User:Dirael/SW

<!--

Smasher namespace and articles about crews
While I am not opposed to removing all crew and smasher pages outright, I believe that the best course of action is to implement serious reforms for both of these types of pages. First, I believe we should create a new namespace for crew pages. These pages should not exist in mainspace, which should be composed of information about the game, not its players. I would also like to propose that redirects from mainspace be deleted. I find the concept of a wiki with more mainspace redirects than articles an unattractive one; once everything is standardized, the concern of "lack of findability" becomes a non-issue, and so such redirects are unnecessary. Now, onto the smasher pages. I believe that a massive overhaul is needed in order to preserve the standard of quality that SmashWiki should strive to obtain/maintain. How this will occur, however, is a matter that requires concensus and discussion. My personal feeling are that is a complete namespace wipe occurs, so much time and effort are erased and even more time and effort will be spent reconstructing the section; however, I also believe that if we simply do nothing but implement a style guide, the desired changes will never occur and we may as well not have done anything. As for the style and formatting instructions, I intend to loosely follow GWW's Guild page policy; they have a Guild: namespace, similar to the Smasher: (and proposed Crew:) namespaces.

Talk pages and their (ab)use
Talk pages here are, quite frankly, abused to death. I honestly can not be bothered to use my watchlist anymore, because every time I check any important edits that I really should see (like edits to a policy page) are completely and totally snowed under by talkpage spam and other general uselessness. This is not a social website, this is a wiki. We aren't here to discuss everything from how much a speck of dust weighs to how many inches it is from the North Pole to the moon. Without naming anyone specifically, here are a few ratios I got from Special:Editcount. The ratios are considered with Main/Talk/SmashWiki/SmashWiki talk : User/User talk. ...I could keep going, but I don't have to. Most of the users on SmashWiki have editcount ratios like this, and consider what this means for the whole of SmashWiki, in the short-term and long-term. Are we a repository of information about Super Smash Bros., or are we a social network? Will the user culture become so based on talkpage spam that it becomes unsalvageable? I don't want people to get the wrong idea of my opinion, however. I have no problem with moderate amounts of general chatter, since it is a community-fostering activity, and it is my personal belief that if you work some, you should get to relax some. I wouldn't mind if ratios were kept at a general 50/50 of useful/chatter, even. But slippery slope is slippery, and we're starting to head in the wrong direction.
 * 1) 20.49% : 66.89%
 * 2) 16.54% : 71.84%
 * 3) 11.49% : 83.71%

Forums and their (ab)use
Much like the arguments presented above, the forums are overused and many of the topics cover what should be covered on a talk page. Talk pages are there for discussion you know, and centralized discussion is centralized. Forum pages like Forum:Stop the Pictoquotes, Forum:Quietly deal with vandals, Forum:Public Apology from BNK, or even Forum:Smash Wiki: The Movie is here!!! are fine. Random forums that belong in the talk namespace such as Forum:Idea for a Better Link Recovery and Forum:Metaknight's hidden flaw (very well hidden indeed) are not. We don't need to 1) create a new page and/or 2) flood the forums everytime a lightbulb goes on in someone's head or they stumble across a glitch... just post it on the talk page.

Images
Cut it out with the external image linking. It is just a not-so-subtle bypass to get around the rules about image use here, and it's bad. External image linking can be disabled by having C.Hawk go ask User talk:KyleH or some other Wikia member to disable them. ...I personally disagree with the image use rules here, but that issue is one for another post. -->