MarioWiki:Proposals/Archive/48: Difference between revisions

From the Super Mario Wiki, the Mario encyclopedia
Jump to navigationJump to search
No edit summary
No edit summary
Line 54: Line 54:


::It's capitalized in the tutorial of Mario Party 2, but not capitalized in the tutorial of Mario Party 3. It's inconsistent between such close games. A better choice would be to capitalize it depending on the game, and have the higher case be more dominant otherwise (because it is a main item), but I feel this is such a minor unnoticeable issue, yet the "do nothing" option does not convince me. --{{User:Megadardery/sig}} 06:30, 27 August 2017 (EDT)
::It's capitalized in the tutorial of Mario Party 2, but not capitalized in the tutorial of Mario Party 3. It's inconsistent between such close games. A better choice would be to capitalize it depending on the game, and have the higher case be more dominant otherwise (because it is a main item), but I feel this is such a minor unnoticeable issue, yet the "do nothing" option does not convince me. --{{User:Megadardery/sig}} 06:30, 27 August 2017 (EDT)
===Include the date a proposal was withdrawn within the proposal (when applicable)===
{{ProposalOutcome|passed|11-0|include date}}
When it comes to the proposal archives, in which we write down the date each proposal ended, it's standard to use the date a proposal was canceled by its proposer or withdrawn for whatever other reason, rather than the proposed deadline ([[Template:PArchive|as documented here]]). This makes sense: it wouldn't be accurate to say that a proposal had concluded a week later than it actually did, and the point of the archives is that we're documenting each proposal exactly as they played out (which is why we make note of proposals that themselves failed but whose proposed changes later passed, and vice-versa). With that in mind, why do we only make note of this in the [[MarioWiki:Proposals/Archive|broad]] [[MarioWiki:Proposals/Talk Page Archive|archives]] and not within the proposals itself? Sure, it's possible to find the date it was canceled by going through the page's history, in the same way it's also possible to find the original proposer through the history page, but we still make note of it within the proposal itself. Leaving only the proposed deadline by itself is also rather misleading and non-informative, considering that any users reading through the proposal wouldn't be able to obviously tell when it actually closed. Even with the proposal outcome saying it was canceled, that doesn't help people find out ''when'' it was canceled. We should strive for accuracy, especially when all we'd need to do is make note of one more date.
The changes I have in mind would only be applicable to proposals that were canceled before their deadline, obviously. First of all, the '''Deadline''' section would be renamed to '''Proposed Deadline''', with no changes to the date. Secondly, a section called '''Date Withdrawn''' would be placed underneath the Deadline, documenting exactly when the proposal was canceled. Ideally, this would include the time in GMT to match the Deadline, but for simplicity's sake, this proposal will only ask that the day needs to be documented and not the time. The details may be subject to change through future discussions, but the main change is clear: within the proposals, document when they were canceled.
'''Proposer''': {{User|Time Turner}}<br>
'''Deadline''': September 9, 2017, 23:59 GMT
====Support====
#{{User|Time Turner}} Per proposal.
#{{User|Alex95}} - Per proposal.
#{{User|Yoshi the SSM}} Per proposal.
#{{User|TheFlameChomp}} Per proposal.
#{{user|Mario jc}} Per proposal.
#{{User|Toadette the Achiever}} Per proposal.
#{{User|7feetunder}} Per proposal.
#{{User|Niiue}} Per all.
#{{User|Owencrazyboy9}} Per proposal, especially considering a few recent talk page proposals ended up getting cancelled way earlier than the original deadline.
#{{User|Ultimate Mr. L}} Per all.
#{{User|LuigiMaster123}} Per all.
====Oppose====
====Comments====
Should this apply to all cancelled proposals regardless, or all proposals cancelled after September 9? {{User:Toadette the Achiever/sig}} 13:46, 3 September 2017 (EDT)
:The plan is to make this retroactive. If the goal is to be accurate, it wouldn't do us much good to ignore ten years of proposals. {{User:Time Turner/sig}} 13:47, 3 September 2017 (EDT)
On that note, my plan also involves editing the proposal archives, which I can't actually do since they're protected. Should this proposal pass, the pages' protection restrictions can be temporarily lifted so that I can make the necessary changes, or an admin can make the edits themselves, whichever works best. {{User:Time Turner/sig}} 15:23, 3 September 2017 (EDT)

Revision as of 22:04, September 9, 2017

All past proposals are archived here. Please add archived proposals to the bottom of the page.
Previous proposals

Is it "Coin" or "coin"?

Template:ProposalOutcome Currently, the wiki has no set standard for the capitalization of the golden that Mario and co. collect in abundance across the franchise: is it "Coin", with a capital C, or "coin", with a lowercase c? This isn't entirely clear-cut: from the games that I've looked at, there are many that do not capitalize it, including most recently Mario Party 8, Sm4sh, and New Super Mario Bros. 2, but there are also other games that capitalize it, including New Super Mario Bros. Wii and Mario Party, and there's something odd and inconsistent about listing the Red Coin, the Purple Coin, the Blue Coin, the 20 Coin, the Key Coin, and many others as being derivatives of the coin. That lowercase "coin" seems out of place, doesn't it? Lowercasing it just because it's a generic noun doesn't hold either; the Mushroom is plainly and consistently capitalized in just about every circumstances. If you're going to say it's because the Mario Mushrooms obviously aren't like the real-life mushrooms, then I'd argue the same goes for the floating, golden, abundant Coins. There is a precedent for not capitalizing the names of subjects with, for example, treasure chest (despite there being at least one in-game source that capitalizes them, but that's an issue for another time), but it's a moot point if the subject isn't generic in the first place.

This may seem like a trivially minor issue, but at the same time, this is an issue that has yet to reach a decisive conclusion. I fail to see a reason why we shouldn't strive for consistency, especially since we've already had a proposal to decide on a set spelling for minigame (spoilers: we decided on minigame).

Proposer: Time Turner (talk)
Deadline: September 2, 2017, 23:59 GMT

Use "Coin"

  1. Time Turner (talk) It's hardly as if no official sources have ever not capitalized it. Per proposal.
  2. Niiue (talk) Per Time Turner.
  3. Andymii (talk) Per proposal.
  4. Alex95 (talk) - Originally voted to do nothing as I thought this was also talking about coins in a broader term, i.e. also including Red Coins and Blue Coins. But for referring to just the standard Yellow Coins, yes, "Coin" should be capitalized (at least in instances outside of quotes).
  5. Mario jc (talk) Per Alex, and supporting for consistency (unless "coin" is used in generic terms; see this).
  6. 3D Player 2010 (talk) per all

Use "coin"

  1. Yoshi the SSM (talk) See comments.
  2. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) Alternate vote here, because the games themselves almost always refer to them in lowercase. Still, silly proposal.
  3. LinkTheLefty (talk) Unless it's referring to a specific type in most cases, coins (and for that matter, blocks and, in at least one instance, coin blocks) have consistently been generically lowercase in RPGs.

Do nothing

  1. Toadette the Achiever (talk) I highly doubt that there is enough definitive official sources that specifically stick to one capitalization. I'd rather stick with this option until an official capitalization is given, and right now, there doesn't seem to be. (One example of this is that I found an all-lowercase "coin" in the Super Mario Galaxy 2 instruction booklet.)
  2. Yoshi the SSM (talk) See comments.
  3. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) While this has bugged me minorly before, this proposal is honestly kind of silly.
  4. TheFlameChomp (talk) Per all.
  5. Skuchi037 (talk) Per all.
  6. LinkTheLefty (talk) This seems to be something that changes depending on the game.
  7. Pseudo-dino (talk) Per all.
  8. Drago (talk) Per Toadette the Achiever.

Comments

If anyone has any more in-game citations for "Coin" or "coin" from any games that haven't been mentioned, then I'm all-ears. Hello, I'm Time Turner. 00:16, 26 August 2017 (EDT)

@Toadette: I don't see why we should be inconsistent solely because the games also happen to be inconsistent. Hello, I'm Time Turner. 00:47, 26 August 2017 (EDT)

@Time Turner: Changed the content of my vote. Toadette icon CTTT.pngFont of Archivist Toadette's signature(T|C) 00:50, 26 August 2017 (EDT)
What kind of official capitalization do you want? Is it necessary for Nintendo to make a press release declaring whether it's lowercase or up case? Through the simple fact that the names are seen in plain text, we already have an abundance of official names. It's up to us to decide how we should use the information. Hello, I'm Time Turner. 00:52, 26 August 2017 (EDT)

Template:Quote2

Template:Quote2

I say this is as official as you can get. Although, this could be on a game to game basis. Red Yoshi in a construction hat walking Yoshi the SSM (talk) 01:37, 26 August 2017 (EDT)

@Doc: Why? Hello, I'm Time Turner. 02:54, 26 August 2017 (EDT)

Because it's an inanimate object that is super inconsistent as to how it's capitalized. Honestly, if you wanna go by policy, see how the latest game spells it. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 01:58, 26 August 2017 (CT)
If we strictly followed every new game, the spelling might constantly change, and there are likely cases in which there's no adequate source for capitalization. Best to nip it in the bud, no? I also don't get your point with it being an inanimate object. Hello, I'm Time Turner. 03:06, 26 August 2017 (EDT)

I don't get what's acceptable about setting a standard for "microgame" but not for "coin"? Hello, I'm Time Turner. 17:14, 26 August 2017 (EDT)

It's capitalized in the tutorial of Mario Party 2, but not capitalized in the tutorial of Mario Party 3. It's inconsistent between such close games. A better choice would be to capitalize it depending on the game, and have the higher case be more dominant otherwise (because it is a main item), but I feel this is such a minor unnoticeable issue, yet the "do nothing" option does not convince me. --
User:MegadarderyUser talk:MegadarderyDashbot signature
06:30, 27 August 2017 (EDT)

Include the date a proposal was withdrawn within the proposal (when applicable)

Template:ProposalOutcome When it comes to the proposal archives, in which we write down the date each proposal ended, it's standard to use the date a proposal was canceled by its proposer or withdrawn for whatever other reason, rather than the proposed deadline (as documented here). This makes sense: it wouldn't be accurate to say that a proposal had concluded a week later than it actually did, and the point of the archives is that we're documenting each proposal exactly as they played out (which is why we make note of proposals that themselves failed but whose proposed changes later passed, and vice-versa). With that in mind, why do we only make note of this in the broad archives and not within the proposals itself? Sure, it's possible to find the date it was canceled by going through the page's history, in the same way it's also possible to find the original proposer through the history page, but we still make note of it within the proposal itself. Leaving only the proposed deadline by itself is also rather misleading and non-informative, considering that any users reading through the proposal wouldn't be able to obviously tell when it actually closed. Even with the proposal outcome saying it was canceled, that doesn't help people find out when it was canceled. We should strive for accuracy, especially when all we'd need to do is make note of one more date.

The changes I have in mind would only be applicable to proposals that were canceled before their deadline, obviously. First of all, the Deadline section would be renamed to Proposed Deadline, with no changes to the date. Secondly, a section called Date Withdrawn would be placed underneath the Deadline, documenting exactly when the proposal was canceled. Ideally, this would include the time in GMT to match the Deadline, but for simplicity's sake, this proposal will only ask that the day needs to be documented and not the time. The details may be subject to change through future discussions, but the main change is clear: within the proposals, document when they were canceled.

Proposer: Time Turner (talk)
Deadline: September 9, 2017, 23:59 GMT

Support

  1. Time Turner (talk) Per proposal.
  2. Alex95 (talk) - Per proposal.
  3. Yoshi the SSM (talk) Per proposal.
  4. TheFlameChomp (talk) Per proposal.
  5. Mario jc (talk) Per proposal.
  6. Toadette the Achiever (talk) Per proposal.
  7. 7feetunder (talk) Per proposal.
  8. Niiue (talk) Per all.
  9. Owencrazyboy9 (talk) Per proposal, especially considering a few recent talk page proposals ended up getting cancelled way earlier than the original deadline.
  10. Ultimate Mr. L (talk) Per all.
  11. LuigiMaster123 (talk) Per all.

Oppose

Comments

Should this apply to all cancelled proposals regardless, or all proposals cancelled after September 9? Toadette icon CTTT.pngFont of Archivist Toadette's signature(T|C) 13:46, 3 September 2017 (EDT)

The plan is to make this retroactive. If the goal is to be accurate, it wouldn't do us much good to ignore ten years of proposals. Hello, I'm Time Turner. 13:47, 3 September 2017 (EDT)

On that note, my plan also involves editing the proposal archives, which I can't actually do since they're protected. Should this proposal pass, the pages' protection restrictions can be temporarily lifted so that I can make the necessary changes, or an admin can make the edits themselves, whichever works best. Hello, I'm Time Turner. 15:23, 3 September 2017 (EDT)