3,233
edits
MarioWiki:Proposals/Archive/31: Difference between revisions
Archived. Side note: Why y'alls still usin' Comic Sans? Terrible font lol.
No edit summary |
Bloc Partier (talk | contribs) (Archived. Side note: Why y'alls still usin' Comic Sans? Terrible font lol.) |
||
| Line 93: | Line 93: | ||
::::I don't see any reason we should delete this. Of course some are ridiculously obvious ([[Pier Pressure]] anyone?). But it's fine them being in both articles. I mean, what's the harm? I also agree with Jordan's reasoning, the puns list was part of not one, but ELEVEN articles, and we shouldn't just throw it all away. My point is, the puns list works; there's no point in changing it. {{User|Technickal}} | ::::I don't see any reason we should delete this. Of course some are ridiculously obvious ([[Pier Pressure]] anyone?). But it's fine them being in both articles. I mean, what's the harm? I also agree with Jordan's reasoning, the puns list was part of not one, but ELEVEN articles, and we shouldn't just throw it all away. My point is, the puns list works; there's no point in changing it. {{User|Technickal}} | ||
:::::Technickal, let me ask you a question; What exactly is lost by removing the lists? All the minigame articles already have their respective puns in their articles, as long as they're not obvious ones, so all that's really being lost is bad information that some of us have already removed on several other articles. {{User|GreenDisaster}} | :::::Technickal, let me ask you a question; What exactly is lost by removing the lists? All the minigame articles already have their respective puns in their articles, as long as they're not obvious ones, so all that's really being lost is bad information that some of us have already removed on several other articles. {{User|GreenDisaster}} | ||
===Create a standard on Prima guides=== | |||
<span style="color:red;font-family:Comic Sans MS;font-size:150%">DELETED BY THE PROPOSER</span><br> | |||
Aight, I know this is somewhat minor, but it applies to [[Special:WhatLinksHere/Prima_Games|multiple articles]] on the wiki, so it warrants more than a talk page proposal.. I suggest that we create a standard on whether or not Prima guides should even be mentioned in articles. Prima guides up until Galaxy were all unofficial; instead, Nintendo Power handled the official guides. If I remember correctly, New Super Mario Bros. was the final official guide produced by Nintendo Power. Please correct me if I'm wrong in saying that Galaxy was the first official Prima guide. I want this to be as accurate as possible. | |||
But I digress. I believe we should decide whether or not to include Prima's information, prior to Galaxy, in articles on the wiki. For example, on the [[Gloomba]] page, it says "In the Prima Super Paper Mario strategy guide, it states that Gloombas have the ability to poison the player, although this is false." This would be deleted, since the Prima guide is unofficial. However, on the [[Preying Mantas]] page, it says "In the Prima Official Game Guide for Super Mario Galaxy 2, Preying Mantas are called Jammyfish." This would stay, since that particular Prima guide is the official guide. If anyone wants, I can post a list of current articles that would and would not be affected. | |||
It is my opinion that we should omit all of Prima's information (prior to Galaxy). Many a mention of Prima guides on the wiki is something that the company incorrectly stated in their guide. I think it's redundant to state something that an unofficial source got wrong. Of course, if the official source was incorrect, it absolutely should be added, thus the "prior to Galaxy" bit. | |||
'''Proposer''': {{user|Bloc Partier}}<br> | |||
'''Deadline''': September 17, 2012, 23:59 GMT | |||
====Remove Prima Information Prior to Super Mario Galaxy==== | |||
#{{user|Bloc Partier}} - See my statement above. (Note: First, this proposal does not mean I'll become an active user again, so don't ask. Second, I'm going on vacation for a week during this proposal; I won't check on it during that time.) | |||
#{{User|Koopa K}} It took me a little while to understand what you were saying. Still, once I realized, I strongly support this. Would we use an unofficial source for games now? No. So why should we use an unofficial source for the games then? Simple, we wouldn't. (BTW, I think Super Paper Mario was last one Nintendo Power did that was official.) | |||
====Do Nothing==== | |||
#{{User|Glowsquid}} - Some (a lot) of the Prima guides made before 2007 are official-those have "official [something] guide" on the cover (granted, that may be a silly standard, but otoh, Nintendo would have certainly grilled Prima if they were falsely claiming their material as officialy licensed). They're "less" official due to having an additional degree of separation from Nintendo, but stuff from a pre-2007 Prima guide can still be used when Nintendo Power doesn't give anything/nobody on the wiki owns the Nintendo Power guide. For example, the name for the [[Wario World]] midbosses come from the prima guide. | |||
#{{User|Raven Effect}} Per Glowsquid. | |||
#{{User|JORDAN DEBONO}} Per Glowsquid. | |||
#{{User|Walkazo}} - Per Glowsquid. | |||
#{{User|MarioSmasher}} – Per Glowsquid. | |||
#{{User|Mario4Ever}} Per all. | |||
#{{User|MeritC}} Per all. | |||
====Comments==== | |||
@Koopa K: <s>I'll clarify with examples.</s> EDIT: Done. - {{user|Bloc Partier}} | |||
@Glowsquid: I see your point, but I think most of the Prima guides dodge legislation thanks to their claim of "''Prima's'' Official Guide." Anyhow, I totally see your point on the Wario World thing, but that still leaves us with the multitudes of "Prima got this wrong lol" comments. Perhaps this should be a case by case application and not a proposal. In which case I'd rather just delete this than deal with the whole thing. - {{user|Bloc Partier}} | |||