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)

New Features
None at the moment.

Removals
None at the moment

Splits & Merges
None at the moment.

Changes
None at the moment.

Bob Hoskins Quote
This was brought up by the Bob Hoskins article, which has the "F-Word" written three times in a quote that supposedly came from the guy himself. It has been a huge contreversy, and has been argued back and forth. I propose we censor it. Yes, yes, I know, I've changed my mind a lot, but putting F---ing or f***ing is better.

Proposers: InfectedShroom and Glitchman

Deadline: Sunday, February 10, 15:00

Get Rid of It

 * 1) Per InfectedShroom and myself.  Also, see my comment below.


 * 1) HyperToad Per Crypt
 * 2) Per HyperToad (By X)

Use f*** or f---

 * 1) Sorry to make another section, but I feel both sides are incorrect: we should not be prohibited from including applicable information, but we also must allow everyone to enjoy this site, including those still under the watchful eye of parents.
 * 2) One day some innocent first grader comes to that page and sees that quote and starts dropping the F-Bomb all the time. Do we want that? No, we should censor the quote so kids can't read the word. [[Image:ToadetteMP8.png|30px]] Toadette   4evur!!  [[Image:MP7_Toadette.jpg|35px]] *I love this idea!*
 * 3) Per Stumpers! People finally understand me! It's MARIO wiki, we should keep it clean (as in nothing inaproppriate). It's not even really aproppriate for me, I'm in middle school, and I'm a user! See my comment below too. And good example, Toadette4evur. I don't get why everyone's saying we can't censor. I think it's for a serious reason, and we can make an exception since it's MARIO wiki.
 * 4) Fixitup Use it censored, but as f--- not f***
 * 19:15, 6 February 2008 (EST) I will vote here in consideration of the other younger users on this wiki. The word really doesn't bother me that much, I hear it all the time. However, the mariowiki mostly appeals to little kids (I'm talking about the readers, young kids as editors aren't very useful). Having the word there really won't stop kids from learning it, because in some way or another, everyone who knows English also knows that word or inevitably will learn that word. But this seems like the best option. Censoring the word won't affect the information we're giving and will also show that we respect our younger audience. We might also get blocked from protective web filters, just for having that word repeated 3 time on one page. Think of a scenario like this: a child has a very overprotective mom who cranked up his computer to avoid sites that use bad words. The child is a big fan of Mario and his games. When he searches the web for Mario information, a link to mariowiki does not show up. Therefore, we lost one potential reader.
 * 1) Per all. We do not need that word on our site. True, encyclopedias are not censored. But that is a sad argument. I had seen many words in encyclopedias that I just skipped over the bad stuff when I was young. But that's a little difficult when it's a quote bolded on the top of the page. Do you ever see, in paper encyclopedias, the word bolded in the middle of the page? No. So we don't need it here.
 * 2) - Per Knife.
 * 3) It would be fine for littlekids to see it if it was cencored, or had a little black box around it like on TV. :P (  Toadbert101  |[[Image:TBPaper.PNG|30px]]|  Scream  | My comic ]|Sez:) 19:52, 6 February 2008 (EST)
 * 4) I can't beleive so many people voted to not censor it! What's wrong with everyone!
 * 5) Per InfectedShroom
 * 6) MarioGalaxy2433g5 I hear too many cuss words at school.... make it stop!!!!! Moved to win proposal.
 * 7) Little kids view this wiki!
 * 8) It would be better to do this so that older people who use this site know what it means, but protect the kids who use this site.
 * 1) It would be better to do this so that older people who use this site know what it means, but protect the kids who use this site.

Keep It There

 * 1) I don't care about it
 * 2) This is an encyclopedia, we don't censor things. --
 * 3) Censoring an encyclopedia is one of the absurdest things you can do. It is fact that Hoskins used this word to describe his feelings, and there is no sense in changing that on this wiki. Once we start to censor, when is there an end? Are we gonna ban the phrase "what the heck" tomorrow? That's ridiculous. 13:58, 3 February 2008 (EST)
 * 4) Ultimatetoad per everyone else.
 * 5) Per Time Q. In paper Encyclopedia, do you see things like "BECAUSE IT MAY BE OFFENDING TO YOUNGER READER, THE FOLLOWING DEPICTION OF HUMAN GENITALIA HAVE BEEN CENSORED"? No. It's a fact that Bob Hoskin used the F-bomb, we shouldn't remove it because Kids are browsing the wiki.
 * 6) Walkazo - Per everyone. All this pussyfooting around it tiresome.
 * 7) User talk:Threegee Keep it.
 * 8) Per all, but I seriously think we need some sort of Mature Template.
 * 9) - It's what he said, it shouldn't be altered. All I can think of is a show/hide template for the quote.
 * 10) Per all, except for Pokemon DP.
 * 09:07, 5 February 2008 (EST) Per Uniju.
 * 1) Paper Jorge ( Talk&middot;Contributions)&middot; Per all. Getting an encyclopedia censored is one of the strangest things I've heard of.
 * 2) huntercrunch I don't see why you want to remove it. The page is hardly linked to anyway. Kids should know this is an encyclopedia and know that there are going to be SOME bad things, even if this is a Mario Wiki.
 * 3) Per Uniju.
 * 4) - Encyclopedia, no censoring, etc. We've been through this countless times.

Comments
Blag, I am more than tired of this whole ordeal. Why we just don't remove the farking quote already? All it do is cause problem. --Blitzwing 12:52, 3 February 2008 (EST)
 * Then just say you want to get rid of it. Please.

InfectedShroom: What do you suggest to do if the community decided to "get rid of it"? Remove it completely or censor that bad, bad word? 14:01, 3 February 2008 (EST)
 * Lemme rephrase the whole thing. Better?
 * Thanks, that's more explicit. 14:31, 3 February 2008 (EST)

Think of the children who use this site. Do they really want to see that?
 * Like InfectedShroom said: They see it everyday, everywhere. And: This is no children's wiki, this is Mario Wiki. An encyclopedia that covers everything about Mario. Even this quote. Mario content doesn't imply that everything is safe for children. Kids do also watch the news, which contain much violence. Should news be censored, just because children are watching? 15:20, 3 February 2008 (EST)

Just a question: why can't we just use "f***ing" and stuff like that? If I were a parent and found that on this Wiki, I wouldn't allow my kids to come here. Also, the arguement about the news: those shows censore out the f-bomb and don't show blood and gore, so in a sence just staring out the u, c, k would make us more news-ish than if we kept it here. 15:40, 3 February 2008 (EST)
 * I believe that InfectedShroom (and myself) was right. Not only has this lone quote caused much controversy in the Mariowiki world, but this obscene word has been added to the quote not once, not twice, but THREE times.  The Mariowiki was created as an encyclopedia to the Marioverse for kids and young adults, and why do you need to have a quote like that on any site, much less one for young people?!  That movie not only sucked, it has very little to do with the Marioverse at all.  I'm not saying that the article should be deleted, but the quote should be removed.  Or at least, have users be warned of the cursing in the quote.  Stumpers also has a good point.


 * Ummm.... Glitchman, are you going to vote on your (I mean both you and InfectedShroom) proposal? MarioGalaxy2433g5 15:55, 3 February 2008 (EST)
 * Yes, I did just now.

Stumpers: I suggested that in the first place. But removing the thing entirely makes the contreversy end entirely.
 * Hm. I'll remove my vote for know I think then.  I don't think we should loose that bit of history about the movie.  It's one of the few bits we have about the production of it.  Censoring, I'm for, but avoiding news isn't our job as an encyclopedia.  I'm sorry... :(  16:09, 3 February 2008 (EST)
 * DANGIT. I can't help both sides, though. DANGIT AGAIN.

Crypt Raider: Yeah, and little kids also read dictionaries. And those contain all the bad words. And why? Because they're neutral, descriptive, and not prescriptive. This is how encyclopedias should work. If we censor words, this is some form of POV - which we don't want to have here. So, basically, I don't get your "children" argument, sorry. 16:27, 3 February 2008 (EST)
 * But it isn't the job of an encyclopedia to teach you words. Dictionaries contain every word of every language, even curse words, because THEY'RE SUPPOSED TO TEACH YOU WORDS.Toadette 4evur 22:46, 3 February 2008 (EST) *I'm so smart!*
 * It isn't the job of an encyclopedia to teach you words, that's correct. But it is the job of an encyclopedia to inform you. Censoring words is just the opposite: By doing this, we hide information, we keep the reader in the dark - the worst thing an encyclopedia can do. And it is another job of an encyclopedia to stay neutral and descriptive, both of which is violated by censoring. 05:49, 4 February 2008 (EST)
 * The point of THIS encyclopedia is to teach you about a freaken' video game series for kids! Toadette 4evur 18:52, 4 February 2008 (EST) *Yes, I do have a colorful vocabualry*
 * I doubt that. See below. 18:55, 4 February 2008 (EST)

I support this proposal entirely. But if any of you care, I have a similar idea. "The worst thing I ever did? Super Mario Brothers... The whole experience was a nightmare." And also cut off that part at the end. Anyone want to do that? We're not taking away any information.
 * Because that would be both censoring and a misquote. The latter of which we could get in serious trouble for. InfectedShroom.[[Image:infectoicon.png]]

Time Q, answer to me directly on this: If you were a parent and saw that on this site what would you do? Would you say "I THOUGHT THIS WAS A KID-FRIENDLY SITE?!?!?!?!" or would you say "Whatever."? Toadette 4evur 17:26, 3 February 2008 (EST)
 * I wouldn't care, really. I don't care about the word showing up in every single dictionary, and thus I wouldn't care seeing it in an encyclopedia like the Mario Wiki. 17:30, 3 February 2008 (EST)
 * Yeah, so if you were a parent and your kid started saying the F-Bomb all the time and he/she tells you they read it off this site you wouldn't care. Ok... *Steps backwards slowly* Toadette 4evur 17:36, 3 February 2008 (EST)
 * Don't try to be smart, I just said what I'd do if I saw the word on the page. If my kid started to use the word, just because he or she read it here, I would 1) be sceptical (why should he/she use this of all words? There are many on the pages), and 2) talk to my child. It'd be my problem then. The Mario Wiki isn't there to educate my kids. The Mario Wiki is there for people who wish to get informed about Mario. The one who educates my kids is ME, not a random website. 17:46, 3 February 2008 (EST)
 * I hate to break this too you but for some kid, I'm pretty smart(and sly, too). >=P Toadette 4evur 17:49, 3 February 2008 (EST)
 * Crystal Yoshi and Toadette 4evur have very good points. To do what Crystal Yoshi is saying is not a misquote.  It's not even taking a quote out of context.  17:44, 3 February 2008 (EST)
 * It kind of is... How 'bout this: "The worst thing I ever did? Super Mario Brothers... The whole expirience was a nightmare. It had a husband-and-wife team directing, whose arrogance had been mistaken for talent. After so many weeks their own agent told them to get off the set!" And just leave it at that?


 * No. That's even worse than writing "f***ng" or something. Hoskins didn't leave out the F words when he said that, so he/we shouldn't leave them out here. At the very most, we could put "[...]" where he said that, but then we could also use "f***ing". And I stated several times why I don't think this is a good idea. 17:58, 3 February 2008 (EST)
 * Fine, let's not do the ... if no one likes it. Out of removing the quote or not removing it, I choose remove it. NO one's changing my mind. Toadette 4evur has some great points (but it's a little weird how he keeps saying he's so smart.)

Time Q, can't we just censor it and go on with our lives? Toadette 4evur 18:00, 3 February 2008 (EST)
 * Toadette, can't we just leave the word as it is and go on with our lives? If you don't care about the topic, just remove your vote and leave the discussion. (Or, feel free to discuss it with me and every other member, but please stay seriously and leave out that stumping stuff.) 18:06, 3 February 2008 (EST)
 * You wanna argue? Well I'm Mr. Argue. The word is bad and you know it. Bad words should be censored (or removed if it is used multiple times like it is here). Maybe THIS quote is why all the 6th graders at my school drop the F-Bomb everyday. Toadette 4evur 18:12, 3 February 2008 (EST) Stumped ya! P.S.-That's one of my catch phrases and I use them alot, Time Q.
 * "The word is bad." Says who? Words aren't bad. Words are words, the matter is how we use them. And in this context, we don't use the word because we are swearing, but we use it because we depict what Bob Hoskins has said. "Bad words should be censored." Says who?? I don't. If you're able to disprove my argument about the word showing up in dictionaries, I'll immediately remove my vote. But I'm pretty sure this cannot be disproven. 18:19, 3 February 2008 (EST)
 * Says me! Duh! Toadette 4evur 18:22, 3 February 2008 (EST) *Stumped ya!*
 * Oh yeah. Great. And you are the chosen one to decide about this wiki's destiny. Luckily you're not. Btw, I'm not arguing with you because I think I can change your mind. I'm pretty sure I can't. I'm arguing with you because of the possibility that some people might understand my point and think about the matter before simply saying "ZOMG!!!11 this words so ev1l!! c3nsoR!!!" 18:26, 3 February 2008 (EST)
 * Yeah, bad impersonation of me. I don't talk like that. And I NEVER said i decide the wiki's destiny (although every once in a while I wish I could). Toadette 4evur 18:37, 3 February 2008 (EST) *Stumped ya!*
 * Time Q, Toadette 4evur, you argue in a weird way. I agree with Toadette 4evur's side, but I'm sorry to say, I don't think he's really proving his case the right way (why do you keep saying, "stumped ya"? It's kind of freaking me out). Anyway, my argument: Dictionaries are NOT worldwide-acessible online databases about a video game series FOR KIDS. The point of dictionaries is to teach words, and if someone wants to learn that word, they can. p.s. Stumpers is right below-- don't get all angry at each other, we can have a discussion about this but I don't want you to get all angry about this. But censoring some letters isn't much better than leaving it in, people still know what it says, still might give some people the impression we don't care.
 * But who says that the Mario series is a series for kids? The movie proves this claim just wrong. As we are the "Mario Wiki" and not the "Mario minus the non-children-safe stuff Wiki", it is our task to cover everything about Mario, even if it's more adult stuff. Yeah, of course games like Super Mario World are mostly played by kids. But then, kids will mostly visit articles about just these "children-safe" games. And these articles will of course stay free of "bad words" (I still don't think that any word is bad, but that's a different issue.) . 05:49, 4 February 2008 (EST)
 * Time Q has a point, no word is bad, but, people used them to insult people way back when the the word was thought as indecent ever since. Toadette 4evur 21:57, 4 February 2008 (EST) *Stumped ya!*

Time Q: I left out the part where he said "It was a f-ing nightmare." and put [...] there. Bah, nevermind this whole thing. I have better things to do.

Time Q and Toadette: please don't flame each other... not to take sides or anything. You're both very good users and you both have the same thing in mind: the good of the Wiki. What won't be good for the Wiki is if a sysop blocks both of you for a while. Censoring is find from a journalism standpoint as long as someone who knows the word could figure out that it was in there. However, omiting parts of a quote is something completely different. Please, let's all just take a step back here. What does the Wiki GAIN from that quote? Proof that Hopskins hated working on the movie. It's important info. What does the Wiki LOSE from censoring the f-bombs, like the two at the end? NOTHING... and we might prevent ourselves from losing maybe one viewer. So, why are we getting worked up over this? If we can take our feelings about what people censore on the radio and TV (because I know that this is what some of us are upset about) and think about what needs to be on this Wiki, it's pretty obvious that using f*** or f--- is the way to go. Seriously, this isn't a political forum, this is the Super Mario Wiki. And right now, this Wiki enjoys having it's user base and editor base being everyone from 9 y/o to at least 23 y/o if not more. Do we need to give more ammo to people who don't like their children going online? Besides, we could get banned from parental controls. We're here to provide information about the Mario series to everyone, not everyone whose authority figures don't care about a few f-bombs. 19:15, 3 February 2008 (EST)
 * I'll stop arguing, but the F-Bomb is the mother of dirty words, so personally, we should at least censor it, 'cause you're right, that's important info. =)Toadette 4evur 19:23, 3 February 2008 (EST) *I love it here!*

Alright, I edited the description again.
 * I'll merge Toadette and my votes accordingly. 20:06, 3 February 2008 (EST)
 * If we censor it, could we censor it so it looks like ****in' or something, 'cause if we only block a couple letters, people will still know what the word is. Toadette 4evur 20:13, 3 February 2008 (EST)
 * So? We want people to know what Bob Hoskins said because that's good (and interesting) information. Plus, if the kiddies knew that we were bleeping the f-word it'd help enforce the fact that it's a "bad word". Anyway, this whole argument is irritating, we'd be stupid to delete the quote and lose that info, but nomatter which way we censor it people are gonna be unhappy. Anyway, I asked my parents and they said they'd prefer f--- but wouldn't get overly freaked about the actual word. Kids pick up these swears from their parents or other kids who learned it from their parents, etc.; not from Mario websites. When I was little I'd always ask my parents what a new word meant when I read it, but not neccesarily the ones I heard used. For instance, I learned the f-word in Grade 3 from my deskmate (who also told me he wanted to be a cerial killer), but the first time I used it at home I got chastised and told that the word wasn't politically correct, so I stopped using it. As TimeQ said, it's the parents' responsibility to teach their kids right from wrong, not ours. - Walkazo
 * Look, you made someone feel bad! Toadette 4evur 22:12, 3 February 2008 (EST) *How rude!* P.S.- Walkazo, tell that to Crystal Yoshi.
 * Oh, great, now I'm gonna be known as that idiot who made that stupid proposal... That's a nice thought... -_-
 * No, no. I'm glad you made this proposal to finally stop all this reverting on the Bob Hoskins page. =) 05:49, 4 February 2008 (EST)
 * Walkazo: When kids know there's a bad word, it actually makes them want to say it. But censoring is better than nothing, I guess. Hmmm... should I move my vote to censoring, of leave it for removing the quote? Can't decide.

Censorship-10, leave it the way it is-6. Toadette 4evur 22:14, 3 February 2008 (EST) *Yes!*
 * Just based on past experiences... gloating doesn't help your side. 22:24, 3 February 2008 (EST)
 * I know, but I just had to do that. (It was killing me) Toadette 4evur 22:40, 3 February 2008 (EST) *I hope we win*

Uhm, merging the "censor the word" and "remove the quote" votes isn't okay, I think. That's just biased. Every one of the three options should get the same chances. 05:49, 4 February 2008 (EST)

Hey, why don't we do what Cobold suggested? A template in place of the quote that says something like, "Notice: This quote is hidden because contains swearing." And they can click show to see the quote.
 * Not a bad idea. I would still find it somehow absurd (imagine a paper encyclopedia that says "Be careful, if you turn this page, you will find a swearword"), but it'd be a hundred times better than censoring. And a thousand times better than removing the quote. 16:30, 4 February 2008 (EST)
 * Wikipedia (Well, the french one anyway) do have a template warning the reader that the content of an article might be offending. If Wikipedia do that, why shouldn't we? --Blitzwing 16:33, 4 February 2008 (EST)

Yeah, if Wikipedia does it, let's do it. Pokemon DP and Cobold might want to also. Should we make a new category?
 * No, last time this issue appeared the template was suggested but never made. We should just vote for the quote to be left as is for now and then have another vote about the template only, making sure it's actually remembered if/when the proposal passes (in fact, someone could always make a draft of the new template before the new proposal is made insuring the result of the proposal will be enacted and giving people a chance to see what it would look like so they know exactly what they're voting for). Also, Toadette, who were you talking about when you said I made someone feel bad? - Walkazo
 * Maybe Infected Shroom. (Look at the reply quote (s)he gave you above)Toadette 4evur 18:22, 4 February 2008 (EST) *Go censorship/template!*
 * If censoring doesn't go through, could you guys help me start a new proposal for that? I mean, it's better than censoring. People who seriously want to know what he said can see it. Kids surfing on the site won't see it because it's hidden (unless they're bad kids and they want to learn bad words). It works just as well as censoring if not better. It's true that kids are on the wiki, and they shouldn't see it. But Time Q has a point: it's still important information people might want to learn. This way, everyone gets what they want. So don't you think it's worthy of a proposal (if this doesnt pass)?  P.S. If everyone who voted "remove the quote" moves their vote to "censor", it'll win.
 * I'd like to help if you do that. I won't stop fighting until that page (and every other questionable pages) is kid friendly. Toadette 4evur 17:24, 5 February 2008 (EST) *Fight! Fight! FIIIIIIIIIIGHT!*
 * Good. We'd have to be really convincing, 'cause a lot of people are tired of this issue and don't care (they really should care, the fate of the site depends on this!)
 * It certainly doesn't. But if we do censor, that would be a big step away from an informative, neutral encyclopedia. 18:39, 5 February 2008 (EST)
 * Shut the freak up! No one cares about a freakin' neutral encyclopedia. You nits should care about what OTHER people may think other than you. Toadette 4evur 18:46, 5 February 2008 (EST) *I'm short-tempered*
 * I think you finally deserve a warning. You're obviously not able to accept other's opinions or to argue rationally. Fighting for your views is good, flaming and being ignorant isn't. 18:50, 5 February 2008 (EST)
 * 2 words. 1) I'm, 2) sorry. I've been stressed lately and have been a lot meaner. Toadette 4evur 18:58, 5 February 2008 (EST) *=(*+
 * Yeah Toadette, I agree with your views but I must agree with Time Q that you're being kind of mean. I don't see why hiding a quote and LETTING PEOPLE SEE IT is making it not a neutral encyclopedia. Sure people could argue the word isn't actually "bad", but in most cases, people don't like to see the word (especially on a website lots of kids are on), and having a show/hide template for the quote is making the encyclopedia better, not worse. I don't see why anyone wouldn't like that because it would work even better than censoring. People who want serious information about Bob Hoskins can see the quote, so no one has any reason to say that it still wouldn't work 'cause we're taking away factual information. A big step away from being a neutral encyclopedia would be, "Bob Hoskins is a mean man becuase he swore about being in the SMB movie." And I don't understand why you're saying it would be a step away from having an informative encyclopedia, as people would still have all the information they want. If the French Wikipedia does it, no one here has any reason to say we can't.
 * I'm gonna stop being mean, err, try really-super-hard anyway. And I agree with your last comment, Crystal Yoshi. Toadette 4evur 21:09, 5 February 2008 (EST) *Now to download Kirby 64 music while I wait for a reply comment*
 * CrystalYoshi: With the "informative encyclopedia", I was referring to censoring, not the show/hide template. The only argument I have against such a template would be that there is nothing similar in real encyclopedias (okay, Wikipedia seems to have it, but perhaps we shouldn't that much conform with Wikipedia but more with printed encyclopedias), and that it would hence look strange to me. 06:00, 6 February 2008 (EST)
 * Umm, yeah, Time Q, if this hasn't occured to you yet this isn't a paper encyclopedia, I don't think we should be comparing and online encyclopedia to a paper one. Toadette 4evur 17:14, 6 February 2008 (EST) *(Listens to Zero Two's theme)*
 * Toadette, sounded kind of sarcastic, just don't say things like that. Time Q, It doesn't need to be excactly like a paper encyclopedia, 'cause 1. it's on the internet where anyone can see it whenever they want, and 2. it's about a subject mainly for kids: Mario. P.S. Toadette: My name's one word, I know my sig showed it as two, but I changed it.

Yes, Time Q, I'm gonna make a proposal to ban the phrase "What the heck" because the word "what" is in it. Pfffffft. Toadette 4evur 18:49, 4 February 2008 (EST) *I'm the king of sarcasm*

I'm gonna leave if you guys alow this. I don't want to be apart of an evil site.

The word is, it shouldn't have been made in the first place.
 * OIC. Toadette 4evur 22:28, 4 February 2008 (EST) *I'll remove my other comment*

Here is my brief summary of what will happen if we keep the quote: Kid sees quote, kid says bad word frequently, parents say kids can't visit, members get mad and leave, due to lack of people the site shuts down. We don't want that. Toadette 4evur 22:44, 4 February 2008 (EST) *Save the site!*
 * I really doubt that would ever happen. What's the likelyhood that a kid will see that page anyway?  The youngin's don't care about that movie unfortunately... it's all about them newfangled things!

Toadette 4evur is right. If this site had a rating (like for a game), it would be just E or maybe E10, but becuase of that one word, it's M. But I also want to know how people feel about the "this quote is hidden becuase it contains swearing click show to show quote" idea. And I understand Mcoolister. 23:57, 4 February 2008 (EST)
 * You don't ban out the word by censoring it. Kids know that the word exists anyway. It is up to the parents to teach their kids not to use it, not to us. Also, the word doesn't hurt anyone. - 05:18, 5 February 2008 (EST)
 * Well who could care about a stupid movie like that anyway? Toadette 4evur 17:13, 5 February 2008 (EST) *Yes, I did use a, well, meaner word there*

what is the difference of F--- and f-word?. Everybody knows F--- is the f-word. And, Blue Yoshter, that is the way we have parents, kthx


 * Yeah, McDimentio has a point. That's why I'd prefer a hiding the quote and having the option to show it.

We didn't remove Teh Reggienator's quote. And tha's all I have ta' say 'bout tha'. 09:10, 5 February 2008 (EST)


 * You want to censor that, too? Fine, censor it. There's no point in saying we can't censor Bob Hoskins cause another guy said a bad word (which isn't as bad.) If you want to do the same. do the same.
 * Censored. Toadette 4evur 18:22, 5 February 2008 (EST) *NO foul language should be on the wiki*

I never knew about that word until I was 12. Most cursing words actually.
 * LOL, really?

Stumpers raise a good point here. The 90's movie is pretty much unknown by the newer fanbase or universally reviled by the older fans, plus, I don't really think you would come to the MarioWIki to read about an obscure actor. --Blitzwing 17:31, 5 February 2008 (EST)

First of all, I don't even think the article needs to be there, period! Sure, he played Mario, but still, his article isn't that big, and could be merged with List of People. Secondly, I think that we don't even need the qoute, we could just merge it into the article saying something like "Bob Hoskins himself called the movie the worst thing he ever did, and that being in it was a nightmare." Thirdly, Cobold, THE WORD DOES HURT PEOPLE. If somebody told me to go f--- myself I would be hurt! LASTLY, what if somebody uploaded a image for their userpage of a nakid woman? WOULD YOU GET RID OF IT!?! HyperToad
 * Your comparisons are quite inappropriate for the current case. Firstly, he's not insulting you, he's not telling anyone to "go fuck themselves", that's a different meaning entirely, thirdly porn is in an entirely different league and user pages are also different from quotes. - 12:07, 6 February 2008 (EST)
 * Why must we bring that into this?? It's a very simple matter, censor it or don't censor it. And since there's no reason for that entire page, let alone the quote, to be on the Wiki at all, why put inappropriate stuff like that on a site for kids at all?!? Or we could AT LEAST put the dang mature template on! Is that so hard?!
 * It actually is so hard, because as you see, currently 12 people are voting in favor of leaving the quote as it is, which is the majority. If you think your view is the only correct, you're wrong in a community like the MarioWiki. 16:19, 6 February 2008 (EST)
 * Well, he's only giving examples. He wasn't saying Hoskins was telling anyone to go f--- themselves. Toadette 4evur 18:24, 6 February 2008 (EST) *Please leave my quote censored*
 * Time Q: of course he knows how the MarioWiki works, he's been here forever. As a Wiki we really need to chill on acting as though the person opposing you doesn't know what they're talking about. REGARDLESS! Glitchman: why is there no reason for that page to exist? 18:29, 6 February 2008 (EST)
 * Sorry, maybe it's because I'm no native speaker, but I didn't understand your "As a Wiki..." sentence.
 * Well, those 12 people don't understand a vital part of the issue. Glitchman is absolutely right. This is getting ridiculous. If some adult wants to find out what Bob Hoskins thought of being in the movie, they are not going to go on Super Mario Wiki to find out. Really. Imagine some grown-up guy saying "I was wondering about what Bob Hoskins thought of the movies he was in. I'm going to go on MarioWiki to find out." Ridiculous. The only people who are ever going to see that page are kids who got there by accident. It's mostly kids on the wiki. Is it such a tall order to ask to make the site safe for kids, given everything I've said above? Ridiculous. I feel like I'm in the last level of Super Mario Wiki Galaxy; "Glitchman's article reactor: the fate of the website."
 * I whole-heartedly agree with you, CrystalYoshi. [[Image:ToadetteMP8.png|30px]] Toadette   4evur!!  [[Image:MP7_Toadette.jpg|35px]]

Cobold: Who the hell do you think you are for removing my vote? Had you not seen who the frickin proposer was? Had you not seen all the comments that I wrote? And you think that wasn't enough? This is ridiculous. Retarted. Morons. I'm leaving this proposal in better hands. I hope that Glitchman will come with me. Goodbye.
 * As far as I see it, you're not the original proposer. And a simple "see comment below" is enough as a reason, a "kthxbye" is not. It's not my problem searching for your arguments when I don't know where they are. And I mean it, I didn't look at the comments. - 05:59, 7 February 2008 (EST)
 * You're kidding, right? I thought I was lazy...

@Knife: if the kid dont what means the f-word, he/she can ask to their parents what is....

I never said they couldn't ask their parents... 19:27, 6 February 2008 (EST)

Alright, I'm coming back. Cobold, you still had no reason to remove my vote, but I'll redo it, just for you. I'm still pissed, but I want the job done.

Time Q, answer me directly on this: WHERE does it say in the Wiki that we are an encyclopedia? I haven't found it and I've looked like crazy. Toadette 4evur 18:41, 7 February 2008 (EST) *;)*
 * Those are all the official guideline and help pages that refer to this site as an encyclopedia, so yeah, InfectedShroom is wrong (on the "We are not an encyclopedia part", atleast). --Blitzwing 18:53, 7 February 2008 (EST)
 * Dangit. Revised. Ah, by the way everyone, I will not freak out on anyone anymore. Sorry for doing it earlier. *would use a smiley I once saw but at the moment don't know where it is*

So... how is this going to work? We now have more votes on the side of staring/deleting the quote than in the opposition. So, if this stays that way, will we just go with whichever support side (staring or deleting) has the most votes? Anyway...the proposal now says to censor out uck, so I think even the deleters are now just star-ers. 18:30, 8 February 2008 (EST)
 * What Stumpers! said. [[Image:ToadetteMP8.png|30px]] Toadette   4evur!!  [[Image:MP7_Toadette.jpg|35px]]
 * What? The section with the most votes will win, and currently this is the "Keep It as It Is" section. So we will keep the quote as it is (unless a different section is winning). 18:41, 8 February 2008 (EST)
 * Actually, if you look at the page's history, you'll realize that someone deleted part of our voting title. We were clearly alligned with the deleters.  I don't know who went low and deleted that, but if you're going to act as though deleting it changed our position, then adding it back will as well.  18:44, 8 February 2008 (EST)
 * Time Q, you have no idea what you're saying. The 'get rid of it' and 'use f*** or f---' are both on the support side, while 'keep it there' is on the oppose side. [[Image:ToadetteMP8.png|35px]] Toadette   4evur!!  [[Image:MP7_Toadette.jpg|35px]] *-_-"*
 * I deleted only two votes which didn't give a reason. One has been added already with a reason, so everything is okay. Or what are you talking about? - 18:47, 8 February 2008 (EST)
 * Regardless of what we each think, I just saw the orignal proposal again. The proposer is clearly talking about using f***, not deleting the quote.  I believe it changed partway through.  So, in other words, we should merge those two sections. Cobold: whether or not the first two sections should over-ride the third, since that's what the "f***" supporters started out as: a subset of the support for censorship that wasn't so extreme.  It clearly said on our section that we were a subset, and someone removed that, which I feel is very strange.  18:50, 8 February 2008 (EST)
 * I merged them. Leave it be, now. [[Image:ToadetteMP8.png|35px]] Toadette   4evur!!  [[Image:MP7_Toadette.jpg|35px]]
 * No. Combining the votes is pointless, as we wouldn't know how to deal with the result. 18:54, 8 February 2008 (EST)
 * READ WHAT STUMPERS! SAID BEFORE DOING YOUR ACTIONS, TIME Q!!!! [[Image:ToadetteMP8.png|35px]] Toadette   4evur!!  [[Image:MP7_Toadette.jpg|35px]] *Seriously, do you just do things without thinking?*
 * I READ WHAT HE SAID and now stop shouting. Think before doing your actions. May I add a fourth section "I like apples" and say that they're summed up with the votes of the third section? That's ridiculous! 19:00, 8 February 2008 (EST)
 * YOU'RE being ridiculous! They're basically the same thing. Saying "I like apples" has nothing to do with the quote. [[Image:ToadetteMP8.png|35px]] Toadette   4evur!!  [[Image:MP7_Toadette.jpg|35px]] *per what I said before*
 * This time, I will NOT remove your statement above, in order to stop this stupid edit war. I just want you to know that it won't help you at all to add it again and again, as it will finally be removed - for the reasons I gave above. You can't just decide to "merge those votes." That's biased and not democratic. Ok, if you don't like my apple example, how about "I don't care about the quote"? Also, "answer me directly to this": What if we merged the votes - what would we do with the result? We wouldn't know what do, that's the problem. 19:15, 8 February 2008 (EST)
 * We would do whichever of the 2 supports has more votes: Remove it or censor it. That's really hard, ain't it?(not) [[Image:ToadetteMP8.png|35px]] Toadette   4evur!!  [[Image:MP7_Toadette.jpg|35px]] *Saying "I don't care about the quote is no different than keeping it there.*
 * Says you. Great. What we need is the vote of a majority, not the view of a single person like you. 19:48, 8 February 2008 (EST) *That's rubbish - saying "I don't care" means "I don't care", whereas "Keep it" should mean "I think it's best for the wiki to keep it, so I do care"*

Please stop arguing. I believe that technically the first two sections want pretty much the same thing: something done with the quote. Now, correct me if I'm wrong, but both deleting the quote and censoring it would, in fact, have the same value. They both would get rid of the word, just in different ways. So... My question is the same as Stumper's.
 * They both want the word gone in some way, but regardless, the overall effect is still different; either the quote is removed, or it's censored. Therefore, I believe they should be treated as separate options. -- 21:28, 8 February 2008 (EST)
 * I must wonder: How many kids susceptable to the f-bomb would be ON that page? No matter what the outcome, not many kids that are susceptable to the word would be on that page. Really, how many 7-year-olds would say, "Ooh, dat guy was in dee movie I sawed. I'll look up his ah-tick-all on dee mariowiki."? GreenKoopa - Comments or questions? · Look what I did! Look what I did!: 22:29, 8 February 2008 (EST)


 * All of you seemingly forgot all about Special:Random. MarioGalaxy2433g5 22:34, 8 February 2008 (EST)

Stop going off topic, stop fighting and stop (repeatedly) changing the wording of the proposal for whatever reason(s). -- Chris 22:58, 8 February 2008 (EST)

Okay, okay. I have a solution. I will contact everyone in the top column and ask them whether they were voting for blocking the whole quote or f-bombs. 00:48, 9 February 2008 (EST)

Better solution: Close this proposal and restart it, fresh and clean, with a better idea of what is being asked. -- Chris 01:22, 9 February 2008 (EST)
 * As long as the fights end, this is exactly the solution I thought about. We could do simply as this - no more fighting and a second proposal for it - or fighting and this is declared as unable to be decided by proposal, so the rulings of the administators count. Not everything can be touched by a proposal. I for myself wonder what Steve thinks about this. - 06:58, 9 February 2008 (EST)

Anyone else notice how Wikipedia has the quote censored? The word does not appear in it at all. ._. Just pointing it out.