SmashWiki:Featured content

The next featured article gets chosen on April 1, 2016. The current vote leader is Fireball with a total of +10.

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, stylised 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.

• They will also expire quarterly if they have a score of less than 0.

• There may be no more than 10 suggestions at any one time.
• All suggestions will be archived when they pass or fail (see here).

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

Fireball

Describes the functions of both Mario and Luigi's fireballs and the origin of the move extremely well. Nyargleblargle (Talk · Contribs) 16:04, 16 October 2015 (EDT)

Bump. Nyargleblargle (Talk · Contribs) 13:14, 20 October 2015 (EDT)

support Serpent∞King (talk) 17:02, 26 October 2015 (EDT)

Support Organized. Penro ...that's all. 15:58, 28 February 2016 (EST)

Weak support May honestly be the best special move article along with Blaster and Reflector. However, I don't really think its all that too special. Dots (talk) The Greninja 19:13, 2 March 2016 (EST)

Support. It's undoubtedly the most well-known special move to newbies. RickTommy 22:46, 2 March 2016 (EST)

Support. Has a lot of info. -- Ethan(Discussion) 23:21, 2 March 2016 (EST)

Support seeing as it's one of the best special move articles. BaconMasterLuck o' the Irish. 19:57, 3 March 2016 (EST)

Support I agree, lots of special move articles are either a mess or partially incomplete. This one is nice and notable. RobSir zx 07:45, 4 March 2016 (EST)

Strong Support. I've been a Mario fan, and Fireball should fit the featured article section nicely.(Accidentally misplaced, remind me not to do that again) Pika, Poyo poyo poyo 18:10, 4 March 2016 (EST)

Weak support. This article is fine, and I don't think it's all that great, but I'd rather have this featured than all the rest. MuteSpittah (talk) 18:37, 6 March 2016 (EST)

neutral Poultry(talk) the Pumpkin Pie 14:18, 7 March 2016 (EST)

Strong Support! This is used by Mario & Luigi and I couldn't agree more! Dragonfirebreath25 (talk) 22:58, 7 March 2016 (EST)

Roy

Roy is arguably one of the most popular Smash characters (and was one of two most wanted veterans to return to Smash, alongside Mewtwo). Additionally, Marth and Roy both contributed to bringing Fire Emblem to the western audiences, making their inclusion in Melee a very smart decision on Sakurai's part. Honestly, as I think about it, I don't know anyone who DOESN'T know who Roy is. Even some of my non-Smash playing friends know who he is. Disaster Flare (talk) 16:51, 26 January 2016 (EST)

I think FAs are supposed to be how good the article is, not what the article is about. -- Ethan(Discussion) 13:46, 27 January 2016 (EST)

Well then in that case, this was pointless. :I Disaster Flare (talk) 13:47, 27 January 2016 (EST)

If the article is as good as Marth's, than it should be a FA. How does this article stand out, how informative is it, etc. -- Ethan(Discussion) 13:51, 27 January 2016 (EST)

Despite the fact that its reason for nomination isn't relevant for featured articleship, I do support this. Roy's page is very well written. ---Preceding unsigned comment added by you. Or maybe DatNuttyKid. 14:39, 3 February 2016 (EST)

weak support Poultry(talk) the fluffy 17:02, 7 February 2016 (EST)

Same as Poultry Somewhat of an odd an unknown character, but very long and useful, and gives a great impression on people looking to this wiki for info. Penro ...that's all. 15:58, 28 February 2016 (EST)

Remember, it's about the article, not the subject. But I support. -- Ethan(Discussion) 16:37, 28 February 2016 (EST)

Neutral leaning towards support. Not quite as good as Marth's; it goes into too much detail IMO, but still an excellent article. Nyargleblargle (Contribs) 18:35, 2 March 2016 (EST)

Neutral His popularity status and well developed character articles makes it a good article for FA but Ethan7 said it. Dots (talk) The Greninja 19:13, 2 March 2016 (EST)

Support. Well, he is one of my Melee mains. RickTommy 22:46, 2 March 2016 (EST)

Please read the reminder above. Penro ...that's all. 23:04, 3 March 2016 (EST)

Support; It's well written, and flows quite nicely. BaconMasterLuck o' the Irish. 19:57, 3 March 2016 (EST)

Weak oppose In all honesty, we just had Marth so perhaps we put this one on the back burner. We're not Sakurai, we don't love FE that much. RobSir zx 07:45, 4 March 2016 (EST)

Oppose I can't help but feel like having Roy be a featured article out of all the FE characters would feel very biased to fans, because everyone has a different preference on what character comes to their mind when they think of Fire Emblem in general. 15DollarsWentSouth 15:48, 6 March 2016 (EST)

In that case we shouldn't have any articles on any Fire Emblem characters. Weak support, it doesn't stand out, just like Fireball doesn't, but it's second-best in comparison to all other nominees. MuteSpittah (talk) 19:08, 6 March 2016 (EST)

I was more so referring to the reasons given on why he should become a featured article. "I don't know anyone who DOESN'T know who Roy is" sounds heavily biased to me. 15DollarsWentSouth 14:17, 7 March 2016 (EST)

Oh ok. Well it's more of an assumption than a biased statement. A biased statement is just a statement slanted by personal opinion. MuteSpittah (talk) 22:47, 7 March 2016 (EST)

Jigglypuff

its an oddball player that only this guy respects, come on, give it a chance! btw i support Nintendofan1653 (talk) EZMONEY!! 17:07, 26 January 2016 (EST)

I think FAs are supposed to be how good the article is, not what the article is about. -- Ethan(Discussion) 13:46, 27 January 2016 (EST)

Not bad for a quite notable character appearing across all four Smash games but there's still a lot more work to be developed for Jigglypuff's character articles. Dots (talk) The Greninja 19:13, 2 March 2016 (EST)

Support. As much as I dislike Jiggly, it's a good feature for April Fools' Day. RickTommy 22:30, 2 March 2016 (EST)

Weak oppose. Could have more written about it. -- Ethan(Discussion) 23:21, 2 March 2016 (EST)

Weak oppose for the same reasons as Ethan. BaconMasterLuck o' the Irish. 19:57, 3 March 2016 (EST)

Oppose. Kinda weak article. Not very meaty either. Some of the writing isn't very good. MuteSpittah (talk) 23:01, 7 March 2016 (EST)

Palutena's Guidance

A fun and detailed page on one of the elements of Smash that really makes it unique. ---Preceding unsigned comment added by you. Or maybe DatNuttyKid. 13:24, 27 January 2016 (EST)

Support: I don't see why not. Serpent King 22:45, 27 January 2016 (EST)

weak oppose its a great article, just that it is to minor to be a FA in my opinion Poultry(talk) the fluffy 17:01, 7 February 2016 (EST)

But like, it's not about the topic of the article? First of all, Palutena's Guidance isn't really minor. Secondly, even if it was, if it's a "great article" it deserves to be featured whether or not it's a major one. ---Preceding unsigned comment added by cupid♥. Or maybe DatNuttyKid. 20:29, 7 February 2016 (EST)

I would like to hear a response to this, given that it's currently hindering this page's chances of being featured for a reason I believe is false. ---Preceding unsigned comment added by cupid♥. Or maybe DatNuttyKid. 20:54, 13 February 2016 (EST)

Yes, the major flaw of going by vote count alone...I agree with DNK, though. If you are going to oppose an FA, you should at least have a semi-valid reason for doing so. Serpent King 21:07, 13 February 2016 (EST)

sorry for this late response but i think that if codec wasnt featured, why should PG be (codec for the win!) plus codec is much more detailed about all the metal gear references Poultry(talk) the Pumpkin Pie 16:49, 28 February 2016 (EST)

That's... not a better reason. Besides, PG doesn't have nearly as many references as the codec does, so it can't be more detailed. It has all of the relevant information listed. Besides, you can re-nominate Codec if you want. But judging this one based on the fact that an article you liked wasn't seems unfair. ---Preceding unsigned comment added by you. Or maybe DatNuttyKid. 13:04, 1 March 2016 (EST)

i said that i think that codec is a better article in all qualities, i dont think this one should be featured if a completely better article was not featured. Poultry(talk) the Pumpkin Pie 18:38, 5 March 2016 (EST)

Support. I love her Guidance. -- The 70's called. They said BeepYou was here :v (talk) 17:30, 7 February 2016 (EST)

Weak oppose. Not quite enough prose SmashWiki editors actually wrote. Nyargleblargle (Contribs) 18:35, 2 March 2016 (EST)

Weak support Honestly pretty interesting subject but somewhat minor. Dots (talk) The Greninja 19:13, 2 March 2016 (EST)

Support. It's funny, which is fitting, considering the feature will start on April Fools' Day. RickTommy 22:46, 2 March 2016 (EST)

Weak oppose. Doesn't have much written other than quotes. Codec Conversations has more notes even though Brawl has less characters. -- Ethan(Discussion) 23:21, 2 March 2016 (EST)

Oppose. While it's accurate, complete, and has good style, the majority of it isn't "written" by us, as it is mostly direct quotes from the game. MuteSpittah (talk) 18:53, 6 March 2016 (EST)

Alternate costume (SSB4)

I believe this is worthy of featured article considering how many characters there are in the game with each one having at least 8 alternate costumes (400+ costumes) with almost each one coming from (or likely referencing) costumes from their respective universes, while being able to accurately inform in great detail where those swaps originate from and filtering out information that is too speculative or just plain false. Also, Brawl's was featured. Unknown the Hedgehog 14:22, 27 January 2016 (EST)

Weak oppose. Too much debate surrounding it, and tbh if someone actually looked into it I bet you 50% of the costumes listed there are really huge stretches. ---Preceding unsigned comment added by you. Or maybe DatNuttyKid. 22:47, 27 January 2016 (EST)

Yes, I also have some...concerns with this page. Given that I have went through it...multiple times...to clean out the undesirable descriptions only to find more the next week, I have to oppose. Serpent King 22:50, 27 January 2016 (EST)

I would say 50% is a huge exaggeration considering it has been gone through multiple times by multiple people since it was made and, from what I could see, I haven't seen a one time removal of mass false information. Which indicates to me that this article has been well kept up on the info being added. Yes, the occasional false info sometimes comes, but nothing major that hasn't been fixed somewhat quickly. Unknown the Hedgehog 23:04, 27 January 2016 (EST)

Well, yes, I did exaggerate (and purposefully), but I still think that too much of the page is really just garbage comparisons to be a featured article. ---Preceding unsigned comment added by you. Or maybe DatNuttyKid. 14:38, 3 February 2016 (EST)

What about the main alternate costume page? Aidan, the Wandering Space Warrior 14:43, 3 February 2016 (EST)

Ehhhh, it's less messy but not as informative. It basically serves as navigation and basic descriptions that if you don't understand already you have a problem. ---Preceding unsigned comment added by you. Or maybe DatNuttyKid. 14:53, 3 February 2016 (EST)

oppose it has a cleanup tag on it Poultry(talk) the fluffy 16:18, 5 February 2016 (EST)

Yeah,oppose. Just because it's big doesn't mean it's good. Penro ...that's all. 19:44, 12 February 2016 (EST)

Oppose. This page get changed too much. Each costume has a description, then it gets removed later without warning. ZeldaStarfoxfan2164 (talk) is made in America 09:27, 1 March 2016 (EST)

Oppose. On very, very shaky ground in terms of what it does have. Nyargleblargle (Contribs) 18:35, 2 March 2016 (EST)

Oppose Alternative Costume pages are a fucking mess anyways. Dots (talk) The Greninja 19:13, 2 March 2016 (EST)

Support. I agree with everyone else, but considering the date the new featured article comes... RickTommy 22:46, 2 March 2016 (EST)

Oppose. Changes too much to be an outstanding article. -- Ethan(Discussion) 23:21, 2 March 2016 (EST)

Oppose. This page has come a long way, but it's simply unstable - content is constantly being changed, removed, added in, and there are soooo many stretches. MuteSpittah (talk) 18:53, 6 March 2016 (EST)

Satoru Iwata

Short, to the point, gives all necessary information without overdoing it. Also a nice sentiment of respect to the former Nintendo president. Serpent King 16:26, 7 February 2016 (EST)

Support for reasons stated ScizorSteelix 16:36, 7 February 2016 (EST)

Strong support for every possible good reason. BaconMaster 16:37, 7 February 2016 (EST)

on my business card, i am a CEO, in my brain, i am a game developer, but in my heart, i am a gamer (support)

Poultry(talk) the fluffy 16:58, 7 February 2016 (EST)

Dat strong support tho. -- The 70's called. They said BeepYou was here :v (talk) 17:29, 7 February 2016 (EST)

Weak support. It's an okay-written article, but given that it's arguably relevant to Smash (the only things Iwata has over Tatsumi Kimishima is that he was somewhat involved in the creation of Smash Bros. and was featured in the Mii Fighters' trailer), I don't know if it really should be on SmashWiki (not I'm going to suggest deletion, but) much less featured. ---Preceding unsigned comment added by cupid♥. Or maybe DatNuttyKid. 20:32, 7 February 2016 (EST)

Obligatory Support Iwata definitely was a big part of Nintendo; which means he was directly a part of smash. Terrible puns aside, he did quite a bit of coding for 64 and Melee if I'm not mistaken. One problem I see here is that it might be too little, too late. Perhaps opening scabby emotional wounds of the past isn't such a good idea. RobSir zx 21:55, 7 February 2016 (EST)

Extremely strong support Let's do it in memory of Iwata. Disaster Flare (talk) 22:46, 7 February 2016 (EST)

I just wanna say that doing a FA doesn't have anything to do with the subject, so copying quotes he said (Poultry) or saying to do it in honor of him (The D) doesn't seem like a valid point. However, I Support per Serp King's former point. Penro ...that's all. 15:58, 28 February 2016 (EST)

Support per SK. Drill Blaster Mark 2 (talk) 08:27, 1 March 2016 (EST)

Support echoing SK. Aidan, the Wandering Dragon Warrior 15:48, 1 March 2016 (EST)

Absolute support per literally everyone. Ganonmew, The Evil Clone 17:28, 1 March 2016 (EST)

Leaning towards oppose; I deeply respect Iwata, but I have to admit the article itself is nothing particularly special. It's also a bit short to recommend as a FA, by my judgment. Miles (talk) 17:39, 1 March 2016 (EST)

Do you want me to count this as neutral or oppose? Serpent King 18:18, 1 March 2016 (EST)

Oppose. I respect Iwata a ton as well, but I think the ship has sailed for SW to have given a tribute to him. In addition, the article is pretty basic and short in length, and nothing really stands out to me that leads me to think that it should be a FA. MuteSpittah (talk) 18:58, 1 March 2016 (EST)

I just want to point out: Since when has it been a bad thing for an article to be short? Serpent King 19:02, 1 March 2016 (EST)

Nothing. It's just that, and I'm not sure how everyone else feels about this, but if there's going to be a featured article I'd expect it to me meaty. Not particularly long but not particularly short. Long enough to cover the topic, short enough to keep it interesting. There's not enough meat on the bones of the article for it to be something interesting enough to be something featured. That's just my sentiment though. I know it's not a requirement. MuteSpittah (talk) 19:11, 1 March 2016 (EST)

Except the article does cover its topic, and its interesting in my opinion (of course I could be biased as a wrote the thing, but...) Serpent King 19:18, 1 March 2016 (EST)

It could be better and more interesting. That's all I'm saying. I didn't mean what I said originally (I was trying to echo Miles), but what I really wanted to say is that, it could be better, have more details, and more interesting stuff. MuteSpittah (talk) 21:08, 1 March 2016 (EST)

Really the only page on a person that's actually somewhat satisfactory is Sakurai's. Albeit, this is because he is the person most relevant to Smash, so obviously there's gonna have to be more written about him here, and people less relevant to Smash (Miyamoto, Itoi, Sugimori) are gonna have far less written about them and that's that. So Iwata's page can't be all that meaty in comparison to Sakurai's, but it could be far better given his roles in the original Smash game. If I were to use an analogy, I'd say that Sakurai's page is perfectly short skirt quality, while Iwata's page is like a speedo. It could cover more. MuteSpittah (talk) 21:17, 1 March 2016 (EST)

I support SK: it doesn't need to be long to be featured. -- BeepYou, a user with no grammar at all :v (talk) 19:24, 1 March 2016 (EST)

Oppose. A good article, but it's frankly not on the level of a Featured Article IMO. Nyargleblargle (Contribs) 18:35, 2 March 2016 (EST)

Oppose as well. I'm going to have to agree with Nyargleblargle and Miles on here. Developer articles are not really important to this wiki. Dots (talk) The Lax 18:58, 2 March 2016 (EST)

Oppose. Too insensitive for a feature that starts on April Fools' Day. RickTommy 22:46, 2 March 2016 (EST)

Change to oppose for the reasons given by Nyargle, Miles, and myself. ---Preceding unsigned comment added by you. Or maybe DatNuttyKid. 23:35, 2 March 2016 (EST)

Changing to oppose I said myself it might be too little, too late. RobSir zx 07:45, 4 March 2016 (EST)

Oppose With all due respect, other than its subject, this article isn't all that special. Luke • Talk::: 18:28, 6 March 2016 (EST)