MarioWiki:Proposals

 http://img33.picoodle.com/img/img33/9/9/17/f_propcopym_9045f2d.png A proposal section works like a discussion page: comments are brought up and replied to using indents (colons, such as : or ::::) and all edits are signed with the signature code (~).

How To
 * 1) Actions that users feel are appropriate to have community approval first can be added by anyone, but they must have a strong argument.
 * 2) Users then vote and discuss on the issue during that week. The "deadline" for the proposal is one week from posting at:
 * 3) Monday to Thursday: 17:00 (5pm)
 * 4) Friday and Saturday: 20:00 (8pm)
 * 5) Sunday: 15:00 (3pm)
 * 6) Every vote should have a reason accompanying it.
 * 7) At any time a vote may be rejected if at least three active users believe the vote truly has no merit or was cast in bad faith. However, there must be strong reasons supporting the invalidation.
 * 8) " # " should be added under the last vote of each support/oppose section to show another blank line.
 * 9) At the deadline, the validity of each vote and the discussion is reviewed by the community.
 * 10) Any proposal that has three votes or less at deadline will automatically be listed as "NO QUORUM"
 * 11) All proposals are archived. The original proposer must take action accordingly if the outcome of the proposal dictates it. If it requires the help of a sysop, the proposer can ask for that help.

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

So for example, if a proposal is added on Saturday night at 11:59 PM EDT, the deadline is the next Saturday night at 8:00 PM. If it is indeed a minute later, the deadline is a day plus 15 hours (Sunday), as opposed to a day minus 4 hours.

CURRENTLY: , 28 2024 (EDT)

Crossover Species Page
Er, I think this goes on this section... Whatever. OK, I was discussing this with Stumpers over a certain edit involving a Hedgehog, and we came to an agreement. We believe that perhaps a List of Crossover Species page is needed. I'm feeling lazy right now, so I'm not gonna bother listing five examples. Instead, someone else can fill the blanks for me. Just an idea... We could possibly merge things like Topi, Polar Bear or Octorok with this as well.

Proposer: Deadline: March 17, 2008, 17:00

Create a Crossover Species List

 * 1) I'm the Proposer, and all that jazz.
 * 2) I never thought about it as a way to merge other aritcles, so I'm only in support of the making an article for Hylian, Hedgehogs, Foxes, etc.

Don't Create a Crossover Species List

 * 1) Per Ghost Jam in the comments. Seem rather pointless.
 * 2) Walkazo - If we're not going to merge already existing articles about crossover species and only not make them in the future that's gonna cause some unneccesary inconsitancies, confusion and more proposals down the road.
 * 3) - I don't see a reason for merging them. They are all long enough to warrant their own article. (I'm refering to species which are enemies, e.g. ReDead. We wouldn't need articles because crossover characters are of a certain species, e.g. "Hylian")

Comments
I'm all in favor, as long as it DOESN'T GET CARRIED OVER TO MARIO SPECIES. This Wik was made so every character and enemy, great or small, gets its own article.
 * Not to be Mr. Idiot, but just so I understand things: We'll be making a list article that will contain info on Hedgehogs, Foxes, Topis, and other crossover species; however, we're keeping articles like Sonic and Knuckles because they're about crossover characters?
 * I talked with DP about the merging Topis, and he and I are pretty sure we'd like to keep species that are also enemies separate, so Octoroks and such are fine. Nothing that is currently separate will be merged with this proposal as I understand it: the proposal only allows us to include information about hedgehogs and such collectively, so that the reader does not have to search through a bunch of articles to find what he or she believes is all of them... and also to include information about the species as a whole as well.  Characters are definately not going to be merged.  But, all this is just to my understanding.  DP will have to give you the offical word.  17:14, 11 March 2008 (EDT)
 * This seems like a lot of work for little reward. You're talking about a handful of species that appear more than once, a group of one shots and some species that will, in all likelihood, result in another proposal about what to do with them. This idea either needs to be fleshed out or dropped.
 * Also, DP, in future, if you are too lazy to properly and completely explain your proposals, then please wait until you are NOT too lazy to do so before making them. -- [[Image:Shyghost.PNG]]Chris[[Image:Shyghost.PNG]] 18:42, 11 March 2008 (EDT)
 * If I can stand up for DP here, this really would have been a proposal better headed by me. I asked DP to do it for me because I'm occupied with acting in accordance to the results of the "Birdo" proposal.  21:18, 11 March 2008 (EDT)
 * Thanks, Stumpers! Now I'll vote!
 * No problem! Thanks for the vote.  22:04, 11 March 2008 (EDT)
 * Sure thing! I try to participate in these as much as possible!

Me and Stumpers listed a few Crossover species here, if anyone is curious.
 * Speaking of, Rooben just let me know that Pac-Man and Ms. Pac-Man are of the Pac species. 23:12, 11 March 2008 (EDT)
 * Thanks guys, that helps. And, my Namco instruction book calls them "Pac"s.

Hey 3D Ejong, what about the Pokemon characters huh? They were merged into 1 big Pokemon article. (Actually I don't like that.

Final Smash Trophy Information
I noticed that for the characters that are in Super Smash Bros. Brawl articles, there are the Final Smash Trophy information. The exact same information can be found on each of the Final Smash Articles. (e.g. Ike and Great Aether.) I think that the ones one the character's article should be deleted, even if that means we should put a link to the Final Smash article. I don't think there should be two duplicate trophy informations on two articles.

Proposer: Deadline: March 17, 2008, 17:00

No Trophy info on Character pages

 * 1) Well, why would I be against my own proposal? :P Reasons are given above.

Keep Trophy info on Character pages

 * 1) No one said the Trophy Information had to be restricted to one article each. Its about both the Final Smash and the character using the Final Smash, so, it stays on both articles.
 * 2) Sometimes there are great bits about personality in those trophies.  Take Luigi, for example.  Nowhere else are we lead to believe that Luigi's life in the shadow of his brother has done anything... weird to him.
 * 3) Princess Grapes Butterfly Per all. I sorry but I most agree with 3dejong.
 * 4) Keep it!If trophies were kept,it would be much easier to both guests and users.:]User:Goldguy
 * 5) http://img247.imageshack.us/img247/3473/linkswordmi2.gif Paper Jorge ( Talk&middot;Contributions)&middot; http://img247.imageshack.us/img247/3473/linkswordmi2.gif I'd have to agree mostly with Stumps here. We wouldn't know why the heck Luigi has suc ha bizzare Smash if it wasn't for trophy information.
 * 1) http://img247.imageshack.us/img247/3473/linkswordmi2.gif Paper Jorge ( Talk&middot;Contributions)&middot; http://img247.imageshack.us/img247/3473/linkswordmi2.gif I'd have to agree mostly with Stumps here. We wouldn't know why the heck Luigi has suc ha bizzare Smash if it wasn't for trophy information.

Comments
Why can't we just keep that info there and put a link to the final smash?

Pokémon stuff
Hi everyone, okay now to business. How do I put this? I think there should be articles for each Pokemon instead of all into 1 article. Because seperate articles would make more sense (in my opinion), because most of the Pokemon's stuff is mainly trophy stuff and there should be more about the different kinds of Pokemon. A lot of Pokemon do very different kinds of things. Also if by chance, my proposal doesn't work, than somebody has to merge the Dialga, the Palkia, and the Cresselia articles with the Pokémon article. Love Sincerly 16:05, 13 March 2008 (EDT)

Changes
None at the moment.

Patroller Power!
The Patroller ranking seems very much, useless. They have very limited powers, making them simply Users with a big Block Gun on their side. My point being, the Patroller ranking should NOT be removed, but should at least be given extra powers. At least give them the ability to edit protected pages. Nothing TOO major, just make them less of a User, and more of a higher authority on the Wiki. Also, I tried asking Steve if its even possible to add more powers, and he never responded. So, someone, please, answer that for me.

Proposer: Deadline: March 13, 2008, 17:00

Add moar Powers

 * 1) I am the Proposer and my reasons are given above.
 * 2) - I may be biased because I am a patroller, but I think we should atleast have the abbility to edits protected pages. I wouldn't mind having access to the Sysop only board . Uh, nevermind.
 * 3) I think more power is a great idea. I also think that each ranking should have a certain criteria that helps you try to become what ranking you want to be (sort of like a cheat sheet)!
 * 4) As a Patroller myself, I feel that more powers would only be beneificial. I just can't put my finger on which powers would be suitable, without turning us into Jr. Sysops. But I'm all for it, regardless. -- Booster
 * 5) If you feel it will help me help you, I'm all for it.  But, we're not sysops for a reason, so it's really not my decision.
 * 6) It's true, patrollers don't have as many powers as they should.  They just seem like users with different names.  Per DP, as usual :P
 * 7) Princess Grapes Butterfly Per all I think they should have a little more power because they might need it and the three patrollers are trushful right?
 * 8) I find it funny that all these normal users are supporting this. But hey, it's a good idea! :D So per all.
 * 9) Walkazo - Per all.
 * 10) Informant/ - They deserve the extra power, and besides, maybe one day I'll be a patroller.
 * 11) See my comment below.
 * 12) Patrollers should at least have less powers than Crats', and should have a bit less of Sysops. Per DP.
 * 13) I think that the patroller group are trustworthy enough to have a few extra powers, but not as much as a sysop or there is no point. Powers that I think are OK for patrollers are editing protected pages and deleting pages (Patrollers are about reverting spam and that includes deleting spam pages).
 * 14) http://img247.imageshack.us/img247/3473/linkswordmi2.gif Paper Jorge ( Talk&middot;Contributions)&middot; http://img247.imageshack.us/img247/3473/linkswordmi2.gif If it's possible then it's gotta be done. As Plumber said, being a patroller is very boring. We need to give patrollers more!
 * 15) &euro;zlo Even though I don't have any comments, about the proposal, patrollers also deserve a bit more of acknowledgement by their jobs of protecting the wiki against vandals. however, you can't have such the luxury of having many capabilites that sysops have. therefore, you'd remove the patroller rank.
 * 1) &euro;zlo Even though I don't have any comments, about the proposal, patrollers also deserve a bit more of acknowledgement by their jobs of protecting the wiki against vandals. however, you can't have such the luxury of having many capabilites that sysops have. therefore, you'd remove the patroller rank.

Comments
Now that I think about it, I don't really understand the point behind patrollers. They're job is to find things that a Sysops can fix, but not be able to fix it themselves? -- Chris 13:27, 6 March 2008 (EST)
 * I alway thought that the Patroller were an half-baked reaction to the increased vandalism that happened during February-May 2007. According to former bureaucrat Xzelion, the Patroller are a "test" to see who can becomes a sysop. Personally, I think it's a load of BS.

I think that Patrollers should have powers that ease them in fighting vandalism and making maintenance (Deleting pages, being able to edit protected pages ect) while sysops should have powers that allow them to keep order (Deleting specific revisions, being able to protect an frequently vandalised article, ect..) althought perhap the two rank would be a little too close in term of powers. --Blitzwing 15:14, 6 March 2008 (EST)

I disagree they should have more powers.After all it isn't a really high rank.If patrollers had more powers,why not make them sysops?Patrollers already have good powers,anyway.Like User:Blitzwing said,they have powers that help them with fighting vandals.User:Goldguy
 * Uh, they do have powers, but they are pretty much useless in fighting vandalism (Except for blocking an user), maybe you missreaded my comments. --Blitzwing 13:27, 9 March 2008 (EDT)


 * DP, is that the only power you want to add, or are there others? Because according to this, the patroller rank was designed to counter vandalism, which doesn't include editing protected pages. If they were to gain any more powers, they should be anti-vandal specific, as that's what the rank was designed for. Also, Jaffffey, we have one of those for administators, although perhaps we could have one for patrollers. -- 15:30, 6 March 2008 (EST)
 * It would be useful to me! I don't even know what a "rollback" is, but I was filled in on the main ideas by other users the day I got promoted.  21:21, 6 March 2008 (EST)
 * Rollback = Revert. --Blitzwing 06:05, 7 March 2008 (EST)
 * Normal Users can already revert most pages so giving Patrollers a fatser way of doing it isn't actually doing that much, they can just fight vandalism a bit faster. Letting them delete pages would let them fight more vandalism (but perhaps only small pages under a certain amount of coding lines, or something). - Walkazo
 * Well, let' say that a vandal create a page that only contain nonsense, but it have an humongous number of coding line (I remmember it happened before, some guy create a page containing 400. 000 lines worth of coding, all of which said "MEOW MEOW"), the patroller can't delete the vandalism. --Blitzwing 21:18, 7 March 2008 (EST)
 * Patrollers are considered "Between Sysops and Users", but they are closer to User status than they should be. Patrollers should be able to delete pages...especially nonsense pages of "MEOW MEOW". Maybe Patrollers should be given access to the following powers:
 * 1) To "rollback" pages, like they currently can in order to block spam and vandalism.
 * 2) To be able to block vandals and spammers of pages; however, the Patroller should not be able to block users because of "inappropriate behavior", "offensive usernames", or anything else except vandals/spammers; the rest should be left to the Sysops and bureaucrats.
 * 3) To edit certain special pages. (e.g.: Categories)
 * I don't know how this would work out though, because I'm nothing but a mere user, so I don't know how close of a conflict this would cause between Patrollers' and Sysops' powers.
 * Hmm, not sure. Anyway, to Blitzwing's MEOW MEOW example, couldn't they just edit it and chop out a bunch of the coding lines, and then delete the shrunken page? - Walkazo

What powers DO patrollers have? HyperToad
 * Block users, and mark pages as patrolled (marking pages as patrolled is an internal control system of edits, which displays exclamation marks on unpatrolled edits in the recent changes list, nothing more). - 13:59, 10 March 2008 (EDT)
 * They can also checkuser (Verify the IP of an user) and rollback (A faster way of reverting edits), which isn't much. --Blitzwing 15:06, 10 March 2008 (EDT)

Ehm, just a little note: How are you planning to give them new powers? Even bureaucrats can't change the rights of user groups. - 12:16, 11 March 2008 (EDT)
 * I'm not positive on this, but I think he's gonna try to get Steve to change their powers. I think he'd be the only one that could do that.
 * Steve is a Steward, which means he can promoted and demote Bureacrats. I think he can change it; he made the Patroller rank himself, didn't he?
 * He installed a plugin for it. - 14:51, 12 March 2008 (EDT)
 * Good. Now we can feel secure that when if the proposal wins, it'll pull through successfully. Thanks, Cobold!
 * Not at all. You can't create plugins out of nowhere. - 12:23, 13 March 2008 (EDT)