Talk:Masterpiece

About the 'Gameplay' part in the Zelda OoT section, I think that it is not quite necessary, because this is a MARIO wiki. We can include the time limit and the fact that there are two save files, but I think that the Gameplay section is totally unneeded. Shall I remove that part? Akfamilyhome 08:18, 10 May 2012 (EDT)

Delete Masterpieces

This talk page proposal has already been settled. Please do not edit any of the sections in the proposal. If you wish to discuss the article, do so in a new header below the proposal.

Merge 4-11-0
one, this proposal name is hilarious. Anyways, as you can see above, this article has been in varying levels of questioning for 12 years now, and at one point last year, it had a delete template put on it with no corresponding discussion. So, this will serve as its corresponding discussion!

Basically, Masterpieces are widely irrelevant to Mario. Their coverage is a byproduct of a pre-Smash Wiki era where we covered Smash unconditionally, which has definitely passed; yet for some reason, this article remains almost fully intact. While there are some Mario games in this, they are by no means the only games, and it makes us wonder how necessary any of this really is. We can think of three things to do:

• Delete: Plain and simple, delete this article. Masterpieces will, at most, receive a minor mention on the articles for Brawl and for Wii U as an explanation for what they are. Masterpiece (microgame) could also likely just be renamed to "Masterpiece" without a Masterpiece article.
• Merge info to Brawl/for Wii U: The list of Masterpieces featured in the two games are instead placed on the articles for Brawl and for Wii U respectively, while this article becomes a disambiguation page pointing to those and the Masterpiece microgame.
• Do nothing: Self-explanatory; we just leave this article as-is and don't delete it.

Proposer: Camwoodstock (talk)
Deadline: March 31, 2024, 23:59 GMT

Delete

1. Camwoodstock (talk) This is our personal preference. Given the shifts in our coverage policy, it seems only fair to nix this entirely.
2. OmegaRuby (talk) Per all.
3. Mario (talk) They were pretty stupid additions in Brawl.
4. Archivist Toadette (talk) Pretty ironic either way. In any case, per all.

#Hewer (talk) Listing all the non-Mario masterpieces is like covering every game included in stuff like Game Boy - Nintendo Switch Online rather than only the Mario ones.
#SolemnStormcloud (talk) Per all.
#BMfan08 (talk) Masterpieces? More like SMASH TO PIECES! Per all.
#Tails777 (talk) 2 sections, 38 subsections and all of them are roughly one liners. Oh yeah, this is a masterpiece alright. We have what games appear as masterpieces on the Brawl and Smash Wii U articles, this serves little purpose. Per proposal.

Merge to Brawl and for Wii U's articles

1. Camwoodstock (talk) Our secondary option; we feel like this might be a bit unnecessary for a Mario wiki, we can see the merit in at least listing the games in a table form on the games' articles.
2. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) - I am of the opinion that aspects of each game should be mentioned to some capacity on their respective page. It doesn't have to be long, but... look at the tables in the Super Smash Bros. article. There should be no less coverage than what that represents, on a game-by-game basis. The items don't even need to link to anything on this wiki, but their existence should be acknowledged regardless.
3. Tails777 (talk) Honestly, I support both options. We don't necessarily need this to be a standalone thing, but we can just merge all the info to the main Smash games' articles to keep it where it realistically belongs. I doubt it would take up that much extra space.
4. Hewer (talk) Per all.
5. Okapii (talk) there is Mario content included in Masterpieces; definitely not enough to justify a whole page, but a small section on the Brawl/Wii U pages should be more than adequate.
6. SolemnStormcloud (talk) Per Doc von Schmeltwick.
7. MegaBowser64 (talk) Per every single person that voted above and below me on the proposal section of this page
8. BMfan08 (talk) Fiiiiiiine. No smashing. Per all.
9. FanOfYoshi (talk) Per all.
10. Mario (talk) Either way it doesn't deserve to be a standalone piece. Might as well turn this page in to a piddling redirect.
11. Scrooge200 (talk) Merging this to the game sections feels like a way better option than just not mentioning them at all.

Comments

In all honesty, I don't see anything stopping us from doing both, should deleting them pass. I agree that this page doesn't need to be a standalone thing, but it wouldn't be too hard to just create a table with the necessary info on the Brawl/Smash Wii U articles. Cause I agree with the merging option too. Heck, most of the info from this article is already there (the time limit on how long you can play the game being the key thing here), I see nothing wrong with just deleting this AND merging the info in one fell swoop. Tails777 Talk to me!

Honestly, you make a good point; admittedly, we might've been a teensy bit frazzled as we made the proposal itself because of daylight savings lightheadedness, oops. Especially since, it turns out, there's already stubs for where we could easily merge relevant information to their respective articles as it stands. ~Camwoodstock (talk) 20:44, March 17, 2024 (EDT)

I assume if option 1 passes then the information missing from the Brawl and Wii U pages will still be added there? Brawl's is mostly complete but missing the gameplay details, while Wii U's is just a list of games with no information on time limits, unlock criteria, or anything else. It would be a shame to lose that information entirely since some of these are Mario games. -- Too Bad! Waluigi Time! 20:31, March 17, 2024 (EDT)

We don't see why not, personally. See our response to Tails777. ;P ~Camwoodstock (talk) 20:44, March 17, 2024 (EDT)

I would prefer an option where the non-Mario Masterpieces get trimmed instead. If the page does get merged, all of the information regarding Mario Masterpieces should be kept. Axis (talk) 13:25, March 19, 2024 (EDT)