Just one thing I feel like we should also mention. First, if a Smasher says they would main a character, wait until they actually play that character in tournament before adding it. I feel like this is self-explanatory, but unfortunately we still have these kinds of edits, and for some people, if it isn't outright restricted in a guideline they believe it's fine. The only exception to this would be players who are primarily YouTubers such as Alpharad or Little Z , since they seldom attend tournaments (in Alpharad's case, he only attended 2 double tournaments in Ultimate, mostly with sandbagging characters). I believe in this case taking their word for it is fine. CookiesCreme 09:42, February 23, 2021 (EST)

Yes, it is generally good practice to wait to see if a player actually follows through on their word, rather than just throwing in characters the instant a player claims they're going to play them. Omega Tyrant 15:20, February 23, 2021 (EST)

Question on the former mains? If that doesn't go in the infobox where do you want it, the main paragraphs? The wiki documents smash history, so if they used to main a character, especially if they were good with the character I would think we would want that infomeation. As an aside, I feel like COVID has made things more complicated with mains. I've noticed players declaring new mains but that haven't actually used them in tournaments yet (as many players don't regularly play online). So I personally don't feel comfortable switching the mains until they've used them in a decent sized tourney. (Ignore the last comment I somehow managed to skip reading that paragraph) Wiifitkid (talk) 09:55, February 23, 2021 (EST)

You've struck your comment through, but on the topic of former mains, I've mentioned in the discord that if enough people really do want that information somewhere in the infobox, then it would be better to make a new "Retired and past significant characters" entry or something of that sort, rather than throwing them all into the "other characters" entries. I'm not convinced it's necessary and it could still bloat up the infoboxes, but if enough people want it, I may be willing to compromise on that. Omega Tyrant 15:20, February 23, 2021 (EST)

This also reminds me. What's your opinion on adding secondaries that are ranked alongside a player on a PR. Something like Sparg0's Sephiroth on WWR v7. CookiesCreme 19:42, February 23, 2021 (EST)

If a character is listed as used by them on rankings like WWR, I would assume the tournament results would be there to back it up, so it would be fine unless it's outdated. Omega Tyrant 19:45, February 23, 2021 (EST)

Another related point that has bothered me for a while. At what point do we consider player a "professional" of that character? For example, VoiD is listed as a Peach and Daisy professional even though he only used them seriously at one regional; most of the other times they were used as a counterpick, but even then seldom against other notable players. Yes that one time he used them seriously he did get 2nd, but I don't believe that's enough to give him the Peach and Daisy professional category. CookiesCreme 13:42, March 1, 2021 (EST)

I agree, the way I always handled putting secondaries into those categories was, would the players' results with those characters isolated be enough on their own to merit a smasher article? If not, then they don't belong, no matter how good and noteworthy the player is in general. It can get tricky with niche but otherwise high profile counterpicks (like Armada's Young Link, who would definitely merit that category but if his YL results were isolated into their own hypothetical player, it would call into question just how much a few big wins can carry notability), but usually this standard should hold up fine. Omega Tyrant 14:59, March 1, 2021 (EST)

Official proposal for a "Retired characters" entry

Enough people have raised concerns about removing former mains and other significant past characters from smashers' infoboxes, such as the aforementioned Mango Jigglypuff and Tweek Bowser Jr., so here is the official proposal mentioned before on if we should add a "Retired characters" entry. I'm still neutral on the idea, but will go add it if consensus agrees we should keep past historically significant characters in the players' infoboxes. Also if you have any name ideas, suggest those too, as if we go through it, I'm unsure if it should just be called "Retired characters". As a note if we do add this entry, it would only be for characters the player had significant results with, it won't be used for sandbagging characters, characters they only played for a few sets, nor flavor-of-the-week characters they picked up once and then never played again. Omega Tyrant 22:53, February 26, 2021 (EST)

Support

1. Slight support. While there will still be some bloat, it's better than what we have at this moment. The only concern I have is arguments that the player hasn't "retired" the character, such as this example. To that, I believe the rule of thumb for "retired" characters should be 6 months. CookiesCreme 22:59, February 26, 2021 (EST)
2. Support: Basically what I wrote above applies here. Omegα Toαd, the Toαd Wαrrior. (BUP) 23:11, February 26, 2021 (EST)
3. Do it, makes total sense. One question though, how would retired players be handled? Would all of their characters be bumped to retired? Serpent  King 23:45, February 26, 2021 (EST)
4. Support, this'll help with organization a lot. Aidan, the Lovely Rurouni 12:22, February 27, 2021 (EST)

Comments

@SK: We would just judge from the point they last played, i.e. the characters they used within their last six months of activity (or say last six tournies if their activity was sparse) will be listed as their active characters still, while those not used within that timeframe will go into the retired entry if significant enough. Omega Tyrant 23:49, February 26, 2021 (EST)

I do have a clarification question. Would Nairo's Ganondorf be considered significant enough? Although he only used it in one tournament set, he beat Light in a reverse 3-0 with that character and is also ranked with him on the PGRU. Same with his Robin, only this time with LeoN and the character's not ranked with him. CookiesCreme 23:53, February 26, 2021 (EST)

I'm really iffy on including any such niche counterpick like that, the only argument I see for it is Ganon being considered a bottom tier character lowers the standards while it's the biggest offline win anyone has gotten with Ganon. Omega Tyrant 23:57, February 26, 2021 (EST)

Bumping this, want to make a decision after tonight. Omega Tyrant 21:31, February 27, 2021 (EST)