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

How To
 * 1) Actions that users feel are appropriate to have community approval first can be added by anyone, but they must have a strong argument.
 * 2) Users then vote and discuss on the issue during that week. The "deadline" for the proposal is one week from posting at:
 * 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) Any proposal that has three votes or less at deadline will automatically be listed as "NO QUORUM." The original proposer then has the option to relist said proposal to generate more discussion.
 * 10) 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.
 * 11) There are two topics that cannot be decided on through a proposal: the first is sysop promotions and demotions, which are decided by Bureaucrats. Secondly, no proposals calling for the creation of Banjo, Conker or Sonic series articles are allowed (several proposals supporting them have failed in recent history).

The times are in EDT, and are set so that the user is more likely to be online at those times (after work/school, weekend nights). 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 a minute later, the deadline is a day plus 15 hours (Sunday), as opposed to a day minus 4 hours.

CURRENTLY: , 27 2024 (EST)

New Features
''None at the moment.

Removals
None at the moment.

Mario and Luigi's Parents
For those of you who are unaware, there have been previous discussions regarding whether or not the article Mario and Luigi's Parents should be split into two articles, one for each parent. However, the discussions were based off of the information currently in the article, and as any fan of The Super Mario Bros. Super Show! or Nintendo Comics System could tell you, it was very incomplete at the time, and still is, albeit more complete.

Previously, we have left characters such as Ashley and Red together because neither of them does much without the other, and to have two articles would be to restate a vast majority of the same information. However, this is not the case with Mario and Luigi's parents. In fact, the only time they are seen together is the Super Mario World 2: Yoshi's Island ending. Otherwise, the two appear separately.

To anyone who knows the character well, Mama Mario obviously deserves an individual article: she has an official name (formally given in "Plumbers of the Year" after being called "Mama" by her boys on countless other occasions), has made on-screen appearances in which her face appears, she has speaking roles, and plays integral parts of the plot. This alone puts her ahead of many subjects from The Super Show, such as Cheepy's mother, who did not have an official name and only appeared in one episode. However, the fact is that Mama Mario was referenced almost continuously on the show, the references continued into the later DiC television series, and she also appeared in "Family Album "The Early Years"" and Yoshi's Island. Multiple independent appearances and references place her notability well beyond many characters with their own articles.

There is no argument that Mario and Luigi's father is a much more minor character. He currently has had only two appearances, one in "Family Album" and the other in Yoshi's Island. In both of these, he did not speak and his face was not seen. However, it is very awkward to write an article about such a minor character and such a major character as Mama. Almost the entire article currently is about her, with a small blurb about Mario's father.

I propose we split "Mario and Luigi's Parents" into two articles: "Mama Mario" and "Mario and Luigi's father." The current "Mario and Luigi's Parents" will be made into a disambiguation page to avoid redlinks throughout the Wiki.

Proposer: Deadline: December 1, 2008, 17:00

Support

 * 1) - My reasons are detailed above.
 * 2) - Per Stumpers, these are two diffrent people, why are they merged into one? They deserve to be mentioned.
 * 3) -Per Stumpers and Super-Yoshi.
 * 4) - Good reasons.  They appear independently of each other, so the articles should be seperate.  (I did not know Mario's dad smoked...)
 * 5) - Per all.
 * 6) - Per Stumpers.
 * 7) - Per Stumpers.
 * 8) - Per Stumpers.
 * 9) per all
 * 10) Booster - Silly to keep them merged.
 * 11) - I don't exactly know why these two characters are merged into one article. So ... per Stumpers.

Oppose

 * 1) -i think we leave them be. I don't think there is enough info on both of them to split them. The articles would just be too tiny
 * 2) -There isn't enough info about both, so I think it should be like that. Problaby, both artcles would be stubs.

Comments
The only quibble someone might have with this split is the speculation about the various aunts, grandparents, nieces and nephews (basically the second and third paragraphs of the introduction of Mario and Luigi's Parents): as we have no way of knowing which side anyone's from, we'll have to discuss them on both articles and list both parents as Siblings to be safe, even though one may not be. But given the circumstances, I think anyone who seriously complains about that is being a tad unreasonable. Anyway, I just thought I'd mention all that for the record, in case anything does come up. -
 * It doesn't seal up all the cracks, but if your parents are married, our uncle on your father's side is your mother's brother-in-law, and therefore her sibling by marriage. We can't confirm that Mario's parents were ever married, but if they ever were, that would make each others' relatives related to them.  Thanks for the support and consideration, Walkazo!  20:14, 25 November 2008 (EST)


 * Disambiguation, not redirect.
 * To Stumpers: Thanks! To Master Hand: good point - it can't redirect to both articles, and redirecting to one would be wrong. The best course of action would be making it a disambig. page right off the bat and then going through and changing all the links to the appropriate parent for our readers' convenience (which I'd be more than happy to help out with). -
 * That's what I meant to right; thanks for noticing that! And Walkazo: I'll be right there with you.

3-in-1 Super Mario Bros./Duck Hunt/World Class Track Meet
We should get rid of this page and put the picture, along with a short summary, on the Super Mario Bros. article. Resons are as follows:


 * 1) The game was a complatsion cartrige, which means it was just a 3 games stuffed into a cartridge to save money. It's not realy a Mario series game, it's a cartridge with a Mario game inside.
 * 2) The article is short and just takes up sever space.
 * 3) The people on the talk page are disscusing to get rid of it.

Despite there being only 3 resons, I think I make a strong point.

Proposer: Deadline: December 5, 2008, 20:00

Support

 * 1) per above. I hope this doesn't go the way my Captian Rainbow perpososal went.
 * 2) - I agree that something should be done with the page.  However, as is the case with all merges, rather than just delete the page ("get rid of") we should replace it with a redirect to the page it was merged with: Super Mario Bros.  I also don't support a merge just because the page is short, etc., but rather because if we don't, we're obligated to make a new page for every port of SMB that's out there, including Classic NES Series and so on.
 * 3) - Gah, edit conflict. Well, my reasonings were gonna be pretty much the same as Stumpers', so per him.
 * 4) Per all You have my support.
 * 5) - Per all, but a redirect instead of deletion. The same should go for Super Mario Bros./Tetris/Nintendo World Cup.
 * 6) - Yes, redirect. But I think the brief description should stay on the Super Mario Bros. article.
 * 7) - Per everyone who voted redirect.
 * 8) - Per all.

Comments
To everboby who said redirect: that's what I ment by "Get rid of". --

Changes
''None at the moment.

Miscellaneous
None at the moment.

A question of ethics: articles about hentais
I was able to find some mario hentais online and they are official ones not fan made ones. Like the one for super mario rpg. However it would kind of be bad to go into the and this wiki has never had a disscussion about this yet. So I'm asking, should we be allowed to do articles about hentai if they are official or is it to innopropriate for the wiki. I want opinions from all of you.

1)Please format into a proposal as suggested above.

2)I severely doubt Nintendo has created official Mario hentai.

3)If you can prove Nintendo has authorized Mario hentai, then under Canonicity it would be acceptable material for the wiki. --

Do you want a link to the hentai I found?
 * The odds of Nintendo making hentai of Marioverse characters is extremely low, but I won't completely dismiss the possibility. Even so, if we were to make the article(s), we'd need to make a template for the pages saying that the article contained information about adult material.


 * Send the link 17:27, 30 November 2008 (EST) I'm not interested in seeing, it's a dirty work but someone must do it. 17:27, 30 November 2008 (EST)

It's odd that you brought this up. I randomly remembered the MarioRPG hentai a few days ago. Anyone remember what happened with FF7? It was popular, people started to forget about it, guy in Japan releases a series of hentai doujinshi about FF7, popularity kicked back up and here we are 10 years later, FF7 is still running strong.

I've thought that maybe something similar might have happened with Mario at some point. Marketed hentai's (and by 'marketed' I mean 'stuff that was sold in a store at some point in time') might be worth covering, as well as other unlicensed marketed merchandise. Thoughts?

Also, I'm skipping the ethics debate, as it has no place here. We are an encyclopedia, encyclopedias don't censor. --
 * Unlicensed Marchandise? Meh. But I'd really think Pirate Games deserve some kind of spot here. --

The one Ghost Jam is talking about is the one I found and i cant get the link out until laura3 leaves my room


 * I agree with Ghost Jam and feel ethics is of no concern for a wiki. However I don't think we should cover unlicensed Mario merchandise, as it was not officially recognized by Nintendo.  If we cover one unlicensed product, what's to stop us from writing articles about every single unlicensed product, including pirated games, fan games, etc. (which are all in some way marketed or advertised, and sold [either in terms of actual exchange of money, exchange of time, etc.]).  We should stick to official material. --
 * The problem is, this creates a small double standard. Many of the products we have listed on the merchandise page/category aren't actually licensed by Nintendo, despite the Nintendo Seal of Approval pasted on them. --
 * Unfortunately Mario merchandise is not my speciality, so I wouldn't know the specific products you refer to. If Nintendo somehow authorized the production of a piece of merchandise, I feel it should stay.  However, if a piece of merchandise is a forgery with a false Seal of Approval, it should go. How we determine that, I'm not exactly sure, but we should do out best to uphold that which is official.  --

[Link Removed] the mario hentai adult content warning.


 * I'm starting to think we should move this discussion to the forums.... --
 * As long as no policy decisions are made there! Haha. =) --
 * That it is hentai shouldn't be the problem, we discussed multiple times that we won't censor stuff. But this manga is doujin, isn't it? Doesn't doujin refer to fan-made content? We should only cover this manga if it was officially licensed, was it? Proof is needed. Wouldn't say that it isn't possible, I've also seen some odd officially licensed Kirby manga, which weren't hentai, but still featured a lot of sexual jokes. Anyway, if you want to see a non-dirty (aside from a piece of underwear) page of this odd SMRPG manga, go here. --Grandy02 05:57, 1 December 2008 (EST)