Talk:Source Gaming: Difference between revisions

From SmashWiki, the Super Smash Bros. wiki
Jump to navigationJump to search
No edit summary
Line 7: Line 7:
:::'''Weak support'''. They are fairly significant in the community, but nowhere near as much as, say, SmashBoards. [[File:Nyargleblargle.png|16px]][[User: Nyargleblargle|<span style="color:LawnGreen">'''Nyargle</span>]][[User talk:Nyargleblargle|<span style="color: orange;">'''blargle'''</span>]] ([[Special:Contributions/Nyargleblargle|Contribs]]) 10:24, 23 February 2016 (EST)
:::'''Weak support'''. They are fairly significant in the community, but nowhere near as much as, say, SmashBoards. [[File:Nyargleblargle.png|16px]][[User: Nyargleblargle|<span style="color:LawnGreen">'''Nyargle</span>]][[User talk:Nyargleblargle|<span style="color: orange;">'''blargle'''</span>]] ([[Special:Contributions/Nyargleblargle|Contribs]]) 10:24, 23 February 2016 (EST)
::::'''Support'''. While I check the site everyday and find it really good, it's still not as relevant as, say, SmashBoards. Maybe when the site becomes more relevant, but it's still a little too early for it to be considered notable enough. [[File:TepigSprite.png]][[User:Tepig|Tepig]] ([[User talk:Tepig|talk]]) 23:36, 23 February 2016 (EST)
::::'''Support'''. While I check the site everyday and find it really good, it's still not as relevant as, say, SmashBoards. Maybe when the site becomes more relevant, but it's still a little too early for it to be considered notable enough. [[File:TepigSprite.png]][[User:Tepig|Tepig]] ([[User talk:Tepig|talk]]) 23:36, 23 February 2016 (EST)
:::::'''Weak oppose''' Well, since I created this article I'll weigh in (''If tl;dr essentially I think it should stay but doesn't really have to''). OP is pretty much correct when he said it was wrote for the hell of it. If you haven't noticed, as of late I've been writing fairly random articles about various website/YouTube-related smash subjects that seem to be of some relevance. I thought to myself about when someone, say, a commentator, brought up info referenced from a direct source: "What on Earth that one guy was talking about" or "I've heard that of that thing before, but what is it?" one listening might ask. Unable to tech? Search for Beefy Smash Doods. Bowser's new upthrow hoo hah KO percentages? Smash Corner. Sakurai personally wanting Geno as a character? Source Gaming. Make sense? Every subject I've made an article for thus far have made notable contributions to the community and will most likely continue to do so. Now while this site in particular is kinda fanboyish, most of their articles are accurate, neutral in tone, and articulate. Not to mention just plain interesting. But I'm not one to cry over spilled milk. If it gets deleted that's just fine. Isn't completely necessary nor notable. [[User: RobSir_zx|<span style="color:orange">Rob</span><span style="color:blue">'''Sir '''</span>]] [[File:RobSir-sig.jpg|16px|link=http://www.ssbwiki.com/images/8/8d/G%26WTheme.ogg]] [[Special:Contributions/RobSir zx|<span style="color:red">zx</span>]] 23:51, 23 February 2016 (EST)

Revision as of 23:51, February 23, 2016

Deletion

I agree with the tag. Now, I'll say: it's absolutely fantastic that they translate Sakurai's stuff. But that doesn't mean there needs to be an article here about them. Couple that with how the site isn't totally supposed to be devoted to Smash, and how when they're not translating stuff, they're opinioning and fanboying away on Smash things that don't say anything relevant or substantial (examples: the case for ___ to be in Smash/Sakurai is an artist/etc.) I don't really see much of a reason to have an article about them here. It doesn't mean the site is necessarily bad (if highly underwhelming / redundant without the translations), it just doesn't seem to have anything that warrants mention here besides references. Kinda feel like this page was made for the hell of it. MuteSpittah (talk) 07:00, 23 February 2016 (EST)

Upon inspecting the site, I support this page's deletion for the reasons above. Serpent SKSig.png King 07:14, 23 February 2016 (EST)

Support echoing MuteSpittah. AidanzapunkSig1.pngAidan, the Wandering Dragon WarriorAidanzapunkSig2.png 08:32, 23 February 2016 (EST)
Support PoultrysigSSB4.pngPoultryPoultrysigSSBM.png(talk) the Pumpkin Pie 09:34, 23 February 2016 (EST)
Weak support. They are fairly significant in the community, but nowhere near as much as, say, SmashBoards. Nyargleblargle.pngNyargleblargle (Contribs) 10:24, 23 February 2016 (EST)
Support. While I check the site everyday and find it really good, it's still not as relevant as, say, SmashBoards. Maybe when the site becomes more relevant, but it's still a little too early for it to be considered notable enough. TepigSprite.pngTepig (talk) 23:36, 23 February 2016 (EST)
Weak oppose Well, since I created this article I'll weigh in (If tl;dr essentially I think it should stay but doesn't really have to). OP is pretty much correct when he said it was wrote for the hell of it. If you haven't noticed, as of late I've been writing fairly random articles about various website/YouTube-related smash subjects that seem to be of some relevance. I thought to myself about when someone, say, a commentator, brought up info referenced from a direct source: "What on Earth that one guy was talking about" or "I've heard that of that thing before, but what is it?" one listening might ask. Unable to tech? Search for Beefy Smash Doods. Bowser's new upthrow hoo hah KO percentages? Smash Corner. Sakurai personally wanting Geno as a character? Source Gaming. Make sense? Every subject I've made an article for thus far have made notable contributions to the community and will most likely continue to do so. Now while this site in particular is kinda fanboyish, most of their articles are accurate, neutral in tone, and articulate. Not to mention just plain interesting. But I'm not one to cry over spilled milk. If it gets deleted that's just fine. Isn't completely necessary nor notable. RobSir RobSir-sig.jpg zx 23:51, 23 February 2016 (EST)