From ARMS Institute, the ARMS Wiki
Revision as of 02:10, 7 January 2023 by Prod (talk | contribs) (Prod moved page Help talk:How to use windows 8.1 to Talk:Fighters over a redirect without leaving a redirect: revert)
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

Latest comment: 5 December 2017 by DatNuttyKid in topic Creating Tabs for the Fighters
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Inconsistent Costume Names

Some of the fighters' costume names are inconsistent. For example, Spring Man's Left costume is called "Green" based on his mask and extendable ARMS, but his Right costume is called "Yellow" based on his hair and logo. I suggest we make these names more consistent by referring to the color of the same element from each costume—or possibly two colors from the same two elements, in the same order. Spring Man's costumes could be "Blue", "Brown", "Blond", "Pink" (referring to his hair); or they could be "Pink/Blue", "Blue/Green", "Black/Red", "Blue/Teal" (referring to his chest pad and extendable ARMS), for instance. Or we could let the images speak for themselves and not even name them? Gomtuu (talk) 13:48, 28 May 2017 (EDT)

I'd say to prioritize ARM color, skin, and outfit, in that order, but I'm not totally against removing the descriptions entirely. Nyargleblargle (talk) 15:39, 28 May 2017 (EDT)
By order, I mean list ARM color if it changed, otherwise skin color if that changed, otherwise outfit color. Nyargleblargle (talk) 15:44, 28 May 2017 (EDT)
The skin color never changes Ninjara the Kid Cobra (talk) 17:08, 23 June 2017 (EDT)
Master Mummy, Helix, and (kinda) Barq do. Nyargleblargle (talk) 17:50, 23 June 2017 (EDT)

Introductory Paragraphs

On each fighter's page, the introductory paragraph mentions when that fighter was first revealed or announced. I'm not sure this information is important enough to be so high on the page; instead, I think the first paragraph should briefly describe what makes the fighter unique. Maybe we should move the reveal/announcement info down to a section called "History" or "Meta" (as in "metadata", not "metagame"), or even just a Trivia section (which some pages already have)? And if future patches make balancing adjustments, we could use the same section for notes about those adjustments. Thoughts? Gomtuu (talk) 00:48, 6 June 2017 (EDT)

I agree. That information was probably more useful earlier on, but at this point all the fighters are already revealed so there isn't much point in having that at the top of the page. --XenonNSMB (talk, contribs) 08:10, 6 June 2017 (EDT)
I'd be fine with a "history" section. Nyargleblargle (talk) 08:13, 6 June 2017 (EDT)

Creating Tabs for the Fighters

I think we should parse the fighter pages with tabs at the top of the page similar to some fandom wikis like Dota 2 Wiki. Unfortunately, I cannot figure out a way to create any tabs at all. All the info I get from google points back to either a template inherited by the Fandom wiki or Lua. I'm not sure how we could manually create our own tabs or if we have to inherit the template from somewhere. The tabs I'd create for thefighters are as follows:

  • General (we keep the fighter info box and general stuff like abilities, trivia, and backstory, along with some links to bigger pages like quotes and strategy.
  • Strategy (for any people that want to dispense knowledge of the fighters in battle)
  • Matchups (could be a subset of strategy maybe)
  • Quotes (this way it is neatly in a tab so people can see it better)
  • Gallery
  • Version History


I don't like that idea. The pages aren't heavy in content at the moment, and the meta isn't well-formed enough to allow analysis of specific matchups. I would like to see some more analysis of competitive viability on fighter and ARM pages, though. Nyargleblargle (talk) 20:09, 5 December 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I agree with Nyargle. The game isn't really popular enough (at least, not yet) for us to accurately give strategies or discuss match-ups. Furthermore, it's still being constantly updated to buff and nerf characters, so even if we did get a detailed version of these sections, we'd just have to change it shortly thereafter. We might be able to add these eventually, but I'd say probably not for a while. DatNuttyKid (talk) 20:53, 5 December 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]