MarioWiki:Proposals/Archive/76

From the Super Mario Wiki, the Mario encyclopedia
Jump to navigationJump to search
Proposal archives
1 · 2 · 3 · 4 · 5 · 6 · 7 · 8 · 9 · 10 · 11 · 12 · 13 · 14 · 15 · 16 · 17 · 18 · 19 · 20 · 21 · 22 · 23 · 24 · 25 · 26 · 27 · 28 · 29 · 30 · 31 · 32 · 33 · 34 · 35 · 36 · 37 · 38 · 39 · 40 · 41 · 42 · 43 · 44 · 45 · 46 · 47 · 48 · 49 · 50 · 51 · 52 · 53 · 54 · 55 · 56 · 57 · 58 · 59 · 60 · 61 · 62 · 63 · 64 · 65 · 66 · 67 · 68 · 69 · 70 · 71 · 72 · 73 · 74 · 75 · 76 · 77 · 78 · 79
All past proposals are archived here. This page is protected to preserve the discussions as they were.

Rework "References" sections

Support, type A (fully chronological) 11-1-1
As the Super Mario franchise is both massive and highly interconnected, one aspect of our coverage is listing all instances of a work referencing or being referenced by other works. This is accomplished through a pair of sections near the bottom of the article: "References to other games/media" and "References in other games/media", which list each applicable work as a bullet point on a list in chronological order, then list each reference in prose. While this format works well at smaller scales, certain games push this past its limit.

Take a look at Super Mario Odyssey's "References to other games" section at the time of writing. Certain games listed (such as Donkey Kong, Super Mario 64 or Super Mario Galaxy) are so saturated that it's genuinely difficult to read. Because Super Mario games are constantly referencing past entries, this is a problem that will continue to grow until something is done about it. So, here's my pitch:

Instead of using bullet points for games, we use bullet points for individual references, while separating each title into subsections with ;. This makes individual sections easier to parse, although they *do* take up a bit more space. An individual game listed would look like:

Mario Bros.
  • There is a bonus game starring Luigi available on the title screen, called Luigi Bros. It is played similarly to this game, except both playable characters are Luigi.
  • The big POW Block on the very top of The Great Tower of Bowser Land must be hit multiple times, getting flatter every time it's hit, just like it does in Mario Bros.

I've created two drafts for what a full section would look like using this model, taking Super Mario 3D World as a sample:

If this proposal passes, these guidelines will be codified in our Manual of Style for posterity and slowly rolled out across articles, as we've been doing with Naming sections.

Proposer: EvieMaybe (talk)
Deadline: May 13, 2025, 23:59 GMT Closed early on May 5, 2025, 23:59 GMT

Support, type A (fully chronological)

  1. Yoshi18 (talk) It's a more organized version of what we have right now and I'm fine with what we have right now, but if it's more organized, it's always better if you ask me, and making it chronological makes it even more organized, so it's basically a win-win. Sub-sections are much better than simply putting "[game name]:". Adding the sub-sections makes reading it much easier.
  2. Hewer (talk) If the goal is to decrease clutter and improve readability, I think this solution is better than the other one that adds more unnecessary headers.
  3. Fakename123 (talk) I have thought about proposing something similar myself.
  4. DesaMatt (talk) Per proposal.
  5. Okapii (talk) Much preferred over the current system!
  6. Rering644 (talk) Per proposal.
  7. Sparks (talk) Per all.
  8. Mario4Ever (talk) Per Hewer.
  9. Camwoodstock (talk) Per Hewer, we'd vastly prefer this over a by-series split.
  10. Nintendo101 (talk) I think this is a good idea after some additional thought, and eviemaybe made me appreciate that my concern was a bit silly. I still think our current system is fine, but let's see how this works out.
  11. ThePowerPlayer (talk) Per all.

Support, type B (sorted by series)

  1. EvieMaybe (talk) my preferred choice.

Oppose (reference sections are fine as is)

  1. Hewer (talk) Second choice, I don't think the current way is that bad.

Nintendo101 (talk) I appreciate that so much effort was put into this scheme, and I may be too used to the current system, but I think I prefer how we currently do things for references. It leaves those sections condensed, and I worry introducing a structure that sees different parts of the reference sections subdivided even further would expand byte-usage without much else changing, and that can be a problem for some of the largest game articles on the wiki that I would rather not see split. This is not a hardline vote: I can probably be persuaded or come around to a different perspective with more thought. But this vote reflects how I feel at the moment.

Comments in other games

@Nintendo101 i appreciate the byte usage concern, but it's genuinely not a concern. using semi-colons for the section titles is exactly as intensive (one character) as using asterisks for a bullet point list; the only added weight would come from the extra line breaks and bullet points, which are negligible and can be offset by using Template:A on game titles. i admit Type B's series titles would add some extra bytes, but not much more than adding one single well-sourced NIOL. it's no biggie. — Super Leaf stamp from Super Mario 3D World + Bowser's Fury.eviemaybe (talk / contributions) 20:14, May 3, 2025 (EDT)

Rename "List of (game) staff" articles to "(game) credits" and include what happens in credits sequences

Do not rename or include credits sequence information 3-0-1-6
"Credits" is generally the proper term when listing staff in media. As for the latter part, while we do have an article about ending Parades, I think it couldn't hurt to mention what happens while the credits roll in the article opener. e.g for Super Paper Mario's article: "During the credits, images of scenes throughout the game are shown". Listing the staff itself will remain unchanged.

Proposer: Nightwicked Bowser (talk)
Deadline: May 7, 2025, 23:59 GMT

Both

  1. Nightwicked Bowser (talk) Per proposal
  2. Rykitu credits (talk) Per proposal
  3. Yoshi18 (talk) I'm all in for using the more famous term "credits". Per proposal!

Only rename articles

Only include credits sequence information

  1. Mushzoom (talk) Primary choice, per the sequence part of the proposal and Waluigi Time's issue.

Neither

  1. Waluigi Time (talk) My issue here is that this doesn't account for games without credits sequences or instances where staff members are uncredited, and even if it did that would create an inconsistency with page titles. I'm not necessarily opposed to including information about credits sequences but don't really see it as necessary for that page.
  2. Mario4Ever (talk) Per Waluigi Time.
  3. Mushzoom (talk) Secondary choice, per Waluigi Time.
  4. Salmancer (talk) per Waluigi Time. Though I'm drawing a blank for where on an article to talk about the credits. Setting sections?
  5. Xiahou Ba, The Nasty Warrior (talk) Per all.
  6. ThePowerPlayer (talk) Per all.

Comments

Would this also apply to games that don't have a credits roll, like Super Mario Bros.? I think it would be misleading to refer to the list of staff as "credits" if so. I need more wrenches... Dive Rocket Launcher 08:06, April 24, 2025 (EDT)

Allow old names to be used for article titles if it avoids confusion

Keep the policy as is 3-12
The core target of this proposal is "Koopa Beach 2 no wait its SNES Koopa Beach 2 oh no actually it's SNES Koopa Troopa Beach 2-even-though-it-isnt-a-successor-to-Koopa Troopa Beach no wait now it IS Koopa Troopa Beach-even-though-it-isnt-Koopa Troopa Beach-nor-is-it-a-course-that-isnt-asuccessor". Yeah.

This wiki has a policy that I've always believed to be somewhat flawed, where article titles must always use the most recent name for a subject, no matter how unknown or rarely used it is, or how iconic or popular the older name is, with zero exceptions at all. This goes without saying: but that's flawed. Koopa Beach 2 has now proved that for us here.

With the classic prefixes added in Mario Kart DS, the course was renamed to "SNES Koopa Beach 2", okay that's fair.

In Mario Kart Tour, however, the course was renamed to "SNES Koopa Troopa Beach 2" - which immediately is now creating confusion. It's a successor to Koopa Beach 1, not Koopa Troopa Beach, but the name doesn't illustrate that. Combined with the fact that more people are going to know it as "Koopa Beach 2", there's already a significant amount of confusion created by an already flawed policy.

Then Mario Kart World comes in, and renames the course once again. Now it is called "Koopa Troopa Beach". I do not need to explain how much the policy overcomplicates this.

So: Koopa Beach 1 and Koopa Beach 2 are courses from Super Mario Kart while Koopa Troopa Beach is a course from Mario Kart 64. In Mario Kart Tour, Koopa Beach 2 was renamed to SNES Koopa Troopa Beach 2 while in America in Mario Kart 7, Koopa Troopa Beach is called N64 Koopa Beach, but only in America, while in Tour it's back to N64 Koopa Troopa Beach. In Mario Kart World, SNES Koopa Troopa Beach 2 is now just "Koopa Troopa Beach". It's bad enough, so much so that it literally caused confusion on this wiki whether it was SNES or N64 or not, and the name of the course is the sole blame. Yet, this wiki doesn't tackle the issue: because the policy MUST be enforced at all times.

So: because of the policy, the pages name now needs to be renamed to "Koopa Troopa Beach". But, here's the issue:

Naming it "Koopa Troopa Beach (Super Mario Kart)" is a bad idea since there is no course in Super Mario Kart called "Koopa Troopa Beach", while naming it "Koopa Troopa Beach (Mario Kart World)" also makes no sense since the course obviously did not debut in Mario Kart World. The easiest option is to leave it as "SNES Koopa Beach 2", the name most people will search for anyways, and specify in the article the name is different in subsequent games (which it already does). Maybe a template at the top of the article can be added to inform readers about the article using an older name. I believe that enforcing a policy, especially one with little benefits like this, and forcing it with zero exceptions is a harmful idea, and it's showing now more than ever before.

We can tell from gameplay, screenshots, and of course the in game world map icon, that the course is just Koopa Beach 2 with little gameplay changes - just a name change.

So the options are simple:

•Keep the name policy as it is: this would rename the article to "Koopa Troopa Beach", which creates confusion and conflict.

or...

•Allow the policy to be changed, so articles can still use old names if it avoids confusion and conflict: this would effect the Koopa Beach 2 article by renaming it back to "SNES Koopa Beach 2" with the article going into detail about the subsequent name changes.

Koopa Beach 2 is just one example: inevitably there will be more in the future, and it's best to get this sorted now before then.

To keep things as simple as possible with as little grey area as possible: let's say the definition of "creating confusion" is if two subjects names are different, but then one is changed so it is now identical to the other, despite them not being so in their original appearance.

Proposer: YoYo (talk)
Deadline: May 16, 2025, 23:59 GMT Closed early on May 9, 2025, 23:59 GMT

Allow older names to be used if it prevents confusion

  1. YoYo (talk) Per proposal.
  2. Tails777 (talk) I know I'm likely in the minority of this, but the Koopa Beach 2 example just makes sense to me. I understand the mentality and reason for prioritizing the most recent names, but Mario Kart tracks feel like an interesting case. I feel it's imminent that we'll eventually address Mario Kart's use of console prefixes, as the release of Mario Kart World means that several tracks that used their prefixes prior now logically have to be moved back, which creates an inconsistency with not only other tracks that do use prefixes, but other tracks that may be in the same game. Koopa Beach 2 still feels like a perfect example of this; all possible names for this track will be misleading in some sense, especially with the existence of N64 Koopa Troopa Beach (which, might I add, never had its name moved even when it was shortened between the time frame of Mario Kart 7 and Mario Kart Tour) and while that's for sure not up to us to try and fix, I just feel like it's not a terrible idea to allow some leniency in a specific case like this. Key word: "specific", I also feel that the "used if it prevents confusion" part of the title should be priority here.
  3. LinkTheLefty (talk) I'm with Tails on this one. Quite frankly, the Koopa Beach example reminds me of some of the Super Mario Bros. 3 and Super Mario 64 names, where we keep things consistent either to name sets or for better interchangeability. Some discretion is fine.

Keep the policy as is, with zero exceptions

  1. Hewer (talk) Very strong oppose. It isn't our place to decide that official names are bad or confusing, we should report on them and use them accurately regardless of our opinions. I'd much rather maintain an accurate and consistent naming policy than start arbitrarily ignoring names we don't like. Besides, it's not like any of the games this course appears in are very obscure - a lot of people are gonna play Mario Kart World and may come to know the course as "Koopa Troopa Beach", and it may confuse them to see the wiki using a different name for it. "Koopa Beach 2" (a name that hasn't been used in a game in twenty years) being the name you're personally used to doesn't make it more correct than the newer name.
  2. PopitTart (talk) Per Hewer. The wiki already covers eight (arguably nine) entirely separate courses named Rainbow Road. This is fine.
  3. Salmancer (talk) If Nintendo broke it, we're not allowed to fix it. We report, not embellish. We call Donkey Kong's move where he slaps the ground a "ground pound" in prose, even when this leads to confusion with the Ground Pound. (The only reason the page is named "Hand Slap" is because there wasn't a non-remake Donkey Kong video game for the entirety of the Nintendo Switch's lifespan, leaving Smash Ultimate to reassert Hand Slap.) Maybe on a different wiki, with a different culture, we would consider using older names for clarity. But currently, it is more important on this wiki to be correct than to match fandom expectation.
  4. EvieMaybe (talk) this is incredibly subjective, and also not very helpful unless you already know which one is the SNES track and which one is the N64 track? per all.
  5. Camwoodstock (talk) Per all, especially Salmancer and Evie; it's more important to us to be accurate to a confusing source, and the far more subjective follow-up question of "what even counts as a 'bad name'?" doesn't appeal to us.
  6. Nelsonic (talk) While I agree that Nintendo's official names can be confusing (there's twenty-ish different things that are all called Super Mario Bros.), I don't think we should use older names. Per all.
  7. Rykitu (talk) Per all, especially PopitTart and Nelsonic.
  8. Yoshi18 (talk) Per all, especially Hewer, PopitTart, Salmancer and Evie. They make a very good and strong point.
  9. Mario4Ever (talk) Per all.
  10. ThePowerPlayer (talk) Per all. Also, the N64 course's article is already titled N64 Koopa Troopa Beach, so the article about the course from Super Mario Kart and Mario Kart World can just be titled "Koopa Troopa Beach" - case closed. If anything, this makes it less confusing.
  11. Sdman213 (talk) Per.
  12. Arend (talk) Per all; also, implementing this proposal means we have to re-add the periods in N64 DK's Jungle Parkway and re-remove the 's in all the GBA Bowser's Castles.

Comments

We have something called source priority exception, even though it's not mentioned in the guideline proper. LinkTheLefty (talk) 04:37, May 2, 2025 (EDT)

Wasn't that not intended to affect in-game names? (I know I opposed that proposal but I might vote differently if it happened again) Hewer (talk · contributions · edit count) 04:49, May 2, 2025 (EDT)
All the names mentioned in the proposal here are in-game, I think, so there's difference. LinkTheLefty (talk) 04:57, May 2, 2025 (EDT)
So source priority exception wouldn't take effect at all then, right? Hewer (talk · contributions · edit count) 05:03, May 2, 2025 (EDT)
I'm just pointing out that leniency is a thing, so this proposal could basically be seen as another extension of that. LinkTheLefty (talk) 05:11, May 2, 2025 (EDT)

@PopitTart, I advise you actually read the proposal. Those are all named as such since they debuted, so identifying them different like we do now is perfectly okay. This is not the same. There is no course in Super Mario Kart called "Koopa Troopa Beach" therefore identifying it the same way is not applicable. - YoYo Yoshi Head (light blue) from Mario Kart: Super Circuit (Talk) 05:59, May 2, 2025 (EDT)

Iit wasn't called Koopa Troopa Beach in SMK, but it is now. That's just... what Nintendo is choosing to call it now. And it still debuted in SMK, even after getting a name change.--PopitTart (talk) 06:14, May 2, 2025 (EDT)

Honestly, I'd wait until Mario Kart World is out. People said they have spotted Koopa Beach 1 next to Koopa Beach 2, and if that turns out to be an alternate route through a VS mode intermission like what SEEMS to be happening for Peach Beach and Crown City, then that makes the SNES Koopa Beach courses (and maybe the first three SNES Mario Circuits too) eligible to be merged, in similar vein to all the Tour city courses, and therefor eliminating the problem this proposal wants to resolve in the first place. ArendLogoTransparent.pngrend (talk) (edits) 16:00, May 8, 2025 (EDT)

I really wouldn't say the merged Mario Circuit is in the same boat as Tour city courses. The city tracks are all on the same map and have always been on the same map, the Mario Circuits are three separate tracks that, in World, are simply put together. They never originated in the same map like the city tracks do. I really wouldn't consider merging them into one article since at least 7 other games still treat them as distinct tracks. Sprite of Yoshi's stock icon from Super Smash Bros. Ultimate Tails777 Talk to me!Sprite of Daisy's stock icon from Super Smash Bros. Ultimate

Permit sprite uploads of particle effects

Keep status quo 2-0-10
Particle effects are specific visuals in games (and other media) that are used to represent things such as movement, weather, action, and other such things that might fly under the radar for many people but help make the environment and setting that much more lifelike. You can see at least two here. Most of them require some amount of interaction to appear, so it's not really a case where we can just have "only interactive ones;" they pretty much all are, as either you affect them, they affect you, or as most often is, both. They include:

They do not include other sorts of visual effects like postprocessing, shaders, distance-based fog, and other more nebulous things that can't really be captured in a truly isolated image.

Unsurprisingly, many of these are generic and in later games, may come from stock libraries of images (which, in my opinion, is its own piece of interest, like how the investigation of Wet-Dry World's background went on for a while). Others, however, feature unique animations that may differ depending on the source; when looking at "puffs of smoke" animations in Super Mario Bros. 3, I counted seven distinct smoke puff animations, which I found to be interesting as I was unaware there were more than one. And I think it's time that this oft-overlooked immersion tool got some appreciation here. Generally speaking, they'd go on the game's own gallery page, though ones that specifically relate to other defined subjects can go on their galleries as well. EDIT: I have also drafted a page specifically for the subject, so they can be added there as well.

I tried doing this without a proposal, and no-one seemed to mind when I uploaded ones for NES Golf and some other games. However, when I included their animations among my Super Mario Bros. 3 rips, it was specifically brought up by a few users that they didn't see the utility in featuring them, though others defended their presence - namely in the fact that the Super Mario Wiki is "a collaborative encyclopedia dedicated to documenting anything and everything about the Super Mario franchise and related series," meaning this is the place most people would go to if they were specifically looking for something like that. And we can't just rely on TSR; not only is it wrong to lean on another website, but their content never has processed or animated ones, so... where else would they be uploaded, if not here? So anyway, I'd like to set the record straight with the community: are they OK, or should they be nixed? I'm ultimately fine with either, but I want there to be some amount of consistency rather than the nebulous, arbitrary thing we have now.

Proposer: Doc von Schmeltwick (talk)
Deadline: May 18, 2025, 23:59 GMT Closed early on May 11, 2025, 23:59 GMT

Support: Particle party (yes particles)

  1. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) - Perticle
  2. Hewer (talk) Sure, it's valid and somewhat interesting information about the games we cover. I can't think of a reason why someone would oppose this beyond "it doesn't interest me personally", which doesn't make it not notable.

Oppose: Hay fever (no particles)

Status quo: Leave it without specific rules in place (maybe particles?)

  1. Nintendo101 (talk) I am not wholly opposed to particle effects and the like. They are often part of the visual identity of the games they come from and are an under-documented element online. However, I do think we should exercise discretion. Maybe not every single colored iteration of the same particle is necessary to have on the wiki. Maybe we should not just host them unceremoniously in a gallery with minimal context: it would be create if we had a article that explained what particle effects are and why I (the reader) should or could care about them substantively, and the assets were uploaded to illustrate that point. We document many things on the site that are part of this franchise's identity, including things I would have never thought about documenting like fonts and memes. That stuff is cool, but we do not host every single instance, for example, of a font being used in a game. Or uploaded every letter/character individually. Discretion and curation is an important skill for making good reference material like our wiki.
  2. EvieMaybe (talk) per N101. as an aside, i don't appreciate the name of this voting option, as i am not voting for this because i want it "left nebulous and undefined". i notice that a lot of recent proposals tend to name their non-Support options something disdainful, and i do not enjoy it in the slightest.
  3. Camwoodstock (talk) Per all, especially Nintendo101. While it's nice to have a good illustration of things, is such a thing as too much, to the point where it just becomes unhelpful. There's a reason that the Mario Kart course pages pruned all but one variant of their Tour icons awhile back; it isn't particularly "helpful" to see the exact same image but with a different character in the foreground when one variant would do the trick just as well. Likewise, it'd be nice to have various particle effects, but it'd be rather overkill to have every possible variant based entirely on what the palette of the current level is when you could understand it just as well with only one of those. Unless the differences are actually significant enough to be worth noting (so like... honestly, the only example that comes directly to mind is how the Sharp X1 version of Super Mario Bros. Special has two distinct sprites for Buzzy Beetles, one for if they appear on a blue background and one for if they appear on a black background, and it's the only game in the videogame that does a trick like that, but like, that's an enemy and not a particle, and okay you get it), one is really all you need. And, like Evie, we don't exactly appreciate the implication that a policy that, while definitely in need of being made more clear--seriously, our policy pages are in pretty dire need of a rewrite after a ton of proposals that have changed them and introduced edge cases--is "without specific rules in place". They do exist, they just need to be conveyed a lot better.
  4. Mario4Ever (talk) Per Nintendo101.
  5. Waluigi Time (talk) Per all. While it's true that we're "a collaborative encyclopedia dedicated to documenting anything and everything about the Super Mario franchise and related series", we're also not an asset dump. If particle effects have illustrative value, users should have the freedom to upload them, but that doesn't mean we need to upload every single one just to have it. Similarly, if the texture for a model, for example, had some illustrative value, I would support it, but I would not support blanket uploading every single texture ever for the sake of valuing consistency for its own sake over editorial discretion and curation. The other options of uploading literally everything or uploading nothing at all are certainly not preferable.
  6. Xiahou Ba, The Nasty Warrior (talk) Absolutely not.
  7. TheFlameChomp (talk) Per Nintendo101.
  8. Arend (talk) It really depends on the kinds of particles. Things like emotes or text-based pop-ups feel unique enough to be shown, but I'm not really feeling for sprites of snowstorm snowflakes or the shockwave of a synchronized Ground Pound.
  9. Mario (talk) It would be just as strange if I visited Grand Theft Auto Wiki and saw a substantial portion of the page devoted to the dust and fire and rain particle effects.
  10. Nelsonic (talk) Per all.

Comments, queries, and other (regarding particles)

can you add an option to just upload them when they're needed for illustrative purposes? i think that's what would align with a wiki's goals the most. — Super Leaf stamp from Super Mario 3D World + Bowser's Fury.eviemaybe (talk / contributions) 10:18, May 4, 2025 (EDT)

What is "needed" is itself subjective, unfortunately, as everything that can be done with a sprite rip of them can also be done with a screenshot (and some might argue can be done better through that). And given they're almost entirely based around interaction, there's not really any way to determine what should get more weight than any others. As such, anything that can't be consistently enforced in a way that would have an interpretation that is agreed upon by all users would be option 3. Note that this is based on allowing them to be uploaded, not requiring them to be. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 10:25, May 4, 2025 (EDT)

@EvieMaybe - IDK, I didn't think it was harsh (and "nebula" loosely relates to particles) but I guess "disdain" is in the eye of the beholder, but I've renamed it. The purpose of having the options have specific names, in my experience, is so you can tell which proposal is being opposed on the recent changes list. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 12:33, May 4, 2025 (EDT)

@Nintendo101 - I agree that there should be better textual explanations of them here, but before that can really be implemented we need enough visuals uploaded. This is just the first step. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 12:36, May 4, 2025 (EDT)

Perhaps other folks approach things differently, but I typically start writing things first and upload visual assets after the fact when they feel needed. - Nintendo101 (talk) 12:38, May 4, 2025 (EDT)
And that is also how I would typically do that, but when the subject is itself a visual effect, that gives the visual aspect a higher priority in my opinion. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 12:41, May 4, 2025 (EDT)
Here is a quickly made demo of an article on the subject. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 16:23, May 4, 2025 (EDT)
I'm not voting in this proposal because, while I fully support uploading miscellaneous game assets to the wiki as long as they are distributed in a non-disruptive manner, I'm not sure how you'd enforce that through a rule. I just came here to say that I like that page concept in your sandbox and I want to see it happen. Technical concepts in general have been relatively neglected on this wiki, and little progress has been made toward that goal since this issue was signalled on the forums almost a decade ago. (Apparently there used to be a page on loading zones, regrettably deleted because it was deemed too generic, but surely a topic of that nature can be interesting to some people, no? If it has genuine educational value, why not, for instance, develop a page on how sprites are used in the Mario series?) -- KOOPA CON CARNE 17:54, May 9, 2025 (EDT)

@Camwoodstock: The difference with the Mario Kart icons situation is that we still have all those images, just not on the course pages themselves. If we're covering every officially used font and hashtag, I don't see why we should draw the line at fully covering visual effects that appear in the games themselves. Hewer (talk · contributions · edit count) 13:43, May 4, 2025 (EDT)

@Waluigi Time - I don't think textures that are intended to be applied to fully 3D models are a good comparison; that would seem more like uploading palettes (as in, just the four-to-32 squares of color) not applied to anything. And while I agree that we are in the strictest sense "not an asset dump," I do not think that obstructing the uploading of processed assets (as opposed to unprocessed ones) is warranted. If you can tell what something is supposed to be and it is an accurate rendition of how it appears in the medium in question, while not being 100% redundant with another uploaded asset, there should be no problem. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 13:07, May 5, 2025 (EDT)

No, in terms of 3D models, the closest thing to a palette are vertex colors. A texture is more like an atlas, and textures come in more forms than just albedo/diffuse and depending on the game, compromise of multiple necessary components including ambient occlusion and normal maps, things that you can see as intended in a model but cannot be segregated from one another. BabyLuigiFire.pngXiahou Ba(the Nasty Warrior) 18:12, May 6, 2025 (EDT)
I'd say vertex colors are more akin to the tinting you'd see in some later 2D games, personally. Either way, that's pretty different from the subject here, which are unique standalone graphics. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 18:14, May 6, 2025 (EDT)

So in this proposal there's an "oppose" option that aims to change wiki policy to the opposite of what "support" aims for, and "status quo" that changes nothing. What exactly is the point of naming the second option "oppose" if that one's fine enough and still speaking of "status quo" as if it's the one to be opposed? SmokedChili (talk) 13:15, May 7, 2025 (EDT)

Mainly because the proposal is about determining if they should be featured at all; the status quo is not having any hard-and-fast rule on the subject. Therefore, it neither supports nor opposes the proposal. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 17:56, May 7, 2025 (EDT)
So which outcome is "status quo" then? Pass or fail? SmokedChili (talk) 09:34, May 8, 2025 (EDT)
If nothing is changed, sounds like a fail to me. BabyLuigiFire.pngXiahou Ba(the Nasty Warrior) 12:24, May 8, 2025 (EDT)
Indeed, this. Both support and oppose I would consider a sort of success since that would place a rule on the subject, which currently we do not have. Basically, letting someone in the future know whether they can or can't upload a bunch of particle images if they're crazy enough to do so; if there's a certain "they can" or "they can't," I'd consider this proposal to be a success on either end. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 14:30, May 8, 2025 (EDT)
That just makes calling the other success option "oppose" pointless then. SmokedChili (talk) 16:39, May 9, 2025 (EDT)
Not really, we can have two fail states for this proposal. BabyLuigiFire.pngXiahou Ba(the Nasty Warrior) 17:22, May 9, 2025 (EDT)

Are you, like, trying to turn the Mario Wiki into "The Spriter's Resource 2" with these proposals? Shadow2 (talk) 22:17, May 8, 2025 (EDT)

Just vote if you disagree, there's no need for snark here. BabyLuigiFire.pngXiahou Ba(the Nasty Warrior) 22:39, May 8, 2025 (EDT)
Who's snarking? I'm legitimately asking if that's the intention here. Shadow2 (talk) 07:33, May 10, 2025 (EDT)
Nobody's wanting to turn this site into "The Spriter's Resource 2". Knock off the attitude. BabyLuigiFire.pngXiahou Ba(the Nasty Warrior) 14:55, May 12, 2025 (EDT)
I think animations have a place here, no matter what type they are (y'know s'long as they're relevant to official Mario-media). TSR does not do animations, and especially not animations with unconventional frame delays, reflections, and other such visuals that are only really possible to do while they are moving. I am not about to start advocating that, for instance, this sort of thing be uploaded, because that would be ridiculous as it is unhelpful to illustrate anything as it appears within the game it represents. Puff and explosion effects that do appear unaltered in-game, meanwhile, have no real reason they shouldn't be on here. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 23:02, May 8, 2025 (EDT)

Allow objects to be listed on level articles

Include interactive objects only 2-2-14-5
So I tried adding level objects to SMB3 level pages and was told I need to do a proposal first. I don't see why it should be an issue; after all, we already list items, enemies, music tracks, timer seconds, and other such things on each of them. If we're going to have exact counts of every coin in a stage, why can't we list a stage as having Brick Blocks or P-Switches or unmoving obstacles or specific types of platforms or recurring ambient/decorative objects? Doesn't make much sense when you get right down to it. The easiest way to find out what levels a gimmick is used, after all, is to click on an image and see what pages it's linked on; not linking them on it makes it exponentially harder to find out where something is used with no benefit gained from not having them, and given they're generally short articles anyway, they're not going to get in the way of anything - objectively!

EDIT: At the insistence of the opposition, I have added an option to only have interactive objects - as much as I personally disagree with that sentiment.

Proposer: Doc von Schmeltwick (talk)
Deadline: May 15, 2025, 23:59 GMT

Support - Full equality for all objects (includes interactive and decorative objects in the same section)

  1. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) - Per
  2. Rykitu (talk) Per all.
  • #Yoshi18 (talk) In my opinion, it's absurd the wiki doesn't do this already. Objects are important things in levels. From simple objects, such as Brick Blocks, to objects that are able to change the whole level layout, such as !-Switches. And now I'm basically only talking about the 2D games! The 3D games have much more in store, when talking about objects (mainly dynamic objects). Since the level pages are also short anyway, this is a good way to usefully expand on them more. And as you said, if we literally have the time to count the amount of coins, we surely have the time to count objects.
  • #Arend (talk) ...we don't do this already?!

Support - Separate but equal (includes interactive and decorative objects in separate sections)

  1. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) - Per
  2. Hewer (talk) Sure, no harm in being thorough.

Half-support - Tangibility above all (includes interactive objects alone)

  1. Tails777 (talk) If this focuses more on stuff like palettes for Goombas, blocks, coins and such, I'm personally okay with that. Less so if it's like, every frame for every sprite, but I'm personally more on this option overall.
  2. Hewer (talk) Second choice.
  3. Camwoodstock (talk) - This makes far more sense to list off, and to be frank, we're a bit shocked that listing these course gimmick objects isn't done already. Without background objects gumming up the list into borderline Sisyphean heights, it's a lot more helpful to your average reader--and to be frank, a lot better of a workload--to know specific course elements like Note Blocks or Clear Pipes or POW Blocks or what-not are in a stage, rather than. If there's a bush.
  4. Arend (talk) There you go, this is what I initially thought the proposal was for. Once again... we don't do this already?!
  5. Waluigi Time (talk) This option is something that shouldn't need a proposal, and I think the fact that we don't do it already is because nobody's bothered to rather than it being explicitly not allowed. Like I said in my original vote, if this was what was being done I doubt it would be controversial at all, it was the decorative background tiles being included that caused problems.
  6. Pseudo (talk) Covering these kinds of objects is super useful for the wiki.
  7. TheFlameChomp (talk) As I previously mentioned in my opposition, this approach makes a lot of sense to me and I believe listing interactive elements is beneficial.
  8. EvieMaybe (talk) i don't like having to amend my vote like this, but i guess this options aligns closer to how i think these oughta be covered. per WT and Camwoodstock
  9. Mario (talk) Seems like the best choice. But I would also support including nongeneric objects that are decorative under here (for instance, if there is a Lakitu Cloud in the background that is purely decorative, i.e. can't be interacted with, it should still be included).
  10. PopitTart (talk) I would prefer something like a bulleted list or table rather than a gallery, but there definitely should be lists of these things in some form. and the inverse as well, telling what levels the objects are in on their articles.
  11. Yoshi18 (talk) I was originally for the support option, but seeing the arguments on the óbjection side made, I began to doubt which side I should choose. This seems like the perfect solution actually. Per all.
  12. Nintendo101 (talk) Sure, paritcularly if it matches the tables we have for enemies and items in level articles. However, I hope folks do not use this an justification to list, say, every colored iteration or design of something like a Semisolid Platform within the level (sans the White Block, which has a function distinct from other Semisolid Platforms). If there is no difference in function, I think only one example of the object should be visually displayed.
  13. Xiahou Ba, The Nasty Warrior (talk) We don't really need a proposal for this, we've been doing this for years until somehow, purely decorative background fodder became a relevant thing to discuss? Whatever, at least this will have basis solidified in writing than formless editor discretion.
  14. Scrooge200 (talk) Per other votes for this.

Objection - Objects are second-class subjects

  1. Sparks (talk) Per Waluigi Time. Listing every single background subject/things you don't interact with is too much.
  2. PopitTart (talk) Per EvieMaybe and Waluigi Time, this proposal is just far too vague. If you're gonna count the powerup-shaped clouds and distinct colors of semisolid platform, then you ought to also count the fossils and rocks that appear in the terrain of NSMBU levels and each one of the different colors of Hard Block that make up hidden Luigis in NSLU. In addition, why is the goal listed as two separate gallery entries? They're literally one and the same. This proposal kinda just feels like an excuse to justify your (somewhat excessive) SMB3 sprite rips.
  3. Shadow2 (talk) Per all. And we don't need the object listings on the SMB3 world pages either.
  4. Salmancer (talk) If we want to set the mood for a level, we can just add more screenshots. And make the Hill article to store up lists of every location with Hills. I'm voting here and not for the interactive items list so that this resolves as "no changes". I still don't want to curse anyone with the burden of counting beads. Or trying to count every coin the Gold P Switch in Conkdor Canyon causes to fall. Which declaring that all articles are expected to have lists of interactive objects does.
  5. Mario4Ever (talk) Per my comment below. I already thought the inclusion of non-interactive objects/elements was excessive, and I disagree with the proposed approach regarding interactive ones.
  • Camwoodstock (talk) Per Waluigi Time. The core concept is fine, but we feel like a list of background elements is overkill; it would be incredibly asinine to list Horsetails in every single Mario level they appear in. If there was an option for just things that had tangible gameplay impact, we'd support it in a heartbeat, but for now... Too much, sorry.
  • Arend (talk) I'm all for functional and interactable objects being listed - P-Switches and whatnot - and am baffled we still haven't done this - but after seeing Waluigi Time, Camwoodstock, Eviemaybe, and others' concerns, and re-reading through the proposal, I've realized that the proposal also wants (recurring) background objects to be listed - like the dome-shaped hills or the horsetail plants - AND treats them the same as the functional and interactable ones, even though they add nothing but background aesthetic. If only there were an option that just allows the objects that can be interacted with and/or have functions in gameplay. If only such an option that ditches the background fodder was there...
  • Waluigi Time (talk) I agree with this line of thinking, to an extent. Brick Blocks, P Switches, and other objects that the player can interact with should be listed on level articles. If that was the sole issue here, I doubt this would be at all controversial. However, going as far as having a gallery that includes every single bush or cloud background tile in the level, which this proposal advocates for, is overboard. And keep in mind we're only talking about SMB3 here, a relatively simple NES game. Imagine how out of hand it would be if we had a gallery of every single background model in a Galaxy or Odyssey level that the player can't even interact with.
  • TheFlameChomp (talk) Per all. I agree with what others have said, in that listing functional objects would be beneficial and I would support adding that kind of thing to articles. However, I believe there is a big difference between functional objects and background objects, and I do not agree with filling object lists with background tiles which exist as decorations.
  • EvieMaybe (talk) Per Waluigi Time, Camwoodstock, and Salmancer's comment. This proposal is concerningly vague about what counts as "an object". Do Super Mario Bros. Wonder's decorative objects[1][2] count as distinct objects? This proposal was sparked by you including stuff like hills or clouds in World 1-2 of Super Mario Bros. 3, and those are just tileset elements, so if those count then these absolutely count. Even if we limit it to "objects" which affect gameplay, what about Super Mario Galaxy's invisible gravity areas?[3] What about Super Mario Bros., which constructs everything in its levels out of "objects"?[4] Limiting it once again to subjects with pages, would this require us to count every coin of every level of every game? As long as this proposal remains so vague and undefined about its goals, I cannot in good conscience vote for it, and even then, properly defining these goals would pretty much require this proposal to be canceled and another to be raised. If you plan on trying again, I recommend including clear criteria for what an "object" is, as well as a draft of how a page would look like if this proposal passed. Until then, I'm opposing this.
  • Mario4Ever (talk) Per EvieMaybe.
  • Nintendo101 (talk) Per my comments below.

Object comments

I really, really don't want to have to count beads in every course, and I'm not sure there is anyone who does want to. Or for a more common example, counting coins in New Super Mario Bros. 2, though at least for them size is not a meaningful property of coins. I'm not sure we want to have stub notices saying we have to count up every last one of these minor dealy-bobs. Salmancer (talk) 17:39, May 1, 2025 (EDT)

I'm not advocating anything be counted, I brought that up as a thing I've already seen done without anyone taking issue with it. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 17:46, May 1, 2025 (EDT)

@Waluigi Time - There's a reason I said "recurring" ambient objects, as in decorations that appear throughout the game. I'm not counting level geometry that's all part of one big cohesive model (as that is one object, technically) or random parallax details (if anything, layered backgrounds could have their own gallery section). Given many of the background objects have pages of their own (like tree and cactus), it makes sense to include them in my point of view. Basically, when an asset can actually be isolated without severe edits to the source, which would take out most of what would be a potential "bloating" issue in games more graphically complex than, for instance, Super Mario World. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 17:45, May 1, 2025 (EDT)

The Models Resource's upload of the Metro Kingdom contains 133 separate model files making up that environment. I could very easily isolate and render each piece without having to make any edits whatsoever. --Waluigi's head icon in Mario Kart 8 Deluxe. Too Bad! Waluigi Time! 19:12, May 1, 2025 (EDT)
Honestly? Views of 3D map files seem like an interesting thing to have, though they'd have their own sections of course. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 19:24, May 1, 2025 (EDT)
The map as a whole, yes, I agree. It would be nice to have more comprehensive images of 3D environments without having to resort to other means like Noclip, I feel like that's something we're lacking for certain games. I don't think we need to get into the individual bits and bobs that make up those maps, however. --Waluigi's head icon in Mario Kart 8 Deluxe. Too Bad! Waluigi Time! 19:39, May 1, 2025 (EDT)
Well much of what I uploaded are combinations anyway, so I think that those combined would still be the same thing in spirit. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 19:46, May 1, 2025 (EDT)
References cited in EvieMaybe's (now-cancelled) vote
  1. ^ Rimea (November 13, 2024). The Secret Purpose of These Rocks. YouTube. Retrieved May 1, 2025.
  2. ^ Rimea (February 3, 2025). The Secret of These Pumpkins. YouTube. Retrieved May 1, 2025.
  3. ^ Jasper (September 29, 2020). How Spherical Planets Bent the Rules in Super Mario Galaxy. YouTube. Retrieved May 1, 2025.
  4. ^ Retro Game Mechanics Explained (November 26, 2022). Super Mario Bros. Glitch Levels Explained. YouTube. Retrieved May 1, 2025.

@EvieMaybe - I have stated numerous times that this proposal has nothing to do with counting things. I brought up coin counts as something I have already seen done by other users on SMB3 pages, which no one took issue with. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 18:34, May 1, 2025 (EDT)

i appreciate the clarification, but it does not change my opinion that this proposal is poorly concieved and poorly executed. — Super Leaf stamp from Super Mario 3D World + Bowser's Fury.eviemaybe (talk / contributions) 18:42, May 1, 2025 (EDT)
I must ask, what issues arise with having full coverage of this? If I want to know what stages an asset appears in, the best way to find that out is to see where the image is linked to. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 18:47, May 1, 2025 (EDT)
Checking the articles that an image is linked to seems like relatively extreme Wiki-fu. Aside from not being intuitive without understanding how Mediawiki works, it has two weaknesses. One is that the moment a second game reuses assets from another game the results will be covered in false positives. (Good luck differentiating New Super Mario Bros. U courses from New Super Luigi U courses solely on their titles. Example: File:NSMBU Gliding Waddlewing Artwork.png) The second is that the results are sorted alphebetically, which isn't useful from a user perspective. Back when courses/levels/whatever were always "World X-Y", the results would match the order of the game. Ignore the game article in those results and sure, this works. But as of New Mario U courses can have all manner of names, which means the list of articles an image is linked to haphazardly jumps between Worlds and game order with little rhyme or reason. The best way to find what levels have what objects is the simplest: have the Wiki's writers make the list for the reader. Easier said than done the bigger the game involved, yes, but it generally more accessible and it doesn't bloat out a course article with a gallery of clouds and hills. Salmancer (talk) 19:05, May 1, 2025 (EDT)
"Relatively extreme?" It's an extremely obvious and straightforward thing to do, and I am floored to learn that some people don't do that. Also, given most of the level titles are in the format of "World #-#" anyway, they're pretty much sorted in order anyway, so that argument makes no sense. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 19:22, May 1, 2025 (EDT)
i'm afraid you might've fallen victim to the good ol' XKCD pitfall. the average user does not have the technical know-how nor the familiarity to think "to find out in which levels this enemy appears, i should check what pages link to this image of it" (hell, i wouldn'tve come up with that on my own, and i literally just used citations on a proposal answer). even then, trying to float it as a solution for flooding level pages with sprite rips of what amounts to every single individual graphic used in a stage is absurd. — Super Leaf stamp from Super Mario 3D World + Bowser's Fury.eviemaybe (talk / contributions) 20:01, May 1, 2025 (EDT)
Again, for what reason should we not feature decorative objects? They're important to the stage's visual identity. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 20:20, May 1, 2025 (EDT)
Because the concept of listing every "decorative object" is absolutely Sisyphean. Lets stick with SMB3 as an example. If we're including the various shapes of powerup-like clouds, what about the other shapes of clouds with anywhere from 1 to 3 pairs of eyes? or the hills which come in varying amounts of lumpiness? If we're including the various designs of semisolid, should we include the various designs of ground? Do the large vertical posts in airships get a special mention? Both the aboveground and underground palettes of 1-5? On the topic of underground, are the dark sparkly background tile things an object? How many distinct pipe "objects" are in 7-1? Decor simply isn't rigidly defined at all like things that matter to gameplay.--PopitTart (talk) 20:37, May 1, 2025 (EDT)
I'd consider wiki'ing on such an expansive franchise as this an enjoyable sort of Sisyphean endeavor, myself. Anyways, I held myself back from including the "background walls" in my initial uploads, so I wasn't including them; I'd consider different colors of pipes, blocks, and ground to be fair game for "interactive objects," and the posts on the airship levels are just a particular shape of the "ground" there. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 21:49, May 1, 2025 (EDT)

@PopitTart - Because they are functionally two different things. Granted, the flashing card probably should be listed as an item (along with the balls Boom Boom drops and the Koopalings' wands), as that is technically what it is, while the "holding box" is a background object. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 19:27, May 1, 2025 (EDT)

Sure, as far as the NES is technically concerned, the latter is on the background layer and the former is on the sprite layer, but as far as the wiki is practically concerned, they are The Goal. one thing. Just like a Goal Pole is a pole and flag, and an SMW goalpost is the posts and the ribbon. Conveying them separately to the reader doesn't do anything but tell them the level has a goal (shocking!) over the span of two separate gallery items.--PopitTart (talk) 19:44, May 1, 2025 (EDT)

I worry this proposal is framed around a motte-and-bailey argument. I do not imagine anyone taking issue with the inclusion of interactable objects within a level article like switches and blocks, and if that was the only thing you had done, I doubt anyone would have taken issue with it and may have even appreciated it. What raised eyebrows was the inclusion of noninteractive background elements like clouds. While the background elements are part of the game's visual identity and probably are worth discussing somewhere on the wiki, I imagine most folks would find that their documentation in the level articles, as well as every single color and iteration of each noninteractive background element within a level, is gratuitous and reduces the utility of the level articles. That is the actual issue - not the inclusion of tactile objects like blocks and switches. - Nintendo101 (talk) 19:34, May 1, 2025 (EDT)

I would certainly support a more nuanced proposal to document the actual contents of a level in detail. Pikipedia has lists of enemies, collectables, and reoccurring obstacles for each area, (along with the inverse lists of each area the subjects appear in) which are extraordinarily useful.--PopitTart (talk) 19:44, May 1, 2025 (EDT)
Goomba's walking animation from Super Mario Bros.Cave Goomba from SMBAn animated ? Block from Super Mario Bros. (Overworld palette)An animated ? Block from Super Mario Bros. (Underground palette)A Coin from Super Mario Bros.An animated coin from Super Mario Bros. (Underground palette)The sprite version of the Coin from Super Mario Bros.A horsehair plant from Super Mario Bros.A horsehair plant from Super Mario Bros.Sprite of a Warp Pipe from Super Mario Bros.Warp Pipe sprite from Super Mario Bros.<-If this is OK...
A sprite of a Goomba from Super Mario Bros. 3.A Goomba in Super Mario Bros. 3, as seen in a cave stage.A ? Block.A ? Block on the tile layer in Super Mario Bros. 3, as seen in a cave stageA sprite of a coin from Super Mario Bros. 3A coin on the tile layer in Super Mario Bros. 3, as seen in a dark areaA coin on the sprite layer in Super Mario Bros. 3, as seen in a land stageA tree on the tile layer in Super Mario Bros. 3A tree on the tile layer in Super Mario Bros. 3Sprite of a Warp Pipe from Super Mario Bros. 3A pipe on the tile layer in Super Mario Bros. 3 as seen in a hills or desert stage.<-Then this is OK.
Note that none of the upper row are my uploads. It's perfectly serviceable to document all possible static palettes. SMB3 just has a lot due to being a big game on small hardware, with the remakes lessening that by a lot due to having more palettes with more values available. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 19:46, May 1, 2025 (EDT)
I think there are some misunderstandings going on. I at least welcome hosting those types of assets on the same premise as you. But this proposal is about documenting noninteractive background details on the level articles, and I would not support that for any game because it dilutes those articles.
I also do not think those were the types of assets folks found gratuitous or would have encouraged being cut. Those are illustrative and cute. A better example would be including both the Japanese HUD and the international one with only a pixel being different between. The visual difference is not even distinguishable during gameplay because they are both on black backgrounds, so we are not really earnestly illustrating anything by hosting both of them, in my view. I'm sure similar comments can be made about rubble. - Nintendo101 (talk) 20:31, May 1, 2025 (EDT)
Much of the time they're not on black backgrounds, but on various shades of blue, orange, or otherwise. Anyways, if y'all insist, I'll alter the proposal to have different options. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 21:45, May 1, 2025 (EDT)

@Tails777 - Different animations for one subject are for their own galleries, don't worry there. I'd consider separate images for different static frames of the same animation to be redundant once the image itself has been uploaded, and I've spend the past few weeks uploading the game's animations. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 22:59, May 1, 2025 (EDT)

Where would a "yes but only if object has an article on the wiki already" most likely fall under because I'd probably just stick with this? Isn't that the status quo already? Sprite of Mario's icon in Mario Party DS It's me, Mario! (Talk / Stalk) 23:08, May 1, 2025 (EDT)

Why trees but no pyramids? Ashley icon from WarioWare: Move It! Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 23:17, May 1, 2025 (EDT)
Hm yeah good point, if object has an article and(or?) the player can interact with it. The tree article I've tried to limit to ones the player can do things with OR it's a greater setting. That being said, you can point out to the opposition that if a hypothetical decorative-only and nongeneric object, like a background Skewer, is in a level, it will probably be appropriate to be listed in the article. If so, why not hills? Sprite of Mario's icon in Mario Party DS It's me, Mario! (Talk / Stalk) 23:23, May 1, 2025 (EDT)
A composite of hills on the tile layer in Super Mario Bros. 3, as seen in a hill stage Well I labeled these "hills," but given they're only as tall as Small Mario who's to say what they are? And unlike pyramids, they're not moved to the distant background with parallax scrolling in the remakes, so they're definitely a small, close thing. Not to mention SMB's horsetails, which have lore significance in that game. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 23:36, May 1, 2025 (EDT)

I would like to know more about the intended approach regarding interactive objects, especially those that have animations. I would, for example, be opposed to seeing the same object multiple times with the same animation in an effort to merely highlight palette-related differences. Mario4Ever (talk) 14:32, May 2, 2025 (EDT)

What do you mean? I think it is the right thing to do, to, for instance, include a Koopa Troopa's land and cave palettes if both appear in a single level, since the idea is to show what actually appears in the level. So if these two pipes appear in the same level, Sprite of a Warp Pipe from Super Mario Bros. 3A pipe on the tile layer in Super Mario Bros. 3 as seen in a cave stage., then they absolutely should both be accounted for. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 15:06, May 2, 2025 (EDT)
I think that a single instance of such things is sufficient as a representation of what is in a level, especially if a map is included. For me, the utility in highlighting differences of this sort would be if there were a possibility of confusing the object in question with a similar one based on those differences. Mario4Ever (talk) 15:53, May 2, 2025 (EDT)
I see palette as one of the main things that needs represented when visually documenting NES subjects, simply because of how limited it is. That also avoids the problem of deciding which should have "priority" if there's multiple in one level. Then there's things like green Paratroopas using different animations depending on their behavior, as the flying ones flap faster than the hopping ones. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 16:20, May 2, 2025 (EDT)

Out of curiosity, how would we handle these on pages such as World 1-1 (Super Mario Bros.) or World 1-1 (Super Mario Bros. Special)? Would those get a table like enemies and items, or would they be a gallery a-la the Mario 3 example? Camwoodstock-sigicon.png~Camwoodstock ( talk ☯ contribs ) Camwoodstock-sigicon2.png 14:34, May 2, 2025 (EDT)

Probably a gallery? Personally, I don't see much benefit in having a table for things that are more difficult or even impossible to objectively quantify. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 15:06, May 2, 2025 (EDT)
I personally think a table would be okay if we're talking about the interactive objects: Brick Blocks, Hidden Blocks and the like. I don't see the point of background objects listed in a table, though. ArendLogoTransparent.pngrend (talk) (edits) 06:52, May 3, 2025 (EDT)
Yes, but then we get into weird things like spikes. Do we include each spike? Each two-spike tile? Each connected spike bed? It gets confusing at that point. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 11:56, May 4, 2025 (EDT)
Doc if you are serious about including every palette of an object to the level articles, then I am going to rescind my vote. Doing stuff like that is beyond the scope of what makes level articles actually helpful reference material. I would support including different palettes of Warp Pipes on their own personal gallery, but not in the level articles. - Nintendo101 (talk) 11:41, May 4, 2025 (EDT)
Oh, sorry, didn't notice your objection on that. In that case, I'm considering nixing the orange and green semisolid blocks to focus on just the blue ones since they're the only ones whose palette actually changes by location. The others, I am having different sections for different parts of the levels and they never have multiple palettes for pipes and such in SMB3. So like, the "main area" list has the green ones and the "secret area" one has the black ones, if that makes sense. If that's too much, I can merge those and just have one, but I have to wonder which would get priority in stages with multiple linear sections? Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 11:53, May 4, 2025 (EDT)
I think I would feel more comfortable with my vote if you could provide a mock-up of how one of these level articles would look, even if a rough one. - Nintendo101 (talk) 12:00, May 4, 2025 (EDT)
Like this, but remove all but one of the semisolid platform images. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 12:34, May 4, 2025 (EDT)
I guess that's alright. But could we not have a table that explains what each of these things are to readers, like with enemies and items? I don't assume folks go in with that knowledge. I am also pretty sure we could include colored backgrounds for the sprite columns too. That could look nice. - Nintendo101 (talk) 12:45, May 4, 2025 (EDT)
I see no issue with doing so. This proposal is about having them there in the first place, not about how they are laid out. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 12:50, May 4, 2025 (EDT)
I didn't look very carefully beforehand - we usually don't provide descriptions for enemies and items unless there's an important tidbit, so forget that. And I am not sure knowing how many Cloud Blocks are in the level is as important as how many 1-Up Mushrooms are there, so a gallery is probably fine.
This is tangential, but I did do a small test with colored backgrounds for the sprite columns. I'm not sure I'd support this for games where the background isn't really a solid color (like GameCube or Nintendo DS games, as examples), but I think it looks nice here. What do you all think? - 12:59, May 4, 2025 (EDT)
Yeah, the main reason I included it is because it factors into things such as P-Switch flashing for this game specifically. In games with gradient, parallax, and texture backgrounds, there's no way and no point in replicating it. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 13:08, May 4, 2025 (EDT)
Glad we are on the same page. I have seen other folks attempt colored backgrounds for things like the New Super Mario Bros. titles and I do not think it looks right. - Nintendo101 (talk) 13:24, May 4, 2025 (EDT)

Change "British English" to "Commonwealth English"

Keep using "British English" 7-11
As we all know, many wikis (including the Super Mario Wiki), like to simply say "British English". But I think this just isn't right. It has been like this for long, even though we know that, unlike American English (which spelling really is exclusive to America, or people like me who prefer it over Commonwealth English most of the time), Commonwealth English spelling isn't exclusive to the United Kingdom, and (as a more famous example) also used Oceania. So this proposal aims to change this to avoid making it look like this spelling is only used in the United Kingdom/Europe. Per Evie (talk)'s comment; This is an inclusive wiki, so we should be using the more international (inclusive) term. Cause sometimes, who cares what Nintendo does? If they don't want to acknowledge Oceania, it's their own fault. But we can't make that same mistake.

Proposer: Yoshi18 (talk)
Deadline: May 13, 2025, 23:59 GMT Extended to May 20, 2025, 23:59 GMT

Rename to "Commonwealth English"/"English (Commonwealth)"

  1. Yoshi18 (Commonwealth) (talk) Per proposal. Wikipedia even says "Commonwealth English" is better used to include all countries that use that spelling, instead of only Britain.
  2. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) - I mean, I already write it as this.
  3. EvieMaybe (talk) Per proposal.
  4. Rykitu (Commonwealth) (talk) Per all.
  5. Camwoodstock (talk) We don't see why not. Per proposal.
  6. Nelsonic (Commonwealth) (talk) Per all.
  7. Pseudo (talk) Per all. It's a good idea to be inclusive.

Stay with "British English"/"English (United Kingdom)"

  1. SmokedChili (talk) "British English" is fine, even "European English" would be better, because it's Nintendo of Europe who localized differently for the markets the NA versions don't reach. Making this "Commonwealth English" would generalize and obscure this too much because that's the group the different non-American Englishes all fall into, and it's not all about spelling, the vocabularies also differ.
  2. Hewer (talk) Voting for this as a "do nothing" option. I've seen both terms used on the wiki and they're essentially interchangeable. I don't see the need to enforce a strict policy about which one to use when they're both commonly used terms that mean the same thing. EDIT: The point that other opposers have raised about Canada being a Commonwealth country that doesn't use "Commonwealth English" is also good. Calling it "Commonwealth English" makes no difference at best and reduces clarity at worst.
  3. LinkTheLefty (Teatime) (talk) Nintendo uses the terms "U.S. English" and "British English"
  4. Technetium (talk) Per LinkTheLefty.
  5. Mario4Ever (talk) Per LinkTheLefty.
  6. CarlosYoshiBoi (talk) Per LinkTheLefty and Hewer. British English was even listed as such on the supported languages section for the Switch 2 on the British My Nintendo Store (even listing American English after it).
  7. Arend (talk) Per all. I get that Commonwealth is the "more correct" term, but not only does Nintendo use "British English" instead, but since the term "Commonwealth" ironically not as commonly-used, I think readers would understand "British English" more clearly. Also take in account that Canada is part of the Commonwealth too, yet Mario games in Canada uses the US English language instead.
  8. YoYo (talk) Per Arend. Canada is a Commonwealth nation, yet it uses US names.
  9. U.S. Altendo (talk) Per LTL, CYB, and Arend. I wouldn't necessarily be against a rename to "PAL English", though.
  10. Cadrega86 (talk) Per all.
  11. Rainbow Road Drifter (talk) Nintendo's official website uses it, so it is a valid term for that style of English.

Commonwealth Comments

Just to be clear: British English is going bye-bye, but Australian English and Canadian English, also listed in the cite template's language codes, remain intact? LinkTheLefty (talk) 05:45, April 30, 2025 (EDT)

Australian English can indeed go bye-bye, because British and Australian English are basically the same (aka "Commonwealth English") in terms of spelling. Canadian English is a special case though, since it mixes both American and Commonwealth English. Even though that, a majority of Canadian English uses the Commonwealth English and only some words actually use the American English spelling. We might have to think a little more about to what side Canadian English sides to more. White Yoshi from Mario Kart Tour Yoshi18 (talk/contribs) 19:20, April 30, 2025 (EDT)
is the Canadian English template used anywhere, anyways? — Super Leaf stamp from Super Mario 3D World + Bowser's Fury.eviemaybe (talk / contributions) 20:47, April 30, 2025 (EDT)
Sometimes. LinkTheLefty (talk) 22:18, April 30, 2025 (EDT)
Yeah, but in terms of games, Canadian English is never used. Mostly the gaming pages (like the game infobox) and pages that state the differences between American and Commonwealth English (like most of Mario Party: Island Tour's minigames) are my main target now. White Yoshi from Mario Kart Tour Yoshi18 (talk/contribs) 17:27, May 1, 2025 (EDT)

@SmokedChili I understand your argument, but consider that, as I said; British English isn't only used in the United Kingdom or Europe. Its spelling (which is the thing that matters in games), is also used in Australia (which is the reason PAL used to exist). That the vocabularies differ doesn't really matter, because the Australian versions is just identical to British version. Nintendo of Europe and Nintendo Australia localize the same, so bringing up Nintendo of America doesn't really seem to be needed. Also, yes that's right. Every country except America and Canada use the Commonwealth spelling, which is the reason it should be changed. It's really not exclusive to only one country. White Yoshi from Mario Kart Tour Yoshi18 (talk/contribs) 06:52, May 1, 2025 (EDT)

Nintendo Australia doesn't do translations of its own. Australian versions are identical to EU versions simply because Australia is Nintendo of Europe's territory. Same with Canada to Nintendo of America. And since US English is used over Canadian English in Canada, so should the English translation by NOE be recognised as British/European English. SmokedChili (talk) 17:10, May 2, 2025 (EDT)
But even then, excluding the games, the spelling is still identical and Oceania should be noted. White Yoshi from Mario Kart Tour Yoshi18 (talk/contribs) 06:44, May 3, 2025 (EDT)
Not really, unless Nintendo specifically says they're using Commonwealth English. You keep insisting British and Australian English are identical simply because of their shared spelling while downplaying vocalubaries, and that's not mentioning grammar differences. As I said, Australia is NOE territory and thus gets British/European English text which ignores traits of Australian English like how US English versions ignore the traits of Canadian English. SmokedChili (talk) 13:28, May 4, 2025 (EDT)

@Hewer I get what your meaning, but as the above, Commonwealth English may have originated in the UK, but is no longer exclusive to it. It's like telling Australians that they're writing in British English; it's just not right. "British English/English (United Kingdom)" is basically an old term now that spelling isn't exclusive to the UK anymore and should be changed. White Yoshi from Mario Kart Tour Yoshi18 (talk/contribs) 15:00, May 1, 2025 (EDT)

I mean, if "English" isn't exclusive to England, why must "British English" be exclusive to Britain? Hewer (talk · contributions · edit count) 16:56, May 1, 2025 (EDT)
That's true, but you can't really compare them because, England is just a province (that is named after the language), while Britain (aka the UK) is a whole country, which isn't named after anything. The more-used term for Commonwealth English comes from there, unlike with England, where the name of the province itself comes from the language. White Yoshi from Mario Kart Tour Yoshi18 (talk/contribs) 17:10, May 1, 2025 (EDT)
If "British English" is the more common term for Commonwealth English, why should the origins of the term matter? Would you avoid using the term "American football" because the sport is also played outside America? Hewer (talk · contributions · edit count) 18:13, May 1, 2025 (EDT)
The term matters because it was just simply "English" + the name of the country, even though it's not the only country it's spoken in. "English (United Kingdom/Europe)" is an even better example, the spelling is not exclusive to either of those. What's Oceania then? Nothing? Just see it like (Normal) Dutch and Flemish Dutch. Hollandic Dutch is mostly just called Dutch, because of the fact it's not only spoken in The Netherlands. While Flemish Dutch (or simply Flemish) is called like that, because it's only Flanders (Belgium). Also yes, I mostly say "rugby", because it shares many similarities. White Yoshi from Mario Kart Tour Yoshi18 (talk/contribs) 18:32, May 1, 2025 (EDT)
Plenty of languages are spoken outside of the countries they are named after or originate from. I don't think "British English" implies that it's only spoken in Britain, just that it's a version originating from Britain, much like how Spanish isn't only spoken in Spain, French isn't only spoken in France, Italian isn't only spoken in Italy, etc. Hewer (talk · contributions · edit count) 19:58, May 1, 2025 (EDT)
But you know what the thing is here, we actually do distinguish Spanish and French, and say they're only spoken in either America or Europe, because we know whole Europe speaks/writes it the way they do in the French of France and whole America speaks/writes it the way they do in the French of Canada (it's the same case for Spanish, but with Europe and Latin America). I don't know if Italian has any differences between countries though. I have never seen them in our game infoboxes at least. Plus, French and Spanish have a whole sentence structure difference compared to their American counterparts, unlike Commonwealth English, which just has some spelling differences, like an extra "u" in words like "colour". White Yoshi from Mario Kart Tour Yoshi18 (talk/contribs) 06:44, May 3, 2025 (EDT)
That still doesn't refute my point that names of languages (or language variations) don't have to perfectly describe every place in the world where the language is spoken. Italian is still called "Italian" even when it's spoken in Switzerland, and it wouldn't be incorrect to describe Latin American Spanish as just "Spanish", despite it not being spoken in Spain. Hewer (talk · contributions · edit count) 13:00, May 3, 2025 (EDT)
True, but this is actually my point; We call it Latin American Spanish because it's only spoken in Latin America (similar to Flemish Dutch), but European Spanish is mostly referred to as Spanish because other countries using it are (nearly) identical. White Yoshi from Mario Kart Tour Yoshi18 (talk/contribs) 13:53, May 3, 2025 (EDT)
Doesn't your point about lack of differences between countries actually hurt your argument? There aren't many differences between the English used in the UK and other Commonwealth countries (and Nintendo doesn't make different localisations for them). Hewer (talk · contributions · edit count) 14:45, May 3, 2025 (EDT)
The lack of differences (that they are identical) is the reason why we have to merge British English with Australian English to Commonwealth (or since we never use Australian English, just British English being changed to Commonwealth English). White Yoshi from Mario Kart Tour Yoshi18 (talk/contribs) 19:20, May 3, 2025 (EDT)
i don't understand why we SHOULDN'T use the more international alternative, to be honest. this is an inclusive wiki — Super Leaf stamp from Super Mario 3D World + Bowser's Fury.eviemaybe (talk / contributions) 23:41, May 3, 2025 (EDT)
As I said in my vote, I don't have a problem with using the term "Commonwealth English" if we want, I just don't see the need to enforce a strict policy that replaces one perfectly valid term with another. As I've been arguing, I don't think the term "British English" excludes other countries any more than "English" does. Hewer (talk · contributions · edit count) 07:52, May 4, 2025 (EDT)
To be honest, we don't. We should give users the ability to write it in both ways, instead of just strictly needing to say to British English. White Yoshi from Mario Kart Tour Yoshi18 (talk/contribs) 16:30, May 4, 2025 (EDT)

Wait, is the idea with the new option just that like... "British English" and "Commonwealth English" are used interchangeably, depending on the editor's tastes??? We really, really hope we're missing something here, because if we have that exactly correct, that's... Not great. Camwoodstock-sigicon.png~Camwoodstock ( talk ☯ contribs ) Camwoodstock-sigicon2.png 16:56, May 4, 2025 (EDT)

I have taken this what you're saying here into account. And I've decided to just undo everything. Per Evie, this is an inclusive wiki. So this time, who cares what Nintendo does? If they don't wanna be inclusive, it's their own fault. But we can't just blatantly make the same mistake because Nintendo does it. White Yoshi from Mario Kart Tour Yoshi18 (talk/contribs) 17:11, May 4, 2025 (EDT)
@Camwoodstock: I'm not sure the proposer realised that being able to use either is the current policy. I don't personally see the issue with it, though. Like, would you go around policing whether people type "US English" or "American English"? Would you enforce a policy that requires us to always say "start" instead of "begin"? There are times where multiple different ways of saying the same thing can all be correct.
@Yoshi18: Again, it's not a "mistake" to call English as it's spoken in countries such as Britain "British English" any more than it's a mistake to call Spanish as it's spoken in Mexico "Spanish". Most dictionaries I've seen also denote terms as "British". Hewer (talk · contributions · edit count) 17:20, May 4, 2025 (EDT)
"US English" and "American English" are the same. "British English" and "Commonwealth English" is not the same. The first one basically covers only one country and the second one is more inclusive and covers others (more famously Australia). And once again, on this wiki, we call the Spanish from Mexico "Latin American Spanish". "British English" is at this point just a less formal term that nobody bothers changing (because maybe we're too scared for change which is fine but it needs to happen one day), since even some dictionaries use it. I'm pretty sure that if I would change it everywhere now, on game articles (like Bowser Jr.'s Pound for Pound), the Languages template, I would get warned (or maybe even a last warning). I need to be the one that finally says something about this, and tells that it's wrong (though people are of course still allowed to have their own taste). And will my announcement be heard? Perhaps? But this needs to change some day and if I have to be the one that calls it out, so be it. But I said what I said and I'm not gonna change my decision. That would just show that I don't really know what I want. But this time I'm 100% sure what I want and that is this. For our inclusive wiki (Per Evie) to be one of the firsts that acknowledges and uses the more inclusive term. White Yoshi from Mario Kart Tour Yoshi18 (talk/contribs) 18:00, May 4, 2025 (EDT)
Uh, I thought your argument for this proposal was based on "British English" and "Commonwealth English" being the same thing? If they're not the same thing, why would we change a more specific phrase to be less specific? Nintendo doesn't make different English localisations for Australia, they just use the same British/European localisations. Much like how most modern games just have a single (American) English localisation that gets used for all English-speaking countries. Hewer (talk · contributions · edit count) 18:30, May 4, 2025 (EDT)
When did I say in my latest argument that it wasn't the same? I'm just saying that if I would change it all right now it would result in a warining, which is the exact reason why I made this proposal. White Yoshi from Mario Kart Tour Yoshi18 (talk/contribs) 18:00, May 8, 2025 (EDT)
You said they were "not the same" in the second sentence of your previous comment. Hewer (talk · contributions · edit count) 18:36, May 8, 2025 (EDT)
Oh yeah, well with that I meant that changing it wouldn't be such a big deal. We don't have to stay with "British English" just because Nintendo does it. Wikipedia even says "Commonwealth English" is better used to include all countries that use that spelling, instead of only Britain. White Yoshi from Mario Kart Tour Yoshi18 (talk/contribs) 06:00, May 11, 2025 (EDT)
I don't see where it says that on the article you linked (and if we're citing Wikipedia, their policies refer to "British English", and this article describes the differences between British and Commonwealth English, so I feel it'd be slightly inaccurate to use "Commonwealth English" to describe what Nintendo considers to specifically be "British English"). Hewer (talk · contributions · edit count) 06:20, May 11, 2025 (EDT)
I quote: "Commonwealth English refers to English as practised in the Commonwealth; the term is most often interchangeable with British English, but is also used to distinguish between British English and that in the rest of the Commonwealth." White Yoshi from Mario Kart Tour Yoshi18 (talk/contribs) 06:33, May 11, 2025 (EDT)
That was not present on the article you originally linked to, and you seem to be constantly switching your argument between claiming they are the same and claiming they are different. But either way, I feel it helps my point. If "Commonwealth English" is the same as "British English", why should we have to replace one perfectly valid term with another when both mean the same thing? And if "Commonwealth English" isn't the same as "British English", wouldn't it be slightly less accurate/specific to refer to what Nintendo considers to be "British English" with the broader term "Commonwealth English"? This ultimately doesn't seem like a helpful change either way. Hewer (talk · contributions · edit count) 07:59, May 11, 2025 (EDT)

The article I originally linked doesn't matter, because I forgot there was a better source. Also you're right about me constantly changing my statement. But we're not their clone. Cause I hear "Nintendo uses it" as an argument all the time, but we aren't Nintendo's clone. Same for the discussion about the 3DS not being a predecessor of the Switch, eve though the Switch is a hybrid and shares many similarities to both the Wii U and the 3DS, yet we still don't list the 3DS as the Switch blatantly just because Nintendo says so. White Yoshi from Mario Kart Tour Yoshi18 (talk/contribs) 08:35, May 11, 2025 (EDT)

But Nintendo calling it "British English" isn't incorrect, so that argument doesn't really work. Hewer (talk · contributions · edit count) 08:58, May 11, 2025 (EDT)
Yeah but this is like saying that it's correct for Nintendo to see the Switch as a home console even though it's a hybrid. It’s just not right. And yeah sure, many people may use that term because they're used to it (and Nintendo got influenced by it too, to do use the less inclusive already used for decades without someone doing something about it), but we really don't have to be like this, if you understand what I'm saying. White Yoshi from Mario Kart Tour Yoshi18 (talk/contribs) 17:55, May 15, 2025 (EDT)
I'm not entirely sure why console classifications are relevant, but factually, the Nintendo Switch is a home console. That doesn't prevent it from also being a handheld. That's what "hybrid" means. Hewer (talk · contributions · edit count) 18:37, May 15, 2025 (EDT)

@LinkTheLefty See my comment above. We don't always have to blatantly copy everything Nintendo does. In this case, they are not being inclusive. And it's their own fault if they decide not to be, but we are an inclusive wiki, so we should use the more inclusive term. White Yoshi from Mario Kart Tour Yoshi18 (talk/contribs) 17:14, May 4, 2025 (EDT)

@CarlosYoshiBoi Per my comments above. Just because Nintendo uses "British English" doesn't mean we have to as well. Wikipedia even says "Commonwealth English" is better used to include all countries that use that spelling, instead of only Britain. White Yoshi from Mario Kart Tour Yoshi18 (talk/contribs) 06:00, May 11, 2025 (EDT)

@Yoshi18 I guess it also has to do with how even though Canada is a commonwealth nation they just use American English translations and spelling. CarlosYoshiBoi (talk) 10:16, May 11, 2025 (PDT)
I also noticed that Ireland is listed as a former member of the Commonwealth, as in, it's no longer a Commonwealth nation. Yet not only does Ireland still obviously use the British English localization of Nintendo games (whenever possible), Nintendo of Europe even groups UK & Ireland as a single entity when it comes to the various localizations of their own website. ArendLogoTransparent.pngrend (talk) (edits) 16:53, May 11, 2025 (EDT)

@CarlosYoshiBoi I don't think it's right to comment directly on the voting system, instead you can just post comments down here and use the {{@}} template to ring who you want to direct the message to.

About that, which countries in Southeast Asia use American English? Because if only the Philippines and/or Myanmar use(s) it, then it doesn't really count as the Philippines and Myanmar are also NTSC countries, like the United States and Canada. However, if other Southeast Asian countries use American English, I can cross out the last part of my vote. Altendo 13:15, May 13, 2025 (EDT)

@Altendo Sorry, force of habit. I never said directly about that Southeast Asia uses American English, but based on Nintendo distribution there and the fact I also played with the region settings on Switch, I have seen that Nintendo uses their American English translations in Southeast Asia. CarlosYoshiBoi (talk) 10:19, May 13, 2025 (PDT)

@CarlosYoshiBoi In terms of Asia-Pacific countries, the Malaysian, Singaporean, and Oceanian websites use British/PAL English spellings, while the Philippine website uses American/NTSC spellings. I think my point of being fine with renaming them to "PAL" and "NTSC" English remains valid, but I do still agree that we should just continue calling them "U.S./American English" and "British English" per my vote and Nintendo's terms. Altendo 13:50, May 13, 2025 (EDT)
@Altendo Actually weird to see how the websites for Malaysia and Singapore use British English spelling while the Philippines website uses American English spelling. Based on how Malaysia and Singapore get American English translations (and in addition, American versions of consoles prior to the Switch) alongside the Philippines we would have thought their websites would also use American English spelling. CarlosYoshiBoi (talk) 17:13, May 13, 2025 (PDT)

@SmokedChili For your argument about Canadian English. Canada uses the American English version and that's why it's called American, that shows it doesn't only cover only the United States (at least one of the two terms doesn't), unlike British. By the way, since Canada uses the American version, we can just include it into the American version. With Commonwealth versions, I mean that they use the same spelling/game localization. White Yoshi from Mario Kart Tour Yoshi18 (talk/contribs) 18:00, May 15, 2025 (EDT)

The point is that Canada is part of the Commonwealth, yet doesn't use "Commonwealth English". Hewer (talk · contributions · edit count) 18:37, May 15, 2025 (EDT)
@Yoshi18 I've come to the conclusion that I think you're kind of misunderstanding why these localizations are being called as they currently are. Your argument is that "Commonwealth English" is more inclusive compared to "British English" and has been used in many more nations. And while that part is correct, I think it's also a bit shortsighted on your end to simply rename it from British to Commonwealth based purely on inclusivity.
For you see, I believe that American English and British English are, as far as I can tell, NOT called as such based on the audience receiving said localizations (even when it's still made for them), but rather based on nothing more than simply where the localizations come from. As in, continents or regions and such. You can see in games such as Mario Kart 7, Nintendo has a localization team for both their American division and European division, and you'll also often find that other languages with multiple localizations (mainly French and Spanish) are listed with their chief countries or regions in mind. This is also why a Commonwealth nation such as Canada gets the American localization, while a non-Commonwealth nation such as Ireland shares the British localization with the UK. And also why Canada has its own French localizations (games prior to Super Mario Galaxy didn't even HAVE a Canadian French localization) even when said localizations still follow standard French after a certain controversy following the more Quebec French localization of Galaxy. ArendLogoTransparent.pngrend (talk) (edits) 10:29, May 18, 2025 (EDT)
@Arend Speaking of Nintendo’s Canadian French translations, aren’t they just more or less modified versions of the European French translations these days (while still having some differences) after the Super Mario Galaxy Canadian French controversy? CarlosYoshiBoi (talk) 19:42, May 18, 2025 (PDT)

What is a game? 2: electric boogaloo

Create the list 5-2-0
Per some of the oppose votes on the previous proposal. I can understand not adding these games to the list of games, though I personally do not think they should remain classified as merchandise, either. Because of this, I think these games should have their own spot somewhere, instead of remaining in a list/gallery that covers a wide range of things. I believe these games should move to a dedicated list of physical games or something along the lines of that. (To note, I do not believe this contradicts the recent previous proposal, since this proposal is asking where physical games go, acting semi-independently of the original proposal, though I will temporarily withdraw it if it does contradict/overturn the previous decision.)

Proposer: Nelsonic (talk)
Deadline: May 20, 2025, 23:59 GMT

Create a dedicated list for only physical games

  1. Nelsonic (talk) Per proposal.
  2. Rykitu (talk) Per proposal.
  3. Rainbow Road Drifter (talk) These should be listed in a single article, and they aren't video games.
  4. Koopa con Carne (talk) Per all.
  5. Camwoodstock (talk) Our only wonder is if board games will be on this "List of physical games"; our board game coverage is kind of terrible at the moment. Even still, this definitely makes sense, and if board games can't be on "List of games" for not being video games, there's no reason various water ring toys should--that should likely be split.

Create a catch all list of games with both video and physical games

  1. Nelsonic (talk) This also works.
  2. Rykitu (talk) I like this option as well.

Do not move physical games from their current location

The Comment Games 2

Don't you have to wait 28 days before a follow-up proposal? Camwoodstock-sigicon.png~Camwoodstock ( talk ☯ contribs ) Camwoodstock-sigicon2.png 16:04, May 7, 2025 (EDT)

@Camwoodstock Yes, but I believe that is if the follow-up proposal contradicts or reverses the option on which consensus was reached from the original proposal. Nelsonic (talk) 16:07, May 7, 2025 (EDT)
The phrasing implies it just can't interfere with a concluded proposal less than 28 days ago at all, not just if that proposal passed. Otherwise, if a proposal failed, someone could just.... Create another proposal about the same thing. Immediately. And keep doing that until it passes in their favor. Camwoodstock-sigicon.png~Camwoodstock ( talk ☯ contribs ) Camwoodstock-sigicon2.png 16:11, May 7, 2025 (EDT)
@Camwoodstock Understood, though I was trying to make a proposal on something that was discussed in the original proposal that, while it does relate to physical games, isn't strictly a continuation of the original proposal. I did title the proposal as a sequel, and it does continue discussion on the topic, but I was trying to figure out whether a separate list should be made for these as opposed to placing them on the list of games, since all that was decided in the previous proposal was to not place them on the list of games. I will withdraw the proposal temporarily if this contradicts the outcome of that proposal. Nelsonic (talk) 16:20, May 7, 2025 (EDT)
yeah, this does not contradict the previous proposal in the slightest. should be fine — Super Leaf stamp from Super Mario 3D World + Bowser's Fury.eviemaybe (talk / contributions) 17:49, May 7, 2025 (EDT)

Wait a sec...if there ends up being a separate page for physical games, shouldn't there logically be a third page for games that don't fit in either page? SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA) (talk) 08:30, May 19, 2025 (EDT)

What games are there that fit into neither list? Hewer (talk · contributions · edit count) 08:34, May 19, 2025 (EDT)
I don't have any specific examples...but I'm sure there's at least one in the previous proposal (the big one with stuff like rides and water games (those MIGHT count for the "don't fit on either page" thing, but I don't know)). SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA) (talk) 17:36, May 19, 2025 (EDT)
Things that aren't games at all (such as rides) don't fit on any list of games. Hewer (talk · contributions · edit count) 18:44, May 19, 2025 (EDT)
@Camwoodstock Yeah, I was gonna move the water games and other similar things over (if that works) if this proposal passes, since the resulting list would encompass all physical games. Nelsonic (talk) 16:50, May 20, 2025 (EDT)

Follow the Multimedia: prefix structuring and rename "List of (game) staff" to "Staff:(game)"

canceled by proposer
Recently a proposal was passed that renamed articles "List of [game] media" to "Multimedia:[game]". This proposal is exactly the same thing, only now targeting the "List of [game] staff" pages.

I propose they are renamed to either "Staff:[game]" or "Credits:[game]". (Example: "List of Mario Kart Live: Home Circuit staff" becomes "Staff:Mario Kart Live: Home Circuit")

So the options below are simply to either:

  1. Rename them to use a "Staff" prefix
  2. Rename them to use a "Credits" prefix
  3. Leave it as it currently is

Proposer: YoYo (talk)
Deadline: June 3, 2025, 23:59 GMT

Staff:voters

  1. YoYo (talk) Per proposal, primary option.

Credits:voters

  1. YoYo (talk) Per proposal, second option.

List of "Leave it as is" voters

  1. List of Altendo staff (talk) I am honestly torn a bit on this but the "Multimedia" and "Gallery" prefixes are just there to show a general collection of media in a piece of media. Staff simply shows a list of people who worked on a game, which I think would just look weird as a "Staff" prefix, since it is an actual list and not a collection. And what's next? "Glitches:Game"? "Pre-release and unused content:Game"? "Trading cards:Game"? This seems like it's going too far for me.
  2. Hewer (talk) I think the current way is more clarifying.
  3. User:Technetium (talk) Per Altendo.
  4. Camwoodstock (talk) As the ones behind Multimedia:, Multimedia serves a direct meta purpose; since Multimedia pages uniquely do not hold a lot of text, being, y'know, multimedia files, it's worth it on a meta level to distinguish them for the sake of things like filtering the Recent Changes menu. Staff lists, by contrast, are basically all text--they are, by nature, lists of it. The Staff pages are just fine as they are; "List of x staff" is a perfectly cromulent descriptor for them, and they don't really have the utility purpose of sectioning them off for the sake of the Recent Changes menu.
  5. Jdtendo (talk) Per Porplemontage's message (see the Comments): text-based articles should stay in the main namespace.

Comments

Porplemontage wrote this message on Discord in response to a suggestion that pre-release and unused content could get their own namespace: "The unusual thing about Gallery and Multimedia pages and why they are their own namespaces is because they are primarily not text-based content (Gallery exists to showcase images and Multimedia exists to showcase media files). All primarily text-based pages, including pre-release and unused content, should use mainspace." Jdtendo(T|C) 15:36, May 20, 2025 (EDT)

Move back from the "Multimedia:" prefix

Do not move back 14-1
So apparently, PorpleBot moved the page from "List of WarioWare, Inc.: Mega Microgame$! media" to "Multimedia:WarioWare, Inc.: Mega Microgame$!". And yes, it's just an example, because all other media pages have been moved to use the "Multimedia:" prefix! And yes, this is my first proposal so I'm sorry if the proposal is very informal. But anyways, every pages involving media files currently has the "Multimedia:" prefix. That makes no sense to me, especially when the old title is "List of WarioWare, Inc.: Mega Microgame$! media" for example, and the "media" in the title already makes it clear that it's a page about media files (in this case, WarioWare Inc. media files). This "Camwoodstock" guy said that it's for parity but since the gallery pages are formatted "Gallery:WarioWare: Touched!" for example, it makes no sense to do just the same for the media pages.

Proposer: Alphabetlorefan2003 (talk)
Deadline: May 29, 2025, 23:59 GMT Closed early on May 22, 2025, 23:59 GMT

Media Page Supporters:

  1. Alphabetlorefan2003 (talk) Per proposal.

Wario, the Opposers:

  1. Jdtendo (talk) It makes sense to have a dedicated "Multimedia:" namespace for galleries of media akin to the "Gallery:" namespace for galleries of images, and I don't see the point of reverting to "List of X media" pages.
  2. Xiahou Ba, The Nasty Warrior (talk) Per Jdtendo.
  3. Multimedia:Arend (talk) Per Jdtendo, and my comments down below.
  4. Multimedia:Camwoodstock (talk) first of all why did you use "scarequotes" for us. It's far easier to search for a game's Multimedia page with the namespace rather than to have to write "List of x media", and it's easier to search for changes to them in Recent Changes/the watchlist. And as for the point of "Gallery: has existed for years, but Multimedia: is new"... Well, yeah. Things change all the time on a wiki, and sometimes, the gaps between certain changes are very large. That's kind of a given with a collaborative writing project. We don't even really understand the point about parity "not making sense"; there's literally a Multimedia:WarioWare: Touched! to go alongside Gallery:WarioWare: Touched!. The two match, when they formerly did not, and one was a namespace and one was a list despite the two being functionally companions to one another. And, pray tell, to what end? If this was a push to cut back on dedicated namespaces, why only the Multimedia pages? Granted, we can't see a proposal to convert all Gallery pages to "List of x images" going over well...
  5. List of Altendo media (talk) Per all.
  6. EvieMedia (talk) per these "Camwoodstock" guys
  7. Rainbow Road Drifter (talk) These are collections of audio files in the same way galleries are collections of pictures. They should be named this way to distinguish them from traditional articles.
  8. Okapii (talk) I think those "Camwoodstock" folks were onto something.
  9. YoYo (talk) i don't see your reasoning here... you say it the claim its for "parity" makes no sense, then immediately say an example of it showing said parity?? per all.
  10. SGoW (talk) I love Wario, what a great character. If an option in a proposal is named after him I will certainly be voting for it.
  11. This "Kaptain Skurvy" guy (talk) Wario is funny so im voting his option (jk...per all.)
  12. Nelsonic (talk) Per all. To use an additional example, we already refer to the grouping of Play Nintendo images, videos, and wallpapers as "Multimedia" (granted, the website does as well, in a sense, as it refers to them as "Media").
  13. Hewario (talk) Get Wario'd!
  14. BMfan08:Multimedia (talk) Ehh, maybe Wario has a point for once...

Kat and Ana Comments

From what I can gather, Camwoodstock actually was for a regular Media: namespace, as seen here, but since Media: is already a namespace that's in use (as an alternative to the File: namespace), the proposal has been vetoed, and it was decided to have the new namespace be called "Multimedia:" instead.
Anyway, I don't entirely understand why you want to revert it back? You say that Camwoodstock's reasoning for parity makes no sense because the Gallery: namespace exists... but doesn't that corroborate to his point? Because, you know, it's also a namespace? Are you bothered it's multimedia now instead of simply "media"? What's exactly your problem with these media pages being its own namespace instead of regular list pages? ArendLogoTransparent.pngrend (talk) (edits) 05:58, May 15, 2025 (EDT)

The "Gallery:" prefix has existed for years so adding it now makes no sense. Alphabetlorefan2003 (talk) 10:07, May 15, 2025 (EDT)
What's the problem with adding the Multimedia prefix now? The wiki is always adding new features and articles. How does that "make no sense"? — Lady Sophie Wiggler Sophie.png (T|C) 10:15, May 15, 2025 (EDT)
Perring Lady Sophie here. Just because the Gallery: namespace has existed for years while the Multimedia: one has not, doesn't mean the latter cannot be added later or ever again. This honestly feels like one of those "I don't like change, everything should stay the same" types of complaint. ArendLogoTransparent.pngrend (talk) (edits) 11:05, May 15, 2025 (EDT)
For some context, since part of this was on the Discord. Porplemontage explained the full reason behind why Media: was unavailable (it's a default namespace used by MediaWiki internally for handling files, so inserting something into the Media: namespace would have... Consequences behind the scenes, which is why it doesn't let you do that and just redirects you to a File: page if you try.), and after a conversation, he suggested "Multimedia:" instead, as an alternative that doesn't run into problems behind the scenes. We were fine with that new name, and offered to remake the proposal, but Porple decided to implement it himself without needing to re-run the proposal for the tweaked, internally-sound name; you'd have to ask him for his reasoning for that one, as we're obviously not him.
In short, the idea of a dedicated namespace for Multimedia subpages was our idea, but Porple ultimately chose the name we landed on (with our approval), and he was the one who ultimately helped implement it. (To be honest, the text on the original proposal should probably say "CANCELLED, ALTERNATIVE VERSION PUT INTO EFFECT IMMEDIATELY" or something like that, rather than just "VETOED BY THE ADMINISTRATORS" with the clarification that the proposal was put into effect immediately with a differing name being a small font subtitle--it'd be far clearer for your average user what happened without them having to consult the archive list and see that it's teal. ;P) Camwoodstock-sigicon.png~Camwoodstock ( talk ☯ contribs ) Camwoodstock-sigicon2.png 14:00, May 15, 2025 (EDT)

WAAAH? There are more Wario's than there are supporters? Alphabetlorefan2003 (talk) 19:10, May 15, 2025 (EDT)

Yeah, we pick WAAAAARIOOOOOO But seriously, you have read our reasonings and do understand why we think it's pointless to change it back, right? ArendLogoTransparent.pngrend (talk) (edits) 03:47, May 16, 2025 (EDT)
This implies you named the option "Wario" to steer people away from it, which is not really a good way to structure a proposal. - YoYo Yoshi Head (light blue) from Mario Kart: Super Circuit (Talk) 11:39, May 20, 2025 (EDT)
If that's true, then yeah, that's not good at all. It introduces bias by saying one is an objectively bad option, when all options are supposed to be objectively equal. Hell, I'd argue it's even a poorly designed way to say an option is objectively bad because people actually like Wario and thus would be more inclined to choose the Wario option over the boring "return back to the previous status quo" option, backfiring the proposer completely.
However, I'm sure it's just coincidence, right? I'm certain that the oppose option is only named after Wario since the proposal has been using WarioWare pages as examples of the proposer's issue. I mean, why else would this very comment section be named after Kat and Ana, then? ArendLogoTransparent.pngrend (talk) (edits) 05:01, May 21, 2025 (EDT)

How the heck do I close proposals Alphabetlorefan2003 (talk) 03:46, May 22, 2025 (EDT)

Allow joke aboutfile descriptions for uploading media files

canceled by proposer
A recurrent issue to me ever since I got lectured on keeping file names short and sweet and descriptive. File uploading. It's fairly soul sucking. It gets really boring uploading files and most aboutfile descriptions are kind of window dressing and don't actually affect the quality of the articles they're in. So? Might as well. Taken from the TF wiki[1]: people who upload have dibs on the file descriptions (correcting formatting and sourcing is fine). If you want to add a joke, upload one. If you can't think of a joke (say for a pixelized flower you really can't think of anything), don't try it. Keep it appropriate and in-spirit for the wiki. If an admin removes a joke it stays gone.

If this passes I will have more fun uploading more files, as once this is allowed, it's good motivation for me to keep going, and more files as a result is better for the wiki so why not.

Unlike silly file descriptions, this won't get in the way of editing and unlike how TF wiki handles image captions, most of these aboutfile descriptions are out of the way anyway.

Proposer: Mario (talk)
Deadline: June 7, 2025, 23:59 GMT

Support adding jokes to file descriptions

  1. Mario (talk) Sorry, I'm just kind of expressing some frustration uploading files.

Oppose adding jokes to file descriptions

  1. Pseudo (talk) I'm by no means against a certain degree of levity on the wiki, but the {{aboutfile}} template feels kind of sacred to me due to being a front-facing aspect of the wiki that readers are fairly likely to see if they're trying to understand the full context of an image in a gallery or similar. This isn't something like an edit summary that most readers will never see, it's an integral part of the wiki's text, so it shouldn't have jokes any more than the text of an article itself should, I feel. File uploading sometimes getting tedious doesn't change any of that to me, and I strongly believe that it shouldn't be used as a reason to compromise this wiki's extremely high level of professionalism in its writing.
  2. Camwoodstock (talk) We save our silliness for talk pages, the Discord, edit summaries, and of course April Fools. We really shouldn't be using a template that's meant to give additional context, both to readers and other editors, as a joke repository, and we're unsure how much we buy the idea of it being an outlet for feeling like it's tedious work.

Comments on joke file descriptions

Remove the a and id templates

Remove the a and id templates 16-1-1-3
Back in December, both the a and id templates were created. One of them was from a proposal, and maybe the second one too? I don't know, I couldn't find it in the archives.

Anyways, both of these templates aren't really used at all. The a template was created for the purpose of shortening game titles, but I have not seen anyone actually use it. Same thing with the id template. Many users are used to typing out the entire game articles anyway, myself included.

This proposal aims to remove both templates and fix the articles that have them.

Proposer: Sparks (talk)
Deadline: May 31, 2025, 23:59 GMT Closed early on May 24, 2025, 23:59 GMT

Delete them both!

  1. Sparks (talk) Someone needs to put these templates out of their misery.
  2. Xiahou Ba, The Nasty Warrior (talk) I'll take care of these templates, no problem! Do I have a plan? ...Not really, but I'll do fine, I'm sure!
  3. T (talk) These templates are so confusing man. Like my name in this vote! That's how it feels trying to edit pages with these templates on them.
  4. Nintendo101 (talk) I don't see "id" used too often, but "a" has been actively detrimental to articles.
  5. Mario4Ever (talk) Per proposal.
  6. Ctccm (talk) These templates, which ostensibly exist for ease of editing, have only really served to make it more confusing for editors. Your average editor shouldn't have to memorize which abbreviation is which to edit a page, especially when some abbreviations already require further elaboration as-is, and the list used lacks parity between the actual abbreviations we commonly use for redirects. Does "MF" lead to Mario Factory, Mario's FUNdamentals, or Mario Family? Trick question--MF isn't in the list at all. On the other hand, "W" is used as the abbreviation for Wii, but W is actually a redirect for Wario, thanks to an old guide on the Wario Land 3 website. And considering that deprecating this template could easily be done by siccing PorpleBot on the task... Yeah, we can't say we're endeared to it. It should be deprecated, left with an Abandoned tag so that page histories don't become unreadable, and maybe we could repurpose a version of the list subpage as a maintenance page, to properly showcase the abbreviations we use for games and consoles, when they actually exist; it actually has a rather decent form factor, the list is just... entirely proprietary to the abbreviations we actually use.
  7. Pseudo (talk) Both of these templates seem likely to cause more confusion than anything else. I can see the reasons that one might want to keep them but I don't think they're good enough to justify the potential harm caused by these, especially "a".
  8. Hewer (talk) These remind me of Bulbapedia's linking templates, which is not a good thing. Per Camwoodstock and Pseudo.
  9. EvieMaybe (talk) the minute benefits these templates add aren't enough to counteract how unwieldy they are to use. per all
  10. Kaptain Skurvy (talk) Are we really THAT lazy that we can't be bothered to type out the full title of a page? Per all.
  11. Jdtendo (talk) These templates may be handy when you are the one who type them, but they're cumbersome for all other editors that will encounter them afterwards.
  12. Altendo (talk) Per EvieMaybe (see comments). EDIT on 12:22, May 20, 2025 (EDT): The pipelinking for fully-typed out game titles with the identifier and certain italics don't really matter to me, as even though they are somewhat of a burden, I already don't really type out the identifier in whole when linking these types of pages.
  13. Mario (talk) In this case, the longer route is the shortest way home. Trying to figure out what "YCW" is seeing the latest appearance in an infobox from {{a|YCW|l}} wastes my time, as well as my expressing bafflement at the 1 parameter here, not immediately knowing what the hell "1" does. If that's a bureaucrat's editing here for 15+ years reaction to this, have mercy on newer editors. I've expressed annoyance at the inefficiency dealing with these templates.[2] At first, I thought it might be a good idea to try to shorten some abbreviations here but the execution is taking an axe to a relatively localized problem. Maybe there are better answers to writing out "Mario & Sonic at the Melting 2025 Winter Olympics at Antarctica" but right now, the solution here creates more problems in the process.
  14. Nelsonic (talk) Per Mario. These templates can indeed be helpful, but the parameters can end up being very confusing. I... also may have voted yes on the proposal to bring one of these into existence.
  15. Platform (talk) I've made my objections in the comments.
  16. PanchamBro (talk) Per all.

Delete a, keep id

  1. Ahemtoday (talk) So, here's the thing with me — I make fairly frequent use of {{id}}... but it's never been for its abbreviation functionality. I use it purely as a quick way to avoid having to type pipe-link text that's just the same thing as the article text. And I think that's a great template to have. It's convenient; it saves space; it gets rid of an annoying redundancy. I have an edit comment somewhere where I say I like the template, unprompted, just because I like it that much. But again: none of that has anything to do with the game abbreviations part of the template. I never interfaced with any of that stuff because it seems cumbersome and I don't understand why you'd want to use it. I expect {{a}} shares its backend with that somehow (maybe it's literally part of {{id}} somewhere) so that functionality would probably break if {{a}} went, but I'd be perfectly fine with that. Getting rid of the repetition in linking to, say, Captain Toad: Treasure Tracker the microgame is what the use case of {{id}} is to me, and it's a fantastic thing to have a template for. Let's not throw that out with {{a}}.

#Altendo (talk) Weak support now. To clarify, the identifier template was created by Porple through a discussion relating to a tied proposal that I sided for. The main point of me proposing this template (which I went back to after the abbreviation proposal passed) was to avoid pipelinking, which I agreed with as I didn't want to write the name of the title, the identifier, and the title again (see SeanWheeler's comment) just to avoid a redirect or writing the title multiple times. While I do get the point of identifiers for these specifically existing so people don't have to memorize which pages have the identifiers or not, I think that pipelinking is just tiring, especially when dealing with multiple of them. EDIT on 12:34, May 19, 2025 (EDT): I still feel like this template has a bit of merit for a certain use (see my comment below), but now that Evie's comment explained how to bypass this in the first place (mooting the discussion surrounding the creation of this template), this is no longer my primary choice.

Delete id, keep a

  1. Salmancer (talk) I guess if we want template clutter down...

#Altendo (talk) Weak support, if we have to keep one of these. The point of a template made to ease editing is that they are optional, and experienced editors don't necessarily have to use them; both templates show that they are not required to be used, but I still use both on an occasional basis when adding new stuff (I previously replaced links with these templates before I realized the template told me not to do so for preexisting links and only for newly added ones).

Keep both

  1. Salmancer (talk) I've used them, and they'd probably have more widespread use if not for the fact using "a" in a section header is discouraged. (That forces people to type out full game names at least once, which as one might expect encourages copy and pasting that.) Anyhow shortform versions of long phrases are helpful when you're in a hurry and have lots of text to write. Especially if you need to go back and forth between base game and remake behavior, or are in similar situations. Clipboards can only carry one phrase at a time, which makes copy and pasting from the section header much slower when juggling multiple games. "id" is generally less useful due to "link autocomplete" and the "pipe trick", but I believe "link autocomplete" is optional and therefore "id" serves a niche for people who are not using the autocomplete.
  2. Ahemtoday (talk) Per my other vote. I strongly believe {{id}} is a good and useful template. It's not for {{a}}-related reasons, but if keeping {{a}} is the only way to keep {{id}}, I'll do it.
  3. Tails777 (talk) I for sure get the idea behind this, but I feel like we need more guidelines on their use. Using them for something as small as Nintendo DS or Wii is not something that should be encouraged, but using them for titles like Mario & Luigi: Bowser's Inside Story + Bowser Jr.'s Journey or Mario & Sonic at the Sochi 2014 Olympic Winter Games is still a sense of convenience at least. I'd rather create some rules on their use before flat out removing them.

#Altendo (talk) I often use {{a}} in conjunction with {{id}}, especially since it saves a lot of bytes on a page and shortens subjects even more. I mean, I'm fine with getting rid of {{a}}, but it does further ease the {{id}} template, especially since names are shortened even more. I don't want to type out "[[Captain Goomba (Mario & Luigi series)|Captain Goomba]]". I want to shorten it by writing "{{id|Captain Goomba|M&LSERIES}}". It's a lot easier and shorter.Weak support, I guess, per an unsolved(?) question in the comments. #Koopa con Carne (talk) "both of these templates aren't really used at all." I mean, false. I've been using {{a}} a lot (*cough* when I remember it exists). The reason it doesn't seem used all that much is because its documentation discourages users from reformatting existing game titles with it, and with the site going on 20 years even before the template was created, yeah, obviously the previous method is gonna be way more widespread. As for "id", the reason I haven't used it is simply because I wasn't aware of it.

Comments

These templates would actually be worthwhile if there were a way to automatically substitute {{a|SMB}} with ''Super Mario Bros.'' when the page is saved, in the same way that ~~~~ gets substituted with the user's signature; but I'm not sure that this is technically possible. Jdtendo(T|C) 06:43, May 17, 2025 (EDT)

I'm not too familiar with these templates but my experience with them has been negative. When articles get renamed, merged, or split, the templates break or get linked to the wrong article.--Platform (talk) 10:59, May 17, 2025 (EDT)

Pretty sure we can just use {{subst:a|SMB}}. This will save it as the full link upon saving the page. Altendo 11:05, May 17, 2025 (EDT)
TEST: EDIT on 12:34, May 19, 2025 (EDT): Removed coding per Evie's comment.
Oh, wow. It did not go as planned, as it copied the entire template code onto the page, instead of just the link. Visibly, this doesn't look any different, but on the inside, it looks ugly. Altendo 11:07, May 17, 2025 (EDT)
So ask Porplemontage to tinker with the related parameter when that happens. -- KOOPA CON CARNE 11:36, May 17, 2025 (EDT)

i want to point out that you can type any link with an identifier as [[World 1-1 (Super Mario Bros.)|]], with the vertical bar at the end, and it'll come out as "World 1-1" when submitted.
also, @Altendo, whatever your test did is messing with the automatic syntax highlighting add-on. — Super Leaf stamp from Super Mario 3D World + Bowser's Fury.eviemaybe (talk / contributions) 10:32, May 19, 2025 (EDT)

Wai-WHAAAT? How long has that been a thing? Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 10:41, May 19, 2025 (EDT)
Second test: Super Mario RPG
Well, that actually worked! I might still see a bit of usage in the {{id}} template as sometimes pipelinking is required (like when italicizing game titles with identifiers where the full title should be shown, which requires writing the page name twice but the second game name is italicized, if there is also a way to bypass this it would be great), but now that I know about this, it should simplify things a lot more! Altendo 12:34, May 19, 2025 (EDT)
Doc, I seriously don't know if you're just playing it up or not. I knew about the parenthesis pipe trick for YEARS... ArendLogoTransparent.pngrend (talk) (edits) 12:50, May 19, 2025 (EDT)
I actually didn't know that just adding the pipe (which I didn't know was "|") and nothing more would display the page title without the parenthesis... I thought it would have just made blank space. If I knew this earlier, I wouldn't have even made the id template discussion to begin with. Altendo 13:12, May 19, 2025 (EDT)
I can excuse you for not knowing, you've only joined the wiki in 2022, while Doc joined in 2017. But I suppose I might as well be the jaded one here, I first joined the wiki in 2006/2007 after all. Not to mention that I recently found out (as in, a couple months ago I think?) that commas also trigger a pipe trick, so maybe I'm just stupid for assuming that people should know better. ArendLogoTransparent.pngrend (talk) (edits) 13:45, May 19, 2025 (EDT)
Well, I went down a bit of a rabbithole investigating exactly how long this feature has been a thing... Turns out it's so old it's in the very oldest version of the MediaWiki source code available in its git repository, which dates back to April 2003. So, to say the least, it's not new. AmossGuy (talk) 13:34, May 19, 2025 (EDT)
Huh. That definitely seems to cover the use case I was using {{id}} for. Ahemtoday (talk) 12:37, May 19, 2025 (EDT)
I definitely wasn't aware of this feature. Deleted my vote entirely because, eh, I don't actually care that much what happens to the other template. Auto-fill is useful, too. -- KOOPA CON CARNE 16:24, May 19, 2025 (EDT)

@Nelsonic I don't think you voted on the proposal for the {{a}} template or discussed the {{id}} template, either. Altendo 12:22, May 20, 2025 (EDT)

@Altendo Ah. Okay. I remember seeing it when it was active, I just wasn't sure whether I had voted or not. Nelsonic (talk) 12:25, May 20, 2025 (EDT)

Tighten the definition of "item" used by some games' subcategories

split item subcategories 1-5-0
Within the context of, say, Paper Mario: The Thousand-Year Door, an "item" is a specific class of game entity that goes in its own tab on the pause menu and tab in the battle UI, and can be used in and out of battle. However, this specificity is not reflected in our category system, under which Category:Paper Mario: The Thousand-Year Door items contains the likes of Badge, Hammer, Heart (item), and Star Piece (Paper Mario series). I think things like these sharing a category with the games' definition of "item" is counterintuitive. Should this proposal pass, "items" such as these, no longer contained within the tightened definition, will be placed into the main category; or their own subcategory if there are enough (though I'm not sure what such a category would be called).

If it's preferable that the "items" label be kept consistent with the rest of the wiki, I would also be fine with splitting these items off into a subcategory (or simply renaming the category if the "normal items" are too few in number) — Category:Paper Mario: The Thousand-Year Door consumable items, for instance.

Games and series for which I believe this should be done include:

Proposer: Ahemtoday (talk)
Deadline: May 27, 2025, 23:59 GMT

Tighten the "item" category on these games

  1. Ahemtoday (talk) Per proposal.

#Itemdo (talk) Sounds good from what I can see.

Split these item classes into their own categories

  1. Ahemtoday (talk) Oh, I meant to vote here as well but forgot.
  2. Pseudo (talk) Distinguishing these items from other types of item is useful and important, but I would strongly contend that stuff like Badges and Star Pieces are items, just a different category from consumable items that are sometimes labeled as just "items".
  3. Camwoodstock (talk) We prefer this, personally. It'd be nice to have a clear distinction between types of items found in RPGs aside from just... "Item". Mario Party also has a few color-coded categories for Orbs in 5 to 7, and Candy in 8, which we could potentially distinguish with this.
  4. Altem Class (talk) Second choice EDIT on 20:52, May 25, 2025 (EDT): Sole choice, per all.
  5. Rainbow Road Drifter (talk) The term is used in RPGs to refer to something that can be bought or sold in a shop, used as the action during the player's turn, and is listed in an Items section in the menu. If an object isn't considered an "item" in the game, it should be in a separate category.

Do nothing

Comments (item category proposal)

Create the Dragon Quest Wiki template

Do not create 1-13
This proposal is based on the previous proposal for creating The Cutting Room Floor template ({{TCRF}}). On December 11, 2022, the Dragon Quest Wiki was expelled from the Nintendo Independent Wiki Alliance due to controversies surround its new host, following inappropriate conduct on the part of that host. However, while "pre-release and unused content" articles link to TCRF, articles on Dragon Quest games and subjects that appear in the Super Mario franchise (i.e.: the Slime, Alefgard, Super Smash Bros. Ultimate) and companies responsible for working on Dragon Quest games (i.e.: Square Enix) already link to the Dragon Quest Wiki quite often, so they are considered to-go wikis. As such, I humbly ask if there's a possibility to formalize the linking with the Dragon Quest Wiki template like both {{Wikipedia}} and {{TCRF}}.

Here's what the Dragon Quest Wiki template could look like.

Using {{Dragon Quest}} on the Super Smash Bros. Ultimate article will result in this:

Dragon Quest Wiki icon.png The Dragon Quest Wiki has an article on Super Smash Bros. Ultimate.

Using {{Dragon Quest|Slime}} on the Slime (Dragon Quest) article will result in this:

Dragon Quest Wiki icon.png The Dragon Quest Wiki has an article on Slime.

Credit for the similar text to the one from here goes to Bro Hammer for use on this proposal.

Proposer: GuntherBayBeee (talk)
Deadline: June 7, 2025, 23:59 GMT Closed early on May 31, 2025, 23:59 GMT

Support: A Template Draws Near!

  1. GuntherBayBeee (talk) Per proposal.

Oppose: The Template Started to Run Away.

  1. Arend (talk) Personally, I don't really see a point as to why specifically the Dragon Quest Wiki would get their own "link box template" (for the lack of a better term), when other themed wikis don't, with the NIWA wikis in particular having to share {{NIWA}} instead having their own "link box template" as well. One would think it's a better idea if we had a template similar to {{NIWA}} instead, but for all the non-NIWA wikis instead; though even then, there isn't really anything special to those wikis, so it's not even necessary to put them in a "link box template" when a normal list of external links works too. True, the Dragon Quest Wiki is in this weird position of it being a former NIWA wiki, but I still don't think it's a good idea by making it seem more special than other NIWA wikis by giving it its own exclusive template while the ACTUAL wikis on NIWA have to share {{NIWA}}, when factually speaking, the Dragon Quest Wiki is on a lower level than the NIWA wikis, affiliate-wise. Also, people on the Super Mario Wiki Discord claim that there even is already a "link box template" for specifically this wiki, but I cannot verify that.
  2. YoYo (talk) Per arend
  3. 1468z (talk) Per all. We could just link to the wiki in an External links section like we already do with non-NIWA wikis like Sonic Retro.
  4. Hewer (talk) Wikipedia and The Cutting Room Floor both have more direct overlap with this wiki's coverage due to not being tied to a specific franchise, so I think they make more sense to have their own templates. Meanwhile, the only times we'd have any coverage overlap with Dragon Quest Wiki would be when the franchises specifically cross over with each other, so there's less of a use for it. For those cases, we can just put the links in the "External links" section like normal, as we do with Sonic and Rayman crossovers.
  5. Camwoodstock (talk) Per all, Arend especially. If we had a box like these for all non-NIWA wikis, it would get extremely annoying, fast; Wikipedia and TCRF are exceptions considering their prevalence, and are by no means the norm for this.
  6. Technetium (talk) Per all.
  7. Salmancer (talk) Per all.
  8. Rykitu (talk) Per all.
  9. Altendo Quest (talk) Per all.
  10. PanchamBro (talk) Even disregarding my uncomfortable and complex feelings with Dragon Quest Wiki at the moment, I find it very unnecessary to make a link box template just for a non-NIWA wiki that doesn't hold any special value like Wikipedia or TCRF does.
  11. Nelsonic Quest III HD-2D Remake (talk) Per all.
  12. TheFlameChomp (talk) Per all.
  13. Sparks (talk) Per all.

Dragon Quest Comments

Split every song from the "List of (show) songs" articles

Split 12-0
(Yes, I am aware this might sound like a crazy idea, but hear me out.)

Many of the Mario cartoons, like Super Mario World and Donkey Kong Country incorporate songs into their episodes, and we cover all of those songs by lists. It's a pretty good way to store those songs...but...recently, I was gonna start adding lyrics from other languages to some Donkey Kong Country songs, and I was thinking that if we include every language for every song, the lists will start getting really, REALLY long (Yes, I am aware some dubs didn't dub songs or episodes). And it's not like these songs don't have anything to talk about to warrant their own article. The articles could include a table of which dubs either include the song, dub the song, but shorten it, include the song, undubbed, or just flat-out don't include the song. Donkey Kong Country also has some interesting facts that could also be noted on their pages, "Pirate's Scorn" and "I'm Gonna Be a Star" airing on Musitoon, "Monkey Business"'s "transition" variant on Pure West's website, and Alestorm's cover of "Pirate's Scorn." There's definitely enough information for Donkey Kong Country songs to be split, and I don't see why this can't be applied to all of the other Mario cartoons.

Proposer: Kaptain Skurvy (talk)
Deadline: June 7, 2025, 23:59 GMT Closed early on May 31, 2025, 23:59 GMT

Time to make like the banana and split! (Support)

  1. Kaptain Skurvy (talk) Per proposal.
  2. Al smoothie (talk) We already have peaches, it's time to add bananas to the smoothie.
  3. EvieMaybe (talk) one more step towards covering music better!
  4. Tails777 (talk) Per EvieMaybe. I'd like to kinda rework how we cover music overall, but this is indeed a good step in the right direction.
  5. Jdtendo (talk) If having very long lists hinders coverage, it's better to split.
  6. Camwoodstock (talk) Our music coverage is already a tad strange, and a split like this is a step in the right direction. You could be somebody's hero with this.
  7. Ahemtoday (talk) Given I'm the guy who made the DDR: Mario Mix song articles, I'm very in favor of this kind of thing. Heck, I've been trying to figure out how to justify making Donkey Konga song articles for a while now...
  8. Rykitu (talk) Per all.
  9. FanOfYoshi (talk) Per all.
  10. SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA) (talk) Yeah, sure, why not?
  11. Pseudo (talk) Better music coverage is always appreciated!
  12. Okapii (talk) Per all!

This idea should slip on a banana peel! (Oppose)

Comments Seer, Comments Do (Comments)

Create "catch-all" Mario Sports (series) article

Do not create 1-1-1-10
This article would include the games listed in the Mario & Sonic (series), Mario Golf (series), Mario Tennis (series), Mario Strikers (series), and Super Mario Stadium (series) articles. It would also include Mario Hoops 3-on-3, and Mario Sports Mix. Although I would not prefer it, the Mario Kart (series), Pinball games (Pinball, VS. Pinball, Mario Pinball Land) and Famicom Grand Prix (series) could be included as well. The reason for doing this would be to create a way for users to see all the sports games without having to go through the hassle of having to know every sports game featuring Mario in their head before searching and could instead find them all in one "catch-all" article. A proposal passed for creating a "catch-all" Poltergust article and that has less merit than this in my opinion, so I don't think it'd be too wild to do this. To clarify, the series and game articles mentioned would still be separate but there would be a new article to access all of the sports series and game articles in one place.

Proposer: Pizza Master (talk)
Deadline: June 8, 2025, 23:59 GMT Closed early on June 1, 2025, 23:59 GMT

Support (not including Mario Kart, Famicom GP, and Pinball games)

  1. Pizza Master (talk) preferred.

Support (including Kart, FGP, and Pinball)

  1. Pizza Master (talk) secondary.

Support (including Kart and FGP but not Pinball)

  1. Pizza Master (talk) per Arend's comment.

Oppose

  1. Technetium (talk) Why do we need this? It's not like we have one for the RPG games either. That and the whole "do we include Mario Kart" debate.
  2. Salmancer (talk) For a list, List of games by genre has you covered. For commenting on patterns in Mario adaptations of sports, we have Genre. I'm not seeing this one.
  3. Xiahou Ba, The Nasty Warrior (talk) Per all.
  4. Camwoodstock (talk) Per all, especially Salmancer; we already have genre-centric lists, so this isn't really necessary.
  5. Nelsonic (talk) Per all. I do not believe Nintendo considers these to fall under a singular Mario Sports banner, as the only two games to use that name are Mario Sports Mix and Mario Sports Superstars, which feature their own versions of sports that got their own game series.
  6. Hewer (talk) I think it's inaccurate to act like all these games are part of one "Mario Sports series". Sports games are just a common genre that many Mario games share. For what it's worth, Nintendo lists Mario Kart, Mario Tennis, Mario Golf, and Mario Strikers all as individual series on Mario Portal, not as one collective Mario Sports series. I honestly think you could make a better case to do this for the RPGs than the sports games, since some of those at least have more direct connections to one another (not that I'd support that either).
  7. Altendo & Sonic (series) Per Technetium Golf (series), Salmancer Tennis (series), Xiahou Ba Strikers (series), Super Camwoodstock Stadium (series), Nelsonic Hoops 3-on-3, and Hewer Sports Mix.
  8. MarioWiki users at the Olympic Games Paris 2024 (talk) Per all.
  9. Kaptain Skurvy Sports Mix (talk) Per all.
  10. Nintendo101 (talk) If this is an idea you feel strongly about, I recommend making a rough draft first. I am not personally opposed to the idea of organizing Mario Sports games under an umbrella, but only if done thoughtfully and it is substantiated.

Comments

I can understand go-karting and formula 1 racing be included, but how in the heck is pinball of all things a sport?! That's like calling arcade games such as skee-ball a sport! ArendLogoTransparent.pngrend (talk) (edits) 16:12, May 25, 2025 (EDT)

When looking at the sports games Mario has appeared in on Wikipedia, it mentioned Pinball and Mario Pinball Land as sports games. I don't agree with that but some people consider Poker to be a sport so yea. -- Pizza Master (talk)
A pinball video game is a simulation of the real world activity of pinball. It could count. Salmancer (talk) 16:27, May 25, 2025 (EDT)
@Technetium @Salmancer We don't need a catch-all for the Poltergust either but people wanted it anyway. Why should this be different? Regarding the RPG games, there are only 3 series of RPGs but many series of sports games. In option one, there are 5 series + 2 basketball games, in option two there are 7 + basketball, and in option three there are 8 + basketball. Regarding the List of games by genre, most users looking to find information on particular series aren't going to instinctually look that up and more than likely will type in something more common. Also, what one thinks on whether the real-life Pinball should be considered a sport will guide whether one thinks Pinball should be included in this catch-all article.-- Pizza Master (talk)
"Mario Sports" can redirect to List of games by genre#Sports, thus solving the community held nickname problem. Genre (the article) is already trying to count up all of the real world sports seen in Mario, and failing because the Olympic Games makes it hard to quantify. Salmancer (talk) 17:14, May 25, 2025 (EDT)
How exactly is Poltergust comparable whatsoever? We have an article covering various iterations of a recurring fictional object, so we should also have an article providing an overview of multiple loosely related series of sports games? I completely fail to see the analogy here. Hewer (talk · contributions · edit count) 19:50, May 25, 2025 (EDT)

Allow creation of pages for officially named music tracks

Allow for pages to be created 19-4
Our coverage of music on the wiki is... not great. Currently, pages for music tracks are limited to ones that are deemed recurring (appearing in 8 or more things), and if it falls out of that criteria, creating a page isn't allowed. We have a lot of inconsistent decisions on the wiki right now, but this might be one of the most confusing to an uninformed editor. Imagine you see "World 1 Map (Grass Land)" from Super Mario Bros. 3 has a page, and that "World 2 Map (Desert Land)" doesn't. You might think that's a gap in the wiki's coverage, and decide to create that page... Except you can't, because we have very specific guidelines to determine why some tracks are notable enough to get a page and others aren't. In my opinion, this is one of the biggest coverage disparities on the wiki.

And here's the thing, our current guidelines have very little to back them up as something to be set in stone. We're limited to recurring tracks because the original proposer didn't feel knowledgeable enough to make lots of music pages, which is totally fair! (The wording of "I want to start something of this kind" implies to me that the expectation was always we'd eventually push farther though, yeah?) And we determine what's recurring by 8 appearances because it's an arbitrarily chosen number. To the hypothetical user who wants to know why "World 2 Map (Desert Land)" can't have a page for some reason, I don't think this holds up to much scrutiny. That proposal was made in 2018 as square one, but we're still there.

So here's my proposal, and it's a biggie: allow the creation of pages for music tracks that have been officially named. Basically, anything that's ever been in an in-game sound test, soundtrack release, Nintendo Music, sheet music book, or something like that. Internal names do not count for the scope of this proposal, it needs to be something that Nintendo intended to be public-facing.

This will not do away with the recurring themes guideline entirely. I don't really want to mess with it right now, and whether it's still beneficial if this proposal passes is something we can address separately at a later date. The recurring themes guideline will continue to handle the following cases:

  • Classifying certain themes as recurring and giving them the appropriate category and navbox. I think this is still potentially useful to have.
  • Arrangements of existing themes. If a specific arrangement meets the recurring criteria on its own (e.g. "Slider"), it will get its own page, otherwise it's merged with the original theme. This is how we handle these already, so no change here.
  • Pages for unnamed themes. If a music track has never officially been named, it needs to meet the current recurring criteria to be considered notable enough to have a conjecturally named page.

As for a few questions I'm anticipating:

  • Won't this result in a lot of short articles? Some of these articles will be shorter, yes. I personally don't think this is much of an issue, a shorter article is fine in my view as long as it's comprehensive about the subject. There are things worth talking about regarding these besides where they play in the game, such as their composition.
  • Won't this result in a lot of articles? Yes! If we're trying to cover the Mario franchise to the best of our ability, I don't see why this is a problem.
  • Will this cause copyright problems? As far as I can tell, no. The Kingdom Hearts Wiki, which is also owned by Porplemontage, has full comprehensive coverage of that series' musical themes. Some of our other NIWA affiliates have similarly strong music coverage.

To be clear, this proposal is not specifically to create all of these articles (otherwise it'll probably sit unimplemented until the end of time), rather to relax our guidelines a bit to allow these articles to be created eventually. If someone makes a well-written article, it doesn't really make sense to delete it for falling outside of limits that are arbitrary and not communicated very well.

Proposer: Waluigi Time (talk)
Deadline: June 8, 2025, 23:59 GMT Closed early on June 1, 2025, 23:59 GMT

Music to my ears (Support)

  1. Waluigi Time (talk) Per proposal.
  2. DryBonesBandit (talk) Per.
  3. Technetium (talk) As long as the resulting articles are large enough to warrant their existence. Or maybe some of the shorter ones could be merged into larger articles, based on, for example, shared motifs?
  4. Tails777 (talk) Strong support. The way we currently cover music has been on my mind a lot lately. This at least helps further justify a few music articles we currently have beyond their "recurring" nature (Waluigi Pinball has an article largely because the Brawl rendition appears in three games and Mario Kart 8 Deluxe is being treated as a separate thing from Mario Kart 8, which really feels like cheating considering MK8D is a port.)
  5. SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA) (talk) I may not have voted on the original proposal, but I did support ToxicOJ's proposal, and this is just as good as that. (There's still the whole "PAL on NTSC" vs "NTSC on NTSC" vs "PAL on PAL" vs "NTSC on PAL"/"PAL on Toploader" thing from that proposal that could probably have its own proposal, but that's a whole other topic)
  6. Hewer (talk) Something I like about Inkipedia is how thorough its music coverage is, it'd be great to see this wiki do similar. The "recurring themes" system we've had so far has been decent, but 8 is a completely arbitrary number of appearances, it's not really clear whether things like soundtrack releases count as separate appearances, and it also means music coverage for newer games is really imbalanced with that of older games (like, most of the Super Mario Bros. 3 soundtrack qualifies for articles, while Super Mario Odyssey only has Fossil Falls, one of its main themes, and even that only just managed to scrape past the requirement after a whole console generation's worth of time). And honestly, I've always found it a little odd how tracks with lyrics just get a free pass to have articles no matter how many appearances they have. The solution of doing away with that minimum number of appearances is much more simple, consistent, and fun. The wiki would cover a character or item that only appears in one game, so why should music be different?
  7. Altendo Music (talk) Per all, but particularly Technetium.
  8. Ahemtoday (talk) Per proposal. Lots of big news on the music coverage front, huh?
  9. Pseudo (talk) Per all. I'd really like this wiki to cover music more thoroughly.
  10. FanOfYoshi (talk) per
  11. Kaptain Skurvy (talk) Sounds good to me!
  12. Nightwicked Bowser (talk) Music S.T.A.R.T
  13. Camwoodstock (talk) This is extremely overdue. Honestly, we've had thoughts about this ever since we discovered Super Mario Bros. Special (the album, NOT the game), and discovered it's an album that, apparently, has an overarching narrative in its lyrics. Having those translated and the story summarized on the article would be one, pretty nice, thing. Having individual pages to give proper transcripts and individual summaries on a per-song basis would be VERY nice.
  14. Scrooge200 (talk) I can see a fair amount of use for this. Explaining which tracks are associated with certain characters, lifting leitmotifs and references, smaller cases of tracks being rearranged between games (Sticker Star and Color Splash have a lot), and maybe someone more musically inclined than me could go into instruments used and BPM. Media lists also need more love and I'm hoping this encourages their creation.
  15. Sorbetti (talk) Per music.
  16. Polley001 (talk) I do share some concern that pages might be created without a sufficient amount of content, but by and large I'm all for increasing our music coverage. The 8 appearance rule was rather arbitrary and I generally don't feel that amount of appearances should universally determine how worthy a track is of receiving an article.
  17. Rykitu Music (talk) Per all.
  18. Nintendo101 Music Channel (talk) I support with caution. I do agree with eviemaybe's concerns in the opposition. However, we do not have reservations about deleting articles that are only a sentence or two long long and lack any details. If folks start generating a bunch of shallow articles that become the rule rather than the exception of what to expect in these articles, we can reevaluate this policy. I do think it is better than the current arbitrarily delineated rules.
  19. Mario (talk) Per Nintendo101. I think caution is advised but we can adapt and amend the policy if people are creating rubbish articles or scattering red links recklessly. i.e. Discretion is encouraged. I would say, opposing it amounts to throwing out the baby with the bathwater.

I don't like the sound of that (Oppose)

  1. EvieMaybe (talk) i hate to have to vote against a proposal touching on a subject i very much agree with, but i don't think this is the way to go. this works for some franchises, but Super Mario is absolutely not the kind of franchise this works for. just lifting the barrier and giving editors carte-blanche to create a bunch of scattered little music track pages just because they have an OST release with names seems like a very poor way of both organizing a wiki and analyzing a game's soundtrack. if this proposal allowed for the creation of pages about a game's entire soundtrack, with sections for each track, i would vote for it in a heartbeat. as is? the rules after this passes will be needlessly open ended and result in a lot of work that will then have to be undone when we try to organize things further. it's just poorly thought-out.
  2. Salmancer (talk) I'm going against my principles of favoring more articles here, but I'm with Evie on this. If song article creation becomes open-season, I have a hunch people are going to rush out to fill the quota and we're going to end up with a lot of listicles that technically aren't stubs but also aren't interesting to read. This hunch is based on how many of our current theme articles lack "Composition" sections for their base forms, and how many of the articles have sections for arrangements without having a single sentence in any section for what that section's arrangement actually changed about the song. Mind you, the existing articles are for songs that have eight or more appearances and are therefore more likely to have primary source materials to utilize. If we can't manage to make solid articles off those, then I have low hopes for the flood of articles that will come from this proposal passing doing much better.
  3. Bro Hammer (talk) Per EvieMaybe and Salmancer. Just because something has an official name, it does not mean it's relevant enough to warrant an article. This will result in so many articles that are either nothing or just needlessly specific details to fill a stub-sized article.
  4. Spencer PK (talk) Per EvieMaybe and Salmancer. I would like music coverage to be better, but I feel like there could be a better implementation of this proposal. The requirement of an official name is weirdly restrictive, as some games have sound tests with official names or (incomplete) OST releases, while others (Mario & Luigi: Brothership) have nothing and would need to wait an undefined but long time for Nintendo Music to add it. Some games may have a recurring main theme throughout the game that would make covering everything separately be all over the place (Super Mario World), while others may have a small motif woven throughout the game (TTYD Switch), or both (TTYD Switch battle themes). This gets more complicated as some songs get excluded from sound tests (Bowser's Inside Story DX doesn't have the inside Bowser songs, The Origami King doesn't feature an "Origami Castle - Think" despite it existing), which can place an unnamed song variant either in another article merged, or not covered at all.

Comments (I ran out of jokes)

You say anything that's in an in-game sound test, so this would mean articles for every track in Mario & Luigi: Dream Team through Bowser's Inside Story + Bowser Jr.'s Journey, Paper Mario: Color Splash through The Thousand-Year Door remake, and even the games in Super Mario 3D All Stars. That would definitely get very excessive especially with a lot of the tracks in those games not playing very often. Mario jumping Nightwicked Bowser Bowser emblem from Mario Kart 8 14:11, May 25, 2025 (EDT)

Yes, that's the case. I don't see it as "excessive", personally, I already acknowledged that this would open us up to a lot of articles but I don't see that as being detrimental to the wiki at all. Music is an important part of the franchise and I think we ought to have better ways to cover it than we currently do - so many tracks have their history scattered across various pages because they haven't hit that magic eight or just aren't covered well at all. "The Grand Finale" is an iconic and beloved track, for example, but if I search that name I'm just redirected to the BJJ sound test where it says that it "Plays during the battle against Dark Bowser and Dark Star Core." and nothing else. Where can I read about differences in composition for the remake, or that it was in Smash, or what it's called in other languages? If I wanted to write an article about that, it would be deleted on the spot right now. Maybe it could be a section on Dark Bowser's article, but I'm not fond of having music coverage tucked away in odd places like that and not every track lends itself to that. Having articles for one-off tracks is a price I'm more than willing to pay for better coverage in this area (and, honestly, I still think those articles would be beneficial). I'm open to alternatives though, really I'm just looking for any improvement at all right now and I think ripping off the arbitrary limits bandage is the best way to do that. --Waluigi's head icon in Mario Kart 8 Deluxe. Too Bad! Waluigi Time! 14:38, May 25, 2025 (EDT)
Very well then, but what about the "thinking" versions of battle themes from The Origami King and The Thousand-Year Door? Would those have seperate articles as well or be covered in the base theme's article? There's several other tracks in these games that progressively gain more instruments as the game goes on but with each version listed seperately in the music player such as Origami King's Toad Town theme. Mario jumping Nightwicked Bowser Bowser emblem from Mario Kart 8 20:45, May 25, 2025 (EDT)
The thinking versions and other variants would be considered arrangements and be merged with the base tracks (unless they somehow appeared enough times on their own, which I doubt will ever happen). --Waluigi's head icon in Mario Kart 8 Deluxe. Too Bad! Waluigi Time! 12:07, May 26, 2025 (EDT)

I don't oppose this, personally. I was the one who suggested the "eight minimum" rule in the first place to be cautious, but ultimately, it functioned more as a way to edge in coverage of a subject that was lacking such at the time. Now we do cover this sort of subject, and perhaps that rule is no longer needed. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 15:14, May 25, 2025 (EDT)

Okay, a question I have: how do we decide on a name to use for tracks that have multiple? Currently, it seems like names attached to the original appearance of a theme are higher priority than newer appearances (like "The Toad Brigade" instead of "It's Captain Toad!", and this track was never renamed to "Quizzy-Question Wonder" in the several months between that name and the current name appearing). This is unlike how our naming policy for other subjects prefers newer names, though I guess you could make the argument that a live service like Nintendo Music is treated differently for the purpose of figuring out the most recent name. Perhaps something should be added to MarioWiki:Naming about this. Hewer (talk · contributions · edit count) 08:38, May 26, 2025 (EDT)

That's... a good question. It's out of the scope of this proposal, but seems like something we should have a greater discussion about down the road. (For the slots theme, you can at least make the argument that the SMB3 tracks on Nintendo Music weren't added until after SMBW? No such luck for the Toad Brigade theme though.) For my two cents, I think I would prefer to stick with the title that applies to the theme's original context, but like you say that's not consistent with current naming elsewhere... --Waluigi's head icon in Mario Kart 8 Deluxe. Too Bad! Waluigi Time! 12:07, May 26, 2025 (EDT)
The draft proposal Proposal for defining musical theme name formatting policies would define naming policies. To revise the proposed policy further, musical themes would take names from any form of release of their source work's soundtrack. The source work can be defined as the first Super Mario-related media to feature the theme. If the musical theme is attributed to another work within the first-released work, the attributed work is the source work instead. The soundtrack can be released with a name within the source work's sound test, an official soundtrack, a work containing an official soundtrack (such as Super Mario 3D All-Stars), or Nintendo Music. If a name is not found from those sources, then a name from a later work can be used. Under this criteria, localization changes such as correcting "Koopa's Road" to "Bowser's Road" would be possible without the issue of renaming "Bonus Game BGM" to "Break Time! Tunes 1". B700465189a9 (talk) 12:52, May 26, 2025 (EDT)
I agree that music tracks should gear towards their original context. While I know this doesn't have its own article, as it's a variation of the Invincibility theme, it would be a bit off putting and misleading if "Metallic Mario" was named "Zappy-Zone Wonder", a name that is indeed a rendition of Metal Mario's theme, but not a name that has anything to do with Metal Mario as a whole. I believe this should be a case where the original name is maintained, as remixed/arranged themes can play for situations that are completely different than their original intention and that could get confusing when someone wants a certain theme, but has to look up a name that has nothing to do with what or where it played for. Sprite of Yoshi's stock icon from Super Smash Bros. Ultimate Tails777 Talk to me!Sprite of Daisy's stock icon from Super Smash Bros. Ultimate16:22, May 26, 2025 (EDT)
That makes enough sense for different versions of tracks, but the two examples I picked out in my comment ("It's Captain Toad!" and "Quizzy-Question Wonder") are just re-uses of the original track under a different name, so it's a bit trickier. Hewer (talk · contributions · edit count) 21:24, May 26, 2025 (EDT)

Would these pages have images? I think it would make sense to be our own Nintendo Music and have a screenshot of a level or scene where the song plays, just for some visual association. Scrooge200 (talk) PMCS Mustard Cafe Sign.png 18:46, May 26, 2025 (EDT)

The specifics of these pages aren't covered in this proposal. Our current music articles are pretty barren visually, but I would like to see some improvement on that. --Waluigi's head icon in Mario Kart 8 Deluxe. Too Bad! Waluigi Time! 11:42, May 28, 2025 (EDT)

@Camwoodstock: I'm pretty sure the tracks from that album could technically already get pages even without this proposal, since songs with lyrics seem to bypass the "recurring" criteria. 18 x 13, for instance, has an article despite making only one appearance. Hewer (talk · contributions · edit count) 21:14, May 26, 2025 (EDT)

I think "is an obtainable item" is an outright bypass, as per Work Those Muscles! and friends being Records in Warioware Gold. Salmancer (talk) 21:25, May 26, 2025 (EDT)
Right, bad example. Break Free (Lead the Way), then. Hewer (talk · contributions · edit count) 21:33, May 26, 2025 (EDT)
...See, we assumed there could maybe be a precedent just because of Ignorance is Bliss, but we guess that works. It'd be nice to have it set-in-stone that you can give individual songs in an album articles outside of stuff like that, though. Camwoodstock-sigicon.png~Camwoodstock ( talk ☯ contribs ) Camwoodstock-sigicon2.png 01:12, May 27, 2025 (EDT)

I went through all 111 pages on Template:Themes to find articles which fail to meet both of my criteria: having no textual data about how the original sounds and no textual data about what any one of the arrangements do to change the original. For the purposes of this, noting the song is shorter did not count as noting a change to the arrangement, but noting the variable mix properties used for every song in a specific game did count. There are six outright failures: Gusty Garden Galaxy (theme), Luma (theme) ("additional instrumentation" did not pass), Waltz of the Boos, Castle Theme (Super Mario 3D Land), Fossil Falls (theme), and Hello, Happy Kingdom. In hindsight, allowing shared variable mix properties is way too generous, but that means there should be zero articles that qualify and not six. Salmancer (talk) 06:01, May 28, 2025 (EDT)

Isn't the solution to articles being bad to improve them rather than to prevent their creation? While those articles certainly could be better than they are now, it's not like they're completely worthless in their current state, they still inform you of all the times that the theme has appeared. Hewer (talk · contributions · edit count) 07:02, May 28, 2025 (EDT)
My take on this is that perfect is the enemy of good. I'll concede that a lot of our music articles are not in the best shape they can be. But I also think some coverage is better than no coverage - Gusty Garden Galaxy may be nowhere near featured article worthy, but it's already doing a lot to consolidate information on an iconic track that would be scattered around who knows how many articles otherwise, and I think that's useful to have and something our readers would be interested in even if the article isn't covering everything it should be yet. --Waluigi's head icon in Mario Kart 8 Deluxe. Too Bad! Waluigi Time! 11:42, May 28, 2025 (EDT)
I recognize your point (one of these days I need to make an edit on Super Mario Run that is informed by the writing on Ground Theme (New Super Mario Bros. U)), but I feel that if the floor of quality we're holding ourselves to is "where the song plays in the original game, then list out every game the song appears in", then a full article per song shouldn't be necessary. I'd rather we combine good full articles with actual lists. Salmancer (talk) 20:39, May 31, 2025 (EDT)

Another question. What about songs that don't originate in the franchise? Will this proposal allow All Star from Donkey Konga 2 to get a page? Hewer (talk · contributions · edit count) 07:37, May 28, 2025 (EDT)

To be honest. I was lying in wait for some of the currently running proposals to pass so that I could make a proposal on that subject. If we have precedent for named songs getting articles, precedent for lists of songs being split, and especially precedent for rhythm game songs being level equivalents and therefore requiring articles, then everything lines up for Donkey Konga. Ahemtoday (talk) 11:22, May 28, 2025 (EDT)
This doesn't include licensed tracks. That's pushing scope too much for my tastes and is kind of missing the point of why we're covering these tracks - if you wanted to know about All Star, there's plenty of other resources for those, but if we're not going to be covering Mario tracks, who will? Maybe if we somehow get to a point where every eligible track has a fully comprehensive page, we can consider having that discussion. For now, there's more important things to worry about, and I'd be a little concerned about our priorities if Take On Me had an article here while the majority of the Galaxy soundtrack was still missing pages. --Waluigi's head icon in Mario Kart 8 Deluxe. Too Bad! Waluigi Time! 11:42, May 28, 2025 (EDT)
One more thing I thought of. Based on that response, I assume a music track like Wuhu Loop that's a fairly faithful arrangement of a non-Mario track would be ineligible. But would a track like Hyrule Circuit be eligible for a page? It does consist of themes originating from outside the franchise, but they're combined and arranged in a medley that is original to the franchise. Hewer (talk · contributions · edit count) 18:46, June 1, 2025 (EDT)

@Spencer PK Most of the opposition so far has been down to personal preference, so I don't see much need to argue against it, but there were a few things in your vote I wanted to address.

"The requirement of an official name is weirdly restrictive, as some games have sound tests with official names or (incomplete) OST releases, while others (Mario & Luigi: Brothership) have nothing and would need to wait an undefined but long time for Nintendo Music to add it."

This is by design to put some control on what's already a pretty big expansion of coverage. Although it's a shame that this still leaves a lot of games out in the cold, I feel it makes the most logical sense out of anything we can do to expand music coverage - the alternatives, as I see them, are either keeping the already arbitrary limits in place and just lowering those requirements, or opening the floodgates to conjecturally named pages for every one-off track in every game ever. (And then you have to figure out what to actually title those pages, and can we really be sure we're covering all of our bases for redirects and such? At least for named tracks, Nintendo's giving us something to go on that readers are probably more likely to search for, which is another reason why I'm looking at these specifically. And while there's other ways to do it than this proposal, it would be nice if the list of Super Mario tracks on Nintendo Music made it clear to readers without the app what a track is referring to if the name/image aren't obvious.)

"Some games may have a recurring main theme throughout the game that would make covering everything separately be all over the place (Super Mario World), while others may have a small motif woven throughout the game (TTYD Switch), or both (TTYD Switch battle themes)."

As I've said, this won't entirely override the recurring themes guideline. Ground BGM (Super Mario World) is an already working example of how this would be implemented, with all of the arranged themes merged to one page and the ones that have appeared enough to be considered recurring being split into their own pages.

In cases where the motif is only a very small part of the theme, we can discuss how best to cover those as they come up. This proposal isn't so much about the nitty-gritty as it is a broad guideline change, and I see this as allowing the pages to exist, not forcing them to exist. In other words, we'll still have the discretion to organize things in the best way possible. I don't want this to be taken as "you cannot merge these pages because this proposal said they must exist separately" down the road.

"This gets more complicated as some songs get excluded from sound tests (Bowser's Inside Story DX doesn't have the inside Bowser songs, The Origami King doesn't feature an "Origami Castle - Think" despite it existing), which can place an unnamed song variant either in another article merged, or not covered at all."

As long as a page exists for something that can be considered a base theme, arrangements will be covered there whether they have an official name or not.

--Waluigi's head icon in Mario Kart 8 Deluxe. Too Bad! Waluigi Time! 12:22, May 30, 2025 (EDT)

Create articles for Donkey Konga series music

Create articles 12-0
I understand that us having an article for Losing My Religion may come off silly, but I think it's... the only consistent move given our recently established policies.

  • Recently, we passed a proposal in favor of creating individual articles for songs that are part of large lists due to the ability to individually note down information regarding that music that couldn't be included in a table.
  • Even more recently, we just passed a proposal declaring a song having an official name as sufficient grounds for it to possess an article, even if it was a short one. This didn't extend to licensed tracks necessarily, but combined with the others it's a point in Donkey Konga's favor.
  • Finally, a couple years ago now, I myself put forward the argument that songs in rhythm games were levels, and therefore under our coverage policy, required articles.

But I don't want to make precedent my entire argument here. I fear I make Donkey Konga music articles sound like an obligation or loophole or something of that ilk — something we've forced ourselves to create. I don't see it that way. If I did, I wouldn't be proposing this. So let me discuss why I think, on their own merits, Donkey Konga songs should have articles.

Fundamentally, as a rhythm game, Donkey Konga is its music. That's the reason you get the game; that's what you're going to be spending 95% of your gameplay interacting with. And that's why I don't think it's right to only cover about the available songs in one table like they're only as important as the purchasable bongo sound sets. It's basically not covering the games at all — the navbox for Donkey Konga 1 is threadbare and the navboxes for 2 and 3 don't have enough to even exist. I don't believe this state of affairs, where only the minigames have their own article, is the proper way to cover a rhythm game on this wiki — I think the music is the equivalent of levels and needs to be covered as such. That was my stance for DDR: Mario Mix, and even though Donkey Konga lacks an adventure mode or much music made specifically for it, I still mantain that stance applies. I understand the way it being mostly external licenses may change the situation, but in my mind it's similar to our articles on random characters from other IPs seen in Club Nintendo comics — isn't Whip It having official gameplay relevance to the Mario series interesting information?

Allow me to move onto practical concerns. If this proposal passes, every song from every version of Donkey Konga, Donkey Konga 2, and Donkey Konga 3 JP will receive its own article. (Songs that already have their own article will instead receive similar information in a similar structure in a Donkey Konga section.) This article will list the song's name, original artist, whether or not the song is a cover, the show the song is an opening to (for several of the Japanese-exclusive tracks), which versions the song is exclusive to, its three difficulty ratings, the cost of its hard mode, a music sample, anything else that currently has to be a footnote on the song lists on the game article, and its lyrics (simply because this seems to be traditional for song articles on the wiki). Much of this will be accomplished through a "Donkey Konga song infobox" template to hold the information.

Unfortunately, information on Donkey Konga charts is not as readily available as DDR: Mario Mix's information was. Ideally, I would like to get things like BPMs, lengths, notecounts by difficulty, and even "maps" like this one, but I'm not sure all of that is within my power at the moment. Creating these articles, though, will allow that information to be added later if it ever becomes available to someone with the will to add it.

Proposer: Ahemtoday (talk)
Deadline: June 16, 2025, 23:59 GMT Closed early on June 9, 2025, 23:59 GMT

Support (Donkey Konga)

  1. Ahemtoday (talk) Per proposal. I've been thinking about this ever since the Mario Mix proposal.
  2. Nelsonic Konga (talk) Per proposal.
  3. Camwoodstock (talk) If Mario Mix can have pages for each of its tracks as levels, and in the wake of our slowly but surely increasing musical coverage, surely Donkey Konga can get in on this too. Let's get it on like Diddy Kong! (Per proposal.)
  4. Scrooge200 (talk) Makes total sense for a rhythm game, and the Konga games definitely need better coverage. Get your game on, go play.
  5. Rainbow Road Drifter (talk) Even if they originate from outside of the franchise, as Camwoodstock said, they appear in this game. Per my reason below.
  6. Hewer (talk) Let's drum up support for this idea.
  7. FanOfYoshi (talk) Konkey Donga! - Per
  8. Altendo: Grasslands Beat (talk) Per proposal and consistency with Dance Dance Revolution: Mario Mix.
  9. RHG1951 (talk) Per all.
  10. EvieMaybe (talk) tentative support, per Waluigi Time's comments.
  11. Kaptain Skurvy 3 JP (talk) Per proposal-a.
  12. Xiahou Ba, The Nasty Warrior (talk) Music in these rhythm games are "stages" and gameplay content, plus I would kill to see a Canned Heat article here on this wiki.

Oppose (Donkey Konga)

Comments (Donkey Konga)

I support doing this, but we are going to make these articles anyway because of this proposal, which decided that every song in the franchise gets an article if Nintendo gave it an official name. Rainbow Road Drifter - TalkBadge

Donkey Konga is a bit of an edge-case, as plenty of its tracks are licensed and not technically a part of the Mario franchise. Other things impacted by this cutoff would be SSX on Tour (for all of its music) and White Knuckle Scorin' (for all of its music, except for its single Ignorance is Bliss). Of the three, it's definitely got the best argument considering DDR Mario Mix. Camwoodstock-sigicon.png~Camwoodstock ( talk ☯ contribs ) Camwoodstock-sigicon2.png 23:05, June 1, 2025 (EDT)

You're right, the songs are from outside of the franchise. If this potentially needs to be handled differently, I think this proposal makes sense. I think the songs should still get articles, because they appear in this game, in the same way the Sonic and Final Fantasy characters get articles for their appearances in Mario & Sonic and Mario Hoops 3-on-3 and Mario Sports Mix. As for White Knuckle Scorin', it is an album themed after Mario, with a Mario comic inside. I think its songs should get articles like Donkey Konga's, even if they are from outside of the franchise. SSX on Tour (and NBA Street V3) should not be included, as it is clearly not a Mario franchise game. Likewise, songs from the Super Smash Bros. series that are not Mario songs should not get articles, because they are also not Mario franchise games. Rainbow Road Drifter - TalkBadge

What about songs featured in The Super Mario Bros. Movie? Shall we create pages for Thunderstruck or Mr. Blue Sky? Jdtendo(T|C) 12:11, June 2, 2025 (EDT)

I'd consider that an entirely separate question. This proposal is largely on the back of Donkey Konga being a rhythm game, so I don't think its ruling would be extensible to anything else that currently exists. Ahemtoday (talk) 13:51, June 2, 2025 (EDT)

I would be very cautious about including full lyrics for licensed music, I've heard that's something rights holders can be touchy about. Anyway, since it looks like this is going to pass, I do hope it's conditional on the articles being about the Donkey Konga charts first and foremost - I don't really want to see someone make a full article for All Star with "oh yeah and it's in Donkey Konga" as a brief aside, leaving the actually game-relevant info to be covered by someone else later. The last paragraph of this proposal does concern me a little bit on that front. --Waluigi's head icon in Mario Kart 8 Deluxe. Too Bad! Waluigi Time! 12:35, June 2, 2025 (EDT)

That lyrics thing surprises me. If List of The Super Mario Bros. Super Show! songs hasn't run afoul of it, though, I think we'll be fine. As for your other concern — I think that's an entirely fair concern to have. There's inherently less to cover than in Mario Mix — Donkey Konga lacks Mush Mode–style gimmicks, a position in an adventure mode, and dedicated backgrounds for each song. (Did you know Donkey Konga selects which backdrop to display randomly? Song choice doesn't even factor into it. I was really disappointed when I figured that out.) That only leaves the technical stuff, though I think I may be able to get BPMs and lengths after all. That said, I don't have any intention of extensively covering a song's history outside of Mario beyond... a sentence in the opening paragraph, at most. Being honest, I only recognize like ten of the songs in this series, so I couldn't do that even if I wanted to. Ahemtoday (talk) 13:51, June 2, 2025 (EDT)

We could make List of songs in Donkey Konga, which would only mention the game-relevant information. (The chart, the length, the BPM, etc.) Each entry would be fairly short, so this article wouldn't be too big, and the article is big enough that there wouldn't need to be coverage on the song's history outside of the franchise to extend it. @Ahemtoday, I recommend you add a "Create a list article" option to this proposal, because the Donkey Konga songs don't have as many distinct qualities as the Mario Mix ones. Rainbow Road Drifter - TalkBadge

We just passed a proposal to split the "List of songs" articles we have now, and those ones don't have gameplay built around them. I don't think a list article would be a suitable way to solve this — it's not sortable like a table so all three of a game's versions would be shuffled together in a difficult-to-parse way, and the format doesn't mix nicely with songs that appear elsewhere in the series (which are actually quite a few, some even appearing in multiple Donkey Konga games). Ahemtoday (talk) 16:40, June 2, 2025 (EDT)

I am okay with them being individual articles if it makes them easier to read. I was looking for a solution to your concern of there not being a lot to cover, but if the article is more difficult to read, we shouldn't make it. Rainbow Road Drifter - TalkBadge 16:55, June 2, 2025 (EDT)

Renaming "References" to "Citations"

Do not rename 1-9
"References" should be rename to "citations", as there are "references in other games", and "citations" are simply more accurate, as it can clarify that they are sources.

Proposer: Wariowarefan100 (talk)
Deadline: June 17, 2025, 23:59 GMT Closed early on June 10, 2025, 23:59 GMT

Rename "references" to "citations": rename all "references"(sources) to "citations"

  1. Wariowarefan100 (talk) I agree with this option.

Don't rename "references" to "citations": don't rename all "references"(sources) to "citations"

  1. Altendo (talk) I don't see why this should be done. Yes, this might be a bit confusing for early editors, but this section is usually placed much further down the page than the "References to/in other media" ones. Plus, the actual code for these are <ref>, </ref>, and <references/>, just to name a few. I think keeping the current name would be consistent with how the coding is done.
  2. Camwoodstock (talk) If we type <ref> to make them, we don't see why we shouldn't name the section they go into "References". Renaming them to "citations" feels a lot like change-for-change's-sake. The only real use-case we can think of would be if people were struggling to tell the difference between "References" (as in, reference material) and the "References to/in other media" sections (as in, the game itself making references to/being referenced from other things), but suffice it to say, we don't think this is a common enough issue; especially not one worth upending such a bare-bones basic term in MediaWiki itself.
  3. YoYo (talk) Per Altendo.
  4. Rainbow Road Drifter (talk) These terms aren't interchangeable, they mean different things. This site defines the terms: https://researchdeep.com/citations-vs-references-how-to-master-them-both/#citations-vs-references-understanding-the-core-functions
    Citations: Typically, appear in parentheses, footnotes, or endnotes, depending on the chosen citation style.
    References: A comprehensive list at the end of your document that provides detailed information about all the sources you cited within the text. This list allows readers to locate and consult the full source material for further study or verification
    Also, the "to/in other media" in these sections make clear that they are referring to references the work makes to past media, and references later media make to the work, so there isn't potential confusion in the current names.
  5. Technetium (talk) Per all.
  6. Mario (talk) Seems like change just for the sake of change.
  7. EvieMaybe (talk) i agree with the underlying idea of making our terminology clearer, but i don't think this is the way to go about it. if anything, i'd rather see the references to/in other games get renamed instead.
  8. Power Flotzo (talk) Per all.
  9. Dominoes (talk) Per all.

Discussion

Move Coin Game and Heart Game to 🪙 Game and ♥ Game respectively

canceled by proposer
The Coin Game and the Heart Game have unsourced titles. I wonder if it's an issue? Since Wario Land: Super Mario Land 3 and Virtual Boy Wario Land the sign on the entrance to one minigame that says 🪙 Game and the sign on the entrance to the other that says ♥ Game, I humbly propose if there's a possibility to move Coin Game and Heart Game to 🪙 Game and ♥ Game, respectively, as the kanji 「十」 (meaning 'ten') is stamped on the 10 Gold Coin, with ⊕ being said coin's icon. Maybe this will be likened to match the ♥ page, as ♥s appear in Yoshi's Story.

Proposer: GuntherBayBeee (talk)
Deadline: July 1, 2025, 23:59 GMT

Support: We're-a gonna move 'em!

  1. GuntherBayBeee (talk) Per proposal.

Oppose: Waaah!

  1. Camwoodstock (talk) We're already not a fan of the ♥ page title, to be frank, but that one is technically accurate, even if we'd really prefer if it was just called "Heart (Yoshi's Story)" and used a display name or something, like we do for #1 Iggy's Castle, which is stored as just "1 Iggy's Castle". If requiring a user to use Alt+Numpad3 is too much in our opinion, then having to search for the proper unicode symbol (Circled Plus is not, in fact, a symbol with an alt code to type!) (After leaving this vote, the symbol was changed from ⊕ to 🪙. Nevermind that we're unsure if emojis in MediaWiki titles are even possible, this runs into the same trap as ♥; namely, you either need a mobile keyboard, or Windows+. to access it... or so we thought, because on our computer running Windows 10, searching "coin" on the Windows+. menu just brings up a coin purse, or 👛. This remains just as unsearchable, with the slight benefit that mobile users specifically might have an easier time reaching it. Our stance remains un-changed.) just to access a page for a minigame in Wario Land: Super Mario Land 3, is... No thanks. A conjectural name is preferable than that--or better yet, just tracking down a proper name.
  2. Arend (talk) Per Camwoodstock, both before AND after changing the (+) symbol to a coin emoji... in fact, the iPad also converts the ♥ symbol to a ♥️ emoji (not just any heart emoji like ❤️, SPECIFICALLY the card set one), and that alone makes it difficult to determine what counts as a link. Additionally, we don't name World Bowser "World " with the Bowser symbol either.
  3. Sdman213 (talk) Idle animationIdle animationIdle animation

Comments Game

Encourage epithets for descriptively titled songs

canceled by proposer
This proposal's a little tough to title concisely, so allow me to un-crunch the description of it at the top, here. This is a proposal to, in most contexts, use brief descriptions rather than titles to refer to songs whose official titles are themselves purely descriptive. That might also be a bit unclear, so let me give some examples.

In Donkey Kong Jungle Beat, an arrangement of "Game Kaishi" is incorporated into the battle against Ghastly King.

In Donkey Kong Jungle Beat, an arrangement of Donkey Kong's opening theme is incorporated into the battle against Ghastly King.


In Mario Kart 8, an arrangement of "DS Waluigi Pinball" plays in DS Wario Stadium, likewise titled "DS Wario Stadium" in the game's official soundtrack.

In Mario Kart 8, DS Wario Stadium's theme is rearranged for its appearance as a classic course. This arrangement is titled "DS Wario Stadium" on the game's official soundtrack.

Those are a couple of the sorts of substitutions that would be made if this proposal were to pass. Now that we're hopefully all on the same page regarding this proposal's goal, I'd like to talk about why I think this is worth doing.

Ultimately, what it comes down to for me is that these type of song titles may be titles, but not names, I think. They're labels that describe their place in the game — and especially with older games, they're assigned after the fact, in different and inconsistent ways. We currently don't take this into account. We reify whatever the track was called last and call it that at basically every opportunity, which leads to some negative outcomes with regards to article text. Sometimes, such as the Waluigi Pinball example above, the official label isn't a complete description of the song's role. When we reify that label even when talking about a different role that song has, the resulting text makes little sense — we talk about Wario Stadium as if it's been given a different theme from its own in MK8. Furthermore, in a lot of cases; such as the sea of Ground BGMs, Ground Themes, and Main Themes; the label itself isn't sufficient to identify the song. When the songs are mentioned on other articles, further descriptive text is necessary anyway to clarify which game the song is from.

This style change will extend to most mentions of songs in article text. However, this proposal will not change the title of articles, nor will it apply to when the song's official labels are explicitly mentioned (as typically signified by bold text).

Proposer: Ahemtoday (talk)
Deadline: July 2, 2025, 23:59 GMT

Support (song epithets)

  1. Ahemtoday (talk) Per proposal.
  2. Rainbow Road Drifter (talk) Per proposal.

#Altendo (talk) This makes things a lot less confusing. I didn't even know what "Game Kaishi" was before I clicked on the link shown here.

Oppose (song epithets)

  1. Waluigi Time (talk) I really don't like this because we'd be largely sweeping names under the rug based entirely on personal preference, and I don't think this is helpful coverage of these subjects for our readers. Official track names aren't always well-known or intuitive to track down, and I'm not sure if it's intentional or just an oversight, but the examples in this proposal also go out of their way to remove links to the pages that cover those themes for some reason, which obfuscates things even further. I'll give you that a lot of these track titles are pretty utilitarian, but it's what Nintendo gave us to work with, and saying that some names aren't namey enough to be names isn't a judgment call we should be making. (And I'm with Salmancer, it's fairly easy to disambiguate shared titles by just saying what game it's from if context clues and/or page links aren't already doing the heavy lifting.) Also, I worry that this standard itself could become arbitrary and subject to varying interpretation - how "descriptive" does a title have to be to fall in this category? Is an arrangement of "Invincibility BGM" simply called "Super Star" descriptive? Is "Gusty Garden Galaxy" a descriptive name because it's shared with the level where it plays? How far do we go, and is it worth introducing an inconsistency for new editors who likely aren't going to understand why they shouldn't write "Airship BGM" in an article but "Attack of the Airships" and "Bill Blaster! Go Faster!" are perfectly fine for minimal, if any benefit?
  2. Jdtendo (talk) Per Waluigi Time.
  3. Altendo (talk) Waluigi Time does have a point here.
  4. Camwoodstock (talk) Per Waluigi Time. The lack of links to the actual theme pages is the dealbreaker here for us.
  5. Hewer (talk) Per Waluigi Time, and I also think a minor wording choice like this isn't the kind of thing that should be enforced by a sweeping proposal.
  6. JanMisali (talk) Per all. If a track has an official name, why not use it?
  7. Dominoes (talk) Per all.

Comments (song epithets)

I think I rank pretty high on the wiki's pendant scale, but I think the solution to Ground BGM, Main Theme, and friends is simply to say "Super Mario Bros 3's Ground BGM'". And therefore, the solution to this proposal's problem is "Donkey Kong's 'Game Kashi'". Doesn't really solve the Wario Stadium problem, but I'm one to blame Nintendo for the confusion and move on in that kind of case. Salmancer (talk) 01:31, June 18, 2025 (EDT)

Out of curiosity, is there a reason the sample replacements don't link to the corresponding theme's page (at least, in the case of the Game Kaishi example, where it actually has its own page)? Camwoodstock-sigicon.png~Camwoodstock ( talk ☯ contribs ) Camwoodstock-sigicon2.png 01:39, June 18, 2025 (EDT)

Ah, that one's my bad. Since the focus was the text, I didn't see the need to include links, but I still wanted to point to where these excerpts came from. Including just the one link, though, ended up creating a lot of confusion, which I should have foreseen. I've changed the quotes to have the links they'd be expected to have as article text. Ahemtoday (talk) 12:24, June 18, 2025 (EDT)

As for Waluigi Time's point... I'm starting to regret conceptualizing this as a "writing guideline", because it is true that the boundaries of this are subjective. So phrasing it as if it could be an ironclad rule when it has such fuzzy boundaries — those two things are always a bad mix. I maintain that "New Super Mario Bros.'s tower theme" is more useful to the end reader than the nonsensical "BGM Tride", but perhaps trying to turn that kind of thing into a full-stop rule was a mistake. Ahemtoday (talk) 12:41, June 18, 2025 (EDT)

I actually agree with you on that specific example, and I think it speaks to a larger writing issue on the wiki. The way a lot of articles are written, they tend to treat foreign and even conjectural names on the same "level" as officially localized names, and I'm increasingly of the opinion you could include internal names in that category (we put a lot of stock in them for things the developers never intended for anyone to see), and it tends to lead to awkward and clunky writing when they're dropped in the middle of the page like that, which could be avoided if we used more descriptive writing. Specifically this came up when discussing a lot of the Wonder enemies before we had the derived names proposal and Mario Portal localized them (e.g. you can just say "the Spike" instead of dropping "Fire Gabon" in the text whenever it's mentioned). So in cases like BGM Tride, yes, I think it would be good to do something like this, I just don't think track titles on the whole are part of the issue here. --Waluigi's head icon in Mario Kart 8 Deluxe. Too Bad! Waluigi Time! 12:57, June 18, 2025 (EDT)
Hm. I'd definitely support a proposal to fix that issue, but I don't have nearly the insight necessary to make that proposal myself. That still leaves this proposal, though. Unfortunately, I don't think it would be possible to define an exact scope for this, aside from just a general "where it would otherwise be ambiguous or unclear" (which is vague and also might not need to be a rule to begin with). Maybe I'd be better off cancelling this proposal? Like you said, there are benefits to doing this in some cases, so I'm a bit concerned about setting a precedent against this being done... Ahemtoday (talk) 17:02, June 18, 2025 (EDT)
Retrieved from "https://www.mariowiki.com/index.php?title=MarioWiki:Proposals/Archive/76&oldid=5017776"