Forum:Project M coverage

Forums: Index → Proposals → Project M coverage

This is a closed discussion about a failed proposed change on SmashWiki. It remains for archival purposes.

Here's the fact: Project M is becoming less and less relevant. The PMDT has disbanded, VGBC is no longer streaming it, and the last PM national was held on January 21st, 2017, over a month ago. As PM tournaments become more scarce and our PM character articles fall more and more out of date, I think it is finally time to declare PM old news. That is why I propose that the PM character articles be removed. Two ways we can do this:

1. Delete and never look back.
2. Condense all articles to a [Project M/Characters] article. Each character would get a brief description, changes from vanilla Brawl, and maybe the alts. Revision sections, moveset tables, notable players sections, and trivia would not be included. Currently existing links (e.g. Mario) would redirect to their relevant section on this article.

Now obviously this would be a major change for SmashWiki, so before any decisions can be made, we must first deliberate. Serpent King 21:03, 3 March 2017 (EST)

Support full deletion of PM character pages

1. I think that we need to make ssbwiki more relevant to what is up to date. I think we need to do this for Project M and SSBB. This will drive more attention on what is currently going on, and people won't be adding random Brawl trivia rather than help add results for the recent Melee/Smash 4 SuperMajor tournament. How do you sign stuff... —Preceding unsigned comment added by LCS (talk • contribs) {{{2}}}

   The only reason that this is an option for PM is because it's a mod of an official game. You want to delete character pages for Brawl, an official game in the series? That game had a 7 year run competitively, there's no way those are ever being deleted. Just because it isn't played much anymore doesn't mean they should just be thrown away. (I feel this way about PM as well.) Also, notability is not specifically a matter of "it's no longer relevant": notability is a matter of "it WAS relevant at one point". PokemonMasterJamal3 (talk) 17:25, 4 March 2017 (EST)

   I just think that ssbwiki should be more about getting current info. If brawl at CEO Dreamland revives the franchise, then I think we should change nothing. We are all entitled to our own opinion, and I just think that is a very appropriate option right now. (I'm kind of offended —Preceding unsigned comment added by LCS (talk • contribs) {{{2}}}

   I don't get the logic behind deleting the character pages for Brawl just because they're not being played competitively as much anymore. I think that sets a very dangerous precedent for any other games that may or may not fall into obscurity in the future. Brawl pages aren't stopping people from editing Smash 4 and Melee pages. Also, keep in mind that this is not strictly a wiki for the competitive scene: this is a wiki dedicated to the Super Smash Bros. series. PokemonMasterJamal3 (talk) 14:02, 5 March 2017 (EST)

   Well, I just think that making ssbwiki more based on the competitive scene is what we should do. You don't have to agree with me, but I think this is what would be best for the wiki. Besides, I am the only person on this wiki who thinks this. It won't happen. —Preceding unsigned comment added by LCS (talk • contribs) {{{2}}}

   If you think that this won't ever happen, why bother mentioning it? Bottom line, Brawl character pages will never be deleted. However, Project M, due to it not being official and the mod itself is losing popularity, we need to consider reducing it's significance. Also, please sign your comments with ~~~~. Dots (talk) The Gordon Freeman 13:29, 7 March 2017 (EST)

Support condensed [Project M/Characters] article

1. This is probably the best compromise choice. I never thought the separate character pages were even remotely justified, but this leaves us the ability to give a somewhat more verbose description of each character than would be feasible on a single page. Miles (talk) 21:09, 3 March 2017 (EST)
2. Yeah I think this is probably our best bet. It would be easy enough to change the {{PM}} template to link to these sections, and this option does give us something to link the head icons to, as well as the smasher infobox. Serpent King 21:14, 3 March 2017 (EST)
3. Quite honestly, PM was popular, giving it a legitimate reason (in my book) to have its character pages. With that being said, if you ask me, having this one follow suit with Brawl- with its own subpage for character changes is probably a good idea. Aidan, the Irish Dragon Warrior 21:17, 3 March 2017 (EST)
4. The only reason we allowed separate character pages in the first place was the mainstream popularity and ongoing development. Now that both those are toast, let's cut it down to Brawl Minus's size. Toomai Glittershine The Free 21:20, 3 March 2017 (EST)
5. Never liked PM, but why bother with full deletion? Own PM character articles should not be significant to this wiki, but changes should still be mentioned on its own page like Brawl- should. Dots (talk) The Scout 21:23, 3 March 2017 (EST)
6. I don't have much to add of my own accord, but there's not really much of a downside to having an article like this, even considering the info we'd have to remove. Since the mod is basically dead, a loss of the Notable Players section would mean nothing, and there's honestly not much in the way of character trivia with PM anyway that isn't already present in Brawl. Nymbare and his talk 21:57, 3 March 2017 (EST)
7. I support this for reasons already stated. There is some... messiness associated with PM and mod related content on this wiki, so this is a good first step. RobSir zx 21:59, 3 March 2017 (EST)
8. I agree with the rest that many PM articles in particular are quite messy and outdated. Yet there are not too many people interested on fixing them anymore. Some characters in the mod are barely any different from their Melee iterations anyway, so people could just look at their Melee pages for reference. Therefore, I support the second proposal. (The first proposal is going overboard if you ask me, we still need to let everyone know at least what the mod did.) DracoRexKing, Creator of the Land 09:59, 4 March 2017 (EST)
9. With something so...dormant and uncertain as P:M is (spin-offs and unofficial versions could spring up within a moment's notice), it might be best to have a wiki dedicated to the game. I'd be up for deleting all character pages, but I think having condensed info in a single page would also work very well. Even if details like lists of moves and whatnot wouldn't be present, having a quick overview of how characters are different in P:M is a highly informative way of showing what the community thinks of the series as a whole in terms of balance, fun, competition, themes, etc. — {Espyo^T} 13:08, 4 March 2017 (EST)
10. I'd say that a condensed version with all of the major details (similar to the Brawl Minus character page) seems like a good solution. It's also worth noting that, unlike the Brawl- page, a PM page can't be outdated at this point. BaconMaster 18:01, 4 March 2017 (EST)
11. I never liked Project M. A single bit. Characters are so broken and Meleefied. I never got why it got to become a competitive game. While I like some of the skin mods to characters, this game lacks a lot of originality. However, seeing it does have a competitive base, I think that this should actually be the only factible solution. At least condense it in a full article. And hey, the articles are also badly written. We should really get a Project M dev to help us with the changelogs if the changes to characters are going to stay. -- (talk) 18:36, 4 March 2017 (EST)
12. It's just a mod, and a shitty one, as well. Who can we thank for Brawl's loss of a competitive scene? That's right, Project M! Plus, players unfamiliar with Project M or the series might go here to learn more about Smash, and think some mod is a real Smash game because of how bloated PM is with its unnecessary individual character pages. We can't have that, can we? ViciousViridian (talk) 01:08, 13 March 2017 (EDT)

    Brawl's loss of popularity was due to its unpopular mechanics, slower and unfriendly gameplay, and the imbalance of its character roster. Not to be biased again but, while Project M might be a backlash response to vanilla Brawl's gameplay, it was honestly never the cause of its downfall. Dots (talk) The NES 12:41, 13 March 2017 (EDT)

Oppose any deletion

1. Deletion is ridiculous. For many people, it's the only source of information. Considering how much content Project M has, and the impact it's had overall in Smash history, it would be unwise. Why fix something that's not broken? That's like deleting all information on Brawl because it's old and unpopular. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.160.61.86 (talk • contribs) 21:31, 3 March 2017 (EST)

   Except Brawl is an official game in the series; Project M is not. Aidan, the Irish Dragon Warrior 21:55, 3 March 2017 (EST)

2. I agree with the post above. Project M, like it or not, was still a huge part of the Smash community for a long period of time and it is very much a separate game in terms of mechanics from Brawl. It is unique in that it is a syncretism of Brawl, Melee, and SSB64, and it is a very much unique game. I don't think that relegating such a complex game to a character page is doing the game justice. As said above, this Wiki is pretty much the only source of reliable information on this game, and the frame data and differences from Brawl/Melee help people understand the characters on a much deeper level. Unless some other resource starts supplying frame data (kind of like how Kurogane Hammer supplies this for SSB4), I think it's good to have this as a nice source of information, albeit even if the topic matter is slipping into obscurity. Thevictorystar (talk) 00:22, 4 March 2017 (EST)
3. I think this would be bad precedent. If you'll forgive me for quoting Wikipedia policy, notability is not temporary. "It's not popular anymore" is not cause to delete something. Perhaps the character pages could still use some condensing, but not for this reason, and I don't think they should be deleted. Zyrac(talk•contribs) 10:32, 4 March 2017 (EST)
4. Project M is picking up again, there's a circuit this year just like last years, PMRank, Zyrac is right, And just because it losing popularity Dosent mean it should be deleted and it is nowhere obselete Poultry(talk) the God-Slayer 15:29, 4 March 2017 (EST)
5. There's already so much content on the wiki, how is it beneficial to get rid of it? Of course PM was going to lose popularity, that should've been a consideration before writing the pages in the first place. Now that this content is there, it does no harm by staying. "It's not an official game" doesn't really hold weight when we already use SW:OFFICIAL to override official terms such as Ukemi and Stong Up. Toast ltimatum 20:12, 4 March 2017 (EST)
6. We've already done so much hard work on them. Sure, it may not be relevant for TOURNAMENTS, but that's only because all the original links have been terminated by the PM crew, and thus, it's much harder to find. Lots of people still play it, and enjoy playing it, so it's still popular amongst the public. Deleting the pages would just be a waste. Also, this wiki is supposed to be for INFORMATION. Suppose someone wants to find out how to play, say, Mario. Then they should have the right to look up Mario (PM) here and find out the stuff they need to do to play him, especially since the pages already exist. As ToastUltimatum said, SW:OFFICIAL ovverides official terms like Ukemi and Stong Up, so, unoffical arguments hold little weight. PM was still a huge part of Smash (it's still debatably much more popular than Brawl), and combined the best aspects of all the Smash games sans 4 to truly stand out, so, as ThevictoryStar said, PM shouldn't just be shelved into a a neat little category like Brawl- and Melee SD Remix and the other mods are. PM was so much more than a typical Smash mod. It was innovative. It heleped set the standrads for Smash modding, and is still recognized as such. Once again, deleting them would be a simple waste of time, especially since we already put a lot of effort into making them. (Also, this isn't a competeive wiki, so the argument that it hasn't recently been used in competitve tournaments for a month (and adding to that, that is still pretty recent (heck, there actually was a regional on FEBRUARY 18, 2017, do your freakin' research), is just plain pitiful.(Anonymus Smash fan, 9:35, 6 March 2017) (EST)
7. More and more scarce? Old news? By this wiki's own considerations on what constitutes a major, it's never had more tournaments than now. Just go look at List_of_national_tournaments#Project_M. Eight each for 2014 and 2015, eleven for 2016, two already in 2017 with six announced, and more sure to come. As others have pointed out the game also just had a worldwide ranking released and a national circuit announced, it's not going anywhere. Is the game huge? No, of course not, but these things show it's clearly not on its way out. Those statements are completely unfounded and shows a lack of knowledge of the PM community. If you don't know about it please don't try to get its content on here jammed into one giant unwieldy format. Just because YOU don't see the game doesn't mean it's not there. Bazkip (talk) 17:20, 9 March 2017 (EST)
8. I completely oppose any form of deletion of the Project M articles, for reasons that have been pretty much already stated by everyone. Ragnarok320, The Toa of Fire (talk) 19:53, 9 March 2017 (EST)
9. Why are we deleting? Is it being there hurting anyone? It's not like pages are littered with links to Project M character pages. It's basically its own separate bubble within SmashWiki, I honestly do not see any point in deleting it at all. It's still a thriving scene and I see no reason to change its state on the wiki at all. kenniky 20:07, 9 March 2017 (EST)
10. I am thankful for finding this on the subreddit. Can't believe this discussion is event happening. I don't see a reason to delete. Having your last major over a month ago doesn't mean there hasn't been relevancy such as the top 50 on Smashboards and well The Flex Zone 2 happening recently. I mean you technically could use this reasoning to delete the 64 forum but that obviously won't happen either --PPS KoRo, King of Smash 64 Knowledge, and bad grammar....and bad puns (talk) 21:04, 9 March 2017 (EST).
11. I'm seeing way too much misinformation from people who support the deletion/minimization of PM content. I agree that the PM character pages are messy, but that's due to lack of maintenance by SmashWiki users, NOT because "the game is dead and this doesn't matter anymore." I'm going to go through and start updating the character pages to reflect the current state of things. --Kaeldiar (talk) 21:10, 9 March 2017 (EST)
12. These articles aren't hurting anyone, including the wiki, and as has been said PM is still very much significant at regionals and tournaments with hundreds of entrants are still happening. -- Pseudo-dino (talk•contribs•logs)
13. As per my post in the comments, I oppose any removal. Omega Tyrant 22:33, 9 March 2017 (EST)
14. This is a terrible idea. What is the harm of keeping these pages up? It can't be monetary, the storage is surely miniscule and if bandwidth is a concern then people must want to read the pages. Does it clutter the wiki? I don't see how you can possibly argue that while much, much larger wikis exist. So seriously, what *possible* benefit is there in removing or reducing these pages? -Kered13 98.239.129.142 00:05, 10 March 2017 (EST)
15. The fact that this discussion is taking place to begin with is nonsense, and signifies the fact that some people on this wiki are substantially misinformed about PM, and anything related to it. Project M represents an important part of Smash history, and to suggest the deletion of content related to it because it's "old news" is incredibly ignorant, and more so, pointless. Deleting information doesn't exactly provide much benefit to a wiki. If the point is to focus on more relevant games, that's still dumb. This site is not a competitive resource, and anyone using it like one isn't going to go very far with it. Also, should we remove all of Brawl's content, or low tier characters in almost every one of the games, considering how irrelevant they are? I'm not a PM player, but to suggest that PM is dying is basically just a meme. Let's look at facts, since apparently, that's a little hard. PM is not dying. PM is doing relatively fine. They've just debuted a ranking system. For the second year in a row, they'll be running a national circuit. PM major events consistently average over 100 entrants, which is roughly equivalent to SSB64. Should we start deleting their pages too? Also, the notion that because the last national was in January, and that there hasn't been one afterwards is ignorant. Does there have to be a national, or major event every day? Also, the last PM national was in February, The Flex Zone 2, on the 18th. Stop being uniformed. A little, just, a little research would benefit everyone. Honestly, some of the "reasons" for deletion are just disappointing. Is PM as big as it once was? No. Does it suck that the PMDT disbanded, and that Twitch soft banned the game? Yes. Do PM streams not exist? No. Is the scene as a whole done? No. Should these pages be deleted? No. SaboteurGG (talk)
16. The tournament scene for PM is alive and healthy, unlike Brawl-, to which people are making a ridiculous comparison. Many people still want this information to be here. Who benefits if it's deleted?24.228.89.183 02:27, 10 March 2017 (EST)
17. There is literally no reason for any deletion whatsoever. Completely regardless of whether it's relevant or not - which shouldn't even be a factor - I see absolutely no reason that the pages can't just stay there and what harm they could potentially do by staying there. I think the only result that would come out of deletion is a notable loss in site traffic and revenue. If you're a moderator who supports deletion of ANY, you should seriously consider stepping down. Infinite901 (talk)
18. We worked hard to create the character pages and each of them are fully detailed. Also PM still has appearances in local tournaments. ZeldaStarfoxfan2164 (talk) is a never lover boy 12:09, 10 March 2017 (EST)
19. Are the pages taking up too many kilobytes of data on the servers? I don't understand any reason to delete or condense these pages aside from people who don't play the game having distaste for it, which is ridiculous. If anything, I think an effort should be made to expand the pages, adding more information about character specific techniques and matchups. It's incredibly difficult to learn anything in this game because it lacks good resources; everything I've learned has been through word of mouth at tournaments (which still frequently happen and are well attended). To burn down one of the few resources left is as senseless as it is pointless. 1:09, 11 March 2017 (EST)
20. PM still has it's tournaments. What good will deletion do? Smash Master 14:04, 11 March 2017 (EST)
21. PM is a mod that people like even more than the original game. The only cause of all of this is Nintendo shutting down the project. We can't let the best mod ever created die. We can't forget it saved us from the death of a smash competitive scene. And there's still one. And it's still fun to play casually. This deletion would be everything but good. Anto99 (talk) 08:41, 12 March 2017 (EDT)
22. Ohh so we're supporting creating PM & deleted some of our edits to this? No thanks. That's waste of our efforts to what we are doing. It is notable for saving smash competitive scene from controversial Brawl. Not liking PM is not a good reason. Smash wiki is a source of the game and competitive play NOT anti competitive & mod bias. Luigi540 (talk) 09:48, 13 March 2017 (EDT)

Neutral

1. PM is still significant at regionals, and Legacy TE was just released (very tournament friendly build) which might rekindle some popularity. I don't think we should delete PM information, because we already have it laid out perfectly. Even if it no longer has a major tournament presence, it still has historical relevance. I wouldn't be opposed to it being shrunk to the same size as other Brawl Mods, or being kept as is.DekZek 21:59, 3 March 2017 (EST)
2. Looks like Miles is finally going to get his wish. xD Project M is now irrelevant and at this point I personally don't care what happens to its pages on this wiki. HOWEVER - the information that we have is probably valuable to someone. If we get rid of it we could lose some potential Smashwiki audience/editors. John PK SMAAAASH!! 00:07, 4 March 2017 (EST)

   Irrelevant, really think through what you say, because the PM scene is huge, it got a side at EVO, its own circuit, and then PMRank... Think more thoroughly next time Poultry(talk) the God-Slayer 17:58, 4 March 2017 (EST)

3. Neutral with alternative solution - I think the information we have on the Project M pages right now should be kept on the wiki. I do concede that it has taken a hit in popularity, and because of this, it should not be necessarily given equal standing with the rest of the official games. However, there is still a dedicated PM community who have managed to pull decent numbers for their tournaments, and of course, professional Project M players deserve to be listed on those pages and have their mains listed on their Smasher-space pages. They deserve recognition because they've earned it. Thus, I suggest moving all PM character pages to a Project M subspace, but keeping all information intact for the decently sized audience that still want that information available to them. ---- Yellow of the Grove 20:08, 9 March 2017 (EST)

   People are already complaining about the potential article size for this as it is though. I fail to see how any of what I suggested to be cut is of any use to us anyway, could you explain that? I have explained my side of this many, many times, but it seems that people are too quick to ignorantly jump the gun and oppose because of their bias. Serpent King 20:26, 9 March 2017 (EST)

   Revision sections list buffs and nerfs, which, when coupled with historical and competitive analysis, allow the reader to distinctly see which characters used to be considered "broken" or meta, why they were that way, and how they were nerfed to bring them back in line with the other characters. How this is useful to the wiki is up to debate, but the way I see it, this does have some merit in that it allows readers to see how the PMDT handled character rebalancing and judge for themselves whether or not it was effective. Moveset tables are a little lengthy, especially for characters who have had little changes to their moveset. I wouldn't mind them being removed or replaced as long as all the significant changes to the movesets are made crystal clear. Notable players I vehemently oppose removing, and I already explained my reasoning why. Players who have sunk hundreds of hours into their characters, developing a metagame for PM that goes beyond every other fan-made mod and fangame, deserve recognition for their accomplishments. Trivia I agree is not entirely necessary. -- Yellow of the Grove 20:39, 9 March 2017 (EST)

Comments

The last PM national was actually The Flex Zone 2 on February 18th, but a page hasn't been made for it yet. PokemonMasterJamal3 (talk) 21:49, 3 March 2017 (EST)

What is it that you guys actually think we're losing by going to the subpage method? Literally, all the useful information is still there. We don't need revisions because who seriously cares about old versions. The moveset table is literally just the same thing as each characters' Brawl counterparts, only incorporating the new changes (which will be included in the subpage), rendering it mostly moot. No one cares about the notability section in PM pages, and trivia is just as useless. Serpent King 00:51, 4 March 2017 (EST)

The only thing I completely oppose is getting rid of everything PM related in this wiki. Regardless of how it's doing now, the fact remains that it had a huge impact. Ragnarok320, The Toa of Fire (talk) 01:26, 4 March 2017 (EST)

Assuming that the proposed changes are going to look like this, shouldn't we do the same for the Brawl- characters page? Miles' setup is much cleaner and then the page won't have walls upon walls of text that don't really show anything like they do now. John PK SMAAAASH!! 10:08, 4 March 2017 (EST)

The page is going to be huge then Poultry(talk) the God-Slayer 15:33, 4 March 2017 (EST)

That's fine, really. As I have said before, we gain nothing from having specific changes for B-, as it has little to no following. SD Remix and B+ are in the same boat there. That said, since people don't seem to agree with me there, I would say that a format change would be welcome. Serpent King 17:43, 4 March 2017 (EST)

I have no real input as to what I'd prefer happen (though I did see this happening one day sooner or later), but I do wanna make this point clear for those who may be wondering what to vote for. I would highly advise against voting on deleting Project M off of the wiki without a trace. Not only is this task needlessly long and tedious if we went that route, but think of the possible repercussions. PM had a long tournament run, and if we're to go this route, this could really affect smasher articles as a whole. If we delete all Project M-related things without a trace, does that mean we delete all Project M results? Does that mean we delete all Project M tournaments? I'm not saying that all of this will happen if we went this route, but these are things that definitely need to be considered when voting. Disaster Flare (talk) 17:55, 4 March 2017 (EST)

*actually reads the whole ordeal*

Or what I'm saying is entirely pointless as it's completely irrelevant to the discussion. Scuse me while I jump off a cliff. Disaster Flare (talk) 18:01, 4 March 2017 (EST)

So let me rip apart all sides of this:

Reasons for full deletion

1. To shift attention to SSB4 and Melee

   Err, not a great argument. You cannot force editors to edit only the new, and attempts to do so should be discouraged.

Reasons for subpage

1. PM is obsolete because of the lack of tournaments, streaming, and development
2. Doing this makes more sense for linking than deleting the articles, as it gives us something to link to (including head icons, templates, etc)
3. The only reason we had the character articles in the first place was because of active development
4. The information that would be cut out is irrelevant or useless anyway
5. No one wants to edit for PM anymore, so it's fallen out of date

   No one edits for SSB anymore either. I don't see the lack of recent edits as a decent stand-alone reason to delete an article

Reasons for oppose

1. It's the only source of information

   It's the neatest source, but not the only one. SmashBoards and Reddit both have tech data on PM. Also let me reiterate that by doing the condense, we are not losing anything important.

2. Has a ton of content and large impact on the Smash scene

   An ok point I guess, but I am not sure that content-size really has any relevance in a notability discussion. PM has had a larger impact in the past than Brawl and SSB, but don't see that anymore, really.

3. Notability is not temporary

   An actually decent point, though I do have to say that the condense to one page (but we still have the information) does make this a little irrelevant, since we would not actually be losing anything important.

4. It's not actually obsolete because of PMRank and upcoming tournaments

   Uhh It's obsolete because no one plays the games outside of tiny side events anymore, and even if they do, no one will stream it due to legal stuff.

Neutral

1. New non-PMDT release Legacy TE
2. We have data laid out perfectly as is

   We really don't, though. There are missing sections all over the place, and a bunch of characters have out of date info.

3. We may lose editors/readers if we delete

   I find this a bit unlikely really, especially if we do the condensed version. I have already said it, but all the important stuff would still exist.

So yeah that's about how I am evaluating all of your arguments at this point. Yell at me if I left something out. Serpent King 18:43, 4 March 2017 (EST)

In regards to your fourth counter-point towards "oppose", PM tournaments are always streamed on Hitbox. Obviously, it's not as big as Twitch, but every PM national definitely gets streamed, at the very least. Also, the game still hits 100+ entrants (for example, The Flex Zone 2 was a dedicated PM national that was hosted less than a month ago and got 129), so I think it's a slight exaggeration to say no one plays it (although it's certainly not as big as it used to be): it's just more so that there's a bit of a dedicated fanbase now. PokemonMasterJamal3 (talk) 19:17, 4 March 2017 (EST)

Agreeing with Jamal here, also if you aren't knowledgeable in the competitive scene you shouldn't be involved (if you didn't know of the flex zone 2, which is on the front page, that would count as not very knowledgeable) Poultry(talk) the God-Slayer 19:25, 4 March 2017 (EST)

Excuse me? I made that mistake simply by looking at the List of national tournaments article only, where we fail to mention a Flex Zone. Besides that, you do not get to tell anyone which discussions they can and can't be involved in. This comment is totally inappropriate and borderline rude. I suggest you watch your words. Serpent King 19:29, 4 March 2017 (EST)

I think it was an honest mistake on your part, but it definitely is on the page (right under Cashed Out). Not too big of a deal, though. PokemonMasterJamal3 (talk) 19:36, 4 March 2017 (EST)

Aha that's why. I missed it because it was a redlink. Thanks for that Serpent King 19:38, 4 March 2017 (EST)

Edit conflict... Bruh, here's what I said anyway

I wasn't specifically mentioning you I meant everyone who was saying that project m is obselete and just a friendly side-event

I meant that if you know nothing about competitive smash at all you shouldn't be going around making uneducated points about project m

So, you made a small mistake I don't care about that the fact that you messed up on your facts is proof you didn't look into this enough you also failed at mentioning hitbox which also backs up my point

It's the internet if you get offended you obviously need to harden up Poultry(talk) the God-Slayer 19:52, 4 March 2017 (EST)

I wasn't specifically mentioning you I meant everyone who was saying that project m is obsolete and just a friendly side-event

You literally mentioned my mistake and said that anyone who would make the mistake should not comment. What even.

I meant that if you know nothing about competitive smash at all you shouldn't be going around making uneducated points about project m

Right because they are one in the same aren't they? No actually they are not, competitive != PM nor vice versa. And it's also very far from the truth to say that I know nothing about competitive smash, nor is it your place to make such a statement.

So, you made a small mistake I don't care about that the fact that you messed up on your facts is proof you didn't look into this enough you also failed at mentioning hitbox which also backs up my point.

"I don't care that you made a mistake, but the fact that you did makes you an idiot and disqualifies your opinion in this discussion"

It's the internet if you get offended you obviously need to harden up

"I am allowed to be as rude on the internet as I want" Sooo have a gander at SW:NPA which clearly contradicts that, also you can knock off the arrogant demeanor at any time now. You are not making yourself sound good, just making you look like a pompous jerk. Serpent King 20:06, 4 March 2017 (EST)

Hello. My tag is FlashingFire, and I'm a competitive PM player, TO, spectator, sometimes content creator, etc. I'm new to editing this wiki but not to viewing it, so I apologize if I make formatting mistakes.

I take serious issue with this comment: "Uhh It's obsolete because no one plays the games outside of tiny side events anymore, and even if they do, no one will stream it due to legal stuff." Project M had 19 tournaments with above 100 entrants in 2016. Dozens more regionals of 40+ players occurred. Hundreds of people watch the major events on Hitbox.tv due to the unfortunate situation with Twitch. I am in regular contact with tons of top players, content creators, and community members. This game is not obsolete.

If someone could explain to me more precisely what condensing articles would mean (or where to find that out), I'm willing to listen. But I heavily oppose full deletion of articles and I'm currently against condensation, but I'm open to discussion on that point. FlashingFire (talk) 19:00, 9 March 2017 (EST)

How many more days are we going to give this thing? I feel like it isn't a resolved discussion until Omega Tyrant throws in his two cents lol. John HUAH! 12:47, 5 March 2017 (EST)

Who knows? Didn't think things would escalate this much here. Ragnarok320, The Toa of Fire (talk) 14:48, 5 March 2017 (EST)

I got a good night sleep and i'm feeling better now. So this is what I got now. we shouldn't be arguing based on our feeling for Project M, we should not say nobody cares about something etc. because obviously someone does, and we should get more PM experts here to help decide this Poultry(talk) the God-Slayer 17:08, 5 March 2017 (EST)

The only thing getting a bunch of votes from PM "experts" is going to do is add a bunch of unwanted bias. Serpent King 00:20, 6 March 2017 (EST)

Alternatively, it could be a way to reach out to people who might be willing to work on PM articles. I'm considering doing some stuff myself. FlashingFire (talk) 19:18, 9 March 2017 (EST)

So...why is VGBC relevant in 2017? Literally, we had a major a month ago, national rankings, and a new circuit, but streaming is apparently a reason to cut PM? This honestly proves how little anyone on here actually follows the pm scene. Thumbs13 (talk) 19:01, 9 March 2017 (EST)

@Flashing Fire, I have laid out exactly the information that will remain, and will be cut in the opening to this discussion. Serpent King 19:12, 9 March 2017 (EST)

Eh, even as someone who never really liked PM myself, this looks like an opportunist attempt by people who don't like PM to get rid of its pages when there aren't as many PM people around to oppose such a move. Serpent King comes off with a very anti-PM bias, most notably glaring in not only getting the date of the last PM major wrong, but also acting like a month without a major is some huge gap, much less an indication of the game being dead. But even if the game was completely dead and not played at all anymore, as pointed out before, "once notable always notable", the game still made its mark and had a legitimate competitive scene that shouldn't be swept under the rug. Plus his last comment of saying to not bring "PM experts" here because of "unwannted bias" reeks of someone wanting to push their view through with as little resistance as possible.

I also do not see how it benefits the wiki to "condense" the PM character articles and remove so much information on them. They don't interfere at all with the existence of the main games articles, outside of showing up in the search bar when trying to get to a character article, but then if that's an actual issue for the userbase, the individual move articles are a much bigger culprit in making it annoyingly inconvenient to access character articles in the search bar. And unless some development has came up with Porplemontage's ability/willingness to cover server costs that I'm unaware of, space isn't an issue and thus there's no need to push for the removal of "lesser priority" information.

And of course information being "out-of-date" is almost always a terrible reason to truncate it, the wiki is never complete and there will always be tons of information on articles that needs to be upkeep. It's not even like the PM character articles are in that much worse shape than the main games character articles, nor would it be difficult to bring them up to date; it only takes a PM enthusiast or two with the willingness to come around and edit them. PM no longer being updated just makes it all the easier to bring its articles up to date.

Then when it comes to removing the content to "push" people to edit other content instead, it's misguided and of dubious merit. Users who were editing only PM-related content aren't going to start editing other content when the PM content is no longer there to be edited, and nor should users be pushed to edit content they don't want to and are probably lacking the knowledge/willingness to bring quality edits to, thus not improving the wiki's content. Omega Tyrant 19:49, 9 March 2017 (EST)

It's accurate to say that I am biased against PM, and though I have tried to keep a neutral view, your comment makes too much sense. I have decided that I will not be making any final decision here.

As for your argument on lesser priority, though, it's less about the server space and more about consistency. While I understand that its popularity has granted the expansion to character pages over other mods like B-, it still is an inconsistency.

Side note: if you all would stop attacking me for getting a few things wrong (thanks to those who originally corrected me though), that would be great, because it contributes nothing to this conversation. Serpent King 20:36, 9 March 2017 (EST)

I assumed Toomai, being the bureaucrat, would be the one to make the call at whatever time he deemed the discussion resolved. He resolved the previous discussion as well. Miles (talk) 20:47, 9 March 2017 (EST)

See above for my reasoning. I could also write some of the missing smasher articles if needed just like I did for the old frankly dead/obsolete 64 section. --PPS KoRo, King of Smash 64 Knowledge, and bad grammar....and bad puns (talk) 21:04, 9 March 2017 (EST)

Okay, so as it turns out, we seem to be unpopular with the reddit Smash community for our consideration of cutting Project M's significance.

I'm not going to call any of you guys on reddit out. You know who you are. However, I need to address that no, we never said that Project M is dead. We understand that there are still tournaments going around and is still by far the most popular Smash mod.

Yes. I realize that some of this have to do with our bias of not liking PM and the fact that some of us don't really care much for it. I apologize for this unprofessional behavior. However, do understand that while it hit big for its time, some SmashWikidian feel like they have given the unofficial mod too much attention. As such, we are trying to see if we can reduce the content and see if it is still significant to keep at least the PM character pages or not. Dots (talk) The Smasher 21:38, 9 March 2017 (EST)

This might be in the wrong place (please feel free to move if so), but i just want to add that you seem to be downplaying how much better a wiki is for information like tech data by calling it the "neatest source". Really, Smashboards and Reddit are laughable by comparison; they're discussion forums, not places for tech data or even trivia. Most info there is now buried by all the newer topics and unupdatable (since after all it's a discussion forum, you can't edit other users' posts). And even the fact it is a neater source is a valid reason for oppose; for example, it is nice to be able to look at a character's changelog and tell at a glance what changes were buffs or nerfs because of differently colored icons. What's more, a wiki also allows for further improvement on presentation. We could, for instance, create icons that are a stronger shade of green or red to indicate major buffs or nerfs, respectively, and use the current icons for minor changes. Work like this not only improves the PM pages, but also has the potential to pass on to the other Smash games' pages as well. In summary: instead of condensing all character pages into one unwieldy wall of text, i'd rather see an initiative to reach out to the PM community and have them mantain what is currently the most appropriate source for this kind of information, and hopefully bring what new good ideas they might have to the rest of the wiki (when applicable). Oh, and i realize i did not touch on the "losing anything important" part - i simply happen to find the distinction between what's important and what's not to be way too subjective for meaningful discussion (plz don't take away the trivia). 191.190.80.217 21:31, 9 March 2017 (EST)

Whoever you are, you raise the point that concerned me in the first place. As I wrote above, this discussion needed Omega Tyrant's opinion - he was basically the only one who gave a strong nonbiased opinion here. I think that non-Smashwiki users need to understand that this wiki isn't just for competitive play and is primarily about official games in the series. Insulting some of our best editors isn't helping anything at all. If Project M 3.6 is this important to people, then perhaps they would be better served keeping the Project M content on the wiki up to date than blaming an already busy userbase for being lazy. In fairness, maybe Smashwiki's policy on unofficial content needs revision too. John HUAH! 21:48, 9 March 2017 (EST)

Edit: In case it came off that way, I wasn't implying that you have insulted our editors or blamed us for being lazy - but I have seen people do both of those things as a reaction to this whole thing. John HUAH! 13:02, 10 March 2017 (EST)

I think the problem with this statement is that we can't just rely on one person's opinion. We gotta take what everyone thinks into consideration. Ragnarok320, The Toa of Fire (talk) 22:16, 9 March 2017 (EST)

Resolution

It's clear there is strong dissent on this topic, so I believe this should be resolved as such: Let's leave things the way they are, and see if the people who came out of the woodwork to discuss this are committed enough to stick around and help with the PM-related articles. If anyone has a massive problem with this idea speak now. Toomai Glittershine The Xanthic 06:58, 10 March 2017 (EST)

Given the backlash we have gotten from outsiders, I would conclude to leave the PM articles alone period. There is still much to improve on PM articles, including PM smasher pages.

To reddit users, our point still stands 4 year ago that we won't make PM mainstream compared to official Smash games, even if this wiki is Nintendo official or not itself. Granted, I am happy for your contribution to this discussion. You're more than welcome to help us improve the PM articles on here. Dots (talk) The Wii 10:40, 10 March 2017 (EST)

I have already gathered a whole bunch of people to help fix the character pages. Things are looking good right now. Ragnarok320, The Toa of Fire (talk) 12:54, 10 March 2017 (EST)

I would like to make one tangential point here: It was decided in the original discussion that we allow mentions of PM in any article. What I gather from the contents of these votes is that it should be ok to mention it, but not ok to make whole sections on it. Why are we not acting on this? Serpent King 18:55, 10 March 2017 (EST)

That's not going to happen, sorry. PM content at most is going to remain limited to tournament pages, Smasher pages, and its own pages. It shouldn't be mentioned otherwise. Miles (talk) 21:16, 10 March 2017 (EST)

Still can't give more thorough responses than "nope, it's my way, sorry"? Omega Tyrant 21:36, 10 March 2017 (EST)

It's been standing policy to keep that off normal mainspace pages for the entirety of the existence of Smash mods. We are a) not exclusively a competitive wiki, b) not primarily a competitive wiki, c) not obligated to give PM any press whatsoever, and d) only allowed fan-made content under hyper-limited rules for a reason. There's absolutely no basis for upending years of precedent and good policy on the subject. Miles (talk) 21:47, 10 March 2017 (EST)

Except the exact opposite was agreed on in the poll I linked to. You don't get to override consensus. Serpent King 21:59, 10 March 2017 (EST)

Except that's not how it was implemented into policy, as seen in SW:NOT. That wasn't policy even after the discussion 3+ years ago, and basing policy on 3-year-old discussion isn't a good choice regardless. I'd also argue that this poll hardly qualifies as consensus since we got kind of "witch-hunted" by a reddit thread and many of the accounts voting against deletion are IPs or new users who seem to have had no investment in the issue until then. Miles (talk) 22:05, 10 March 2017 (EST)

So you're saying that the decision (by consensus) wasn't correctly implemented into the policy and it shouldn't be because...it's old? Ooook. Also these "non-invested users" you are talking about include Toomai, Scr7, Dots, JamesHeart, Brian, AC, and Toast. Idk if there's more who are significant, I wasn't around then (also I would have voted the same way as them if I was). Serpent King 22:11, 10 March 2017 (EST)

"This poll" in my previous post refers to this page, not the old one. I refuse to let a bandwagon come into this site and change policy in ways that are ultimately destructive and set a terrible precedent. We've repeatedly taken down fan content that had no business being on the site (remember our machinima page? or our Smash Flash page that was deleted before the move?). PM content getting in was barely acceptable before; expanding it is out of the question and contrary to a decade of precedent. We cover community content that is relevant to the main games, not fan-made content other than basic descriptions. Adding permission to throw PM-related notes all over the mainspace reverses that policy in a disastrous and extremely-hard-to-undo fashion, and is far more than it deserves in this context. If the only justification for it is "it's played a lot in tournaments", then leave it to the tournament listings and an absolute bare minimum beyond that (i.e. the character pages at most). Don't litter the mainspace with it. Miles (talk) 22:20, 10 March 2017 (EST)

reset If that's your stance on it, then you need to create a new poll, rather than ignoring consensus on the old one. We are a consensus-based wiki, and to ignore consensus for no other reason than precedence, I think, is a worse break of precedence. Serpent King 22:25, 10 March 2017 (EST)

I had been planning on making a new poll on the subject (remember this?) but you preempted me and laid out the discussion differently than I would have. You've left me with few options, so I apologize if I'm a bit frustrated by the situation. I would prefer to work more cooperatively on this, but I'm not willing to let "consensus" be hijacked by a thread full of people insulting the wiki and its userbase. Before the thread was posted, it was 12-6 in favor of condensing. It sets bad precedent to let a raid re-write consensus so blatantly, too. Miles (talk) 22:30, 10 March 2017 (EST)

I am more than happy to work cooperatively with you in laying out a new coverage model with you. Obviously we wouldn't be revisiting this discussion again...but I think it's high time we modernize and make perfectly clear what we do and don't cover.

Regarding reddit, if you read between the personal attacks and stupid comments, a few of them actually have decent points, such as this one and this one (strike the "let's remove SSB and SSBB talk at the end). While most of that reddit thread is garbage, we should not disregard the legitimate arguments presented there.

Besides that, you are changing the subject. I was talking about the old discussion, and how it was agreed that PM was allowed to be mentioned. I am not saying, let's go and put "In Project M" sections on everything, I am not saying "Let's add it to our nav and infobox templates" and I am certainly not saying it should be included in the sidebar with the official games, but I really do think that pretending that it doesn't exist outside of competitive articles and PM specific ones is really stupid. Serpent King 22:45, 10 March 2017 (EST)

I deeply apologise for any trouble I may have caused. In a way I kind of started the whole Reddit thing. I know I have no say in this since I'm neither an admin or a rollbacker, but still. Ragnarok320, The Toa of Fire (talk) 09:27, 11 March 2017 (EST)

@Ragnarok320 Reddit didn't do much here, they mostly rekindled the pages so that people are editing them now. @Miles 3 new reddit users voted against, all the others were older users (OT, Toast, Kenniky, KoRo, Baz, Psuedo-Dino, SabotuerGG, and Zeldastarfox) are all older users so you're point there is incorrect. Ragna, don't feel bad for yourself, and Miles, please look between Reddit users and Veteran users EDIT: You are valuable page, you do have just as much as a say as i do, or SK does, your input is important (unless it is vandalism) Poultry(talk) the God-Slayer 13:15, 11 March 2017 (EST)

So I see Miles still hasn't changed from his AllisBrawl moderator days and still would rather alienate the greater Smash community from this wiki in order to get his way. You do realise Miles that this wiki was made and is maintained by the Smash community, for the Smash community? The opinions of smashers from the Smash reddit are just as valuable as the opinions of wiki editors in what information is valuable to the Smash community. Trying to keep the wiki in its own bubble only shuns potential editors, and degrades the wiki's content; did you forget how badly this wiki was at attracting new editors during the Brawl days, when this wiki was treated as a complete joke by the greater Smash community? Sure the efforts of a few very diligent users managed to keep the content from degrading too much during those days, but the wiki nonetheless felt tremendous trouble in remaining up-to-date and filling its pages to the brim with quality information. Just one of the aforementioned diligent users not being there could have been enough to slink this wiki to full irrecoverable irrelevancy. I wouldn't say the wiki still has fully recovered from those dark ages; people still just post their information on reddit, Twitter, Facebook, Youtube, or Smashboards, leaving valuable information scattered and hard to find, instead of posting it on this wiki where it will remain easily visible and findable.

Then when it comes to whinging comments like:

"I refuse to let a bandwagon come into this site and change policy in ways that are ultimately destructive and set a terrible precedent."

"I'd also argue that this poll hardly qualifies as consensus since we got kind of "witch-hunted" by a reddit thread and many of the accounts voting against deletion are IPs or new users who seem to have had no investment in the issue until then."

"I would prefer to work more cooperatively on this, but I'm not willing to let "consensus" be hijacked by a thread full of people insulting the wiki and its userbase. Before the thread was posted, it was 12-6 in favor of condensing. It sets bad precedent to let a raid re-write consensus so blatantly, too."

You just come off as someone who is upset because they didn't get their way, especially when you don't even attempt to offer any refute to the opposition's reasons nor make it any less apparent that you don't have an anti-PM bias going on. Not to mention the anti-community vibe that continues to come off you that I have railed against for who knows how long now. I'm still left wondering why a guy who appears so anti-community, makes no apparent effort to be actively involved with the greater Smash community, nor even makes any effort towards just socializing with the wiki editors, still spends all this time actively modding the wiki for 9 years; do you just really enjoy the dullness of administration, or is this just all a power thing for you? Hell, how much do you even play any Smash nowadays? Omega Tyrant 06:19, 12 March 2017 (EDT)

...While I don't really think that the amount of Smash played has anything to do with administrating this wiki, I do have to agree that your ignoring of the smash community is rather...alarming. You've been blinded by the trollish hate on the reddit thread and because of it, you choose to disregard any true argument against this proposal.

Once this is finished (can't be long now) I intend to open a new poll on the mentioning of PM on other articles, since you apparently won't. If you want to collaborate with me, fine, give me a shout on my talk, but I won't allow you to ignore consensus a second time. Serpent King 13:09, 12 March 2017 (EDT)

"...While I don't really think that the amount of Smash played has anything to do with administrating this wiki"

It's very much relevant for a myriad of reasons. For one thing, it becomes a big question of one motive's for continuing to administrate a wiki that covers a game series they don't really play much in depth anymore; any reasonable admin will attest that the duties of administration are not glamorous themselves and are a time-consuming duty. Then if one doesn't play the games actively indepth, their familiarity with the content material comes under question, especially when Smash is a multiplayer game with a heavy competitive influence, that sees a continuous cycle of new information coming in and old information becoming out-of-date. And then when it's a multiplayer game with a heavy socialisation aspect even if you don't play it competitively, how can one be intuned with the game's community and its desires when they're not much of a player, especially when they have remained so asocial?

Now one could be a capable admin still without really playing the game, but mostly towards handling the user-side and noncontent-related policy side. Shadowcrest/Emmett was an admin/bureaucrat who exemplified this, who helped the wiki tremendously on user-side issues, but even then problems arose from his lack of interest in the games and his lack of familiarity with the community. He faded away to his own accord when he lost interest in the wiki's content material however, before those problems could end up hurting the wiki on the content side. But Miles as admin has always been content-focused and never delve much into the user-side, while always having been recognised as poor in that area, so that possible mitigation doesn't apply here for this lack of ingame experience and community awareness. Omega Tyrant 01:10, 13 March 2017 (EDT)

Final comment: It seems this suggestion was made primarily based on a misunderstanding of the current state of affairs, so since there is so much dissent about it, there's no way it's going through. Toomai Glittershine The Honcho 17:48, 13 March 2017 (EDT)