User talk:Porplemontage/Archive 14

Power Moon Tables
I would like to discuss your official decree on the way to do the Power Moon Tables. You call for the Moon #, name, image, and description for each table, but that ends up looking like this. The amount of vertical space this takes is horrendous, and it makes finding a specific moon take much longer than it should. On my laptop I can only see about 5 rows at once, on my phone (an S8 with the longer screen) I can see 8 rows when zoomed out, and on the mobile format of the site, I can only see 1 row at a time. I hope you can see the problem this creates, especially when most kingdoms have around 50-100 power moons. In contrast, this is a much better way of displaying the power moons on the kingdom pages. on my laptop I can see about 30 rows at once, on my phone I can see nearly the entire list at once, and on the mobile format I can see about 6 or 7, depending on the amount of text accompanying it.-- 16:56, 2 November 2017 (EDT)
 * @Eldritchdraaks: This is a TEMPORARY decree, so we don't take any big steps towards resolving the issue until the tables are all complete. 17:04, 2 November 2017 (EDT)
 * I want to convey as much info about the moons as possible, and images are an important part of that. We could do a gallery, but then you'd put the moon number and name as the caption and lose the description, which is also important (unless you, uh, linked to a separate article for each moon). The table is the only option to include all the info I want while keeping everything on one page. -- 17:07, 2 November 2017 (EDT)
 * Understood. In an effort to keep things simple and not overrun the kingdom pages with the ghastly large tables, I suppose I now support making separate articles.-- 17:15, 2 November 2017 (EDT)
 * However until the proposal has gone through and a decision has been made, can we default to the simpler lists? Just until that point. It will provide the same necessary information, minus the picture which will already take a long time to obtain.-- 17:20, 2 November 2017 (EDT)
 * I thought of another option, which is this. The kingdoms have a Power Moons section, with a gallery of the Moons and the Moon names as the captions. At the top of the Power Moons section, there is a link to "List of X Kingdom Power Moons" which features the full table. -- 17:44, 2 November 2017 (EDT)
 * On mobile format, galleries display as a single column, and only about 4 would fit on screen. Is this an option for what to do until the proposal, or after?-- 17:47, 2 November 2017 (EDT)
 * I will test this idea. It would be implemented before the proposal. -- 18:07, 2 November 2017 (EDT)
 * Using the galleries would force readers to go to the article pages to get a tiny bit of information about them. The table and list, at the very least, say something about how to obtain the moons. If that bit of info isn't on the kingdom page, it makes looking up the needed information more tedious. The table/list could keep the single short sentence about the moon, and then you can go to it's main article for what amounts to a walkthrough to obtain the moon.-- 19:14, 2 November 2017 (EDT)
 * What are the results of your test?-- 21:26, 2 November 2017 (EDT)
 * The gallery provides the reader with a more visual and less-overwhelming display of the Moons. If they wish to find out more about a Moon, they simply click the Moon title and are taken to the spot in the table with more information. These links also help with search engines by associating each Moon title with the list of Moons page. If we were ever to give Moons their own articles, the Moon title links in the gallery would simply be changed from the list anchors to the Moon articles. Based on these results, the test was good. -- 21:36, 2 November 2017 (EDT)
 * Perhaps think of this way: A reader needs help finding the power moons, but doesn't want to resort to outright looking up exactly where they are. The easiest way is to view the names of the power moons, which hint at how to get them. If the photos are they, they risk getting spoiled because they can't not see it, but if there's just the description beside it, one can easily choose not to read it. The names would still link to the table/articles, as they do now, and they would provide the images for each both. In the past couple hours I've gone through a handful of sites with their own lists of power moons and the best formatted ones are on the Mario Party Legacy site, where they have the list of all the moons, sans description, and upon clicking the name takes you to its page with the image and description.-- 21:48, 2 November 2017 (EDT)
 * I don't know that it's for us to worry about spoilers vs. non-spoilers, I just want to present the info in a nice and accessible way. While a list of names linking to the table/article (and a short description next to them) gets the job done, right now I think the gallery is a more pleasant option. It's possible that the sheer number of Moons in some of these kingdoms will make me want to switch to lists, so we'll see how it goes. -- 22:27, 2 November 2017 (EDT)
 * Here's a mockup of how it would look with a page like metro kingdom with 81 moons.-- 22:57, 2 November 2017 (EDT)
 * You're not going to like this, but I think I still like that better than a basic list. Sorry! -- 23:04, 2 November 2017 (EDT)
 * I once again defer to the mobile format of the site, as well as point out again the amount of scrolling this requires on any device. It makes searching through the gallery for the moon you need more confusing, because your eyes are constantly darting all over the screen, and it gets worse when you have to scroll and your eyes have to readjust to find the next line, which is made more difficult with the sea of images taking priority of your eyes, rather than the names. You can tell I'm trying really hard here when I need to bring in data on how the human brain+eyes work. Now, how about this: instead of each and every image on the page, we use a map. I'm already working pretty hard to piece together the brochure maps from the games to use on the wiki, which is hard because it's not displayed flat in the game.-- 23:37, 2 November 2017 (EDT)
 * If you're looking for a specific number moon, it's not difficult to quickly scroll through and get there on mobile. It is what it is. If you're just perusing the list, then the images are nicer to look at than a big wall of text. I had considered an image map for a minute, if it's even possible with all the layers, but if you're looking for a moon number and don't know where it is, the whole thing falls apart. And a map with everything listed underneath isn't much different than just the list. -- 00:08, 3 November 2017 (EDT)
 * Is this up for debate? Can I make a proposal for this?-- 00:29, 3 November 2017 (EDT)
 * You can create it. I'd like to know what others think. -- 02:55, 3 November 2017 (EDT)
 * I've made the proposal over here -- 14:46, 3 November 2017 (EDT)
 * Scratch that, the proposal is on the main page.-- 15:46, 3 November 2017 (EDT)
 * It's also disagreeable in that Darker Side only has ONE Power Moon, thus breaking the consistency. All the more reason to split them into separate articles. 17:59, 2 November 2017 (EDT)
 * That one Power Moon will get its own article anyway, wouldn't it? 18:00, 2 November 2017 (EDT)
 * ...Taking into account a situation like Bonefin Galaxy and Kingfin's Fearsome Waters. 18:28, 2 November 2017 (EDT)

Table displays on mobile devices
Hey there, Porplemontage; relaying a heads-up from someone saying that the tables are not displaying well on mobile devices. Are you aware of this situation by any chance and if so, do you know if there might be a solution in the works to deal with it? --M. C. - Profile | Talk Page 11:18, 9 November 2017 (EST)
 * They look fine to me. I'm not sure what one would do. -- 14:08, 9 November 2017 (EST)
 * Yeah, I saw that someone else was working on a solution to that even after I posted this inquiry to you. Should be fine now. --M. C. - Profile | Talk Page 14:10, 9 November 2017 (EST)
 * After MeritC removed the rewrite template and consulted you, I thought I'd see how I could adjust the tables on the Super Mario 3D World. Not perfect, but at least they aren't going off the screen anymore. Was a simple fix. 14:19, 9 November 2017 (EST)

APNG Revisited
In the past, there were three proposals about the controversial APNG format and someone suggested you were opposed to the idea for the time being (can't find exactly where you expressed disapproval). That was 2016. As of 2017, starting with, is natively supported without the need of a plug-in. I tested this with Bulbapedia, as they have been supporting APNG for years. Still holds true with the latest versions. What is your stance now? -- 06:03, 11 November 2017 (EST)
 * Then the biggest issue now is that thumbnails would not be animated here and you'd have one format that behaves differently from the rest. Either way, with Chrome support, I'm neutral and it can be decided via proposal. -- 13:16, 11 November 2017 (EST)
 * I would hold off the proposal until MediaWiki software can animate thumbnails of APNGs like it can for GIFs. To avoid confusion, I would recommend creating a policy to ensure that PNGs are distinct from APNGs through extension. Don't upload an APNG as *.png and vise-versa. If it happens anyways, treat it like Discouraging the OGG Extension (File:PMCS Ludwig Animated.png should be moved to File:PMCS Ludwig Animated.apng). Also prohibit converting GIF to APNG to expand a previous proposal's outcome. -- 14:12, 11 November 2017 (EST)
 * In the current situation APNG won't be supported at all for thumbnailing. MediaWiki recommends ImageMagick for thumbnailing, and the person in charge of handling PNG images within ImageMagick is a member of the PNG Development Group and as such deliberately refuses to support APNG images. I think the main way to solve this with the current tools is writing a script that uses the APNG Disassembler and APNG Assembler command line tools, and unless we can easily come with such a script, it probably would be better to contact the people maintaining MediaWiki about this.--Mister Wu (talk) 12:26, 12 November 2017 (EST)

Identifiers
Hi, I want to see if I can get your approval before I propose this: I want the wiki to stop using series identifiers to refer to entities. This causes confusion for readers totally unfamiliar with the given subject; take Block Star (Mario Party series) as an example, because I think most would initially think it's an item, not a minigame like what it really is. By having a game identifier, I think it helps remove the ambiguity immensely. Also, keep in mind that some entities exclusive to a series suddenly appear outside the series they debuted in! Basically, my proposal would be to change the series identifiers to game identifiers of the game the subject first appeared in; we could also do this only for levels. Any thoughts? 17:48, 13 November 2017 (EST)
 * Using the series is technically more correct. Using the first game implies it's only in that game, which is worse than implying it's only in a series. And changing Block Star (Mario Party series) to Block Star (Mario Party 6) does nothing to change any implication of whether it's an item or minigame. The Spiny Shell is best known from the Mario Kart series, so using that identifier is not a crime. Moving it to Spiny Shell (Mario Kart 64) is just less accurate, imo. -- 19:00, 13 November 2017 (EST)
 * Sorry but I thought Toadette was talking about using an identifier like Block Star (Minigame) instead of series or specific games.-- 19:11, 13 November 2017 (EST)
 * ...Right. You do have a point... Time to make an alternate proposal: KEEP the series identifiers for all concrete subjects (items, objects, enemies, karts, bikes, tires, gliders, etc.) but add "series" at the end of each identifier so that they're not mistaken for individual works (I think that was my actual concern.), but REPLACE the series identifiers for all abstract subjects (worlds, levels, minigames, stages, race courses, etc.) with the identifiers of the game they first appeared in. How does that sound? 15:53, 14 November 2017 (EST)
 * Sounds like you're just adding unnecessary complexity. I think "series" is only added when it's necessary to differentiate from a game - it's not needed for Mario Kart since there is no game called Mario Kart, but it's used for Mario Party to differentiate the series from the game called Mario Party. And again, Block Star (Mario Party series) is still better than Block Star (Mario Party 6) because it appears in later games of the series as well. -- 16:22, 14 November 2017 (EST)
 * "(Mario Kart)" is actually arguably confusing for readers not very familiar with the series. It makes it sound like that's a game, when really it's not. 08:01, 15 November 2017 (EST)

um.
can you delete User:Yoshikart/chat please? it is not a allowed subpage.

uh.... HELLO? imma trying to get you're attention. oh my dad is coming. better log off.


 * Excuse me, get off my page. I don't take basic admin task requests. -- 20:04, 15 November 2017 (EST)

Bulk Image Upload
Does the wiki have a method for bulk uploading images?-- 15:57, 17 November 2017 (EST)
 * Nope :) -- 16:01, 17 November 2017 (EST)
 * Are you aware that there are several bulk upload options for media wiki?-- 16:03, 17 November 2017 (EST)
 * Certainly, we had one years ago. -- 16:04, 17 November 2017 (EST)
 * What happened to it?-- 16:06, 17 November 2017 (EST)
 * Oh, it was maintained poorly. Plus, I want everyone to take their time with uploads. -- 16:11, 17 November 2017 (EST)
 * I suppose that makes sense, wanting to take our time. Thanks for the talk.-- 16:16, 17 November 2017 (EST)

Bot edits
Pardon me, but I've made another proposal that involves changing a group of nav template names. Could you please run the bot on them?


 * Template:MLBIS --> Template:M&LBIS
 * Template:MLDT --> Template:M&LDT
 * Template:MLPIT --> Template:M&LPIT
 * Template:MLPJ --> Template:M&LPJ
 * Template:MLSS --> Template:M&LSS
 * Template:MASATOG --> Template:M&SATOG
 * Template:MASATOWG --> Template:M&SATOWG
 * Template:MASATSOWG --> Template:M&SATSOWG

19:18, 19 November 2017 (EST)


 * Weird keeping ampersands but not colons. I would have kept both or gotten rid of both. -- 17:26, 20 November 2017 (EST)
 * I think the majority logic was that the ampersands contribute more to their titles than the colons (although it is a mite bit weird). 17:39, 20 November 2017 (EST)

.OGG/.OGA Problem
Last night I had a brief talk with Wildgoosespeeder over on my talk page about the .ogg/.oga files I was uploading. For reasons I don't understand and don't see what the problem is, the files all say "(Invalid Ogg file: Stream Undecodable)". I'm wondering if you might know what the problem is, and if this even matters.-- 10:57, 22 November 2017 (EST)
 * Converter not great. I just used this on the Bonneton OGA and the new file works, smaller size too. -- 11:12, 22 November 2017 (EST)
 * Thanks, I'll put it to use.-- 11:13, 22 November 2017 (EST)

Userboxes
Hey, Porplemontage, did you ever consider getting a userbox tower? You know, I actually made you a userbox: The code is as follows: I chose the image of Dr. Snoozemore because he is the proprietor of Pi'illo Island. Whether you use the box or not is your decision, but I think I'll keep it in my personal sandbox for now. And while I'm here, happy (early) Thanksgiving! - 16:12, 22 November 2017 (EST)
 * Thank you! Happy Thanksgiving! Not a big userbox guy, but never say never! -- 22:44, 23 November 2017 (EST)

Revert Several Edits
I am working with to resolve an issue I discovered with his uploads on Gallery:Paper Mario. Can you revert edits to that of 's edit on [ 12:59, September 1, 2017‎] since there are three consecutive edits? -- 11:35, 2 December 2017 (EST)
 * Don't worry, I've done it.

File Size Limit for OGG videos
There was a proposal that voted to increase the size limit for .ogg files to "around 25 - 30 MB". Since it is listed as having not been implemented in the archive, I thought that I would ask if you are able to put it into action, or if it's always been done. 21:17, 2 December 2017 (EST)
 * This is something I can't really support on our current server given bandwidth and storage concerns. We would need a server upgrade, but those suck for everyone involved, so we're not going to do an upgrade for this reason alone. It would have to be the case that we need an upgrade anyway, and since things have been stable, there are no plans for that at this time. -- 21:37, 2 December 2017 (EST)
 * I'll make note of that in the archive, then. 21:45, 2 December 2017 (EST)

Bot work
Hi, would you mind running the bot to change all transclusions of to ? Thanks! 23:08, 3 December 2017 (EST)

Proposal on FLAC
Sorry if I ask, but before making the proposal on adding Free Losslees Audio Codec support on the wiki, I would like to know beforehand if there would be problems connected to that format and its addition among the formats of files that can be uploaded to the wiki, to avoid making a proposal that should then be withdrawn by other administrators.--Mister Wu (talk) 18:08, 9 December 2017 (EST)
 * Can't be done now. Maybe after we upgrade to 1.31 and I see if TimedMediaHandler works. -- 19:40, 9 December 2017 (EST)
 * Thanks, that is what I wanted to know.--Mister Wu (talk) 19:56, 9 December 2017 (EST)

Odyssey missions
Hey, Steve. I considered making a proposal regarding this matter, but figured I should go to you for this first since this relates to a decision you made. You said previously that the articles concerning the Odyssey Power Moons that can be made currently are for the story missions, the ones where the name pops up on-screen in underlined white text at the start of each one. However, it turns out these names are the names of the objectives seen on the brochure screen, not necessarily the Power Moon names (most of the objective names just happen to share the same names as those of the corresponding Power Moons). They're not just repeated or alternative names for Power Moons, though; some objectives are overarching missions with multiple Power Moons to collect as part of each one (e.g. "Getting the Band Together" with every "[Band member] on Board!" moon), while two of them don't have Power Moons at all. Up until now, most of the articles that have been put up are of missions that share the same name for both the objective and Power Moon, so I'm not quite sure which of the two we're making articles for. 06:53, 29 December 2017 (EST)
 * We're not creating articles for Power Moons, we're creating articles for the objective names and calling them story missions for the purposes of the wiki (just like how we use the word "mission" for Mario 64 courses and Mario Sunshine episodes). Whether moon(s) are collected or not is irrelevant. -- 13:13, 29 December 2017 (EST)
 * That gives me the opportunity to ask a question of my own that's still related to the previous question. Two "missions" - A Fresh Start for the City and An Invitation from the Mayor - aren't technically missions at all, as all you have to do is talk to Pauline to start Getting the Band Together and A Traditional Festival!, respectively. Is it still worth creating articles for them? 18:15, 29 December 2017 (EST)
 * If the objective name appears in bold on-screen, it gets an article that covers up until the next time that happens, or you're transported back to the Odyssey. If the objective changes with no bold text on-screen, those are sub-objectives of the current mission. So for New Donk, the three articles are The Scourge on the Skyscraper, A Fresh Start for the City, and A Traditional Festival!. Getting the Band Together, Powering Up the Station, and An Invitation from the Mayor are all objectives covered in the A Fresh Start for the City mission article. Note that boss battles Hat-to-Hat Combat and Battle with the Lord of Lightning! are a special case because even though the text never appears in bold on-screen, they are their own separate things and therefore get their own mission articles. -- 18:45, 29 December 2017 (EST)
 * That makes sense, thanks! 22:41, 29 December 2017 (EST)

I know that this conversation is old, but I was wondering, which of the three Cap Kingdom missions deserve articles? I know that opening cutscenes don't exist for them, but you can't exactly call them sub-missions because the first "major mission" is in the Cascade Kingdom. I brought it up on the level articles thread on the forums, and said that To the Top of Top-Hat Tower seemed to be the only important one but to ask you about it. So what's your opinion on this? - 16:30, 6 February 2018 (EST)
 * Well, if you make an article for Cappy of the Cap Kingdom then at least you can cover all three in one article. But now I'm starting to think that we're making too many arbitrary exceptions and should just give all objectives an article to escape this trap. Proposal? -- 12:58, 9 February 2018 (EST)
 * Seems reasonable. I'll probably make one later today. - 13:08, 9 February 2018 (EST)

Unused Protected MarioWiki Image
File:Discord.svg is going unused. I would tag with, but it is protected. I'm asking you because you uploaded it. -- 12:57, 29 December 2017 (EST)

Mouser
Hi, would you mind running the bot to change all instances of  to  ? Thanks! 08:02, 30 December 2017 (EST)

MediaWiki Text
For MediaWiki:Sidebar, do you think it should have Category:Unresolved talk pages under Community somewhere, maybe between Proposals and Mario Boards? -- 13:21, 3 January 2018 (EST)
 * No, not at all. -- 13:23, 3 January 2018 (EST)
 * Oh. I thought it would make sense because we have a lot of talk pages going unresolved. I think it is because not many users are aware of its existence. It's easy to miss on Maintenance. I have even seen removal of because no one wanted to participate in a discussion, leaving nothing resolved. -- 13:35, 3 January 2018 (EST)

Bub
I'm curious as to your thoughts on the discussion here. 20:23, 12 January 2018 (EST)
 * How do we know that SM64 Bubs are Cheep Cheeps at all? -- 20:29, 12 January 2018 (EST)
 * I think Encyclopedia Super Mario made it unambiguous. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 20:32, 12 January 2018 (EST)
 * If they are, then the proposed change is fine. -- 20:37, 12 January 2018 (EST)

Order of navigation templates
I'm curious as to your thoughts on this proposal (permalink), especially regarding my vote and this proposal.

PS: Just in case I'm too late, is there any way I can legitimately challenge the outcomes of proposals less than four weeks old, if simply making another proposal will be rejected? 16:17, 18 January 2018 (EST)
 * I would support option 2, but with the series ordered alphabetically. Games that are not within a series would be ordered as if the game title is the name of a series (example below). I guess you can't challenge it sooner than four weeks (proposals have consequences). -- 16:46, 18 January 2018 (EST)

It's too late for me to edit or cancel my proposal, but it would be possible for the admins to cancel it (and then I can put up the proposal again), should they decide that this "option 5" is worth pursuing. What do you think? 17:11, 18 January 2018 (EST)
 * It's definitely my personal second choice if Option 4 fails. 17:14, 18 January 2018 (EST)
 * Alright, let's compare the exact same list, but with the intended option 2.


 * Yeah, I like what you suggested better due. However, I am seeing it almost the same as alphabetically. The only difference being the order of the games within the series and games that are in the series that are generally far from the others (eg. Super Mario World 2 will be separate from other Yoshi games (not just Yoshi's Island) on the pure alphabetical ordering). Now that I think about it, it would be better to have things in series no matter what. 17:33, 18 January 2018 (EST)
 * One more question for now: For the DiC cartoons, should they be grouped together, and the "series" titled "DiC"? 17:44, 18 January 2018 (EST)

I'm vetoing the proposal. New proposal should have two options: My idea, and do nothing. The other options aren't enough of an improvement that they would be worth implementing. In response to option 2, I don't think the navigation templates necessarily should match the history sections because they serve different purposes. History starts in the past and moves forward. The nav templates are all about finding what you're looking for. I think once you find the series section you're looking for, it makes sense to have the games in release order. And I think the easiest way to find that series section is alphabetical order, rather than when the first game in that series came out, because that's not something we should expect casual readers to know (especially as the Mario franchise goes on longer and longer and has been around decades before a reader was born). -- 18:02, 18 January 2018 (EST)
 * I do have a follow-up idea that we can implement later on: Why not offer both options, rather than just relying on either one. I'm pretty sure we can use the "sortable" table call argument for sorting the templates. It will definitely take some time to implement (given how hard it might be to code), but it might work. See for more information (and  might be helpful too).  18:09, 18 January 2018 (EST)

Delete-request
For, in the lead sentence, shouldn't it be "This article is being considered for deletion." rather than "This article is currently pending deletion."? 16:57, 24 January 2018 (EST)

Fix the zeldawiki links
Can you go on the interwiki log and change "zeldawiki.org" into "zeldawiki.gamepedia.com"? The links to the zeldawiki are not working because it is labeled incorrectly. Just click on this link and see. Zelda Torey (talk) 19:47, 28 January 2018 (EST)

Recreate Editing Tools
MediaWiki:Edittools should be recreated. Why? It would be useful for inserting Japanese characters and NIWA markup. Just take a look at Edit tools on F-Zero Wiki. -- 17:44, 8 February 2018 (EST)
 * Still thinking about it? -- 13:12, 12 February 2018 (EST)

On a side note, it would be nice if the  feature for file uploads was visible (would appear under  ). I realize that any image that was optimized with my program or similar will be lacking the section. -- 22:01, 27 February 2018 (EST)

Bot work (again)
Hi, when you get the chance, could you please run the bot to change all instances of to  (and  to )? Thanks! 17:40, 13 February 2018 (EST)
 * Hang on, that's incompatible with Template:The Super Mario Bros. Super Show! Live. 17:41, 13 February 2018 (EST)
 * Okay, could you please instead run the bot to change all instances of to,  to , and  to ? Thanks!  17:46, 13 February 2018 (EST)

Morty Mole vs. Mega Mole
Okay, this is ridiculous. Since the notion of splitting Morty Mole from Mega Mole has now just been proposed a third time, I'm curious as to your thoughts on the matter. 00:25, 15 February 2018 (EST)
 * I lean on names, so I would probably split it. I would also merge Skeeter (New Super Mario Bros.) into Skeeter. I kind of wanted to split out Bub from Cheep Cheep. And as a side note, I badly want Chuckster to have an article (not as a separate species or anything, I just love Chucksters). -- 12:26, 15 February 2018 (EST)
 * While I want the moles split myself (and will make sure they get split if it takes me the rest of my life), Skeeter's actually a bit of a different case, as the Japanese name makes it clear they're about as different as Shy Guy and Bomb Guy (plus the guide that just called them "Skeeters" also called Sledge Bro. "Sumo Bro."). I'm surprised Chuckster doesn't have an article, maybe it doesn't to avoid meme spam. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 12:53, 15 February 2018 (EST)
 * I'd be happy to protect it if spam became an issue! -- 12:59, 15 February 2018 (EST)
 * Since this proposal was extended, I think you should give your thoughts on the Super Mario Maker version considering this proposal. Also, it does have alternative versions a la Mario Party: Star Rush and Mario Party 10 games involving them. 23:34, 27 February 2018 (EST)
 * I wouldn't go nuts with Mario Maker stuff, especially if they're not named. -- 00:05, 28 February 2018 (EST)
 * Well, yes, they don't have an official official name (it is not in any text, but the official name that can be generated is Big Monty Mole), but the Mario Party variants do, but called Mega Monty Mole. Even still, these Monty Moles (as discussed in the proposal) don't belong to either if they are split. 00:10, 28 February 2018 (EST)

The header message
Can you change it from “Issue 130 of the 'Shroom has been released” to “Issue 131”? Thanks! - 03:29, 18 February 2018 (EST)

Auto Creating Redirects
I understand the importance of moving a page and having a redirect be automatically created. However, in the likelihood that when moving a page it's original location has nothing else that links to it, can it be made so that a redirect is not automatically created? Or maybe a delete template could be automatically placed on the original page?-- 14:58, 20 February 2018 (EST)
 * I’m not Porple, but that is already a right of sysops. - 23:17, 27 February 2018 (EST)

Br to Clear
Should be changed to ? has nothing to do with css floating element clearings (although it used to with  but was changed to an HTML5-compliant version). -- 00:03, 28 February 2018 (EST)
 * Nah, not worth the effort. -- 00:05, 28 February 2018 (EST)
 * Thought you would go for it because of your moves a while back. I can see why you don't want to do it because there are thousands of pages for your bot to go through. -- 00:08, 28 February 2018 (EST)

"The Morty-fying Situation"
Hi, in regards to the heated molten debate on whether we should split Morty Mole from Mega Mole, is it alright if the proposal is withdrawn with the option to relist immediately, given that it's now a multi-option proposal? By that I mean, give the users the option to vote on which information from each game (Super Mario World, Super Mario 3D Land, and Super Mario Maker) gets split and which of it stays merged. I have yet to draft this proposal, but I believe I can create a fairly decent proposal on the matter. Please advise. Thanks! 23:34, 6 March 2018 (EST)
 * I am going to say the complete opposite and say that the talk page (as well as Morty Mole's) should be blocked from editing of non-admins (after the proposal, obcourse) until a certain date (the day Encyclopedia Super Mario Bros., where more info can be obtained). I know that this is the most drastic action, but it would guarantee that no proposals on either page would happen. Then again, nothing is stopping it being placed on the proposals page. But, proposals until that time aren't going to be very effective. But, on the other hand, no new information is foreseeable until that time. But (knowing that you don't want to involve SMM version), withdrawing the proposal won't give time for any unforeseeable new info. 00:53, 7 March 2018 (EST)
 * @Yoshi the SSM: With all due respect, that idea will cause more problems than it solves. I stand by my proposed action as is for now. 15:57, 7 March 2018 (EST)
 * I don't mean to be nagging, but I need a response as soon as possible! 16:30, 8 March 2018 (EST)
 * It's still a Support/Oppose proposal. If Support passes, then there can be a new proposal/discussion of how to handle it. -- 16:36, 8 March 2018 (EST)
 * Good answer so far! The problem, though, is that the proposal is a bit nebulous. Though "Mega Moles" are clearly defined to be from Super Mario World and "Morty Moles" are clearly defined to be from Super Mario 3D Land, little to nothing has really been said about how to group the big Monty Moles from Super Mario Maker and Super Mario Maker for Nintendo 3DS. The other specific reason why I'm requesting this is because this matter has dragged on and on and on for FAR too long; even if the proposal passes or fails like normal, practically next to nothing will really be accomplished. 16:59, 8 March 2018 (EST)
 * Also, I'll need a response to that comment whenever you get the chance (don't mean to nag you again, but what can I do?). 17:01, 8 March 2018 (EST)
 * I think Morty Moles are unique to Super Mario 3D Land at this time. The Mario Maker enemy is an enlarged Monty Mole, which I would consider to be the same thing as a Mega Mole without sunglasses. -- 17:51, 8 March 2018 (EST)
 * But, even then, SMM version acts way way way differently from SMW. 18:00, 8 March 2018 (EST)
 * Then I guess it's literally just an "enlarged Monty Mole" and wouldn't be covered in either article. -- 18:04, 8 March 2018 (EST)
 * That would actually cause a serious coverage gap on the wiki. Here's what LinkTheLefty said a while ago: "But we can't split off the Super Mario Maker big Monty Mole into its own article without conflicting with another proposal. That's precisely the problem - if Mega Mole and Morty Mole split, there will still be no obvious place to put this enemy. It will be in the same exact wishy-washy position of perpetual limbo that the Super Mario Maker winged Buzzy Beetle was in before the Para-Beetle and Parabuzzy merge. That's why this aspect needed to be decided in advance." That wasn't what I meant anyways. I already know your opinion on the matter. What I mean is, should I withdraw and relist the proposal with the changes I mentioned, or should I not? That's all. 18:12, 8 March 2018 (EST)
 * The enlarged Mario Maker Monty Mole would not get its own article. It's already mentioned here that they can be enlarged, you would just update it to remove that it turns them into a Mega Mole, because as you say yourself, the behavior is different. It turns them into a larger Monty Mole. -- 18:17, 8 March 2018 (EST)
 * Coverage gap? If that's the case, please direct me to the pages for the large Spike Tops, Baby Bloopers, and Rocky Wrenches from Super Mario Maker. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 18:18, 8 March 2018 (EST)
 * Please just answer this question I tried to ask you without talking about your personal stance. I know it already! 18:24, 8 March 2018 (EST)
 * You didn't ask a question there. I'm responding to your points on why it's nebulous and how to proceed if it passes regarding the Mario Maker enemy, etc. -- 18:31, 8 March 2018 (EST)
 * ...Well, yeah, I didn't, but I still wasn't saying whether we should split it or not (I believe you have already mentioned your stance about a week or two ago when I previously asked for your assistance.). I was asking whether we should withdraw and relist the current proposal with a broader, multi-option scope concerning as many of the possible routes we could take as possible (E.G., split out Morty and keep the other two merged, split out all three enemies (or drop initial Super Mario Maker coverage), hold off until Encyclopedia Super Mario Bros. releases in English, etc.). 19:15, 8 March 2018 (EST)
 * I essentially already answered that we shouldn't withdraw and relist. If Support passes, we'll get to that (although after working through it here, I believe I've described the best course of action). If Oppose passes then we won't have to worry about any of it anyway. -- 19:20, 8 March 2018 (EST)
 * Okay I guess. Very sorry for any rudeness I might have caused. 19:40, 8 March 2018 (EST)