MarioWiki:Proposals/Archive 1

Set in Stone

1. Wa _T^C_@ | Mi Youtube – couldn't hurt.
2. Plumber, Yeah, Hk, but Link kept bugging us about it.
3. Dinosaur bob – I think it's better that way- it gives more incentive to play nice.
4. YellowYoshi398 – I doubt these are reeeeally necessary, but, as Wayoshi said, they wouldn't hurt.
5. Why not? No harm can come from it. Hisak 19:20, 30 May 2007 (EDT)
6. Phoenix See comment
7. Gives them no excuse to do it. Heh, I recommended Good Faith here.
   Sorry, but I am Confused 21:36, 30 May 2007 (EDT)
8. Rules are rules, and they're usually for the betterment of all. Eggbert
9. Aipom can't harm, just a reminder
10. PRETxZELion Won't do any harm.. ^{E T C}

Leave it Unsaid

1. Hk-We aren't idiots. No need to set it in stone. The policy was suggested by someone who uses condescending statements and insults every other line.
2. Cobold (talk · contribs) - no need for a guidline for everything. I'm with unwritten rules.
3. No need to make a rule for what is essentially common sence.Gofer

Comments

All I'm saying is that we aren't stupid, people should have enough common sense to understand that if they are rude, they have to go home.Saudy^Talk!

Can we define "personal attacks" before implementing the policy? In any case, I wasn't aware that this wasn't written down... I guess it's really an extension of the "final judgment" of moderators... or whatever we refer to it as here. Anyway, on absolutely every online community I've ever been to, moderators are allowed to do whatever they feel necessary to keep the peace, but maybe this will help community newbies understand better. I'm in favor of the edit wars thing, but I have my own ideas for how it should be settled. I think if an edit war arises, however, we need to move right to the talk page of that particular article and vote on the edits, returning the next day. If we say, "No edit wars," I feel it is too open ended and may lead to people backing down on issues that are important to them for fear that it may be considered a war. I'm not saying an edit war is acceptable in some cases, I just feel that we need to define it more. --Stumpers (EDITED by Stumpers)

This might sound cruel, but if you don't have enough common sense, you deserve to be banned. I have yet to see how this would affect anything for the better not making it a rule. Phoenix

Keep

1. Wa _T^C_@ | Mi Youtube – Never know when another bad rash will come along. I'll find more active users to replace the original four if necessary.
2. PRETxZELion Ya can never be too safe.. ^{E T C}
3. Maybe we just need more patrollers...
   Sorry, but I am Confused 23:37, 29 May 2007 (EDT)
4. Bean Yep, never know...
5. Phoenix Never know.
6. Aipom never know
7. ~PY Everyone is right. You never know...
8. Plumber, Never know....whoever keeps removing my vote, stop.

Get Rid Of

1. I really don't think they're needed. Even with patrollers, the administrators are still doing most of the anti-vandal work. No offense to the current patrollers, but they haven't done much vandal fighting since their promotion. I feel we have enough admins at the moment to withstand another vandal attack even without patrollers, anyway. (that's just my opinion, though). --KPH2293 (T/C/EC/L)
2. Really I mean, instead of being patrollers isn't it easier to make them sysop or something? Silent but deadly! SuperLuigi821 You lost everything. Way to go genious.
3. Agree, we have than enough sysop, and there hasn't been a big vandal attack for long. Sorry, dudes.
4. Our current patrollers haven't been doing much, and I actually think we'd be in good condition if we abolished the patroller status and kept our current system operators unchanged. YellowYoshi398
5. There are thirteen sysops, about 10 of those are on some type of active basis. I think that's more than adequate to counter spam attacks. Eggbert

Comments

What does it mean to "use patrolling powers properly"? Plumber 20:47, 30 May 2007 (EDT)

Don't abuse them. Also: "We should always have 4 Patrollers." – Why, exactly? " Ya never know when an Early Saturday mornin' and sysops are sleeping in..." – What exactly makes you think patrollers would be up at that time, yet not sysops? --KPH2293 (T/C/EC/L) 20:58, 30 May 2007 (EDT)

They might be up, they might not, but it's better to have extra hands around. Why decline some willing to help you with your work? Plumber, I think there's more to it than "Don't abuse them." since I was demoted for not using my powers when I never abused them.

True, but why patrollers? Why couldn't we just make active and trustworthy users sysops if we need more guards against vandalism? They can fight vandalism more efficiently, since they can delete pages that are created by vandals, protect frequently vandalized pages, and permanently hide obscene revisions. --KPH2293 (T/C/EC/L) 21:27, 30 May 2007 (EDT)

I don't think Wayoshi wants too many sysops here. I would change my votes if there was a higher chance of more users becoming sysops, but that doesn't look like it's gonna happen. Plumber

When I originally suggested a new group, I thought it was going to be more inclusive than sysops. The reason why Patrollers aren't that effective is because I am only active at night and as for Aipom, I haven't seen him around that much. Patrollers aren't that effective because there are only two semi-active ones. Of course we're useless. But maybe if Patrollers were better utilized and more active users were chosen, then it could definately work. Give it a chance, that's all I got to say.
Sorry, but I am Confused 22:44, 30 May 2007 (EDT)

I'm on around 6 AM and 3PM on weekdays. On Saturday, I'm pretty much on all the time.-- Aipom --

You know, I was up and on at 6 AM today, and saw not one patroller for hours and hours. No trolls either. Trolls are sad, sad things, but I doubt even they can afford to get up at 6 AM to terrorize us.Saudy^Talk!

Keep

1. Cobold (talk · contribs) - I'd say, better less feature articles than many bad ones.
2. The old system sucked, people were voting for theirs favorite characters rather than for the qulality of the article itself. I might review some...
3. Dinosaur bob -I've done a few edits to Yoshi already. Just point me towards the other articles and I'll see what I and my meager talents can do.
4. Hk-Even if it was ALttP's idea, it still might help. I'll review article everyday if it helps.
5. Stumpers - Well... He really has a lot of good ideas. This is one of his best ideas, IMO. I think we need to create an article on the front page that asks for input on the articles, though. That would be sweet.

Get rid of

1. Plumber 00:21, 30 May 2007 (EDT)
2. No one is really reviewing the articles Aipom
3. Bean 17:49, 30 May 2007 (EDT) I don't really like this proposal thing, and not many users rate the articles.
4. Phoenix I don't think it's really working out.
5. I agree. Peer Reviews aren't working out so well, our old system was more effective. I don't see any supporters reviewing either.
   Sorry, but I am Confused 21:33, 30 May 2007 (EDT)
6. Not many people are reviewing articles; I liked it better with our old FAs. YellowYoshi398
7. ~PY - I prefer nominating FA's, like YY398 said.

Comments

It's a good idea, but no one is using it. Therefore, it is pointless. Plumber 20:48, 30 May 2007 (EDT)

Confused: If you do not see any supporters reviewing, I cannot help you. I reviewed two articles yesterday. - Cobold (talk · contribs) 04:57, 31 May 2007 (EDT)

How about this instead: Review Board. It could be a 3 user board, made up of famous Wiki-ers (like Monty, or Waysohi, but I think Wayoshi probably too busy running the rest of the Wiki, but you get picture) They come together and discuss, and then post on the talk page yay or nay. Then, *boom* pop it up on the main page as featured article. --Stumpers

That's actually a good idea.Saudy^Talk!

I'm not familiar with this new system... so if you want to propose it before I do, go ahead. It might take me a while ;) We could also rotate the reviewers so the work load doesn't land on the same people all the time, and then everyone could have their voices heard. Stumpers! 16:38, 4 June 2007 (EDT)

Wiki

None

Forum

1. Hk
2. Silent but deadly! SuperLuigi821 You lost everything. Way to go genious.
3. I agree. Forum should be used more. Plus there are a lot of wiki glitches.
   Sorry, but I am Confused 23:44, 29 May 2007 (EDT)
4. Phoenix Original plan, and how it's going to stay.
5.  The MissingLinkI can't get in the chatroom so as long as it's not there I'M COMING!
6. YellowYoshi398 This plan seems better... Think of all the annoying edit conflicts that could happen on the wiki.
7. PRETxZELion Edit conflicts would be overwelming. ^{E T C}
8. Aipom Edit conflicts made me choose this.

Let it lie where it is

1. Wa _T^C_@ | Mi Youtube – The chat needs to be open to everyone – compromise could be for Steve to unlock the restriction on the forum.
2. Stumpers It's much more appealing where it is... I mean you just click. Boom.
3. Bottle Wizzerd - Nobody can troll forever. :/
4. --Shyster 19:01, 4 June 2007 (EDT)-I think willy is gone for good. Bottle Wizzerd is right too.

Move Chat to Forum

1. Hk-As is said, many users are for this change, and this will definitely deter trolls.
2. Bean Keeps trollers away from forum, some might not even know where the forum is
3. While it is more convenient to use the Wiki Chat, the Forum Chat is less suceptible to hacking and random IP chatting.
   Sorry, but I am Confused 21:31, 30 May 2007 (EDT)
4. Forums, without a doubt. It'd prevent spammers and the like. If one is too lazy to simply go to the forums and access the chat, then they shouldn't be on it. Eggbert

Comments

People seem to believe this Willy guy is going away soon. Take a look-- he's been here forever. One of the first big things I did on this wiki a year ago was move pages back to their rightful name after Willy had his first bout of fun. He ISN'T going anywhere.Saudy^Talk!

This is what it says in the block log about Willy: 07:55, 18 June 2006 Porplemontage (Talk

Use the System

1. Wa _T^C_@ | Mi Youtube – everyone is laid out fairly, efficient, plenty of capable users to make the system work consistently
2. PRETxZELion Ditto.. ^{E T C}
3. Stumpers! 01:28, 7 June 2007 (EDT) Well, I'm a little confused on the specifics, and it might be too complex, but y'know what? We won't know until we try, so full steam ahead IMO. Heh, heh... I'm voting for an idea I started... I feel kinda cheat-ish. Thanks for working out the details Wayoshi!
4. Cobold (talk · contribs) - Sounds fair. But we'll have to see if we can concentrate on the same article long enough to have a proper result.
5. Aipom This may just be perfect.
6. Saudy^Talk! I helped design the system, actually. Wayoshi modified my details.
7. <<< Knife, you're a Proposals/Archive 1 – If this doesn't work out, we can alway go back to the old way.
8. Plumber, What about the old FAs?

Not Effective

Comments

This is probably too early to tell, but here's what I'm worried about, and it's inspired by Cobold's point. For this to be effective, we're going to have to make this system as fast as possible so people don't get bored. Are there any ways that we could trim down on the system? It might work as is, but I just don't want to have it go for a bad run and then have everyone abandon it like the Peer Reviews. It also might help if we could see this visually, like with a diagram. Who knows, though. Maybe all this needs is just a chance to see the system in motion. In any case, I think this is our best bet to keep the FAs. Stumpers! 12:59, 7 June 2007 (EDT)

What we need is for everyone to make an effort and get involved. There's nothing we can do if no one tries. Reviewers especially should watch pages they review (I may force is as a default) and continually look at their watch pages for updates. The editors/users may be responsible for contacting a reviewer to review/validate an article for FA nomination. Wa _T^C_@ | Mi Youtube 16:18, 7 June 2007 (EDT)

How about we stick a section on the main page that features the current under-review articles? That might get people's attention, especially if it's one they worked on ;) Stumpers! 21:49, 7 June 2007 (EDT)

This proposal has reached its deadline. What now? - Cobold (talk · contribs) 09:15, 14 June 2007 (EDT)

Well its 8-0 in favor of having it, so it get accepted. But from what I heard we need a mediawiki extension. PRETxZELion ^{E T C} 10:28, 14 June 2007 (EDT)

Sweet... well, as usual, if you need any help, please let me know. :) Stumpers! 14:59, 14 June 2007 (EDT)

Ban it hard

1. Saudy^Talk!-Its a nasty thing.
2. PRETxZELion Seven year old kids are on this site!. ^{E T C}
3. Pokemon DP - Yes, I say definitely get rid of it.
4. Agreed, last thing you'll need is some parent griping about what their kid learned here. Eggbert
5. Maybe for the wiki and discussion, but I think that some (as long as it's not too bad) should be allowed on the forums and chat. Hisak
6. I'd like to see curse words totally purged from this wiki, whether it be in userspace, chat, the forum, or anything. YellowYoshi398
7. It should only be permitted when in a quote from the Marioverse or when referring to the location hell, or as the description "hellish" etc. Also, people should be allowed to use ****, *bleep*, etc. on userpages for humorous reasons only, but never like, "You are a ****" because we're smart enough to fill in the blanks. --Stumpers lol, I'm kinda moderate on this... maybe I should be in a third category.
8. The MissingLinkI'm only eleven, I don't want to hear thta stuff.
9. Minus World
10. RickyMario: Cursing? Get rid of it! I am only 12 and I hate cursing!
11. Bean Get rid of it.
12. Full Metal Moogle Words liek Hell seem to be ok... I swear a lot, but swearing on a Mario wiki? COME ON!

What'd be the point?

1. I don't cuss, but I don't see the point of banning it, either. Why is it that a person can say "idiot" but not "asshole"? What makes the latter word more offensive than the first? They both mean the same thing! Waluigi Freak 99 16:17, 3 June 2007 (EDT)
2. Ultimatetoad

Comments

This is really just to get some use out of the system, as we all have enough foresight to determine the results on this one.Saudy^Talk!

It depends on how extreme some of the words are. Maybe only if the word is actually used in the Marioverse ("Hell" in the DK Rap), but that's the only exception. Actually, "Hell" isn't too bad, since The Underwhere is modelled after it. But again, only when necessary, if ever. Booster

Boosty, it should never be necessary.Saudy^Talk!

I agree, but what should we do in the rare case where it's actually appropriate (DK Rap)? Booster

Heck, I dunno. Use that word there. Heck.Saudy^Talk!

There's no word censor in MediaWiki. I'm not sure if there is an extension for one. Wa _T^C_@ | Mi Youtube 14:29, 3 June 2007 (EDT)

This would be a personal challenge for users, and the entire community would need to make a conscious effort on each and everyone's own part. Plug-ins don't solve everything, and really shouldn't.Saudy^Talk!

Take that back. Wa _T^C_@ | Mi Youtube 14:36, 3 June 2007 (EDT)

Lol. No. :P Saudy^Talk!

This isn't a laughing matter. You're criticizing the reliability of an extension, a piece of coding. Wa _T^C_@ | Mi Youtube 14:41, 3 June 2007 (EDT)

If coding is so powerful, why can't it do all the work? I wasn't insulting it or its reliability. Just citing the fact that they can't do EVERYTHING, and probably shouldn't.Saudy^Talk!

WF99, please take away the offensive comment. The second is traditionally considered vulgar and unnacceptable in modern society.Saudy^Talk!

But we can't say that the rap's line was "He's one heck of a guy!" That would be a lie. Something like writing "scared the h*** out of him" shouldn't be permitted of course, but as a referrence to the location, I think that's fine. However, before using it, we should consider comparisons to the Netherworld, which is a place in the Marioverse (see Shadow Queen). --Stumpers

HK, why is it traditionally considered vulgar? It means the same thing as "idiot", which is not traditionally considered vulgar. Who decided that it is unacceptable? Some guy somewhere? As I said, I don't cuss, but I don't see anything wrong with it, and I don't allow my activities to fringe upon the decisions of some guy somewhere.Waluigi Freak 99 13:08, 4 June 2007 (EDT)

I absoulutely understand where you are coming from Mr. Freak (Can I call you that?). All I'm saying is that in today's society, idiot is considered a milder version.Saudy^Talk!

The thing is, neither word belongs on the writing portion of this Wiki except in quotes from characters, people, etc. However, if you guys wanted to use it on your talk pages (not to each other, I would hope) I don't know why we would have a problem. Perhaps what we need is a note on the main page that warns users about the content on user talk pages? I mean... if the word idiot offends people... it's not like I think the user pages should turn into full blown R-rated content. Stumpers! 16:36, 4 June 2007 (EDT)

Oh, what the hell? I'm sorry, but this is the stupidest thing I've seen you people argue about. If a curse word is needed as part of a quote/script/site name/game name/whatever, so be it. This is an encyclopedia, not My First Dictionary First Grade Edition. Actually, that would be better. Most of those dictionaries list curses too. Only a few instances of blatant profanity being a problem can be sited. Don't make a problem out of nothing. -- Chris 23:48, 4 June 2007 (EDT)

I think we're talking about user fairness, especially in chat. Any Mario quotes with profanity, if it ever comes up, will be shown in full here, or nearly in full, here. If this is accepted, when I create the policy I'll mention that is applies to the community, not the encyclopedia aspect. Wa _T^C_@ | Mi Youtube 23:41, 5 June 2007 (EDT)

Ummmm...... EVERYONE curses, me, you, and ... well..... a greayt proportion of all humanity. Personal Attacks are already banned, I don't see the need of banning the occasional vulgar phrase. And what, may I ask, describes a "curse word"? Is there a specific requirment? I think this is dumb.... - Ultimatetoad

We want this site to appear professional. How about we just not use these (censored for the sake of kids but you know what they are): fu**, co**, sh**, bi***, as*, cu**, fa*, ect. There should already be rules against racist slurs and insults against groups of certain people, re***d, ni**a, ch**k, ect. If it's used in certain context like location or not as an insult, it can be acceptable, queer, hell, gay, ect.
As for the childish ones like dork, idiot, loser, I would be surprised if any of you actually use those in insults.
PLUS THIS IS A MARIO SITE. THERE'S NO SWEARING IN ANY OF THE GAMES, CHILDREN COME HERE.
Just use symbols, it's not that hard.
- Yoshi Mastar

The one instance in Donkey Kong and any other "in game instances" will be allowed as exceptions. Elsewise, avoid it as much as possible. This will be said in the policy I'll draw up if the proposal is passed.Saudy^Talk!

FYI DB you have "Im just some idiot that does cra**." PRETxZELion ^{E T C}

It definately should be allowed in the encyclopedia if it ever comes up. If somone is can read they have most likely heard every swear word, and if they havn't they will not be scared for life. They are part of the english language and if there is a purpose for on of them to be used in the database they should not be censored. It not this websites job to babysit children. p.s. asshole and idiot do not mean the same thing in any context. several of you seem ot be confused about this. Threegee

I changed it... The MissingLink Thanks for pointing that out GG!

No Prob...PRETxZELion ^{E T C}

Alright, there are only two times when I could see it, because there are two "swears" in the whole of the "Marioverse" thing. The first is obviously the DK64 rap, and the second is a NPC in Mario Tennis: Power Tour, who says, "We suck!" referring to a school that lost a championship. That's it. Finito. End of story. Why is this being such an issue? :) Stumpers! 01:23, 7 June 2007 (EDT)

What about the obvious Underwhgere=Hell thing? As Threegee said, it is not our job babysit kids on this site. It should be used when it is needed, and Suck is NOT a cuss word. - Ultimatetoad

Look: THe few times its necessary in an article, sure, fine, go ahead. But the Ban is affecting OUTSIDE of articles.Saudy^Talk!

So why shouldnt we use it when talking among ourselves? If it is appropriate, like saying "Damn it!" when something bad happens, and not doing it excessivly..... - Ultimatetoad

But, even right there, when you said "not doing it excessivly" that's still a sort of ban... I don't know. Maybe we should just put a message on the front page that notes that talk pages are fair game. Oh, and btw, suck isn't a cuss, I know. It is rude, though, and you wouldn't find it on an encyclopedia page ;) Stumpers! 00:30, 12 June 2007 (EDT)

Support

1. PRETxZELion ^{E T C}
2. Bean Let's help them!
3. Hk -- Erm... Yeah. Newbies are important. We all go through that stage.
4. 3D, newbies need help. Let's help them!
5. Wa _T^C_@ | Mi Youtube – wasn't sure at first, but the continual help afterwards convinced me.
6. YellowYoshi398 – Although a lot of the committee goals seem like simple user duties, newbies do indeed need help and a team dedicated to answering their questions seems like a pretty good idea.
7. Master Crashn00bs are the future of our wiki! with SOS gone we need more users contributing.

Oppose

1. Plumber, I do not think a committee should be run by one person.

Comments

Bean, you need a better reason than that, and I already said we could help newbies without a committee, Hk. Plumber

I end up helping everyone, it'd be nice to have some guys that can help too, and if we have an "unofficail Comitee" why not make it offical, this will end up helping the wiki and making it better. PRETxZELion ^{E T C}

Well, I don't think it should be run by anyone. A committee is usually run by everyone. And if everyone can participate, it isn't really a commitee. Plumber, I would help people if they asked me

But they don't, and now they'll ask the people in the Committee. PRETxZELion Like the user fairness, it will do no harm. ^E