Talk:Bob Hoskins

Glowsquid has a point. WE SHOULD CENSOR/REMOVE that part.


 * I was under the impression that articles needn't be censored, seeing as this is a direct quote. -- Booster

Articles need censoring.


 * The No Swearing rules only applies to userspace not articles & direct quotes.

Actually, I am strongly agaisnt censoring quote. I was only pointing out that there is innapopriate stuff, and that Conker shouldn't be excluded because of that. Censoring should be destroyed. Glowsquid
 * We censor only in userspace.

Well, we should do something. maybe a notice on the top of teh page. Something.


 * No need, as this is a main space article. -- Son of Suns
 * OMG!!! IT HAS THE "F" WORD IN IT!!! That is horrible, we shouldn't have that there.
 * Also the whole part containing the F word seems a little pointless.
 * I think it has a point. It's his views on the movie, although it may be better in the film article itself. -- Son of Suns

Maybe we need a proposal To stop spam!


 * The problem is, where do you draw the line? As I've noted before, Peach and Daisy wear some very revealing soccer outfits.  Should that be censored? -- Son of Suns

Maybe Template:Censor might be good saying "Warning: This article contains swearing and/or adult content" or stuff like that. Uh...as I type this I'm beginig to think the wiki went too far.http://img257.imageshack.us/img257/9276/papertoycf7.gif Paper Jorge! I give paper cuts so stand back! http://img257.imageshack.us/img257/9276/papertoycf7.gif


 * Isn't adult content is relative? Kids should not be able to read SSB Melee content, as the game is rated teen.  The violence is too much for kids under age 13 to handle, and they should be warned. -- Son of Suns

Uh, more like below 8 (just because I'm 10 and I watch South park once and awhile), but I think this is how a template would work say:

This article has content not sutiable for people under the age (?). Preceed with caution.

The (?) is a number we come up with.  Minimariolover10    TALK TO ME ABOUT MINIES!! 
 * Just put a note that it has Swearing on it, and be done with it. Yeesh, no need to argue about this. And, SSBM was only rated "T" because they had no better rating at the time, if they did, they would of rated it a bit lower. It isn't even rated PG down under, only G8+ (G is the most child-friendly rating, PG comes right after it).

Whose to say what is mature or not? Many articles may be too "mature" for some people - there is a lot of violence in the Mario series. Should we add a warning template to most every single article in the wiki? -- Son of Suns
 * OK, so, you are saying that slight violence and minor sexual themes are worse than constant use of the "F" word. Yep, that makes a LOT of sense. (Sarcasm)

Enough. This is getting way out of hand. If a gamee script/quote/screen shot/whathaveyou makes use of profanity, it will be included in any copies of said material we use on the wiki. This is an encyclopedia, we do not censer.

And I personally find the idea of a 'warning' a person that he/she may see mean words and icky pics absurd. -- Chris 23:09, 23 September 2007 (EDT)

Many (including myself) think that the Baby Yoshis singing in Yoshi's Story really sound like they are saying a...ole. Should we put that template on these two pages? Glowsquid

Should we have this "quasi-template" on the DK Rap article too? I mean, someone's gonna find Hell offensive. Same goes if we describe Magikoopa's role in Mario Party 8, a bunch of Europeans found his use of "spaz" (or something) highly distateful, with it apparently being profanity over there or something. -- Sir Grodus
 * The word was "spatic", it actually got pulled out of the shelves in the UK because of it, it's an abusive word toward those with learning difficulty, apparently.

Glowsquid

We should do this: F**** instead of adding a template or leaving it out, the f word could be censored, they don't even say it on tv!


 * Maybe not at the times you watch TV, or on the channels you watch. Nothing should be censored in an encyclopedia. - 11:17, 25 September 2007 (EDT)

Vote for Template:Mature
Add Template
 * 1) The "F" word is a very horrible word, people should be given at least a warning about the page.
 * 2) Per DP
 * 3) If this doesn't go through,I at least think it should be censored.( Toadbert101 |[[Image:TBPaper.PNG|30px]]| Give a yell |Sez:) 02:01, 27 September 2007 (EDT)

No Template
 * 1) Time Q
 * 2) Glowsquid As Sir Grodus showed, there's a lot of possibly offensive content in the Marioverse. We woud end up with everyone putting this template on every pages. Heck, Mario himself could be considered offensive to Italians since he's pretty much a stereotype/caricature. Glowsquid
 * 3) Son of Suns - Per what I've said, what Sir Grodus has said, what Glowsquid just said. Articles should not be censored.  Freedom of speech man.
 * 4) - Per SoS.
 * 5) Per Son of Suns and Sir Grodus. --
 * 6) Per, everyone else.
 * 1) Per, everyone else.

Results

It's been four days and just about everyone that cares has cast a vote. Consensus is 7-3 on not using Template:Mature.

As a note, someone stated that, instead of using the template, censoring the words. This is an encyclopedia. We do not censer. However, if anyone feels that we should, please make a Proposal. -- Chris 07:05, 28 September 2007 (EDT)
 * Since the conscensus is to not use this template, shouldn't said template get deleted?

Glowsquid
 * I'm currently running a few searches to see if there are any other articles that it may be used for. If I find none (which I'm sure I won't), I'll delete it. -- [[Image:Shyghost.PNG]]Chris[[Image:Shyghost.PNG]] 07:10, 28 September 2007 (EDT)
 * Thank you. - Glowsquid

Orangeyoshi When you had this vote, I didn't know it was happening. (I'm not even sure I was registered back then!) But then I read this whole page, and I noticed it's true that we should have had a warning template. Everyone who thought so is right, and there's a specific reason why we should have a warning, but it's a little hard to explain. I just want to say, for all of you who voted against the template, I could prove each of you wrong if you wanted me to. But... it's too late. It won't help me at all.

I made a proposal. Go there.

Wait, who won InfectedShroom and Glitchman's proposal? Is it going to get censored?
 * InfectedShroom withdrawn the proposal before it could pass. So yeah, there's no official status on what to do with the swear words. --Blitzwing 18:23, 12 February 2008 (EST)
 * Toadette 4evur took action again before there was any consensus *yawn*. So, are we gonna use the template that Porplemontage proposed? 19:08, 12 February 2008 (EST)

I want to, or we could leave it censored like that. Whichever one you prefer.
 * Or we could just leave it uncensored :P No reason why this option should be excluded. The old proposal brought no consensus, so either there's a new proposal or we follow the admin's suggestion. 20:06, 12 February 2008 (EST)
 * I'd say use Steve template. this way, the article is censored, but the ``offending`` content is still here. The way it's censored as of now just look retarted. --Blitzwing 20:18, 12 February 2008 (EST)

So, has anyone made the template? Does anyone know how to make the template? And Blitzwing, how come you like to use the infinitive form of verbs when the he/she/it conjugation is needed? You just do it 'cause you think it's funny? Or 'cause you know it'll annoy everyone?

Wait, wut? I thought I said to delete it cuz it had expired... The censoring side won by one vote. I didn't withdraw...


 * Apologies, I misinterpreted the comment you left on the proposals page. Anyway, the show-hide template sounds like a nice idea to me. -- 20:23, 14 February 2008 (EST)

Forget it, leave it the way it is, it's better that way.

Uh, no CY. And that's OK, KPH. The hide/show box sounds pretty good. Let's do that.

No, the template should say that the quote contains swearing, so that people know why it's hidden and kids know not to click show.
 * The best solution would be changing the text of the buttom from "show" to "show rest of the quote (contains swearing", however this seems to be impossible due to technical limitations. But adding a text directly into the quoation marks also looks bad. - 18:51, 22 February 2008 (EST)
 * I'd personally try to find a different qoute to post; then delete the current one. But hidng it sounds good. Let's do do it.

But most people don't want to do that, so I'm okay with censoring (which won the proposal, I don't understand why InfectedShroom doesn't want to do it anymore) or the template they have now, but with a notice telling that there's swearing and that's why it's hidden.
 * Didn't you or someone else say that Wikipedia uses such a template? How do they do it? 19:13, 22 February 2008 (EST)
 * We can't properly say who won the proposal, as the wording was modified and both sides were very close. Consensuses aren't made by winning 50,5% of the votes but a remarkable majority. Currently, nothing is decided, so automatically we should do that what doesn't get any complains. And when the show/hide goes okay with everyone, there's no reason to change it. - 19:34, 22 February 2008 (EST)
 * But think about it. Not in the point of view of Cobold or Time Q or whoever is reading this, but in the point of view some kid who has never heard of our debate. He'd se this and say, "What the heck is this "show" thing, and editing mistake?" Not everyone knows about the swear words, just us. No one has any reason to say there's something wrong with putting a note of the swearing in the quote, so that kids (good ones at least) know to to click show.