MarioWiki:Proposals: Difference between revisions

From the Super Mario Wiki, the Mario encyclopedia
Jump to navigationJump to search
(→‎Oppose: Voted.)
 
Line 1: Line 1:
{{MarioWiki:Proposals/Header}}
{{/Header}}
 
===List of ongoing talk page proposals===
{{TPPDiscuss|Remove the "Compatibility" section from ''[[Mario Teaches Typing 2]]''|Talk:Mario Teaches_Typing 2#Remove "Compatibility" section|March 31, 2021, 23:59 GMT}}
{{TPPDiscuss|Split [[Cannon]] based on character interactivity|Talk:Cannon#Article_Split_Proposal%3A_the_enemy_cannon_vs._the_interactive_cannon|April 2, 2021, 23:59 GMT}}
 
==Unimplemented proposals==
{| class=sortable align=center width=100% cellspacing=0 border=1 cellpadding=3 style="text-align:center; border-collapse:collapse; font-family:Arial;"
|-
!width="3%"|#
!width="65%"|Proposal
!width="18%"|User
!width="14%"|Date
|-
|1
|align=left|[[MarioWiki:Proposals/Archive 52#Change the way that recurring Mario & Sonic events are handled, round 2|Decide how to cover recurring events in the ''Mario & Sonic'' series]]
|{{User|BBQ Turtle}}
|July 17, 2018
|-
|2
|align=left|[[Talk:Note Block#Split into Note Block, Jump Block (New Super Mario Bros. Wii) and Jump Block (Mario & Wario)|Split Jump Block (''Mario & Wario'') from Note Block]]
|{{User|Alternis}}
|July 21, 2019
|-
|3
|align=left|[[MarioWiki:Proposals/Archive 54#Reorganize and split Gallery:Toys and other Merchandise galleries|Reorganize and split Gallery:Toys and other Merchandise galleries]]
|{{User|Results May Vary}}
|July 30, 2019
|-
|4
|align=left|[[MarioWiki:Proposals/Archive 54#Split all multi-items in the Mario Kart series|Split all multi-items in the ''Mario Kart'' series]]
|{{User|Archivist Toadette}}
|October 12, 2019
|-
|5
|align=left|[[Talk:Construction Zone#Merge with the Mario vs. Donkey Kong 2: March of the Minis page|Include information on Construction Zone for the rest of the ''Mario vs. Donkey Kong'' series]]
|{{User|Koopa con Carne}}
|November 24, 2019
|-
|6
|align=left|[[Talk:Somersault#Merge Backflip here or split backwards somersault info and merge that to backflip|Split backwards somersault info and merge it to Backflip]]
|{{User|Doc von Schmeltwick}}
|February 26, 2020
|-
|7
|align=left|[[MarioWiki:Proposals/Archive 55#Create a "character/species" infobox|Create a "character/species" infobox]]
|{{User|Doc von Schmeltwick}}
|April 16, 2020
|-
|8
|align=left|[[MarioWiki:Proposals/Archive 55#Split the Paper Mario: Sticker Star and Paper Mario: Color Splash attacks|Split the attacks from ''Paper Mario: Sticker Star'' and ''Paper Mario: Color Splash'']]
|{{User|Scrooge200}}
|July 4, 2020
|-
|9
|align=left|[[MarioWiki:Proposals/Archive 55#Merge Game Boy Donkey Kong enemy variations / Split Wario World enemy variations|Split the enemy variants from ''Wario World'']]
|{{User|Koopa con Carne}}
|July 11, 2020
|-
|10
|align=left|[[MarioWiki:Proposals/Archive 55#Split the Super Mario RPG item lists|Split the item lists from ''Super Mario RPG: Legend of the Seven Stars'']]
|{{User|Doc von Schmeltwick}}
|July 12, 2020
|-
|11
|align=left|[[MarioWiki:Proposals/Archive 55#definitions of undead and deceased|Clean up Category:Undead and Category:Deceased]]
|{{User|Pokemon}}
|August 6, 2020
|-
|12
|align=left|[[MarioWiki:Proposals/Archive 56#Upload images from the base game along with remakes|Reorganize images in levelboxes pertaining to games with remakes, remasters, etc.]]
|{{User|DarkNight}}
|September 30, 2020
|-
|13
|align=left|[[MarioWiki:Proposals/Archive 56#Super Mario Sunshine Minor Locations|Create articles for minor locations in ''Super Mario Sunshine'']]
|{{User|The Mansion}}
|October 30, 2020
|-
|14
|align=left|[[MarioWiki:Proposals/Archive 56#Decide where to cover Cheese the Chao|Create an article for Cheese the Chao]]
|{{User|BBQ Turtle}}
|November 25, 2020
|-
|15
|align=left|[[MarioWiki:Proposals/Archive 56#Decide where to cover Froggy|Create an article for Froggy]]
|{{User|BBQ Turtle}}
|November 25, 2020
|-
|16
|align=left|[[MarioWiki:Proposals/Archive 56#Split the tour appearances of every Mario Kart Tour course|Split the tour appearances of ''Mario Kart Tour'' courses]]
|{{User|Koopa con Carne}}
|March 5, 2021
|}


==Writing guidelines==
==Writing guidelines==
===Remove non-''Mario'' characters from the trophies, Assist Trophy, stickers, and Spirit pages===
===Standardize "History in the Super Mario franchise" headings under certain conditions===
The Mario Wiki's ''Super Smash Bros.'' coverage always has been, and likely always will be, one of the most consistently controversial aspects of the wiki. In my opinion, instead of trying to solve any of these coverage issues with one large, sweeping proposal, it would be better to handle individual topics in smaller-scale proposals. This is one of them.
Inspired by [[User:Nintendo101|Nintendo101]]'s [[User talk:Nintendo101/flowerpot|flowerpot]] subpage (from an [https://www.mariowiki.com/index.php?title=User:Nintendo101/flowerpot&oldid=4209600 earlier revision], before it had been removed), this proposal aims to standardize the use of '''<nowiki>==History in the Super Mario franchise==</nowiki>''' over '''<nowiki>==History==</nowiki>'''. This will help make it clear to readers what is ''Super Mario'' and what is not while reading articles, and prevent potential disputes once a standard has been set. Please note that this proposal is '''NOT''' about the ''DK'', ''Yoshi'', or ''Wario'' subfranchises.
 
Basically, the [[Special:LongPages|longest page]] on this wiki as of this proposal is [[List of trophies in Super Smash Bros. for Wii U]] - something about a game which isn't even part of the ''Mario'' franchise. That's pretty insane. We have several lists, such as the Spirit page, the Assist Trophy page, the Sticker page, and the lists of trophies in _ game, which give coverage to each and every single collectable that is a part of their respective groups, even if they have absolutely nothing to do with the franchise. We don't need this. It unnecessarily bloats the pages with information not related to the wiki itself, and would make it harder for readers to access the information actually pertinent to the franchise and in turn, the wiki. No one would go to the Mario Wiki to find out what Ghirahim's spirit does. If they did, they would just go to a Smash Wiki. Basically, this non-Mario related list content just makes these pages filled to the brim with non-pertinent info that would just make a page harder to load for those who want to find actual ''Mario'' related info on a Mario Wiki, and not info about a million other gaming franchises. In short, what I propose is the following:
 
That any list information that isn't pertinent to the ''Mario'' or related franchises would be removed. This will affect the following pages, under this proposal:
 
*[[Assist Trophy]]
*Any of the "List of trophies in _" ''Super Smash Bros.'' game (will not affect [[Trophy (Super Smash Bros. series)]].
*[[List of Smash Run enemies]]
*[[Spirit (Super Smash Bros. Ultimate)]].
*[[Sticker (Super Smash Bros. Brawl)]].
*[[List of Mii Fighter Outfits]]
*[[List of Mii Headgear]]
*[[Subspace Army]]
 
This will not affect:


*The [[Pokémon]] page. The page is entirely filled with non-''Mario'' information. Wether or not this page should be deleted is a discussion for a different proposal.
For an article to apply for the '''<nowiki>==History in the Super Mario franchise==</nowiki>''' heading, the article should meet one of the following criteria:
*The intro of any of these pages. The spirit page, for example, will still inform the reader about what a spirit is.
*The fighter pages. Even if the trophy/list pages have non-''Mario'' content removed, any spirit or trophy info on any fighter's page will still remain. Wether or not we should even have pages on fighters which never appeared in the ''Mario'' franchise is for another proposal.
*The ''Super Smash Bros.'' game pages, which will remain mostly unaffected. Any changes that should be made to these is again, a subject for another another proposal.


Additional notes:
#It is a generic subject (e.g. [[Grape]]s) or something from real life, like a person, with a fictional portrayal in ''Super Mario'' media, such as [[Thomas Jefferson]]. An example of this [https://www.mariowiki.com/index.php?title=Dinosaur&oldid=4213618 was on the Dinosaur article before being reverted].
#It is from the [[Super Mario (franchise)|''Super Mario'' franchise]] '''BUT''' has also appeared in non-''Super Mario'' media, popular examples being the [[Super Smash Bros. (series)|''Super Smash Bros.'' series]] and the ''[[Minecraft]]'' textures. Everything that isn't ''Super Mario'' would be subheadings of '''<nowiki>==History in other games==</nowiki>''', or '''<nowiki>==History in other media==</nowiki>''' if the subject also (or instead) appeared in publications, television shows, etc. not in ''Super Mario'' franchise. An example of this can be seen on the [[History of Luigi]] article.
#Crossover content, including Nintendo products, as they appear in ''Super Mario'' media. Examples can be seen on the [[Game Boy]], [[Link]], and [[Egg Pawn]] pages.


*Some redirects, such as [[Bonkers]], may have to be deleted if they become useless after this proposal is enforced, if it passes.
For the first bullet point, this would help establish that real and generic subjects are not from ''Super Mario'' and makes the History heading less ambiguous. On the [[Dinosaur]] article, for example, are we reading about history of dinosaurs as they exist in real life, up to the point of extinction, or from the ''Super Mario'' franchise? It's the latter. For [[George Washington]], are we reading history about him from the 18th century or as he exists in the ''Super Mario'' franchise? It's also the latter, clearly.
*This '''will not''' remove any list info directly pertinent to the franchise (such as any Mario, Wario, Yoshi, or DK trophies).
*I have included the option to support the removal all non-''Mario'' thing on these lists '''except''' for fighter trophies, spirits, etc for those who would rather that outcome.
*[[MarioWiki:Coverage]] will be slightly modified to reflect any changes with how we handle this content.
*This will be enforced simply by removing any parts of the list that aren't pertinent to the franchise. For example, the info about Akira's Assist will be removed from the Assist Trophy page, though the info on say, Waluigi's, or Klaptrap's Assist, will remain.
*Some of the pages affected by the proposal are featured articles. Wether or not they will still be worthy of their featured status is something to be considered after the proposal is enforced.


Edited notes:
For the second bullet point, this would help eliminate the popular misconception that ''Super Smash Bros.'' is part of the ''Super Mario'' franchise and help better contextualize ''Super Mario'' as it exists in other media, like sometimes ''Zelda'' or ''Minecraft'', rather than being integral to the same degree as their main appearances in ''Super Mario'' media itself.


*I have added an option for voters who support removing non-pertinent items, '''except''' for items which already have individual pages. Under this option, stuff for Blinky (the Pac-Man ghosts), Knuckles, and the fighters would be kept, as they already have their own individual pages for other reasons (being a playable MK character, being in ''Mario & Sonic'', and being a fighter). The above option would still be for those who want to keep the fighter items, but not the non-fighter items.
For the third bullet point, this would eliminate confusion that the history is talking about Nintendo products in general, like when they were produced, the amount of sales generated, etc. and rather mention its appearances within the ''Super Mario'' franchise itself. History on Nintendo products themselves can be found on [[nwiki:|NintendoWiki]]. Similarly, for articles like [[Link]], it helps when the History section specifies it is of Link as he appears in the ''Super Mario'' franchise. Then connections to ''Super Mario'' go under the "History in other media" heading.
*I have added the Mii gear pages, due to forgetting them at first.
*Added info about the Subspace Army.


'''Proposer''': {{User|Doomhiker}}<br>
To make it short, if this proposal passes, and <nowiki>==History==</nowiki> is changed to <nowiki>==History in the ''Super Mario'' franchise==</nowiki> (and split into a separate <nowiki>==History in other media==</nowiki> in the case of criteria #2) on an article that can be categorized by any of the three numbered bullet points above, '''users will not be allowed to revert it back to the initial <nowiki>==History==</nowiki> heading''', like in the [https://www.mariowiki.com/index.php?title=Dinosaur&diff=next&oldid=4213618 aforementioned case involving the Dinosaur article].
'''Deadline''': <del>March 14, 2021, 23:59 GMT Extended to March 21, 2021, 23:59 GMT</del> Extended to March 28, 2021, 23:59 GMT


====Support (including the removal of non-''Mario'' fighter spirits, trophies, etc)====
'''Proposer''': {{User|Super Mario RPG}}<br>
#{{User|Doomhiker}} Per proposal.
'''Deadline''': May 31, 2024, 23:59 GMT
#{{user|TheDarkStar}} - per proposal
#{{User|MarioManiac1981}} Per proposal; there really is no need for unnecessary info if it's irrelevant to ''Mario''.
#{{User|Magma.}} - per proposal
#{{User|Lakituthequick}} Per proposal.
#{{user|7feetunder}} I support any proposal that aims to remove ''Mario''-irrelevant ''Smash'' content from this wiki. All other NIWA wikis (barring Smash Wiki itself) stick purely to covering ''Smash'' content that is relevant to its franchise. The only thing different here is that ''Mario'' gets more representation than other franchises; that alone doesn't mean we should have tons of articles and information on things that have no relation to ''Mario''. Bulbapedia doesn't have articles on Bayonetta, Rathalos, Tabuu, etc., but we do!
#{{User|Archivist Toadette}} Per 7feetunder, as well as Bazooka Mario in the comments.
#{{User|PinkYoshiFan}} Per 7feetunder
#{{User|Shy Guy on Wheels}} Per all.
#{{User|Superbound}} I am guilty od adding many spirits to spirits page, something I regret doing so. I planned on making similar TPP but never got around it. Per all.
#{{User|Wynn Liaw}} This is Super '''Mario''' Wiki. Nobody would expect to find these things here.
#{{User|Shiny K-Troopa}} Per proposal and 7feetunder
#{{User|SmokedChili}} Per proposal. Smash Bros. it's its own series which compiles content from other series.


====Support (excluding the removal of non-''Mario'' fighter spirits, trophies, etc)====
====Support for all three options====
#{{user|Glowsquid}} - If it has a page, is fair game, is how I see it.
#{{User|Super Mario RPG}} I'm for this option.
#{{User|Koopa con Carne}} Strong support. [[MarioWiki:Proposals/Archive 52#Delete the bonuses pages from the Super Smash Bros. series|We went out of our way]] to limit coverage of the ''Super Smash Bros.'' franchise itself, which has more in common with the ''Mario'' franchise than any other singular franchises represented in it. In that case, why pray tell do we have so much irrelevant coverage on Zelda, Star Fox, Kirby and many others? However, as Glowsquid stated above, any extra-Mario subject that has a page here for one reason or another should still be allowed additional info like trophy and spirit information.
#{{User|SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)}} Yes. Also, for the flowerpot thing, I have that saved (with a few tweaks) [[User:SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)/Nintendo101's flowerpot old revision saved plus tweaks|here]].
#{{User|Doomhiker}} I'm additionally fine with this being the case, though the above option is preferred in my opinion.
#{{User|PanchamBro}} I'm more than happy for the articles to be downsized in my opinion, considering how large the [[List of trophies in Super Smash Bros. for Wii U]] article is, with not much information on Mario and more-so on other franchises.
#{{User|Power Flotzo}} Per everyone.
#{{User|Metalex123}} - We really don't need all of these lists of non-''Mario'' stuff. I think all of the fighter spirits/trophies/stickers that aren't ''Mario''-themed should also be removed from said list pages, but should be kept on the actual character's pages. For example, I think Link's Spirit shouldn't be included in the list of Spirits page, but should still stay on the Link article. Same thing with like the Sonic characters that crossed over in ''Mario & Sonic'', with Banjo & Kazooie, with Villager/Isabelle, with Inklings, etc, since all of these crossed over in a ''Mario''-themed game before. (I still think some pages like Cloud/Marth/Mementos/Bombchu/etc should be deleted in general due to never actually crossing over with Mario outside of Smash, but that's for another day I guess...)
#{{User|7feetunder}} Second choice.
#{{user|TheDarkStar}} - second choice
#{{User|MarioManiac1981}} This'll be my second choice if all else fails.
#{{User|Wynn Liaw}} Second choice.
#{{User|SmokedChili}} Second choice.
<s>{{User|Ray Trace}} Trophies and spirits from other franchises that aren't Mario aren't information relevant to MarioWiki.</s>


====Support (excluding any spirits, assists, etc of subjects we already have individual pages for, such as Knuckles, fighters, and Blinky)====
====Apply to only crossover content and real products====


====Oppose====
====Oppose====
#{{User|Waluigi Time}} Traditionally our reduction in Smash Bros. coverage has always been to reduce the prominence of information, rather than outright remove it. I don't really feel comfortable going farther. I also worry that any other option we go for will look inconsistent and arbitrary to our readers, whether it's within our Smash coverage itself or with other crossovers. I'm '''especially''' opposed to Assist Trophies being tossed into this proposal since they have a much more significant impact on gameplay. Doing this will effectively leave us with an article that only partially explains what an item that Mario chcaracters can use does. Not listing every single collectible in the game is one thing, having an Assist Trophy page where we don't even acknowledge the majority of them is confusing and not very helpful. At that point we're starting to gut our coverage of the gameplay of the series itself, and I only see us being a few more proposals away from deleting the rest of the fighters entirely. I also have serious problems with this proposal as a whole which I have outlined in the comments, particularly that this proposal is far larger than it claims to be and tries to clump together too many unrelated subjects (of the 8 articles listed, I can think of 4 groups to accurately separate them into). <s>(And actually I do find myself using the Spirit page here for all of them in general, I find it more helpful that they're on one page which afaik SmashWiki doesn't have)</s>
#{{User|Hewer}} Similar to your [[MarioWiki:Proposals/Archive/65#Standardize a "Cameo appearances" section|previous]] [[MarioWiki:Proposals/Archive/65#Standardize the "Other appearances" scope to include anything that's not a Super Mario game|proposals]] about reorganising history sections, I don't really see what we'd gain from this. For the first and third bullet points, the edit summary that removed it from the [[Dinosaur]] page sums up my thoughts: "This is obvious and unnecessary". Of course we're only going to be covering the subject's history that's within our scope, I don't think anyone's visiting the Dinosaur page seeking a complete history of the Mesozoic Era only to be disappointed when they don't find it. For the second bullet point, I ask the same question as your last attempt to split up non-Mario appearances: why does it not being a Mario game make it worth splitting up? The assertion that they're not "integral to the same degree as their main appearances in Super Mario media itself" feels wrong, games like Smash are major appearances of the Mario characters and are important to their histories, sometimes moreso than appearances in actual Mario games (Smash Melee introducing Yoshi's [[Egg Roll (move)|Egg Roll]], Smash Ultimate being K. Rool's first physical appearance in a decade, etc.). I also again question whether "the popular misconception that Super Smash Bros. is part of the Super Mario franchise" exists or is worth "fixing" in such an indirect way (we already don't consider them Mario games to my knowledge anyway). The [[Game Boy]] example is the only one given where I see some merit in doing this, since we do give some coverage to the actual histories of Nintendo hardware and it could be worth distinguishing the history of their in-universe appearances from that.
#{{User|Doc von Schmeltwick}} Per WT and my general opposition to removing Smash content.
#{{User|Nintendo101}} Because this is the <u>Super Mario</u> Wiki, the inherent assumption is that any subject with an article appears in the franchise (including [[Link]] and [[Sonic]]), and that the "History" section would only cover its appearance in the ''Super Mario'' franchise. What else would it be about? If a "history in the Super Mario franchise" was to be implemented anywhere, I feel like it only makes sense for recurring subjects that debuted in the ''Super Mario'' franchise, but make recurring appearances elsewhere (like Chain Chomps, which make some a few appearances in ''Zelda''). But even in that context, I don't know if it would be appropriate. (I also don't agree with the premise that any in-game subject is "generic", regardless of its name or design. The [[grape]]s in ''Yoshi's Story'' are just as derived from the {{wp|grape|real article}} as the [[Sour Bunch]].)
#{{User|Hewer}} Per all. The Assist Trophies don't even take up a lot of space, they just describe what they do in Smash Bros. like the other things do. If we can fully cover the Mario & Sonic games and have pages about characters like Sticks the Badger, I don't see why Smash should be treated differently. It's not really unrelated to Mario if it's in Smash.
#{{User|Nightwicked Bowser}} Per my edit summary Hewer quoted.
#{{User|MrConcreteDonkey}} - Per Waluigi Time both here and in the comments. I just don't see the point in outright removing all of this unless it explicitly clashes with the coverage policy (which it doesn't seem to) or substantially slows down the entire Wiki. I also don't think elements that have a larger effect on gameplay (Assist Trophies, maybe Subspace) should be lumped together with things that are primarily collectibles (Trophies, Stickers...) - unless the plan is to outright get rid of all non-Mario Smash coverage entirely, in which case this feels like a half measure. And either way, why would it be better to remove it entirely rather than just rewriting and condensing it to solve the size issue?
#{{User|FanOfRosalina2007}} Per Nintendo101.
#{{User|Chester Alan Arthur}} Per all
#{{User|Jazama}} Per all
#{{User|Tails777}} Per Waluigi Time. While I can agree that maybe trimming down content like trophies, stickers and trophies wouldn't be that bad, I feel Subspace and Smash Run enemies and Assist Trophies are a bit more involved and could stand to have their lists kept.
#{{User|Dine2017}} Under criterion #2, common ''Mario'' subjects such as [[Goomba]] would have a long ==History in the Super Mario franchise== and a short ==History in other games/media==, making the two unbalanced. Also per all. (In the case of [[Game Boy]], I think ==Appearances in the Super Mario franchise== is more accurate, cf. [[Nintendo Entertainment System]] and [[Nintendo 64]].)
#{{User|TheFlameChomp}} Initially, I supported this proposal. However, after considering it more, I have decided that I agree with some of the points brought up by Waluigi Time, MrConcreteDonkey, and Tails777. I do personally still believe that the lists of trophies, stickers, and spirits should definitely be cut down, as there is no reason for them to be among the longest articles on the wiki. However, I agree that Assist Trophies and the Subspace and Smash Run enemies have a much more significant role, and thus I do not feel it makes sense to group them in with the lists of collectibles, since it would be inconsistent with how we currently cover other items that have a larger impact on gameplay. I fully agree with the idea of possibly limiting ''Super Smash Bros.'' content, but I feel this proposal currently combines subjects that do not have a completely similar impact on gameplay.
#{{User|Niiue}} Per all. I've never been a fan of reducing SSB coverage anyway.
#{{User|Results May Vary}} Too much will be removed in the process.
#{{User|Yoshi876}} Per all.
#{{User|BBQ Turtle}} While I agree with the idea of this proposal, I think it might be biting off a little bit more than it can chew. I think it could use a little bit more thinking through and maybe some splitting down to try to work through some more of the concerns with it before I'd be happy to support it.
#{{User|CaillouFan}} Per Results May Vary.
#{{User|Sdman213}} Per all.
#{{User|Keyblade Master}} While I am a bit indifferent about how we handle Smash coverage, it seems like removing so much like this is not a very smart idea after all.
#{{User|Duckfan77}} Per all.
#{{User|AwdryFan1997}} I hate the way Smash content is represented here, but I certainly wouldn't call this a reasonable alternative to what we currently have.


====Comments====
====Comments====
@Waluigi Time We shouldn't not do something because another wiki is lacking. In addition, I do see any reason to stop at removing info if there's no reason for the info to be on this wiki in the first place, and it's not like we haven't removed swaths of non-pertinent info in the past (like with how we previously had a ton of Banjo content). {{User:Doomhiker/sig}} 17:19, February 28, 2021 (EST)
For clarity, when I say "standardize," (not to be confused with "allow," since I don't think there's anything in the rules that explicitly forbids formatting in the aforementioned three cases), it means if a page is formatted that way, others aren't allowed to revert it, since it's the standard for how said articles should look. Also, {{@|SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)}}, glad to see that flowerpot page. [[User:Super Mario RPG|Super Mario RPG]] ([[User talk:Super Mario RPG|talk]]) 14:32, May 17, 2024 (EDT)
:I'm not saying that's why we shouldn't remove it, just addressing the comment you made. I agree in theory - the Banjo and Conker content was way out of scope and didn't need to be here, and we don't need to keep unrelated content just because some people may find it helpful. Smash however is too intertwined with the Mario series for me to be comfortable with throwing large parts of our coverage out completely. --{{User:Waluigi Time/sig}} 17:33, February 28, 2021 (EST)
:"For clarity, when I say "standardize," (not to be confused with "allow," since I don't think there's anything in the rules that explicitly forbids formatting in the aforementioned three cases), it means if a page is formatted that way, others aren't allowed to revert it, since it's the standard for how said articles should look." Thanks for the clarification! My support will still be there. "Also, {{@|SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)}}, glad to see that flowerpot page." Thanks! I wanted to keep/expand on it as a subpage of my userpage, b/c I didn't want any edit conflicts. You and {{@|Nintendo101}} are free to edit it if you want. [[User:SONIC123CDMANIA+&#38;K(B&#38;ATSA)|SONIC123CDMANIA+&#38;K(B&#38;ATSA)]] ([[User talk:SONIC123CDMANIA+&#38;K(B&#38;ATSA)|talk]]) 14:43, May 17, 2024 (EDT)
::How is Smash intertwined? While yes, there's a lot of content themed around the franchise, it's not like the actual ''Mario'' franchise takes inspiration from Smash itself, or vice versa. {{User:Doomhiker/sig}} 17:37, February 28, 2021 (EST)
:::There's enough Mario content in the series for me to consider it a proper crossover (i.e. Mario & Sonic or Fortune Street) worthy of covering. It's not like Banjo and Conker where they happened to appear in Diddy Kong Racing as advertisement and never touched the Mario franchise again (until Banjo in Smash obviously). --{{User:Waluigi Time/sig}} 17:39, February 28, 2021 (EST)


While I prefer the second option over outright removing everything, since there's no reason not to keep information on subjects we cover, after all, I can't see it working out too well... Crossover characters can gain relevance to the Mario franchise at any time, either through becoming a fighter or other means, and if we give them articles then we'd also have to dig up all of the Smash info we used to have for that character and restore it, and possibly end up missing some along the way. Additionally, this option only makes exceptions for non-Mario fighters. What about characters like Knuckles? He's not a fighter but still has a page. --{{User:Waluigi Time/sig}} 17:53, February 28, 2021 (EST)
Wasn't there a proposal about roughly the same thing not too long ago? You're meant to wait 28 days between proposals on the same thing, so if that's the case, we don't exactly wanna wait for a substantial amount of votes before calling attention to it. {{User:Camwoodstock/sig}} 15:12, May 17, 2024 (EDT)
:I'm only giving exceptions to fighters due to having a larger importance. Knuckles doesn't have a page because he's in Smash - he has a page due to ''Mario & Sonic''. Anyways, we shouldn't keep unneeded info because of the mere possibility of a character becoming more relevant - that's like saying we should keep the humans page in case a reason to have it independent of categories latter pops up. If, in the future, a removed spirit becomes a fighter, then we can re-add it then, but's it's no reason to keep massive quantities of non-pertinent info. {{User:Doomhiker/sig}} 18:22, February 28, 2021 (EST)
:No, I think this is different. That one had to do with removing franchise headers, which this one doesn't. [[User:SONIC123CDMANIA+&#38;K(B&#38;ATSA)|SONIC123CDMANIA+&#38;K(B&#38;ATSA)]] ([[User talk:SONIC123CDMANIA+&#38;K(B&#38;ATSA)|talk]]) 15:23, May 17, 2024 (EDT)
::That seems almost arbitrary, to be honest. Some non-Mario characters we cover get to have their information kept, but others don't? It's pretty bizarre that Knuckles would still have his trophy/spirit/sticker information on his own page (I assume it would stay), but the pages covering those items as a whole including lists would make no mention of them. I don't see how this is comparable to the human page at all, either. The human page is being proposed for deletion ''because'' there's currently no useful information to cover there. It's not any extra effort to start a new article with information that we never had before. This on the other hand would be information that currently is useful and if the option passes, could and would be brought back at any time. --{{User:Waluigi Time/sig}} 18:30, February 28, 2021 (EST)
::Yeah, this one is not about removing headings. It's about modifying "History" to "History in the ''Super Mario'' franchise" in one of three case, and in one case (if there's appearances outside of ''Super Mario''), splitting "History in other games/media"  into its own history heading. See what I did on [[Don Bongo]] as an example. [[User:Super Mario RPG|Super Mario RPG]] ([[User talk:Super Mario RPG|talk]]) 15:39, May 17, 2024 (EDT)


:::How would the resulting list be organised? "''Mario'' spirits", "Non-''Mario'' fighter spirits" and "Spirits of subjects that appear in other ''Mario'' media"? I feel like if they were otherwise merged without sections, the list would look kind of... random: A list of ''Mario'' subjects with a number of non-''Mario'' subjects mixed in, which might lead some readers to wonder why some are listed and some aren't.
Where would appearances in things like Smash and Captain N go in this case? {{User:Koopa con Carne/Sig}} 15:40, May 17, 2024 (EDT)
:"History in other media" (see [[Link]] article). [[User:Super Mario RPG|Super Mario RPG]] ([[User talk:Super Mario RPG|talk]]) 15:41, May 17, 2024 (EDT)
::Makes sense. [[User:SONIC123CDMANIA+&#38;K(B&#38;ATSA)|SONIC123CDMANIA+&#38;K(B&#38;ATSA)]] ([[User talk:SONIC123CDMANIA+&#38;K(B&#38;ATSA)|talk]]) 15:48, May 17, 2024 (EDT)


:::''"Knuckles would still have his trophy/spirit/sticker information on his own page (I assume it would stay)"'' About that... Just to clarify, if option 2 passes, does this just apply to the lists, and not their individual pages? In other words, would articles on non-''Mario'', non-fighter subjects that have spirit, trophy etc. information (e.g. [[Moogle]]) retain those sections? I think they should at least be kept on their own pages in a similar approach to the ''Captain N'' info for [[Simon Belmont]], in that "They have a page, they appear in this thing we also cover; we should mention it." {{User:Mario jc/sig}} 05:31, March 1, 2021 (EST)
{{@|Hewer|Nintendo101|Nightwicked Bowser}} I thought [[MarioWiki:Proposals/Archive/65#Oppose_13|"This is a Super Mario Wiki" as a argument was getting old]], but that's what you 3 are using! What happened in between? Is it not a old argument anymore? [[User:SONIC123CDMANIA+&#38;K(B&#38;ATSA)|SONIC123CDMANIA+&#38;K(B&#38;ATSA)]] ([[User talk:SONIC123CDMANIA+&#38;K(B&#38;ATSA)|talk]]) 09:04, May 20, 2024 (EDT)
::::The proposal as a whole only impacts lists. Thus, Knuckles will to retain any Smash info, Moogle will, fighter pages will still list their trophies, etc. What to do with these non-list pages is for another proposal. {{User:Doomhiker/sig}} 17:52, March 1, 2021 (EST)
:I don't think anything in the comment you reference contradicts any of the sentiments made here. No one is arguing subjects that originated outside of the ''Super Mario'' franchise (like Link, Sonic, [[Mad Scienstein]], [[Wart]], etc.) should not receive coverage, nor that appearances made by subjects that ''did'' emerged within the franchise should not be noted (like ''Link's Awakening'', ''Smash Bros.'', ''Tetris'', ''Qix'', etc.). Rather, because of the inherent scope of the wiki, it is assumed that a "History" section on this site encompasses the subject of the article's appearances in the ''Super Mario'' franchise and it is unclear to me why that needs further clarification. - [[User:Nintendo101|Nintendo101]] ([[User talk:Nintendo101|talk]]) 09:35, May 20, 2024 (EDT)
::But you said yourself in your oppose vote "Because this is the Super Mario Wiki", which, again, I thought was getting old as an argument. Hewer himself in the linked proposal said it! I'm just confused about what changed in between that and now. [[User:SONIC123CDMANIA+&#38;K(B&#38;ATSA)|SONIC123CDMANIA+&#38;K(B&#38;ATSA)]] ([[User talk:SONIC123CDMANIA+&#38;K(B&#38;ATSA)|talk]]) 09:38, May 20, 2024 (EDT)
:::First off, why are you getting on Nintendo101's case for an argument that I made in a proposal they didn't even take part in? Second, my point when I made that comment was that "This is a Super Mario wiki" is getting old as an argument on its own to trim, reorganise, or otherwise alter crossover content like Smash, as Super Mario RPG keeps trying to do, whereas Nintendo101's argument is that, because this is a Super Mario wiki, we don't need to specify that our content is about Super Mario. The same words may have been used, but the context of the arguments is different. {{User:Hewer/sig}} 11:54, May 20, 2024 (EDT)
::::First off, I'm not. Second, I didn't know that the CONTEXT was different, I only paid attention to the words, not the context. Third, a "History" section only covering the ''Super Mario'' franchise kinda neglects the references and cameos. [[User:SONIC123CDMANIA+&#38;K(B&#38;ATSA)|SONIC123CDMANIA+&#38;K(B&#38;ATSA)]] ([[User talk:SONIC123CDMANIA+&#38;K(B&#38;ATSA)|talk]]) 12:01, May 20, 2024 (EDT)
:::::Isn't the point of this proposal (which you're supporting) to have history sections that only cover the Super Mario franchise? {{User:Hewer/sig}} 12:05, May 20, 2024 (EDT)
::::::I would like to redirect you to point 2 of the proposal. [[User:SONIC123CDMANIA+&#38;K(B&#38;ATSA)|SONIC123CDMANIA+&#38;K(B&#38;ATSA)]] ([[User talk:SONIC123CDMANIA+&#38;K(B&#38;ATSA)|talk]]) 12:31, May 20, 2024 (EDT)
:::::::Does that not just prove my point? {{User:Hewer/sig}} 12:34, May 20, 2024 (EDT)
::::::::The history section is going to be split. That's the point of this proposal. YOUR point is just around 1/2 of the point of this proposal. [[User:SONIC123CDMANIA+&#38;K(B&#38;ATSA)|SONIC123CDMANIA+&#38;K(B&#38;ATSA)]] ([[User talk:SONIC123CDMANIA+&#38;K(B&#38;ATSA)|talk]]) 12:45, May 20, 2024 (EDT)


Would this proposal impact the [[Subspace Army]] article? It is not specifically listed, but I feel the "Basic troops" section of the article is a similar situation to the [[List of Smash Run enemies]] article. --{{User:TheFlameChomp/sig}} 19:56, February 28, 2021 (EST)
==New features==
:It wouldn't, as like with the Pokemon article, it is entirely about a non-''Mario'' subject that would end up deleting the page if all non-''Mario'' content was removed, and it is thus out of this proposal's reach. {{User:Doomhiker/sig}} 23:02, February 28, 2021 (EST)
''None at the moment.''
::There are Mario enemies in the Subspace Army, though, similar to the Smash Run enemies. {{User:Mario jc/sig}} 05:31, March 1, 2021 (EST)
:::My mistake. I have rectified that. {{User:Doomhiker/sig}} 09:10, March 1, 2021 (EST)


==Removals==
''None at the moment''


I'm pretty indifferent on the proposal. I don't have a problem with the way we handle Smash content now (except for the absurdly long list pages of trophies and spirits). So I'll just help with whatever outcome happens, should pages need deleted.<br>
==Changes==
What I *do* see a problem with, though, is how this effects our other crossover content. With what is said on [[MarioWiki:Coverage]], every element in a crossover game gets full coverage as if it's relevant to the ''Mario'' series. Be it ''Mario & Sonic'', ''Fortune Street'', and even elements that cross over with Mario such as Link in ''Mario Kart 8''. I realize the page states that ''Smash'' is decided on a more particular basis, but it is still a crossover game, so removing all ''Mario'' content when other crossover games do not will look very out of place, imo. {{User:Alex95/sig}} 00:24, March 1, 2021 (EST)
===Move ''Super Smash Bros.'' information for crossover characters into the list articles and delete their ''Super Smash Bros.'' profiles===
:The content being removed here isn't ''Mario'' content, though. Any spirits, assists, etc that are actually directly related to the franchise will be kept, but stuff like Bonkers on the Smash Run enemies page will be purged. Bonkers in Smash Run isn't ''Mario'' related, and thus removing him from the page isn't removing ''Mario'' content as much as it is removing ''Smash'' content.
This proposal concerns ''Super Smash Bros.'' information of certain characters listed in [[Template:Crossover characters|Crossover characters]]. It makes it harder to see the actual ''Super Mario'' content on said articles, like how the [[Isabelle]] page largely concerns her appearances in ''Super Smash Bros.'' while the actual ''Super Mario'' appearances in ''Mario Kart 8'' and ''Super Mario Maker'' are all the way below. In the case of [[Villager]], it starts off by showing the ''WarioWare'' appearances but then has this huge chunk of ''Super Smash Bros.'' information in between that and the appearances in ''Mario Kart 8'' and ''Super Mario Maker''.
 
In addition, this doesn't really affect other crossover content. As you stated, that page notes that ''Smash'' content is treated differently. It wouldn't look weird to treat this differently from ''Fortune Street'' and ''Mario & Sonic'': those two are crossovers much more exclusively focused on the two franchises represented, compared to Smash which not only covers dozens of different franchises to different degrees but is altogether its own thing, with a good amount of original content and characters. You could very much classify ''Smash'' as its own franchise independent of any individual ip represented, compared to ''Fortune Street'' which is very much only a ''Dragon Quest'' and a ''Mario'' game, not part of an independent franchise, if that makes any sense. If anything what looks out of place is the sheer amount of content we have with other franchises which have absolutely nothing to do with ''Mario'', though I understand that's a different topic for a different proposal. {{User:Doomhiker/sig}} 09:10, March 1, 2021 (EST)
 
In the case of Trophies, Stickers and Spirits, I can agree to that. Mii Fighter costumes, maybe too. But I feel Subspace/Smash Run enemies could remain, as they have a more involved role in their respective modes. That’s just my opinion on this topic. {{User:Tails777/sig}}
:But respective modes aren't in a ''Mario'' game. Why should we, a Mario Wiki, care about how important non-''Mario'' enemies are in a non-''Mario'' mode in a non-''Mario'' game? {{User:Doomhiker/sig}} 17:49, March 1, 2021 (EST)
::A fair point, but I still believe the physical, role playing appearance is a bit more deserving of coverage compared to a cameo as a sticker, trophy or spirit. I can say the same about Assist Trophies; they play a more involved role in the core gameplay of Smash. And yes, Smash is a non-''Mario'' mode. And Smash is the only way to play on non-''Mario'' stages and use non-''Mario'' characters. The cameos of Trophies, Stickers and Spirits is something I can agree on, but involved roles through Subspace enemies, Smash Run enemies and Assist Trophies seems a bit of a stretch to me at the moment. {{User:Tails777/sig}}16:44, March 4, 2021 (EST)
 
Right, I'm not quite sure where to vote here yet, but I wanted to ask some questions about some of the unusual cases that I don't think have been covered in the proposal as it stands (If I've misread the proposal and it is included, or I just haven't understood it right, please let me know):
*So, just to clarify what's happening to the stuff for characters that aren't fighters but have pages for other reasons, like the Sonic or Pac-Man characters? I've seen it's been discussed already but I don't quite understand what the current position is.
*What happens to stuff that isn't a fighter but already has a page, like the various items or Skyloft?
*When you say about keeping the fighters' spirits/trophies, what exactly do you mean by that? Is that only keeping the ones specifically tied to Smash, or does that include anything that features them, such as the goodness knows how many Link's got? And how would that work with ones that got trophies in earlier instalments and became fighters later, like King Dedede or Little Mac? What about spirits for Min Min, she's a funny case as she's got two? And what would happen for fighters who have multiple costume spirits, like the Heroes, Corrins and Inklings?
*Would stickers that feature non-Mario characters but specifically affect them (i.e. the ones that can only be used on certain characters) be kept or removed?
*What about vice versa, are the non-Mario related conditions going to be removed as well?
*What about spirits where the battles feature Mario characters representing non-Mario characters, what happens to those? And the vice versa of that one too.
*Is there a full plan for what's going to happen to the Assist Trophy page? I was just taking a look at it to check my facts, and if we just chuck all of the non-Mario characters it's going to leave a really big mess behind, so some thoughts on a future structure might be nice.
*Has some thought been given to what's going to happen to somewhat-related characters that don't have a page, such as the Arcade Bunny or Nikki from Swapnote? I think R.O.B.'s stuff might also fall into this category, so are there any thoughts what's happening there?
I might still be missing some stuff, but I'd at least like to know what the plans are for stuff like this, as if this isn't thought out there's going to be a big mess to clean up if it comes to execution time, and I don't think we want to have to set up another load of proposals just to sort through the case by case ones. [[User:BBQ Turtle|BBQ Turtle]] ([[User talk:BBQ Turtle|talk]]) 16:29, March 1, 2021 (EST)
:In order:
*Under the first option, all non-''Mario'' list items will be removed. This includes non-fighters that have pages for other reasons. Under the second option, non-''Mario'' fighters will be kept with everything else being kept, so Sonic would stay but Blinky would not. Under the third option, non-''Mario'' fighters and non-''Mario'' items that have pages for other reasons would be kept, but the rest would be removed, so both Sonic and Blinky (Pac-Man ghosts, in this case) would be kept but Bonkers wouldn't. Option 4 wouldn't do anything.
*See above. Skyloft trophies/other would be removed under options 1 and 2, but not 3 or 4. Same with items.
*For the sake of simplicity, under options 2 or 3 the only fighter spirits kept would be the spirits of the fighter type. So with Link, his fighter spirit, as well as Toon Link and Young Link's fighter spirits would stay, but the Link (''The Legend of Zelda'') wouldn't, as that is a primary (3) sprit, not a fighter one. Min Min would also follow this; her primary (2) spirit would go, but her actual fighter spirit would stay. Any list item of a character which only became playable in a later instalment would be removed, so Little Mac's assist would go as he wasn't a fighter in that game.
*Stickers are pretty different from the other items here, as non-''Mario'' stickers can exclusively affect ''Mario'' characters. As to not remove any info actually pertinent to the franchise, I would suggest only removing those that don't exclusively for some of the ''Mario'' fighters, and just put them under a header like "Stickers not from the ''Mario'' franchise that can be applied to ''Mario'' fighters". The proposal is about removed information not pertinent to the actual ''Mario'' franchise, not about removing any actual, valid, pertinent info.
*Any sticker or spirit which is kept will have said sticker/spirit's full information.
*My plan is that we'll simply remove the template info of any deleted item, and that the correlating trophy info + gallery images would also be removed.
*I don't know what you mean by "somewhat" related. The Arcade Bunny as in the character is not related to the ''Mario'' franchise. The Nintendo Badge Arcade as in the video game is related to the franchise, but the character is not, and thus he would still be removed. As for Swapnote, while the actual application is related, Nikki the character is not, so again she would be removed.
*I appreciate the concern. Please add any addition questions and I'll try to respond in due time. {{User:Doomhiker/sig}} 17:49, March 1, 2021 (EST)
 
So here's the issue I have with the Assist Trophy page in general being trimmed, a bit more fleshed out after having thought about it for a while. Short of failing entirely, this proposal will remove certain characters from the Assist Trophy page entirely. Now here's the issue: We have a page for an item that can be used by Mario franchise characters that no longer fully explains what the item does. You could argue the item's sole function is "spawns a character" and stop at that, but that only opens up more questions. What characters? What do they do? I see no benefit to ignoring Assist Trophy characters for the sake of "not Mario". I also feel the same way about the Pokemon, though I think it could be beneficial to heavily trim that page and just merge it to Poke Ball. --{{User:Waluigi Time/sig}} 16:50, March 1, 2021 (EST)
:The Assist Trophy page will still have an intro explaining what the actual item does. That's not going anywheres. It will still explain its basic function, and what they (in general) will do. We don't need to list non-''Mario'' assists or what those in specific do as the actual info isn't pertinent to the actual franchise, and bloats the page for those who want ''Mario'' info on a Mario site. As for Pokemon, that's not for this proposal, as that entire page is about a subject with literally nothing to do with the franchise; if we were to remove non-pertinent info they we would just end up deleting the page, and again, that's for another proposal. {{User:Doomhiker/sig}} 17:57, March 1, 2021 (EST)
::I strongly disagree. If the article's content only explains that the item spawns something, but then doesn't say what it spawns or what the things it spawns do, that's not at all helpful or comprehensive. Why we should have a bizarre half-article just because the item can spawn some non-Mario things is beyond me. --{{User:Waluigi Time/sig}} 18:23, March 1, 2021 (EST)
 
"The fighter pages. Even if the trophy/list pages have non-Mario content removed, any spirit or trophy info on any fighter's page will still remain."
<br>A question: why should their trophy bios remain? The information doesn't really come from a Mario source does it? {{User:Bazooka Mario/sig}} 17:19, March 1, 2021 (EST)
:The page doesn't aim to affect the fighter pages. The info about their moves also doesn't come from a ''Mario'' source, but it's still there. That's a topic for a future proposal. {{User:Doomhiker/sig}} 17:49, March 1, 2021 (EST)
 
With all due respect to Doomhiker, and my opposition to the premise aside, this proposal is very flawed. To my knowledge, there was not any discussion anywhere else prior to this being proposed, and it shows. There's already been a lot of confusion and disagreement about what should and shouldn't be included in this proposal that could have easily been cleared up if this was discussed. Furthermore, this proposal was originally and still is being purported as "smaller-scale", yet is quickly snowballing out of control into an all-encompassing blanket proposal that, as far as I can tell, is now affecting the majority of our Smash coverage, for the most part only stopping short of pages that would be deleted entirely. (And I take serious issue with this as well - several of these subjects have been added after many users already voted and aren't comparable with what was already included in the proposal, which while allowed, is a very bad idea for something as delicate as Smash coverage.) Many of these subjects simply aren't at all comparable with each other and have been tossed in with no regards to their effects on gameplay, and some of Doomhiker's statements make me believe that this ignorance of gameplay is ''by design'', which I find very concerning. Even trophies, stickers, and spirits, some of the most closely related things on this list, aren't 100% comparable. Trophies are a bit easier to deal with since they're really just collectibles, but what about non-Mario stickers that have effects on Mario characters specifically, or non-Mario spirits that have Mario characters in their spirit battles? How are we supposed to organize those in a way that doesn't immediately appear awful and inconsistent to our readers?
 
tl;dr This proposal, while claiming to be "smaller-scale", is far too broad and trying to clump together too many unrelated subjects. I strongly suggest either canceling this proposal for the time being and starting a discussion instead to iron out the issues, or opposing it for the same reasons so we can come back to it later. --{{User:Waluigi Time/sig}} 11:23, March 2, 2021 (EST)
:ok so. No offense to anyone but. There was actually quite a bit of discussion about doing the things this proposal aims to do on the discord a couple weeks ago. The only thing that has been added to the proposal since it was created was the subspace army, the rest were going to be in the proposal from the start. If someone wants to look up say a list of trophies in super smash brothers for the nintendo 23ds xl & watch they're more likely to look on the smash wiki other than here, I don't think we should be the wiki with the biggest trophy lists because ''this is the mario wiki''. I see no reason not to remove all these things, they're related in that they're completely irrelevant to mario as a series. All of the items listed here except Assist Trophies don't have much of an effect on gameplay beyond status effects. non-mario stickers that only affect mario characters or non-mario spirits that have mario characters in their spirit battles shouldnt be covered imo, their only relation with the mario series is by proxy. {{User:TheDarkStar/sig}} 13:26, March 2, 2021 (EST)
::Well I'm glad to hear there was at least some discussion on this prior, though I don't think there was enough since there are still glaring issues that were already pointed out in the first two days of this proposal. Your stance on the stickers is contradictory to what Doomhiker has already said (he said they should be kept), and rightfully so. Removing items that only specific Mario characters can use for the sake of removing content that's not relevant to the Mario series makes absolutely no sense. I don't think I need to explain why. Similarly, I don't see any value in removing coverage of battles that Mario characters fight in for the sake of removing content not relevant to the Mario series. I think you're shifting the goal posts a bit here, since a tangible connection to the Mario series has been pointed out and now you're just devaluing those things entirely. --{{User:Waluigi Time/sig}} 13:43, March 2, 2021 (EST)
 
I think ultimately, the fact that the ''Mario'' representation in ''Smash'' covers ''four separate franchises'', countless subseries, and a disproportionately large amount of ''every'' smaller factor of each of the games that saying "not Mario related" to any portion of it is incredibly shortsighted. As mentioned, ''Mario'' characters can already use the items/spirits/stickers/whathaveyou, and honestly, considering unlike any other franchise represented, the representation in question is so large it can't just be summarized in a few sentences, that not going all the way with explaining it is doing nothing but a disservice to our readers. And whether they'd look on Smashwiki or not is irrelevant; not only are we not at all bound by what a separate wiki does, but Smashwiki is a ''totally'' different animal full of fan jargon, other fan-related stuff, and absolutely no consideration for casual players of the game. So no, removing that stuff from here, where it is written in a way normal people can understand, is a shortsighted thing to do that will do nothing but leave behind a bunch of glaring half-articles that won't look good no matter how you slice it. [[User:Doc von Schmeltwick|Doc von Schmeltwick]] ([[User talk:Doc von Schmeltwick|talk]]) 14:39, March 2, 2021 (EST)
 
My concern is that deleting so much Smash content without relocating it elsewhere will result in a lot of wasted time & effort. As Doc said, SmashWiki is filled with fan jargon & does not neutrally accommodate for both causal and competitive players. Personally I'd want an alternative ''Super Smash Bros.'' wiki for the content to be relocated to (honestly an alternative for any big Nintendo franchise in the Mario Wiki format would be nice) so that all this content isn't wasted and so it can reach its potential. [[User:Results May Vary|Results May Vary]] ([[User talk:Results May Vary|talk]]) 15:24, March 2, 2021 (EST)
 
@Waluigi Time, all the options in here have something in common; they're lists with some Mario content, but heaps of completely unrelated fluff. It's far from too broad: I specifically designed this to avoid affecting stages, fighter pages, the game pages, and to avoid having any item page deleted. There's been years' worth of discussions about this and related subject; no need to delay it more. I'm not cancelling. I did not say that stickers should be kept; I made it clear that stickers that do absolutely zilch when it comes to the franchise (not being equip able by Mario characters, as unlike spirits or assist what sticks can be removed is fighter-specific, or not being from the actual franchise. Removing non-Mario items makes sense. We're the Mario wiki, not a Smash wiki, not a general video game wiki. Like, if we for some odd reason we had a page on ''Sonic Adventure'' because of some dated policy, would that be called removing content for the sake of removing content? We can't just cover anything we feel like covering; there needs to be limits, and imo the wiki is still passing those limits.I'm also not trying to devalue anything; we just aren't the type of wiki which needs this stuff.
@Doc Smashwikis problems are shortcoming should have no effect on what we do with '''this''' wiki. We shouldn't keep unneeded content just to make up for an unrelated shit wiki, as we don't exist to make up for other wikis' shortcomings. In addition, a Mario Wiki article with only Mario content isn't going to leave "half-articles", it'll leave articles which are complete in the context of the Mario Wiki and the Mario franchise. It's not shortsighted to say that Akira, a character that has zilch to do with the franchise besides for appearing in a game in a completely different franchise, is unrelated to Mario. "not going all the way with it" isn't going to disservice our readers; this is a Mario Wiki, so we only need to cover the actual Mario content, doing so isn't "going halfway", and it's not like Smash games are Mario games.
@RMV, again, the failings of other wikis shouldn't effect our own wiki. It's not wasted effort; anyone can go and look up the revision history and copy-paste templates if they're really desperate. It's a wiki, some content, no matter what, will end up being deleted or edited to the point of being unrecognizable. {{User:Doomhiker/sig}} 17:57, March 2, 2021 (EST)
:That's the problem. You're looking at it from the angle of "they are all lists of Smash stuff", I'm looking at it from the angle of "these are separate kinds of subjects which should be dealt with separately", a position that as far as I'm aware is historically consistent with how we've always done things. They are similar ''articles'', yes, but completely different subjects, and you could make any ridiculous blanket proposal you want by taking that logic and running with it. Ideally, this would be split into four proposals - collectibles (trophies, stickers, spirits), customizations (Mii gear), enemies (Subspace Army and Smash Run), and an Assist Trophy proposal, possibly split even further to account for the nuances of the different collectibles. I understand you meant that only non-Mario stickers which have effects specific to Mario characters would be kept, my apologies if that was unclear - I was specifically referring to TheDarkStar's position that non-Mario stickers and spirits should be removed regardless of any relation to the Mario franchise (this was also what my "devaluing" content was reflected towards). As for the Sonic Adventure comparison, I find it very hard to imagine any scenario in which we would have justified a Sonic Adventure page, and frankly I'm not a fan of comparisons like this. A comparison that would make more sense would be Banjo and Conker, but even still there's really nothing you can 100% compare properly to Smash, which the Mario franchise has actually been a part of (and continues to be) since the beginning. --{{User:Waluigi Time/sig}} 18:14, March 2, 2021 (EST)
:You completely neglected to acknowledge my main point of Mario's disproportionately large representation in order to go after some minor side-issue I brought up. Don't do that. ''Mario'', ''Donkey Kong'', ''Yoshi'', and ''Wario'' are all treated as separate franchises by it, and that's not even getting into the different subseries (Super Mario, Dr. Mario, Mario Kart, Wrecking Crew, etc.) it covers. Additionally, the mere fact that Mario is always the most prominent character on the covers, first one on the character select, first character trophy, and treated as the most basic "default" character points to it being at least more than a little related. And before anyone goes "but World of Light so it's really ''Kirby''," Sakurai is on record for saying his original choices for starter characters in that were Palutena and/or Bayonetta, and they're definitely minor characters in the grand scheme of things. And need I remind you it's not just "Smash," but ''SUPER'' Smash ''BROS.''? [[User:Doc von Schmeltwick|Doc von Schmeltwick]] ([[User talk:Doc von Schmeltwick|talk]]) 18:15, March 2, 2021 (EST)
::The fact that ''Mario'' content take up a decent chunk of the franchise's content doesn't automatically mean that we should treat it similar to a ''Mario'' content, or give depth to droves and droves of unrelated stuff. Also, in SSBU, there's 12 Mario-related fighters; out of the 87 fighters with the DLC, that means that all four of the ''Mario'' franchises in Smash only take up a mere 13.79% percent of the roster. That's not a bit of "disproportionately large representation" even relative to other series: Pokemon has 9 (counting PKMN Trainer as 3) equating to 10.34%, Fire Emblem has 8 equating to 9.2%. Mario being the first on the character select, being prominent on the cover doesn't mean that the Smash franchise is squared and mainly focused on Mario and that we thus should cover it en mass, when it comes to cover art Link and Pikachu both have been just as prominent (Pikachu is flat out front and center for Smash 4 Wii U); I don't see the correlation between box art and coverage. Mario's likely the "default" character here simply because he's one of Nintendo's most profitable and popular characters; not because he defines Smash. Also, the Super Bros title thing is looking too deep into it; plenty of game have had "super" in their name, and the bros. part may just be referring to the variety of characters, sometimes with a degree of familiarity. (Bros. has also been in other video game titles too, like ''Snow Bros.''). {{User:Doomhiker/sig}} 18:38, March 2, 2021 (EST)
:::Having "Super" and "Bros." at the same time is clearly derivative, though, and pretending it might not be is just silly. [[User:Doc von Schmeltwick|Doc von Schmeltwick]] ([[User talk:Doc von Schmeltwick|talk]]) 18:48, March 2, 2021 (EST)
::::It could be derivative for the reason that it draws more attention from the many potential buyers who are acknowledged with Nintendo's most popular franchise, Super Mario Bros., which would make it a purely marketing-based decision. Same thing can be said about Mario’s prominence on promotional material—his recognizability is being exploited with the endgame being larger sales. That doesn't change the fact that the Smash Bros. series is not solely focused on Mario with his role in these games being one as big as Zelda's, Corrin's, and Duck Hunt Duo's. In fact, Mario hasn’t always been the only central boxart figure. Regarding the title, there is a similar case in ''Super Mario World 2: Yoshi's Island'' where the title pretends there's a significant link between this game and ''Super Mario World'' when there isn't, probably also with the intention of driving more sales. {{User:Koopa con Carne/Sig}} 20:24, March 2, 2021 (EST)
 
So I have to ask, why should Smash take a backseat to other crossovers anyway? There's a lot of franchises represented in Smash, sure, but that doesn't at all diminish the prominent role the Mario franchise has in it. It's just as important as any other franchise, and in all honesty probably way more important than the majority of them because, well, it's Mario. I would argue that "too many franchises" alone being the reason for not covering it is getting dangerously close to the practice of [[Talk:Super Mario Bros. 35#List of daily challenges|not covering things]] because [[Talk:List of Mario Golf: World Tour tournaments#Tournament section|there's "too much information"]]. And at that point, what even determines if there's "too many franchises"? The amount of franchises represented in the game alone? (And in Smash's case specifically, how would this be determined? Do random games getting, for example, a handful of trophies or spirits but nothing else, count toward the total? Or is it only franchises that have fighters, stages, and items? Potentially only some of those criteria?) Is it the percentage of Mario content in the game? (Again, how would this be determined? Only certain types of content? Absolutely everything in the game?) And how would either of these standards not be completely arbitrary, especially when software updates or DLC can skew these numbers at any time? Or are there no standards whatsoever and it's just some sort of gut level feeling? (Probably not the best way to run a wiki especially if you at all value consistency) This doesn't just affect Smash, realistically it affects our coverage of crossovers in general. Would we axe a good chunk of our Mario & Sonic coverage if they added a third franchise to the mix? If not, what about a fourth or a fifth? How arbitrarily big does a crossover have to become before we decide "nah, this isn't important enough to Mario anymore"? Will we ever get a crossover even close to as big as Smash again for any of what I said to even be important? Highly unlikely, but these are still questions that should probably be answered. --{{User:Waluigi Time/sig}} 10:49, March 3, 2021 (EST)
:My guess is that by the nature of many franchises being repped, this makes Smash less of a Mario game compared to Fortune Street and Mario & Sonic games. It's also suggested in the Super Mario Bros. Encyclopedia (yeah I know) that Mario doesn't play a major role compared to the classifications of the other crossovers. Instead of taking half of the content, Mario takes only a fraction. If they added a third franchise to Mario & Sonic, I still think proportionally, Mario is still a good chunk. Asking about fourth and fifth does muddy that water a bit, but there's not many games that do strictly four or five way crossovers that I can think of. Usually when it's more than three (even three I'm not having much idea) it's a general crossover of multiple franchises. I don't think it's relevant to ask. {{User:Bazooka Mario/sig}} 00:31, March 4, 2021 (EST)
::With all due respect to the Encyclopedia (who am I kidding, it doesn't deserve any) I really disagree with that. Mario is just as important to Smash as Link, Kirby, or Pikachu. To say that he's less important just because of the sheer amount of characters represented is looking at it from the wrong perspective, imo. (And if this was referring to the Mario franchise rather than Mario himself, swap out characters for franchises. My argument remains the same otherwise.) --{{User:Waluigi Time/sig}} 11:09, March 4, 2021 (EST)
 
@7feetunder: The "other NIWA wikis don't do this" argument has been used many times before and the response is always we don't base our content on other wikis. Do you care to expand on why you think following in the footsteps of those other wikis is worth emulating here? --{{User:Waluigi Time/sig}} 11:31, March 4, 2021 (EST)
:Because we're the ''sole'' exception here. Obviously other wikis do things different from us (Pikipedia allows strategies, Smash Wiki covers the competitive scene), but it's still really telling that we're the ''only'' ones (besides Smash Wiki, of course) that cover ''Smash'' this much. If there were a good reason for it, I'd understand, but there is none. Like I said, the ''only'' difference between ''Mario'' and other franchises represented in ''Smash'' is that ''Mario'' has more of it. It still only accounts for a fraction of the representation. It's not marketed as a ''Mario'' game, it's marketed as a massive Nintendo (and increasingly, non-Nintendo) crossover fighter, and ''Mario'' just happens to be Nintendo's flagship franchise, so it gets the most reps. ''[[SSX on Tour]]'' has three ''Mario'' reps as playable characters, so unless you think we should have full coverage of ''that'' game, ''yes'', we ''do'' have to decide what crossovers qualify for full coverage and which ones don't, otherwise this wiki would be bloated with extraneous articles and information. If a game comes out that we're not sure of, that's what discussions and proposals are for. Because let's be real, who's going to Super Mario Wiki to look up info on Solid Snake? {{User:7feetunder/sig}} 14:54, March 4, 2021 (EST)
::Literally me 10 years ago? Anyways, I personally feel the title similarity ''at the very least'' indicates it is (or at least initially was) marketed as a Mario ''derivative'', with the increasing divergence being comparable to the DK, Yoshi, and Wario games and how little they tend to have to do with the "core" Mario much of the time. [[User:Doc von Schmeltwick|Doc von Schmeltwick]] ([[User talk:Doc von Schmeltwick|talk]]) 15:22, March 4, 2021 (EST)
:::You're just sidestepping the issue here. I asked for something more than "other wikis don't do this" and all you gave me was "we're the only one that does this", which is just the same thing. What are your reasons for thinking that our current Smash coverage is an issue that don't take any other wikis into account? Admittedly you do bring up an interesting point regarding SSX on Tour, though I'd like to point out that we [[MarioWiki:Coverage|already have guidelines]] for distinguishing between proper crossovers and mere guest appearances not worthy of full coverage. I'd whole-heartedly categorize SSX on Tour as the latter since 1. It's part of a game series that already existed and 2. The game was released on multiple consoles and had the Mario content cut from the rest of them, clearly showing that this was never intended to be a Mario crossover game, just a fun extra for the Gamecube version. (Sidenote, I find it humorous how the supporters for this proposal keep rhetorically asking "who's going to read this on our wiki anyway" while handwaving away examples of people who actually have done that as irrelevant to the proposal. If it's not relevant, don't bring it up? Not saying you're one of the ones handwaving, but this isn't the first time it's been used.) --{{User:Waluigi Time/sig}} 17:19, March 4, 2021 (EST)
::::I'm not sidestepping anything. Only the first three sentences of my previous comment had anything to do with the "other wikis don't do this" bit, the rest stand on their own. Not sure how you got that impression, but it's false. Anyway, the point I was trying to convey with even bothering to bring those up (and I realize I didn't make this clear enough) is that if ''we'' were for instance, a Pokémon wiki, would you still be advocating for full coverage of ''Smash''? Would you go to a ''Fire Emblem'' wiki (or any other franchise with large representation in ''Smash'') expecting to find articles on Rathalos and Mr. Saturn? What makes ''Mario'' so special that ''Smash'' needs to be treated like full-on ''Mario'' games instead of the massive multi-franchise crossovers they are? There's nothing different about ''Mario''<nowiki>'s</nowiki> representation in ''Smash'' other than that there's more of it. 1/3 of ''[[Nintendo Land]]'''s attractions/minigames are themed off of ''Mario'' and its offshoots, but we still only cover the ''Mario'' content, even deleting Monita's article via proposal (and that's a standalone game and Wii U exclusive, so the arguments you made against ''SSX on Tour'' don't apply). Lastly, about the "who would look this stuff up here" bit: just because ''someone'' may find some use for us having an article on Rathalos doesn't mean we should have one, I'm sure ''someone'' out there also thought it was useful for us to have a list of characters who kissed Mario, but we still got rid of that, and for good reason. The only reasons to look up Solid Snake here instead of, say, Wikipedia or a ''Metal Gear'' wiki, is because you either A) want to know how he relates to the ''Mario'' franchise (with the answer being "he doesn't, outside of being in ''Smash'') or B) you are already have prior knowledge of Super Mario Wiki's ''Smash'' coverage and want info specifically on his ''Smash'' appearances (in which case Smash Wiki is much more comprehensive). So, it's not ''irrelevant'', it's just not good enough. {{User:7feetunder/sig}} 01:01, March 6, 2021 (EST)
:::::So here's the thing. I wouldn't necessarily just go on any wiki and push for them to start fully covering Smash if they don't already. Every wiki does things their own way and that's fine. But we already do cover Smash, and I personally see no benefit to removing that coverage. As for Nintendo Land, I wouldn't really consider that a proper Mario crossover either since if you'll notice, no Mario characters or locations actually physically appear. It's all just theme park attractions and Miis in costumes, but no elements of the Mario series appear proper. --{{User:Waluigi Time/sig}} 11:56, March 6, 2021 (EST)
::::::"We already cover the ''Smash'' content, so we might as well keep it" is not an argument. It's conservative, change-fearing hogwash. Whether or not the ''Smash'' content already exists on the wiki ''should not be a factor whatsoever''. Things change, and so does this wiki. There was a time when people made proposals to split levels from their worlds that ''failed''. Nowadays, such a thing would be preposterous. If that can change, than so can our ''Smash'' coverage. There is a benefit to removing it - less ''Mario''-irrelevant junk on our wiki. ''Smash'' gets more and more content with each installment, which means more and more articles on ''Mario''-irrelevant fighters, items, stages, and bosses every time a new game or DLC comes out. It's not even consistent; we have articles on every Subspace Emissary stage but almost nothing on ''Ultimate''<nowiki>'s</nowiki> World of Light. {{User:7feetunder/sig}} 18:38, March 6, 2021 (EST)
:::::::That wasn't the point I was trying to make at all. I'm not saying "change is bad", I'm saying "I don't think this particular change is good". There's a difference between being afraid of change for the sake of it and disagreeing with a specific change being made. I don't consider Smash "Mario-irrelevant junk" and therefore don't think removing it would be a good idea. Also, I've played World of Light and watched Subspace Emissary, I don't see any inconsistency between our coverage of the two since they're vastly different game modes, but I'd be happy to give my thoughts on it if you care to point it out. --{{User:Waluigi Time/sig}} 19:18, March 6, 2021 (EST)
::::::::If you don't see any inconsistency, you aren't looking hard enough. Since you say you've played World of Light, you know that it's split into three major overworlds, each of which has sub-areas. We don't have articles on any of them, just a brief mention of the DK Island sub-area (which is a recreation of the ''DKC'' Kongo Jungle map) on the [[Kongo Jungle]] and [[Donkey Kong Island]] articles. In fact, just about the only thing in World of Light we ''do'' cover is the bosses. But Subspace Emissary? Full coverage of every stage, articles on [[Subspace (Super Smash Bros. Brawl)|Subspace]] itself, the [[Subspace Gunship]], [[Subspace Bomb]], [[Dark Cannon]], the [[Isle of Ancients]], [[Shadow Bug]]s... what makes The Subspace Emissary so much more worthy of coverage than World of Light? {{User:7feetunder/sig}} 19:47, March 6, 2021 (EST)
:::::::::Subspace Emissary's stages aren't comparable to World of Light, which is really just a glorified world map. (Although we do have an article for [[World of Trophies|Subspace Emissary's world map]] - which technically should be merged to the Brawl article, since there was a successful TPP back in ''2010'' to merge it with Subspace Emissary, which has since been merged to the Brawl page, but it was never enacted, and there's no counterproposal that I know of.) But if it's not covered as well as it should be, then it should be expanded. World of Light doesn't exactly have a lot of content unique to it that we would even give coverage to. The Spirit battles aren't changed at all from their Spirit Board counterparts, and the bosses except for Galeem and Dharkon can be fought in Classic Mode routes. There's not even any unique stages there besides the final battle, which is arguably a very heavily modified Final Destination. --{{User:Waluigi Time/sig}} 20:03, March 6, 2021 (EST)
If it helps any of you feel better, I've been hard at work relocating the content (and rewriting) to another wiki (CC-BY-SA compatible) over the past week. Might not be the correct place to mention this, but I can see that ''Smash'' coverage is a divisive issue on this wiki, likely in part because some have been used to it on here for several years. [[User:Results May Vary|Results May Vary]] ([[User talk:Results May Vary|talk]]) 09:25, March 12, 2021 (EST)
:Obviously I'd prefer the content to stay here, but I appreciate that it won't be going to waste at least (assuming this proposal does pass). I think a more casual Smash Bros. wiki would be a good resource. --{{User:Waluigi Time/sig}} 16:59, March 12, 2021 (EST)
 
=====Glowsquid's comment=====
I wasn't sure about posting this comment since it's really more about my thoughts about the wiki's coverage of Smash in general rather than the specific points discussed in the proposal, but clearly it's what this comments section turned toward so whatever. At least I'll have something I can link back to.
 
<b>A Mario crossover vs a adjectiveless crossover</b>


I don’t feel Smash is the same thing as other crossovers featured on the wiki like the Mario & Sonic series, Fortune Street, etc. For Mario & Sonic, the pitch is having Mario and Sonic together, characters with a certain real-world history, is the core premise of the game. Something like Fortune Street is a bit more distanced because it was a long-running franchise before its Mario installments,, but even then a short research on the source series history show earlier installments did not have branded characters sot at least for Fortune Street and its DS predecessor specifically, the combination of Mario and Dragon Quest in a board game is the draw, and thus is makes sense to cover the game in full since Fortune Street is a game that has Mario at the core of its DNA, ie it’s a Mario crossover.  
Besides, the List of ''Super Smash Bros.'' fighters pages feel kind of awkward that certain crossover characters do not have their information listed there with other non-''Super Mario'' characters, so this proposal aims to rectify that.


By contrast, the pitch for Smash Bros. is not “Super Mario vs everything else”, it’s ‘’Nintendo crossover’’ . Since Mario is Nintendo’s mascot franchise and one of its biggest and most financially successful, there’s obviously a lot of content mined from Mario and its derived series… but not so much it can be said the basis, or cornerstone of the crossover nor is there any authorial statement it is foremost Mario with the other franchises along for the ride.
The fighters on the list pages do not have their profiles, and I don't see why the crossover characters should have them but not the fighters already in the list pages, so if this proposal passes, all of that will be deleted too. This '''includes''' the Profiles section on '''other crossover pages''' like [[Knuckles]], [[Deku Baba]], [[Zangief]], and so forth, since it would be illogical for them to keep their profiles but not the protagonists of the ''Super Smash Bros.'' series, an inconsistency that's already present. But the status of the ''SSB'' content in the History section of crossover content OTHER THAN fighters in the ''Super Smash Bros.'' series can be for a future proposal.


Oh yeah, the name. It’s probably true ‘’Super Smash Brothers’’ was specifically meant to riff on Super Mario Brothers, but one could just argue it was done for the pun rather than to highlight Mario is meant to be the star of the show. I don’t feel it changes what I argue above.
This will affect the following pages, and their ''Super Smash Bros.'' information (excluding profiles) will go into the following articles:


<b>On cascading coverage and why I think our way of covering Smash Bros. goes into nonsense territory</b>
*[[Link]] → [[List of fighters debuting in Super Smash Bros.]]
*[[Isabelle]] → [[List of fighters debuting in Super Smash Bros. Ultimate]]
*[[Villager]] → [[List of fighters debuting in Super Smash Bros. for Nintendo 3DS / Wii U]]
*[[Kirby]] → [[List of fighters debuting in Super Smash Bros.]]
*[[Sonic]] → [[List of fighters debuting in Super Smash Bros. Brawl]]
*[[Mii]] → [[List of fighters debuting in Super Smash Bros. for Nintendo 3DS / Wii U]]
*[[R.O.B.]] → [[List of fighters debuting in Super Smash Bros. Brawl]]
*[[Kirby]] → [[List of fighters debuting in Super Smash Bros.]]
*[[Banjo]] → [[List of fighters debuting in Super Smash Bros. Ultimate]]
*[[Kazooie]] → [[List of fighters debuting in Super Smash Bros. Ultimate]]
*[[Mega Man]] → [[List of fighters debuting in Super Smash Bros. for Nintendo 3DS / Wii U]]
*[[Pac-Man]] → [[List of fighters debuting in Super Smash Bros. for Nintendo 3DS / Wii U]]


Smash Bros is a very modular game with a lot of content and mechanics that interact with each other. Currently the thinking is -> Mario characters are playable in the game (and there is other Mario stuff) -> The game gets a page (that part I don’t object to) -> The other characters/items/stages that are not from Mario also get a page, because Mario characters can fight those characters or use those tiems. It’s all quite logical on the surface
There's also Samus, and there's a proposal to currently split the article, so if that passes, her ''Super Smash Bros.'' information will stay on the [[List of fighters debuting in Super Smash Bros.]] page.


The comparison I’m about to make is quite niche and certainly painfully nerdy, but I feel it’s the one that most directly describe the way we do things right now and why I think they’re flawed: Let’s imagine for a moment that there is a wiki on the Mobile Suit Gundam media franchise (there’s one, but picture one that is more exhaustive and like us in term of coverage). Now a good Gundam wiki would cover the Super Robot Wars franchise: for those not familiar. Super Robot Wars is a long-running series of crossover video games that combines multiple franchises from the mech genre in turn-based strategy games that link all those franchises in one continuous storyline (usually). It makes sense: while Gundam is not the basis of the crossver (just as how Mario isn’t really the basis of Smash Bros.), the original anime and its countless sequels and alternate universe spinoffs makes up a large chunk of Super Robot War’s content, so it makes sense to talk about it.
Note: A short summary of the character's role, or any connections to ''Super Mario'', will remain intact, similarly to how [[Mario#History]] has a short summary on Mario throughout his appearance while the main history page on Mario is located at [[History of Mario]].


However, if that Gundam Wiki applied the same logic to Super Robot War as we do to Smash Bros, it will go a lot beyond just talking about Super Robot Wars as it is relevant to Gundam. It would have individual pages on the mechs, characters, locations fictional concepts, etc. of other massively popular franchises like Super Dimension Fortress Macross, Mobile Police Patlabor, Neon Genesis Evangelion, the original characters and storylines of Super Robot Wars itself and countless other properties not mentioned, not just because the fictional storyline of Super Robot Wars have those properties intersect, but because the format of Super Robot Wars means you can have the robots from Gundam fight the robots from Macross in the game’s turn-based battles and that counts as an interaction, just as we justify having a page for Joker Persona 5, not because that character has any substantial narrative or real-world ties to the Mario franchise, but because he is playable in a crossover video game Mario also appears in, and Mario can punch him.  
There are three options: Option 1 will enact all of the changes above, Option 2 will remove only the ''Super Smash Bros.'' profiles from pages on non-''Super Mario'' content, and Option 3 opposes everything in this proposal.


Now consider there are well over a dozen of Super Robot Wars games (though granted a subset of it only features the series original characters), exhaustive coverage would mean you end up neck-deep into ''complete nonsense'' territory, with well over hundreds of articles on robots, characters, lore etc, that ultimately don’t have any link to the Gundam franchise beyond that they appear in a crossover game, not a Gundam game, but a crossover game that Gundam appears in, taking the warped view that Super Robot Wars is not a crossover game that includes Gundam content, but a Gundam game that includes other fictional franchises. And I can take the analogy further: just as some users here appeal to keeping Smash Bros content not necessarily because of its relevance to Mario but because the existing Smash Bros resource is arguably lacking in certain regards, some users in this hypothetical Gundam wiki scenario could feel that, because of Wikipedia being what it is and the lack of dedicated ressources for the more obscure properties represented, the state of the matter would mean that the Gundam Wiki’s would ironically have the best pages on certains characters, etc, and even if a  page on the protagonist of Detonator Orgun does not further the reader’s understand of Gundam as a fictional universe or real-world media franchise, that it should stay as an useful ressource to the western mech fandom. But the "we shouldn't base ourselves on other wikis" goes both ways; just as the fact NIWA wikis don't cover Smash Bros anywhere as rigolously as we do is not an argument in itself for scaling back our coverage, the feeling that the main Smash Bros ressource is lacking in some respects is not an argument to keep it either.
'''Proposer''': {{User|Super Mario RPG}}<br>
'''Deadline''': June 4, 2024, 23:59 GMT


I was going to leave it at that, but the exchange featuring 7feetunder made me wonder... if we have page on Smash-exclusive characters on the basis of "Well you can fight those characters  and pick up those items while playing as Mario characters", then for what reason really do we make a distinction for those EA gamecube games. The Mario characters in SSX and NBA Street V3 are just as fully realized as the other playable characters and not segregated to their own mode, meaning they can trade hoops and fouls just as well. Those games being released on other systems do not change that. Bring on the {{fake link|Shaquille O'Neal}} page I say! --[[User:Glowsquid|Glowsquid]] ([[User talk:Glowsquid|talk]]) 11:32, March 6, 2021 (EST)
====Option 1: Full support====
:Those are guest appearances unique to a single release of a multiplatform game, whilst in ''Smash'', Mario's depicted as a headliner character consistently. Those examples are more similar to Link in SoulCalibur II or all those random characters in that one Mortal Kombat game (or was it Tekken?). [[User:Doc von Schmeltwick|Doc von Schmeltwick]] ([[User talk:Doc von Schmeltwick|talk]]) 16:52, March 6, 2021 (EST)
#{{User|Super Mario RPG}} As proposer.
::I'm not sure if I 100% buy the distinction between Smash Bros. and the Mario & Sonic games. Barring the mere name, what's making Mario & Sonic a Mario crossover and not Smash Bros, and is it arbitrary to cut off the distinction of a part-way Mario game after a third franchise comes in? I know the Super Mario Bros. Encyclopedia kinda stuck at making Mario play a minor role in Smash Bros compared to a major role in Mario & Sonic, but that might owe to proportion of content rather than Mario's less dominant coexistence with the other franchises. I guess I can help in thinking that question over, that we don't consider Smash Bros a Pikmin crossover or a Animal Crossing crossover or a Legend of Zelda crossover, or it'll be odd to view it that way, compared to seeing Mario & Sonic as a ''Sonic'' crossover too or Fortune Street as a Dragon Quest crossover. Perhaps approaching from that angle can help people see that you mean by Smash Bros. having Mario crossed in does not a Mario crossover make. However, I do think the point about Shaquille O'Neal isn't super strong since you can argue guest characters in a game that isn't Mario, ''but'' my own devil's advocate asks, why would we have Joker's page, who is also arguably a guest character in Smash Bros., a game that isn't Mario as well? Why is Joker more justified than Shaquille O'Neal? Where does guest end and crossover begin? [[File:PM Mariothininking.png|20px]] {{User:Bazooka Mario/sig}} 00:33, March 7, 2021 (EST)


==New features==
====Option 2: Trim profiles only====
''None at the moment.''
#{{User|Super Mario RPG}} Secondary


==Removals==
====Option 3: Oppose====
''None at the moment.''
#{{User|Axis}} I believe it's unnecessary.
 
#{{User|Nintendo101}} It makes intuitive sense to just list the ''Super Smash Bros.'' info on the pages of the character when available. (As a side note, the ''Super Smash Bros.'' series has a pretty intimate relationship with the ''Super Mario'' franchise, and I do not think we should be omitting coverage here just because SmashWiki exists. We don't address topics the same way.)
==Changes==
#{{User|Tails777}} If the characters have an article, I see no reason why Smash stuff should be singled out and removed just because it's not Mario related.
===Decide where to use pre-release and unused content images===
#{{user|Doc von Schmeltwick}} - Per all, especially Nintendo101
This is something I've been trying to figure out, but as far as I'm aware, we don't actually have a guideline for. Where exactly should pre-release screenshots and unused graphics belong on articles?
#{{User|Hewer}} It's standard practice (and also pretty logical) to list any time a subject happens to appear alongside Mario stuff. [[Captain N: The Game Master]] is a good example - it's considered a guest appearance, so it doesn't get full coverage, but we still mention things' appearances there if they happen to be covered on the wiki for some other reason, e.g. [[Slime (Dragon Quest)]]. So why should Smash (where Mario stuff perhaps has a greater role than in Captain N) be the one exception? The proposal tries to argue about organisation and finding information, but I'd say unnecessarily splitting a character's information across multiple pages is the real bad organisation here. If people really can't bear to scroll through some Smash stuff in order to find what they're looking for (which, mind, might be the Smash stuff anyway), they can use the contents links at the top of the article to jump to particular sections no problem. And also, to be frank, I don't really understand what the proposal is talking about regarding "profiles".
*[[Parabomb]] uses a pre-release screenshot from ''[[Paper Mario: Sticker Star]]''. The level shown is not in the finished game, and the caption does not indicate that this is not from the final release. Additionally, I sometimes find unused sprites used on games' galleries, even when they should go on its respective unused content article instead.
#{{User|FanOfRosalina2007}} Per all, especially Hewer's reasoning.
*[[Bandit]], [[Gallery:Koopa Paratroopa]], [[Gallery:Green Shell]], and [[Gallery:Red Shell]] contain unused graphics from ''[[Paper Mario]]'', ''[[Mario Kart Wii]]'', ''[[Super Mario 64]]'', and ''[[Paper Mario: The Origami King]]'', explicitly labeled as unused. This seems to be the most common situation.
#{{user|MegaBowser64}} Per all of yall. Personally I don't think it's a big deal to leave Smash info on character pages. There isn't much harm done.
*Sometimes, unused appearances are not mentioned at all, even when it would benefit the article. [["Deep Cuts" Toad]], a character exclusive to ''[[Paper Mario: Color Splash]]'', has new, unused graphics in the data for ''[[Paper Mario: The Origami King]]''. These both [[:File:Deep Cuts Toad PMTOK sprite.png|show how he looks in the game's art style]] (thinner lines, different perspective, redrawn hands) and [[:File:Deep Cuts Toad PMTOK back.png|show him from the front]] for the first time, revealing that he has a worried expression.
I propose four options on how to handle this:
*'''Option 1: Allow pre-release and unused images without indicators.''' An graphic not seen in-game, or a screenshot not from the final release, can be used without such descriptions.
*'''Option 2: Allow pre-release and unused images, but only when using indicators.''' These images can be used on articles, but must be explicitly labeled as being unused and within the data, from a trailer, or such.
*'''Option 3: Do not allow pre-release and unused content.''' This information is restricted to use on the game's respective pre-release and unused content article, and should not be used on pages outside of that.
*'''Option 4: Do nothing.''' No guideline should be established.
 
'''Proposer''': {{User|Scrooge200}}<br>
'''Deadline''': March 27, 2021, 23:59 GMT
====Option 1====
====Option 2====
#{{User|Scrooge200}} This option seems the most logical.
#{{User|Waluigi Time}} I think we'd be doing a disservice to our readers not to show it, but we also shouldn't be potentially misleading while doing so.
#{{User|RHG1951}} Per Scrooge200 and Waluigi Time.
#{{User|TheFlameChomp}} Per all. I do not feel that there is a problem with including the images in relevant articles, but it certainly should be clarified where they come from.
#{{User|Ray Trace}} Per all.
#{{User|Results May Vary}} For many years, there have been official pre-release screenshots on pages that have not been marked as such. It's about time that we had a standard to establish this. Per all.
#{{User|Metalex123}} Agreed with everyone else. Per all.
#{{User|Archivist Toadette}} It'll certainly be easier for our readers. Better have ''that'' going for us at least.
#{{User|Alex95}} - All for clarification.
#{{User|Wynn Liaw}} Per all.
#{{User|Hewer}} The most logical and helpful option. Per all.
#{{User|Mister Wu}} Nice to give visibility to cut content, but since it's cut it must be clarified that it's not released material
#{{User|Keyblade Master}} There have been times when I was thrown off from this.
#{{User|BBQ Turtle}} Per all, seems like the most sensible option and I thought this was the case anyway.
#{{User|Niiue}} Per all. I'm surprised this wasn't already the rule, tbh.
 
====Option 3====
====Option 4====


====Comments====
====Comments====
<s>[[MarioWiki:Proposals/Archive/61#Trim_the_Smash_Bros_trophies_page|This passed proposal]] already establishes that non-Mario trophies should be removed from dedicated character articles. Check out the bolded sentence and the rationale after it:<blockquote>It's simple. I propose to simply trim those trophies list pages to only the Mario/DK/Wario etc. character and cut the rest. '''This includes crossover characters that have pages on the wiki''' - while we may have a Link page because he's in Mario Kart 8, his Smash Bros trophy is about Link the protagonist of his own independent intellectual property and not Link the funny Mario Kart 8 man, and it leads to the bizarre situation of having a listing of Link but not the character his series is named after. Best keep things simple. </blockquote> I believe if option 3 were to win in this proposal, that decision would be overturned.</s> {{User:Koopa con Carne/Sig}} 15:06, May 28, 2024 (EDT), edited 15:14, May 28, 2024 (EDT)
:Okay, I'll remove that from the scope of the proposal then. [[User:Super Mario RPG|Super Mario RPG]] ([[User talk:Super Mario RPG|talk]]) 15:09, May 28, 2024 (EDT)
::Wait, hold on, I may be stupid. That simply specifies that the subjects who have pages on the wiki, but do not pertain to the Mario franchise, would be among the trophies trimmed from the trophy pages, but it does not specify that they'd be trimmed from their own pages as well. I confused myself and hopefully I can clear it up following my above comment. {{User:Koopa con Carne/Sig}} 15:13, May 28, 2024 (EDT)
:::I was about to ask about the example of me trimming the profiles from the [[Sonic]] page applies, but now I'm not sure what's going on myself. [[User:Super Mario RPG|Super Mario RPG]] ([[User talk:Super Mario RPG|talk]]) 15:25, May 28, 2024 (EDT)
::::That was about the lists of all trophies per game, not profile sections for individual subjects. Doesn't look like there's any overlap between these proposals. --{{User:Waluigi Time/sig}} 16:14, May 28, 2024 (EDT)


===Move animal names from the Donkey Kong Country series to just their normal names===
I was going to address the opposition by stating that, should this pass, a short summary of each character's ''SSB'' role will remain on the page (See [[Mario#History]] for a similar type of example), but the main information will be on the list of fighters pages. [[User:Super Mario RPG|Super Mario RPG]] ([[User talk:Super Mario RPG|talk]]) 16:42, May 28, 2024 (EDT)
Resuming the proposal that left off [[Talk:Rambi the Rhino|here]] per responses in the comments. As I stated there, these animals are often referred to by just their names e.g. "Rambi", including in the credits of the first Donkey Kong Country, and in instruction manuals.
 
'''Proposer:''' {{User|Keyblade Master}}<br>
'''Deadline:''' April 5, 2021, 23:59 GMT
 
====Support====
#{{User|Keyblade Master}} Per proposal.
#{{User|Scrooge200}} More common and concise.
#{{User|The Mansion}} Sounds good to me.
#{{User|Power Flotzo}} Per all.
#{{User|Results May Vary}} Per all.
#{{User|Archivist Toadette}} Per all.
#{{User|Niiue}} Per all.
#{{User|RickTommy}} Per all; also, I've started a similar discussion [[Talk:Animal Friends#Something I've always wondered|here]].
 
====Oppose====
#{{User|Hewer}} Per Alex95's comment on the original proposal. Princess Peach is usually just Peach, but we use the full name anyway, and it's the same with other characters that have full names like the ''Sonic'' characters (unless it's more obscure like Yoshi's 'full name'). Readers searching for the shorter title isn't a problem because of redirects. That's my understanding at least.
 
====Comments====
@Results May Vary: You need to state your reason for supporting this proposal. {{User:Archivist Toadette/sig}} 16:18, March 22, 2021 (EDT)


@Hewer: Except "Princess Peach" is used all the time, whereas "Rambi the Rhino" is barely ever used. {{User:Keyblade Master/sig}} 16:40, March 22, 2021 (EDT)
Looks like the truncation of the moves helps a lot with accessibility, like on the Villager page listed above. Pages like [[Fox]] still have excessive profiles, and it seems weird to have those there but not on like the corresponding List of trophies pages. [[User:Super Mario RPG|Super Mario RPG]] ([[User talk:Super Mario RPG|talk]]) 17:30, May 29, 2024 (EDT)
:What about 'Princess Daisy'? That's very rarely used as far as I know, and it's still the title. There's also the ''Sonic'' characters who rarely go by their full names within the ''Mario & Sonic'' games. {{User:Hewer/sig}} 16:46, March 22, 2021 (EDT)
:Eh, I'd say it makes sense. The list of trophies pages are only meant to be lists of Mario trophies, but we happen to also have pages describing fighters in Smash, so why not list the trophies there where they're relevant? Again I raise you Captain N - the article about it is only about the show and its relevance to Mario, so we don't mention the appearance of Dragon Quest Slimes on that article since it has nothing to do with Mario in that context, but because we happen to have an article about Slimes for another reason, we mention the appearance there. Also, I find the "accessibility" arguments you keep going for a bit strange - there are people who might want to look at Smash information on this wiki, it's not just some burden that we have to avert people from as best as we can. {{User:Hewer/sig}} 07:54, May 30, 2024 (EDT)
::I'm not too familiar with the Sonic franchise but I assume their full titles would be used within that franchise. I should also bring up the title of Bowser, who's full title is "King Bowser" used quite often in certain games, yet we still just call him "Bowser" since that's still used more often, even in profiles. Regarding Daisy, I'm also not familiar with basically any game she appears in (see my userpage why), but looking through her profile page you seem to be right about that, most cards and stuff title her as just "Daisy" but that can be a seperate discussion. In comparison to that, "Princess Peach" is used way more often on similar cards, along with in-game profiles, so keeping that title still makes the most sense. Back to the Donkey Kong animals, I haven't seen an instance of the full titles being used outside of a single quote from Cranky Kong, which you can see on Rambi's page. Then there's the Tropical Freeze bosses, and the Legion of Stationery in Paper Mario: The Origami King, they have full titles too, but we still simply use their normal name. {{User:Keyblade Master/sig}} 17:27, March 22, 2021 (EDT)


==Miscellaneous==
==Miscellaneous==
''None at the moment.''
''None at the moment.''

Latest revision as of 10:52, May 30, 2024

Image used as a banner for the Proposals page
Current time:
Thursday, May 30th, 17:23 GMT
Proposals can be new features (such as an extension), the removal of previously-added features that have tired out, or new policies that must be approved via consensus before any action is taken.
  • "Vote" periods last for one week.
  • Any user can support or oppose, but must have a strong reason for doing so (not, e.g., "I like this idea!").
  • All proposals must be approved by a majority of voters, including proposals with more than two options.
  • For past proposals, see the proposal archive and the talk page proposal archive.

A proposal section works like a discussion page: comments are brought up and replied to using indents (colons, such as : or ::::) and all edits are signed using the code {{User|User name}}.

How to

Rules

  1. If users have an idea about improving the wiki or managing its community, but feel that they need community approval before acting upon that idea, they may make a proposal about it. They must have a strong argument supporting their idea and be willing to discuss it in detail with the other users, who will then vote about whether or not they think the idea should be used. Proposals should include links to all relevant pages and writing guidelines. Proposals must include a link to the draft page. Any pages that would be largely affected by the proposal should be marked with {{proposal notice}}.
  2. Only registered, autoconfirmed users can create, comment in, or vote on proposals and talk page proposals. Users may vote for more than one option, but they may not vote for every option available.
  3. Proposals end at the end of the day (23:59) one week after voting starts, except for writing guidelines and talk page proposals, which run for two weeks (all times GMT).
    • For example, if a proposal is added at any time on Monday, August 1, 2011, the voting starts immediately and the deadline is one week later on Monday, August 8, at 23:59 GMT.
  4. Every vote should have a strong, sensible reason accompanying it. Agreeing with a previously mentioned reason given by another user is accepted (including "per" votes), but tangential comments, heavy sarcasm, and other misleading or irrelevant quips are just as invalid as providing no reason at all.
  5. Users who feel that certain votes were cast in bad faith or which truly have no merit can address the votes in the comments section. Users can ask a voter to clarify their position, point out mistakes or flaws in their arguments, or call for the outright removal of the vote if it lacks sufficient reasoning. Users may not remove or alter the content of anyone else's votes. Voters can remove or rewrite their own vote at any time, but the final decision to remove another user's vote lies solely with the administrators.
    • Users can also use the comments section to bring up any concerns or mistakes in regards to the proposal itself. In such cases, it's important the proposer addresses any concerns raised as soon as possible. Even if the supporting side might be winning by a wide margin, that should be no reason for such questions to be left unanswered. They may point out any missing details that might have been overlooked by the proposer, so it's a good idea as the proposer to check them frequently to achieve the most accurate outcome possible.
  6. If a user makes a vote and is subsequently blocked for any amount of time, their vote is removed. However, if the block ends before the proposal ends, then the user in question holds the right to re-cast their vote. If a proposer is blocked, their vote is removed and "(banned)" is added next to their name in the "Proposer:" line of the proposal, which runs until its deadline as normal. If the proposal passes, it falls to the supporters of the idea to enact any changes in a timely manner.
  7. No proposal can overturn the decision of a previous proposal that is less than 4 weeks (28 days) old.
  8. Any proposal where none of the options have at least four votes will be extended for another week. If after three extensions, no options have at least four votes, the proposal will be listed as "NO QUORUM." The original proposer then has the option to relist said proposal to generate more discussion.
  9. All proposals that end up in a tie will be extended for another week. Proposals with more than two options must also be extended another week if any single option does not have a majority support: i.e. more than half of the total number of voters must appear in a single voting option, rather than one option simply having more votes than the other options.
  10. If a proposal with only two voting options has more than ten votes, it can only pass or fail with a margin of at least three votes, otherwise the deadline will be extended for another week as if no majority was reached at all.
  11. Proposals can only be extended up to three times. If a consensus has not been reached by the fourth deadline, the proposal fails and can only be re-proposed after four weeks, at the earliest.
  12. All proposals are archived. The original proposer must take action accordingly if the outcome of the proposal dictates it. If it requires the help of an administrator, the proposer can ask for that help.
  13. If the administrators deem a proposal unnecessary or potentially detrimental to the upkeep of the Super Mario Wiki, they have the right to remove it at any time.
  14. Proposals can only be rewritten or deleted by their proposer within the first three days of their creation (six days for talk page proposals). However, proposers can request that their proposal be deleted by an administrator at any time, provided they have a valid reason for it. Please note that canceled proposals must also be archived.
  15. Unless there is major disagreement about whether certain content should be included, there should not be proposals about creating, expanding, rewriting or otherwise fixing up pages. To organize efforts about improving articles on neglected or completely missing subjects, try setting up a collaboration thread on the forums.
  16. Proposals cannot be made about promotions and demotions. Users can only be promoted and demoted by the will of the administration.
  17. No joke proposals. Proposals are serious wiki matters and should be handled professionally. Joke proposals will be deleted on sight.
  18. Proposals must have a status quo option (e.g. Oppose, Do nothing) unless the status quo itself violates policy.

Basic proposal and support/oppose format

This is an example of what your proposal must look like, if you want it to be acknowledged. If you are inexperienced or unsure how to set up this format, simply copy the following and paste it into the fitting section. Then replace the [subject] - variables with information to customize your proposal, so it says what you wish. If you insert the information, be sure to replace the whole variable including the squared brackets, so "[insert info here]" becomes "This is the inserted information", not "[This is the inserted information]". Proposals presenting multiple alternative courses of action can have more than two voting options, but what each voting section is supporting must be clearly defined. Such options should also be kept to a minimum, and if something comes up in the comments, the proposal can be amended as necessary.

===[insert a title for your proposal here]===
[describe what issue this proposal is about and what changes you think should be made to improve how the wiki handles that issue]

'''Proposer''': {{User|[enter your username here]}}<br>
'''Deadline''': [insert a deadline here, 7 days after the proposal was created (14 for writing guidelines and talk page proposals), at 23:59 GMT, in the format: "May 30, 2024, 23:59 GMT"]

====Support====
#{{User|[enter your username here]}} [make a statement indicating that you support your proposal]

====Oppose====

====Comments====

Users will now be able to vote on your proposal, until the set deadline is reached. Remember, you are a user as well, so you can vote on your own proposal just like the others.

To support, or oppose, just insert "#{{User|[add your username here]}}" at the bottom of the section of your choice. Just don't forget to add a valid reason for your vote behind that tag if you are voting on another user's proposal. If you are voting on your own proposal, you can just say "Per my proposal".

Talk page proposals

All proposals dealing with a single article or a specific group of articles are held on the talk page of one of the articles in question. Proposals dealing with massive amounts of splits, merges or deletions across the wiki should still be held on this page.

For a list of all settled talk page proposals, see MarioWiki:Proposals/TPP archive and Category:Settled talk page proposals.

Rules

  1. All active talk page proposals must be listed below in chronological order (new proposals go at the bottom) using {{TPPDiscuss}}. Include a brief description of the proposal while also mentioning any pages affected by it, a link to the talk page housing the discussion, and the deadline. If the proposal involves a page that is not yet made, use {{fake link}} to communicate its title in the description. Linking to pages not directly involved in the talk page proposal is not recommended, as it clutters the list with unnecessary links. Place {{TPP}} under the section's header, and once the proposal is over, replace the template with {{SettledTPP}}.
  2. All rules for talk page proposals are the same as mainspace proposals (see the "How to" section above), with the exceptions made by Rules 3 and 4 as follows:
  3. Voting in talk page proposals will be open for two weeks, not one (all times GMT).
    • For example, if a proposal is added at any time on Monday, August 1, 2011, it ends two weeks later on Monday, August 15, 2011, at 23:59 GMT.
  4. The talk page proposal must pertain to the article it is posted on.
  5. When a talk page proposal passes, it should be removed from this list and included in the list under the "Unimplemented proposals" section until the proposed changes have been enacted.

List of ongoing talk page proposals

Unimplemented proposals

Proposals

Merge the Wrecking Crew and VS. Wrecking Crew phases into list articles, Axis (ended February 24, 2022)
Do not consider usage of classic recurring themes as references to the game of origin, Swallow (ended March 9, 2022)
Split Mario Kart Tour character variants into list articles, Tails777 (ended May 4, 2022)
Enforce WCAG Level AA standards to mainspace and template content, PanchamBro (ended May 29, 2022)
Change how RPG enemy infoboxes classify role, Doc von Schmeltwick (ended September 18, 2022)
Classify the Just Dance series as a guest appearance, Spectrogram (ended April 27, 2023)
Establish a standard for long course listings in articles for characters/enemies/items/etc., Koopa con Carne (ended June 8, 2023)
Consider filenames as sources and create redirects, Axis (ended August 24, 2023)
Add tabbers to race/battle course articles, GuntherBB (ended November 18, 2023)
Remove elemental creatures categories from various Super Mario RPG enemies, Swallow (ended January 11, 2024)
Standardize the formatting of foreign and explanatory words and phrases in "Names in other languages" tables, Annalisa10 (ended February 7, 2024)
Merge Super Mario Bros. (film) subjects with their game counterparts, JanMisali (ended April 18, 2024)
Remove profiles and certain other content related to the Super Mario Bros. Encyclopedia from the wiki, Koopa con Carne (ended April 30, 2024)
Break alphabetical order in enemy lists to list enemy variants below their base form, EvieMaybe (ended May 21, 2024)
Consider "humorous" and other related terms as frequently misused in MarioWiki:Good writing, DrippingYellow (ended May 28, 2024)

Talk page proposals

Split all the clothing, Doc von Schmeltwick (ended September 12, 2021)
Split the various reissues of Mario Bros., Doc von Schmeltwick (ended April 22, 2022)
Split machine parts, Robo-Rabbit, and flag from Super Duel Mode, Doc von Schmeltwick (ended September 30, 2022)
Expand source priority exception to include regional English differences, LinkTheLefty (ended January 14, 2023)
Add product IDs in game infoboxes, Windy (ended March 18, 2023)
Remove the list of Super Smash Bros. series objects, Axis (ended May 10, 2023)
Split Special Shot into separate articles by game, Technetium (ended September 30, 2023)
Convert the lists of episode appearances for television series characters into categories, Camwoodstock (ended November 22, 2023)
Change the Super Mario 64 DS level section to include more specific character requirements, Altendo (ended December 20, 2023)
Split the Jungle Buddies from Animal Friends, DrippingYellow (ended December 22, 2023)
Make bestiary list pages for the Minion Quest and Bowser Jr.'s Journey modes, Doc von Schmeltwick (ended January 11, 2024)
Merge the ghost Bats and Mice from Luigi's Mansion to their respective organic counterparts from the later games, Doc von Schmeltwick (ended January 20, 2024)
Split Strobomb from Robomb, Doc von Schmeltwick (ended January 20, 2024)
Split the NES and SNES releases of Wario's Woods, SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA) (ended March 27, 2024)
Split Mario's Time Machine (Nintendo Entertainment System), or the Super Nintendo Entertainment version along with both console versions of Mario is Missing!, LinkTheLefty (ended April 11, 2024)
Remove non-Super Mario content from Super Smash Bros. series challenges articles, BMfan08 (ended May 3, 2024)
Merge Stompybot 3000 with Colonel Pluck, DrippingYellow (ended May 4, 2024)
Split "Team Dinosaur" from The Dinosaurs, Blinker (ended May 15, 2024)
Delete Memory Card, Nightwicked Bowser (ended May 23, 2024)
In Template:Species infobox, expand "Relatives" guidelines to include variant-type relationships with significant differences between species, DrippingYellow (ended May 26, 2024)
Split Cheep Blimp (Paper Mario: The Thousand-Year Door) and Zeeppelin from the blimp page, Doc von Schmeltwick (ended May 28, 2024)

Writing guidelines

Standardize "History in the Super Mario franchise" headings under certain conditions

Inspired by Nintendo101's flowerpot subpage (from an earlier revision, before it had been removed), this proposal aims to standardize the use of ==History in the Super Mario franchise== over ==History==. This will help make it clear to readers what is Super Mario and what is not while reading articles, and prevent potential disputes once a standard has been set. Please note that this proposal is NOT about the DK, Yoshi, or Wario subfranchises.

For an article to apply for the ==History in the Super Mario franchise== heading, the article should meet one of the following criteria:

  1. It is a generic subject (e.g. Grapes) or something from real life, like a person, with a fictional portrayal in Super Mario media, such as Thomas Jefferson. An example of this was on the Dinosaur article before being reverted.
  2. It is from the Super Mario franchise BUT has also appeared in non-Super Mario media, popular examples being the Super Smash Bros. series and the Minecraft textures. Everything that isn't Super Mario would be subheadings of ==History in other games==, or ==History in other media== if the subject also (or instead) appeared in publications, television shows, etc. not in Super Mario franchise. An example of this can be seen on the History of Luigi article.
  3. Crossover content, including Nintendo products, as they appear in Super Mario media. Examples can be seen on the Game Boy, Link, and Egg Pawn pages.

For the first bullet point, this would help establish that real and generic subjects are not from Super Mario and makes the History heading less ambiguous. On the Dinosaur article, for example, are we reading about history of dinosaurs as they exist in real life, up to the point of extinction, or from the Super Mario franchise? It's the latter. For George Washington, are we reading history about him from the 18th century or as he exists in the Super Mario franchise? It's also the latter, clearly.

For the second bullet point, this would help eliminate the popular misconception that Super Smash Bros. is part of the Super Mario franchise and help better contextualize Super Mario as it exists in other media, like sometimes Zelda or Minecraft, rather than being integral to the same degree as their main appearances in Super Mario media itself.

For the third bullet point, this would eliminate confusion that the history is talking about Nintendo products in general, like when they were produced, the amount of sales generated, etc. and rather mention its appearances within the Super Mario franchise itself. History on Nintendo products themselves can be found on NintendoWiki. Similarly, for articles like Link, it helps when the History section specifies it is of Link as he appears in the Super Mario franchise. Then connections to Super Mario go under the "History in other media" heading.

To make it short, if this proposal passes, and ==History== is changed to ==History in the ''Super Mario'' franchise== (and split into a separate ==History in other media== in the case of criteria #2) on an article that can be categorized by any of the three numbered bullet points above, users will not be allowed to revert it back to the initial ==History== heading, like in the aforementioned case involving the Dinosaur article.

Proposer: Super Mario RPG (talk)
Deadline: May 31, 2024, 23:59 GMT

Support for all three options

  1. Super Mario RPG (talk) I'm for this option.
  2. SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA) (talk) Yes. Also, for the flowerpot thing, I have that saved (with a few tweaks) here.

Apply to only crossover content and real products

Oppose

  1. Hewer (talk) Similar to your previous proposals about reorganising history sections, I don't really see what we'd gain from this. For the first and third bullet points, the edit summary that removed it from the Dinosaur page sums up my thoughts: "This is obvious and unnecessary". Of course we're only going to be covering the subject's history that's within our scope, I don't think anyone's visiting the Dinosaur page seeking a complete history of the Mesozoic Era only to be disappointed when they don't find it. For the second bullet point, I ask the same question as your last attempt to split up non-Mario appearances: why does it not being a Mario game make it worth splitting up? The assertion that they're not "integral to the same degree as their main appearances in Super Mario media itself" feels wrong, games like Smash are major appearances of the Mario characters and are important to their histories, sometimes moreso than appearances in actual Mario games (Smash Melee introducing Yoshi's Egg Roll, Smash Ultimate being K. Rool's first physical appearance in a decade, etc.). I also again question whether "the popular misconception that Super Smash Bros. is part of the Super Mario franchise" exists or is worth "fixing" in such an indirect way (we already don't consider them Mario games to my knowledge anyway). The Game Boy example is the only one given where I see some merit in doing this, since we do give some coverage to the actual histories of Nintendo hardware and it could be worth distinguishing the history of their in-universe appearances from that.
  2. Nintendo101 (talk) Because this is the Super Mario Wiki, the inherent assumption is that any subject with an article appears in the franchise (including Link and Sonic), and that the "History" section would only cover its appearance in the Super Mario franchise. What else would it be about? If a "history in the Super Mario franchise" was to be implemented anywhere, I feel like it only makes sense for recurring subjects that debuted in the Super Mario franchise, but make recurring appearances elsewhere (like Chain Chomps, which make some a few appearances in Zelda). But even in that context, I don't know if it would be appropriate. (I also don't agree with the premise that any in-game subject is "generic", regardless of its name or design. The grapes in Yoshi's Story are just as derived from the real article as the Sour Bunch.)
  3. Nightwicked Bowser (talk) Per my edit summary Hewer quoted.
  4. FanOfRosalina2007 (talk) Per Nintendo101.
  5. Jazama (talk) Per all
  6. Dine2017 (talk) Under criterion #2, common Mario subjects such as Goomba would have a long ==History in the Super Mario franchise== and a short ==History in other games/media==, making the two unbalanced. Also per all. (In the case of Game Boy, I think ==Appearances in the Super Mario franchise== is more accurate, cf. Nintendo Entertainment System and Nintendo 64.)

Comments

For clarity, when I say "standardize," (not to be confused with "allow," since I don't think there's anything in the rules that explicitly forbids formatting in the aforementioned three cases), it means if a page is formatted that way, others aren't allowed to revert it, since it's the standard for how said articles should look. Also, @SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA), glad to see that flowerpot page. Super Mario RPG (talk) 14:32, May 17, 2024 (EDT)

"For clarity, when I say "standardize," (not to be confused with "allow," since I don't think there's anything in the rules that explicitly forbids formatting in the aforementioned three cases), it means if a page is formatted that way, others aren't allowed to revert it, since it's the standard for how said articles should look." Thanks for the clarification! My support will still be there. "Also, @SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA), glad to see that flowerpot page." Thanks! I wanted to keep/expand on it as a subpage of my userpage, b/c I didn't want any edit conflicts. You and @Nintendo101 are free to edit it if you want. SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA) (talk) 14:43, May 17, 2024 (EDT)

Wasn't there a proposal about roughly the same thing not too long ago? You're meant to wait 28 days between proposals on the same thing, so if that's the case, we don't exactly wanna wait for a substantial amount of votes before calling attention to it. ~Camwoodstock (talk) 15:12, May 17, 2024 (EDT)

No, I think this is different. That one had to do with removing franchise headers, which this one doesn't. SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA) (talk) 15:23, May 17, 2024 (EDT)
Yeah, this one is not about removing headings. It's about modifying "History" to "History in the Super Mario franchise" in one of three case, and in one case (if there's appearances outside of Super Mario), splitting "History in other games/media" into its own history heading. See what I did on Don Bongo as an example. Super Mario RPG (talk) 15:39, May 17, 2024 (EDT)

Where would appearances in things like Smash and Captain N go in this case? -- KOOPA CON CARNE 15:40, May 17, 2024 (EDT)

"History in other media" (see Link article). Super Mario RPG (talk) 15:41, May 17, 2024 (EDT)
Makes sense. SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA) (talk) 15:48, May 17, 2024 (EDT)

@Hewer @Nintendo101 @Nightwicked Bowser I thought "This is a Super Mario Wiki" as a argument was getting old, but that's what you 3 are using! What happened in between? Is it not a old argument anymore? SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA) (talk) 09:04, May 20, 2024 (EDT)

I don't think anything in the comment you reference contradicts any of the sentiments made here. No one is arguing subjects that originated outside of the Super Mario franchise (like Link, Sonic, Mad Scienstein, Wart, etc.) should not receive coverage, nor that appearances made by subjects that did emerged within the franchise should not be noted (like Link's Awakening, Smash Bros., Tetris, Qix, etc.). Rather, because of the inherent scope of the wiki, it is assumed that a "History" section on this site encompasses the subject of the article's appearances in the Super Mario franchise and it is unclear to me why that needs further clarification. - Nintendo101 (talk) 09:35, May 20, 2024 (EDT)
But you said yourself in your oppose vote "Because this is the Super Mario Wiki", which, again, I thought was getting old as an argument. Hewer himself in the linked proposal said it! I'm just confused about what changed in between that and now. SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA) (talk) 09:38, May 20, 2024 (EDT)
First off, why are you getting on Nintendo101's case for an argument that I made in a proposal they didn't even take part in? Second, my point when I made that comment was that "This is a Super Mario wiki" is getting old as an argument on its own to trim, reorganise, or otherwise alter crossover content like Smash, as Super Mario RPG keeps trying to do, whereas Nintendo101's argument is that, because this is a Super Mario wiki, we don't need to specify that our content is about Super Mario. The same words may have been used, but the context of the arguments is different. Hewer (talk · contributions · edit count) 11:54, May 20, 2024 (EDT)
First off, I'm not. Second, I didn't know that the CONTEXT was different, I only paid attention to the words, not the context. Third, a "History" section only covering the Super Mario franchise kinda neglects the references and cameos. SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA) (talk) 12:01, May 20, 2024 (EDT)
Isn't the point of this proposal (which you're supporting) to have history sections that only cover the Super Mario franchise? Hewer (talk · contributions · edit count) 12:05, May 20, 2024 (EDT)
I would like to redirect you to point 2 of the proposal. SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA) (talk) 12:31, May 20, 2024 (EDT)
Does that not just prove my point? Hewer (talk · contributions · edit count) 12:34, May 20, 2024 (EDT)
The history section is going to be split. That's the point of this proposal. YOUR point is just around 1/2 of the point of this proposal. SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA) (talk) 12:45, May 20, 2024 (EDT)

New features

None at the moment.

Removals

None at the moment

Changes

Move Super Smash Bros. information for crossover characters into the list articles and delete their Super Smash Bros. profiles

This proposal concerns Super Smash Bros. information of certain characters listed in Crossover characters. It makes it harder to see the actual Super Mario content on said articles, like how the Isabelle page largely concerns her appearances in Super Smash Bros. while the actual Super Mario appearances in Mario Kart 8 and Super Mario Maker are all the way below. In the case of Villager, it starts off by showing the WarioWare appearances but then has this huge chunk of Super Smash Bros. information in between that and the appearances in Mario Kart 8 and Super Mario Maker.

Besides, the List of Super Smash Bros. fighters pages feel kind of awkward that certain crossover characters do not have their information listed there with other non-Super Mario characters, so this proposal aims to rectify that.

The fighters on the list pages do not have their profiles, and I don't see why the crossover characters should have them but not the fighters already in the list pages, so if this proposal passes, all of that will be deleted too. This includes the Profiles section on other crossover pages like Knuckles, Deku Baba, Zangief, and so forth, since it would be illogical for them to keep their profiles but not the protagonists of the Super Smash Bros. series, an inconsistency that's already present. But the status of the SSB content in the History section of crossover content OTHER THAN fighters in the Super Smash Bros. series can be for a future proposal.

This will affect the following pages, and their Super Smash Bros. information (excluding profiles) will go into the following articles:

There's also Samus, and there's a proposal to currently split the article, so if that passes, her Super Smash Bros. information will stay on the List of fighters debuting in Super Smash Bros. page.

Note: A short summary of the character's role, or any connections to Super Mario, will remain intact, similarly to how Mario#History has a short summary on Mario throughout his appearance while the main history page on Mario is located at History of Mario.

There are three options: Option 1 will enact all of the changes above, Option 2 will remove only the Super Smash Bros. profiles from pages on non-Super Mario content, and Option 3 opposes everything in this proposal.

Proposer: Super Mario RPG (talk)
Deadline: June 4, 2024, 23:59 GMT

Option 1: Full support

  1. Super Mario RPG (talk) As proposer.

Option 2: Trim profiles only

  1. Super Mario RPG (talk) Secondary

Option 3: Oppose

  1. Axis (talk) I believe it's unnecessary.
  2. Nintendo101 (talk) It makes intuitive sense to just list the Super Smash Bros. info on the pages of the character when available. (As a side note, the Super Smash Bros. series has a pretty intimate relationship with the Super Mario franchise, and I do not think we should be omitting coverage here just because SmashWiki exists. We don't address topics the same way.)
  3. Tails777 (talk) If the characters have an article, I see no reason why Smash stuff should be singled out and removed just because it's not Mario related.
  4. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) - Per all, especially Nintendo101
  5. Hewer (talk) It's standard practice (and also pretty logical) to list any time a subject happens to appear alongside Mario stuff. Captain N: The Game Master is a good example - it's considered a guest appearance, so it doesn't get full coverage, but we still mention things' appearances there if they happen to be covered on the wiki for some other reason, e.g. Slime (Dragon Quest). So why should Smash (where Mario stuff perhaps has a greater role than in Captain N) be the one exception? The proposal tries to argue about organisation and finding information, but I'd say unnecessarily splitting a character's information across multiple pages is the real bad organisation here. If people really can't bear to scroll through some Smash stuff in order to find what they're looking for (which, mind, might be the Smash stuff anyway), they can use the contents links at the top of the article to jump to particular sections no problem. And also, to be frank, I don't really understand what the proposal is talking about regarding "profiles".
  6. FanOfRosalina2007 (talk) Per all, especially Hewer's reasoning.
  7. MegaBowser64 (talk) Per all of yall. Personally I don't think it's a big deal to leave Smash info on character pages. There isn't much harm done.

Comments

This passed proposal already establishes that non-Mario trophies should be removed from dedicated character articles. Check out the bolded sentence and the rationale after it:

It's simple. I propose to simply trim those trophies list pages to only the Mario/DK/Wario etc. character and cut the rest. This includes crossover characters that have pages on the wiki - while we may have a Link page because he's in Mario Kart 8, his Smash Bros trophy is about Link the protagonist of his own independent intellectual property and not Link the funny Mario Kart 8 man, and it leads to the bizarre situation of having a listing of Link but not the character his series is named after. Best keep things simple.

I believe if option 3 were to win in this proposal, that decision would be overturned. -- KOOPA CON CARNE 15:06, May 28, 2024 (EDT), edited 15:14, May 28, 2024 (EDT)

Okay, I'll remove that from the scope of the proposal then. Super Mario RPG (talk) 15:09, May 28, 2024 (EDT)
Wait, hold on, I may be stupid. That simply specifies that the subjects who have pages on the wiki, but do not pertain to the Mario franchise, would be among the trophies trimmed from the trophy pages, but it does not specify that they'd be trimmed from their own pages as well. I confused myself and hopefully I can clear it up following my above comment. -- KOOPA CON CARNE 15:13, May 28, 2024 (EDT)
I was about to ask about the example of me trimming the profiles from the Sonic page applies, but now I'm not sure what's going on myself. Super Mario RPG (talk) 15:25, May 28, 2024 (EDT)
That was about the lists of all trophies per game, not profile sections for individual subjects. Doesn't look like there's any overlap between these proposals. --Waluigi's head icon in Mario Kart 8 Deluxe. Too Bad! Waluigi Time! 16:14, May 28, 2024 (EDT)

I was going to address the opposition by stating that, should this pass, a short summary of each character's SSB role will remain on the page (See Mario#History for a similar type of example), but the main information will be on the list of fighters pages. Super Mario RPG (talk) 16:42, May 28, 2024 (EDT)

Looks like the truncation of the moves helps a lot with accessibility, like on the Villager page listed above. Pages like Fox still have excessive profiles, and it seems weird to have those there but not on like the corresponding List of trophies pages. Super Mario RPG (talk) 17:30, May 29, 2024 (EDT)

Eh, I'd say it makes sense. The list of trophies pages are only meant to be lists of Mario trophies, but we happen to also have pages describing fighters in Smash, so why not list the trophies there where they're relevant? Again I raise you Captain N - the article about it is only about the show and its relevance to Mario, so we don't mention the appearance of Dragon Quest Slimes on that article since it has nothing to do with Mario in that context, but because we happen to have an article about Slimes for another reason, we mention the appearance there. Also, I find the "accessibility" arguments you keep going for a bit strange - there are people who might want to look at Smash information on this wiki, it's not just some burden that we have to avert people from as best as we can. Hewer (talk · contributions · edit count) 07:54, May 30, 2024 (EDT)

Miscellaneous

None at the moment.

Retrieved from "https://www.mariowiki.com/index.php?title=MarioWiki:Proposals&oldid=4233447"