| Latest revision |
Your text |
| Line 373: |
Line 373: |
| :I like this idea. I can agree to not giving ''everything'' in ''Smash'' an article, but, as I stated on the recent proposal surrounding the music articles, I'm not a fan of outright not covering this stuff. At least mentioning and covering these things in their respective ''Smash'' articles feels like a nice in between. Sure, we don't need a full article dedicated to a Killing Edge from ''Fire Emblem'', but to just not make any mention of it simply because it's not ''Mario'' related? Point being, I can agree to this approach. {{User:Tails777/sig}} | | :I like this idea. I can agree to not giving ''everything'' in ''Smash'' an article, but, as I stated on the recent proposal surrounding the music articles, I'm not a fan of outright not covering this stuff. At least mentioning and covering these things in their respective ''Smash'' articles feels like a nice in between. Sure, we don't need a full article dedicated to a Killing Edge from ''Fire Emblem'', but to just not make any mention of it simply because it's not ''Mario'' related? Point being, I can agree to this approach. {{User:Tails777/sig}} |
| :Strong support. In general, covering the ''Smash Bros.'' series on this wiki similar to guest appearance seems to be the best option. If ''Super Smash Bros.'' for N64 was the only game in the series, covering it in full would be the best option, but ''Smash'' strays further away from being just a Nintendo crossover. Now it's a crossover between... pretty much everything in gaming. I would argue if ''Smash Ultimate'' was the only game in the series, this wiki would call it a guest appearance and there wouldn't ever be a need for this discussion. [[User:Axii|Axii]] ([[User talk:Axii|talk]]) 16:14, August 31, 2024 (EDT) | | :Strong support. In general, covering the ''Smash Bros.'' series on this wiki similar to guest appearance seems to be the best option. If ''Super Smash Bros.'' for N64 was the only game in the series, covering it in full would be the best option, but ''Smash'' strays further away from being just a Nintendo crossover. Now it's a crossover between... pretty much everything in gaming. I would argue if ''Smash Ultimate'' was the only game in the series, this wiki would call it a guest appearance and there wouldn't ever be a need for this discussion. [[User:Axii|Axii]] ([[User talk:Axii|talk]]) 16:14, August 31, 2024 (EDT) |
| ::Just as before, and I will note this again, one of the pieces is trying to undo a proposal of mine that passed. What am I missing about the Poke Ball Pokemon's connections to ''Super Mario''? I simply just don't see it. [[User:Super Mario RPG|Super Mario RPG]] ([[User talk:Super Mario RPG|talk]]) 18:03, August 31, 2024 (EDT)
| |
| :::In the ''Super Smash Bros.'' games, Mario can: pick up a Poké Ball; throw a Poké Ball; receive damage from a Poké Ball; engage directly with the creatures contained (either in being the summoner or in being the recipient of their attacks); Ditto can physically transform into Mario; etc. The fact that those things can also occur for Sephiroth or Snake do not mitigate that fact.
| |
| :::I completely understand if you personally feel that is not substantive enough for coverage. I get it. But I think suggesting they have "nothing" to do with ''Super Mario'' is wholly accurate. - [[User:Nintendo101|Nintendo101]] ([[User talk:Nintendo101|talk]]) 18:13, August 31, 2024 (EDT)
| |
| ::::That means they have something to do with ''Castlevania'', ''Banjo-Kazooie'', ''Final Fantasy'', ''Kingdom Hearts'', ''Street Fighter'', so forth and so forth. There wouldn't be any of this arguing if SmashWiki handled their coverage in a way this wiki likes, since everyone would agree clearly on "it's not ''Super Mario''; it's ''Smash Bros.''" [[User:Super Mario RPG|Super Mario RPG]] ([[User talk:Super Mario RPG|talk]]) 18:17, August 31, 2024 (EDT)
| |
| :::::Is it not ''Super Mario'' simply because it is ''Super Smash Bros.''? Is any crossover game not the sum of its parts? I think it comes down to what people want covered on Super Mario Wiki, and less about any self-imposition. - [[User:Nintendo101|Nintendo101]] ([[User talk:Nintendo101|talk]]) 18:22, August 31, 2024 (EDT)
| |
| :::::Wikis are not divided solely by what they cover, but the community of editors interested in that topic. The fact that Smashwiki has such a vastly different community and writing standards is indeed related (that "buff" and "nerf" were used unironically in prose and headers and there were whole articles over real-world players last I checked is indicative of that) - and if as you said the ''exact same members'' were the editors there, then it wouldn't be a different community in the first place, making that somewhat moot. [[User:Doc von Schmeltwick|Doc von Schmeltwick]] ([[User talk:Doc von Schmeltwick|talk]]) 18:23, August 31, 2024 (EDT)
| |
| ::::::{{@|Nintendo101}} Yeah, so imagine if a Castlevania wiki had screenshots of all these Pokemon. Would that feel right or awkward? The interactive nature is the same as to ''Super Mario'' characters. I'm not trying to offend in any way when I say this, but if this wiki becomes a dumping grounds for unrelated content simply because we don't like how another wiki does it, that will affect the integrity of this wiki badly. I remember a proposal here for full ''Minecraft'' coverage. [[User:Super Mario RPG|Super Mario RPG]] ([[User talk:Super Mario RPG|talk]]) 18:25, August 31, 2024 (EDT)
| |
| :::::::I know that wasn't directed at me, but consider that of the represented franchises, only Mario and allies, Zelda, Metroid, Kirby, Pokemon, Earthbound, and F-Zero have had representation in every ''Smash Bros.'' game - hence reason to have "all these" images, and of those, many were very token in the representation they got at the start. ''Mario'' is a notable outlier there in that it got a bunch from the very beginning. [[User:Doc von Schmeltwick|Doc von Schmeltwick]] ([[User talk:Doc von Schmeltwick|talk]]) 18:30, August 31, 2024 (EDT)
| |
| ::::::::Okay, but I'm starting to make the point that if SmashWiki allowed the galleries and the wikitables you wouldn't fight so hard for the content to be kept on this wiki, so that's why there's all these excuses for keeping lists of Pokemon on a Super Mario wiki. They're not as notable as the items, i.e. the Poke Ball, which they're components of. [[User:Super Mario RPG|Super Mario RPG]] ([[User talk:Super Mario RPG|talk]]) 18:34, August 31, 2024 (EDT)
| |
| :::::::::I'd disagree they are "components" of the item. They're more a separate type of summoned NPC fighter that is intrinsically related to the item, that until the addition of the assist trophies, was an extremely unique aspect of the gameplay that bears explanation simply due to how different from the rest of it that system is. [[User:Doc von Schmeltwick|Doc von Schmeltwick]] ([[User talk:Doc von Schmeltwick|talk]]) 18:38, August 31, 2024 (EDT)
| |
| ::::::::::I'm trying to not regurgitate the same points that I made before, but they are NPC fighters 100% representing ''Pokemon'', whilst Assist Trophies have "melting pot" franchise representation. [[User:Super Mario RPG|Super Mario RPG]] ([[User talk:Super Mario RPG|talk]]) 18:44, August 31, 2024 (EDT)
| |
| :::::::::::Thing is, the article ''[[Super Smash Bros.]]'' does not describe the ''Super Mario'' series. It describes a crossover game. Therefore, we should describe what ''crosses over'' within the context of the game, not limit our scope to a myopic range around the ''Mario'' stuff. ''[[Itadaki Street DS]]'' is also not a ''Mario'' game in title or spirit, and we still list all the Square-Enix stuff found in it. [[User:Doc von Schmeltwick|Doc von Schmeltwick]] ([[User talk:Doc von Schmeltwick|talk]]) 22:00, August 31, 2024 (EDT)
| |
| :::::::That is a fair question, and not at all offensive. I don't know how I would feel as a reader, but if the community at this hypothetical Castlevania Wiki wanted to cover it, then I think that would be fine. There is ''Castlevania'' material in ''Super Smash Bros. Ultimate''. I would probably find it odder if they had full coverage for a game like ''Super Bomberman R'' because there is a Simon Belmont Bomber - a character that is in fact ''not'' Simon Belmont, but a Bomberman character based on him. I don't believe I was involved in the ''Minecraft'' proposal you mentioned or I at least don't remember, but I understand it considering, for as far as I know, the Super Mario Mash-Up content are considered skins of ''Mario'' subjects and not the "real" articles.
| |
| :::::::But that is my personal perspective. Other folks are welcomed to feel differently and share their thoughts. What I think would be healthier for a discussion at large is to move away from imposing definitions on ourselves, appreciate that we are in fact human beings making curatorial choices on coverage, and have a more honest conversation about that. - [[User:Nintendo101|Nintendo101]] ([[User talk:Nintendo101|talk]]) 18:36, August 31, 2024 (EDT)
| |
| :My personal viewpoint, philosophically but maybe not ''practically'', is that... I don't think there's any sense in having an incomplete list, and I don't think "list of all Mario-related X" counts as a complete list. I think this proposal might be as close as we can get to lining up with that — minor stuff like trophies and spirits will still be out of line but I can't really think of a sensible way to fix that. I'm all in favor of it. [[User:Ahemtoday|Ahemtoday]] ([[User talk:Ahemtoday|talk]]) 21:03, August 31, 2024 (EDT)
| |
|
| |
| '''Addendum to the list''': I figured the "minigame" pages needed dealt with as well.
| |
| *Include the "minigame" stages (Break the Targets, Board the Platforms, Race to the Finish, Snag Trophies, Home Run Contest, Trophy Tussle, the Melee Adventure Mode stages) in the "list of stages debuting in [game]" articles. For ones like Targets, it would just explain how it worked and then have a gallery for the different layouts rather than describing each in detail. Said minigame pages should be merged to a section in the SSB series article covering the series' minigames. The Subspace Emissary stages will get a section with a {{tem|main}} to the stage section of the Subspace Emissary article (detailed in an above point).<br>
| |
| -[[User:Doc von Schmeltwick|Doc von Schmeltwick]] ([[User talk:Doc von Schmeltwick|talk]]) 22:25, September 2, 2024 (EDT)
| |
| :That merge sounds sensible, as long as they're in a separate heading.from the multiplayer stages. Also, how will we be handling the different Break the Targets layouts in this case? Listing them separately seems pointless, but the images have to go somewhere. I suppose we just have a gallery of each Break the Targets stage under the subheader? [[User:Ahemtoday|Ahemtoday]] ([[User talk:Ahemtoday|talk]]) 22:38, September 2, 2024 (EDT)
| |
| ::That's basically what I said. Not sure if a subheader is needed, but a gallery with labels for each layout (ie, characters for the first two games, difficulty for Brawl). But yes, they would be separated from the "multiplayer" stages, though for SSB, the three single-player-only battlefields should also probably be listed with the targets, platforms, and race stages. [[User:Doc von Schmeltwick|Doc von Schmeltwick]] ([[User talk:Doc von Schmeltwick|talk]]) 22:41, September 2, 2024 (EDT)
| |
| :::Oh, I just meant "under the Break the Targets header" — you wouldn't need a subheader underneath it for the gallery. ....in any case, do you think Adventure Mode stages are different enough in nature to be separate from the multiplayer ''and'' minigame stages? Subspace definitely is, so I have to wonder. [[User:Ahemtoday|Ahemtoday]] ([[User talk:Ahemtoday|talk]]) 23:00, September 2, 2024 (EDT)
| |
| ::::Not quite sure, as I wouldn't consider them different from "Race to the Finish" which is treated roughly equal to Targets/Platforms/Trophies. [[User:Doc von Schmeltwick|Doc von Schmeltwick]] ([[User talk:Doc von Schmeltwick|talk]]) 23:22, September 2, 2024 (EDT)
| |
