MarioWiki:Proposals

http://i143.photobucket.com/albums/r149/Deadringerforlove/dessert1.jpg 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.

This page observes the No-Signature Policy.

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) All proposals that end up in a tie will be extended for another week.
 * 10) If a proposal has more than ten votes, it can only pass or fail by a margin of three votes. If a proposal reaches the deadline and the total number of votes for each option differ by two or less votes, the deadline will be extended for another week.
 * 11) 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.
 * 12) No proposal can overturn the decision of a previous proposal that is less than 4 weeks (28 days) old.
 * 13) Proposals can only be rewritten or deleted by their proposer within the first three days of their creation. However, the proposer can request that their proposal be deleted by a Sysop at any time, provided they have a valid reason for it.
 * 14) 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.
 * 15) There shouldn't be proposals about creating articles on a underrepresented or completely absent subject, unless there is major disagreement about whether the content should be included. To organize efforts about completing articles on missing subjects, try creating a PipeProject.
 * 16) Proposals can not be made about System Operator promotions and demotions. Sysops can only be promoted and demoted by the will of Bureaucrats.
 * 17) If the Sysops deem a proposal unnecessary or potentially detrimental to the upkeep of the Super Mario Wiki, they have the right to remove it at any time.
 * 18) No joke proposals. Proposals are serious wiki matters, and should be handled professionally. Joke proposals will be deleted on sight.

The times are in EDT (UTC -4:00), 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 (EDT)

Create spoiler boxes
Over on a couple wikis, they have spoiler boxes that contain any information that may give away the ending plot. I propose that we do the same. That way, people can't say that they just figured out the entire plot of the game without a warning. Now I know that we already have those warning things, but my eyes tend to linger and other people's probably do too. I would need lots of help to create and place these if this proposal goes through. So if it does, help would be appreciated.

Proposer: Deadline: September 7, 2009, 17:00

Support

 * 1) Per above

Oppose

 * 1) - It's too much hassle. Really, people should expect spoilers if they read anything on the Internet; the fact that we even bother warning them puts us ahead of the vast majority of websites out there (not to mention people who troll forums just to spoil plots). Our job is to deliver all the facts we can, and bending over backwards to accommodate people who don't want all the facts is counter-productive.

Comments
we already have them :)
 * So, if the wiki has them... are they in use? Sorry, i checked. They are.-
 * Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think he's not talking about the -thingies, but about something that hides the spoiling contents from the visitors eyes and reveals it when clicked on. -
 * Yes, you're exactly right, Edofenrir. The spoiler template is "those warning things", as mentioned in the proposal; Electrobomber is suggesting we put the spoiling information in show/hide boxes. -
 * oh, sorry :embarassed: i didnt understad the proposal ver good :/

No name, no vote, no creator's username, delete, Version 2
Alright a few months back we had a proposal known as "No name, no vote, no creator's username, deleted poll" which is a small rule for the poll selection page which organized voteing, the proposal pass, but when it pass the poll selection page was no longer used (which sucks because it just happen with no warning and a lot of users like it because it was a lot of fun. I still think the Poll selection page should still be running), so I came up with the idea to apply this rule to the FI and proposal page (I'm not sure if the FA has the support or oppose system, but if it does then it will be apply to that page also.). For all the new users who don't know what I'm talking about it's just basically if you don't put your username under support or oppose then your vote is deleted. note: This doesn't apply to the "comments" section but if a user forgot to put his/her name then just let them, you, or someone else put there username in.

Proposer: Deadline: September 5, 2009, 20:00

Support

 * 1) I am Zero! (creator) The last one pass very successfully, because think about it why make a section if you are not going to support it yourself? There's no reason to oppose since if it pass then it will make a turn for the better for everybody. This proposal will make the pages I just said more organized. Zero signing out.
 * 2) Yoshi! I don't like it when a niminator doesn't support it himself but I see no real reason to have to add creator after your user name as  above it usually says nominated by.

Oppose

 * : You want to remove votes that lack the # symbol? I'm not sure about the other rules you're proposing, but that's going too far. You can always forget to put this symbol. There's absolutely no reason to punish anyone by removing their votes. IMO, removing someone's vote is much worse than forgetting to put a single symbol. This is out of all proportion. <
 * 1) - So... If i dont say who i am when i vote, my vote gets deleted..... Stupid.
 * 2) - Per all. We dont need to delete those right off the bat, it's often just a misunderstanding and once the user is told, he/she will almost always change it.
 * 3)  - Per Time Q
 * 4) Per all except Time Q.
 * 5) - Just add, yeash. No need to make someone worry about not having their vote there like someone did to me.
 * 6)  - Per all.
 * 7) No. Just no. I don't vote on some of my proposals (such as the recent amendment to the No-Signature policy that requires coding). Sometimes the proposer might understand the reasoning of both sides, and can't make up their mind. So, as I said, I oppose this.

Comment
I am Zero! Oh ya, I forgot that part, I was thinking of the poll selection page. Zero signing out.
 * we already use that...

I agree with the no name no vote part but I dont think the no username of creator is pointless. Don't most creators vote after they already have published it?
 * The no name rule already exists with the no-sig policy. I don't think we have to rewrite it.
 * Time Q: Have you noticed that the top six votes all per you in a way?
 * Yeah, hehe. I guess that either that means my reasons are really good, or they're all just lazy. :P

What happened to the other votes?
 * The proposer unwarrantedly deleted them.


 * I'm kinda confused too oO -

I am Zero! I altered the proposal so much I have to delete the votes and start all over, because some people aren't getting the picture. Zero signing out.

I struck my vote and those that are "per-ing" me for now. Anyone of the users concerned feel free to replace your striked votes with a valid one.

I am Zero! Well if you put it that way, well ya it's stupid, but overall is good. Zero signing out.

I have to say that I don't really get the point (what keeps me from voting). So an unsigned vote will be deleted, but another one can fill in your username and then it's fine? Wouldn't it be easier to just tell the person that he/she forgot to sign the vote? I don't understand it. To me it seems like the bold text and the rest contridict each other. Someone please enlighten me.

- Sorry Time Q but you crossed out your vote and your vote has no logic. Plus, your vote is messing up the number system, it looks like there are seven people yet there are only four.
 * I know it has no logic (anymore), that's why I crossed it out >.< But there are still some people per-ing me, so I left it there for now. I'll remove it soon, but I wanted to give the other users the chance to update their votes. By the way, you're vote has no reason and thus is invalid.

Removals
'None at the moment.

Merge Rope Snake with Lucas
I propose we merge Rope Snake with Lucas. Because, do we really need an article on Lucas' grab move? I don't think so.

Proposer: Deadline: September 6, 2009, 15:00

Support

 * 1) - We have no articles on Iceberg or Palutena's Army and they are most definitely more important than snake-move-thing as they are final smashes. Why create an inconsistency in the articles just redirect the page to Lucas.
 * 2) I forgot to vote first so per me and Marioguy1.
 * 3) Would make sense...
 * 4) as all special moves have already been merged, these should go as well.
 * 5) Per all
 * 6) I am Zero! Agree, you know how in Mr. Game & Watch's and Luigi's brawl info there is a section called "other attacks" well you probably do something similar to that to edit in the rope snake into Lucas. Zero signing out.
 * 7) Per all.
 * 8) - Per all, but see below comments.
 * 9) – Per all.

Comments
Will we do the same for Hookshot? -


 * I'd say yes.
 * And please let's not forget Grapple Beam -

Since most of the moves were merged to main articles, there's no doubt on moving these info to the corresponding pages...
 * These pages (Banana Peel (Super Smash Bros. attack), Egg Throw (Super Smash Bros. attack), Grapple Beam, Gyro, Hookshot and Rope Snake) were simply missed when the rest of them were merged, so really, we should be able to go around and merge them without going through the whole Proposal process. Therefore, the two proposals can be removed and the work done immediately (I'd remove them now, but I thought I'd give people warning first). -

Merge Smash Moves with Move Users
This proposal is based off of Lemmy Koopa Fan's proposal so I have no problem with allowing him to edit and delete this proposal if he wants to for the next three days of course. Basically it extends his proposal to incorporate all of the things mentioned in his comments section. Before you think that this proposal is breaking the rules, the rules say no reversing the effects of a proposal, not no powering up the effects.

Proposer: ( has permission to edit and delete it) Deadline: September 8, 2009, 17:00

Merge Articles

 * 1) - I did create that proposal.
 * 2) I say yes. I wonder why I only thought of doing Rope Snake?
 * 3) - (Just in case) Per the same reasons as in the proposal above.
 * 4) Per all
 * 5) - Per all, but see comment below: this is a proposal for a rule that already exists.

Comments
Sorry for taking your idea LKF, you can delete this proposal if you want.

Is this proposal really necessary? I mean, it's basically the same as the proposal above and once that one is through, it can serve as a precedent to all the other sepparate Specialmove articles, thus the problem would be solved. -
 * Did you not read my little block of text? I mentioned why I made this and merging one article does not give you permission to merge all the others.


 * I read your statement, did you read mine? ;3
 * And basically, yes, it does give you the right to merge all the others, or rather it would make it much easier to get permission to do so. This is a matter of precedent. If that proposal gets approved, it becomes a precedent for that case, meaning that changing all the other articles becomes valid, as the problem is related to those of the Lucas article. At least that's what I think. -

Actually, both these proposals are unnecessary since it's already Wiki policy to merge the attacks into their users' articles. If Lemmy Koopa Fan and Marioguy1 want to go around and merge all the pages that seemed to have fallen through the cracks (Banana Peel (Super Smash Bros. attack), Egg Throw (Super Smash Bros. attack), Grapple Beam, Gyro, Hookshot and Rope Snake), they are welcome to without all this song-and-dance. Just ask, and both proposals will be removed, letting you go about your merry business as soon as you'd like. -

Changes
Nothing at the moment

Miscellaneous
''None at the moment.