MarioWiki:Proposals

Proposals can be new features (such as an extension), removal of a previously added feature that has tired out, or new policies that must be approved via consensus before any action(s) are done. Any user can support or oppose, but must have a strong reason for doing so, not, e.g., "I like this idea!" "Vote" periods last for one week. All past proposals are archived.

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}}.

This page observes the No-Signature Policy.

How To

1. Actions that users feel are appropriate to have community approval first can be added by anyone, but they must have a strong argument.
2. Users then vote and discuss on the issue during that week. The "deadline" for the proposal is one week from posting at:
   • Monday to Thursday: 17:00 (5pm)
   • Friday and Saturday: 20:00 (8pm)
   • Sunday: 15:00 (3pm)
3. Every vote should have a reason accompanying it.
4. At any time a vote may be rejected if at least three active users believe the vote truly has no merit or was cast in bad faith. However, there must be strong reasons supporting the invalidation.
5. "# " should be added under the last vote of each support/oppose section to show another blank line.
6. All proposals that end up in a tie will be extended for another week.
7. If a proposal has more than ten votes, it can only pass or fail by a margin of three votes. If a proposal reaches the deadline and the total number of votes for each option differ by two or less votes, the deadline will be extended for another week.
8. Any proposal that has three votes or less at deadline will automatically be listed as "NO QUORUM." The original proposer then has the option to relist said proposal to generate more discussion.
9. No proposal can overturn the decision of a previous proposal that is less than 4 weeks (28 days) old.
10. Proposals can only be rewritten or deleted by their proposer within the first three days of their creation. However, the proposer can request that their proposal be deleted by a Sysop at any time, provided they have a valid reason for it.
11. 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 a Sysop, the proposer can ask for that help.
12. There shouldn't be proposals about creating articles on a underrepresented or completely absent subject, unless there is major disagreement about whether the content should be included. To organize efforts about completing articles on missing subjects, try creating a PipeProject.
13. Proposals can not be made about System Operator promotions and demotions. Sysops can only be promoted and demoted by the will of Bureaucrats.
14. If the Sysops 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.
15. No joke proposals. Proposals are serious wiki matters, and should be handled professionally. Joke proposals will be deleted on sight.

The times are in EDT (UTC -4:00), and are set so that the user is more likely to be online at those times (after work/school, weekend nights). If a proposal is added on Saturday night at 11:59 PM EDT, the deadline is the next Saturday night at 8:00 PM. If it is a minute later, the deadline is a day plus 15 hours (Sunday), as opposed to a day minus 4 hours.

CURRENTLY: 16:39, 16 May 2024 (EDT)

Removals

None at the moment.

Splits & Merges

Put Waffle Kingdom and all the related places into "List of Implied Locations"

Some of you may know Waffle Kingdom. I propose this article and all the locations related to it to be merged with List of Implied Locations.

The reason is quite simple: The Waffle Kingdom is never actually visited in any game, and is therefore an implied location (duh). If that isn't enough reason, then there are plenty of other ones. It is f.e. impossible to add images to these articles and there's not much info available for them. Too few to fill a whole article. So, for the sake of fighting stubs and such, let us merge this articles.

Another thing: Since I can change this proposal within the first three days, I will use this to add another thing. Like SMB said, Princess Eclaire should also be merged with the List of Implied Characters if this proposal passes. Not sure about the Chestnut King, because this could also be a mistranslation of the Goomba King.

Proposer: Edofenrir (talk)
Deadline: 21. November 2009, 15:00

Merge them

1. Edofenrir (talk) - Per consistency and myself.
2. Super Mario Bros. (talk) Per Edofenrir, and we also would have to merge the Princess Eclair page and the Chestnut King into List of Implied Characters.
3. Zero777 (talk) I am Zero! Merge them, no picture and little info, belongs to implied locations. Zero signing out.
4. Marioguy1 (talk) - Per Edo. If this proposal somehow fails then I am adding an image tag!</tryingtolooktough>
5. Gamefreak75 (talk) - PEr Edo.
6. Vini64 (talk) Per all.
7. Grandy02 (talk) Per Edo.
8. T.c.w7468 (talk) Per Edo.
9. Stooben Rooben (talk) - Per Edo; I've always meant to make a proposal just like this for the exact same reason.
10. Karinmij (talk) Per all of the above.

Comments

Regarding the "Chestnut King", this is a mistranslation for Goomba King/Goomboss for sure, his Japanese name is always the same, while his English name changes from Goomba King to Chestnut King to Goomboss. There could still be a reference for that in the List of Implied Characters, but information about "Chestnut King" should go to the Goomboss article. --Grandy02 (talk)

Miscellaneous

"Fan Names" for things without official names

Here's one: Look, while a lot of things sure do get official, definite names, there are also other things that just don't. It happens.

Even if anything doesn't have an official name doesn't mean hope is lost on it. Just call them (usually) whatever they're supposed to be. Or if you're really feeling up for it, in fact, there's nothing wrong with fan-naming something (just as long as it's fair enough to make sure the majority rolls with it). This especially compensates for NOA's (and depends, even NOJ's) lack of interest on these things.

Proposer:Boo Destroyer (talk)
Deadline: November 27th 20:00

Oppose

1. FunkyK38 (talk) Why would we do that? We have a template that tells everyone we're trying to get rid of that kind of stuff. And how would we decide majority? Put a poll on the Main page and ask everyone to vote?
2. BabyLuigiOnFire (talk) Fan names will cause confusion and we may as well add fan stories, fan personalities, and fan quotes, etc.

Comments

I find this proposal odd, because we do have a sytem sort of (not exactly) like this. The level of naming an article on the MarioWiki is: The first English-release name takes priority (which means if a game is released in North America first, then any information would be referred to as it is in that release. If it is released in Europe first, then any information would be referred to as it is in that release, the same applies to Australia and other English-release), then comes the Japanese name if there is no official English name. If there is no official name whatsoever, then we will use a very commonly used name for it or a simple name (in example, see the Starbag article). These types of titles are referred to as conjectural names, and are only used when it has to be applied. Super Mario Bros. (talk)

I don't get it either so I aint voting Marioguy1 (talk)

"If there is no official name whatsoever, then we will use a very commonly used name for it or a simple name"

Exactly:

"Just call them (usually) whatever they're supposed to be."

And let's leave it at that.Boo Destroyer (talk)

Add Shortcuts for Mario Kart Wii tracks

My first proposal. Add shortcuts to Mario Kart Wii tracks.
This will help struggling racers get the fast staff ghosts, or beat an annoying sibling's best time.
Add more spots if necessary.

Proposer: lllkkklll (talk)
Deadline: 20 November 2009, 20:00

Add Shortcuts

1. lllkkklll (talk) as per above, and for the people who can't find them on their own.
2. Pie Shroom (talk) If nothing else, it's more encyclopedic.

Don't add Shortcuts

1. Super Mario Bros. (talk) Per Coincollector and FunkyK38's comments below.
2. Edofenrir (talk) Ok, since the proposer didn't explain his/her intentions further, I have to conclude what it means. And judging from how the proposal is written, I think he/she wants to add mere tricks to get to the goal quickly, instead of built-in shortcuts. And as stated below, I oppose this.
3. Zero777 (talk) I am Zero! Like Funky said, were not a strategy wiki, and I think there are alrady shortcuts on some courses on MKWii, but only if there notable enough. Even though there is such thing as a spoiler section we don't want to spoil the player too much they end up as an ass on online play and are now roten and had to be thrown away (metaphor right there). Zero signing out.
4. Gamefreak75 (talk) Much easier to look up on YouTube. ;D And per Funky's and Coin's comments below.
5. Dodoman (talk) The 'W' in 'SMW' stands for "Wiki," not "Walkthrough."
6. Vini64 (talk) Per Dodoman.
7. T.c.w7468 (talk) Per all. Shortcuts should be found elsewhere, not here.
8. FunkyK38 (talk) Per my comment below.

Comments

What do you mean with shortcuts specificly? Are you talking about shortcuts implemented in the tracks (like secret tunnels) or just driving tricks that help you getting to the finish faster? I'd support the first and oppose the latter one. - Edofenrir (talk)

Per Edo. Also, your reasoning makes it sound like you're trying to turn those articles into game guides. :/ -- Stooben Rooben (talk)

Aren't shortcuts already in some of the racecourse articles? Marioguy1 (talk)

The tone of this proposal makes me to think like a joke (or a walkthrough issue, like explaining bug shortcuts or glitches, eg: the worst shortcut glitch of Grumble Volcano) and that's not a valid question to propose. Coincollector (talk)

There's already mentioned shortcuts in articles. I think he's trying to say that he wants EVERY article with a shortcut-explanation guide. Vini64 (talk)

We don't really have to put those on there, this isn't a strategy Wiki, we're the Mario wiki. FunkyK38 (talk)

This proposal is not described well enough for me to vote. Describe it better or I will not vote. Marioguy1 (talk)

Same here Vini64 (talk)

Staff pages

I've noticed how we have a bunch of separate articles on the staff of video games. I believe this is fine, but why do we need stand alone articles on the staff pages? Why not just move them to subpages of the games' articles, kinda like the Beta elements sub-pages? The only page they are linked from is the game anyways (the template doesn't count).

Proposer: Knife (talk)
Deadline: 24 November 2009, 20:00

Support

1. Knife (talk) – Per proposal suggestion
2. Time Q (talk): There's no need for a stand-alone page. Making it a sub-page of the game article makes more sense. Per Knife.
3. Edofenrir (talk) - This should actually go without saying, but of course we can't skip the proper channels...
4. Vini64 (talk) Per Knife.
5. T.c.w7468 (talk) Per Knife's proposal.
6. Gamefreak75 (talk) - Per all.
7. Marioguy1 (talk) - Sounds good :D
8. Stooben Rooben (talk) - Per Knife.
9. Coincollector (talk) - If galleries and betas have that, why not staff?
10. Yoshario (talk) – Per Knife

Comments

Vini64: You seem to misunderstand the proposal. It's not about putting the staff information into the game articles themselves. Rather, they would go on a sub-page of the game articles (e.g. Template:Fakelink), just like it's already done with the beta elements: Super Mario World/Beta elements. Time Q (talk)

Ohh, now I understood. Sorry about the misunderstanding. Vini64 (talk)

No problem! Time Q (talk)

Vini64: It's not about merging those pages with the article, it's about making the standalone pages to subpages for organisatory meanings. That doesn't consume any room on the original article at all. I was too slow, so, what Time Q just said. - Edofenrir (talk)