MarioWiki:Proposals

From the Super Mario Wiki, the Mario encyclopedia
Revision as of 02:09, May 20, 2008 by Purple Yoshi (talk | contribs) (what a funny typo.)
Jump to navigationJump to search
f_propcopym_9045f2d.png


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}}. Signing with the signature code ~~~(~) is not allowed due to technical issues.

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:
    1. Monday to Thursday: 17:00 (5pm)
    2. Friday and Saturday: 20:00 (8pm)
    3. 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. At the deadline, the validity of each vote and the discussion is reviewed by the community.
  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 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.

The times are in EDT, and are set so that the user is more likely to be online at those times (after school, weekend nights).

So for example, 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 indeed a minute later, the deadline is a day plus 15 hours (Sunday), as opposed to a day minus 4 hours.

Also,
NO PROPOSALS ABOUT HAVING BANJO AND CONKER ARTICLES -The Management.

CURRENTLY: 23:02, 20 May 2024 (EDT)

New Features

Featured Article Voting Modification

Browsing the current FAs Nominations on this Wiki, I have noticed users complaining about two types of votes. (1) Support votes cast because of personal favor to the subject of the article, aka "fan votes", ie "Peach deserves the nomination." as opposed to, "Well written article about a notable character." (2) Oppose votes that do not specify enough information for supporters to fix the problem, ie "This article has poor structure." as opposed to, "The Mario Kart information should be placed in one section." I am proposing that, in light of votes such as these, we give the users power to remove votes on Featured Article nomination pages in the same way users have power to remove votes from the Proposals section (see the top of this page for more information) with a few modifications to prevent the posibility of three users teaming up.

Briefly, this would mean that if three users believe a support vote is a fan vote or an oppose vote is is impossible to appease without further comment from the opposer, the vote could be removed. THIS DOES NOT MEAN THREE SUPPORTERS/OPPOSERS CAN REMOVE RIVAL VOTES BASED SOLELY ON OPINION! ONLY FAN VOTES WITHOUT FURTHER REASONING OR OPPOSE VOTES THAT ARE NOT CLARIFIED CAN BE REMOVED! IF AN USER IS DISCUSSING HIS/HER VOTE ON THE NOMINATION PAGE, THE VOTE CANNOT BE REMOVED WITHOUT THE APPROVAL OF THREE SYSOPS AND/OR USERS OF HIGHER RANK.

An oppose vote that has been appeased can be removed in the same manner if the opposer is not in discussion.

Proposer: Stumpers (talk)
Deadline: May 26, 2008, 17:00

Support (Give Users This Power)

  1. Stumpers (talk) This would prevent an article from being supported on the basis of the subject rather than the article. Additionally, oppose votes that do not enable the improvement of the article could be removed, both of would allow the FA process to more effectively serve its purpose of improving articles and celebrating good editing. It would also prevent users who have opposed and now left the page from bringing the process to a halt.
  2. Stooben Rooben (talk) - Per Stumpers. This will also probably decrease the likelihood of flaming on FA pages. It just clears things up for everyone, making it a lot simpler than it was.}}
  3. Glitchman (talk) - You're not going to remove my opposed vote are you? XD No, I think this is just common sense, if someone doesn't think an article is good enough to be featured, they HAVE to explain WHY it isn't so someone can DO something about it!
  4. Xzelion (talk) - Per all
  5. Super-Yoshi (talk) Per Xze
  6. Purple Yoshi (talk) - Per all. I am sick of votes like that.

Oppose (No Modifications to the Current System)

Comments

I know this vote gives more power to sysops under rare circumstances. Supporters are free to specify that every sysop except me should have this power, just so that you know this proposal is not a ploy to give me more power. Stumpers (talk) 23:41, 19 May 2008 (EDT)

Removals

None at the moment.

Splits & Merges

Merge Super Mushroom to Mushroom

I think we should merge the Super Mushroom article to the Mushroom article. Why? They're almost THE SAME! I mean, look at the beginning phrase of the Super Mushroom article. It says: "A Super Mushroom is a red Mushroom that allows whoever eats it to grow to an enormous size". The normal Mushroom is also red and also will you grow. However, the Mushroom have some other effects in other series. But, notice the images on the Super Mushroom article. You'll see an artwork of Mario Kart Super Circuit. But in other Mario Kart games, it's called Mushroom. Also, the Golden Mushroom was sometimes called Super Mushroom. In SSB series, they are called Super Mushrooms, but they are still the same.

I also readed on the Super Mushroom article that a Super Mushroom appeared in Super Mario 64 DS that will let you grow. But on the Mushroom article, there stands information that has the same meaning. And there was only ONE red-capped Mushroom in that game! So both articles has information about the same item.

So, now I told enough information from why we should merge the Super Mushroom Article to the Mushroom Article. When we have merged, we can maybe (I say "Maybe") make a Disambiguestion page with the name "Super Mushroom" (I told that the Golden Mushroom also sometimes was called Super Mushroom).

Sooo...

Do you also think that the Super Mushroom article should be merged to the Mushroom article? Or do you think of NOT?

Proposer: Arend (talk)
Deadline: May 23, 2008, 20:00

Merge the Super Mushroom Article!

  1. Arend (talk) What do you think? I'm the proposer!

Don't Merge it!

  1. Stumpers (talk) I'm opposing because "Super Mushroom" and "Mushroom" are two distinct items in many (all?) Mario RPGs. You bring up a very good point which made question my oppose: the two articles do need clean-up. How to go about doing that for an item that is the same in the platformers but different in the RPGs is a tough question.
  2. While I do think some things should be moved from one page to the other, I think that they are things that should have independant articles. Also per Stumpers. -Canama
  3. Ninjayoshi (talk) - Per all.
  4. To follow on from what Stumpers said, the Mushroom and Super Mushroom are distinct items in the Mario Kart series as well. --Pikax 06:17, 17 May 2008 (EDT)
  5. Pokemon DP (talk) - Per Stumpers.
  6. CrystalYoshi (talk) Per Stumpers. I have some issues with those two pages, actually. The main picture on the Mushroom page is actually a Super Mushroom (It's from New Super Mario Bros.). Plus the Mushroom page doesn't cover enough about all Mushrooms in general, and the Super Mushroom page doesn't cover enough about it in platformers.
  7. EnPeached (talk) Per all. They're not stubs, so why be merged?
  8. Walkazo (talk) - Per all.
  9. InfectedShroom (talk) Per all. I'd say more, but everyone else has me covered.
  10. Glitchman (talk) Normally I'd agree with Arend here, but they both aren't stubs, have images, and are officially named, so....yeah.

Comments

I thought we solved this problem long ago by combining all mushrooms into the main mushroom article. -- Ghost Jam (talk) 21:03, 16 May 2008 (EDT)

Pikax, in Mario Kart series, there ia an item called Golden Mushroom, who is SOMETIMES known as Super Mushroom. You didn't really readed the proposal fully. Arend (talk)

Can you give us an example of the Golden Mushroom being called a Super Mushroom? - Walkazo (talk)
I'm pretty sure that MK64 is the only place it could be. Someone should check. Stumpers (talk) 19:17, 19 May 2008 (EDT)

Changes

Limit Images from the Same Game

Currently there is no limit for images (screenshots or artwork) from the same game to appear in galleries at the bottom of articles. In a previous proposal, Grandy02 (talk) pointed out the example of Princess Peach, an article which has twelve different artwork images from Super Princess Peach in the gallery. In my opinion, this fails to serve the purpose of galleries, that is to show the development of a character (more precisely, his or her appearance), because there's too much importance attached to just one game. Therefore I propose to limit the number of images from one and the same game in galleries to three. This only applies to articles about characters (or species, whatever), not articles about games (those may have more than three images of course).

Proposer: Time Q (talk) (originally brought up by Grandy02 (talk))
Deadline: May 23, 2008, 20:00

Limit of Three Images

  1. Time Q (talk): Per myself.
  2. WikiGuest - Per Time Q.
  3. Grandy02 (talk): 3 images already show the character's appearance in the respective game distinctly enough, I'd also accept 4 images, but that's really sufficient enough then. But we should try to use the images taken off the gallery in the fitting articles, so that they won't be deleted.
  4. Wayoshi (talk) – I was concerned when I read the title of this proposal, but the details told me exactly what the issue is and I agree just in those circumstances, image galleries can be overbearing in main character articles.
  5. MegaMario9910 (talk) Per Time Q.
  6. Ghost Jam (talk) I'm all for the spirit of this proposal, but feel the finer points should be judged on a case-by-case basis.

No Such Limit

  1. ForeverDaisy09 a limit of three doesn't seem to be enough for certain characters such as Mario and Peach.
  2. Cobold (talk) - Why don't we use reason for a limit? I don't think we need set-in-stone rules which might get in our way. Characters may have different appearances in the same game (such as Peach in Mario Kart Wii).
  3. Bob-omb buddy (talk).Some pages need to have lots of screenshots,showing different features of the game.
  4. Stooben Rooben (talk) - I have to agree with Cobold. We should all be able to judge what looks right.
  5. Stumpers (talk) Per Cobold. It seems to me that the SPP example is the only one really under question. The problem could be more easily solved on the talk page for the article.
  6. Per Stumps. Toadette 4evur (talk)
  7. Per Stumpers. -Canama
  8. Ninjayoshi (talk) - Per all, but the Princess Peach pics from Super Princess Peach are outrageous.
  9. RedFire Mario (talk) - We need more pictures than just 3 or less, because , like what Cobold said, a picture can have a different appearence of a character and a picture can be important to that character's page. Per all
  10. Storm Yoshi (talk) Per Cobold and Stumpers
  11. Per Stumpers' comment about Princess Shroob. If the character has appeared in only one or two games, this limit should perhaps be overlooked. --Pikax 06:27, 17 May 2008 (EDT)
  12. EnPeached (talk) Per Cobold
  13. CrystalYoshi (talk) The purpose of a gallery isn't only to show the character's development. It's also just where to put the extra images. Where else would we put all that artwork.
  14. Princess Strawberry Butterfly (talk) Per all. I agree with mostly everyone.

Comments

Hmm... I think it should be upped to four, as the articles of certain obscure games (Mario Bros. Special, Punch Ball Mario Bros., etc) could use the images to include more information. But I'm all for limiting the number of images. ;) InfectedShroom (talk)

Okay... other opinions? I might change it to four, but only if there are some more users who agree with it. Time Q (talk)
I agree that the Princess Peach article shouldn't have 26 SPP artworks... But I don't think that the limit should apply to games article. I stay neutral. D'oh, didn't read the proposal correctly. Blitzwing (talk)
Huh? What do InfectedShroom and Blitzwing want to say? I thought this is about the galleries for character articles, not about screenshot galleries for articles about single games. Grandy02 (talk)
Grandy02, indeed ;) I didn't read InfectedShroom's comment very well either, otherwise I would have noticed that he's talking about game articles. So yeah, this proposal only talks about character articles. Time Q (talk)

Oh, also, since I have a feeling this will go through, I think we should still keep all of the artworks (regardless of amount) on the game pages. ForeverDaisy09

I absolutely agree with that. Time Q (talk)

Cobold and Bob-omb buddy: You're right, but then again, a limit would avoid putting too much focus on just one game in the gallery. If there is much different artwork of Peach in Mario Kart Wii, what's the point in cluttering the gallery up and deflecting from the other games? As ForeverDaisy09 said, the artwork could be placed in the game article. Three images, in my opinion, totally suffice to show the appearance of a character in a game. Time Q (talk)

Yeah, sorry for the somehow confusing title of the proposal. If you can think of a better name, let me know. :{User|Time Q}}

ForeverDaisy09, three images from each game is sufficient for any character, be they as uncommon as Princess Shroob or as famous as Mario himself. --Pikax 17:35, 16 May 2008 (EDT)

That's a good example of why this is worrying me, actually. Princess Shroob only appeared in one game, so all of the information about her personality (which is established largely though visual action) might be limited to 3/4 images. I do agree that the massive galleries do detract from articles like Princess Peach, but I really feel that a different solution is needed. How about this: the current galleries are moved to a page, such as Image Gallery (Princess Peach), and the main Princess Peach article could feature enough images to show her visual developement over the years, something like what you are proposing. Stumpers (talk) 17:55, 16 May 2008 (EDT)
Might end up creating to many low content, yet bandwidth heavy pages, but otherwise a good idea. -- Ghost Jam (talk) 21:07, 16 May 2008 (EDT)
Cobold and I were discussing this: if the artwork/screenshots are all listed at least once on the Wiki because they are in the game articles (or should be if this proposal passes), then they can be put into image categories. Because they'll be on at least one game article as well, they won't show up as unused. Stumpers (talk) 01:33, 17 May 2008 (EDT)

Stumpers, you got some very good point (the Princess Shroob example). In this case, I do agree that more than three images should be allowed. Well, now I got to choose: Ignore your demur? That would be dumb. Change this proposal to something like "only three images with the exception of characters who appeared in less than three games"? That's silly, makes things complicated and deciding on a case-by-casis basis would be much more rational here indeed. So probably I'm going to remove the proposal, but first I need to think about it again... Time Q (talk) Oh, and your idea about separate image galleries is good, too.

For the 3 vs. 4 images, couldn't the general rule be something like 3 of screenshots/images plus one more of the other kind (with a total of 4)? That way variety is guaranteed. I dunno, just throwing it out there. - Walkazo (talk)

Miscellaneous

None at the moment

Retrieved from "https://www.mariowiki.com/index.php?title=MarioWiki:Proposals&oldid=382446"