SmashWiki:Featured content

The next featured article gets chosen on April 1, 2017. The current vote leader is Stale-move negation with a total of +9.

Featured articles are considered to be the best articles on SmashWiki, as determined by our editors. Before being listed here, articles are reviewed at featured article candidates for accuracy, completeness, and style. A small, stylized Super Smash Bros. logo with a star on an article's page indicates that the article is featured, or has been featured in the past.

You can view all featured article snippets on SmashWiki:Featured content/Full.

Rules and regulations

• Feature articles will be chosen quarterly: on the first of January, April, July, and October.

• New suggestions may not be added in the month leading up to the next featured article (e.g. no suggestions in December because it's a month before January).

• Feature articles will be chosen based on vote count alone.

• The article with the highest vote total (supports being +1, opposes being -1) will be chosen.
• In the event of a tie, an admin picks which article gets used.

• Suggestions expire:

• a year after they are given, should they not be chosen.
• quarterly if they have a score of less than 0.

• There may be no more than 10 suggestions at any one time.
• Each user is limited to one suggestion per voting period.
• All suggestions will be archived when they pass or fail (see here).
• All votes should be bolded or they will not be counted. (e.g. "support because this page is the greatest of them all!")

Things to consider

The following is a list of things to consider, both when nominating and voting on an article

1. Quality and completeness of the article: Does the article sufficiently cover the topic at hand? Is it comprehensible and easy to follow? Are images used effectively and not excessively? Is the article lacking in grammar and spelling errors?
2. Relevance to Smash: Is the article directly related to the Smash series, or is it more tangential?
3. Requirements: Does the article have a sufficiently lengthy opening paragraph that it will fill out the featured article space on the main page? Does the article have an identifying image to accompany this description? Has the article been featured before (we do not accept articles that have already been featured)?

How to request that an article be featured

To propose an article be featured, please do the following:

• Create a heading under "Proposed featured articles" that looks like this: ===Article Name===, where "Article Name" is the full name of the article you believe is worthy of being labeled as a featured article.
• Briefly explain why this article merits featured article status.
• Be sure to sign your proposition with ~~~~

Proposed Featured Articles

Robin (SSB4)

A well-written page that covers the character in a clear and concise manner, also very clean and demonstrates everything a fighter page should be. MuteSpittah (talk) 22:46, 3 April 2016 (EDT)

Support This is good indeed. I like it so much. Dragonfirebreath25 (talk) 07:20, 4 April 2016 (EDT)

"Victory poses" has an incomplete tag in it. -- Ethan(Discussion) 14:42, 7 April 2016 (EDT)

Yeah. That's pretty minor though. Marth also had an incomplete tag while it was featured for a time as well. MuteSpittah (talk) 14:47, 7 April 2016 (EDT)

Just saying (no one really voted for Marth anyways). -- Ethan(Discussion) 14:57, 7 April 2016 (EDT)

Weak support. Great, but a bit too long, especially the opening paragraph. Nyargleblargle (Contribs) 15:50, 14 April 2016 (EDT)

Oppose: really starting to get tired of always featuring fighters. Serpent King 20:25, 26 June 2016 (EDT)

Strong Oppose It's missing Japanese in one section. TabuuandMasterCore 11:58, 29 June 2016 (EDT)

Weak support Though it is a superb article, 2/3 of the past 3 featured articles (including the current one) have been FE characters. However, as this one is a game-specific page, I feel it is a bit more of a change. BaconMaster 16:27, 1 July 2016 (EDT)

Oppose. It could still use some work and I don't really see Robin as a feature article that too soon. Dots (talk) The Blue 21:54, 8 July 2016 (EDT)

Link

Has a lot of info, is clean and has many nice images. -- Ethan(Discussion) 23:38, 3 April 2016 (EDT)

Support A good one indeed. Dragonfirebreath25 (talk) 14:01, 14 April 2016 (EDT)

Weak oppose Solid, but could be more concise. Take, for example, the Smash 64 section. Nyargleblargle (Contribs) 15:50, 14 April 2016 (EDT)

Support! I mean, come on! It's Link! He is a good fighter and the theread is clean, very nice, and has (like any other thread or whatever you call it. ∆_∆) much info! Hello! (talk) 12:22, 2 June 2016 (EDT)

Oppose: really starting to get tired of always featuring fighters. Serpent King 20:25, 26 June 2016 (EDT)

Strong oppose Same reason as Serpent King. TabuuandMasterCore 14:07, 2 July 2016 (EDT)

The 46 featured articles so far have consisted of 11 characters, 12 stages , 3 game mechanics, 3 games, 3 game menu areas (SSE, My Music, and Stickers), 2 bosses, 2 items (counting the Final Smash), 2 cosmetic items (music and costumes), 2 techniques, 2 fan creations (Smashtasm and tier list), 1 special move, 1 about AI, 1 about glitches, and 1 about stage aspects (platform). At a 11:12:23 ratio of characters:stages:misc, you have a 23.9%, 26.1%, and 50% featuring proportion, respectively. For a game based heavily on the stages and fighters, these ratios are pretty much expected. If you're getting tired of us recently having featured character articles (which is a whopping number of 2 if you go back to the Master Hand glitch), you need a different voting system. MegaTron1 12:34, 4 July 2016 (EDT)

Weak support. Great character for a feature article but it could be better. @Serpent King: Why do you think that? Fireball and amiibo, some of the more recent FAs, aren't about characters. Dots (talk) The Blue 21:54, 8 July 2016 (EDT)

Support. It's a pretty good article, with plenty of good images, information about him, and his useful tools and placement. Pika, Chilly! 14:17, 10 December 2016 (EST)

Support. When I read over it I didn't see anything glaringly wrong. --Meester Tweester (talk) 20:21, 13 December 2016 (EST)

Stale-move negation

Describes everything in full detail and tells it in a very clean way. Plus, very well known, and somewhat detailed. Penro 20:14, 5 April 2016 (EDT)

Support per Penro. Nyargleblargle (Contribs) 15:50, 14 April 2016 (EDT)

Support for this reason. Dragonfirebreath25 (talk) 16:18, 14 April 2016 (EDT)

Bump. This page really is very good, and I'd hate for it to be missed out on it's chance to shine. Penro 16:43, 1 July 2016 (EDT)

Weak oppose I think that it might be a little to complicated for some people, but otherwise it is a great article Poultry(talk) the God-Slayer 07:13, 7 July 2016 (EDT)

Support even if it is somewhat complicated for some, it is an important and good article all the same. BaconMaster 13:30, 7 July 2016 (EDT)

Weak Support. Could be better but it talks about an interesting mechanic. Dots (talk) The Blue 21:54, 8 July 2016 (EDT)

Support: Good 'n' Interesting. Sir Glazington (talk) 13:14, 28 December 2016 (EST)

Support: Well-written and different from the other featured articles thus far kenniky 23:20, 29 December 2016 (EST)

Support. RickTommy 02:20, 1 February 2017 (EST)

Support: Per BaconMaster A51 Trooper 03:35, 2 March 2017 (EST)

Support. Ragnarok320, The Toa of Fire (talk) 0:2:16, 4 March 2017 (EST)

Super Smash Bros. Melee in competitive play

It really shows how a game designed to be non-competitive can become a competitive scene where people can win up to 15k, shows ups and downs of a important part of this Wiki, it also shows how much the competitive scene, and Smash Bros. as a whole advanced from its early days. That's including SmashWiki too. It is written in a way that many people wouldn't imagine doing, many people don't even think there was a platinum age. It also is written in long and informing paragraphs that definitly tells us a great our community is to put in that much time into one article. I can go on and on about how good this article is and how much it deserves to be featured, but i cannot make up your minds. You, and the rest of the SmashWiki community, will judge this article wisely Poultry(talk) the God-Slayer 10:53, 1 July 2016 (EDT)

Weak support. A bit lengthy towards the end, but overall well-written and has just the right amount of images. Nyargleblargle (Contribs) 17:36, 2 July 2016 (EDT)

Support per NB. BaconMaster 13:30, 7 July 2016 (EDT)

Weak Oppose. Well-written, but do you think this would be interesting enough? I don't really think so. Dots (talk) The Blue 21:54, 8 July 2016 (EDT)

Oppose. Featuring it will undoubtedly inflate Melee supremacists' egos. RickTommy 02:20, 1 February 2017 (EST)

Support. This article is the most relevant to what is going on right now. My 2nd option would be stale-move-negation, but competitive melee is talked about more than any other options. How do you sign things??? —Preceding unsigned comment added by LCS (talk • contribs) 12:15, March 5, 2017‎ (EST)

• Support because it is well-written! Dragonfirebreath25 (talk) 09:18, 21 March 2017 (EDT)

Stage Builder

A pretty well rounded and concise article. The intro paragraph is a little short but it could be buffed up a bit or I could always pull a sentence or two from the Brawl and Smash 4 sections. Serpent King 17:48, 1 October 2016 (EDT)

• Support: A nice article indeed for the wiki and I like it here! Dragonfirebreath25 (talk) 21:38, 1 October 2016 (EDT)
• Support. RickTommy 02:20, 1 February 2017 (EST)
• Support. This article has great potential of becoming featured. Dots (talk) The Quake 21:18, 3 March 2017 (EST)

Falco (SSBB)

This article was written with the same content as other featured Brawl fighter articles. Over the times more pics and other files were added to make the article more visually appealing. There are some red links to pages on standard attacks but many featured articles have that feature as well. ZeldaStarfoxfan2164 (talk) is made in America 01:16, 9 January 2017 (EST)

• Oppose: Well, it's strange to feature Brawl-related articles now that it's been a while since the game has been at the front of peoples' minds. RickTommy 02:20, 1 February 2017 (EST)

That's not really a good reason for opposing a featured article. A good article is a good article. However, I wouldn't support this one - I don't like some of the wording. John HUAH! 13:20, 5 March 2017 (EST)

Bayonetta (SSB4)

This article is well made, and the topic of Bayonetta is a big one, as she is fun in casuals, and strong in competitive play too. *SupportLCS (talk) 07:36, 17 March 2017 (EDT)

Support for one reason: SMASHING! Dragonfirebreath25 (talk) 09:58, 21 March 2017 (EDT)