Talk:Main Page/Archive 7

current talk page

Archives

1. 1
2. 2
3. 3
4. 4
5. 5
6. 6

Fan made stuff on Smashwiki

If we have Project M on here, why not put on Super Smash Flash?

Because Project M's reach is almost as good as the series itself. I assume you haven't read the debate on whether to add Project M or not by asking such a question. You probably haven't read what the site is not either. Besides, McleodGaming has its own wiki to cover SSF2. Don't forget to sign your comments. Dragon5 (talk) 20:37, 1 February 2014 (EST)

That's actually true I have always been wondering why Project M is here and not other fan made games. I always thought Project M was not fan made. I know SSF series has its own wiki but should we put it in a page called "Fan Made Versions of Super Smash Bros.Rosapuff (talk) 08:58, 6 February 2014 (EST)

scratch that I did not read "what smashwiki is not"Rosapuff (talk) 09:11, 6 February 2014 (EST)

Conjecture template

I've been poking around the templates and, pardon me if my eyes are playing tricks on me, it seems that we don't have a template for articles with conjectural titles. It seems to me that such a template would be necessary, especially with a new game coming along, so is there a specific reason why this template is still non-existent? Or was it simply wasn't necessary up until this point - 'cause I can name a few articles that need this template, if need be. Again, sorry if I just didn't see it. --72.53.134.85 17:05, 2 February 2014 (EST)

We have the unofficial lingo part of {{ArticleIcons}}. Toomai Glittershine The Different 17:28, 2 February 2014 (EST)

Ohhh, oops. :P Thanks for the clarification. All articles which need the icon have it. Although, you must admit, the icon isn't that noticeable. Maybe a template would be better - then again, it does take up a lot of space... Anyway, thank you again! --72.53.134.85 17:44, 2 February 2014 (EST)

Attack page project?

So i recently noticed this page http://www.ssbwiki.com/Fox_(SSBM)/Up_tilt . Im wondering who is in charge of this hitbox/frame project, because id love to help, especially on mewtwo. —Preceding unsigned comment added by DJLO (talk • contribs) 11:11, 13 February 2014 (EST)

No one's explicitly "in charge", though I do go over each page to make sure what people add seems legit and fill in data I have that others leave out/don't know. Toomai Glittershine The Yoshi 13:12, 13 February 2014 (EST)

Featured Article

I've noticed how many wikis, from bulbapedia and zeldapedia all the way up to wikipedia itself have "featured articles," or the best articles in the site. Should we have that here?75.85.64.155 22:23, 27 February 2014 (EST)

I wasn't aware that blind people could use the Wiki, especially when Artificial Intelligence is the featured article at the moment. MegaTron1XD 14:52, 2 March 2014 (EST)

Not like that, I mean something like a tag, like the Brock page on Bulbapedia.75.85.64.155 16:32, 15 March 2014 (EDT)

You mean this category? Because we've got that. I don't think we need some banner at the top of random pages. Clarinet Hawk (talk · contributions) 19:22, 15 March 2014 (EDT)

Do you mean a featured article icon, because we have that represented by a gold circle with a star. ZeldaStarfoxfan2164 (talk) is made in America 22:28, 15 March 2014 (EDT)\

Can we get an April Fools featured article? Like lying about something (such as saying Pichu is the strongest Melee character)? --TheLegendaryKRB (talk) 22:44, 31 March 2014 (EDT)

April Fools' Day

I would just like to talk about some of the "new" things that were added to the SmashWiki today: 1. Is the new skin for SmashWiki permanent, or not? Because, in my opinion, it looks too similar to the Donkey Kong Wiki, and it looks REALLY bad on the SmashWiki. 2. The stuff about Wreck-It Ralph and Nester should be deleted sometime soon, if not tomorrow. 3. To prevent these things from happening again, I suggest we make the SmashWiki only changeable by users of the wiki.

I'm not saying I'm leaving this wiki if these changes don't get applied, but I just thought I'd throw these things out there (even if they're completely in the obvious). Aidanzapunk (talk) 12:57, 1 April 2014 (EST)

Don't worry, were revert everything at the end of the day. Users are responsible for cleaning up after themselves. ZeldaStarfoxfan2164 (talk) is a never lover boy 13:00, 1 April 2014 (EDT)

Thank you; it's not like I doubted that the changes would be reverted, but I just wanted to double check. Aidanzapunk (talk) 13:17 1, April 2014 (EST)

The skin isn't here anymore, but it's been two days and the 'Users should take note of the wiki's new skin' note is still there. THIS IS REALLY BUGGING ME75.85.64.155 00:45, 4 April 2014 (EDT)

It shouldn't be there, I undid it at the proper time. Try going to this page or this page and doing a hard refresh. Toomai Glittershine The Cloronic 11:53, 4 April 2014 (EDT)

It's still there what do i do75.85.64.155 20:19, 14 April 2014 (EDT)

If the customized skin is still there after you hard refreshed, then something's absurdly wrong with your operating system or browser. A hard refresh involves using ctrl + F5 (Windows only), rather than just hitting the refresh button on the browser. As tech support has taught me, some people forget the simple ways to fix the issue. If your problem is still there, your os or browser is just really buggy, and beyond our control. MegaTron1XD 20:36, 14 April 2014 (EDT)

I don't think they're referring to the actual skin; what I think they mean is the message for the new skin is still there (for anonymous users), which is very odd. I don't think there's anything that can really be done about it. Aidanzapunk (talk) 20:41, 14 April 2014 (EDT)

png

I don't want to make this sound like a big deal or anything, but for future and current reference, can we try uploading images as .png rather than .jpg, as png doesn't worsen the quality of the image like jpg does. For some images this isn't as bad, but for others .jpg really makes the image look worse than the original (especially when the image is scaled down in the article itself). Idk, I just believe that as a Wiki we should have high quality screens. Unknown the Hedgehog 08:46, 10 April 2014 (EDT)

Yes, I am one who will stare at an HD image admiring the quality, but some pictures can't really get in to higher quality. Plus, if clicked on on the SmashWiki, .jpgs already show up at a decent quality. I don't know if this is really necessary. Aidanzapunk (talk) 08:54, 10 April 2014 (EDT)

While yes, for whatever reason, Nintendo releases their screenshots in jpg (and because of that we won't be able to get better quality images), they are still in good quality. But when the image is uploaded as a jpg again here on the Wiki, it doesn't fair up well. Unknown the Hedgehog 13:40, 10 April 2014 (EDT)

This is pretty late, but JPEG files look crappy as thumbnails, so we should probably use PNGs. Red (Talk) 12:03, 23 April 2014 (EDT)

Link to Project M main page in the navigation bar?

Can we get a link to PM in the navigation bar under the official Smash titles? Bit of a bummer to have to type it in to reach the main article.

With its current level of relevance in the community I feel like it's gotta deserve some kind of permanent link, right? Nevergreen (talk) 03:23, 27 April 2014 (EDT)

It's not an official game by Nintendo. Also, not a lot of people think Project M is a real Smash Bros. title. Aidanzapunk (talk) 20:58, 28 April 2014 (EDT)

It's technically not a real Smash Bros. title; it's a mod for Brawl that has reached extreme levels of popularity. Since the wiki came to the decision to raise PM above the other mods, I support this. intendrone⁴² 21:19, 28 April 2014 (EDT)

Absolutely not. It's not an official game. Miles (talk) 22:49, 28 April 2014 (EDT)

I don't really see that as an acceptable argument, after all: SmashWiki is not official. We use tons of unofficial terms and host a great deal of content that would never be endorsed by Ninty, such as tiers and character matchups. To quote that article, "As an example, Nintendo does not endorse Super Smash Bros. tournaments. However, as these have become such an ubiquitous part of the Smash community, it would be wrong for this wiki not to cover them."

Project M's "officialness" shouldn't matter as much as its relevance in the community, which is debatable. Nevergreen (talk) 23:53, 28 April 2014 (EDT)

It was determined in the PM debate that while PM will be covered, it will not be given equal status as the actual games. Having a navbar link alongside the actual games is therefore inappropriate. Toomai Glittershine Le Grand Fromage 00:40, 29 April 2014 (EDT)

Template:'

What is the point of this template? I see it in a lot of places, but honestly, you probably can barely tell the difference between this' and this'! Even if you could, do you care?

Anyways... this template looks pretty popular, and it shouldn't be. Can a user delete it? It's semiprotected.

On a different note, we should have a help page with wiki markup.75.85.64.155 21:55, 6 May 2014 (EDT)

It's true that ''this''' and ''this''{{'}} usually produce the same result. However, since '''bold formatting''' is three apostrophes, both editors and the code parser can get confused as to what's going on if they're used in the same paragraph. The template probably isn't necessary in all the places it's used, but it cuts down on confusion and is required in some spots that the parser mistakes for bold.

Also, we already have Help:Editing, which is a decent new-user resource for wiki markup. Toomai Glittershine The Producer 22:22, 6 May 2014 (EDT)

The template takes up space (an extra 6 bytes, actually, checked in sandbox), and as for the edit help, it doesn't cover the advanced side of wiki markup, such as color, font, references, &nbsp... There's a lot. We could just copy it off of wikipedia anyway.75.85.64.155 23:13, 6 May 2014 (EDT)

Yes it does take up space (5 bytes actually, since the 6th is for the Enter in your test edit), but it's pretty minimal. And having a more advanced page for wikicode may be a good idea, I'll think about something to do with such. Toomai Glittershine The Brass 23:53, 6 May 2014 (EDT)

FA

The goal was to keep each featured article for 2-3 months, we've had Artificial Intelligence for 6. We need a new one. How about this page? Qwerty the amazing 01:48, 18 May 2014 (EDT)

I personally think this a great choice of FA. And a new FA is long overdueHarro (talk) 05:17, 18 May 2014 (EDT)

Pay attention to the article icons; momentum cancelling has already been featured, and there's nothing new on it that would warrant a refeature. Omega Tyrant 14:18, 18 May 2014 (EDT)

Try one of these two. Heavily leaning towards the second one.Qwerty the lord 18:14, 18 May 2014 (EDT)

Beta Elements was already featured when it was one big article, featuring either of those would be refeaturing content. Omega Tyrant 21:37, 18 May 2014 (EDT)

WHY AM I SO BAD AT PICKING THESE anyways, try this. Qwerty the lord 23:01, 18 May 2014 (EDT)

Not bad of an article and looks pretty good to me. Also, your not bad at picking article candidates for feature article, its just that it may already be a featured article like OT said. Dots (talk) The 80's 23:13, 18 May 2014 (EDT)

Pretty sure that this should be used to nominate featured articles. Scr7(talk · contribs) 11:20, 19 May 2014 (EDT)

My main problem is that no one ever visits that page. My suggestion's been hanging there for 3 weeks...Qwerty the lord 20:23, 3 June 2014 (EDT)

Hey

Instead of template SSBB, SSB4, SSB, SSBM, and to an extent, uv, I think we should have a universal template called "SC", which consists of:

[[{{{2}}} ({{{1}}})|{{{1}}}]]

to prevent cases such as [[EarthBound (game)|EarthBound]]. Just want to hear your opinion.Qwerty the lord 22:30, 3 June 2014 (EDT)

Wow I suck at using the nowiki code thing. Next time I'll use preview.Qwerty the lord 22:32, 3 June 2014 (EDT)

We have this, it's {{b}}. The more-specific templates you mentioned still exist because they're simpler to use. Toomai Glittershine The Producer 22:42, 3 June 2014 (EDT)

Oops... anyways I don't see that template on this wiki at all... On my way to add it to some pages that need it.Qwerty the lord 23:14, 3 June 2014 (EDT)

Hey

A few things:

1. We should put a notice at the top of this page that says "This page is not for propsals. If you have a proposal, see this page."
2. In the fifth line of the Main Page's source, there is [[Super Smash Bros. (universe)|Super Smash Bros.]]. Admins please add Template uv there. My OCD is getting ticked off.
3. Is there a Mega Man wiki we can link to in interwiki links?

Qwerty the lord 00:28, 22 June 2014 (EDT)

In response to your questions:

1. Not a good idea. Quite the opposite, actually.

2. I can't do anything about that, as I am not an admin (although I've never noticed what you mentioned before).

3. There is no Mega Man wiki, as Mega Man isn't Nintendo. The SmashWiki, along with other Nintendo Wikis (such as Mario Wiki, Donkey Kong Wiki, and WikiBound), are a part of the Nintendo Independent Wiki Alliance, or NIWA, for short.

Aidanzapunk (talk) 14:09, 22 June 2014 (EDT)

I'll change the link to the series page, because that's more correct. Proposals can go anywhere (I'd prefer independant forums pages, not on that messy conglomeration of a page), and no we don't have an interwiki for any of the third parties. Toomai Glittershine The Trumpeteer 14:12, 22 June 2014 (EDT)

Liquipedia

Liquipedia has stated that "we have partnered with SSBwiki for Melee content." When did this ever occur? Awesome Cardinal 2000 08:14, 24 June 2014 (EDT)

To my knowledge, they have made no such proposition the way MLG did. I'm not sure what exactly they're referring regarding us in that post, anyway. Miles (talk) 08:20, 24 June 2014 (EDT)

It looks like they literally copied the hitbox icons and just put them on their own pages. If Liquipedia is falsely saying that they can take the information we have here something should be done. Awesome Cardinal 2000 08:25, 24 June 2014 (EDT)

In the emails I exchanged with Alex of MLG, nothing was ever said about Liquipedia, and I'm fairly certain Porple would have said something about it. Omega Tyrant 09:23, 24 June 2014 (EDT)

A lot of articles have literally been copy-pasted from our versions of them. Awesome Cardinal 2000 09:29, 24 June 2014 (EDT)

The sad thing is is that they also copied from our character articles and tried to get rid of some parts of the articles as well. I have a feeling they are trying to compete with us in a unfair way. Dots (talk) The PhD 10:00, 24 June 2014 (EDT)

They are violating license by doing so. We're share-alike with attribution, but they're failing to list us as the source. Miles (talk) 10:00, 24 June 2014 (EDT)

Here's what was discussed on IRC last night: Someone on Liquipedia by the name of "arrian" presented themselves as a SmashWiki admin and gave them permission to basically copy everything as long as they gave credit. We spoke with tofucake (LP staff) and clarified that, whether this "arrian" is staff here or not, they acted without community approval or input. We're currently waiting to see if tofucake can learn who arrian is here; tofucake appears to be of good faith and realizes they have been misinformed. Toomai Glittershine The Brass 10:29, 24 June 2014 (EDT)

After further discussion, we believe that "arrian" was also misinformed and/or made an incorrect assumption, and so I believe that nothing intentionally malicious has occured. We're working right now to resolve the situation. Toomai Glittershine The Brass 12:25, 24 June 2014 (EDT)

Semicolon == Arrian. C-Hawk and I talked it over as well. Toomai, so did you and I. But this is no place for a discussion like this. IRC. Semicolon (talk) 01:26, 28 June 2014 (EDT)

Okay so here's the gist of the entire situation. Back when TL initially created their SSBM team, Semicolon (who is part of that community) talked with me about how they create wikis for all games they participate in, and that they would appreciate using some of our content to kickstart things. I said that the only real issue would be if they blatantly plagarised us; under the license we's working under, other people are allowed to use and expand on our work as long as they attribute it to us. After Semi discussed with Clarinet Hawk and TL staff, TL was very much on board with attribution, allowing them to not have to start from scratch while also potentially directing positive traffic our way.

Semicolon admits to not having discussed this with more of our admins and the userbase before TL's wiki was opened to the public, as he didn't expect there to be an indignant reaction from our users, which I believe was caused because the attribution to SmashWiki had not yet been fully formed (i.e. the "SmashWiki wrote this" notice wasn't created yet, so attribution was missing). The Reddit post that TL had "partnered" with us was also admitted to be a mistake on TL's part; Semi doesn't know why they put it that way aside from how they wanted to appreciate us, endorse us, and stop people bashing us on their forums.

So in short: TL intends to be friendly to us, attributing anything they borrow from us before rewriting it for their standards, and a few mixups resulted in no one here aware that it was about to go public. If Semi or someone else involved thinks I got something wrong in this summary, go ahead and correct me. Toomai Glittershine The Multifaceted 14:20, 28 June 2014 (EDT)

Smashers

Just wondering, why do we have 'smashers' on this wiki? Smashwiki should be about the games, not the people that play them, no matter how good. Harro (talk) 03:39, 17 July 2014 (EDT)

"SmashWiki is designed to include content relating to a number of issues including the games themselves, characters, stages, strategies and techniques, competitive play, the vibrant community that has developed around the game, and much more."

A Wiki should go far beyond what's just in a game, and should cover everything that makes up the game. If there's a competitive following of the game, the Wiki should cover what is a major part of the Smash franchise: the competitive players. You can't deny that the competitive part of Smash is extremely important, and when it has turned Smash into what it is to people today, then it should be covered on the Wiki. MegaTron1XD 03:50, 17 July 2014 (EDT)

More importantly: Back when the wiki was originally created, it was by SmashBoards, and they wanted to document both the games and the notable players. Since no one has ever made a serious effort the change this, we still do it. Toomai Glittershine The Honcho 10:12, 17 July 2014 (EDT)

I'm having second thoughts on whether that's still relevant nowadays, though. I mean, we're not really just SmashBoards' wiki anymore, are we? We've sort of outgrown that; we're the highest-profile Smash wiki out there. Is it really necessary for us to have pages on individual players, when pretty much none of them are affiliated with the series in any official capacity? Now, I'm well aware of SW:OFFICIAL and how we've documented things like Project M in a low-visibility fashion for referential purposes, but what purpose does having Smasher pages actually serve?

Here's the thing: some players with Smasher pages are actually members of the wiki already, complete with their own userspace. I find it redundant to have both; surely their user page and any subpages would be enough for their personal information and Smash standings? Consider that anything outside of the userspace is subject to a notability requirement; that's quite a gray area when it comes to players. I don't think anyone would deny the prominence of someone like Ken Hoang but it's a shakier matter moving down the ranks.

Personally, I believe that encyclopedic pages should be limited to official personnel and that info on any player, regardless of notability, should be solely on their userspace. This means we don't have to deal with the gray area of notability and the drama of whether or not someone "deserves" a Smasher page. If someone doesn't have an account, it's easy enough to sign up and for the really high-profile players, they may even have Wikipedia pages we could link to instead, such as Hoang himself.

Again, I'm well aware of SW:OFFICIAL, but that's just my stance. Coming from the Team Fortress Wiki, that's how things are set up there and it works pretty well (and yes, I know we're not the Team Fortress Wiki either. I'm just saying.) VinLAURiA (talk) 11:58, 21 July 2014 (EDT)

It seems you are unaware of how big the competitive scene has become (especially for Melee). Nintendo has taken full notice of it, with the Super Smash Bros. Invitational, as well as them sponsoring EVO 2014 and doing a speech to the players. The competitive scene is fully relevant to the wiki, and the smashers that are so good at the games deserve coverage. Scr7(talk · contribs) 12:00, 21 July 2014 (EDT)

Also, just saying that there are hardly any smashers who would care about their userspace on this wiki, let alone smashers who even do much with accounts here. And there are also barely any smashers with complete pages on Wikipedia. Ken has also been on stuff like Survivor, which is part of why he has a detailed Wikipedia page. Scr7(talk · contribs) 12:04, 21 July 2014 (EDT)

Having Smasher pages is worthwhile in general; however, I think we ought to be a bit stricter on who merits one. We should really be limiting them to players who consistently make it to the top of power rankings and major tournaments (or are otherwise significant like TOs). Miles (talk) 12:07, 21 July 2014 (EDT)