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.
 * Technically, Majority means above 50%. But it doesn't matter. We do need a warning, though, because as CY said, we at the wiki are the only ones who know about the quote. But as Cobold said, we are unable to do that because of technical limitations... Hmm... I'll try editing around a little...


 * Hmmm... I added something, but I'm sure someone won't like it...


 * "Explicit materials" sounds a little weird. How about just "swearing"? Can I change it?


 * Good. Which is better, "Warning" or "Notice?"


 * Warning is better. ``Notice`` just mean that something is unusual or that you should look at it. Warning is well... a warning. --Blitzwing 20:57, 24 February 2008 (EST)


 * Good!

Yay! (Confetti falls from the sky, balloons are floating up into the air) The wiki is kid-friendly! Everyone agrees on this solution! I'm really glad, when I first came across this page I thought there would never be a solution to make it kid-friendly. And now there is! - 15:50, 25 February 2008 (EST)

Pah, kid-friendly on an Encyclopedia? This Wiki is pathetic. Xzelion tells me that the rules state that cursing is allowed on Articles, just not on Userspace (that said, I'm having a tough time FINDING the rules. ^^;). So, you want to break this rule just to make the Wiki 'kid friendly'? You should get a warning for breaking this rule, actually. All this censorship is pointless. I'm calling for a removal of the "Show/Hide" feature once again, and leaving the article as it was before.

No, not after we've done all this work! Steve said we should do this, he's the founder of MarioWiki, he would not suggest it if it was breaking the rules. And we had a proposal, and this side passed (by one vote, but still passed.) And I don't understand why you're saying this, becuse at the top of this same exact talk page, you said: "OMG!!! IT HAS THE "F" WORD IN IT!!! That is horrible, we shouldn't have that there." And you voted on the vote for the mature template. Now you're saying I deserve a warning? First of all, InfectedShroom did it, not me. Second of all, he shouldn't get a warning because Steve said this is what we should do. Third of all, everyone agrees that this works. How can you say that? 20:58, 25 February 2008 (EST)

First of all, that was back when I was all about the Community, not about the Wiki. I care more about this Wiki being profressional now. Have you EVER seen a profressional Encyclopedia being censored before? What happens if Mario turns from "Kid-friendly fun" to "Violent, gorey horror"? Will you stay at this Wiki and accept the change, or will you leave? The point is, regardless of our focus, a Wiki is a Wiki, and censorship has never been a good thing for it. Second, did you REALLY think I was talking to YOU only? I was talking to everyone who chooses censorship over profressional work. I'm not saying YOU should get a warning, I'm saying all the people who are trying to censor this should get a warning, as it is breaking a rule. Third, everyone agrees on it, but that doesn't make it any less justified if it breaks a rule. But, assuming I haven't ACTUALLY seen the rule itself (Xzelion only told me, I've never seen it), I guess I should stop talking. I can't even FIND the rules. ._.

I agree that the Show/Hide feature should be removed... But the swearing itself should be censored. No matter what the rules say. Rules aren't always right you know, and this rule does not work. This may be an encyclopedia, but it is an encyclopedia based on a series of KID-FRIENDLY games. Having this quote included and un-censored will just cause trouble. Snack 22:58, 25 February 2008 (EST)
 * THAT'S WHAT I'VE BEEN SAYING ON THE FORUM. Glad someone listened.


 * Kid-friendly games...hmm, yes you have a point there. But censoring encyclopedia is...bad, in my opinion. The show/hide option should remain-let's just leave it like that. http://img247.imageshack.us/img247/3473/linkswordmi2.gif Paper Jorge ( Talk&middot;Contributions)&middot; http://img247.imageshack.us/img247/3473/linkswordmi2.gif Also, it isn't so kid-friendly if there's T games in the series (Smash Bros. games and DOnkey Konga games-also E10 rated games)

Yes, Snack is absolutuley right about the "This may be an encyclopedia, but it is an encyclopedia based on a series of KID-FRIENDLY games" thing. That's exactly what I've been trying to say. But this works to protect the quote to and more people like it... so I'm going to settle for this. I don't want to get into the argument again.

I still disagree with the "Kid-Friendly" thing, but, assuming I've only heard about that rule from Xze, and never seen it myself, I'm gonna disregard. For all I know, he could be lieing to me. So, keep the article the way it is, I'll just be sitting over there... =P

LOOK HERE, EVERYONE. This is the MARIOWIKI, not the HALO 3 WIKI. If this was a wiki based on, say, an "M" rated game like Bioshock, people would expect that we would have stuff like this and steer clear. But Mario games are ALWAYS rated E/E10+. There is a MUCH better chance that a young kid could be scarred by this than by going on the Wikipedia, or the Bioshock wikia. GET IT? We always have been a little different; we make our own rules here. OK? It's all right for an encyclopedia like ours to censor this stuff.


 * OMG, there's a huge warning that warns kids. If the kids want to be scared then let them click on show. There. They see what they shouldn't have. Their fault. http://img247.imageshack.us/img247/3473/linkswordmi2.gif Paper Jorge ( Talk&middot;Contributions)&middot; http://img247.imageshack.us/img247/3473/linkswordmi2.gif

I'm talking about if the proposal goes through and the "warning" gets removed. The warning is a great idea and will be just fine.

Thank you 3D. That's what I was trying to say. 20:12, 26 February 2008 (EST)


 * D'oh. http://img247.imageshack.us/img247/3473/linkswordmi2.gif Paper Jorge ( Talk&middot;Contributions)&middot; http://img247.imageshack.us/img247/3473/linkswordmi2.gif

The quote should be fully shown, and the page should be unprotected. This site has porn ads, I don't see why swearing is problem. 21:55, 31 March 2008 (EDT)
 * I don't see it either, but too many people do, as a proposal indicated. 07:21, 1 April 2008 (EDT)
 * I didn't ask for the page to be protected. That wasn't part of the proposal. If someone uncensores it, we change it back and note the results of the proposal in the edit summary.
 * It was protected due to an edit war, some user repeatedly changed "swearing" to "cursing". 06:30, 2 April 2008 (EDT)

God in heaven, this argument is still going on? Are we now arguing about keeping the that ugly as hell template? -- Chris 06:44, 2 April 2008 (EDT)

Please can't we just keep it? We've already discussed this stuff, I've said what I've had to say, the proposal passed (even though it was only by one vote) and Steve, the founder, made this suggestion. So can't we just keep it this way?

Cursing & Swearing
Is there even the slightest difference in the meaning of those words? - 17:27, 28 March 2008 (EDT)

Well, cursing could mean like "You and your family are cursed for eternity". So, just to make it clear. Then again, swear could mean "I swear to god, I didn't do it!", but it's less likely to misinterpret swear than curse.

Yeah, I agree. The kids on the site know what swearing means. But I'm fine with either, as long as the show/hide features get taken away. 17:36, 28 March 2008 (EDT)