MarioWiki:Proposals/Archive/25

All past proposals are archived here. This page is protected to preserve the discussions as they were.

Allow autoconfirmed users edit other users' userpages

don't allow 1-34
Recently I have seen red links, redirect links, etc. on other peoples userpages along with deleted images and I was wondering if us autoconfirmed users can edit their userpages for errors, etc. It really doesn't make sense that only sysops get to edit this so I set up this proposal. Also, on Wikia we get to edit others' userpages along with most other wikis.

Proposer: Kaptain K. Rool (talk)
Voting start: March 19, 2011 14:30 UTC
Deadline: March 26, 2011 3:30 UTC

Support

1. Kaptain K. Rool (talk) - Because I made this proposal.

Oppose

1. Yoshiwaker (talk) Sysops only edit userpages if they need to. This would let almost anybody put anything on your user page. It's just pointless anyway.
2. M&SG (talk) - I agree with Yoshiwaker.
3. Ultrahammer5365 (talk) - Per all. You shouldn't be allowed to mess with other people's userpages.
4. Zero777 (talk) I am Zero! Per all. Zero signing out.
5. Tails777 (talk) Per all
6. Bowser's luma (talk) Yes, let us support vandalism.
7. Super Mario Bros. (talk) - Ask a sysop to fix it. I believe the "Keep Your Hands to Yourself" extension was added to the wiki by Porple because vandals were messing with user pages. It makes complete sense that only sysops and the user that owns the user space gets to edit it. And nobody cares if you can edit others' user pages on Wikia, as we aren't Wikia.
8. Phoenix (talk) No way, I'm sorry, but there's really no reason...
9. Fawfulfury65 (talk) Imagine a vandal coming onto your userpage and replacing all of your personal information with fake, unnecessary and inappropriate information that could be offensive to you. This is why only sysops can edit other peoples' userpages. If there's a problem with a userpage, you are expected to ask a sysop to remove it. It only takes a minute to ask.
10. MrConcreteDonkey (talk) - Per all. Only Sysops can be trusted with these powers. In my opinion, you've made just another proposal to suit your personal wants.
11. Bop1996 (talk) Per all. I like how you have control of your userspace and I don't want a vandal messing up my page, even if I can revert it later.
12. Yoshidude99 (talk) I don't want some random person editing my userpage.
13. Reversinator (talk) Per all.
14. Ralphfan (talk) - Per all.
15. UltraMario3000 (talk) Per all.
16. Luigi is OSAM (talk) Ummmm editing another person's page? Most users are autoconfirmed, and you never know when someone could VANDILIZE!
17. Edofenrir (talk) - None of your points is significant enough to outweight the benefits this extention provides.
18. SWFlash (talk) I've just imagined how my userpage was edited…that's……:(
19. Pokémon Trainer Mario (talk) I think once a vandal moved a sysops userpage.
20. Walkazo (talk) - Per all.
21. Paper Yoshi (talk) - Per all.
22. DK and Diddy Kong vs Bowser and Bowser Jr. (talk) - Per Bowser's luma and Yoshidude99.
23. T.c.w7468 (talk) Per all.
24. BabyLuigiOnFire (talk) Only if we autoconfirmed users can ONLY have the ability to remove fake new message boxes, but this is all or nothing, so I say nothing. Per all.
25. Baby Mario Bloops (talk) - Where to begin...hmmm...oh yes, no! There is too much vandals around the wiki to even let this happen. Not only that, but some users don't want other users putting crap on their page.
26. Gamefreak75 (talk) - Per my comment below and the rest above.
27. Mariomario64 (talk) - Per all. Plus, why give normal "everyday" users (I guess you could say that) access to editing other users' own pages? If you ask me, that makes no sense.
28. New Super Mario (talk) I like my userpage and don't want anyone editing my page.
29. Magikrazy51 (talk)Okay, so if your proposal passes, I'll erase everything and put on it "?". You could lose a lot of data that way. Per all.
30. Geniusguy445 (talk) Aren't talk page messages enough to offer help? "Your link to [Mario]] should really be [[Mario]]. Glad I could help." Or would it be better to have your entire user page destroyed except for that one correct Mario link.
31. Count Bonsula (talk) - Per all.
32. Iggykoopa (talk) per all
33. Akfamilyhome (talk) Definitely opposing. Having people wreck up your own userpage isn't fun. Why don't inform them about the error on their talk page instead?
34. Superdaisygirl (talk)I hardly have anything on my page but I still don't want someone making changes to it.

Comments

@Yoshiwaker: We can revert vandalism if they do put junk on our userpages and we do need to help the community too. Kaptain K. Rool (talk)

@Kaptain: Is there ever any really good reason to edit someone else's userpage? Yoshiwaker (talk)

Err yes... to replace images and fix red links. Kaptain K. Rool (talk)

I don't think that's a very good reason, but I'll just stop arguing because this would go on forever. Yoshiwaker (talk)

@Kaptain K. Rool - Well, that may be true, but what happens when some vandal whams your userpage? I mean, do you really want to be constantly looking over your shoulder and reverting edits every other day...? Phoenix (talk) 15:52, 18 March 2011 (EDT)

I think we would need to talk to Steve about this even if the proposal did pass... Marioguy1 (talk)

Also, on Wikia we get to edit others' userpages along with most other wikis

How many of these edits are actually good edits? About 1 in 10, I say. Judging from my userpage at Kirby Wikia, those who have edited it besides me have only inserted derogatory remarks or just complete rubbish on it. Gamefreak75 (talk)

Imagine a vandal coming onto your userpage and replacing all of your personal information with fake, unnecessary and inappropriate information that could be offensive to you.

This. What if people go to my user page and say "I hate (insert any Nintendo character here)!"? It offends me a lot when Kirby or Diddy Kong gets insulted. DK and Diddy Kong vs Bowser and Bowser Jr. (talk)

Basically, if a user page has any red links, let the Sysops handle that stuff. That's why the Sysops are here; if you want a user page fixed, just contact me or any other Sysop. M&SG (talk)

@Kaptain K. Rool - Adding on to what I said above: you say we need to "help out the community" by "removing red links, redirect links...along with deleted images," but technically, userpages are not really part of the community in this context. Pretty much the whole point of it being your userpage is that it's, well, your userpage. If other people start editing it left and right, then it's not really just yours anymore is it? That's the one thing that sets userpages apart from every other article on this wiki. In your argument, it seems to me that you're almost saying that the prospect of complete (and possibly recurring) userpage obliteration is better than some of the fairly minor problems you list above. Long story short: the only part of the wiki that we are responsible for improving is the articles. Phoenix (talk) 17:48, 19 March 2011 (EDT)

Look you're just embarrassing yourself with this proposal. It's not going to pass by any means. M&SG (talk)

I can see it possibly working if you could lock off sections of a page. Which would be FANTASTIC! for many articles. E.g. All of the stuff like release dates for past games that aren't going to change could be locked off. But until then...No. Geniusguy445 (talk)

Once upon a time, I used Wikia. And a tale from my past would have to be when I was trolled there. How was I trolled? Well, a user went to my userpage and repeatedly replaced it with insults. Marioguy1 (talk)

Caw? Iggykoopa (talk)

Spam? Reversinator (talk)

Confused? Magikrazy51 (talk)

Without a reason for existence? Bop1996 (talk)

Guys, please don't leave anymore comments about an insubstantial comment. BabyLuigiOnFire (talk)

The third line of text here pretty much makes this entire proposal invalid... Phoenix (talk) 05:25, 27 March 2011 (EDT)

---

Merge all of King Koopa's alter egos into one article

merge to king koopa's alter egos 20-3-0
On The Super Mario Bros. Super Show! King Koopa has many alter egos. These alter egos are just him in a different costume. The costumes don't give him any extra abilities, they are only seen for one episode, and while wearing the costumes, King Koopa is no different from when he's not wearing the costumes. Thus, I propose to merge the alter-egos of King Koopa that currently have an article (Al Koopone, Captain Koopa, Emperor Augustus Septemberus Octoberus Koopa,Kid Koopa, Koopa Khan, Koopa Klaus (alter ego), Moon Man Koopa, and Robo Koopa (alter ego)) into a single article. I'd prefer merging them to King Koopa's alter egos, but I'll also add a section to merge them to Bowser.

Proposer: Reversinator (talk)
Voting start: March 20, 2011, 15:50
Deadline: March 27, 2011, 23:59 (UTC)

Merge to King Koopa's alter egos

1. Reversinator (talk) Per my proposal.
2. Walkazo (talk) - Per Reversinator.
3. Bloc Partier (talk) - Per above.
4. Reddragon19k (talk) - Per all!
5. SWFlash (talk) Per Bloc Partier.
6. Bop1996 (talk) Per all.
7. Mariomario64 (talk) If they give no special powers and only appear in one episode, then why have separate articles in the first place?
8. New Super Mario (talk) Per Reversinator
9. M&SG (talk) - Alter egos really don't need their own articles.
10. DK and Diddy Kong vs Bowser and Bowser Jr. (talk) Per Mariomario64.
11. Luigi is OSAM (talk) PER ALL
12. Magikrazy51 (talk) MergemergemergemergemergemergeMERGE! Per all (merge).
13. Paper Yoshi (talk) - Per Reversinator's comment below (the one after mine).
14. Geniusguy445 (talk) good idea. per all. Because they were a separate article to begin with. We can do this now, and then allow another proposal if people really want the page to be part of Bowser.
15. Mpeng (talk) D'accordo
16. Iggykoopa (talk) per all
17. TheBreakshift (talk) Per all.
18. Zero777 (talk) I am Zero! what the heck happen to my original vote Per all. Zero signing out.
19. DKPetey99 (talk) Per all except M&SG
20. Lu-igi board (talk) per all

Merge to Bowser

1. Pokémon Trainer Mario (talk) I honestly think this idea is better. Per a- There's no one above me!
2. DKPetey99 (talk) Bowser is no different than the alter egos, thus, it should merge to Bowser.
3. Akfamilyhome (talk) Per all? Yeah... but even better you can just add a link that redirects to the alter ego page.

Comments

I agree. Just as how the Super Strikes and Mega Strikes were merged together, these alter egos should be merged together. DK and Diddy Kong vs Bowser and Bowser Jr. (talk)

How are you planning on merging? Are you going to add a new column to the table, or do something altogether different. Bop1996 (talk)

I was planning on adding a new column and giving a short description of the alter-ego's role. Reversinator (talk)

Before merging King Koopa, I suggest that you merge Robo Koopa to Robo Suit, because I feel that information belongs there rather than being deleted. Also, what are we going to do with the Featured Article status on Robo Koopa if this proposal passes? BabyLuigiOnFire (talk)

The powers of the suit should go there, and like I said before, I'll give a brief summary on King Koopa's alter egos. And if it's merged, there's no point in keeping the FA status. Reversinator (talk)

Although I believe the pages have enough information to stand by themselves, I'll stay open to any opinions before voting, as I never watched The Super Mario Bros. Super Show!. Paper Yoshi (talk)

Most of the info is basically the plot of the episode. Reversinator (talk)

Will this proposal unfeature Robo Koopa? I'm not sure the articles that will be merged will be the same quality. LeftyGreenMario (talk)

While this is going on, how about merging all of the pages on the (sort of borrowing my brother's idea here, please don't add a megabyte of protests to my userpage, again) Super Paper Mario people, and other single-appearance things? Mpeng (talk)

@Mpeng What the heck are you even talking about? King Koopa (Or just Bowser) has nothing to do with Super Paper Mario.UltraMario3000 (talk)

@UltraMario3000 - Didn't say he was. I guess this isn't the time or place. Mpeng (talk)

I think Robo Koopa should keep its own article, and FA status - if it's long enough and good enough, what's the point of merging and losing a great article. Instead, we can just use {{main}}. If we merge it, we're bound to lose some information and that's not good for the Wiki. MrConcreteDonkey (talk)

But that would be inconsistent. Besides, all the information can easily be saved. Robo Koopa (episode) already has a complete record of events, so shortening the alter ego's History into a summary isn't an issue. The Trivia about the RoboCop and Terminator reference can also go into the episode page, and the Powers and Abilities chart can go into Robo Suit (along with the other Trivia point about the "destroy you miserable little meddlers" button). So the only thing we'd be losing is an entry in out list of FAs, but that's a small price to pay for a much more efficient and consistent organization of Koopa's 30+ alter egos. - Walkazo (talk)

---

Merge Minor NPCs with their location

don't merge 1-16
There are a lot of articles for minor NPCs in RPGs that are too minor to be their own article. I believe we should merge them with the location where they are, so they can be found easily. Also, many of these articles are stubs anyway, so it would also get rid of some stubs.

Proposer: Yoshiwaker (talk)
Voting start: March 27, 1:00 UTC
Deadline: April 3, 23:59 (UTC)

Support

1. Yoshiwaker (talk) - Per my proposal.

Oppose

1. Zero777 (talk) Per opposing comments.
2. Reversinator (talk) Per Zero.
3. New Super Mario (talk) Per Zero
4. Edofenrir (talk) - It might get rid of a few stubs, but it would also get rid of some pretty decent articles. I also think the location articles wouldn't really benefit from having those NPCs slapped on them.
5. Reddragon19k (talk) No way! Per all!
6. SWFlash (talk) Per Zero.
7. Iggykoopa (talk) per zero
8. Magikrazy51 (talk) What's your definition of minor NPC? If it's "a character that has little to nothing to do with the main plot", that would include Culex, Jinx, and etc. I don't want any of these merged! If not, let me know in the comments and I'll change my vote.
9. Walkazo (talk) - Per all, including the anti-merging stuff being said in the comments.
10. Bowser's luma (talk) Per al. Who's al? All.
11. Luigi is OSAM (talk) Per All. Even if they are minor and non-playable, they still are characters. CJARACTERS ARE IMPORTANT, MINOR AND NON-PLAYABLE OR NOT!
12. UltraMario3000 (talk) Per the purple dragon with green hair.
13. Nicke8 (talk) Per all.
14. Bop1996 (talk) Per Zero.
15. Ultrahammer5365 (talk) Per Zero's comments.
16. Mario4Ever (talk) Per Zero.

Comments

I hate the trigger-happy people on this wiki that shout "MERGE!" to all stubs. First of all, at least three hundred articles on this wiki, if not more, are minor characters. That's a lot of articles. Second, while they are minor, they are still characters, and they are officially named, and thus, they deserve an article. Third, how would this be better? I mean, a lot of the minor character articles are actually decently sized, and merging them would require some trimming, thus reducing quality. Fourth, why their location? Considering the amount of minor NPCs in a town, the articles would look cluttered. Reversinator (talk)

Also, small articles are not automatically bad: they might not even be stubs if all the information we could possibly find has been added (stubs are pages lacking info). It makes sense to merge characters who are attached at the hip (it cuts down on repetition and may boost comprehensiveness if all the info is together), and sometimes it is done for the sake of organization and consistency (like King Koopa's alter egos), but none of that is applicable to minor NPCs. - Walkazo (talk)

I agree with you 100%, though I do find it funny that you made a proposal to merge all the minor Mario Golf characters into one article and now you're against merging minor characters. --Reversinator 22:32, 25 March 2011 (EDT)

Really? That must've been a while ago, because I can't remember doing that at all... - Walkazo (talk)

Archive 18. I made a mistake though, you only supported it. You were the only one though, aside from Zero. --Reversinator 22:42, 25 March 2011 (EDT)

Ah, that makes more sense; I was a big supporter of making big lists of stuff back them, but I was pretty sure I hadn't made any proposals about it (the closest I came to one had something to do with Keys, iirc). Anyway, 2009's ancient history now: I'm not nearly as zealous about merging these days (well, depending on the situation, at least). - Walkazo (talk)

@Reversinator: It's not just because they're stubs, but also that they are EXTREMELY minor. Most of them just say a couple of lines and do nothing else. Yoshiwaker (talk)

Walkazo: Didn't you co-write that with SMB? Anyways, to all users, if you see an article marked as a stub and it's off a (as this guy puts it) "minor NPC" then, unless the article has like two sentences or something like that, remove the template. It is the easiest way to get rid of stubs. When I'm bored and looking for something to do, I go to this page and just click random things on the list and get rid of any unnecessary stub templates. Marioguy1 (talk)

Yeah, we were working together on it together, but I didn't think we ever came forward with a proposal, in the end: I got swamped by RL stuff, or something. Anyway, like you said, Stub templates are definitely put on things that aren't stubs all the time and fixing that is a very good thing to do, but I'd like to emphasize that people should look at them on a case-by-case basis (like most things on the wiki, really). One paragraph is probably fine for a lot of NPCs (or whatever), but some "minor" characters could have a lot of random info attached to them, and in those cases, a paragraph might indeed be short-changing the readers, in which case it would be a legitimate stub. Or at least, that's how I look at it. (Also, "minor NPC" has been a term around the wiki for years: this guy didn't come up with it.) - Walkazo (talk)

"working together on it together"? Aaanyways, do you think we could make a list of Minor NPCs? It wouldn't (necessarily) have to be in a mainspace article, but I think I'd like a list telling me what is and what isn't a minor NPC. Marioguy1 (talk)

You mean make a category for Minor NPCs? Bop1996 (talk)

@MG1: I considor "Minor NPC"s to be characters who do not help you in any way and have no relevance to the plot. Yoshiwaker (talk)

@Yoshiwaker: That definition is incredibly vague. What about a character who contributes to a minor side quest only taken upon by completionists, but if you complete that side quest, you can get a hint as to the main plot? That type of character is not uncommon in RPGs, so if I were to support this, I would want to have a clear, concise definition. Bop1996 (talk)

At least my proposal to merge all generic humans into one article had more good reasons then just they're all small/stubs and it will look good. Merging them all into a location article is as random as that TPP that wanted to merge Bozzo with Watchitt and NO it will not make the articles nicer, it will make it look cluttered-up, unorganized, and unprofessional. And plus, WE ARE USERS, NOT AMERICANS, what do we do when we notice a list of related articles are stubs, we either add information to expand it or do something to them (like merging) with very good logic and support, we don't lazily decide let's merge them all because I don't know a thing about about the article or I'm too lazy so I'll do the easiest thing that comes to mind without thinking over it. (P.s. No offense, and this wasn't directed only towards the proposer.) Zero777 (talk)

"working together on it together"... yeaaah, I was really tired when I wrote that last comment: I'm just glad that was the only mistake ^_^; Anyway, in its strictest sense, I'd say a minor NPC is a character who you don't ever need to interact with in order to complete a game, including side-quests. For example, almost everyone in Category:Flip-Flop Folk is a "minor NPC", with exceptions like Red and Green (Super Paper Mario), Saffron, Old Man Watchitt, Pook, etc. However, this is just a very basic definition: there's probably lots of exceptions, and any single blanket statement probably isn't the way to go about this; a list in MarioWiki namespace might be a more solid approach, but I don't really see any benefits of it: so we'd know they're "minor NPCs", so what? A basic knowledge of the games should tell people whether or not the pages are lacking info or not and should or shouldn't be labeled as Stubs, so a list isn't needed for that (for example); if we were going to delete all the pages and wanted to show people what not to write about, an inventory would make sense, but if the proposal fails, that's obviously not a factor. A category would not be a good idea, since labeling things as "minor NPCs" is a value judgement; that's okay for deciding what we do behind-the-scenes, but that sorta thing shouldn't go into mainspace: it's akin to speculation. - Walkazo (talk)

That was the point I was trying to make. The term "Minor NPCs" is so subjective, there would have to be one concise definition used if we pass this proposal. Bop1996 (talk)

I think my definition was quite concise. I also clarified/changed the proposal to make it easier to show that the main purpose isn't because of them being stubs.Yoshiwaker (talk)

You might want to put your definition right in the proposal itself (so readers don't have to comb through the comments to figure out what exactly will be merged). You should also explain why you think they're too minor for articles: simply saying "There are a lot of articles for minor NPCs in RPGs that are too minor to be their own article[s]." is rather tautological, leaving the "they're stubs" argument as the only thing to go on (the bit about finding things more easily doesn't relate to the "they're too minor for pages" aspect). - Walkazo (talk)

If I'm right on the definition, you want Culex, Jinx and Monstermana merged with Monstro Town, Toadofsky merged with Tadpole Pond and The Sunglasses Salesman and Doot-Doot Sisters merged with Isle Delfino? They have nothing to do with the main plot. Magikrazy51 (talk)

---

Input new rules for name changing

don't input 1-19
I used up my 2 chances to change my name, but I find my current name to be too long. I say to increase the number of times we can change our names to three, and place a limit on how many letters, numbers, spaces, etc. to 20. It saves users from making their second (and last) name change, then realizing that the username is too long.

Proposer: DK and Diddy Kong vs Bowser and Bowser Jr. (talk)
Voting start: March 29, 2011 at 21:30 UTC
Deadline: April 6, 2011 at 21:30 UTC

Support

1. DK and Diddy Kong vs Bowser and Bowser Jr. (talk) Isn't it annoying to have to type my long name EVERY SINGLE TIME? Also, the limit prevents people from making really long usernames like "I enjoy Nintendo games so much I like (insert Nintendo series here)! My favorite character is (insert character here)."

Oppose

1. Fawfulfury65 (talk) Per my comments.
2. DKPetey99 (talk) Per FF65 comments.
3. Bowser's luma (talk) Per all.
4. Iggykoopa (talk) i don't think you should change the rules just cause you messed up
5. Bop1996 (talk) Per FF65.
6. Luigi is OSAM (talk) Per all. Bending the rules so you can change your name? Maybe next time you make an username on something, make it shorter!
7. Phoenix (talk) Per my comment.
8. Zero777 (talk) How does this benefits the wiki? This only helps you. Look, if you really think your name is too long then I suggest to truly show a mod that your name is WAY TOO LONG and must change for one last time to a shorter name. Also, I prefer that it should be illegal to change usernames the wiki, forum is one thing but in the wiki it gets too confusing on who is who.
9. Walkazo (talk) - Per all, including Xzelion in the comments.
10. Xzelion (talk) - Per my comments
11. Ultrahammer5365 (talk) Your name IS too long, but like Phoenix said, you can't change the rules just because they inconvenience you.
12. Nicke8 (talk) Per Zero777.
13. Superfiremario (talk) Per Fawfulfury65's comments and Zero777.
14. Paper Yoshi (talk) - Per all.
15. Mario4Ever (talk) You picked it, your problem. Per all.
16. Magikrazy51 (talk) This looks like a job for Hindsight Man! You should have picked a smaller name. Per those above and below me (if any are below me).
17. SuperYoshiBros (talk) Per Iggykoopa, Luigi is OSAM, Zero777 and Ultrahammer5365.
18. Volatile Dweevil (talk) Per all.
19. Turboo (talk) - per all

Comments

So you're basically making this proposal to help yourself change your username? Users shouldn't have to change their username at all, and changing it just causes confusion. Users should know that they should avoid changing their username to something long and that they only have two times to change it. Fawfulfury65 (talk)

I shortened the title because the old title really expanded the TOC at the top of the page, feel free to change it to another message; just as long as the new message is not a full sentence.

Also, my suggestion to you would be to go to your preferences, replace the signature with [[User:<yourname>|<yourname>]] [[User talk:<yourname>|(Talk)]] - then just click the signature button when trying to sign a comment. Marioguy1 (talk)

I find two changes to be too short. Three should be enough. DK and Diddy Kong vs Bowser and Bowser Jr. (talk)

I don't think so. I'm sorry, but you can't just change the rules simply because they inconvenience you. No offense, but you wouldn't be stuck in this situation if you had read the rules in the first place. Phoenix (talk) 23:02, 29 March 2011 (EDT)

Ya know if you just got rid of your first account and made a new account that would settle that matter easily instead of changing the rules Iggykoopa (talk)

Um, no, that's called sockpuppeting and is completely against the rules: the only time we let people replace their account is if they forget their original password. - Walkazo (talk)

fair enough Iggykoopa (talk)

Name changes are quite the big deal and users should think it through before going ahead with it, also the limit is foolish, you should know when there's too many characters in your name yourself. Should there be a law that you can't chop off your own hand? No, cause it should be common sense. Two is just fine, heck one would be perfectly fine. Xzelion (talk)

My username is long and has the symbol é. That means I can't go here on my laptop and it takes me a little longer to type my name at certain times. Pokémon Trainer Mario (talk)

Just a thought, but maybe you could type your username in a blank word document, save it, and just copy and paste it into the login page each time you go to log in. That would be easier. Tails777 (talk)

You know, if you get that é symbol once, most browsers (at least ones that I use, such as Firefox and Chrome) will give you the option to remember the username and password. Bop1996 (talk)

When you make your name, shoundn't you choose a shorter one? And at Pokémon Trainer Mario, You can click "Remember me on this computer" BTW I'm laptopin, and I Wrote your name! Luigi is OSAM (talk)

I'd also like to mention that if we use the 20 character limit mentioned in the proposal, a lot of users will need their usernames to be changed. This just gives bureaucrats a lot of worthless work to do, and it would cause a lot of problems. Fawfulfury65 (talk)

You should of been wiser for your username. Superfiremario (talk)

It would be worth considering to have a character limit for new users. Old users may keep theirs, and this could prevent problems like this or even some name changes in the first place. But that's only if it is possible. Cacciaguida (talk)

If the number of characters is ever a problem, we will fix it. Marioguy1 (talk)

Pokémon Trainer Mario, a really easy way to get that "é" in Pokémon is to google "pokemon". The first entry has the word Pokémon with an "é". Just copy and paste it. Volatile Dweevil

---

Make an Article for AR games

make an article for ar games 15-0
I think AR games needs a page on here.It has a lot of Mario characters in it

• Mario
• Cheep-Cheep
• Blooper
• Lakitu
• Fishbone
• Green Shell(item)

No other wiki has a page for AR games,and it's Mario related,so it should have an article.

Proposer: yoshiyoshiyoshi (talk)
Voting start: April 2, 5:30 UTC
Deadline: April 9, 23:59 (UTC)

Support

1. yoshiyoshiyoshi (talk) - Per my proposal.
2. Luigi is OSAM (talk)- WHy don't we have an article for this??? It's Strongly Mario related.
3. Nicke8 (talk) Per Luigi is OSAM
4. SWFlash (talk) Per proposal.
5. Superfiremario (talk) Per yoshiyoshiyoshi's proposal.
6. LeftyGreenMario (talk) This proposal isn't even necessary. You can just create an article and see how that goes.
7. Bop1996 (talk) Per proposal.
8. Mariomario64 (talk) Per LeftyGreenMario.
9. Zero777 (talk) Per all, but only the Mario related ones.
10. Mario4Ever (talk) Per Zero.
11. Bowser's luma (talk) Per Zero.
12. SuperYoshiBros (talk) Per Zero.
13. Reddragon19k (talk) Per all and myself!
14. Ultrahammer5365 (talk) Per all.
15. Magikrazy51 (talk) Per yoshiyoshiyoshi, Luigi is OSAM, LeftyGreenMario, Zero777 and others who have good idea for supporting.

Comments

What the heck is an AR game? Zero777 (talk)

It's one of the new things bundled with the 3DS. this site has some articles that mention it, including their most recent article on the 3DS. Oh, and yoshix3, I agree, the AR cards have a variety of uses, and we could make an article on the Mario related ones. Bop1996 (talk)

Fishing is highly Mario related(you can catch Mario stuff) and Star Pics has Mario in it so i think we should make an article on AR games itself and those 2 — The preceding unsigned comment was added by Yoshiyoshiyoshi (talk).

I still don't know what's an AR game because the website is too vague on what it specifically is. Zero777 (talk)

AR stands for augmented reality. The second image in the Wikipedia article is (in my opinion) the best way to describe it. Mariomario64 (talk)

On the 3ds,there are these special cards,and you look at them in the camera and it makes it look like things are appearing wherever you have the camera.its kind of like virtual reality,but the opposite http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1FZP2jvNljs yoshiyoshiyoshi (talk)

Oh now I know what you are talking about. I think it's best to make one article for this, because the cards are too simple for them to have their own separate articles. Zero777 (talk)

If there aren't more AR cards coming, maybe it would be best to have them in the 3DS article? Fawfulfury65 (talk)

I'd be happy with having them in the 3DS article or their own article, but there are a bunch of Mario-related minigames in there, and they need to be mentioned. Bop1996 (talk)

I'd go with both and use the {{main|Article Name}} template. BabyLuigiOnFire (talk)

---

Remove certain entries in "References in Other Games" sections

remove entries 14-0
On most of the articles about games, there is a "References in Other Games" section that lists games that reference that game. What's the problem? If an enemy is introduced in one game, and then that enemy is used in a future game, it is considered a reference to the former game. May I ask why? If an enemy appears in another game, that means it is a recurring enemy. The first game just introduced it.

Proposer: Reversinator (talk)
Voting start: 5 April, 2011, 10:15
Deadline: 12 April, 2011, 23:59 (UTC).

Delete those entries

1. Reversinator (talk) Per proposal.
2. Luigi is OSAM (talk) It should only have real references.
3. Bop1996 (talk) Per proposal. If we were going to allow an enemy that debuts in a game to be considered referenced every time it appears in a game, then, for example, Super Mario Bros. could have a reference section listing every game Goombas appear in, and their role in those games, the same for Koopas, Piranha Plants, etc. It doesn't make any sense, and is not really a reference. If a spin-off series mentions something from a game (eg: a sticker in SSBB), then it could be considered a reference because that is (at least partially) intended to be a reference.
4. Iggykoopa (talk) Per all however i do feel that it is a reference when something like a Spike reappears or if say Phanto or the Goomba's Shoe ever came back
5. Reddragon19k (talk) Lose it! Per all if you please.
6. Mario4Ever (talk) Per Bop1996.
7. Zero777 (talk) Enemies returning aren't really a reference to any other game if they're in the same series. Keep the ACTUAL references.
8. SuperYoshiBros (talk) Per Bop1996 and Zero777.
9. Bowser's luma (talk) Per Zero.
10. Nicke8 (talk) Per Bop1996.
11. Magikrazy51 (talk) Per Bop and those who "per" him.
12. BabyLuigiOnFire (talk) I did remove this information before. Besides, this is inconsistent if we do have it. Why can't we put Goomba and Koopa Troopas as references to Super Mario Bros. in every darn game they appeared in? What makes other enemies, such as Freezies and Sidesteppers? If this warrants to enemies, I think this should be extended to items as well, such as the POW block.
13. yoshiyoshiyoshi (talk) per Zero
14. SWFlash (talk) Per proposal.

Comments

But it technically could be a reference to the game since it debuted in an earlier game Iggykoopa (talk)

Um, I don't think this warrants a proposal. I've seen people deleting those entries lately such as Marioguy1 in something about Freezies and stuff. I've deleted several of these myself. BabyLuigiOnFire (talk)

Might as well make one in case someone disagrees. Reversinator (talk)

@Reversinator: Which types of entries are you proposing to delete? You mentioned one example, and while it makes sense, you have not specified which sections specifically you want deleted. Bop1996 (talk)

This proposal is to remove certain entries in "References in other games" sections, not entire sections. I'm talking about removing any entires that say "This enemy reappeared in this game". Reversinator (talk)

Only those or other entries? Bop1996 (talk)

Maybe if the enemy is minor enough, it can stay referenced. If the Stus from SMS return in another game, that references SMS and Gooper Blooper in Mario Power Tennis is a reference to SMS because he was new and therefore minor back then. Keep that in mind before this passes. Magikrazy51 (talk)

If it was clear that it was meant to be a reference, then I'll keep it. Reversinator (talk)

References are not that simple; if they were, a concise rule set would be developed already. But as we do not know what Nintendo was thinking, we can't do this. I definitely don't think that every game with a Goomba in it is a reference to SMB, or that every game with Mario is a reference to the original DK. But sometimes when enemies appear, it is a reference (i.e. Dino Piranha in SMG is referenced by Peewee Piranha in SMG2 (sorry, couldn't think of anything better)). So it's complicated. And then, to make matters more complicated - music. Sometimes music is remixed music from another game, sometimes it's the same, sometimes it's different, but we can't be sure whether music that sounds like it's from SMB3 is actually a reference to SMB3 or they just ran out of sound files so they remixed something. Like I said, the references to other games sections are very complicated. Marioguy1 (talk)

I agree with Marioguy. Nintendo seems to love including nostalgic references to other games, and then not specifying whether it is a reference or not. Where does that leave us? It seems that this is going to be a case-by-case situation. However, I feel that this discussion is clouding the issue a bit. Bop1996 (talk)

---

Split Category:Donkey Kong Levels into Separate Categories

don't split 21-24
This is my first proposal. There are many games in the Donkey Kong series. The category, Donkey Kong Levels, there is too much content. It has about 5 different games in one category. I think we should make categories for each game. For example, Category:Donkey Kong Country Levels, etc. It would be easier to find levels and it wouldn't take up 2 pages! We should make one for every game such as Donkey Kong Country 2, Donkey Kong Country 3, DK: King of Swing, etc. It just seems easier to navigate levels. We should also delete the original one if we make other categories. I will add a section for making new categories and I will add one for keep the original one as is.

Proposer: DKPetey99 (talk)
Voting start: March 23, 2011 20:51
Deadline: March 31, 2011, 23:59 (UTC) Extended: April 7, 2011, 23:59 (UTC), April 14, 2011, 23:59 (UTC)

Make a New Category

1. DKPetey99 (talk) - It is my proposal and I think it would help the wiki and other users by making it simple to navigate levels by games.
2. M&SG (talk) - That sounds like a good idea.
3. Kaptain K. Rool (talk) - Per M&SG.
4. SWFlash (talk) Per proposer.
5. Reddragon19k (talk) Love it! Per SW and Kaptain K. Rool!
6. Bowser's luma (talk) Per all.
7. Akfamilyhome (talk) That'd make it more simple. Per all.
8. Magikrazy51 (talk) We don't have all the Mario games levels in one category.
9. Yoshidude99 (talk) Per Magikrazy51.
10. Nicke8 (talk) Per Magikrazy51 also.
11. Boowhoplaysgames (talk) Per All
12. Ilovemarioandtoad (talk) Per All
13. Lucas777123 (talk) Per All.
14. IGGY7735 (talk) Per all.
15. BoygeyDude (talk) Why not? Per all
16. Allycat0925 (talk) Per all.
17. Superfiremario (talk) Per all.
18. YoshiGo99 (talk) Per all.
19. SuperYoshiBros (talk) Per all.
20. DK and Diddy Kong vs Bowser and Bowser Jr. (talk) Per DKPetey99.
21. yoshiyoshiyoshi (talk) Per all

Keep Original Category

1. Walkazo (talk) - Just use the games' navigation templates: they're supposed to have all the levels listed, and generally they'll be arranged by world, which is a much better way to organize the levels than the alphabetical categories. It's better if all games, DK or otherwise, simply have general categories for all their subjects.
2. Bop1996 (talk) Per Walkazo. I don't see why this is necessary.
3. Paper Yoshi (talk) - Per Walkazo and Fawfulfury65's comment below (although FF65 hasn't voted yet).
4. Luigi is OSAM (talk)- Is this really necessary? It's sort of like going to the characters catagor