Super Mario Wiki

MarioWiki:Proposals: Difference between revisions

Project page Discussion
Tag: Mobile edit
 
Line 1: Line 1:
{{MarioWiki:Proposals/Header}}
{{/Header}}


==Writing guidelines==
==Writing guidelines==
Line 5: Line 5:


==New features==
==New features==
===Make changes to MarioWiki's editbox wallpaper===
''None at the moment.''
'''The editbox''' is the field where one can type their edits into. But the most overlooked cosmetic aspect of the editbox is its wallpaper thing: Those strings of character artwork located at the bottom half of the editbox. Currently, it features '''2000s artwork''' (Luigi, Mario Sunshine with Yoshi, Princess Peach, Luigi, Mario Sunshine with Yoshi), as somehow the wiki was established in the 2000s.
 
The editbox's wallpaper pattern as of now looks like this:
<gallery>
Luigi Artwork - Super Mario 64 DS.png
Mario and Yoshi SMS.png
Princess Peach Artwork - Mario Party 6.png
Luigi Artwork - Super Mario 64 DS.png
Mario and Yoshi SMS.png
</gallery>
 
If changes were to be made to it, I would elaborate on these three options:
 
*'''Give new changeable designs to the editbox wallpaper:''' We could implement new designs to the editbox's wallpaper. This could be changeable in [[Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-editing|Special:Preferences, under Editing]]. There could be countless designs: "Mario Kart", "Paper Mario", "Mario Party", "WarioWare", "Donkey Kong Country (game series)", "Wario Land", "Luigi Mansion", "Yoshi's Island", "Yoshi's Wooly/Crafted World", the list goes on and on.
*'''Just update the existing wallpaper design with new ''Mario'' franchise artwork:''' The editbox still looks like it's from the 2000s, so maybe we can just replace the old art with the 2017-present promo arts of ''Mario'' characters.
*'''Do nothing:''' Do not like these changes? Please feel free to state your reasons for choosing this option.
 
'''Proposer''': {{User|PnnyCrygr}}<br>
'''Deadline''': May 21, 2023, 19:06 EDT
 
====Give new changeable designs to the editbox wallpaper====
#{{User|PnnyCrygr}} Per explanations above, as I would like more variety to the edit box wallpaper.
 
====Just update the existing wallpaper design with new ''Mario'' franchise artwork====
#{{User|Camwoodstock}} - Having renders from mid-2000s games that are as high quality as the mid-2000s internet would allow us to get our hands on on bold, proud display as the default, in the year '''''2023''''', feels almost comically out of date, right? Updating this to be more in-line with the site aesthetics we've grown into since implementing this is way overdue. It's not 2005 anymore (citation needed), so like, if we've updated the wiki logo and various other parts of the wiki's graphics and visuals since then, why should the thing you're forced to see whenever you edit an article--the thing we see ''as we write this vote'' and constantly revise it--be some exception? We'd like to suggest, as Koopa con Carne indirectly mentioned, the [[Talk:Main Page#That editing field...|designs mentioned on the Main Page's talkpage]] for a potential candidate. Anything a bit more recent than renders that can literally become US Citizens in how old they are!
#{{User|Somethingone}} Thank you Camwood for clearing the purpose of this proposal up for me; per Camwood.
#{{User|Hewer}} Per all, I've thought the editing field looks bad literally ever since I first saw it so I've long awaited this change.
#{{User|Killer Moth}} Per all. Updating the renders would be the best call.
#{{User|Arend}} Per Camwoodstock. The current edit box image appears make use of low-quality JPGs of outdated artwork and might have never been updated since its inception on the wiki, so let's focus on just updating that first. While it would be real neat to have different edit box skins with specific themes for the novices which may find CSS code too advanced for them, I'm not sure if the suggested manner of having it in [[Special:Preferences]] can be easily arranged, since I don't think admins can customize that. Maybe {{User|Porplemontage}} could, being the wiki proprietor, but you might have to ask. So let's not get too overambitious and just stick with updating the one edit box style we have.
#{{User|Dinoshi 64}} While I do find the current design sort of charming with its 2000's-ish style, I do think it should be changed to something better.
 
====Do nothing====
<s>#{{User|Somethingone}} I really don't see how the edit box featuring artwork from the 2000s is a bad thing. Is it because they have been replaced by newer artwork? I don't see why that would be a reason to replace them for OOW cosmetic reasons, such as the background of the edit box. Also, per KCC in the comments regarding customization; if it is really an issue for someone, they can change how it looks on their own end.</s>
 
====Comments====
Users can personalise their editing field any way they want with [[Help:CSS|some HTML knowledge]] through a "monobook.css" user subpage. I do agree that the default editing field skin would benefit from an upgrade, [[Talk:Main Page#That editing field...|but there should be some consensus on it beforehand]]. {{User:Koopa con Carne/Sig}} 19:16, May 14, 2023 (EDT)
 
There'd have to be more to the proposed themes than just names for us to vote for changeable designs outright, but we're down to update the default if nothing else, because... well, see our statement. Also... Listen. We get it, a user ''can'' customize them on their end, so who cares about the default, right? ...But that's not to say that your average user will customize their background, or even if they know ''how'' to do that. Being real here, most people would probably just accept they don't know how to do that, and decide to grin and bear it, and slowly tune it out until it all becomes background noise anyways, just another mild eyebrow-raiser to add to the pile, another thing you just have to kind of insist someone will "get used to" whenever it comes up. <small>Like us, we did that. Well, except that last one.</small> {{User:Camwoodstock/sig}} 22:13, May 14, 2023 (EDT)
:Come to think of it--should this proposal pass in the favor of option 2 (just update the renders), would we have a second proposal to determine which option we change to based on a select few options (yes, likely [[Talk:Main Page#That editing field...|these ones, again]])? We'd assume the answer is yes, but y'know, we want to make sure all the bases are covered here. {{User:Camwoodstock/sig}} 12:17, May 15, 2023 (EDT)
 
Maybe we could use [[:File:SMM2 Background.png|this]] design from Mario Maker 2? I think it fits very well for an editing field! (Maybe you'd need to remove the SMM2 text on it but otherwise it should be fine) {{User: Shadic 34/sig}} 01:44, May 18, 2023 (EDT)
:I dunno, I would prefer something more general as opposed to something more game-specific. I'd also prefer the background to be white, instead of yellow: I don't mind colors in the editing field, but I feel like the background shouldn't drastically change the color if the editing field itself. {{User:Arend/sig}} 06:32, May 18, 2023 (EDT)
:I don't think a design being too "game-specific" is enough to disqualify it, and you could just edit the image to be colored white. But, I guess as a second option we could use [[:File:NSMBUD Item Background.jpg|this]] one instead, it is less specific after all, and it's easier to edit to white. {{User: Shadic 34/sig}} 06:44, May 18, 2023 (EDT)


==Removals==
==Removals==
Line 54: Line 11:


==Changes==
==Changes==
===Create articles for ''Dance Dance Revolution: Mario Mix'' songs===
===Move ''Super Smash Bros.'' information for crossover characters into the list articles and delete their ''Super Smash Bros.'' profiles===
My reasoning for this is simple: Our [[MarioWiki:New articles|coverage policy]] is that levels get their own article. As a rhythm game, ''Mario Mix''{{'}}s songs are its equivalent of levels. Therefore, they should have their own article.
This proposal concerns ''Super Smash Bros.'' information of certain characters listed in [[Template:Crossover characters|Crossover characters]]. It makes it harder to see the actual ''Super Mario'' content on said articles, like how the [[Isabelle]] page largely concerns her appearances in ''Super Smash Bros.'' while the actual ''Super Mario'' appearances in ''Mario Kart 8'' and ''Super Mario Maker'' are all the way below. In the case of [[Villager]], it starts off by showing the ''WarioWare'' appearances but then has this huge chunk of ''Super Smash Bros.'' information in between that and the appearances in ''Mario Kart 8'' and ''Super Mario Maker''.


I think these articles would be substantial enough to justify their existence on their own, as well. Each one would have an infobox primarily made to contain information on each difficulty's note count, and the article would cover the song's origin, role in Story Mode, what occurs in the background during the song, and what elements show up in Mush Mode.
Besides, the List of ''Super Smash Bros.'' fighters pages feel kind of awkward that certain crossover characters do not have their information listed there with other non-''Super Mario'' characters, so this proposal aims to rectify that.


The elements in question here are the '''names''' of these articles, and whether they should cover all of the original song's ''Mario''-series appearances (similarly to how ''[[Mario is Missing!]]'' opens up articles for landmarks that then appear in minor roles in ''[[Mario Kart Tour]]''). I see multiple philosophies here, each with potential upsides and downsides.
The fighters on the list pages do not have their profiles, and I don't see why the crossover characters should have them but not the fighters already in the list pages, so if this proposal passes, all of that will be deleted too. This '''includes''' the Profiles section on '''other crossover pages''' like [[Knuckles]], [[Deku Baba]], [[Zangief]], and so forth, since it would be illogical for them to keep their profiles but not the protagonists of the ''Super Smash Bros.'' series, an inconsistency that's already present. But the status of the ''SSB'' content in the History section of crossover content OTHER THAN fighters in the ''Super Smash Bros.'' series can be for a future proposal.
*'''OPTION 1:''' Consider them all separate songs from their source material, thereby receiving entirely separate articles covering only their ''Mario Mix'' appearances. This approach neatly sidesteps all naming issues, and it works great with {{fake link|Moustache, Barrel, and Gorilla}}, which takes from multiple songs, but it also creates situations like [[Ground Theme (Super Mario Bros.)|Ground Theme (''Super Mario Bros.'')]] and {{fake link|Here We Go!}} being two separate articles. Maybe that makes sense, though, especially with our increasingly split-heavy approach to level articles.
*'''OPTION 2:''' Consider the ''Mario Mix'' songs arrangements of the song they're based on, and give those songs articles covering all their appearances, including their ''Mario Mix'' ones with the information outlined above. (Note that [[Ground Theme (Super Mario Bros.)|Ground Theme (''Super Mario Bros.'')]], [[Underwater Theme]], [[Fever]], and [[Underground Theme]] all already exist.) This works excellently with things like {{fake link|Ground Theme (''Super Mario Bros. 2'')}} and {{fake link|Athletic Theme (''Super Mario Bros. 3''}}, but it also results in things like {{fake link|Greenhorn Forest (song)}}, having to decide on which ''Double Dash!!'' circuit to name Rollercoasting's article after, and Moustache, Barrel, and Gorilla. Most unfortunate here is the classical music - ''Mario Mix'' is most of these tracks' only relevance to the series, so it feels odd to have {{fake link|Eine Kleine Nachtmusik}} and not Underground Mozart, {{fake link|Overture (''Carmen'')}} instead of Garden Boogie, and '''especially''' {{fake link|Tritsch-Tratsch Polka}} instead of Always Smiling (seriously, they barely sound like each other). Maybe it wouldn't be a big deal since the ''Mario Mix'' names would all be redirects, but this still doesn't seem ideal.
*'''OPTION 3:''' They're arrangements again, and we still cover its other appearances, but this time we use the ''Mario Mix'' names because those were the names when the songs were most mechanically relevant. The upside of this is that all the naming stuff that was awkward with option 2 disappears. The downside is that we're naming the articles for all these recurring and important songs after what this one obscure GameCube game called them once. This would rename the [[Ground Theme (Super Mario Bros.)|Ground Theme (''Super Mario Bros.'')]] to {{fake link|Here We Go!}}. It doesn't seem like the right move to me.
*'''OPTION 4:''' Articles still cover all appearances of the song, but this time we name them on a case-by-case basis. With a few exceptions, the classical songs will use their ''Mario Mix'' names since that's their only relevance to the series, while ''Mario'' songs will use their original titles and be covered in articles that also cover all the other appearances of the song. The exceptions are {{fake link|Moustache, Barrel, and Gorilla}}, which is a combination of multiple songs from the original ''Donkey Kong''; {{fake link|Ms. Mowz's Song}}, because the name "Ms. Mowz's Theme" is close but has never been official as far as I can tell; {{fake link|Bowser's Castle (song)}}, which needs the identifier for obvious reasons; and {{fake link|Piroli}}, which would use its ''Mario Mix'' name in absence of having anything better to call it. The disadvantage of this option is its lack of consistency, but it doesn't suffer from any of the awkwardness of the previous two options.


Oh, one more thing: yes, my argument for making ''Mario Mix'' song articles '''does''' also apply to the ''[[Donkey Konga (series)|Donkey Konga]]'' series. I was originally planning on this proposal extending to those games as well, but I'm much less familiar and their situations are slightly different in many places, so I decided to just focus on ''Mario Mix'' for now.
This will affect the following pages, and their ''Super Smash Bros.'' information (excluding profiles) will go into the following articles:


'''Proposer:''' {{user|Ahemtoday}}<br>
*[[Link]] → [[List of fighters debuting in Super Smash Bros.]]
'''Deadline:''' May 18, 2023, 23:59 GMT
*[[Isabelle]] → [[List of fighters debuting in Super Smash Bros. Ultimate]]
*[[Villager]] → [[List of fighters debuting in Super Smash Bros. for Nintendo 3DS / Wii U]]
*[[Kirby]] → [[List of fighters debuting in Super Smash Bros.]]
*[[Sonic]] → [[List of fighters debuting in Super Smash Bros. Brawl]]
*[[Mii]] → [[List of fighters debuting in Super Smash Bros. for Nintendo 3DS / Wii U]]
*[[R.O.B.]] → [[List of fighters debuting in Super Smash Bros. Brawl]]
*[[Kirby]] → [[List of fighters debuting in Super Smash Bros.]]
*[[Banjo]] → [[List of fighters debuting in Super Smash Bros. Ultimate]]
*[[Kazooie]] → [[List of fighters debuting in Super Smash Bros. Ultimate]]
*[[Mega Man]] → [[List of fighters debuting in Super Smash Bros. for Nintendo 3DS / Wii U]]
*[[Pac-Man]] → [[List of fighters debuting in Super Smash Bros. for Nintendo 3DS / Wii U]]


====Option 1: Articles cover only ''Mario Mix'', use ''Mario Mix'' names====
There's also Samus, and there's a proposal to currently split the article, so if that passes, her ''Super Smash Bros.'' information will stay on the [[List of fighters debuting in Super Smash Bros.]] page.
#{{User|Ahemtoday}} I can easily see the reasoning for this one. While I'd probably prefer option 4, this also seems like it could be the right move.
#{{User|Hewer}} Per proposal and these being the equivalent of level articles.
#{{User|RHG1951}} After seeing the drafts, I prefer the information be handled this way.
#{{User|7feetunder}} No reason to pretend that articles for what are essentially just random music tracks that just happened to get redone for a dancing game would exist if they didn't appear in said dancing game. As for the issue of creating "redundant" articles, I see no problem here. We should be treating these like level articles, ''not'' music articles. The logic behind this proposal is that these are this game's equivalent of levels, not that Toy Dream's background music magically becomes article-worthy because it appeared in this game. It's no more redundant than splitting ''DKC'' boss level articles from the bosses when they're pretty much interchangeable.
#{{User|Arend}} Actually yeah, 7feetunder brings up a good point I should've thought about while voting earlier: the articles should be about levels first and music second, not the other way around. Per.


====Option 2: Articles cover all appearances, use original names====
Note: A short summary of the character's role, or any connections to ''Super Mario'', will remain intact, similarly to how [[Mario#History]] has a short summary on Mario throughout his appearance while the main history page on Mario is located at [[History of Mario]].
<s>#{{User|Arend}} Second choice, see Option 4 reasons.</s>


====Option 3: Articles cover all appearances, use ''Mario Mix'' names====
There are three options: Option 1 will enact all of the changes above, Option 2 will remove only the ''Super Smash Bros.'' profiles from pages on non-''Super Mario'' content, and Option 3 opposes everything in this proposal.


====Option 4: Articles cover all appearances, named on case-by-case basis====
'''Proposer''': {{User|Super Mario RPG}}<br>
#{{User|Ahemtoday}} This is my favored option. Articles like [[Ground Theme (Super Mario Bros.)]] show that major enough ''Mario''-series songs can warrant articles, and here we have a bunch of songs that are directly mechanically relevant, being the game's equivalent of levels.
'''Deadline''': June 4, 2024, 23:59 GMT
#{{User|Camwoodstock}} This works for us. Don't want to avoid having articles for effectively redundant tracks, but having articles for as many tracks as make sense/within reason would definitely help a ''lot'' more with coverage, especially since the tracks are fairly distinct from one another (at least, as far as we could tell; admittedly, we're not very familiar with DDR Mario Mix, but what we've seen and what we understand about it and other DDR games checks out).
<s>#{{User|Arend}} I too feel like this (or Option 2) is the best option too, given that Option 1 might gives us multiple articles of themes we already have an article of, and Option 3 would give single-game song titles of ''remixes'' to the ''original themes'' that already have more well-known names. Sure, Ahemtoday's draft on Greenhorn Forest with this option isn't the best example, given the long list of appearances of the Greenhorn Forest leitmotif in ''Wario World'', but I feel like that could be rewritten into a regular paragraph as well.</s>


====Option 5: Do not create articles====
====Option 1: Full support====
#{{User|Super Mario RPG}} As proposer.


====Comments====
====Option 2: Trim profiles only====
Personally, I think we should consider an attempt to list the original music for each arrangement more correctly; for instance, [[Dance Dance Revolution: Mario Mix#Music|this table]] lists the original music for "Pirate Dance" being the Athletic theme of ''Super Mario World'', yet the beginning is clearly based on the intro for ''Super Mario World's'' Ground theme; and with "Step by Step", the original music is listed as "Bonus game / Switch Palace" from ''Super Mario World'': not only parsed with spaces as if they're two different tunes (even though they share the same music), but I believe it's also an arrangement of Vanilla Dome, also from ''Super Mario World'', which the table fails to mention completely. "Step By Step" could also be a slower-paces arrangement of the Athletic theme instead of "Pirate Dance", the intro for "Step by Step" does sound like a mix between that and Vanilla Dome.
#{{User|Super Mario RPG}} Secondary


I don't know if the current listings were originally from Nintendo themselves or not, but I think some more thorough research may be in order for a couple of tracks. {{User:Arend/sig}} 19:44, May 11, 2023 (EDT)
====Option 3: Oppose====
#{{User|Axis}} I believe it's unnecessary.
#{{User|Nintendo101}} It makes intuitive sense to just list the ''Super Smash Bros.'' info on the pages of the character when available. (As a side note, the ''Super Smash Bros.'' series has a pretty intimate relationship with the ''Super Mario'' franchise, and I do not think we should be omitting coverage here just because SmashWiki exists. We don't address topics the same way.)
#{{User|Tails777}} If the characters have an article, I see no reason why Smash stuff should be singled out and removed just because it's not Mario related.
#{{user|Doc von Schmeltwick}} - Per all, especially Nintendo101
#{{User|Hewer}} It's standard practice (and also pretty logical) to list any time a subject happens to appear alongside Mario stuff. [[Captain N: The Game Master]] is a good example - it's considered a guest appearance, so it doesn't get full coverage, but we still mention things' appearances there if they happen to be covered on the wiki for some other reason, e.g. [[Slime (Dragon Quest)]]. So why should Smash (where Mario stuff perhaps has a greater role than in Captain N) be the one exception? The proposal tries to argue about organisation and finding information, but I'd say unnecessarily splitting a character's information across multiple pages is the real bad organisation here. If people really can't bear to scroll through some Smash stuff in order to find what they're looking for (which, mind, might be the Smash stuff anyway), they can use the contents links at the top of the article to jump to particular sections no problem. And also, to be frank, I don't really understand what the proposal is talking about regarding "profiles".
#{{User|FanOfRosalina2007}} Per all, especially Hewer's reasoning.
#{{user|MegaBowser64}} Per all of yall. Personally I don't think it's a big deal to leave Smash info on character pages. There isn't much harm done.
#{{User|Sdman213}} Per all.
#{{User|Jazama}} Per all
#{{User|SeanWheeler}} If we move these characters Smash information to the list of Smash characters, we might as well just delete those pages and move all information to the Smash character lists. Those lists already have the Super Mario Maker costumes anyway. But we shouldn't move them to the lists because those lists are cluttered enough as they are.


For clarification, do options 2-4 create separate pages for the music like the recurring themes in [[:Category:Musical themes]] or are they included in the ''Mario Mix'' level page itself like with [[Gusty Garden Galaxy#Music|Gusty Garden Galaxy § Music]]? If it's the former, the [[MarioWiki:Proposals/Archive/52#Create pages with renditions of recognizable music themes|original proposal]] for covering recurring themes specifies that a theme needs to appear in at least 8 unique games. - [[User:RHG1951|RHG1951]] ([[User talk:RHG1951|talk]]) 11:17, May 12, 2023 (EDT)
====Comments====
:What I was envisioning happening was: if one of those options wins, we create (as an example) the article {{fake link|Lots of Toys}}. This article has sections for both the song's appearance in ''[[Mario Party 5]]'' as [[Toy Dream]]'s theme, and its appearance in ''Mario Mix'' as Cabin Fever, which would be a redirect to that section (or simply the name of the article in option 3). I think that's the second thing. [[User:Ahemtoday|Ahemtoday]] ([[User talk:Ahemtoday|talk]]) 12:53, May 12, 2023 (EDT)
<s>[[MarioWiki:Proposals/Archive/61#Trim_the_Smash_Bros_trophies_page|This passed proposal]] already establishes that non-Mario trophies should be removed from dedicated character articles. Check out the bolded sentence and the rationale after it:<blockquote>It's simple. I propose to simply trim those trophies list pages to only the Mario/DK/Wario etc. character and cut the rest. '''This includes crossover characters that have pages on the wiki''' - while we may have a Link page because he's in Mario Kart 8, his Smash Bros trophy is about Link the protagonist of his own independent intellectual property and not Link the funny Mario Kart 8 man, and it leads to the bizarre situation of having a listing of Link but not the character his series is named after. Best keep things simple. </blockquote> I believe if option 3 were to win in this proposal, that decision would be overturned.</s> {{User:Koopa con Carne/Sig}} 15:06, May 28, 2024 (EDT), edited 15:14, May 28, 2024 (EDT)
:Okay, I'll remove that from the scope of the proposal then. [[User:Super Mario RPG|Super Mario RPG]] ([[User talk:Super Mario RPG|talk]]) 15:09, May 28, 2024 (EDT)
::Wait, hold on, I may be stupid. That simply specifies that the subjects who have pages on the wiki, but do not pertain to the Mario franchise, would be among the trophies trimmed from the trophy pages, but it does not specify that they'd be trimmed from their own pages as well. I confused myself and hopefully I can clear it up following my above comment. {{User:Koopa con Carne/Sig}} 15:13, May 28, 2024 (EDT)
:::I was about to ask about the example of me trimming the profiles from the [[Sonic]] page applies, but now I'm not sure what's going on myself. [[User:Super Mario RPG|Super Mario RPG]] ([[User talk:Super Mario RPG|talk]]) 15:25, May 28, 2024 (EDT)
::::That was about the lists of all trophies per game, not profile sections for individual subjects. Doesn't look like there's any overlap between these proposals. --{{User:Waluigi Time/sig}} 16:14, May 28, 2024 (EDT)


I'd personally prefer to see a draft of an article before I throw my hat in the ring. If I do support, I'm definitely picking option 1 - most of the tracks in ''Mario Mix'' are neither major recurring themes nor original songs ("songs" meaning they have lyrics, like [[Phantom of the Bwahpera]]), so we should be treating these like level articles, not song articles. Plus it's just awkward to be like "yeah here's an article on the music from Toy Dream even though none of the other ''Mario Party'' board themes have one; it appeared in some rhythm game so that makes it special". I am completely opposed to making song articles for the ''Donkey Konga'' games. There's no storyline or scenario behind the songs in that game, so articles on them would ultimately boil down to lyrics sheets for a bunch of random pop and rock songs. At best they warrant a list, like ones we have for the ''Mario'' cartoons. {{User:7feetunder/sig}} 09:24, May 13, 2023 (EDT)
I was going to address the opposition by stating that, should this pass, a short summary of each character's ''SSB'' role will remain on the page (See [[Mario#History]] for a similar type of example), but the main information will be on the list of fighters pages. [[User:Super Mario RPG|Super Mario RPG]] ([[User talk:Super Mario RPG|talk]]) 16:42, May 28, 2024 (EDT)
:Gotcha. I made a couple drafts for Starring Wario!: '''''[[User:Ahemtoday/Mario Mix Draft A|This one]]''''' for option 1, and '''''[[User:Ahemtoday/Mario Mix Draft B|this one]]''''' for option 4 (though it can be easily repurposed for options 2 and 3 with only minor changes). I chose Starring Wario mostly at random, for the record. [[User:Ahemtoday|Ahemtoday]] ([[User talk:Ahemtoday|talk]]) 16:57, May 13, 2023 (EDT)
::...y'know, on second thought, maybe I should've chosen a different song. They wouldn't all have big weird lists like that, I swear. (Though maybe that's just a sign I needed to stretch to fill the ''Wario World'' section with halfway-worthwhile information...) [[User:Ahemtoday|Ahemtoday]] ([[User talk:Ahemtoday|talk]]) 19:24, May 13, 2023 (EDT)


===Split major classic remakes===
Looks like the truncation of the moves helps a lot with accessibility, like on the Villager page listed above. Pages like [[Fox]] still have excessive profiles, and it seems weird to have those there but not on like the corresponding List of trophies pages. [[User:Super Mario RPG|Super Mario RPG]] ([[User talk:Super Mario RPG|talk]]) 17:30, May 29, 2024 (EDT)
I was inspired by the [[Talk:Mario_Bros._(game)|Mario Bros. split proposal]] to make this proposal. Essentially, we have some remakes, like SM64/DS, the SMA series, & SMBDX split. With [[MarioWiki:Proposals/Archive/52|the Switch/3DS remake proposal]], I feel like someone should do a classic remake proposal, whence why I'm doing this.
:Eh, I'd say it makes sense. The list of trophies pages are only meant to be lists of Mario trophies, but we happen to also have pages describing fighters in Smash, so why not list the trophies there where they're relevant? Again I raise you Captain N - the article about it is only about the show and its relevance to Mario, so we don't mention the appearance of Dragon Quest Slimes on that article since it has nothing to do with Mario in that context, but because we happen to have an article about Slimes for another reason, we mention the appearance there. Also, I find the "accessibility" arguments you keep going for a bit strange - there are people who might want to look at Smash information on this wiki, it's not just some burden that we have to avert people from as best as we can. {{User:Hewer/sig}} 07:54, May 30, 2024 (EDT)


There are 3 options. Option 1 splits all major remakes. Option 2 only splits major remakes that would be in a strict definition. Option 3 is the "do nothing" option.
===Merge the name of Mario family wiki===
Mariowiki contains content from ''Donkey Kong'' and ''Wario'' series despite Mario did not appears. [[Pauline]] is an intersection between ''Mario'' and ''Donkey Kong'' series, so she can be included in either. As independent games of the Mario family including ''Luigi'' and ''Princess Peach'' released, the name of ''Mariowiki'' will no longer be effective. luigiwiki.com and peachwiki.com also redirected to Mariowiki.


'''Proposer:''' {{user|SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)}}<br>
Since Mario is from the ''Mushroom Kingdom'', the important thing is that they are the ''Mario family'', so I'd suggest giving them a new name.
'''Deadline:''' May 19, 2023, 23:59 GMT


====Option 1====
'''Proposer''': {{User|Windy}}<br>
#{{User|SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)}} This is my perferred option.
'''Deadline''': June 8, 2024, 23:59 GMT


====Option 2====
====Option 1: Rename to Mushroomwiki====
#{{User|SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)}} I'm fine with this, though. Secondary option.
====Option 2: Rename to Kinopedia====
#{{User|Windy}} As proposer.


====Option 3====
====Status quo====
#{{User|SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)}} Of course, if enough people are fine with the inconsistency, this would be fine, too. Tertiary option.
#{{User|Arend}} Current wiki name is fine. It's straight to the point: it's about the ''Super Mario'' franchise, and in marketing for this franchise, characters with their own series such as Wario, Yoshi and DK are often included anyway. Something like "Mushroom Wiki" is not clear at all, and are probably even ''less'' relevant to the Yoshi, DK or Wario series, since none of their series have anything to do with mushrooms. "Kino" is also German for "cinema", so "Kinopedia" works even ''less'' (unless you're trying to say it's a pun on [[Toad|Kinopio]] rather than [[Mushroom|Kinoko]], in which case that's still worse).
#{{User|Hewer}} This proposal is extremely vague and unclear in what it's trying to achieve and I still don't really see the point of it, so I'll oppose.
#{{User|Pseudo}} The current wiki name is simple, concise, and great for searchability. Changing it would completely torpedo that for very little gain. While separate, the Donkey Kong, Yoshi, and Wario games are closely related to the Mario franchise, and make sense to be covered on the Mario wiki.
#{{User|Spectrogram}} Per Hewer, and the fact that the proposer doesn't seem to know which games would be split as well. Even if the goal of this proposal is to open a door for future splits, that door was never closed in the first place, and it's better to determine what needs to be split on a case-by-case basis.
#{{User|Hewer}} The name of the whole franchise is Super Mario, a game doesn't necessarily need to feature Mario to be in the franchise. I don't think anyone is confused to see New Super Luigi U on the Super Mario Wiki. Meanwhile, they most certainly would be confused as to what the hell Mushroom Wiki or Kinopedia is even about, those names are significantly more generic and less recognisable and would create immense amounts of confusion, not solve it. This is a disastrous "solution" to a non-existent issue. (also I'm not entirely sure what you meant when you said Pauline "can be included in either" but the idea that Pauline is the main crossover between the Mario and Donkey Kong franchise rather than their shared origins and DK's continued appearances in Mario games is laughable)
#{{User|Camwoodstock}} Per Spectrogram. This proposal in its current state is in this uncomfortable middle ground between being way too vague and having way too many potential ramifications. What's... What's even meant to be enacted if this passes? What articles are being effected? What does this policy ''mean''?! It was mentioned this was apparently meant to be the prelude to determining potential articles to split in future proposals, but honestly, you need to lead with that, because we don't want to say "yeah, let's do it!" and then it turns out exactly 0 of the given games are remakes we agree should be split up, rendering everything a moot point anyways as we end up with some protocol that has an "exceptions" list that covers ''every possible application''.
#{{User|Super Mario RPG}} Absolutely not. Per all.
#{{User|Arend}} Per all: It is extremely unclear ''which'' articles the proposer wants to split, especially regarding Option 2 which would split major remakes that "would be in a strict definition" (and even when clarifying that it would be like how we split modern remakes on a case-by-case basis, it's still rather vague). Clarity is key for a proposal with big ramifications like this one, so the proposer should make sure to provide a list of which articles would be split under Option 1, and a list of which would be split under Option 2; yet, they didn't provide any of these lists. Even when asked, it gets totally ignored in favor of other questions. This makes Spectrogram's theory of the proposer actually ''having no idea'' what games should be split very plausible, which, for a proposal like this, '''is a huge problem'''. If you don't know ''what'' should be split for your proposal to split articles, then why bother making it? Should this proposal be tried by someone else another day, please think of the articles you want to split first, and make sure to list them when you do make the proposal.
#{{User|Nightwicked Bowser}} Per all, this would be confusing as f**k.
#{{User|Zootalo}} Nah. Per all.
#{{User|Sparks}} Per all.
#{{user|Doc von Schmeltwick}} - ...why would that be better? It just makes it harder to find. Obtuse names like "JiggyWikki" and "Triforce Wiki" were chosen just because the more obvious "Banjo Wiki" and "Zelda Wiki" were already taken.
#{{User|Camwoodstock}} Per all. "Mushroomwiki" makes us think of a wiki for mushroom foragers, and no offense, but "Kinopedia" make us think of a knockoff of Urban Dictionary--all things considered, we lucked out ''hard'' by having the name "Super Mario Wiki" at "mariowiki.com" ripe for the picking; we really, really shouldn't just throw that all away for something obtuse. We are not Elon Musk.
#{{User|Sdman213}} No. Definitely per all.
#{{user|MegaBowser64}} What the actual hell. Do I even need to make an argument? per all
#{{User|SolemnStormcloud}} I ''dislike'' this idea! (Per all.)
#{{User|Axis}} Per all.
#{{User|Mario}} I think the wiki should continue using my name.
#{{User|Jazama}} Per all
#{{User|Ahemtoday}} These names, especially Kinopedia, are just as tied to specifically-Mario games, and make the wiki's subject much less obvious.
#{{User|SeanWheeler}} I never heard of Kino. And the Mushroom is the the Smash series symbol for Mario and not Donkey Kong (letters DK), Yoshi (egg) or Wario (letter W). The mushroom isn't that essential to DK, Yoshi or Wario, but Mario is a very important figure to the spinoffs. The first Donkey Kong game is the debut of Mario. The Yoshi series has Baby Mario. And Wario is pretty much Mario with the M turned upside-down and was supposed to be a rival to Mario.
#{{User|Tails777}} [[MarioWiki:BJAODN/April Fool's 2019|Pink Donkey Kong Jr. Wiki, then we'll talk]]. Otherwise, per all.
#{{User|Shadow2}} So your argument is "Mariowiki contains content from Donkey Kong and Wario series despite Mario [doesn't appear in those games]", so the solution is to name it after the Mushroom Kingdom...which ALSO doesn't appear in most Donkey Kong and Wario games? Opposing due to nonsensical.
#{{User|Dive Rocket Launcher}} Per all, this rebrand would be almost as bad as what happened to Twitter.


====Comments====
====Comments====
What exactly do you mean by "classic remake" here? That's much too vague. [[User:Doc von Schmeltwick|Doc von Schmeltwick]] ([[User talk:Doc von Schmeltwick|talk]]) 12:48, May 12, 2023 (EDT)
The point is the merging of Mario character names. The domain; Luigiwiki, Peachwiki, DKwiki (or donkeykongwiki.com), Wariowiki, Yoshiwiki and Bowserwiki have all been redirected to Mariowiki. [[User:Windy|Windy]] ([[User talk:Windy|talk]]) 10:26, June 1, 2024 (EDT)
:Why would that need done? Especially Peach, who has two major games plus an LCD thing under her... petticoat...? (she doesn't have a belt) And Bowser, who has zilch. [[User:Doc von Schmeltwick|Doc von Schmeltwick]] ([[User talk:Doc von Schmeltwick|talk]]) 10:38, June 1, 2024 (EDT)
::All those URLs already redirect to this site, which I think is what Windy's trying to get at for whatever reason. As for what relevance that's supposed to have to the idea of renaming the wiki, I haven't a clue. {{User:Hewer/sig}} 15:09, June 1, 2024 (EDT)
:::Windy already stated as such about the luigiwiki.com and peachwiki.com URLs in the proposal itself, directly after stating the MarioWiki name will no longer be effective (which uh, wouldn't be true given the name of the franchise; for some reason, Windy seems to think this wiki is named after the ''character'' instead of the ''franchise''). I... ''think'' they bring it up to say "oh, we can make mariowiki.com a redirect to the new URL, like the luigiwiki.com and peachwiki.com URLs" (I wouldn't have any idea what ''else'' it could've meant). {{User:Arend/sig}} 16:21, June 1, 2024 (EDT)
:So...where's the issue? What does this have to do with renaming the wiki? {{User:Hewer/sig}} 10:39, June 1, 2024 (EDT)


What games would fall in the scope of this proposal? [[User:Spectrogram|Spectrogram]] ([[User talk:Spectrogram|talk]]) 12:51, May 12, 2023 (EDT)
Let me ask you a question: what is the name of [[Super Mario (franchise)|the ''whole'' franchise this wiki is about, and covers franchises like Yoshi, Donkey Kong and Wario alike]]? It's not some weird merger of names, not something like "Mushroom" or "Kinoko" or even the "Mario family" (which admittedly is a better to name a wiki after than "Mushroom"/"Kinoko"). No, it's ''Super Mario''. "Super Mario Wiki" is still a perfectly fine name for the subjects this wiki is talking about. While this wiki does contain content from the ''Donkey Kong'' and ''Wario'' series despite Mario "did not appears", there's really no need to rename this wiki since Yoshi, DK and Wario are still characters in the franchise that Mario ''is the center of''. And so are Luigi, Peach and Toad: ''all six of these'' are always to be recognized as ''Super Mario'' characters, so even if Mario doesn't appear in some games that these others star in, the current name of our wiki is still effective and relevant. {{User:Arend/sig}} 10:47, June 1, 2024 (EDT)
:For the record, [[Mario Family]] is also a bad name. {{User:Hewer/sig}} 15:09, June 1, 2024 (EDT)


What "major classic remakes" are we talking about here? Which ones "would be in a strict definition"? Are there "minor remakes" we're excluding here? [[User:Ahemtoday|Ahemtoday]] ([[User talk:Ahemtoday|talk]]) 12:55, May 12, 2023 (EDT)
Dunno guys, I think Windy's got a point about the second option: Mario's pretty kino. {{User:Koopa con Carne/Sig}} 15:28, June 1, 2024 (EDT)
:But is he the epitome? If we wanna name the wiki after the most Mario adjective, [[MarioWiki:BJAODN/April Fool's 2021|we've got a better option]] - {{User:Hewer/sig}} 15:37, June 1, 2024 (EDT)
::If we're talking about the cream of the crop, Luigi's got two much better contenders. [[File:MP1WarioLuigiDK.gif|150px]] {{User:Koopa con Carne/Sig}} 15:55, June 1, 2024 (EDT)
:::[[File:MP3MarioRelaxing.gif]] NO ONE TOPS MARIO. {{User:Mario/sig}} 16:09, June 1, 2024 (EDT)
::::Guys, we're all overlooking the obvious candidate--[[Kinoppe|it's literally 4/7ths of her name]]. {{User:Camwoodstock/sig}} 16:18, June 1, 2024 (EDT)
:::::DID MARIO STUTTER {{User:Mario/sig}} 16:25, June 1, 2024 (EDT)
::::::We could alternatively pick [[MarioWiki:BJAODN/Proposals/April Fool's 2021#Who should take the red-capped plumber's position?|any of these names]]. How does [[inkipedia:Marie|Marie]]Wiki sound? {{User:Arend/sig}} 16:28, June 1, 2024 (EDT)
::::::Kinoppe's described as a follower of Dr. Mario's daughter<small> (that was the grammar on the original article we don't get it either)</small>! She was born because of Mario with a PhD! {{User:Camwoodstock/sig}} 16:32, June 1, 2024 (EDT)
:::::::Actually, she's stated to be a follower of Peach and Dr. Mario's daughter. I think that's to say she's Dr. Mario's daughter ''and'' a follower of Peach, instead of a follower of the daughter of Peach and Dr. Mario <small>(Yeah I completely agree that sentence was grammatically confusing)</small> {{User:Arend/sig}} 16:50, June 1, 2024 (EDT)


Whoa! Already, you 3 ask this! Not being rude, of course. Now, to answer Doc's question, "classic remake" is a remake of a classic game, unlike a "modern remake" which is something like Donkey Kong Country Returns 3DS, or Tropical Freeze Switch. To answer Spectrogram's question, games like Super Mario Bros, Donkey Kong, and so on, would fall in the scope of this proposal. Mario Bros is not included due to there already being a passed proposal for it. To answer Ahemtoday's questions, here's my answers. 1. I'm talking about remakes of a game like Super Mario All-Stars' remakes of SMB1, TLL, 2, & 3 that are still in the articles of the OG game. 2. Strict definition would be something akin to the DKC games mentioned earlier, Luigi's Mansion 3DS, & Poochy & Yoshi's Wooly World. 3. Minor remakes would be like splitting Mario Bros. Classic from Mario Bros. Battle, or Super Mario Bros. with its' FDS version. {{User|SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)}} 12:57, May 12, 2023 (CST)
As an aside--so, um, ''do'' mushrooms all appear in the spinoff side-series??? We know there's mushrooms in the original Luigi's Mansion (namely the [[Poison Mushroom]]) and in the WarioWare series (they repeatedly appear in microgames), but like, are there any in the Wario Land games? Are there any in the Donkey Kong games? We aren't exactly familiar with Every Single Mario Video Game Ever Released, but like, it's not like Mario games are even defined by having ''a'' mushroom in them in the first place; ''[[Mario Bros. (game)|both Mario]] [[Mario Bros. (Game & Watch)|Bros. games]]'' lack them, and those are literally named based on the fact that Mario is in them. {{User:Camwoodstock/sig}} 16:18, June 1, 2024 (EDT)
:I think they were asking for a complete list of what articles would be split with each option. By the way, you should probably remove at least one of your votes, voting for every option is effectively the same as not voting at all. --{{User:Waluigi Time/sig}} 20:35, May 12, 2023 (EDT)
:I already stated in my oppose vote that mushrooms are barely relevant in any of the Yoshi, DK and Wario games. It's really only ''Mario''-specific. {{User:Arend/sig}} 16:28, June 1, 2024 (EDT)
::We knew they weren't relevant to them, that's definitely not in question for us. Our question is if Mushrooms made a meaningful appearance in any of them. ;P {{User:Camwoodstock/sig}} 16:32, June 1, 2024 (EDT)
::"It's really only Mario-specific" [[Shroom (enemy)|Nuh-uh]], I'll have you know this is a real mushroom inspired by the mushrooms that slide on the ground in mario games. {{User:Koopa con Carne/Sig}} 17:02, June 1, 2024 (EDT)
:::Ah of course, excuse me for forgetting about the true emblems and stars of the DK franchise. {{User:Hewer/sig}} 18:36, June 1, 2024 (EDT)


{{@|SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)}} One user cannot support to every option at the same time. They should support to at most, one option. {{User:PnnyCrygr/sig}} 00:01, May 13, 2023 (EDT)
===Discourage "([Title] for [system])" disambiguation format when "([Title])" alone is sufficient to identify the subject===
:You can support multiple. But not all. [[User:Doc von Schmeltwick|Doc von Schmeltwick]] ([[User talk:Doc von Schmeltwick|talk]]) 00:26, May 13, 2023 (EDT)
These past months, there have been some remakes that share titles with the games they're remaking. This has led to a few new articles with titles ending with "([Title] for [system])", such as [[Scrapbook (Super Mario RPG for Nintendo Switch)|Scrapbook (''Super Mario RPG'' for Nintendo Switch)]] and [[Gold Medal (Paper Mario: The Thousand-Year Door for Nintendo Switch)|Gold Medal (''Paper Mario: The Thousand-Year Door'' for Nintendo Switch)]]. However, this long-winded double-disambiguation format is not always strictly necessary, and both of these example articles fall outside of the specific use case [[MarioWiki:NAME]] recommends using this format in. There isn't a Scrapbook in the original ''Super Mario RPG'', and there isn't a Gold Medal in the original ''Paper Mario: The Thousand-Year Door''. These are not cases where "two different games share the same title but appear on different consoles and the identifier '''needs''' to distinguish between them" (emphasis added).


I must say, this is probably the first time I've seen a proposer put their support in ''all'' options of their proposal. I don't think it's allowed to vote for every option though, because as Waluigi Time said, it's essentially like not voting at all. If every option is given a vote by the same person, it doesn't make a significant change in the standings.<br>Another thing: I'm really confused at what the difference between options 1 and 2 are. Option 1 is "Split all major remakes", that sounds clear enough, but Option 2 is "Only split major remakes that would be in a strict definition", and reading that, I'm like: "what would does 'in a strict definition' even mean?!" I got to ask, ''what games are affected with option 2, and which games are '''not''' affected?'' I know Ahemtoday already asked what "in a strict definition" meant and you already answered that, but I don't feel any more enlightened with the three examples you gave him. All I'm certain of is that minor remakes ''won't'' be affected by ''either'' option. Listing all games that will be or won't be affected by either option (similar to [[MarioWiki:Proposals/Archive/61#Merge certain non-Mario fighters from the Super Smash Bros. series into game-specific lists and trim away detailed special move information for all non-Mario fighters|this]] or [[MarioWiki:Proposals/Archive/59#Re-merge the Mario Party Advance "generic species representative character" articles back into their respective "species" articles|this]]) would help a lot, as Waluigi Time said. {{User:Arend/sig}} 02:40, May 13, 2023 (EDT)
I propose a change to the naming policy to explicitly discourage using this disambiguation format in such cases. If the game title alone is enough to specify the subject, including the system in the article title is unnecessary and awkward. Those details belong in the article itself, not the title.
:There is no rule against voting for every option on a proposal with multiple options though [[User:Spectrogram|Spectrogram]] ([[User talk:Spectrogram|talk]]) 03:09, May 13, 2023 (EDT)
::There's no rule against it because it doesn't really hurt anything, but it's also pointless to do so. You ''can'' vote for every option, but you shouldn't because it accomplishes nothing. There's no difference between the current state of the proposal and if the proposer had decided not to vote at all. --{{User:Waluigi Time/sig}} 12:14, May 15, 2023 (EDT)


WOAH WOAH WOAH WOAH!!!! JEEZ! This is crazy! Let me try to clear more things up. Waluigi Time, PnnyCygr, Doc, & Arend have good points on voting, but I think on that matter Spectrogram sums it up perfectly. On the topic of what falls under 2, I was talking about how we split modern remakes under a case-by-case basis, option 2 would essentially be like that. It's nice to know that you understood option 1! One last thing. PnnyCygr, that at symbol thing made me get Porplemontage vibes. {{User|SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)}} 09:39, May 15, 2023 (CST)
'''Proposer''': {{User|JanMisali}}<br>
:So do you have a list of games that would be split if option 2 passes, or is it just meant to pave the way for future proposals? --{{User:Waluigi Time/sig}} 12:14, May 15, 2023 (EDT)
'''Deadline''': June 9, 2024, 23:59 GMT
::The second one. {{User|SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)}} 12:42, May 15, 2023 (CST)
:::Look, man, we cannot really work here if we don't get any specific games that need to be split off, at least for Option 2. While I appreciate the slight clarity with the case-by-case explanation, that doesn't mean much without examples. Just give us a full list of what articles would be affected for Option 1, and a more trimmed-down list for the articles that would be affected for Option 2.<br>And if you can't provide such lists, then perhaps this proposal a bit undercooked. It's quite vague as it is, so you might need to take some time, think it through, etc. {{User:Arend/sig}} 17:35, May 15, 2023 (EDT)


Fine, no one likes this. Can an admin cancel this, then? {{User|SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)}} 14:30, May 15, 2023 (CST)
====Support change====
:If you cannot wait for an admin to veto/cancel it, you can always move your proposal from here to [[MarioWiki:Proposals/Archive]]. Make sure you reach the bottom end of the archive page (press the End key), then cut this proposal above and paste into that archive. Hope it help. {{User:PnnyCrygr/sig}} 09:26, May 16, 2023 (EDT)
#{{User|JanMisali}} As proposer.
:: This is incorrect.<br/>''"Proposals can only be rewritten or deleted by their proposer within the first three days of their creation (six days for talk page proposals)."'' [[User:Spectrogram|Spectrogram]] ([[User talk:Spectrogram|talk]]) 09:36, May 16, 2023 (EDT)
#{{User|Camwoodstock}} Erring on this for the time being. We get the counter-arguments, but it's usually clear from the article's body itself that the content is exclusive to a given remake of a video game that happens to hold a similar name, and it's not like we even apply these nametags consistently anyways--if a thing has a more specific name that isn't already shared with something else, like [[Hottest Dog]] or [[Goomboss Battle]], we don't append these "<name> for <console>" tags. As it stands, if you ''need'' the title to clarify it's exclusive to a remake, then something's probably wrong in the article itself.
:::Oh. sorry about that. I thought proposals can be cancelled within any amount of time (remember my sonic character proposal?). {{User:PnnyCrygr/sig}} 09:42, May 16, 2023 (EDT)
#{{User|Shadow2}} Trim! Trim the excess!


=== Move [[Banzai Bill]] to [[Bomber Bill]] and other related species ===
====Oppose change====
(I made this proposal here and not on the talk page since this doesn't just affect the main Banzai Bill page but also the other species)
#{{user|Doc von Schmeltwick}} - "There isn't a Scrapbook in the original Super Mario RPG, and there isn't a Gold Medal in the original Paper Mario: The Thousand-Year Door" ...that is precisely ''why'' this is needed, or else it's confusing as to why something that isn't in the actual, original game is identified as though it is.
 
====Comments====
You may have noticed Banzai Bills are occasionally getting called "Bomber Bills" on occasion. At first, it seemed like either a strange case of censorship (regarding the LEGO sets) or a translation error (such as the English ''Mario'' Portal website). However, with ''The Super Mario Bros. Movie'' '''using this term now''', I am heavily convinced that Bomber Bill is the new name. To explain, let me detail the history of Banzai Bill's renames.
{{@|Doc von Schmeltwick}} I disagree. "Gold Medal (''Paper Mario: The Thousand-Year Door'')" is not a name that implies the subject appears in the GameCube game ''Paper Mario: The Thousand-Year Door''; that would be "Gold Medal (''Paper Mario: The Thousand-Year Door'' for Nintendo GameCube)". All the "(''Paper Mario: The Thousand-Year Door'')" identifier suggests is that the subject appears in ''some'' game with that title. The body of the article can specify which game. {{User:JanMisali/sig}} 20:12, June 2, 2024 (EDT)
 
:Common sense dictates the game title refers to the original, not the George Lucas'd Special Edition (that verbiage may be cruel, but I'll stand by it). [[User:Doc von Schmeltwick|Doc von Schmeltwick]] ([[User talk:Doc von Schmeltwick|talk]]) 20:26, June 2, 2024 (EDT)
<big>'''LEGO ''Mario'' Sets'''</big><br>
::Would you recommend moving [[Switch (Donkey Kong)|Switch (''Donkey Kong'')]] to "Switch (''Donkey Kong'' for Game Boy)" then? Or [[Floor (Mario Bros.)|Floor (''Mario Bros.'')]] to "Floor (''Mario Bros.'' for arcade)"? {{User:JanMisali/sig}} 20:33, June 2, 2024 (EDT)
In the LEGO ''Super Mario'' sets, the Boomer Bill Barrage set includes Banzai Bills for you to add to your sets. As the set's name suggests, they are renamed "'''Boomer Bills'''". Why the name changed is unknown, but as just2good mentions in his [https://youtu.be/3SGvL5S2VvI?t=169 censorship video],  the word "Banzai" is a Japanese war cry. Now this rename isn't the only case of renames as they refer to Parabombs as "Parachute Bob-ombs" which has yet to appear in a mainline game or a feature-length movie. The LEGO set incident wouldn't be the best reason to rename them since it seems like it was just a LEGO thing. LEGO doesn't like to dip its toes into military themes unless it's fantasy (''Star Wars''), likely being a case of aiming the sets toward a family audience. And then came the English ''Mario'' Portal.
:::[[Floor (Mario Bros.)]] is a bad example; "Floor (Mario Bros. for arcade)" implies that it ''only'' appears in the arcade original, yet it actually appears in ''all'' versions of ''Mario Bros.'', so it being called just "Floor (Mario Bros.)" is actually justified. {{User:Arend/sig}} 20:45, June 2, 2024 (EDT)
 
::::But it ''doesn't'' appear in [[Mario Bros. (Game & Watch)|the original]]. {{User:JanMisali/sig}} 20:46, June 2, 2024 (EDT)
<big>'''English ''Mario'' Portal'''</big><br>
:::::...the ''lesser known'' one, to the point that its identifier is "(Game & Watch)" instead of simply "(game)" that's attached to the arcade version? I feel like if there were floors in the G&W game, such an article is more likely to be called something like "Floor (Mario Bros. for Game & Watch)" simply for how well-known and widespread the arcade version is in comparison. {{User:Arend/sig}} 20:56, June 2, 2024 (EDT)
The Japanese ''Mario'' Portal website has the option to view certain elements of the page in English. The English localization on this website is intriguing, [[MarioWiki:Proposals/Archive/60#Partially_unban_citing_the_English_version_of_the_Super_Mario_Bros._Encyclopedia_as_official_names_for_subjects|mainly because it took names from the]] [[Super Mario Bros. Encyclopedia|''Mario'' Encyclopedia]], [[MarioWiki:Proposals/Archive/52#Citing_the_Super_Mario_Encyclopedia|which also plagiarized the Mario Wiki.]] One of the odd things about it was the Banzai Bill translations. Their names are '''Bomber Bills'''. The Bull's-Eye Banzais are '''Bull's-Eye Bomber Bills'''. The Cat variation is '''[https://www.nintendo.co.jp/character/mario/en/archives/3d_world/index.html Cat Bomber Bill]'''. However, Gold Banzai Bill and Mad Banzai Bills are not localized yet.
::::::Therefore, it is not always reasonable to assume that a title without specifying system always refers to "the original". {{User:JanMisali/sig}} 21:02, June 2, 2024 (EDT)
:::::::My impression of the (<game> for <system>) identifier is to use it when one feature appears in one version of a title, but not in another version (or is different in another version), and when it's identical in both versions (or multiple versions), just (<game>) may be used as normal. [[Special:Diff/4035332|this revision]] justifies the (<game> for <system>) for consistency with article such as [[100m (Mario & Sonic at the Rio 2016 Olympic Games for Nintendo 3DS)]] - which would have to have such a name because [[100m (Mario & Sonic at the Rio 2016 Olympic Games for Wii U)]] also exists. This kind of identifier is also used after [[MarioWiki:Proposals/Archive/63#Rename pages with the full Super Mario RPG: Legend of the Seven Stars title|this proposal]] has passed in which to opt out the (Super Mario RPG: Legend of the Seven Stars) identifier in favor of the shorter (Super Mario RPG) one, since the remake is simply called "Super Mario RPG" and enemies with the (Super Mario RPG: Legend of the Seven Stars) identifier clearly appear in both games; with (Super Mario RPG for Nintendo Switch) being used for features that weren't in the SNES original, and presumably using (Super Mario RPG: Legend of the Seven Stars) for features that weren't in the Switch remake. {{User:Arend/sig}} 21:20, June 2, 2024 (EDT)
:::::That ignores that the arcade one was ''in development'' first, the G&W one just beat it to the release punch on account of being simpler to program and manufacture. [[User:Doc von Schmeltwick|Doc von Schmeltwick]] ([[User talk:Doc von Schmeltwick|talk]]) 23:12, June 2, 2024 (EDT)
::::::Do you have a source for that? If so, you should put that source on the ''Mario Bros.'' (game) article. {{User:JanMisali/sig}} 09:21, June 3, 2024 (EDT)
:::::::Considering it's been repeatedly said Miyamoto created Luigi for the arcade game and the G&W games were created without his involvement, it seems pretty self-explanatory. [[User:Doc von Schmeltwick|Doc von Schmeltwick]] ([[User talk:Doc von Schmeltwick|talk]]) 10:22, June 3, 2024 (EDT)


Now this website isn't perfect; there are some errors and kinks in terms of translations, and at that time, the term Bomber Bill had not appeared. But what was interesting was that it was somewhat a combination of the word "bomb" and "boomer", like the LEGO sets. That is particularly strange, but it wouldn't suggest a rename. Well, that is until now.
Only tangentially related, but why ''are'' the three [[Gold Medal (Paper Mario: The Thousand-Year Door for Nintendo Switch)|Gold]] [[Gold Medal (Super Paper Mario)|Medal]] [[Gold Medal (Yoshi Topsy-Turvy)|items]] split anyways? Sure, they all function differently, but it seems like a fairly generic concept all things considered, and we don't split articles like [[Apple]]s just because they happen to work differently across games. And then [[Medal]] is ''also'' split up even further, but makes no mention of Gold Medals? {{User:Camwoodstock/sig}} 20:52, June 2, 2024 (EDT)
 
:Have badges ever been merged with other items? As far as I can tell, basically every badge from the first two games has its own article, even ones that are clearly related to and similar to items in other games ([[Power Plus (badge)]] and [[Power Plus (Super Paper Mario)]] for example). [[File:Modern Rocky Wrench SM-k.png|35px|link=]] [[User:Dive Rocket Launcher|Dive]] [[User talk:Dive Rocket Launcher|Rocket]] [[Special:Contributions/Dive Rocket Launcher|Launcher]] 02:16, June 3, 2024 (EDT)
<big>'''''The Super Mario Bros. Movie'''''</big><br>
'''Now this section will contain spoilers. If you have yet to see the movie, I strongly suggest you do. It's a decent flick and does a proper job of adapting the Mario games into a story, and it does lack some of the severe flaws in other Illumination films.'''
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
In this movie, Bowser is about to launch a giant Banzai Bill onto Peach's Castle. But here's the riveting thing; Bowser says, "Launch the '''Bomber Bill''' and DESTROY THE MUSHROOM KINGDOM!!" Woah, what?! Bowser just used the term "Bomber"! What does that mean? Well, the implications seem to be clear now. What seemed like censorship on LEGO's part or an odd translation goof on the ''Mario'' website, we now have a significant, full-length movie telling us it's a Bomber Bill. I didn't know about it until I randomly stumbled upon it on its page.
 
<big>'''The goal of this proposal'''</big><br>
It's pretty clear what this proposal is about: Moving Banzai Bill to Bomber Bill and making similar, relevant changes to its subspecies. The short story, the Bill has recently been referred to differently in its last few appearances. It could be possible to join [[Lava Bubble|Podoboo]] and [[Swoop|Swooper]] for pointless name changes. I don't know about specific arguments people could have for keeping the old name. However, the one possible side point I could hear is that Banzai Bill is in Super Mario Maker 2, and unlike other Mario enemies, Banzai was in effect for a long time. And that is true, but the recent attempts at not calling this thing a Banzai Bill piqued my interest here.
 
These articles will get these renames.:
*[[Banzai Bill]] to [[Bomber Bill]]
*[[Bull's-Eye Banzai]] to [[Bull's-Eye Bomber Bill]]
*[[Cat Banzai Bill]] to [[Cat Bomber Bill]]
These articles will '''keep their names currently.''':
*[[Gold Banzai Bill]]
*[[Mad Banzai Bill]]
*[[Banzai Bill Cannon]]
 
The reasons are that they have yet to get an English translation. If they appear in future games and have the name Bomber Bills, we still call the cannons Banzai Bill Cannons if they aren't named in-game. If a new name for them comes out (like Bomber Bill Blasters), we call them that in their appearances with Bomber Bills as we did with Paragaloomba.
 
'''Proposer''': {{User|Wikiboy10}}<br>
'''Deadline''': May 24, 2023, 23:59 GMT
 
====Support====
#{{User|Wikiboy10}} Per proposal and ''The Super Mario Bros. Movie''
 
====Oppose====
#{{User|Arend}} I dunno, the name "Banzai Bill" has still been used fairly recently (like with [[Parabomb]]), and the movie is not 100% one-to-one with the games either. I'd wait until the games use "Bomber Bill" as well.
#{{User|Swallow}} I'd rather wait and see if at least one more game uses this name first, then I'll be more convinced Nintendo have settled on this as the new name.
#{{User|Hewer}} The Super Mario Bros. Movie actually has a few naming oddities like [[Spiny Shell (blue)|Blue Shell]] and [[Mini Mushroom|Blue Mushroom]], as well as calling the [[Tanooki Suit]] a Raccoon Suit. Lego Super Mario is also a bit of a stretch to use as evidence since it doesn't use Banzai Bill ''or'' Bomber Bill. Since we're yet to see this name in a source that doesn't have oddities like this, and the name "Banzai Bill" was still in use recently, I'd rather wait until the name gets used in more sources (preferably an actual game). I'll gladly support if the name ends up consistently getting used, though.
#{{User|Camwoodstock}} - Per all, we'd definitely give it at least ''one'' more instance of Bomber Bill over Banzai Bill--preferably in an actual game--before we put it to a vote. Banzai Bill was still in use as recently as ''[[Super Mario Maker 2]]'' and ''[[Dr. Mario World]]'' in 2019, after all. <small>also we still call lava bubbles "podoboos" out of habit</small>
#{{User|7feetunder}} I'm with the "wait for the actual games to start using it" camp.
#{{User|Spectrogram}} Per all.
#{{User|Cadrega86}} Oppose until it's used in a game.
#{{User|SeanWheeler}} I heard Bowser call it the Banzai Bill in the movie.
#{{User|Ray Trace}} Not a regular occurrence and I think it's too early to make that call just yet.
#{{User|ThePowerPlayer}} Per all.
#{{User|TheFlameChomp}} I kind of expected to see a proposal about this, but "Banzai Bill" has still been used fairly recently in games and I would prefer that it is used in the context of a game before changing it.
 
====Comments====
@Seanwheeler He definitely says "Bomber". {{User:Swallow/sig}} 16:21, May 17, 2023 (EDT)
:Nah, he said "Banzai." If he said "Bomber," I would have been confused. [[User:SeanWheeler|SeanWheeler]] ([[User talk:SeanWheeler|talk]]) 23:29, May 17, 2023 (EDT)
::Oh, goodness, is this gonna be the next Yanny/Laurel? We haven't seen the movie/don't have plans to, so we can't vouch for one side or the other... ;p {{User:Camwoodstock/sig}} 01:04, May 18, 2023 (EDT)
:::Regardless of what they were called in the movie, as other people said the name change haven't been made into the games yet. Also, LEGO called them Boomer Bills, not Bomber Bills, which leaves the Japanese site translated to English as the last source for "Bomber Bills." This proposal doesn't have any ground to stand on. [[User:SeanWheeler|SeanWheeler]] ([[User talk:SeanWheeler|talk]]) 01:38, May 18, 2023 (EDT)
::::Oh boy, who would prevail: "Banzai" or "Bomber"? I have not watched the movie for the second time, so I don't know if ever I hear King Koopa utter banzai, or bomber. {{User:PnnyCrygr/sig}} 05:28, May 18, 2023 (EDT)
I've seen the movie in theaters, the English version with Dutch subtitles to be specific. I'm pretty sure Bowser said "Bomber Bill", and I theorize that they were called "Bomber Bill" on the Mario Portal ''because'' of the movie.<br>But regardless if he actually said "Bomber" or "Banzai", the movie still has several other inconsistencies that don't match one-to-one with the games (e.g. in the movie, Donkey Kong is Cranky's son, whilst in the games, he's Cranky's ''grand''son). This is true for the names of several things as well, as Hewer stated before. So it doesn't really matter whether or not Bowser did call them "Bomber Bills", as the movie and the Portal aren't sufficient enough to rename the page of a character that's been used fairly recently and quite often. The most important thing is that we need to see ''the games themselves'' using said name, too, before we do anything. {{User:Arend/sig}} 06:20, May 18, 2023 (EDT)


==Miscellaneous==
==Miscellaneous==
''None at the moment.''
''None at the moment.''

Latest revision as of 10:22, June 3, 2024

Image used as a banner for the Proposals page
Current time:
Monday, June 3rd, 14:22 GMT
Proposals can be new features (such as an extension), the removal of previously-added features that have tired out, or new policies that must be approved via consensus before any action is taken.
  • "Vote" periods last for one week.
  • Any user can support or oppose, but must have a strong reason for doing so (not, e.g., "I like this idea!").
  • All proposals must be approved by a majority of voters, including proposals with more than two options.
  • For past proposals, see the proposal archive and the talk page proposal archive.

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 {{User|User name}}.

How to

Rules

  1. If users have an idea about improving the wiki or managing its community, but feel that they need community approval before acting upon that idea, they may make a proposal about it. They must have a strong argument supporting their idea and be willing to discuss it in detail with the other users, who will then vote about whether or not they think the idea should be used. Proposals should include links to all relevant pages and writing guidelines. Proposals must include a link to the draft page. Any pages that would be largely affected by the proposal should be marked with {{proposal notice}}.
  2. Only registered, autoconfirmed users can create, comment in, or vote on proposals and talk page proposals. Users may vote for more than one option, but they may not vote for every option available.
  3. Proposals end at the end of the day (23:59) one week after voting starts, except for writing guidelines and talk page proposals, which run for two weeks (all times GMT).
    • For example, if a proposal is added at any time on Monday, August 1, 2011, the voting starts immediately and the deadline is one week later on Monday, August 8, at 23:59 GMT.
  4. Every vote should have a strong, sensible reason accompanying it. Agreeing with a previously mentioned reason given by another user is accepted (including "per" votes), but tangential comments, heavy sarcasm, and other misleading or irrelevant quips are just as invalid as providing no reason at all.
  5. Users who feel that certain votes were cast in bad faith or which truly have no merit can address the votes in the comments section. Users can ask a voter to clarify their position, point out mistakes or flaws in their arguments, or call for the outright removal of the vote if it lacks sufficient reasoning. Users may not remove or alter the content of anyone else's votes. Voters can remove or rewrite their own vote at any time, but the final decision to remove another user's vote lies solely with the administrators.
    • Users can also use the comments section to bring up any concerns or mistakes in regards to the proposal itself. In such cases, it's important the proposer addresses any concerns raised as soon as possible. Even if the supporting side might be winning by a wide margin, that should be no reason for such questions to be left unanswered. They may point out any missing details that might have been overlooked by the proposer, so it's a good idea as the proposer to check them frequently to achieve the most accurate outcome possible.
  6. If a user makes a vote and is subsequently blocked for any amount of time, their vote is removed. However, if the block ends before the proposal ends, then the user in question holds the right to re-cast their vote. If a proposer is blocked, their vote is removed and "(banned)" is added next to their name in the "Proposer:" line of the proposal, which runs until its deadline as normal. If the proposal passes, it falls to the supporters of the idea to enact any changes in a timely manner.
  7. No proposal can overturn the decision of a previous proposal that is less than 4 weeks (28 days) old.
  8. Any proposal where none of the options have at least four votes will be extended for another week. If after three extensions, no options have at least four votes, the proposal will be listed as "NO QUORUM." The original proposer then has the option to relist said proposal to generate more discussion.
  9. All proposals that end up in a tie will be extended for another week. Proposals with more than two options must also be extended another week if any single option does not have a majority support: i.e. more than half of the total number of voters must appear in a single voting option, rather than one option simply having more votes than the other options.
  10. If a proposal with only two voting options has more than ten votes, it can only pass or fail with a margin of at least three votes, otherwise the deadline will be extended for another week as if no majority was reached at all.
  11. Proposals can only be extended up to three times. If a consensus has not been reached by the fourth deadline, the proposal fails and can only be re-proposed after four weeks, at the earliest.
  12. 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 an administrator, the proposer can ask for that help.
  13. If the administrators 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.
  14. Proposals can only be rewritten or deleted by their proposer within the first three days of their creation (six days for talk page proposals). However, proposers can request that their proposal be deleted by an administrator at any time, provided they have a valid reason for it. Please note that canceled proposals must also be archived.
  15. Unless there is major disagreement about whether certain content should be included, there should not be proposals about creating, expanding, rewriting or otherwise fixing up pages. To organize efforts about improving articles on neglected or completely missing subjects, try setting up a collaboration thread on the forums.
  16. Proposals cannot be made about promotions and demotions. Users can only be promoted and demoted by the will of the administration.
  17. No joke proposals. Proposals are serious wiki matters and should be handled professionally. Joke proposals will be deleted on sight.
  18. Proposals must have a status quo option (e.g. Oppose, Do nothing) unless the status quo itself violates policy.

Basic proposal and support/oppose format

This is an example of what your proposal must look like, if you want it to be acknowledged. If you are inexperienced or unsure how to set up this format, simply copy the following and paste it into the fitting section. Then replace the [subject] - variables with information to customize your proposal, so it says what you wish. If you insert the information, be sure to replace the whole variable including the squared brackets, so "[insert info here]" becomes "This is the inserted information", not "[This is the inserted information]". Proposals presenting multiple alternative courses of action can have more than two voting options, but what each voting section is supporting must be clearly defined. Such options should also be kept to a minimum, and if something comes up in the comments, the proposal can be amended as necessary.

===[insert a title for your proposal here]===
[describe what issue this proposal is about and what changes you think should be made to improve how the wiki handles that issue]

'''Proposer''': {{User|[enter your username here]}}<br>
'''Deadline''': [insert a deadline here, 7 days after the proposal was created (14 for writing guidelines and talk page proposals), at 23:59 GMT, in the format: "June 3, 2024, 23:59 GMT"]

====Support====
#{{User|[enter your username here]}} [make a statement indicating that you support your proposal]

====Oppose====

====Comments====

Users will now be able to vote on your proposal, until the set deadline is reached. Remember, you are a user as well, so you can vote on your own proposal just like the others.

To support, or oppose, just insert "#{{User|[add your username here]}}" at the bottom of the section of your choice. Just don't forget to add a valid reason for your vote behind that tag if you are voting on another user's proposal. If you are voting on your own proposal, you can just say "Per my proposal".

Talk page proposals

All proposals dealing with a single article or a specific group of articles are held on the talk page of one of the articles in question. Proposals dealing with massive amounts of splits, merges or deletions across the wiki should still be held on this page.

For a list of all settled talk page proposals, see MarioWiki:Proposals/TPP archive and Category:Settled talk page proposals.

Rules

  1. All active talk page proposals must be listed below in chronological order (new proposals go at the bottom) using {{TPP discuss}}. Include a brief description of the proposal while also mentioning any pages affected by it, a link to the talk page housing the discussion, and the deadline. If the proposal involves a page that is not yet made, use {{fake link}} to communicate its title in the description. Linking to pages not directly involved in the talk page proposal is not recommended, as it clutters the list with unnecessary links. Place {{TPP}} under the section's header, and once the proposal is over, replace the template with {{settled TPP}}.
  2. All rules for talk page proposals are the same as mainspace proposals (see the "How to" section above), with the exceptions made by Rules 3 and 4 as follows:
  3. Voting in talk page proposals will be open for two weeks, not one (all times GMT).
    • For example, if a proposal is added at any time on Monday, August 1, 2011, it ends two weeks later on Monday, August 15, 2011, at 23:59 GMT.
  4. The talk page proposal must pertain to the article it is posted on.
  5. When a talk page proposal passes, it should be removed from this list and included in the list under the "Unimplemented proposals" section until the proposed changes have been enacted.

List of ongoing talk page proposals

Unimplemented proposals

Proposals

Split Mario Kart Tour character variants into list articles, Tails777 (ended May 4, 2022)
Classify the Just Dance series as a guest appearance, Spectrogram (ended April 27, 2023)
Establish a standard for long course listings in articles for characters/enemies/items/etc., Koopa con Carne (ended June 8, 2023)
Add tabbers to race/battle course articles, GuntherBB (ended November 18, 2023)
Remove elemental creatures categories from various Super Mario RPG enemies, Swallow (ended January 11, 2024)
Merge Super Mario Bros. (film) subjects with their game counterparts, JanMisali (ended April 18, 2024)
Remove profiles and certain other content related to the Super Mario Bros. Encyclopedia from the wiki, Koopa con Carne (ended April 30, 2024)
Break alphabetical order in enemy lists to list enemy variants below their base form, EvieMaybe (ended May 21, 2024)
Consider "humorous" and other related terms as frequently misused in MarioWiki:Good writing, DrippingYellow (ended May 28, 2024)

Talk page proposals

Split all the clothing, Doc von Schmeltwick (ended September 12, 2021)
Split machine parts, Robo-Rabbit, and flag from Super Duel Mode, Doc von Schmeltwick (ended September 30, 2022)
Add product IDs in game infoboxes, Windy (ended March 18, 2023)
Split Special Shot into separate articles by game, Technetium (ended September 30, 2023)
Convert the lists of episode appearances for television series characters into categories, Camwoodstock (ended November 22, 2023)
Split the Jungle Buddies from Animal Friends, DrippingYellow (ended December 22, 2023)
Make bestiary list pages for the Minion Quest and Bowser Jr.'s Journey modes, Doc von Schmeltwick (ended January 11, 2024)
Split the NES and SNES releases of Wario's Woods, SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA) (ended March 27, 2024)
Split Mario's Time Machine (Nintendo Entertainment System), or the Super Nintendo Entertainment version along with both console versions of Mario is Missing!, LinkTheLefty (ended April 11, 2024)
Remove non-Super Mario content from Super Smash Bros. series challenges articles, BMfan08 (ended May 3, 2024)
Split Cheep Blimp (Paper Mario: The Thousand-Year Door) and Zeeppelin from the blimp page, Doc von Schmeltwick (ended May 28, 2024)

Writing guidelines

None at the moment.

New features

None at the moment.

Removals

None at the moment.

Changes

Move Super Smash Bros. information for crossover characters into the list articles and delete their Super Smash Bros. profiles

This proposal concerns Super Smash Bros. information of certain characters listed in Crossover characters. It makes it harder to see the actual Super Mario content on said articles, like how the Isabelle page largely concerns her appearances in Super Smash Bros. while the actual Super Mario appearances in Mario Kart 8 and Super Mario Maker are all the way below. In the case of Villager, it starts off by showing the WarioWare appearances but then has this huge chunk of Super Smash Bros. information in between that and the appearances in Mario Kart 8 and Super Mario Maker.

Besides, the List of Super Smash Bros. fighters pages feel kind of awkward that certain crossover characters do not have their information listed there with other non-Super Mario characters, so this proposal aims to rectify that.

The fighters on the list pages do not have their profiles, and I don't see why the crossover characters should have them but not the fighters already in the list pages, so if this proposal passes, all of that will be deleted too. This includes the Profiles section on other crossover pages like Knuckles, Deku Baba, Zangief, and so forth, since it would be illogical for them to keep their profiles but not the protagonists of the Super Smash Bros. series, an inconsistency that's already present. But the status of the SSB content in the History section of crossover content OTHER THAN fighters in the Super Smash Bros. series can be for a future proposal.

This will affect the following pages, and their Super Smash Bros. information (excluding profiles) will go into the following articles:

There's also Samus, and there's a proposal to currently split the article, so if that passes, her Super Smash Bros. information will stay on the List of fighters debuting in Super Smash Bros. page.

Note: A short summary of the character's role, or any connections to Super Mario, will remain intact, similarly to how Mario#History has a short summary on Mario throughout his appearance while the main history page on Mario is located at History of Mario.

There are three options: Option 1 will enact all of the changes above, Option 2 will remove only the Super Smash Bros. profiles from pages on non-Super Mario content, and Option 3 opposes everything in this proposal.

Proposer: Super Mario RPG (talk)
Deadline: June 4, 2024, 23:59 GMT

Option 1: Full support

  1. Super Mario RPG (talk) As proposer.

Option 2: Trim profiles only

  1. Super Mario RPG (talk) Secondary

Option 3: Oppose

  1. Axis (talk) I believe it's unnecessary.
  2. Nintendo101 (talk) It makes intuitive sense to just list the Super Smash Bros. info on the pages of the character when available. (As a side note, the Super Smash Bros. series has a pretty intimate relationship with the Super Mario franchise, and I do not think we should be omitting coverage here just because SmashWiki exists. We don't address topics the same way.)
  3. Tails777 (talk) If the characters have an article, I see no reason why Smash stuff should be singled out and removed just because it's not Mario related.
  4. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) - Per all, especially Nintendo101
  5. Hewer (talk) It's standard practice (and also pretty logical) to list any time a subject happens to appear alongside Mario stuff. Captain N: The Game Master is a good example - it's considered a guest appearance, so it doesn't get full coverage, but we still mention things' appearances there if they happen to be covered on the wiki for some other reason, e.g. Slime (Dragon Quest). So why should Smash (where Mario stuff perhaps has a greater role than in Captain N) be the one exception? The proposal tries to argue about organisation and finding information, but I'd say unnecessarily splitting a character's information across multiple pages is the real bad organisation here. If people really can't bear to scroll through some Smash stuff in order to find what they're looking for (which, mind, might be the Smash stuff anyway), they can use the contents links at the top of the article to jump to particular sections no problem. And also, to be frank, I don't really understand what the proposal is talking about regarding "profiles".
  6. FanOfRosalina2007 (talk) Per all, especially Hewer's reasoning.
  7. MegaBowser64 (talk) Per all of yall. Personally I don't think it's a big deal to leave Smash info on character pages. There isn't much harm done.
  8. Sdman213 (talk) Per all.
  9. Jazama (talk) Per all
  10. SeanWheeler (talk) If we move these characters Smash information to the list of Smash characters, we might as well just delete those pages and move all information to the Smash character lists. Those lists already have the Super Mario Maker costumes anyway. But we shouldn't move them to the lists because those lists are cluttered enough as they are.

Comments

This passed proposal already establishes that non-Mario trophies should be removed from dedicated character articles. Check out the bolded sentence and the rationale after it:

It's simple. I propose to simply trim those trophies list pages to only the Mario/DK/Wario etc. character and cut the rest. This includes crossover characters that have pages on the wiki - while we may have a Link page because he's in Mario Kart 8, his Smash Bros trophy is about Link the protagonist of his own independent intellectual property and not Link the funny Mario Kart 8 man, and it leads to the bizarre situation of having a listing of Link but not the character his series is named after. Best keep things simple.

I believe if option 3 were to win in this proposal, that decision would be overturned. -- KOOPA CON CARNE 15:06, May 28, 2024 (EDT), edited 15:14, May 28, 2024 (EDT)

Okay, I'll remove that from the scope of the proposal then. Super Mario RPG (talk) 15:09, May 28, 2024 (EDT)
Wait, hold on, I may be stupid. That simply specifies that the subjects who have pages on the wiki, but do not pertain to the Mario franchise, would be among the trophies trimmed from the trophy pages, but it does not specify that they'd be trimmed from their own pages as well. I confused myself and hopefully I can clear it up following my above comment. -- KOOPA CON CARNE 15:13, May 28, 2024 (EDT)
I was about to ask about the example of me trimming the profiles from the Sonic page applies, but now I'm not sure what's going on myself. Super Mario RPG (talk) 15:25, May 28, 2024 (EDT)
That was about the lists of all trophies per game, not profile sections for individual subjects. Doesn't look like there's any overlap between these proposals. --  Too Bad! Waluigi Time! 16:14, May 28, 2024 (EDT)

I was going to address the opposition by stating that, should this pass, a short summary of each character's SSB role will remain on the page (See Mario#History for a similar type of example), but the main information will be on the list of fighters pages. Super Mario RPG (talk) 16:42, May 28, 2024 (EDT)

Looks like the truncation of the moves helps a lot with accessibility, like on the Villager page listed above. Pages like Fox still have excessive profiles, and it seems weird to have those there but not on like the corresponding List of trophies pages. Super Mario RPG (talk) 17:30, May 29, 2024 (EDT)

Eh, I'd say it makes sense. The list of trophies pages are only meant to be lists of Mario trophies, but we happen to also have pages describing fighters in Smash, so why not list the trophies there where they're relevant? Again I raise you Captain N - the article about it is only about the show and its relevance to Mario, so we don't mention the appearance of Dragon Quest Slimes on that article since it has nothing to do with Mario in that context, but because we happen to have an article about Slimes for another reason, we mention the appearance there. Also, I find the "accessibility" arguments you keep going for a bit strange - there are people who might want to look at Smash information on this wiki, it's not just some burden that we have to avert people from as best as we can. Hewer   (talk · contributions · edit count) 07:54, May 30, 2024 (EDT)

Merge the name of Mario family wiki

Mariowiki contains content from Donkey Kong and Wario series despite Mario did not appears. Pauline is an intersection between Mario and Donkey Kong series, so she can be included in either. As independent games of the Mario family including Luigi and Princess Peach released, the name of Mariowiki will no longer be effective. luigiwiki.com and peachwiki.com also redirected to Mariowiki.

Since Mario is from the Mushroom Kingdom, the important thing is that they are the Mario family, so I'd suggest giving them a new name.

Proposer: Windy (talk)
Deadline: June 8, 2024, 23:59 GMT

Option 1: Rename to Mushroomwiki

Option 2: Rename to Kinopedia

  1. Windy (talk) As proposer.

Status quo

  1. Arend (talk) Current wiki name is fine. It's straight to the point: it's about the Super Mario franchise, and in marketing for this franchise, characters with their own series such as Wario, Yoshi and DK are often included anyway. Something like "Mushroom Wiki" is not clear at all, and are probably even less relevant to the Yoshi, DK or Wario series, since none of their series have anything to do with mushrooms. "Kino" is also German for "cinema", so "Kinopedia" works even less (unless you're trying to say it's a pun on Kinopio rather than Kinoko, in which case that's still worse).
  2. Pseudo (talk) The current wiki name is simple, concise, and great for searchability. Changing it would completely torpedo that for very little gain. While separate, the Donkey Kong, Yoshi, and Wario games are closely related to the Mario franchise, and make sense to be covered on the Mario wiki.
  3. Hewer (talk) The name of the whole franchise is Super Mario, a game doesn't necessarily need to feature Mario to be in the franchise. I don't think anyone is confused to see New Super Luigi U on the Super Mario Wiki. Meanwhile, they most certainly would be confused as to what the hell Mushroom Wiki or Kinopedia is even about, those names are significantly more generic and less recognisable and would create immense amounts of confusion, not solve it. This is a disastrous "solution" to a non-existent issue. (also I'm not entirely sure what you meant when you said Pauline "can be included in either" but the idea that Pauline is the main crossover between the Mario and Donkey Kong franchise rather than their shared origins and DK's continued appearances in Mario games is laughable)
  4. Super Mario RPG (talk) Absolutely not. Per all.
  5. Nightwicked Bowser (talk) Per all, this would be confusing as f**k.
  6. Zootalo (talk) Nah. Per all.
  7. Sparks (talk) Per all.
  8. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) - ...why would that be better? It just makes it harder to find. Obtuse names like "JiggyWikki" and "Triforce Wiki" were chosen just because the more obvious "Banjo Wiki" and "Zelda Wiki" were already taken.
  9. Camwoodstock (talk) Per all. "Mushroomwiki" makes us think of a wiki for mushroom foragers, and no offense, but "Kinopedia" make us think of a knockoff of Urban Dictionary--all things considered, we lucked out hard by having the name "Super Mario Wiki" at "mariowiki.com" ripe for the picking; we really, really shouldn't just throw that all away for something obtuse. We are not Elon Musk.
  10. Sdman213 (talk) No. Definitely per all.
  11. MegaBowser64 (talk) What the actual hell. Do I even need to make an argument? per all
  12. SolemnStormcloud (talk) I dislike this idea! (Per all.)
  13. Axis (talk) Per all.
  14. Mario (talk) I think the wiki should continue using my name.
  15. Jazama (talk) Per all
  16. Ahemtoday (talk) These names, especially Kinopedia, are just as tied to specifically-Mario games, and make the wiki's subject much less obvious.
  17. SeanWheeler (talk) I never heard of Kino. And the Mushroom is the the Smash series symbol for Mario and not Donkey Kong (letters DK), Yoshi (egg) or Wario (letter W). The mushroom isn't that essential to DK, Yoshi or Wario, but Mario is a very important figure to the spinoffs. The first Donkey Kong game is the debut of Mario. The Yoshi series has Baby Mario. And Wario is pretty much Mario with the M turned upside-down and was supposed to be a rival to Mario.
  18. Tails777 (talk) Pink Donkey Kong Jr. Wiki, then we'll talk. Otherwise, per all.
  19. Shadow2 (talk) So your argument is "Mariowiki contains content from Donkey Kong and Wario series despite Mario [doesn't appear in those games]", so the solution is to name it after the Mushroom Kingdom...which ALSO doesn't appear in most Donkey Kong and Wario games? Opposing due to nonsensical.
  20. Dive Rocket Launcher (talk) Per all, this rebrand would be almost as bad as what happened to Twitter.

Comments

The point is the merging of Mario character names. The domain; Luigiwiki, Peachwiki, DKwiki (or donkeykongwiki.com), Wariowiki, Yoshiwiki and Bowserwiki have all been redirected to Mariowiki. Windy (talk) 10:26, June 1, 2024 (EDT)

Why would that need done? Especially Peach, who has two major games plus an LCD thing under her... petticoat...? (she doesn't have a belt) And Bowser, who has zilch. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 10:38, June 1, 2024 (EDT)
All those URLs already redirect to this site, which I think is what Windy's trying to get at for whatever reason. As for what relevance that's supposed to have to the idea of renaming the wiki, I haven't a clue. Hewer   (talk · contributions · edit count) 15:09, June 1, 2024 (EDT)
Windy already stated as such about the luigiwiki.com and peachwiki.com URLs in the proposal itself, directly after stating the MarioWiki name will no longer be effective (which uh, wouldn't be true given the name of the franchise; for some reason, Windy seems to think this wiki is named after the character instead of the franchise). I... think they bring it up to say "oh, we can make mariowiki.com a redirect to the new URL, like the luigiwiki.com and peachwiki.com URLs" (I wouldn't have any idea what else it could've meant).  rend (talk) (edits) 16:21, June 1, 2024 (EDT)
So...where's the issue? What does this have to do with renaming the wiki? Hewer   (talk · contributions · edit count) 10:39, June 1, 2024 (EDT)

Let me ask you a question: what is the name of the whole franchise this wiki is about, and covers franchises like Yoshi, Donkey Kong and Wario alike? It's not some weird merger of names, not something like "Mushroom" or "Kinoko" or even the "Mario family" (which admittedly is a better to name a wiki after than "Mushroom"/"Kinoko"). No, it's Super Mario. "Super Mario Wiki" is still a perfectly fine name for the subjects this wiki is talking about. While this wiki does contain content from the Donkey Kong and Wario series despite Mario "did not appears", there's really no need to rename this wiki since Yoshi, DK and Wario are still characters in the franchise that Mario is the center of. And so are Luigi, Peach and Toad: all six of these are always to be recognized as Super Mario characters, so even if Mario doesn't appear in some games that these others star in, the current name of our wiki is still effective and relevant.  rend (talk) (edits) 10:47, June 1, 2024 (EDT)

For the record, Mario Family is also a bad name. Hewer   (talk · contributions · edit count) 15:09, June 1, 2024 (EDT)

Dunno guys, I think Windy's got a point about the second option: Mario's pretty kino. -- KOOPA CON CARNE 15:28, June 1, 2024 (EDT)

But is he the epitome? If we wanna name the wiki after the most Mario adjective, we've got a better option - Hewer   (talk · contributions · edit count) 15:37, June 1, 2024 (EDT)
If we're talking about the cream of the crop, Luigi's got two much better contenders.   -- KOOPA CON CARNE 15:55, June 1, 2024 (EDT)
  NO ONE TOPS MARIO.   It's me, Mario! (Talk / Stalk) 16:09, June 1, 2024 (EDT)
Guys, we're all overlooking the obvious candidate--it's literally 4/7ths of her name. ~Camwoodstock (talk) 16:18, June 1, 2024 (EDT)
DID MARIO STUTTER   It's me, Mario! (Talk / Stalk) 16:25, June 1, 2024 (EDT)
We could alternatively pick any of these names. How does MarieWiki sound?  rend (talk) (edits) 16:28, June 1, 2024 (EDT)
Kinoppe's described as a follower of Dr. Mario's daughter (that was the grammar on the original article we don't get it either)! She was born because of Mario with a PhD! ~Camwoodstock (talk) 16:32, June 1, 2024 (EDT)
Actually, she's stated to be a follower of Peach and Dr. Mario's daughter. I think that's to say she's Dr. Mario's daughter and a follower of Peach, instead of a follower of the daughter of Peach and Dr. Mario (Yeah I completely agree that sentence was grammatically confusing)  rend (talk) (edits) 16:50, June 1, 2024 (EDT)

As an aside--so, um, do mushrooms all appear in the spinoff side-series??? We know there's mushrooms in the original Luigi's Mansion (namely the Poison Mushroom) and in the WarioWare series (they repeatedly appear in microgames), but like, are there any in the Wario Land games? Are there any in the Donkey Kong games? We aren't exactly familiar with Every Single Mario Video Game Ever Released, but like, it's not like Mario games are even defined by having a mushroom in them in the first place; both Mario Bros. games lack them, and those are literally named based on the fact that Mario is in them. ~Camwoodstock (talk) 16:18, June 1, 2024 (EDT)

I already stated in my oppose vote that mushrooms are barely relevant in any of the Yoshi, DK and Wario games. It's really only Mario-specific.  rend (talk) (edits) 16:28, June 1, 2024 (EDT)
We knew they weren't relevant to them, that's definitely not in question for us. Our question is if Mushrooms made a meaningful appearance in any of them. ;P ~Camwoodstock (talk) 16:32, June 1, 2024 (EDT)
"It's really only Mario-specific" Nuh-uh, I'll have you know this is a real mushroom inspired by the mushrooms that slide on the ground in mario games. -- KOOPA CON CARNE 17:02, June 1, 2024 (EDT)
Ah of course, excuse me for forgetting about the true emblems and stars of the DK franchise. Hewer   (talk · contributions · edit count) 18:36, June 1, 2024 (EDT)

Discourage "([Title] for [system])" disambiguation format when "([Title])" alone is sufficient to identify the subject

These past months, there have been some remakes that share titles with the games they're remaking. This has led to a few new articles with titles ending with "([Title] for [system])", such as Scrapbook (Super Mario RPG for Nintendo Switch) and Gold Medal (Paper Mario: The Thousand-Year Door for Nintendo Switch). However, this long-winded double-disambiguation format is not always strictly necessary, and both of these example articles fall outside of the specific use case MarioWiki:NAME recommends using this format in. There isn't a Scrapbook in the original Super Mario RPG, and there isn't a Gold Medal in the original Paper Mario: The Thousand-Year Door. These are not cases where "two different games share the same title but appear on different consoles and the identifier needs to distinguish between them" (emphasis added).

I propose a change to the naming policy to explicitly discourage using this disambiguation format in such cases. If the game title alone is enough to specify the subject, including the system in the article title is unnecessary and awkward. Those details belong in the article itself, not the title.

Proposer: JanMisali (talk)
Deadline: June 9, 2024, 23:59 GMT

Support change

  1. JanMisali (talk) As proposer.
  2. Camwoodstock (talk) Erring on this for the time being. We get the counter-arguments, but it's usually clear from the article's body itself that the content is exclusive to a given remake of a video game that happens to hold a similar name, and it's not like we even apply these nametags consistently anyways--if a thing has a more specific name that isn't already shared with something else, like Hottest Dog or Goomboss Battle, we don't append these "<name> for <console>" tags. As it stands, if you need the title to clarify it's exclusive to a remake, then something's probably wrong in the article itself.
  3. Shadow2 (talk) Trim! Trim the excess!

Oppose change

  1. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) - "There isn't a Scrapbook in the original Super Mario RPG, and there isn't a Gold Medal in the original Paper Mario: The Thousand-Year Door" ...that is precisely why this is needed, or else it's confusing as to why something that isn't in the actual, original game is identified as though it is.

Comments

@Doc von Schmeltwick I disagree. "Gold Medal (Paper Mario: The Thousand-Year Door)" is not a name that implies the subject appears in the GameCube game Paper Mario: The Thousand-Year Door; that would be "Gold Medal (Paper Mario: The Thousand-Year Door for Nintendo GameCube)". All the "(Paper Mario: The Thousand-Year Door)" identifier suggests is that the subject appears in some game with that title. The body of the article can specify which game. jan Misali (talk · contributions) 20:12, June 2, 2024 (EDT)

Common sense dictates the game title refers to the original, not the George Lucas'd Special Edition (that verbiage may be cruel, but I'll stand by it). Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 20:26, June 2, 2024 (EDT)
Would you recommend moving Switch (Donkey Kong) to "Switch (Donkey Kong for Game Boy)" then? Or Floor (Mario Bros.) to "Floor (Mario Bros. for arcade)"? jan Misali (talk · contributions) 20:33, June 2, 2024 (EDT)
Floor (Mario Bros.) is a bad example; "Floor (Mario Bros. for arcade)" implies that it only appears in the arcade original, yet it actually appears in all versions of Mario Bros., so it being called just "Floor (Mario Bros.)" is actually justified.  rend (talk) (edits) 20:45, June 2, 2024 (EDT)
But it doesn't appear in the original. jan Misali (talk · contributions) 20:46, June 2, 2024 (EDT)
...the lesser known one, to the point that its identifier is "(Game & Watch)" instead of simply "(game)" that's attached to the arcade version? I feel like if there were floors in the G&W game, such an article is more likely to be called something like "Floor (Mario Bros. for Game & Watch)" simply for how well-known and widespread the arcade version is in comparison.  rend (talk) (edits) 20:56, June 2, 2024 (EDT)
Therefore, it is not always reasonable to assume that a title without specifying system always refers to "the original". jan Misali (talk · contributions) 21:02, June 2, 2024 (EDT)
My impression of the (<game> for <system>) identifier is to use it when one feature appears in one version of a title, but not in another version (or is different in another version), and when it's identical in both versions (or multiple versions), just (<game>) may be used as normal. this revision justifies the (<game> for <system>) for consistency with article such as 100m (Mario & Sonic at the Rio 2016 Olympic Games for Nintendo 3DS) - which would have to have such a name because 100m (Mario & Sonic at the Rio 2016 Olympic Games for Wii U) also exists. This kind of identifier is also used after this proposal has passed in which to opt out the (Super Mario RPG: Legend of the Seven Stars) identifier in favor of the shorter (Super Mario RPG) one, since the remake is simply called "Super Mario RPG" and enemies with the (Super Mario RPG: Legend of the Seven Stars) identifier clearly appear in both games; with (Super Mario RPG for Nintendo Switch) being used for features that weren't in the SNES original, and presumably using (Super Mario RPG: Legend of the Seven Stars) for features that weren't in the Switch remake.  rend (talk) (edits) 21:20, June 2, 2024 (EDT)
That ignores that the arcade one was in development first, the G&W one just beat it to the release punch on account of being simpler to program and manufacture. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 23:12, June 2, 2024 (EDT)
Do you have a source for that? If so, you should put that source on the Mario Bros. (game) article. jan Misali (talk · contributions) 09:21, June 3, 2024 (EDT)
Considering it's been repeatedly said Miyamoto created Luigi for the arcade game and the G&W games were created without his involvement, it seems pretty self-explanatory. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 10:22, June 3, 2024 (EDT)

Only tangentially related, but why are the three Gold Medal items split anyways? Sure, they all function differently, but it seems like a fairly generic concept all things considered, and we don't split articles like Apples just because they happen to work differently across games. And then Medal is also split up even further, but makes no mention of Gold Medals? ~Camwoodstock (talk) 20:52, June 2, 2024 (EDT)

Have badges ever been merged with other items? As far as I can tell, basically every badge from the first two games has its own article, even ones that are clearly related to and similar to items in other games (Power Plus (badge) and Power Plus (Super Paper Mario) for example).   Dive Rocket Launcher 02:16, June 3, 2024 (EDT)

Miscellaneous

None at the moment.

Retrieved from "https://www.mariowiki.com/index.php?title=MarioWiki:Proposals&oldid=4241586"