MarioWiki:Proposals

From the Super Mario Wiki, the Mario encyclopedia
Revision as of 18:58, October 29, 2011 by Yoshiwaker (talk | contribs) (→‎Comments)
Jump to navigationJump to search
Image used as a banner for the Proposals page


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

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 Guideline proposals must include a link to the draft page.
  2. 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.
  3. Every vote should have a reason accompanying it. Agreeing with or seconding a previously mentioned reason given by another user is accepted.
  4. 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.
  5. 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.
  6. No proposal can overturn the decision of a previous proposal that is less than 4 weeks (28 days) old.
  7. 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.
  8. All proposals that end up in a tie will be extended for another week.
  9. 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.
  10. 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.
  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 an administrator, the proposer can ask for that help.
  12. Proposals can only be rewritten or deleted by their proposer within the first three days of their creation. 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 cancelled proposals must also be archived.
  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. There should not be proposals about creating articles on an 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.
  15. Proposals cannot be made about promotions and demotions. Users can only be promoted and demoted by the will of the administration.
  16. No joke proposals. Proposals are serious wiki matters and should be handled professionally. Joke proposals will be deleted on sight.

Basic Proposal and Support/Oppose Format

This is an example of what your proposal should 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]".

===[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, at 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 here.

Rules

  1. All active talk page proposals must be listed below in chronological order (new proposals go at the bottom). All pages affected must be mentioned in the brief description, with the talk page housing the discussion linked to directly via "(Template:Fakelink)". If the proposal involved a page that is not yet made, use {{fakelink}} to communicate its title. The Deadline must also be included in the entry. 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 heading.
  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. Talk page proposals may be closed by the proposer at any time if both the support and the oppose sides each have fewer than five votes.
  5. The talk page proposal must pertain to the article it is posted on.

List of Talk Page Proposals

Writing Guidelines

Animation errors and cartoon episodes pages

The pages for the individual episodes of the three DIC cartoons and the CGI Donkey Kong Country series often lists the animation goofs (stuff like "Luigi has three eyes in one shot") and minor continuity errors, and due to the shoddy animation of all four shows, the listings can get quite big. However, the way they are organised isn't consistent, with most pages listing the errors in the Trivia section and an handful other putting them in their own separate sections. Either way, it needs to be more consistent.

Proposer: Glowsquid (talk)
Deadline: October 29, 2011, 23:59 GMT

Have a "Animation and Continuity error" section and move the relevant info there

  1. Glowsquid (talk) - I find this preferable because the animation errors are numerous and recurring enough to be distinct from the one-off anecdotes that the trivia sections are for.
  2. Nintendo64Fan (talk) - Per Glowsquid.
  3. Lindsay151 (talk) - A section would be good, Per all.
  4. LeftyGreenMario (talk) It makes the trivia section too big. I think these goofs deserve their own section.
  5. Bop1996 (talk) Overdone trivia looks really bad, so this would help with fixing a lot of this. Per all.
  6. M&SG (talk) - This would help clean up the Trivia sections a lot.
  7. Dry-Petey (talk) - They really are cluttered.
  8. MeritC (talk) - Per all on this cases; consistency would definitely help in a situation like this.
  9. Jazama (talk) Per all
  10. Phoenix (talk) Per all.
  11. Fawfulfury65 (talk) It's much more consistent.
  12. Baby Mario Bloops (talk) - Per.
  13. Wildgoose (talk) Finally! A proposal that is not ridiculous or silly!!! Per all!
  14. Mario4Ever (talk) Per Glowsquid.
  15. RandomYoshi (talk) - Per LeftyGreenMario.
  16. Magikrazy51 (talk) Defiantly. A separate error page would cut way down on the articles (there are many errors, after all. In fact, I think DIC just didn't care). Per Neon Cephalopod.
  17. Lakituthequick (talk) Per all
  18. Raven Effect (talk) Per all
  19. Zero777 (talk) Per all
  20. Walkazo (talk) - Per Glowsquid.
  21. Bowser's luma (talk) Per all.

Leave it in Trivia

Comments

@Wildgoose: Your comment seems a tad offensive for how other users explain their proposals in this wiki. Please be more prudent next time. Coincollector (talk)

New Features

Countdowns for upcoming games

Personally i think this would be a great feature,basically theres a countdown to the release of the game(depending on where it launches first)and when the first one is up re-do it to the countdown of the next launch date example: Mario Kart 7 launches in japan in [countdown] and after its released re-do it depending on wheres next. Main page or actual game article state whatever you think is better,and either support or oppose on whichever.

Proposer: Donaldthescotishtwin (talk)
Deadline: November 1, 2011, 23:59 GMT

Support

  1. Donaldthescotishtwin (talk)

Oppose

  1. Walkazo (talk) - The proposal's a bit vague... Anyway, as mentioned in the Comments, this shouldn't go on the articles. However, at any given time, we have multiple games coming up, plus different localization release dates, and having to count down to them all would make a mess of the Main Page. On the other hand, choosing only one would seem like rather shoddy coverage of upcoming Mario events. Either way, it's not a good idea.
  2. Coincollector (talk) - Per Walkazo. I wanted to get the right words to oppose to this. Thanks to Walkazo, her words are what I was looking for.
  3. MeritC (talk) - Per Coincollector and Walkazo.
  4. M&SG (talk) - Per Walkazo's reasons.
  5. Marioguy1 (talk) - I think we could easily have this added onto the main page, however if you insist on putting it into the articles, I will oppose.
  6. Bop1996 (talk) Per Walkazo.
  7. Bowser's luma (talk) Per Marioguy1.
  8. Wildgoose (talk) Per all who oppose this.

Comments

I think this could be a good idea, but put moreover on the front page or somewhere like that than on the actual articles. If we have space for it on the front page, maybe. So where are you proposing we put it? Marioguy1 (talk)

WiKirby had this for Kirby's Return to Dream Land. I don't know if it would work on Super Mario Wiki though... Mario & Luigi (talk)
And Bulbapedia with Black and White.Magikrazy51 (talk)
I agree with Marioguy1 that it should be put in the main page. Zero777 (talk)

Well we could put it on the main page where the Proposals box was,but i think having it at the very top of the actual games article is better. Donaldthescotishtwin

It really depends on whether we could make it aesthetically pleasing on the main page or not in that case. I've seen some pretty awesome countdowns on main pages before, but those were done by expert coders. I would oppose having it on the game articles, as that would likely be distracting and jarring to the content of the articles.Bop1996 (talk)
I'm with Bop on this. If we can make it work on the main page, great, but if not, oh well. Mario4Ever (talk)

I am rather skeptical with this idea. Additionally, this would have to be restricted to the main page only. M&SG (talk)

And as Walkazo stated, the main page would become way too messed up if we do count downs for every single upcoming game. M&SG (talk)

I'm not insisting on putting them on articles,put them on the main page if it would look better. Donaldthescotishtwin

Also if anyone's confused I mean countdowns for games coming for the present year, example:SM3DL and MK7 isn't far away so countdowns for their releases for whichever country first and so fourth. Donaldthescotishtwin

I actually think this is a great idea if it looks good and can be consistently maintained. Could end up creating more hype for the game and possibly raise traffic for the site. However since so many games are being released at the same time, we should probably only do a countdown for the most recent game coming out. We should also set a time minimum, like we cannot start a countdown unless there is less than two weeks for the game to come out. It also has to look good on the main page. If I were you, I'd rework this proposal into something a lot more specific and detailed, possibly including a sample main page to show us how it would look. This is assuming you are serious about the idea. If you don't get this one to work, you can always re-propose 28 days later.--Knife (talk) 13:11, 28 October 2011 (EDT)

This is being done by Nintendo Wiki when I posted this comment for E3 2012. I think it could be good. But It may not work because the dates for the game depend on where you live. So I'm at a loss Jman2401 (talk)

Removals

Remove customizable infoboxes

Yeah, I've noticed a big problem in the past years and I want to stop in this way. Why stop? Because, in general, it's not appropiate. As an student of graphic design and experienced user, I've noticed that customizing some infoboxes like the {{character-infobox}}, the {{item-infobox}} or the {{form-infobox}}, by changing their preset colors for others is annoying because, most of the time users like to add acid or strong colors like red, bright green, purple, blue, etc. The problem of these colors is that hinder the user to read the info contained in the infoboxes and those colors take away totally the template's function and aesthetics. I suggest to remove all those options from the infoboxes to change their colors and customize them in less-useful tools that make the article less formal and consistent visually.

Proposer: Coincollector (talk)
Deadline: October 29, 2011, 01:08 GMT.

Support

  1. Marioguy1 (talk) - I agree, this feature doesn't serve any purpose (AFAIK) and in some cases, as shown, even goes as far as to hinder the articles. Definitely support.
  2. Mario4Ever (talk) Per MG1.
  3. SWFlash (talk) Per proposal.
  4. Bop1996 (talk) Per Coincollector. This will help the aesthetics of our infoboxes greatly.
  5. M&SG (talk) - Agreed, but there is one dilemma to keep in mind; see my comment below.
  6. Wildgoose (talk) Another non-silly proposal! Per proposal and support.
  7. Baby Mario Bloops (talk) - Sounds reasonable.
  8. Mario & Luigi (talk) Per all. I did this already on Punpun.
  9. Lakituthequick (talk) I knew those color-changing-variable's exist, but not their reason. Per all.
  10. Walkazo (talk) - Per Coincollector. Colour-coding makes sense (like the SSB infoboxes discussed in the comments), but slapping on random, gaudy colours just for fun makes the wiki look bad.
  11. Tails777 (talk) Per all and the comments.
  12. Bowser's luma (talk) Per Coincollector, we don't need anyone yelling "My Eyes!" :)

Oppose

Comments

The template that's used for the Super Smash Bros. characters uses a color code that determines which installment the character first appears in; green for N64; blue for Melee; red for Brawl. The colors aren't too bright, so they shouldn't be a major issue to readers. M&SG (talk)

@Coincollector: You can add your own support. Wildgoose (talk)

@Wildgoose: Please try to avoid telling how sysops/administrators what to do, it's very disrespectful. Baby Mario Bloops (talk)
Not only sysop, bureaucrat too. Lakituthequick (talk)
@ M&SG: That's a good point. However, as you can see, the infobox has restricted preset values to change the color scheme, counting with three options only, and preventing the inclusion of other hues. Therefore that template is safe from this proposal. Coincollector (talk)
Thanks for clearing that up for me. M&SG (talk)

I would love to vote on this, but I read through the proposal and I don't really understand it all. I understand that we are using different info box styles for different things such as items and characters, but I don't understand what is wrong with them. Can someone explain that? Tails777 (talk)

@ Tail2777: Basically, the problem is that those templates have an option where you can change their colors in infinite ways, but It seems that such property has been abused or badly used. Have you seen those multi-colored infoboxes in some articles that use them? Have you read the info with those bright, almost-blinding colors that usually users like to add just because they think they look nice? Have you managed to read the words on my proposals that are tagged with that kind of colors? If you have but it's hard to see, you've found the problem. Coincollector (talk)
Basically, certain colors make it harder to read the text, unless the text is recolored as well. M&SG (talk)
Now I see and yes I agree, so I support. Tails777 (talk)

Changes

Starting Planet Stop

In Super Mario Galaxy and Super Mario Galaxy 2, people call the first planet you go into the "Starting Planet". Not surprisingly, people at Mariowiki do the same. But this needs to stop because each planet is different from every other planet in its game. The first planet in a galaxy should be named the same way the others are named. For example, the "starting planet" in Good Egg Galaxy could be called the Dark\Light Planet.

Proposer: Wildgoose (talk)
Deadline: October 30, 2011 23:59 GMT

Support

  1. Wildgoose (talk) Per Proposal.

Oppose

  1. Bop1996 (talk) This has been proposed twice and failed both times for various solid reasons, of which I will name two: Starting Planet describes the first planet perfectly, without ambiguity or room for misunderstanding, except in the cases of the Space Junk and Dreadnought Galaxies. Naming after numbers don't work afterwards as the sequence of planets changes between missions. Per every reason we had for not implementing this last time.
  2. Mario4Ever (talk) As contrary as it is to my opinions concerning this subject, I must oppose. There is not enough here to differentiate the idea from the previous proposals to an extent that would make the subject worth more consideration than it has been given already.
  3. Baby Mario Bloops (talk) - It is better to do research and look at past proposals before creating a proposal, as this exact proposal has been dealt with multiple times. Unless people provide reasonable proof that we should call it otherwise, than this will just be like the other few, and end like them as well.
  4. Jazama (talk) Per all
  5. Marioguy1 (talk) - Per my arguments against the "No Starting Planet Left Behind" proposal in archive 26.
  6. mario & Luigi (talk) I'd rather have the Prima names (Planet A, Planet B, etc.) than this. Per all.
  7. Super Mario Bros. (talk) – Despite the fact that I supported the "No Starting Planet Left Behind!" proposal in the twenty-sixth archive, this matter has been decided twice: both times in favor of keeping the status quo. I myself support the "third option" of merging the planets into the mission articles in the least redundant manner possible, but there is no need to go through all of this discussion again when this proposal will likely be defeated a third time.
  8. RandomYoshi (talk) — Per all. Though if we were to rename the starting planets, or any other planet really, differently, we would use the in-game filename for them.
  9. M&SG (talk) - A lot of the planet names are conjectural, so it would be no good if we change the starting planet names, unless we have official sources.
  10. Rise Up Above It (talk) Really? Is this actually happening? Why would we do this when, as others have mentioned, there were two or three proposals about the Starting Planet conjecture. Two or three proposals that got shot down. Per all.
  11. Magikrazy51 (talk) I've done it once, I've done it twice and now I'll do it thrice. Per Bop.
  12. Lakituthequick (talk) Starting Planet is clear, per all.
  13. Walkazo (talk) - Per SMB.
  14. Bowser's luma (talk) Serious deja vu here, we have voted against this in the past.
  15. Phoenix (talk) I've already tried to float this boat twice, and both times, it sank like the Titanic...per all.

Comments

Bop1996, why do we always have opposite opinions? Wildgoose (talk)

@Wildgoose, It's like why your question is not stated clearly. Coincollector (talk)

@RandomYoshi
That looks like a good ide-
Nevermind… SWFlash (talk)

@Wildgoose: If you check the archives for the last two proposals on this topic, then you'll see that I opposed it those two times because of the proposal itself, and this is independent of proposer. Bop1996 (talk)

@SWFlash: Not really, I can see the names clearly with "Ctrl +". We would have a problem with figuring out which galaxy each planet filename belongs to, however. -ThirdMarioBro (talk)

That's what he meant. Rise Up Above It (talk)

@SWFlash:If I wanted to, I could look through every single one of those. It wouldn't take that much time anyway(I'm serious). However, there is a hunch to this... My computer doesn't run Dolphin, which means that I really have no way of opening the files... Though if I could solve that problem, expect to see some changes... Though I have found a wiki about unused items/text/characters etc. which has an article about Super Mario Galaxy. With that we at least have a start. This page also, coincedentally, gets rid of one planet being named "starting planet". RandomYoshi (talk)

Even though someone may have found the data that contains the level files, these are often named something not designed for the player to see and use as a name. For example, we could name a ref "shiofhsdoihisdhooewuor", and as long as it was done properly, it wouldn't affect the quality of our information (aside from annoying other editors, which is a separate issue). In light of that, I wouldn't support the idea of changing all the planet names to the names from the game data itself unless they all made perfect sense and there was one for every single planet in the two games. Bop1996 (talk)
OK. This means that it really can't be done: the maze-like planet in Gusty Garden Galaxy is called "LavaMazeCubePlanet", a name which doesn't make a whole lot of sense. RandomYoshi (talk)

How about the "Planet A", "Planet B", "Planet C", etc. as those names are official? Mario & Luigi (talk)

Those names give absolutely no description of the planet itself, though. Yoshiwaker (talk)
But they are official. Mario & Luigi
Official? Nintendo actually called them that? How lazy of them. Magikrazy51
Yes... By Prima Guides... Mario & Luigi (talk)
@Phoenix: It wasn't that bad; remember, your second proposal ended with both sides tied. As for this little discussion right here, official or not, if the names don't aid in reader comprehension of the planets, there's no point in using them. Mario4Ever (talk)


New Super Mario Bros. Wii Level Split

For levels in New Super Mario Bros. Wii, people keep them all in an article depending on their world.Why? This doesn't give the wiki a chance to give an overview of the levels, like how to get the Star Coins or how to reach the secret exit. The purpose of this proposal is to split all levels in New Super Mario Bros. Wii so each level has its own article.

Proposer: Wildgoose (talk)
Deadline: November 5, 2011 23:59 GMT

Support

  1. Wildgoose (talk) Per proposal. This would be an awesome improvement, and it would give Mariowiki more information.

Oppose

  1. Bop1996 (talk) We already voted a proposal down that was similar to this here. Per Mario4Ever and Walkazo in that archived proposal.
  2. Marioguy1 (talk) - We don't need to create more articles; that doesn't give us more information, it just moves the information to harder-to-reach pages so that people searching for it will have to click through several more links to get to it.
  3. Mario & Luigi (talk) Per Marioguy1.
  4. RandomYoshi (talk) - Per Marioguy1.
  5. Mario4Ever (talk) Per Bop1996 and MG1.
  6. LeftyGreenMario (talk) I don't know what to say other than "I agree with the users above". :/
  7. M&SG (talk) - I can't really explain this. Therefore, per Marioguy1.

Comments

Bop1996, you are trying to prevent my proposals from working! Also, my proposal is nothing like the one you showed me. The articles will be named like "Word 1-1 (New Super Mario Bros. Wii)". Wildgoose (talk)

That's illogical. If you want me to support your proposals, you might try proposing something I didn't vote against the last times we voted on it. And actually, the proposal in the archives wanted an article on each level in all the 2D games, but the reasoning applies to the NSMBW levels as well, minus the long list of redirects and disambiguation pages that would have been created in the previous proposal. Bop1996 (talk)
Wildgoose: Please don't confuse users like me by removing all the oppose votes. Just because people have different views from you doesn't mean that they're wrong or silly. LeftyGreenMario (talk)

Come on, can't I have just one support comment? No one ever agrees with me. Wildgoose (talk)

There's no need to complain. The proposal's got some time left, so who knows, you might get some before the deadline. Mario4Ever (talk)

What's wrong with disambiguation pages anyway? They have always been a part of the wiki, they always will be. This will add more information, the articles would be similar to articles about Donkey Kong Contry levels. Wildgoose (talk)

Just like MG1 said, making separate pages for each level won't make them any more detailed; it's just how much is put into each section. Yoshiwaker (talk)

Merges\Splits

None at the moment.

Miscellaneous

None at the moment.

Retrieved from "https://www.mariowiki.com/index.php?title=MarioWiki:Proposals&oldid=1160147"