Smasher talk:IntroSpecktive

Deletion

Gonna have to say this but this page has to go, I fully support this deletion. S3AHAWK (talk) 20:50, July 12, 2020 (EDT)

Support as well, this article was deleted before and will be deleted again for the exact same reason. NPM Morr!? 21:26, July 12, 2020 (EDT)

Support Player has no relevance to the competitive scene. Page needs to go. Señor Mexicano (talk) 00:31, July 15, 2020 (EDT)

Support: Try creating a smasher article that has actual tournament results. A popular Youtube channel is insufficient warrant a page. MemeDedede (talk) 09:40, July 16, 2020 (EDT)

Bump S3AHAWK (talk) 00:46, July 22, 2020 (EDT)

The new notability policy seems to completely contradict the arguments made here. He's definitely been "contributing to the growth of the community" through his YouTube channel, and he is certainly a "content creator". I don't get the arguments here given this. Heavy oppose. --Plague von Karma 11:02, July 22, 2020 (EDT)

I feel as though many people forget that the notability guideline specifically says that notability is defined "for the purposes of this Wiki, as any article pertaining to the competitive community of the Super Smash Bros. series". IntroSpecktive's content creation and contributions to the community have nothing to do with the competitive scene which is what the wiki documents. As per current guidelines the subject in question is not notable. Señor Mexicano (talk) 15:11, July 22, 2020 (EDT)

Neutral. I don't see a reason to not include popular Smash YouTubers without a competitive presence, but at the same time Smasher pages are for competitive players, not content creators. Also, I don't want to go down the rabbit hole on defining what a "notable" content creator is, especially since the ones with a lot of subscribers such as Alpharad, Shofu, and Little Z have participated in legitimate tournaments and a subscriber threshold isn't really a good idea for notability. CookiesCreme 15:25, July 22, 2020 (EDT)

The question that needs to be asked is, has he ever been in a tournament notable by this wiki's standards? Not that I recall, but I may be wrong. If he has, Oppose. If not, Support. Sincerely, Samuel the Banjo-Kazooie Boss. 15:54, July 22, 2020 (EDT)

As per my latest edit summary on the page, bump again. S3AHAWK (talk) 15:59, July 25, 2020 (EDT)

third bump S3AHAWK (talk) 22:14, July 31, 2020 (EDT)

All right, I'm getting tired of this. I apologize if I'm forgetting something, but can we not just delete the page already? Support is nearly unanimous, with no reasonable arguments being made against it. Sincerely, Samuel the Banjo-Kazooie Boss. 00:50, August 1, 2020 (EDT)

Doing some quick research, I found Intro has no Smash.gg profile. Intro has a SmashBoards account and, as of August 1, 2020, he hasn't been seen in 4 years. So yeah, gonna reconfirm my support here. S3AHAWK (talk) 01:10, August 1, 2020 (EDT)

Aren't we supposed to delete this here talk page as well now that the associated mainspace page is gone? Sincerely, Samuel the Banjo-Kazooie Boss. 22:22, March 29, 2021 (EDT)

I say not delete yet and think this case should be brought back up, because I want to know since when was it decided that being a big Smash youtuber didn't count as any sort of notability. Plague is right here, and I've noticed the CCD article was deleted, as well as an attempt to create a MagicScrumpy article was deleted, which I find highly disagreeable. We even have a Youtuber category, which exists because youtube stuff is noteworthy. Plus I don't find this distinction with "contribution to the competitive community" worthwhile; the Smash community is the Smash community, and it's not like these people's fans weren't largely competitive players themselves, or that they didn't contribute by getting more casuals into competitive play. Omega Tyrant 00:04, March 30, 2021 (EDT)

Echoing OT here, it's pretty questionable that between two equally famous Youtubers, one gets to have a page because he got some mediocre placements at a tournament (that probably would not merit him a page otherwise), while the other who does not participate in tournaments does not. With that said, we should be probably more strict with articles on non-competitive people than we are normally, otherwise we are going to be swamped by pages about minor youtubers. --Rdrfc (talk) 05:07, March 30, 2021 (EDT)

I don't have a problem with a popular YouTuber being included once we've set guidelines. I assume they would be similar to adding a labber or director or something in that if you don't compete competitively you would need to have a strong case for notability. I don't think it would be beneficial for us to have a flood of YouTubers Wiifitkid (talk) 05:51, March 30, 2021 (EDT)

Allow me to take a look at where IntroSpecktive might fall under the guidelines of SW:NOTABLE as they currently stand.

SW:NOTABLE's guidelines for content creators refers to a person "ha[ving] contributed high-level content to the Smash community or has contributed significantly in other ways. For example, being involved in a highly regarded tournament-streaming team, discovering and reporting information about the inner workings of Smash including specific characters or mechanics, being a high level commentator, creating and uploading popular tutorial videos, being a highly regarded Smash modder, contributing to the growth of the community, etc."

Now, I just so happen to be a big fan of Mr. Colin's content, he's probably one of my favorite Smash-related channels. I would personally love for him to get have an article here, and I've tried to see how that might work out. But his content and the types of people who watch his channel are not going to qualify him - his channel is almost entirely nonsense comedy and skits, as well as the occasional commentary on an aspect of the Smash community, or videos on stuff completely unrelated to Smash. Almost every single one of his videos with over 1M views is a skit about one part of the Smash community's take on some other part of the community or another game entirely; his "serious" discussions perform relatively poorly by comparison, and ones that actually show off and discuss in-game mechanics (which are extremely scarce) perform even worse. Big-league players don't talk about him, and heck, he doesn't talk about big-league players unless his jokes call for it. So as far as I'm concerned, IntroSpecktive's content most certainly does not qualify for coverage under the "significant contributions" clause.

There is that second clause that provides for creators that "can prove legitimate regional or greater fame within the competitive community otherwise not covered by these guidelines." Now, I don't like these "generalisation" clauses because someone can work through the wording in a way that lets anybody in, but thankfully we've kept to a pretty decent selection of 'Tubers. So what this discussion comes down to, regardless of "significant contributions" (which, again, he doesn't have), is whether he's well-regarded enough within the community, and whether people talk about him. If someone can bring up sufficient evidence of notable people taking notice of him, then I will happily support bringing this page back per my interpretation of SW:NOTABLE. Otherwise, I maintain that the "YouTubers" category is strictly for otherwise notable Smashers who also just so happen to have channels, and that this page and any similar cases of pure-entertainment content creators with no notable tourney results should be discarded.

Hope you got the general idea of my argument through all that rambling. Sincerely, Samuel the Banjo-Kazooie Boss. 08:58, March 30, 2021 (EDT)
P.S. who is this "Plague" YouTuber? That page may not be needed either.

To answer Sam's question about this "Plague" YouTuber: Are you perhaps responding to Omega Tyrant's quote of "Plague is right here"? Because I'm pretty sure OT is referring to Plague von Karma's comment (By "Plague is right here", they probably meant "I agree with Plague"). The only YouTubers OT mentioned are Crappy Capture Device and Scrumpy. SuperSmashTurtles of the Turtle Tribe 09:50, March 30, 2021 (EDT)

yes, that's exactly what I was asking about, haha Sincerely, Samuel the Banjo-Kazooie Boss. 09:55, March 30, 2021 (EDT)

"Big-league players don't talk about him, and heck, he doesn't talk about big-league players unless his jokes call for it. So as far as I'm concerned, IntroSpecktive's content most certainly does not qualify for coverage under the "significant contributions" clause."

It doesn't matter how "serious" you think his content is, the fact he provides Smash-based content that is enjoyed by such a massive amount of people, and in turn helps a lot in keeping eyes on Smash, is significant contribution itself. Plus I don't even follow the guy on Twitter and I see him all the time having "serious discussions" and interacting with "big league players", so he is by no means isolated in his own bubble like you make him sound.

"Now, I don't like these "generalisation" clauses because someone can work through the wording in a way that lets anybody in"

It exists because there's no fair objective standard that can be set for "notability", so it makes it clear that admins and the community can decide an article stays just because they believe an article's subject is noteworthy enough under some other criteria of "fame".

"So what this discussion comes down to, regardless of "significant contributions" (which, again, he doesn't have) is whether he's well-regarded enough within the community, and whether people talk about him. If someone can bring up sufficient evidence of notable people taking notice of him, then I will happily support bringing this page back per my interpretation of SW:NOTABLE."

As of this writing, the guy has 463K subscribers on youtube and over 100K followers on twitter off the back of near entirely Smash-based content, that's far far far beyond any remotely reasonable standard for fame within the community, and if you want to go through his follower list and mentions on Twitter, I'm sure you'll see ton of "notable people" "taking notice of him" (though "being noticed by notable people" shouldn't be any sort of criteria). Omega Tyrant 15:03, March 30, 2021 (EDT)

My opinion on the subject is still largely unchanged. I feel like we would need to set guidelines in the notability section (eg how many subscribers would be consider notable). Also, I still don't like giving them the "Smasher" namespace since they aren't competitive players, but on the other hand I'm not sure if a "YouTuber" namespace would be ideal either. Finally, a new concern is what characters go into the infoboxes, if any, since there are a few YouTubers without defined mains. Aside from these, I don't mind having YouTuber-only players on the wiki. CookiesCreme 10:34, March 30, 2021 (EDT)

"Also, I still don't like giving them the "Smasher" namespace since they aren't competitive players"

The Smasher namespace was never for just competitive players, it's for noteworthy people of the Smash community, and the term itself is just shorthand for "Smash fan/player". It's splitting hairs to be worrying about the name of the namespace a person's article is put in, and entirely unnecessary as "Smasher" is encompassing enough for any individual.

"Finally, a new concern is what characters go into the infoboxes, if any, since there are a few YouTubers without defined mains."

It has never been entirely necessary to have those entries filled up if nothing fits for them, so if there were youtubes we have articles for that truly have no known main, then we just won't list any in their infobox. Omega Tyrant 15:03, March 30, 2021 (EDT)

Full support for the re-instatement of this article per Omega Tyrant's excellent points and counter-arguments (fantastic logic and reasoning skills you have, by the way). For my initial position on the topic, I was putting too much emphasis on the professional side of the Smash community; this is always a mistake. If we do end up bringing this article back, we should definitely look into improving the guidelines for articles on content creators without tournament results. Sincerely, Samuel the Banjo-Kazooie Boss. 16:07, March 30, 2021 (EDT)

I'll be recreating this article as well as the other deleted Smashtuber articles if a good reason isn't brought up within the next 24 hours on why they aren't noteworthy to the Smash community. Omega Tyrant 21:11, April 3, 2021 (EDT)

I mean as it currently stands, the Smasher namespace has exclusively been used for people within the competitive community, despite what it's original intentions were. As I've stated earlier, SW:NOTABLE only further confirms this by stating "for the purposes of this Wiki, as any article pertaining to the competitive community of the Super Smash Bros. series". Ultimately I'm neutral on this subject, but if people do choose to move forward with it, we absolutely must have a amendment to SW:NOTABLE detailing guidelines for determining notability within non-competitive content creators. I feel that without this we'd be opening a huge can of worms in terms of who to give an article to. Señor Mexicano (talk) 21:59, April 3, 2021 (EDT)

But it has never been exclusively for people that play competitively, the CrappyCaptureDevice article was made all the way back in 2007 and no one ever made a fuss about it until Serpent King unilaterally deleted it last August, while we have articles for modders and contributors that have never participated in tournaments before. Like I said in my initial post it seems to be some users just made up a rule that youtubers don't count and Serpent King went with it, whether because he mistook that as "consensus" or he was enforcing his own flawed view of "what counts for notability". Plus as I stated prior, saying they don't contribute to the community is just wrong, as they create content that is enjoyed by people whether they're competitive or not, and are responsible for getting people into the competitive scene (hell I've had people before tell me that I got them into competitive Smash through my youtube channel, despite my competitive content being a lesser focus of my channel and my channel's following being a smidgen compared to the Smashtube titans out there like Intro). Additionally the very first sentence in the Notable Community Members section mentions "content creators" among who smasher articles are for and the second point of SW:NOTE says:

"Has contributed high-level content to the Smash community or has contributed significantly in other ways. For example, being involved in a highly regarded tournament-streaming team, discovering and reporting information about the inner workings of Smash including specific characters or mechanics, being a high level commentator, creating and uploading popular tutorial videos, being a highly regarded Smash modder, contributing to the growth of the community, etc."

There is no specifying of "competitive only", and the last point of "helping the community grow" is something that Smash-based youtubers and streamers definitely help with. And there's no greater issues with determining notability for Smash-based youtubers than there are for the typical player, in fact it would be even easier as we can outright see the size of their following and the popularity of their videos, instead of having to dig through shoddily-documented results and determining if they were good enough to cross some indeterminate threshold. Omega Tyrant 23:00, April 3, 2021 (EDT)

Speaking of that, we have pages for My Smash Corner and GRsmash. There's already a precedent here so I don't see a reason to oppose it anymore. CookiesCreme 00:32, April 4, 2021 (EDT)

Yeah we have multiple examples of this precedent being set (and going back as far to the pre-Brawl days as mentioned prior with CCD), so we're not really doing anything new by allowing Intro and other people without a competitive history to have articles, we're just correcting a few shoddy deletions here and a misconception among some users that youtube presence has nothing to do with notability. Omega Tyrant 02:20, April 4, 2021 (EDT)

Which smashtuber articles will be reinstated besides this one? The only other one I'm familiar with is Etika, but he's more notable for his suicide and the behavior leading up to it rather than his smash videos. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.219.72.215 (talk • contribs) 02:55, April 4, 2021 (EDT)

Etika is definitely notable enough here for his Smash content, the most popular thing about him was his Smash reaction videos (with his Mewtwo reaction even getting the attention of Sakurai), and he was majorly mourned within the Smash community when he died. Besides him and Intro, CrappyCaptureDevice and Magic Scrumpy will get their articles recreated, and if anyone here can think of other Smash-based youtubers/streamers with deleted articles, I'll review the case and recreate if they're noteworthy enough. Omega Tyrant 05:53, April 4, 2021 (EDT)