Talk:Greatest of all time: Difference between revisions

Talk:Greatest of all time (edit)

Revision as of 04:00, December 10, 2020

3,720 bytes added , 4 years ago

no edit summary

Ac2k

Rollbackers

6,225

edits

@@ Line 56: / Line 56: @@
 :::I think that we are in a unique position amongst the NIWA, as (to my knowledge, anyway), we're the only ones who both majorly cover, and promote the covering of, the greater community of the people who play the games. Sure, Inkipedia and Bulbapedia cover [[inkipedia:Category:Tournaments|numerous]] [[bulbapedia:World Championships|tournaments]] for Splatoon and Pokémon, but they don't go into quite as heavy detail as we do, and I also don't think it's their place to do so personally, primarily because those haven't had quite the same impact as Smash (though, given the rise of #FreeMelee and #FreeSplatoon, that may change, but that's up to Inkipedia, and I digress). Even ignoring Splatoon, you have Melee's legacy up against the constant switching to the newest games for Pokémon; you could make a case and say that Pokémon has numerous releases, but even in Smash, there are still people who stay dedicated to Melee and ignore the newer titles (which personally confuses me, given [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uEA9QSM1BUU how] [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mpuBAFGI4jo messy] the game is, but, again, I digress). You'll notice that I supported option #3; I can definitely see the merit of having a conglomerate of information rather than one specific source (which is exactly why the forum exists in the first place, since the SBR isn't exactly the best source to pull from as of late). Though I will say, and I think you're in agreement on this as well, I think that there should be a line drawn between what subjective content should be here (page or not, a declaration of a player being the greatest of all time) and what subjective content shouldn't be here (a single person making a ranking of the best players ever).
 :::That's why I said "you and others". I know not everyone invested in the competitive scene (as in, paying attention to it) has ties to actual people within it, but you never know. [[User:Aidanzapunk|<span style="color: red;">'''Aidan'''</span>]], [[User talk:Aidanzapunk|<span style="color: green;">'''the Festive Rurouni'''</span>]] 02:19, December 10, 2020 (EST)
+::::The official name thing might have something to do with SmashWiki's simplified search system in my opinion (afaik it doesn't do spell checks and doesn't search for the singular/plural form and vice versa, among other things). That being said, a lot of the competitive articles here (like "Super Smash Bros. in competitive play") probably end up getting found through Google most of the time, and I don't think that's necessarily a bad thing. Hell, this page is only 2 days old, and if you Google "smash bros greatest of all time", this article is already the 2nd result on the page. And the Google search algorithm manages to skip all the Melee-specific stuff about Armada/Mango, then highlights the line about Mew2King's overall greatness all the way at the bottom of this article. Which is to say, I think articles like these (plus SmashWiki overall) do a pretty good job of displaying Smash-related info in an organized manner.
+::::After looking at it more, I do agree that putting that one ranked list on the page would make it more like Option #2. But even if you take that ranking out, you still have the opinions of tons of top players that are all pretty consistent (example, if you search [https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=goat+melee "goat melee"] on YouTube you'll see lots of pro players giving their opinion, and they all have the same two people in the thumbnails.) So that could make the page look more like Option #3. Right now the article includes both paraphrasing the general opinions of the top players/smash community, as well as direct quotes from the players involved. I think it's fine to have information that many top players agree on, though if we wanted make it so the page only includes direct quotes, that would probably be okay too. After all it never hurts to have more references/citations in an article (though I think this is an entirely separate issue that has to do with SmashWiki's historically low usage of citing sources). Also would be fine to just remove the full table of the "100 Greatest Melee Players" ranking, and instead use it as an in-line citation, to avoid an Option #2 scenario.
+::::Also for the record, the guy who made the "Melee is broken" videos [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YSluwQoIfnE&list=PLDFKJhgbKXYulN5RUjTQswv17U2rBiAXQ made a series and did it for every Smash game.] I have no idea if he's biased towards any specific game, but Melee's continued popularity as a competitive game (it reaches similar and sometimes even greater viewer numbers on Twitch compared to Ultimate) should warrant increased attention on the competitive scene here.
+::::I think judging competitive articles on a case-by-case basis would work fine. These types of articles don't pop up that often, because you have to gather citations and reliable sources for everything. This is my first time editing SmashWiki in almost two years, and I'm pretty sure that the articles I made this week (+ the Big House article) are the only new competitive articles in that timeframe, so I think it would definitely be manageable. In addition, the mere creation of one of these articles is usually enough to inspire other users to help edit them (see [[Talk:Super Smash Bros. Brawl in competitive play|this page]] for an example), which keeps the articles organized and up to date.
+::::All that being said, regardless of what happens to this page, this has been an enjoyable conversation for me that's helped me rethink some of my original opinions, and I want to thank you for taking the time to discuss this with me. '''[[User:Ac2k|<span style="color: red;">Awesome</span>]] [[User talk:Ac2k|<span style="color: red;">Cardinal 2000</span>]]''' 04:00, December 10, 2020 (EST)