MarioWiki:Proposals/Archive/65: Difference between revisions

no edit summary
No edit summary
No edit summary
Line 549: Line 549:


I'm just gonna say it again: a "Do Nothing" option would just give way to more pointless edit wars. That concern is also what guided much of the opposition in [[MarioWiki:Proposals/Archive/59#Remove_the_15th_infraction_for_why_a_reminder_can_be_issued_.28changing_American_spellings_and_grammar_conventions_to_British_standards.29|a previous proposal]] that sought to loosen restrictions for British English spellings in wiki text. Regarding the subject of the current proposal, there is a conventional, widespread way to format words depending on their nature and purpose: foreign words should be in italics to make it clear they're foreign, and words that are being separated from the rest of the others for an explanatory purpose should be in quotation marks. Regardless of that, the idea that articles can be consistent only within themselves and not across the entire wiki is a questionable point of view to have; having an ambiguous outlook for a medium that's supposed to be encyclopedic is anything but encyclopedic. In the words of 7feetunder (concerning the aforementioned proposal on British English spelling): "how do we decide who's right and who's wrong if we don't have a preference? If the answer is 'first come, first serve', the worst solution ever to anything on a wiki, then no thanks". Let's settle on one formatting option or another. {{User:Koopa con Carne/Sig}} 15:06, February 2, 2024 (EST)
I'm just gonna say it again: a "Do Nothing" option would just give way to more pointless edit wars. That concern is also what guided much of the opposition in [[MarioWiki:Proposals/Archive/59#Remove_the_15th_infraction_for_why_a_reminder_can_be_issued_.28changing_American_spellings_and_grammar_conventions_to_British_standards.29|a previous proposal]] that sought to loosen restrictions for British English spellings in wiki text. Regarding the subject of the current proposal, there is a conventional, widespread way to format words depending on their nature and purpose: foreign words should be in italics to make it clear they're foreign, and words that are being separated from the rest of the others for an explanatory purpose should be in quotation marks. Regardless of that, the idea that articles can be consistent only within themselves and not across the entire wiki is a questionable point of view to have; having an ambiguous outlook for a medium that's supposed to be encyclopedic is anything but encyclopedic. In the words of 7feetunder (concerning the aforementioned proposal on British English spelling): "how do we decide who's right and who's wrong if we don't have a preference? If the answer is 'first come, first serve', the worst solution ever to anything on a wiki, then no thanks". Let's settle on one formatting option or another. {{User:Koopa con Carne/Sig}} 15:06, February 2, 2024 (EST)
===Provide more context as to ''Mario'' entities' roles in ''Minecraft''===
{{ProposalOutcome|failed|7-13|do nothing}}
In ''[[Minecraft]]''{{'}}s ''Super Mario Mashup'', which gets (relatively) full coverage here, many familiar ''Mario'' entities get appearances replacing traditional ''Minecraft'' mobs and items, and their respective pages reflect that. The problem is, they are relegated to what amounts to a footnote of a section and do not provide any further context as to what they replace, which is unhelpful if you do not know what the original thing does in vanilla ''Minecraft''. For example,
{{quote2|In the Super Mario Mash-up in Minecraft, Spiders are replaced by Scuttlebugs, using their New Super Mario Bros. 2 appearance.|current Scuttlebug page}}
Tells us nothing about how they actually act. What this proposal aims to do is, for example, make this one say
{{quote2|In the Super Mario Mash-up in Minecraft, Spiders are replaced by Scuttlebugs, using their New Super Mario Bros. 2 appearance. As such, they appear primarily in overworld areas, becoming hostile in darkness. When defeated, they may drop strings or [[Tarantox]]'s eyes.|my intended Scuttlebug page}}
This should clear up any confusion readers may have on the subject.
'''Proposer''': {{User|Doc von Schmeltwick}}<br>
'''Deadline''': February 11, 2024, 23:59 GMT
====Support====
#{{user|Doc von Schmeltwick}} - [[Piranha Plant|HI GUYS (V)]]
#{{User|Ray Trace}} I've played zero Minecraft and I'm not interested in clicking external wiki links to get information. Context like this should be filled in; you don't need to get into too much detail but a general overview is nice. I've also went out of my way to detail what stats are in playable character pages in the wiki (eg Paratroopa is classified as a technique character, which means that her shots are accurate).
#{{user|GuntherBB}} Per Doc von Schmeltwick.
#{{User|Waluigi Time}} It feels very incomplete to say something appears in a game and then not elaborate any further on its actual role. Sure, it's just a cosmetic change, but I don't think it's horribly out of scope to expand these a little. Regardless of the outcome we at least need to get Minecraft Wiki links in all those sections, though.
#{{User|FanOfRosalina2007}} Per all. More context is needed in these sections, especially because not everyone who either browses the wiki or is a user on the wiki plays Minecraft (I don't play Minecraft at all). Those people would need more detail as to what the characters do in Minecraft. Besides, this is a ''Super Mario'' wiki; we need to cover everything that's ''Super Mario'' related in order to keep the wiki up to date.
#{{User|Hooded Pitohui}} Per proposal and per Waluigi Time. A ''brief'' overview of what the role of these Mario-skinned enemies and objects serve in the game is nice to have. I do think the point Camwoodstock has brought up regarding the versatility of Minecraft's elements is a good point and worth considering, but I feel it's entirely possible to keep these descriptions brief. For, say, Spider Eyes, we simply describe them as an item used in various crafting recipes that are dropped by Spiders. That's enough to know, broadly, where they appear and what they do; more in-depth coverage and explanation of mechanics can be saved for another site to cover. Likewise, for blocks with a Mario skin, we simply leave it at something like "Wood planks can be obtained in the overworld or by crafting, and may be placed in the world as a building material or decoration or be used in crafting."
#{{User|Ninja Squid}} Not adding at least an overview of how they work feels incomplete and ridiculous honestly. Per all.
<del>#{{User|Swallow}} Per all. It's not like we'd be giving Minecraft full coverage.</del>
====Oppose====
#{{user|Super Mario RPG}} - While it's true that the first option does not talk of much, there is little relevance to ''Super Mario'' other than what the skins and contents are replaced with. This was one of the main reasons why I wanted to direct people to minecraft.wiki, so that they can read more than just what the ''Super Mario'' content replaces. What's described in the second example are not attributes exclusive to the ''Super Mario'' Mash-up Pack, except for Tarantox's eyes.
#{{User|SolemnStormcloud}} Per Super Mario RPG.
#{{User|Koopa con Carne}} If you want info on how each NPC in Minecraft works, you go to a website that has it. If you're leery to go there, c'est la vie, not our business. A sentence-long overview of what the game itself is about is fine on Mario Wiki's [[Minecraft]] article, but further details don't belong here. Those Mario-themed skins don't affect gameplay in any way, so there's nothing worth noting here in that particular regard either; best one can do is link to the relevant NPC's Minecraft Wiki page from the character that inspired its appearance in the Mario texture pack.
#{{User|Camwoodstock}} Per KCC in particular--we feel like it's probably just more conductive to link to, say, the Minecraft Wiki article for Spider Eyes when mentioning Tantrox's Eyes replace them, than to try and give a brief overview, for one key reason--Minecraft blocks, items, and to a lesser extent even ''mobs'' are <small>(usually)</small> incredibly versatile and variable in their use-cases. What we mean by that is that a lot of things in Minecraft are multi-purpose and can be used for a wide variety of different things, '''''especially''''' the older ones. Bringing it back to Tantrox's eyes, Spider Eyes are used in no fewer than 3 crafting recipes themselves and technically count as a food item (and apparently can be used to breed the upcoming Armadillos??? <small>were we just meant to find this out because of this proposal??? <small>''what is mojang game design nowadays''</small></small>), and one of those items it crafts is... The Fermented Spider Eye, which gets used in ''4 more potion recipes''. That's about 4 distinct uses for this one item and 4 uses for an item we'd likely have no other place to mention--even if we forcibly limited the sections to be one sentence per relevant (e.g. all the uses for Spider Eyes are one sentence and all the uses for Fermented Spider Eyes are another sentence), this has the potential to kill a section's pacing stone-cold dead. (Case in point, look at how long this vote is... Oops. ;P) In comparison, a quick link is all the reader needs to learn more if they're just that curious or otherwise aren't familiar with Minecraft; for those who are, then they just need the thing's name, which is presumably provided by the link itself.
#{{User|MegaBowser64}} Per all.
#{{User|DrippingYellow}} Per all, the ''Mario'' series content in Minecraft is just limited to the texture pack, skins, and add-on map. There's really no point in going into any further detail for mobs or items. I would even go as far as to say that claiming that Minecraft objects are "replaced" by Mario objects is misleading, as again, the ''only'' thing that changes for them is the texture. They're still named "Spider", "Spider Eyes", "Zombie", etc., and they still make their original Minecraft sounds.
#{{User|Cadrega86}} per Koopa con Carne and DrippingYellow.
#{{User|PnnyCrygr}} A something like "''Minecraft Wiki article: (link)''" right below the section header would fit better than a paragraph that literally and redundantly recaps the behavior of a ''Minecraft'' mob.
#{{User|Hewer}} Per all, but in particular, DrippingYellow brings up a good point - these aren't appearances of the Mario entities so much as [[Talk:Blurp#Consider the Super Mario Maker games a design cameo rather than a full appearance|design cameos]].
#{{User|Shy Guy on Wheels}} Per all. We'll essentially just be covering how Minecraft works but in Mario terminology, and I don't believe that has a place on this wiki.
#{{User|Nintenboi1}} Per all.
#{{User|Killer Moth}} Per all. All the Mario content in Minecraft are just skins and retextures.
#{{User|Mushroom Head}} Per all. This is a Mario wiki, not a Minecraft wiki.
====Comments====
@Camwoodstock "this has the potential to kill a section's pacing stone-cold dead" - The Minecraft appearances get their own sections anyway though. I don't think that "''[[Shiverian#Minecraft|In the Super Mario Mash-up in Minecraft, pandas are replaced by Shiverians.]]''" has any pacing to kill in the first place. {{User:Hewer/sig}} 12:20, February 4, 2024 (EST)
:In addition, this is not the level of coverage I was thinking about anyway. I want something a little bit more than "Scuttlebugs replace Spiders" but not to the extent that "spiders can be used as crafting items to spawn a bullshit item or this other bullshit item and they can drop legs that you can make a weapon out of". My sentence here also demonstrates my utter lack of Minecraft knowledge and I have zero desire to hop across external websites just to look up very generic information that can easily be corrected with a little bit more context. {{User:Ray Trace/sig}} 17:34, February 4, 2024 (EST)
:Yes, in some articles, like Shiverians, there is a Minecraft section... But that that's kind of the exception, not the norm. In fact, it currently looks like there ''is'' no norm or standard whatsoever. The closest we have is the list on the Minecraft article itself, but not only is that list incomplete, but just a few examples we saw from articles linked on that: In the example we gave for Tarantox (in which we'll likely have to go over the 8 uses for his eyes alone--we didn't even touch on the minutia of the mob itself), Tarantox doesn't ''have'' a Minecraft section; it's just in his article opener. Also, because Tarantox is the ''Cave'' Spider, we'd likely have to mirror a good portion of that information to [[Scuttlebug]] as well, since they replace ordinary spiders and those also drop Spider Eyes--and Minecraft is only mentioned in an "Other appearances" section for Scuttlebugs and shares this section with other games, not a bespoke header of its own; either that needs to get split, or else it ''will'' indeed clog that section with the minutia of Minecraft Spider Information. What about Spider Jockeys, just ''at all''--do they go on the article for Scuttlebugs or Dry Bones, and what do we discuss on those articles about Spider Jockeys? What about [[Nabbit]], who lacks any mention of Minecraft on his article because he replaces the Killer Bunny (an otherwise-removed mob only summonable via commands)? [[Buzzy Beetle]]s lack a section, but replace Endermites, which are used. What about blocks and items? Do we explain how to acquire froglights in the [[Snake Block]] article? Do we discuss the Trident in [[Fauster]]'s article? And then there's the Totem of Undying replacement, which we genuinely aren't even sure where you'd put that short of the Minecraft article itself.<br>We think what it boils down to is that, since our coverage of Minecraft as it is is already rather dodgy and inconsistent, whole-sale inserting these descriptions without any consideration of where to actually put them is a very poorly thought-out idea (at least in our opinion, natch.) This is the '''Mario''' Wiki--we need to consider what information pertaining to Minecraft is actually relevant to the Mario franchise and what is best suited for another wiki, because otherwise, this could get out of hand very fast, and lead to plenty of confusion down the road; and in our humble opinion, a simple acknowledgement of what's what is all that's relevant, as any details about Minecraft's gameplay are better suited for a different wiki.<br>We guess what we've been trying to say is that we would like to see some clear limit of where the coverage ends be defined, because Minecraft is ''big'', and if unchecked, you get the aforementioned issue with Spider eyes where suddenly what's supposed to be just a sentence could reasonably become much, much larger. {{User:Camwoodstock/sig}} 18:50, February 4, 2024 (EST)
::For the record, each subject should have a dedicated Minecraft section in their history based on current organization. The inconsistency is mostly due to changes in policy and Minecraft's coverage status over time that haven't really been kept up with. While it's unfortunate and something that should be fixed ASAP, it's not really relevant to this proposal. (Also, I'm fairly certain the aim of this proposal isn't to cover literally everything in Minecraft, but to be more descriptive when we say "this appears in the game". The Trident and Totem examples are moot.) --{{User:Waluigi Time/sig}} 18:59, February 4, 2024 (EST)
:::We had a feeling at least ''some'' of what we were seeing was just kind of the consequence of coverage priority shifting about, so it's good to know we're not going ''completely'' nuts <s>more than we usually are</s> on that regard. Still, it does kind of leave us with a lot of questions seeing as, even after that gets resolved, we're not quite sure where exactly the line is drawn for descriptiveness; as we mentioned, that count range from anywhere to simply listing what a Mario thing is replacing to literally just a full description of the Minecraft mob, and we're honestly a little hesitant to support when there doesn't really seem to be a cleanly defined line for ''how'' descriptive we should be aside from kinda "feeling" it based on the provided example--which works fine for mobs, but doesn't quite work good for items or blocks. {{User:Camwoodstock/sig}} 19:06, February 4, 2024 (EST)
This certainly is an interesting proposal. On the one hand, a ''little'' more context on how the (Mariofied) mobs act would be nice, so expanding the info a little bit with a short, one-sentence summary would be appreciated... but on the other hand, since the mobs aren't necessarily Mario-related and don't have additional behavioral differences in the Mario Mash-Up pack, it doesn't really make a ''lot'' of sense to talk more about regular Minecraft mobs on a Mario wiki, and simply linking to the Minecraft wiki would also solve the issue. I do get Ray Trace's concern though, and since it would make sense to link to the Minecraft wiki anyway, regardless of the proposal's outcome; really, it's boiling down to whether we should add a bit more context on what the Minecraft mobs do on each of our pages, or if it's too irrelevant for this wiki. {{User:Arend/sig}} 17:07, February 4, 2024 (EST)
Maybe a "if it can be neatly summarized" should've been a key qualifying part. Linking to the wiki shouldn't be a crutch to being opaque about information. If something like a Scuttlebug can be like "Replaces spiders. They make webs and scare Steve." go for it. I kind of doubt ALL replaced assets in Minecraft are so incredibly complex affairs that we have to link to a wiki to satisfactorily cover all bases. {{User:Mario/sig}} 23:27, February 7, 2024 (EST)
:The point isn't that Minecraft assets are too complex to explain, it's the principle of the matter that information peculiar to a non-Mario subject, in a non-Mario game, is best left in the hands of a website dedicated to that game. The Mario textures applied to existing assets are in the same realm as cameos and don't affect gameplay per se, i.e. the "Scuttlebug-skin" spider doesn't do anything different from the default-skin spider. {{User:Koopa con Carne/Sig}} 18:36, February 9, 2024 (EST)
2,437

edits