SmashWiki talk:Character Project
*claps and gives cookie* Bravo! – Smiddle ( Talk • Conts ) 17:59, January 29, 2007 (GMT)
lol, you're faster than me. This is what I was about to post:
"I also want to have a section of specific "issues" regarding pages, such as:
- the pro/con section of each character page, which is somewhat POV and a little offish to novices
- the overly guide-like tone to match-up articles
- and more
I might add that when I get home from school, if none of you do. Gotta go now." – MaskedMarth (t c) 18:00, January 29, 2007 (GMT)
- Agree. I hate the guides telling you what to do. – Smiddle ( Talk • Conts ) 18:03, January 29, 2007 (GMT)
- Well, if we're going to expose the casual players to the tier list, they're going to want a reason for the rankings of certain characters, especially since most of them will disagree with the list. The pros/cons sections should mainly be used to defend the tier list. --Greenblob 17:29, February 4, 2007 (GMT)
- You have a good point, but the goal of SmashWiki is to present information, not to teach novices. Certainly we should include pros' opinions on the characters - that Fox combos like crazy and Roy can't kill - but it shouldn't be the focus of the article. Novices are looking more for information about characters' backstories (which in itself is a topic that KK recommended we make a project about) and the simple aspects of their attacks - which A attacks are notable, funny statistics about their special attacks, et cetera. Pro/cons should come at the end of the article under the header of "Ness in competitive play," and should be written in paragraph form. – MaskedMarth (t c) 15:28, February 16, 2007 (GMT)
Main character pages and redirects
Right now if you look up a character like Mario or Luigi or Kirby you're directed to a disambiguation page with a sometimes absurd number of links. For the number of people who are likely to simply enter these terms and expect an actual entry, not to mention the number of links we have that are currently pointing to these pages, I don't think this is a particularly wise solution.
My idea is that for these character pages, we have a sort of generic page about that character, probably with some information about that character as a character (sort of like what might be on their universe page, maybe linking to the universe page for more information?) and then some general information about that person in the Smash Bros. series. At minimum it could discuss that character's evolution and the differences between the character's different incarnations, but it could probably talk a bit about similarities, because a lot of the key features about these characters stay the same throughout the series. They'd still have articles about each of their games too, but now their main page would have some real content.
Characters who are only in one Smash game could just have that page serve both purposes. Thoughts? --Kirby King 03:30, February 22, 2007 (GMT)
- Whoa... You just proposed something I was going to propose after I would be done with my big Universe project. I totally support the concept, of course. Erik the Appreciator 03:36, February 22, 2007 (GMT)
What's that? Semicolon contributed?
What's that I hear? Semicolon blitzed the last 10 Brawl character Pros/Cons sections and converted them to attributes? You mean he actually contributed? He's going to give himself a shining star now, because he's special. Semicolon (talk) 01:05, 22 October 2008 (UTC)
Umm, I contributed...Where's my Shining Star? Oh, wait Here it is!SmoreKingxg456BOO! 01:22, 22 October 2008 (UTC)
My, we've still a lot of work to do
Most of the character articles (or at least those related to Melee, i.e. the ones I've read) are woefully poor. I might run through the Character Project and re-clarify our objectives, and then get to work on articles. Some ideas:
- Pro/con absolutely needs to go. It's unprofessional and sloppy thinking.
- It could be replaced by a repository of basic statistics - where a character ranks in weight, running speed, jump height, falling speed, traction.
- Character strategies. If we include them, they must be organized very carefully (here's a bad example). My personal way of outlining a character's strategy is to look at their game in three parts: approach, comboing, and killing. That's one organization method; there are others. Regardless we should all be on the same page when it comes to such ideas.
- Notable moves and attributes - there needs to be criteria for what we note. Attributes like floating or having five jumps are clearly important, but how do we determine it for attacks? Where do borderline cases like Marth/Roy's turnaround bair work out?
I'm going to reflect on these thoughts a while before editing the project, but it's coming, and I'll rip into those character pages with a vengeance :) – MaskedMarth (t c) 21:18, 18 November 2008 (UTC)
I think this project needs to be updated and completed. As per the words of MaskedMarth, pro/con sections need to go, and techniques need to be cleaned up. Again, we need to re-evaluate this project, and complete it. Cheezperson {talk}stuff 04:54, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
I agree about the Melee character articles. Some of them barely even follow the way character articles are supposed to be written (some even lacking movesets, such as Falco and Fox's pages). Luigi's page is a great example to what a character article should look like. I'm going to try to format the character pages I know about to how they should be. -Masq
