Automatically downloading higher-quality imagesEdit
Every PotD's first image on Miiverse has a higher quality image on the official site. But you could only see it for 24 or 72 hours. I've tried this thing which downloads from the same URL every 24 hours. Not necessary, but useful. Also, it might not work as intended.
https://drive.google.com/folderview?id=0B4izFJJyL211N3RSTWdsN0tmeUE&usp=sharing --ComJay (talk) 06:52, 18 November 2014 (EST)
Background colorsEdit
I think users have a misunderstanding on what the background colors are supposed to mean. They're supposed to mean that there's been a reveal of sorts, not a mention. So making the background color for the PotD for Dec. 6, 2014 orange because Mewtwo is mentioned would be wrong, because he wasn't revealed. This would be the equivalent of making every post that mentions Mario in in orange because Mario is in it. Here's what the page itself says:
- "…each entry is given a background colour that denotes that something new or otherwise important has been revealed."
The last time I checked, a mention in a post is not something that has been revealed.
So, here's how it should go: if something is revealed, then it gets the appropriate background color. If something is mentioned, on the other hand, then it does not get that appropriate background color of the mention in question and the background color would instead be of the actual reveal, if there is one. Simple enough? Rtzxy 
Reflect! 20:22, 5 December 2014 (EST)
- Seems late for that, since this was the last pic of the day. Unless we need to go back and fix some others, I suppose. ---Preceding unsigned comment added by you. Or maybe Nutta. 20:23, 5 December 2014 (EST)
- We probably do, actually. Rtzxy
Reflect! 20:25, 5 December 2014 (EST)
- whooa we have a ton. A lot of these could stand to be white, not cyan, because they don't reveal anything at all. ---Preceding unsigned comment added by you. Or maybe Nutta. 20:25, 5 December 2014 (EST)
- I'm just gonna go through and change all of the inaccurate colors now, so if you could avoid editing it... unless, of course, you're already doing this :P ---Preceding unsigned comment added by you. Or maybe Nutta. 20:27, 5 December 2014 (EST)
- No, no, go ahead. I'm not editing, but be wary of reverts, especially to the archives. Rtzxy Reflect! 20:29, 5 December 2014 (EST)
- there may have been a few that I wrongfully changed to white, I can't remember when everything was officially revealed. So if someone could go behind me and fix those, that'd be useful. ---Preceding unsigned comment added by you. Or maybe Nutta. 20:39, 5 December 2014 (EST)
- Also I g2g. I'll do the archives tomorrow if someone else hasn't already. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nutta Butta (talk • contribs) 20:40, 5 December 2014 (EST)
- there may have been a few that I wrongfully changed to white, I can't remember when everything was officially revealed. So if someone could go behind me and fix those, that'd be useful. ---Preceding unsigned comment added by you. Or maybe Nutta. 20:39, 5 December 2014 (EST)
- No, no, go ahead. I'm not editing, but be wary of reverts, especially to the archives. Rtzxy
- I'm just gonna go through and change all of the inaccurate colors now, so if you could avoid editing it... unless, of course, you're already doing this :P ---Preceding unsigned comment added by you. Or maybe Nutta. 20:27, 5 December 2014 (EST)
- whooa we have a ton. A lot of these could stand to be white, not cyan, because they don't reveal anything at all. ---Preceding unsigned comment added by you. Or maybe Nutta. 20:25, 5 December 2014 (EST)
- We probably do, actually. Rtzxy
12/22/14Edit
Something's up with that thing's code...I just can't figure out what. 
BlueStreak Speeds By 22:35, 22 December 2014 (EST)
Double-check our archive and anything else to keep?Edit
Miiverse's demise is nigh, and while the Web Archive should keep most of the important stuff accessible, it would be worthwhile to double-check that Sakurai's posts are correctly transcribed here. Furthermore, are there any other Miiverse-related Smash elements that should be archived while it's still possible? Miles (talk) 02:58, 29 August 2017 (EDT)
Move proposalEdit
Strong oppose. Why does this need to be moved? Just because Miiverse is no longer running? This page is itself an archive - there's really no need for this move to happen. Black Vulpine of the Furry Nation. Furries make the internets go! :3 03:16, 27 February 2018 (EST)
Oppose. I can't see any of these pages getting moved anytime soon. St. Reggie, Leprachaun 23:48, 27 February 2018 (EST)
Oppose Please explain why. I fail to see any reason to do this. Serpent 
King 22:42, 28 February 2018 (EST)
The newer posts should not be on the main section of the article, and should instead be moved to an archive like the older ones. The current layout implies that the newer posts are considered the primary topic over the others, while simultaneously creating the impression that the page is still being updated.
[1] See this Wikipedia page for example. The main article is a disambiguation page called "Lists of colors," while the lists themselves are split into separate pages alphabetically, in order to keep the page size manageable. Under the current state of the page, it would be like if the page "List of colors" contained letters A-F, while you would have to click on the other links to see the colors G-Z. The Miiverse posts page should be formatted similarly to the Wikipedia article. Awesome Cardinal 2000 00:17, 1 March 2018 (EST)
- We’re not Wikipedia, though. It’s not just me saying this either - this is the stance of our entire administration. It’s been said time and time again, in fact I’m pretty sure that phrase is buried in the SmashWiki: namespace somewhere. If you want to discuss our SOPs with them, be my guest, but if the basis for your proposal, or even just your main reason for it is, “We should be using Wikipedia standards”, then it will likely be doomed to failure. Black Vulpine of the Furry Nation. Furries make the internets go! :3 08:36, 1 March 2018 (EST)
- I think a "SmashWiki is not Wikipedia" section should be added to SW:NOT so that this doesn't happen again... Aidan, the Rurouni 08:46, 1 March 2018 (EST)
- You didn't actually respond to any of the arguments I made, you just strawmanned the "We're not Wikipedia" argument without taking into account what else I said. Looking like Wikipedia is not the main basis of my proposal, I just brought up the previous link as an example of how this page would look, since visualizations can be more effective than typing things out in words. Awesome Cardinal 2000 12:59, 1 March 2018 (EST)
- Okay, then let me shoot down the other half of your argument - the page is itself an archive. Why do we need to create an archive of an archive? Black Vulpine of the Furry Nation. Furries make the internets go! :3 17:34, 1 March 2018 (EST)
- If you want to go by that logic, then all the old posts are also "archives of an archive." This page is not the same kind of archive as a talk page. This page contains encyclopedic content, whereas talk page archives are kept as historical logs for future reference. The main article should be turned into a "table of contents," and the other archives should be given more encyclopedic names. Awesome Cardinal 2000 00:44, 2 March 2018 (EST)
- I'm still not convinced. That just sounds like pointless busywork that only increases the amount of data on the wiki without any tangible benefit. Black Vulpine of the Furry Nation. Furries make the internets go! :3 00:55, 2 March 2018 (EST)
- If you're not convinced, then explain why. Also, the "pointless busywork" argument is terrible; if there are users willing to do the job, then let them. If you think it's pointless, then just ignore it when you see it in Recent Changes and let someone else handle it. Besides, this does have a tangible benefit. Archive subpages are primarily used for talk page conversation, and implies that the information is old and is not meant to be viewed by regular readers. Removing the archive aspect of this page will ensure that the encylopedic information appears like it belongs in the mainspace. Awesome Cardinal 2000 01:26, 2 March 2018 (EST)
- I'm still not convinced. That just sounds like pointless busywork that only increases the amount of data on the wiki without any tangible benefit. Black Vulpine of the Furry Nation. Furries make the internets go! :3 00:55, 2 March 2018 (EST)
- If you want to go by that logic, then all the old posts are also "archives of an archive." This page is not the same kind of archive as a talk page. This page contains encyclopedic content, whereas talk page archives are kept as historical logs for future reference. The main article should be turned into a "table of contents," and the other archives should be given more encyclopedic names. Awesome Cardinal 2000 00:44, 2 March 2018 (EST)
- Okay, then let me shoot down the other half of your argument - the page is itself an archive. Why do we need to create an archive of an archive? Black Vulpine of the Furry Nation. Furries make the internets go! :3 17:34, 1 March 2018 (EST)
Oppose 'Nuff said Alex Parpotta the flying lobster! 09:53, 1 March 2018 (EST)
Unless someone else has something to say about this, I move to declare this proposal failed. Black Vulpine of the Furry Nation. Furries make the internets go! :3 17:34, 2 March 2018 (EST)
- While I won't deny the fact that four people are opposing the one supporter (five if you include myself, despite me not commenting my opinion on the matter), I'd hardly call that a consensus. Ac2k did leave a comment for you to respond to, BV, so I wouldn't necessarily go around declaring that you've won. Aidan, the Rurouni 22:28, 2 March 2018 (EST)
- SK has unconditionally agreed to close the discussion. I decided to make the motion to declare a failure after Ac2k had three times failed to articulate why a move should have been made. I can understand what he wants to do - segregate the list of the posts from the article content. However, he has not provided a satisfactory explanation for why this should be. First off, I STILL think that segregating at all is unnecessary, and secondly, segregating the list from the article itself will render the article useless, as the list is pretty integral to the article itself. Now, if that's a complete misinterpretation of the situation, well then, I don't know what the hell Ac2k is trying to do, and I probably won't ever understand what he was thinking. Black Vulpine of the Furry Nation. Furries make the internets go! :3 22:47, 2 March 2018 (EST)
- If no one else agrees with this proposal, then I'll back off on it. But this kind of logic is flawed in numerous ways. Firstly, you should never support a decision because "An admin made it so it's final." Administrators are not 100 percent infallible, and users should not be afraid to challenge them because their of their superior status. It's also dubious to claim that you've "won" an argument when your main opposition has consisted of "I'm not convinced" or "Your argument is not enough." Calling for an admin to close the discussion, while refusing to respond to the other person despite being given a lengthy opportunity, just looks really bad on your part. In addition, the points you made above demonstrate a misunderstanding of what the proposed page would look like. If you're still at all interested in continuing this discussion, I can make a draft of it so you can see what it looks like. Awesome Cardinal 2000 17:16, 3 March 2018 (EST)
- Sorry, but I don't see the point of making an extra archive when Miiverse's shutdown would prevent Sakurai from making any more posts to add to this article. So I oppose just like everyone else. SeanWheeler (talk) 22:38, 5 March 2018 (EST)
- Your input is appreciated, but the discussion has already been closed. Black Vulpine of the Furry Nation. Furries make the internets go! :3 23:30, 5 March 2018 (EST)
- Sorry, but I don't see the point of making an extra archive when Miiverse's shutdown would prevent Sakurai from making any more posts to add to this article. So I oppose just like everyone else. SeanWheeler (talk) 22:38, 5 March 2018 (EST)
- If no one else agrees with this proposal, then I'll back off on it. But this kind of logic is flawed in numerous ways. Firstly, you should never support a decision because "An admin made it so it's final." Administrators are not 100 percent infallible, and users should not be afraid to challenge them because their of their superior status. It's also dubious to claim that you've "won" an argument when your main opposition has consisted of "I'm not convinced" or "Your argument is not enough." Calling for an admin to close the discussion, while refusing to respond to the other person despite being given a lengthy opportunity, just looks really bad on your part. In addition, the points you made above demonstrate a misunderstanding of what the proposed page would look like. If you're still at all interested in continuing this discussion, I can make a draft of it so you can see what it looks like. Awesome Cardinal 2000 17:16, 3 March 2018 (EST)
- SK has unconditionally agreed to close the discussion. I decided to make the motion to declare a failure after Ac2k had three times failed to articulate why a move should have been made. I can understand what he wants to do - segregate the list of the posts from the article content. However, he has not provided a satisfactory explanation for why this should be. First off, I STILL think that segregating at all is unnecessary, and secondly, segregating the list from the article itself will render the article useless, as the list is pretty integral to the article itself. Now, if that's a complete misinterpretation of the situation, well then, I don't know what the hell Ac2k is trying to do, and I probably won't ever understand what he was thinking. Black Vulpine of the Furry Nation. Furries make the internets go! :3 22:47, 2 March 2018 (EST)