Forum:Project M coverage

Forums: Index → Proposals → Project M coverage

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

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 As PM tournaments become more scarce and our PM character articles fall more and more out of date, I think it is finally time to declare PM old news.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)

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)

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)

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)