Talk:Prima Games

Discuss. I'm not sure what I think yet. --RoyboyX Talk 20:18, 20 March 2013 (EDT)

Prima Games are more important than "any other game guide maker", as they make the official guides for the Super Smash Bros. games. Keep. Toast ltimatum 22:33, 20 March 2013 (EDT)

Prima Games game guides are the most notable guides for the Smash Bros. games so I'm agreeing with Toast. Keep. Dots The 90's 22:35, 20 March 2013 (EDT)

Keep Ignoring their "official" status, these guides are really infamous among the Smash community. Omega Tyrant 23:17, 20 March 2013 (EDT)

Keep For reasons stated above. --RoyboyX Talk 08:23, 21 March 2013 (EDT)

Delete

Given that Prima is now not allowed to be referenced (be it trivia, move names, etc) and that it's been outcasted by SW:OFFICIAL, I'd say we could stand to loose this page. However, discuss. Serpent King 00:37, 10 April 2016 (EDT)

Are there any other notable Smash strategy guides/player's guides in print? We could merge this into a page on that subject more generally if so. Miles (talk) 01:14, 10 April 2016 (EDT)

To answer your question, yes. Nintendo has approved the creation and distribution of a Smash 64 guide by Brady Games and a Melee guide by Nintendo Power. Additionally, "special editions" of Smash guides have been released as well. With all this content, an official guide book article should be created. To add even more content, a "mistakes and errors" section could be added. Pokebub (talk) 02:42, 10 April 2016 (EDT)

Why is Prima not allowed to be referenced? MuteSpittah (talk) 12:37, 10 April 2016 (EDT)

Most likely because of it's inaccurate information and lesser-known terms for some features/techniques. Pokebub (talk) 15:41, 10 April 2016 (EDT)

^Exactly the reason. Its information can be so inaccurate it's unreliable, hence why we don't use it for references and trivia. Disaster Flare (talk) 15:45, 10 April 2016 (EDT)

That makes sense. That just means we shouldn't reference its inaccurate information. If there's ever something from Prima that is accurate and we want to reference it, it can still be referenced. Right? MuteSpittah (talk) 15:52, 10 April 2016 (EDT)

(reset indent) That I wouldn't know. Just so I'm clear, I'm neutral about this whole deal, so I'm not the best person to be asking about Prima's fate on the wiki. Disaster Flare (talk) 15:55, 10 April 2016 (EDT)

Yeah. Well just because a source is inaccurate on certain things doesn't mean it's inaccurate on other things, hence why I don't understand why it's "not allowed to be referenced." MuteSpittah (talk) 15:58, 10 April 2016 (EDT)

I honestly don't understand myself. I didn't make the rule so I can't really say much on the matter. Disaster Flare (talk) 15:59, 10 April 2016 (EDT)

Bump. Any input? MuteSpittah (talk) 19:35, 10 April 2016 (EDT)

Keep per Mute, plus it's still pretty well known. Penro 19:49, 10 April 2016 (EDT)

Keep. Still famous, still infamous. We could compile a list of mistakes/errors/misconceptions brought about by them. Then again, I wouldn't want to paint Prima in a dickish manner and portray this page as unnecessarily harping on them so maybe we'd have to write some more about their contributions to balance it out lol MuteSpittah (talk) 19:56, 10 April 2016 (EDT)

Rewrite and move to a guides page. I don't think Prima on its own is notable enough, but I think the idea of a strategy guide is important enough for a page. Nyargleblargle (Contribs) 21:34, 10 April 2016 (EDT)

Well our own policy on creating articles says that articles about miscellaneous subjects can be created as long as they are about the Smash series. To me, outside of the negative reputation it has Prima doesn't have that much of a major presence in the series even if the guides they make are official. I think though that a page about strategy guides would be OK like Nyargle said. - EndGenuity (talk) 10:44, 11 April 2016 (EDT)

Keep. Omega Tyrant's point made three years ago still stands. John PK SMAAAASH!! 12:29, 11 April 2016 (EDT)