Talk:Top 100 Smash Bros. Players of All Time

Notability

Ranks such as RetroSSBMRank, and ones by EventHubs and Cloudhead are arguably more notable than a redditors project that just started a couple weeks ago. This isn't bagging on the person nor even their rank, but the notability of the rank itself. For example, EventHubs is a popular site and so when they compile a rank, it's worth mentioning as opposed to one person's project. Another example would be how Wikipedia has an article for Rolling Stone's 500 Greatest Songs of All Time, and, yes, while that list is entirely subjective and just their opinion as much as any other persons', it being compiled by the Rolling Stone makes it noteworthy to mention. Now imagine if a guy on reddit decided to make his own top 500 songs list? Would that rank be notable enough to have an article on Wikipedia? Very likely not. Now whether this rank gains popularity and acceptance amongst the community in the future is something we don't know yet, and I just think the gun might've been jumped on giving it an article. VoqéoT 19:58, December 4, 2019 (EST)

It's not like the person who is putting together the list has not done their research, they mention in their methodology post (https://old.reddit.com/r/smashbros/comments/dz5hbh/top_100_smash_players_of_all_time/) that they have been working on the project for many months and we already have a page for their RetroSSBB Rank (https://www.ssbwiki.com/RetroSSBB_Rank). Also it's important to note that this is one of the first big rankings that sets to rank players between multiple-games which definitely should make it notable. The only thing I would suggest is to change the title so that it shows that only 1999-2019 were counted. JFMV763 (talk) 20:42, December 4, 2019 (EST)

Oppose, as per reason above. If we get rid of this page, we'd also have to get rid of RetroSSBB Rank. Crazy456Rhino (talk) 14:24, December 16, 2019 (EST)

Oppose for the reasons above as well, unless RetroSSBB Rank is removed as well. The methodology is very legitimate and could potentially make waves in how we rank players in the future. --Plague von Karma 09:58, December 24, 2019 (EST)

This article's notability is extremely dubious. As far as I can see, this is basically just one random reddit user's opinion, and the oppose reasons here do nothing to convincingly say why this ranking should be treated legitimately by the wiki. It doesn't matter if they have a "methodology", it's one person's (of questionable authority, who even is "orange_ssbu"?) extremely subjective opinion, and it's not like the "methodology" is some objective arbiter (besides the subjectiveness of what to factor, how the hell do you measure "metagame impact"?). And it's not like the Smash reddit was in huge approval of this ranking; the initial post only got 215 upvotes, while the final post peaked at 419, decent numbers but nothing to show this as having some mass approval that could be argued as notability. If we accept this article, you might as well make an article for anybody's rankings that made a long reddit post for it.

Delete this shit Omega Tyrant 08:01, February 16, 2021 (EST)

Delete: Permanently subjective article, the fact that this article is basing it off of one reddit user's opinion just makes the notability even more questionable. Omegα Toαd, the Toαd Wαrrior. (BUP) 09:03, February 16, 2021 (EST)

Delete: No matter the methodology a cross-Smash ranking is bound to be subjective and filled with flaws, especially a PR from a rather unknown player. CookiesCreme 10:46, February 16, 2021 (EST)

Gonna elaborate on this point. I know all PRs are subjective, but for the major PRs they're usually run by people who have experience in creating PRs and have a pretty good methodology. I honestly don't know what orange_ssbu's credentials are. Furthermore, he's ranking 100 players using his own judgement and methodology, the latter which I believe is rather questionable. CookiesCreme 16:00, February 16, 2021 (EST)

Delete it: Thegameandwatch The Nerd 10:50, February 16, 2021 (EST)

Delete: As per above. VoqéoT 14:04, February 16, 2021 (EST)

Delete: Would be more trustworthy from Panda Global or OrionRank Dick Johnson (talk) 15:00, February 16, 2021 (EST)

Keep: Probably not going to change anyone's mind with this but, even though it is one single person's project, I don't think that should stop it from being removed. It's not like their are a large amount of multi-game rankings out there that attempt to do the same thing and keeping this up shows a good perspective of how a member of the scene viewed it's top 100 players at the 20th anniversary of the series. If we restrict pages on this wiki to only PR's from organizations with large backings and larger public support, we forget the grassroots nature that the Smash Bros. scene formed in and how in many instances it does come down to one person's interpretation of things that in turn make up future perceptions of history. Also PR's are subjective no matter how many people work on them, if we remove one we might as well just remove them all JFMV763 (talk) 15:42, February 16, 2021 (EST)

We aren't deleting this page because it's not from an organization (heck OrionRank is mainly run by 2 people). Notability is the issue here: it's from someone who doesn't have that many credentials when it comes to making power rankings, and we can't just have random Reddit PRs on the wiki. CookiesCreme 15:54, February 16, 2021 (EST)

Like I said before, there's nothing that differentiates this ranking from any other random person making their own personal ranking and then having an article here for it. This isn't remotely similar to other rankings, which are A: created by a panel of people with known legitimate authority in the ranking's subject, and B: are accepted by the relevant community as legitimate and used for the various purposes that rankings serve (such as seeding, Arcadian eligibility, sponsorship opportunities, etc.). If any other random person created their own personal ranking and posted it to reddit or twitter or whatever, it wouldn't have any less notability to it than orange_ssbu's, and well surely you can see how ridiculous it would get at that point when other randos start making articles for their personal rankings and use this article's existence as precedent for their article's validity.

I don't know why you have such a stake in an article for this guy's rankings, are you orange_ssbu or their friend? Omega Tyrant 19:26, February 16, 2021 (EST)

I just don't think this wiki should be so gatekeepy when it comes to content, it's not like PR's like this are a dime a dozen and I feel that it could be interesting to compare this PR to possible future PR's that attempt to do the same thing. JFMV763 (talk) 19:50, February 16, 2021 (EST)

There's a big difference between a ranking made by professionals that have strong community backing (such as tier lists), and a ranking made by some random person on reddit that had no influence among the competitive Smash community. Articles like this are no different from just some random person's userpage, which is what EagleRank literally is, except this somehow slipped into the mainspace. If let this stay then we might as well move my casual tier list into the mainspace. Omegα Toαd, the Toαd Wαrrior. (BUP) 19:57, February 16, 2021 (EST)

I don't see anyone else trying to make a ranking for Smash Wii U or a multi-game rank. By deleting these pages we lose parts of our history and discourage people from even attempting to make their own PR's. If you find it unvaluable that is fine but value is not something that is or should be universal. JFMV763 (talk) 20:05, February 16, 2021 (EST)

Except that isn't something the Wiki gets to decide. Had said list suddenly gained major traction and actually saw usage outside of being a simple musing, then we would report on it. It's not like Greatest of all time which is a frequent discussion point among the community and is a big part of metagame development. The attention and relevance it has is the salient point: that's exactly why the Wiki is backing away from reporting on the SBR tier lists, because to the community they're worth almost as much as any fanmade tier list. - EndGenuity (talk) 20:13, February 16, 2021 (EST)

"I don't see anyone else trying to make a ranking for Smash Wii U or a multi-game rank."

Just supposedly being the "first" doesn't give any more cred, someone else makes their own ranking and then what?

"By deleting these pages we lose parts of our history"

So the opinions of random people with little-to-no acceptance by the community is now "history"?

"and discourage people from even attempting to make their own PR's."

This is just silly, the wiki ain't going out there and taking down people's reddit/twitter/whatever posts about their rankings, yours and orange_ssbu's rankings still exist outside the wiki, and people have been just fine posting their own rankings/tier lists/matchup charts on those other sites without trying to seek validation from SmashWiki. We're just not going to fill your need for validation by letting you post userspace content in the mainspace. Omega Tyrant 20:21, February 16, 2021 (EST)

I'm going to close with this: All PR's ultimately seek validation and some get it more than others. It's a slippery slope to determine which amount of validation results in keeping a PR in comparison to deleting it. Despite relative growth over recent years the competitive Smash Bros. scene is still very niche and I doubt the vast majority of the world's population would be able to tell you what the PGR is, despite it being so big among the competitive Smash Bros. community. I have nothing more to add. JFMV763 (talk) 21:09, February 16, 2021 (EST)

The slippery slope here is allowing articles like these in our main spaces, again what is the difference between a ranking made by you/orange_ssbu and any other random person on reddit/twitter with their own ranking/tier list/matchup chart? Why do your rankings deserve an article anymore than LinkMaster420's personal rankings? Omega Tyrant 21:34, February 16, 2021 (EST)

Why do any rankings deserve anything? If you set up an arbitrary barrier you might as well disallow all power rankings since they are all made by either individuals or groups of them, regardless of how much acceptance they have. The 2018-2019 SSBBRank has under 2000 views on Youtube, yet it is accepted because it is made up by people whom this wiki considers worthy. In the end it comes down to whether the ranking is perceived as worthy or not. If you think it's not, that's fine go ahead and delete the page, but don't think this argument is magically going to go away anytime soon. JFMV763 (talk) 6:55, February 17, 2021 (EST)

You're clearly missing the point here. All the other power rankings are done with individuals who have experience with power rankings and the competitive scene. Even the SSBBRank had top Brawl players in the panel. You have yet to provide any credentials for orange_ssbu aside from being a Smash enthusiast. CookiesCreme 11:09, February 17, 2021 (EST)

You're still dodging the core question here, what makes yours and orange_ssbu's rankings any more notable than all the other random rankings, tier lists, and matchup charts made by countless relatively unknown people out there? Or are you truly advocating for a free-for-all here where everyone can post whatever the fuck they want, and we just let LinkMaster420 make articles for all his own personal rankings and tier lists to not be "gatekeepy"? Because if you're advocating for the latter, you're clearly out of your depth here and are best off making your own wiki for such purposes. If you recognize why the latter is a terrible idea, then why do yours and orange_ssbu's rankings merit coverage here over all the other random personal rankings out there?

And the comparison to the 2018-19 SSBBRank doesn't work, when the ranking was made a panel of people with credible authority within the Brawl competitive community, while of course the reveal video is going to be that lacking in views when the current active Brawl community is as small as it is. Now if you want to try to argue that the current Brawl community is so small that it shouldn't be covered here, that's another discussion entirely. Omega Tyrant 15:20, February 17, 2021 (EST)

What separates this ranking from any other rando with their own ranking or tier list? Throwing out buzzwords doesn't help your case, regardless of it's "gatekeepy" the wiki needs notability limits in place; the wiki intends to be a serious professional endeavor, and is explicitly not a place for people to just create their own personal articles for them and their friends. Otherwise this wiki, and its relevant templates and categories, will be clogged up with a bunch of useless articles for random people and their opinions, that would then drown out the articles on the actually legitimate subjects. Do you have any idea what this wiki's Smasher namespace looked like in the early Brawl era when we didn't have notability limits in place? If you want a wiki where you can create articles on whatever rankings you want, you can go to Wikia and create your "Rankings wiki" or whatever. Omega Tyrant 20:09, February 16, 2021 (EST)

Delete this page. This has already been discussed. Aidan, the Lovely Rurouni 20:15, February 16, 2021 (EST)

Delete: Since it's made by some Reddit user, I don't think there's any relevance to this page. Sure, it gives some idea to readers about the best players out there, but there is a chance that this list might include the user's bias. Also, it's a little silly that we're now making pages about things made by Reddit users (no offense to those who have a Reddit account). SonDaniel (talk page) 20:18, February 16, 2021 (EST)

Regardless of whatever "methodology" was used to construct this list, it is still at the end of the day a mere opinion that doesn't amount to much. There is a reason we don't report on Smash character speculation despite how reasonable the arguments people make for it are: it would open the floodgates to rampant speculation and editorialization that really don't inform readers about anything whatsoever. Delete. - EndGenuity (talk) 20:21, February 16, 2021 (EST)

Delete per reasons laid out by Omega Tyrant. Unless we get to know exactly how their methology works this article isn't notable to deserve a page. Superbound (talk) 11:52, February 17, 2021 (EST)

Delete. Like what many people said, the article is very flawed and seemingly was created for an opinion on the matter. Invisible Star 12:09, February 17, 2021 (EST)

Keep. Or, at least keep Retro SSBBRank. It is, to my understanding, a well-researched project that has variably had some segments published on non-reddit websites and is very detailed in its descriptions. Brawl discussions I've had with other people who've dug into the scene back the veracity of RetroSSBBRank. A traditional non-panel methodology that is largely non-subjective would be very difficult due to the volume of lost Brawl-era data, and I don't think burying the ranking helps preserving the scene or encouraging independent work that's defined the Smash scene's data collection for the past 5 years. It additionally considers non-USA scenes in its rankings, something the only official Brawl ranking did not do in 2014, which led to a cascading effect on following rankings & scene organizer perceptions that weren't adequately addressed until 2017. I understand that standards must be kept, but it's clear to me that the standards applied here were more than an average opinionated forum post. I can't speak to the veracity or quality of the Top 100 list (I'm only on this page since discussion on orange ssbu's stuff is here), but I would implore the site's editors to keep the Brawl ranking in the event this particular page is deleted, as it is a well-researched piece that likely took proper time & research to make. Barnard's Loop (talk) 15:06, February 17, 2021 (EST)

Effort and research doesn't help with the issue that it's still ultimately just one guy's opinion, and it's not like other personal rankings and the like out there didn't have people put any effort and research into them too. And it's not the wiki's place to be an encouragement for people to do their own independent work, we're just covering what's deemed relevant and sufficiently noteworthy to Smash in an encyclopedic-style, not to exist as an arbiter of validation. However, if evidence can be provided that the current Brawl community backs RetroSSBBRank, that can suffice for notability despite the unorthodox creation behind it. Omega Tyrant 15:57, February 17, 2021 (EST)

I'm not sure how to exactly demonstrate Brawl community backing outside of my personal connections who've studied Brawl agreeing with it. The "current Brawl community" is essentially just the Ultimate community since Brawl has been abandoned outside of a few scattered discords to my knowledge. The most work I could personally do to back it with sources would take the kind of time & research designed to create it, and I'm not sure who to reference outside of 16bit and maybe Zan. The ranking itself seems to be backed at least by ADHD and Poyo, since the latter contributed with fact checks and the former gave responses and interviews. Mew2King was aware of it as well and did not seem to be critical. Former PG Staff Tetra, a major figure in Japan translations for Smash 4 who knew a ton about the scene, also regularly responded.Barnard's Loop (talk) 16:39, February 18, 2021 (EST)

Can you get in contact with the Brawl Bois (i.e. the guys behind the 2018-19 SSBBRank) and see if they approve of RetroSSBBRank? If so, that would be enough for RetroSSBBRank to stay. Omega Tyrant 19:47, February 19, 2021 (EST)

I have messaged Gardex. I'll report back with any response. Barnard's Loop (talk) 21:07, February 19, 2021 (EST)

Updates and sources are posted to the Retro SSBBRank talk page. Gardex, ADHD, Poyo, Luigisama, and seemingly everybody involved in Brawl sanctioned orange's project, considers the data to be good, contributed some to the project, and responded promptly to confirm. This should close the matter entirely. Barnard's Loop (talk) 16:29, February 20, 2021 (EST)

Thank you, that will suffice. Omega Tyrant 17:39, February 20, 2021 (EST)

I mostly agree with the arguments for deletion. Hpwever, if this individuals work is of the highest standard and fills significant information gaps then it may be of value. Also, I don't think we need to worry about opening the floodgates to these kind of articles provided we require these to be of the highest quality and to be filling significant information gaps. All that said to say, for it to be notable it should either be accepted by the broader smash community (this isnt) or be accepted by enough notable smash researchers/historians (I don't know about this one). So for now I remain leaning towards deletion, but I do think their is an argument for keeping it. Wiifitkid (talk) 16:19, February 17, 2021 (EST)

So consensus is clear here that the articles for this ranking and EagleRank have to go, however per Barnard's post, RetroSSBBRank may have standing if it can be shown that the current Brawl community backs it. I'll delete this and EagleRank's articles by the end of the day if no one can bring up a strong objection, but I'll give RetroSSBBRank some more time. Omega Tyrant 16:27, February 18, 2021 (EST)

Fine, but if another post Smash Ultimate release Smash Wii U PR does not pop up by 2028 and I'm still running EagleRank, I am going to reupload the article at that time. JFMV763 (talk) 19:03, February 19, 2021 (EST)

The passive-aggressiveness is nice, I would expect better from a Smash reddit mod. Whether it's in 2028 or any sooner/later, recreate the article without any prior discussion to show a proof of change in its notability and that will be a fast way to earn a block. Omega Tyrant 19:47, February 19, 2021 (EST)