MarioWiki:Proposals: Difference between revisions

From the Super Mario Wiki, the Mario encyclopedia
Jump to navigationJump to search
 
Line 1: Line 1:
<table style="background:#fefffe;color:black;-moz-border-radius:8px;border:2px solid black;padding:4px" width=100%><tr><td>
{{/Header}}
<div class="proposal">
 
<center>http://img33.picoodle.com/img/img33/9/9/17/f_propcopym_9045f2d.png</center>
==Writing guidelines==
<br clear="all">
===Consider "humorous" and other related terms as frequently misused in [[MarioWiki:Good writing]]===
{| align="center" style="width: 85%; background-color: #f1f1de; border: 2px solid #996; padding: 5px; color:black"
 
|'''Proposals''' can be new features (such as an extension), removal of a previously added feature that has tired out, or new policies that must be approved via [[Wikipedia:Wikipedia:Consensus|consensus]] before any action(s) are done.
A writing quirk that seems to pop up everywhere (particularly in the Mario RPG pages/sections) that always drives me ''nuts'' is referring to a situation or action as "comical" or "humorous". Generally, these words are used to describe something that is percieved to be amusing, which is obviously subjective and should not be present in encyclopediac writing. However, usage of these words on here seems to follow an improper, "objective" pattern of referring to features intended by the developers as gags or jokes. Examples of blatant misuse:
*Any user can support or oppose, but must have a strong reason for doing so, not, e.g., "I like this idea!"
 
*"Vote" periods last for one week.
From the [[Minion Quest: The Search for Bowser]] article:
*All past proposals are [[/Archive|archived]].
<blockquote>The group runs into [[Prince Peasley]], and after a battle ensues with a few [[Piranha Bean]]s, Captain Goomba ''humorously'' sends out one of them to attack Prince Peasley.</blockquote>
|}
Who says Captain Goomba is trying to make a joke out of sending monsters out to fight an ego-centric prince? In Captain Goomba's eyes, he's practically fighting for his life trying not to be eaten. The only one who could find this humorous is the viewer, and since this is a story synopsis in an encyclopedia, there shouldn't be any viewer.
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 <nowiki>{{user|</nowiki>''User name''<nowiki>}}</nowiki>. '''Signing with the signature code <nowiki>~~~(~)</nowiki> is not allowed''' due to technical issues.
 
From [[Goomba Mask]]:
<blockquote>In ''[[Paper Mario: The Origami King]]'', a different Goomba Mask resembling a [[Paper Macho Goomba]] appears in the [[Shogun Studios]] storage area. If Mario wears it, he spins around and causes the mask's eyes to roll, with the humorous appearance making [[Olivia]] laugh.</blockquote>
Even though there is actually an in-game audience this time, the wording still implies that the ''writer'' thinks it is humorous. In order to emphasize that it's Olivia who thinks it is funny, I changed the last sentence to:
<blockquote>If Mario wears it, he spins around and causes the mask's eyes to roll, which Olivia finds amusing to the point of laughter.</blockquote>
 
The article for [[Kruller]] has quite possibly the most egregious usage of "humorously" I've ever seen:
<blockquote>When Luigi enters the office afterward, Kruller briefly faints from shock at Luigi entering, before entering the next room to find a suitable weapon to defend himself (''humorously'' getting stuck on his back mid-roll) [...] Gooigi then retrieves the Mezzanine's elevator button, with it being ''humorously'' revealed that Luigi slept through the entire battle [...] After defeating Kruller in two-player mode, Luigi, who was watching the battle from outside, takes all the credit saying that he did it, after which Gooigi ''humorously'' copies Luigi as he had actually defeated Kruller [...] </blockquote>
 
''All'' of these are jokes meant for the audience. And once again, because this is a synopsis in an encyclopedia, there shouldn't ''be'' an audience.
 
And there's way more that I haven't mentioned (just look up the word "humorous" on here and you'll see what I mean). To summarize how I feel this term has been frequently misused, in a form easily copyable for the rules:
 
;'''Humorous/Comical/etc.''': "Humorous", along with other similar words, is used from an observational perspective to describe something one finds amusing or funny, which is, of course, subjective on the part of the writer and should be avoided in an encyclopedia. However, it is commonly misused to refer to anything that is specifically written to be a joke or a gag by the authors of a piece of media. These kinds of words should generally be used only when a character or person relevant to the article ''finds'' something amusing. Not to be confused with "comedic", a word that simply means something relates to comedy in general, and is fine to use if a joke is deliberate on the part of a character (or, in case of references to the media's development, a developer).
 
'''Proposer''': {{User|DrippingYellow}}<br>
'''Deadline''': May 26, 2024, 23:59 GMT
 
====Support====
#{{User|DrippingYellow}} This whole situation is, dare I say it... "humorous". Per proposal.
#{{User|Camwoodstock}} Per proposal. Flowery writing is no laughing matter!
#{{User|Hewer}} I'd add that "comedic" should be used instead to get across that something is meant to be funny while using more objective language, but otherwise, sure, I'll humour this idea.
#{{User|Ray Trace}} We should just get rid of that subjective adjective altogether, let readers decide from the context of the quote if it's humorous or not, we don't need to write an editorial about it (ie sentences such as "Patrick gets caught by Sandy's lasso and dragged back, resulting in a nuclear explosion" already conveys to the reader that it's comedic)
#{{User|TheFlameChomp}} Per all.
 
====Oppose====
 
====Comments====
"Comical" and "comedic" should be fine, as those simply mean relating to comedy. [[User:Doc von Schmeltwick|Doc von Schmeltwick]] ([[User talk:Doc von Schmeltwick|talk]]) 19:31, May 12, 2024 (EDT)
:"Comedic" is definitely fine, but in multiple dictionary sources I've come across, the definition of "comical" meaning "relating to comedy" is either listed as obsolete and deprecated, or absent altogether. [[User:DrippingYellow|DrippingYellow]] ([[User talk:DrippingYellow|talk]]) 19:43, May 12, 2024 (EDT)
 
{{@|Ray Trace}} That was a really good example of obvious comedy. SpongeBob itself is comedy, so that was a good idea to use that as an example! [[User:SONIC123CDMANIA+&#38;K(B&#38;ATSA)|SONIC123CDMANIA+&#38;K(B&#38;ATSA)]] ([[User talk:SONIC123CDMANIA+&#38;K(B&#38;ATSA)|talk]]) 08:12, May 15, 2024 (EDT)


<h2 style="color:black">How To</h2>
{{@|Hewer}} I updated the rules blurb, is it good now? [[User:DrippingYellow|DrippingYellow]] ([[User talk:DrippingYellow|talk]]) 11:34, May 15, 2024 (EDT)
#Actions that users feel are appropriate to have community approval first can be added by anyone, but they must have a strong argument.
:Yeah, that works. {{User:Hewer/sig}} 11:43, May 15, 2024 (EDT)
#Users then vote and discuss on the issue during that week. The "deadline" for the proposal is one week from posting at:
##Monday to Thursday: 17:00 (5pm)
##Friday and Saturday: 20:00 (8pm)
##Sunday: 15:00 (3pm)
#Every vote should have a reason accompanying it.
#At any time a vote may be rejected if at least '''three''' active users believe the vote truly has no merit or was cast in bad faith. However, there must be strong reasons supporting the invalidation.
#"<nowiki>#&nbsp;</nowiki>" should be added under the last vote of each support/oppose section to show another blank line.
#Any proposal that has three votes or less at deadline will automatically be listed as "[[Wikipedia:Quorum|NO QUORUM]]." The original proposer then has the option to relist said proposal to generate more discussion.
#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 a sysop, the proposer can ask for that help.
#There are two topics that cannot be decided on through a proposal: the first is sysop promotions and demotions, which are decided by [[MarioWiki:Bureaucrats|Bureaucrats]].  Secondly, no proposals calling for the creation of Banjo, Conker or Sonic series articles are allowed (several proposals supporting them have failed in recent history).


The times are in EDT, and are set so that the user is more likely to be online at those times (after work/school, weekend nights).  If a proposal is added on Saturday night at 11:59 PM EDT, the deadline is the next Saturday night at 8:00 PM. If it is a minute later, the deadline is a day plus 15 hours (Sunday), as opposed to a day minus 4 hours.
===Standardize "History in the Super Mario franchise" headings under certain conditions===
Inspired by [[User:Nintendo101|Nintendo101]]'s [[User talk:Nintendo101/flowerpot|flowerpot]] subpage (from an [https://www.mariowiki.com/index.php?title=User:Nintendo101/flowerpot&oldid=4209600 earlier revision], before it had been removed), this proposal aims to standardize the use of '''<nowiki>==History in the Super Mario franchise==</nowiki>''' over '''<nowiki>==History==</nowiki>'''. This will help make it clear to readers what is ''Super Mario'' and what is not while reading articles, and prevent potential disputes once a standard has been set. Please note that this proposal is '''NOT''' about the ''DK'', ''Yoshi'', or ''Wario'' subfranchises.


__TOC__
For an article to apply for the '''<nowiki>==History in the Super Mario franchise==</nowiki>''' heading, the article should meet one of the following criteria:


<center><span style="font-size:200%">CURRENTLY: '''{{LOCALTIME}}, {{LOCALDAY}} {{LOCALMONTHNAME}} {{LOCALYEAR}} (EDT)'''</span></center>
#It is a generic subject (e.g. [[Grape]]s) or something from real life, like a person, with a fictional portrayal in ''Super Mario'' media, such as [[Thomas Jefferson]]. An example of this [https://www.mariowiki.com/index.php?title=Dinosaur&oldid=4213618 was on the Dinosaur article before being reverted].
#It is from the [[Super Mario (franchise)|''Super Mario'' franchise]] '''BUT''' has also appeared in non-''Super Mario'' media, popular examples being the [[Super Smash Bros. (series)|''Super Smash Bros.'' series]] and the ''[[Minecraft]]'' textures. Everything that isn't ''Super Mario'' would be subheadings of '''<nowiki>==History in other games==</nowiki>''', or '''<nowiki>==History in other media==</nowiki>''' if the subject also (or instead) appeared in publications, television shows, etc. not in ''Super Mario'' franchise. An example of this can be seen on the [[History of Luigi]] article.
#Crossover content, including Nintendo products, as they appear in ''Super Mario'' media. Examples can be seen on the [[Game Boy]], [[Link]], and [[Egg Pawn]] pages.


==New Features==
For the first bullet point, this would help establish that real and generic subjects are not from ''Super Mario'' and makes the History heading less ambiguous. On the [[Dinosaur]] article, for example, are we reading about history of dinosaurs as they exist in real life, up to the point of extinction, or from the ''Super Mario'' franchise? It's the latter. For [[George Washington]], are we reading history about him from the 18th century or as he exists in the ''Super Mario'' franchise? It's also the latter, clearly.
===Super mario cartoons===
A few articles have information that regard the Mario cartoons as canon. For example, this can be found in Mario's biograpy:


''Abandoning carpentry and leaving Donkey Kong to his own devices, Mario entered the plumbing business with Luigi and formed Mario Brothers Plumbing as revealed in The Super Mario Bros. Super Show. The pair worked on plumbing from the business's headquarters, performed house calls, and also released a line of products. As the years passed, they remained financially unsuccessful, but gained a reputation for their plumbing skills and were recognized by the Grand Order of Plumbers as Plumbers of the Year in "Plumbers of the Year" despite an embarrassing appearance on David Horowitz's worldwide television show that ruined the reputation of their product line in "The Marios Fight Back"
For the second bullet point, this would help eliminate the popular misconception that ''Super Smash Bros.'' is part of the ''Super Mario'' franchise and help better contextualize ''Super Mario'' as it exists in other media, like sometimes ''Zelda'' or ''Minecraft'', rather than being integral to the same degree as their main appearances in ''Super Mario'' media itself.


''Mario and Luigi had a variety of mainly benign adventures. For example, in "Texas Tea" the brothers became rich from an oil well in their tomato garden. However, they were endangered on several occasions, such as in "Slime Busters" when the brothers were attacked by Slime Ghosts. Despite their adventures, Mario confided to Luigi in "Baby Mario Love" that he was dissatisfied with his current life, complaining it lacked glitz and glamour.''
For the third bullet point, this would eliminate confusion that the history is talking about Nintendo products in general, like when they were produced, the amount of sales generated, etc. and rather mention its appearances within the ''Super Mario'' franchise itself. History on Nintendo products themselves can be found on [[nwiki:|NintendoWiki]]. Similarly, for articles like [[Link]], it helps when the History section specifies it is of Link as he appears in the ''Super Mario'' franchise. Then connections to ''Super Mario'' go under the "History in other media" heading.


''Two conflicting stories of how the Mario Bros. returned to Mushroom World exist. The first originates from The Super Mario Bros. Super Show! introduction and later expanded on in "Toddler Terrors of Time Travel." Mario and Luigi were performing a house call for a slightly daft lady who hired them to fix her bathtub drain. Unknown to them, the drain was a Warp Zone connected to the Mushroom World. After Luigi cleared it, Mario and Luigi were sucked towards the drain. Mario grabbed onto the shower curtain bar, but Luigi was already in the drain's suction. Grabbing unto Mario, Luigi ended up pulling both of them down. Later, Mario and Luigi were forced to relive this event due to Ludwig von Koopa's Time Travel Tube. The events were slightly altered. Instead of struggling against the drain, Mario and Luigi openly jump through the pipe, accompanied by Toad. The three were warped from the past Earth to the present Mushroom World, ending the process of overwritting past events.''
To make it short, if this proposal passes, and <nowiki>==History==</nowiki> is changed to <nowiki>==History in the ''Super Mario'' franchise==</nowiki> (and split into a separate <nowiki>==History in other media==</nowiki> in the case of criteria #2) on an article that can be categorized by any of the three numbered bullet points above, '''users will not be allowed to revert it back to the initial <nowiki>==History==</nowiki> heading''', like in the [https://www.mariowiki.com/index.php?title=Dinosaur&diff=next&oldid=4213618 aforementioned case involving the Dinosaur article].


''The second was invented for "The Legend." While Mario ate lunch one day in Mario Brothers Plumbing, the brothers heard a cry for help through a very small pipe. Springing into action, they grabbed their plungers and followed the voice, which they later learned belonged to Princess Peach.''
'''Proposer''': {{User|Super Mario RPG}}<br>
'''Deadline''': May 31, 2024, 23:59 GMT


However, Nintendo has confirmed that the Mario cartoons are non-canon. Therefore, I propose that all information like this should be removed or put into a non-canon information section.
====Support for all three options====
#{{User|Super Mario RPG}} I'm for this option.
#{{User|SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)}} Yes. Also, for the flowerpot thing, I have that saved (with a few tweaks) [[User:SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)/Nintendo101's flowerpot old revision saved plus tweaks|here]].


'''Proposer''': {{User|Magikoopa67}}<br>
====Apply to only crossover content and real products====
'''Deadline''': August 30th, 2008, 20:00


==== Support ====
====Oppose====
#{{user|Magikoopa67}} Per my proposal
#{{User|Hewer}} Similar to your [[MarioWiki:Proposals/Archive/65#Standardize a "Cameo appearances" section|previous]] [[MarioWiki:Proposals/Archive/65#Standardize the "Other appearances" scope to include anything that's not a Super Mario game|proposals]] about reorganising history sections, I don't really see what we'd gain from this. For the first and third bullet points, the edit summary that removed it from the [[Dinosaur]] page sums up my thoughts: "This is obvious and unnecessary". Of course we're only going to be covering the subject's history that's within our scope, I don't think anyone's visiting the Dinosaur page seeking a complete history of the Mesozoic Era only to be disappointed when they don't find it. For the second bullet point, I ask the same question as your last attempt to split up non-Mario appearances: why does it not being a Mario game make it worth splitting up? The assertion that they're not "integral to the same degree as their main appearances in Super Mario media itself" feels wrong, games like Smash are major appearances of the Mario characters and are important to their histories, sometimes moreso than appearances in actual Mario games (Smash Melee introducing Yoshi's [[Egg Roll (move)|Egg Roll]], Smash Ultimate being K. Rool's first physical appearance in a decade, etc.). I also again question whether "the popular misconception that Super Smash Bros. is part of the Super Mario franchise" exists or is worth "fixing" in such an indirect way (we already don't consider them Mario games to my knowledge anyway). The [[Game Boy]] example is the only one given where I see some merit in doing this, since we do give some coverage to the actual histories of Nintendo hardware and it could be worth distinguishing the history of their in-universe appearances from that.
==== Oppose ====
#{{User|Nintendo101}} Because this is the <u>Super Mario</u> Wiki, the inherent assumption is that any subject with an article appears in the franchise (including [[Link]] and [[Sonic]]), and that the "History" section would only cover its appearance in the ''Super Mario'' franchise. What else would it be about? If a "history in the Super Mario franchise" was to be implemented anywhere, I feel like it only makes sense for recurring subjects that debuted in the ''Super Mario'' franchise, but make recurring appearances elsewhere (like Chain Chomps, which make some a few appearances in ''Zelda''). But even in that context, I don't know if it would be appropriate. (I also don't agree with the premise that any in-game subject is "generic", regardless of its name or design. The [[grape]]s in ''Yoshi's Story'' are just as derived from the {{wp|grape|real article}} as the [[Sour Bunch]].)
#{{User|Cobold}} I don't see your problem. All other media are ''alternate''-canon and are separated from the games everywhere.
#{{User|Nightwicked Bowser}} Per my edit summary Hewer quoted.
#{{User|Time Q}}: Per Cobold. When and where did they confirm that the cartoons are "non-canon" anyway?
#{{user|InfectedShroom}} - Per Cobold.
#{{user|Clay Mario}} - Per all. There is no proof that Nintendo considers this non-canon, therefore it is alternate canon. I once did a proposal similar to this and have learrned one thing: The Super Mario Wiki doesn't only cover the games, but the complete mario series. Therfore the information on the cartoon is acceptable.
#[[User: Booster|Booster]] -- Per all. Alternate canon is and should be allowed.


====Comments====
====Comments====
For clarity, when I say "standardize," (not to be confused with "allow," since I don't think there's anything in the rules that explicitly forbids formatting in the aforementioned three cases), it means if a page is formatted that way, others aren't allowed to revert it, since it's the standard for how said articles should look. Also, {{@|SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)}}, glad to see that flowerpot page. [[User:Super Mario RPG|Super Mario RPG]] ([[User talk:Super Mario RPG|talk]]) 14:32, May 17, 2024 (EDT)
:"For clarity, when I say "standardize," (not to be confused with "allow," since I don't think there's anything in the rules that explicitly forbids formatting in the aforementioned three cases), it means if a page is formatted that way, others aren't allowed to revert it, since it's the standard for how said articles should look." Thanks for the clarification! My support will still be there. "Also, {{@|SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)}}, glad to see that flowerpot page." Thanks! I wanted to keep/expand on it as a subpage of my userpage, b/c I didn't want any edit conflicts. You and {{@|Nintendo101}} are free to edit it if you want. [[User:SONIC123CDMANIA+&#38;K(B&#38;ATSA)|SONIC123CDMANIA+&#38;K(B&#38;ATSA)]] ([[User talk:SONIC123CDMANIA+&#38;K(B&#38;ATSA)|talk]]) 14:43, May 17, 2024 (EDT)


The whole CANON thing is a load of bullcrap: There,'s no official guide for wut is "canon" and what isn't, and besides, what is the point of saying "X NEVER HAPPEND" when '''we're still going to write about it''', Anyway?
Wasn't there a proposal about roughly the same thing not too long ago? You're meant to wait 28 days between proposals on the same thing, so if that's the case, we don't exactly wanna wait for a substantial amount of votes before calling attention to it. {{User:Camwoodstock/sig}} 15:12, May 17, 2024 (EDT)
:No, I think this is different. That one had to do with removing franchise headers, which this one doesn't. [[User:SONIC123CDMANIA+&#38;K(B&#38;ATSA)|SONIC123CDMANIA+&#38;K(B&#38;ATSA)]] ([[User talk:SONIC123CDMANIA+&#38;K(B&#38;ATSA)|talk]]) 15:23, May 17, 2024 (EDT)
::Yeah, this one is not about removing headings. It's about modifying "History" to "History in the ''Super Mario'' franchise" in one of three case, and in one case (if there's appearances outside of ''Super Mario''), splitting "History in other games/media"  into its own history heading. See what I did on [[Don Bongo]] as an example. [[User:Super Mario RPG|Super Mario RPG]] ([[User talk:Super Mario RPG|talk]]) 15:39, May 17, 2024 (EDT)


On the other hand, I support rewriting the Mario biography to separate the Cartoon from the game, the whole thing is just confusing, misleading and doesn't really works. --[[User:Blitzwing|Blitzwing]] 12:38, 23 August 2008 (EDT)
Where would appearances in things like Smash and Captain N go in this case? {{User:Koopa con Carne/Sig}} 15:40, May 17, 2024 (EDT)
:"History in other media" (see [[Link]] article). [[User:Super Mario RPG|Super Mario RPG]] ([[User talk:Super Mario RPG|talk]]) 15:41, May 17, 2024 (EDT)
::Makes sense. [[User:SONIC123CDMANIA+&#38;K(B&#38;ATSA)|SONIC123CDMANIA+&#38;K(B&#38;ATSA)]] ([[User talk:SONIC123CDMANIA+&#38;K(B&#38;ATSA)|talk]]) 15:48, May 17, 2024 (EDT)


Magikoopa67, are you going to support your own proposal or not? {{User|Pikax}}
{{@|Hewer|Nintendo101|Nightwicked Bowser}} I thought [[MarioWiki:Proposals/Archive/65#Oppose_13|"This is a Super Mario Wiki" as a argument was getting old]], but that's what you 3 are using! What happened in between? Is it not a old argument anymore? [[User:SONIC123CDMANIA+&#38;K(B&#38;ATSA)|SONIC123CDMANIA+&#38;K(B&#38;ATSA)]] ([[User talk:SONIC123CDMANIA+&#38;K(B&#38;ATSA)|talk]]) 09:04, May 20, 2024 (EDT)
:Also, Magikoopa67 has offered the option of putting the information from the cartoons into a separate section. Such a section exists in [[Princess Peach]]'s article - '''Appearances in other media'''. I want to know why [[Mario]]'s article doesn't have such a section and, right now, I put it down to terrible article writing. {{User|Pikax}}
:I don't think anything in the comment you reference contradicts any of the sentiments made here. No one is arguing subjects that originated outside of the ''Super Mario'' franchise (like Link, Sonic, [[Mad Scienstein]], [[Wart]], etc.) should not receive coverage, nor that appearances made by subjects that ''did'' emerged within the franchise should not be noted (like ''Link's Awakening'', ''Smash Bros.'', ''Tetris'', ''Qix'', etc.). Rather, because of the inherent scope of the wiki, it is assumed that a "History" section on this site encompasses the subject of the article's appearances in the ''Super Mario'' franchise and it is unclear to me why that needs further clarification. - [[User:Nintendo101|Nintendo101]] ([[User talk:Nintendo101|talk]]) 09:35, May 20, 2024 (EDT)
::{{user|Stumpers}} queried some sysops about merging the Cartoons with the game and everyone was pretty much "YEAH YEAH DO IT", and when he did it, everyone gave him accolades. But when looking back at it, yeah, it was a terrible idea. --[[User:Blitzwing|Blitzwing]] 17:43, 23 August 2008 (EDT)
::But you said yourself in your oppose vote "Because this is the Super Mario Wiki", which, again, I thought was getting old as an argument. Hewer himself in the linked proposal said it! I'm just confused about what changed in between that and now. [[User:SONIC123CDMANIA+&#38;K(B&#38;ATSA)|SONIC123CDMANIA+&#38;K(B&#38;ATSA)]] ([[User talk:SONIC123CDMANIA+&#38;K(B&#38;ATSA)|talk]]) 09:38, May 20, 2024 (EDT)
:::First off, why are you getting on Nintendo101's case for an argument that I made in a proposal they didn't even take part in? Second, my point when I made that comment was that "This is a Super Mario wiki" is getting old as an argument on its own to trim, reorganise, or otherwise alter crossover content like Smash, as Super Mario RPG keeps trying to do, whereas Nintendo101's argument is that, because this is a Super Mario wiki, we don't need to specify that our content is about Super Mario. The same words may have been used, but the context of the arguments is different. {{User:Hewer/sig}} 11:54, May 20, 2024 (EDT)
::::First off, I'm not. Second, I didn't know that the CONTEXT was different, I only paid attention to the words, not the context. Third, a "History" section only covering the ''Super Mario'' franchise kinda neglects the references and cameos. [[User:SONIC123CDMANIA+&#38;K(B&#38;ATSA)|SONIC123CDMANIA+&#38;K(B&#38;ATSA)]] ([[User talk:SONIC123CDMANIA+&#38;K(B&#38;ATSA)|talk]]) 12:01, May 20, 2024 (EDT)
:::::Isn't the point of this proposal (which you're supporting) to have history sections that only cover the Super Mario franchise? {{User:Hewer/sig}} 12:05, May 20, 2024 (EDT)
::::::I would like to redirect you to point 2 of the proposal. [[User:SONIC123CDMANIA+&#38;K(B&#38;ATSA)|SONIC123CDMANIA+&#38;K(B&#38;ATSA)]] ([[User talk:SONIC123CDMANIA+&#38;K(B&#38;ATSA)|talk]]) 12:31, May 20, 2024 (EDT)
:::::::Does that not just prove my point? {{User:Hewer/sig}} 12:34, May 20, 2024 (EDT)
::::::::The history section is going to be split. That's the point of this proposal. YOUR point is just around 1/2 of the point of this proposal. [[User:SONIC123CDMANIA+&#38;K(B&#38;ATSA)|SONIC123CDMANIA+&#38;K(B&#38;ATSA)]] ([[User talk:SONIC123CDMANIA+&#38;K(B&#38;ATSA)|talk]]) 12:45, May 20, 2024 (EDT)


I don't like the idea of removing information, but I do like the idea of having separate sections for "non-canon" information. Is my vote a support or an oppose? The headings aren't really clear enough. {{User|Pikax}}
==New features==
''None at the moment.''


===Copyrighted Info===
==Removals==
''None at the moment''


In the [[Mario Super Sluggers]] article and a few others, we seem to not have information that Copyrighted Products do (ie. Nintendo Power, etc.) While it may seem that I am proposing that we allow articles from the copyrighted products onto their respective articles, I am not. I propose that we can at least allow a paragraph or two from copyrighted products into their articles. If it is maybe needed, we can tweak the paragraph around, so it is not '''directly''' copying off the article. So, shall we allow short paragraphs of info into the articles, or not?
==Changes==
===Create seperate pages for Level themes===


'''Proposer''': {{User|Palkia47}}<br>
I think there should be seperate pages for level themes for example: Grass lands. Not just as categories. And it should not be listed alphabetical, but rather after a game for extram all Grass land levels in Super Mario World. Than another page for different Desert levels, sorted by games.
'''Deadline''': August 30, 2008, 20:00


==== Allow Copyrighted Info ====
'''Proposer''': {{User|Big Super Mario Fan}} (banned)<br>
'''Deadline''': May 21, 2024, 23:59 GMT


#{{User|Palkia47}} - I'm the proposer, so per me.
====Support====
#{{user|Luigi001}} Per palkia. If we take that paragraph and tweak it a lot, that (I think) is not plagerism.
<s>#{{User|Big Super Mario Fan}} - Per my proposal.</s>
#{{User|SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)}} Well, the proposer said it wasn't for repetition, so sure.
#{{User|MegaBowser64}} Per proposal


==== Don't Allow Copyrighted Info ====
====Oppose====
#{{User|Sparks}} Categories are enough. If there were to be articles of different level themes across all ''Mario'' games, it would get much too repetitive. Adding category identifications to the bottom of level articles sorts them all without the need for many extra pages.
#{{User|Camwoodstock}} Per Sparks. These would get very repetitive, very quickly.
#{{User|Mario}} I'm not going to support a proposal that's poorly put together. Elucidate your course of action.
#{{User|Ray Trace}} The [[Level]] page I feel is already adequate for covering the themes (could maybe use an expansion). As for the Airship, Ghost House, etc. those are at least marked with a unique icon in the world map whereas a generic snow course isn't so I feel those are exceptions rather than the rule.
#{{User|Sdman213}} Per all.
#{{User|Nintendo101}} Per Ray Trace.
<s>{{User|BMfan08}} We already have a [[Level]] page to discuss nuances of the types of levels. Making separate pages for these would be repetitive, as Sparks and Camwoodstock said, and I fear that the listing of the levels would be longer than the description of the themes.</s>


====Comments====
====Comments====
To be fair, we do have pages for [[Airship]], [[Ghost House]], [[Fortress]], [[Tower]], and [[Castle]]. [[User:Doc von Schmeltwick|Doc von Schmeltwick]] ([[User talk:Doc von Schmeltwick|talk]]) 22:44, May 13, 2024 (EDT)
@ Doc von Schmeltwick: Yes, why can't we make pages for the other level themes too. This would also be helpful for the Super Mario Maker articles. [[User:Big Super Mario Fan|Big Super Mario Fan]] ([[User talk:Big Super Mario Fan|talk]]) 22:51, May 13, 2024 (EDT)
:@Doc von Schmeltwick: That is a valid point, though I'd like to point out that only one of those pages actually lists all the levels of that type (which, if I'm not mistaken, is what the proposer wants to do with these articles).<br>@Big Super Mario Fan: What do you mean by helpful for the Super Mario Maker articles? [[User:BMfan08|BMfan08]] ([[User talk:BMfan08|talk]]) 22:55, May 13, 2024 (EDT)
@BMfan08:For example in the Super Mario Maker 2 article you can click on the levels themes Ghosthouse , Airships, Castles. To than see the history of those on their own articles. I think this should also be done for orher level themes. Because that's really interesting to know. For example on YouTube there are also videos about the evolution of Grass land levels or Dessert levels, etc. [[User:Big Super Mario Fan|Big Super Mario Fan]] ([[User talk:Big Super Mario Fan|talk]]) 23:05, May 13, 2024 (EDT)


Can somebody please add the deadline for this, as I'm not well with the deadlines? {{User|Palkia47}}
I'm stuck here. On the one hand, the opposition has a point. On the other hand, both Doc & BSMF have good points too. [[User:SONIC123CDMANIA+&#38;K(B&#38;ATSA)|SONIC123CDMANIA+&#38;K(B&#38;ATSA)]] ([[User talk:SONIC123CDMANIA+&#38;K(B&#38;ATSA)|talk]]) 08:41, May 14, 2024 (EDT)
:I am not familiar with the exact rules about the Copyright policy here, but in any situation, "Tweaking" still counts as plagirism. But maybe we're allowed to quote articles. I don't know. Is there a copyright law expert in this wiki? {{User|Garlic Man}}
:This is why I'm abstaining for now. As Doc points out, we have several articles on specific level themes already, so making articles on other recurring level themes such as Ground/Grassland/Overworld and Underground would be obvious. On the other hand, it could be seen as becoming quickly repetitive, and something like [[Level]] already covers all themes without the repetition. It would also bring into question whether courses such as[[World 1-3 (Super Mario Bros.)]] should be counted as ground levels or sky levels. {{User:Arend/sig}} 12:36, May 14, 2024 (EDT)
::If you're talking users, I think {{User|Cobold}} is. He's familiar with the wiki law. {{User|Palkia47}}
::True, true. As for the 1-3 thing, I personally view it as both. [[User:SONIC123CDMANIA+&#38;K(B&#38;ATSA)|SONIC123CDMANIA+&#38;K(B&#38;ATSA)]] ([[User talk:SONIC123CDMANIA+&#38;K(B&#38;ATSA)|talk]]) 13:40, May 14, 2024 (EDT)
::Yeah, after giving things some thought from everyone here, I'm removing my vote for the time being. I'll abstain though, only cause I'm not entirely sure what the proposer has in mind for such articles. I'm not interested if the end goal is repetition for the sake of it. [[User:BMfan08|BMfan08]] ([[User talk:BMfan08|talk]]) 14:05, May 14, 2024 (EDT)
:::I don't really know WHAT the proposer has in mind, which is why I'm abstaining. [[User:SONIC123CDMANIA+&#38;K(B&#38;ATSA)|SONIC123CDMANIA+&#38;K(B&#38;ATSA)]] ([[User talk:SONIC123CDMANIA+&#38;K(B&#38;ATSA)|talk]]) 14:11, May 14, 2024 (EDT)
@SONIC123CDMANIA: I tell you what I have in mind. There should be pages for level themes likes Grass lands, Deserts, etc. They should be structured like the pages about Ghosthouse, Airship and Castle. [[User:Big Super Mario Fan|Big Super Mario Fan]] ([[User talk:Big Super Mario Fan|talk]]) 17:45, May 14, 2024 (EDT)
:(facepalm) I knew THAT, I'm talking about the other comments. Is this just for repetition, or not? [[User:SONIC123CDMANIA+&#38;K(B&#38;ATSA)|SONIC123CDMANIA+&#38;K(B&#38;ATSA)]] ([[User talk:SONIC123CDMANIA+&#38;K(B&#38;ATSA)|talk]]) 08:38, May 15, 2024 (EDT)


I don't fully understand this proposal. I also don't think it would change anything. Let me try and sum up the facts: Copying text, images, etc. from copyrighted material is ''illegal'' and won't be allowed. No matter if it's a whole article or just one or two paragraphs. Using information from copyrighted material without directly copying it (i.e. paraphrasing texts) is allowed, but we should make sure to always [[MarioWiki:Citation Policy|cite]] our sources. In other words: even if you're proposing to allow publishing copyrighted material, be it only one paragraph, and if your proposal passes, we still won't allow it, simply because it's illegal. {{User|Time Q}}
No, it's not just for reptition. It's also interesting to know about such things. [[User:Big Super Mario Fan|Big Super Mario Fan]] ([[User talk:Big Super Mario Fan|talk]]) 18:42, May 15, 2024 (EDT)
:Yeah, I agree with Time. However, we can quote things. If a copyrighted product says (for example) "Mario really enjoys blueberry muffins with hint of lemon," we can put that exact quote in quotation marks and say something to the effect of "According to the official Nintendo Biography, 'Mario really enjoys blueberry muffins with hint of lemon.' " And yeah, I just made that source up, but we are allowed to do that, so long as we don't do it too much. {{user|InfectedShroom}}
:Ah, ok. Thanks. [[User:SONIC123CDMANIA+&#38;K(B&#38;ATSA)|SONIC123CDMANIA+&#38;K(B&#38;ATSA)]] ([[User talk:SONIC123CDMANIA+&#38;K(B&#38;ATSA)|talk]]) 08:44, May 16, 2024 (EDT)


==Removals==
@Mario: As I wrote. The Proposal is about creating pages for Grassland, Dessert, Water Level themes (History, Apperances), that a built like the pages for Ghost House, Airship, Castle. [[User:Big Super Mario Fan|Big Super Mario Fan]] ([[User talk:Big Super Mario Fan|talk]]) 20:55, May 16, 2024 (EDT)
''None at the moment.
 
===Break alphabetical order in enemy lists to list enemy variants below their base form===
bit of a wordy title, so let me explain.


==Splits & Merges==
as they stand, enemy lists in game articles are sorted purely alphabetically. this causes some minor organization issues, for example: the "B" section of every enemy list being crowded with just about every Big variant in the game. i think that's not a useful communication of information. what i propose is that instead, variations such as [[Big Goomba]]s, [[Horned Ant Trooper]]s, that usually don't appear on their own, would be listed right after the base form even if it breaks alphabetical order. of course, since there can be more than one variation of an enemy, those would then be listed alphabetically, placing [[Big Goomba]] before [[Mini Goomba]].
===Mario Super Sluggers Cutscenes===
Currently, we have an article entitled [[Challenge Mode Cutscenes (Mario Super Sluggers)]]. So my question is; is this article really needed? I mean all it is is the story of [[Mario Super Sluggers|MSS]] in it's own article. It really doesn't have a point. Shouldn't it just be included in the main article? And having this page gives me a feeling that we need an article about cutscenes in [[Super Mario Galaxy]], or [[Super Mario Sunshine]]. (Note how on those pages the cutscenes are merged nicely with the Story/Plot sections.)


I'd also like to address the length matter. Number one: Does it really matter about how long the article is? Look at the [[SSBB]] article's story (or the Subspace Emissary in it's case.) It's extremely long, but no one is complaining about it. And second of all, I don't mean to put every single bit of information from the page in the actual article. All we need is the major details, because, like Moonshine said, we don't need to know who threw what to who. And as for the pictures, I say we use the best ones and put it right next to the story section, or, if we still want the pictures, make a gallery at the page's bottom that has them in it, and call it Challenge mode screenshots or the like.
some games split new enemies into their own table, so if a game introduces a new variation (such as something like a Big Gamboo) they would just be on the new enemy table.


'''Proposer:''' {{user|Luigi001}}<br>
'''Proposer''': {{User|EvieMaybe}}<br>
'''Deadline:''' August 28, 2008, 17:00
'''Deadline''': May 21, 2024, 23:59 GMT


====Merge into main article====
====Support====
#{{user|Luigi001}} Per myself (above and below.)
#{{User|EvieMaybe}} as proposer.
#{{User|Palkia47}} Per 001. I don't think it would make it long; I mean, just look at the [[Super Smash Bros. Brawl]] article, it has info on just about every cutscene in the Subspace Emissary, and that article would be way longer even if the cutscenes for MSS were added to the article.
#{{User|SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)}} Yeah, sure
#{{User|Moonshine}} Per my comment below. As said below, if we merge it, we should shorten it significantly.
#{{User|JanMisali}} Per proposal.
#{{User|King Mario}} Per All. The Challenge Mode stuff should be there with most of the images.
#{{User|Super Mario RPG}} Yeah, I'm fine with this.
#{{User|Cobold}} Story mode of a game? Any modes don't get articles because that would leave little to say in the game's main article.
#{{User|Jazama}} Per all
#{{User|Walkazo}} - Per all. Also, the Cutscene's page is too gaudy as it is, so merging it would be a good time to cut out the superfluous charts and screenshots.
#{{User|ThePowerPlayer}} Per proposal.
#{{User|Pikax}} - Per Cobold. See my comment below for why I question the oppose votes.
#{{User|Yook Bab-imba}} This is something that has bothered me forever, so I agree wholeheartedly.
<s>{{User|Big Super Mario Fan}} I think that's really a good idea.</s>


====Keep Article====
====Oppose====
#{{User|Arend}} - The MSS Page has enough info. Also, the cutscene article of MSS is detailed with everything what happens, for just '''4''' Cutscenes! And the article is already long enough to deserve a standard place on this Wiki. Other cutscenes, like SMG and SSBB aren't detailed, because there are many, many cutscenes of those games, and are long either.
<s>#{{User|Megadardery}} As the proposal currently stands, it doesn't offer a well-established alternative to the alphabetical order. I assume you mean that you want to merge the following as well ([[Paratroopa]]s is grouped with [[Koopa Troopa]], [[King Bob-omb]] is grouped with [[Bob-omb]]s, etc). Doesn't this mean, we are just grouping by species? [[List of species]] kind of already fills this purpose. Alphabetical order makes the most sense for an uncategorized exhaustive list of enemies, where List of species page fills other purposes.</s>
#{{user|tanokkitails}}-Getting rid off them would take a while and if we merge it with anything else ''that'' article would be much longer so keeping it makes the most sense.
#{{user|MeritC}} - I also say that this should stay a separate article for the SMW. As others have pointed out on this section of the proposal, if this were to be "merged" with the main ''[[Mario Super Sluggers]]'' article, then it would be <i>way</i> too long. Besides, as long as this article has active links to to the main Mario Super Sluggers article page, then I don't see any need in merging the Mario Super Sluggers cutscene article. What we <i>do</i> need to know, however, is what criteria needs to be met to view the fourth and final cutscene so that we can make any necessary edits on that part of the cutscene article itself.
#{{user|ForeverDaisy09}} -It's extremely spoiler filled, and extremely lengthy. I don't want to give people the excuse of taking out the galleries, shortening it by taking out sentences, or whatever.


====Comments====
====Comments====
That's not entirely true Infected Shroom. Notice how on the SMG page there is a nice little paragraph about each cutscene. It doesn't have all that who is involved or the picture galleries. I mean, do we really need those? All we need are little paragraphs on the cutcenes, not an entire article. If we have the article, we may as well make one for every game with cutscenes. {{user|Luigi001}}
Would you be open to drafting an example of what you'd like to see changed on your userpage or a sandbox? I'm kinda visually oriented. - [[User:Nintendo101|Nintendo101]] ([[User talk:Nintendo101|talk]]) 19:48, May 14, 2024 (EDT)
:Yeah, it is true. First off, the SMS article doesn't have a giant table with all the characters on it. Also, the "Story" in Sluggers is supposed to be unlike the story of any other sports game. And no, technically we don't need them. It just makes for a better experience when reading the page. {{User|InfectedShroom}}
:Some time ago I formatted the ''[[New Super Mario Bros. 2#Enemies and obstacles]]'' in a manner similar to this proposal. This game has the gold variants, and having them clumped together just because they all begin with "gold" was odd (in fact, most enemies in this game are just variants), so I took the liberty to rearrange it. {{User:Yook Bab-imba/sig}} 12:58, May 17, 2024 (EDT)
All in all, I think that the Cutscenes page is essentially just the story of MSS, which the MSS page is missing. The story, especially in this case, is far more important that what's on the MSS page now. Why do we have an in depth explanation of Toy Field but no story? The page really needs to get it's priorities in order. It's not hard to cut down the cutscenes page. Simply merge it with the MSS page, give it it's own section entitled "story" and it's done. There's no need for each scene to have an infobox, and there's no need for 10 pics per scene either. You could put like 1 or 2 pics in the section, and get rid of the rest. Also, most of the info is unneeded and over-descriptive. We don't need to put 'who Mario threw the ball too in the intro' and things like that. If we do this then the MSS page won't be THAT long. But if we were to merge it the way it is now, I agree that it would be too long. {{User|Moonshine}}
 
@Megadardery: I'm pretty sure Evie is just talking about enemy lists on game articles (e.g. ''[[Super Mario Bros. Wonder]]''), which tend to ''always'' list enemies in alphabetical order regardless of enemy variants. Evie mentions how enemies are listed on games a lot. {{User:Arend/sig}} 20:09, May 14, 2024 (EDT)
:indeed, i kind of forgot to specify. retouched phrasing to clarify. [[User:EvieMaybe|EvieMaybe]] ([[User talk:EvieMaybe|talk]]) 23:42, May 14, 2024 (EDT)
::Oh, I apologize, I thought this referred to [[List of enemies]]. I'll redact my vote, I agree that alphabetical order in articles is clunky, but I think chronological order (order by appearance in levels) makes the most intuitive sense. As it's less "subjective" than other forms of grouping--{{User:Megadardery/sig}} 06:47, May 15, 2024 (EDT)
:::You know, that's not a bad idea either. We'll have to see what Evie thinks of it, though. {{User:Arend/sig}} 07:25, May 15, 2024 (EDT)
::::Weird, I remember looking at the linked page once and that was how it was structured! Did something change since then, or was that a different page? Maybe it was [[List of species|this]]?? [[User:SONIC123CDMANIA+&#38;K(B&#38;ATSA)|SONIC123CDMANIA+&#38;K(B&#38;ATSA)]] ([[User talk:SONIC123CDMANIA+&#38;K(B&#38;ATSA)|talk]]) 08:41, May 15, 2024 (EDT)
 
I don't know how this wasn't noticed by anyone before (including myself), but it appears this proposal was set to two weeks after its creation. Only talk page proposals and writing guideline proposals can last up to two weeks without extension, so I changed the deadline to one week after its creation (...which is ''today''). It doesn't look like it needs an extension anyway if the current standing indicates anything. {{User:Arend/sig}} 08:49, May 20, 2024 (EDT)
:You would be correct that this proposal would only last one week instead of two. However, I looked at the Proposals history and it appears to have been created on the 14th, meaning that this proposal would really be finished on the 21st. The proposal above this one also has an end date of the 21st, so unless the order was somehow broken it would fit chronologically. [[User:BMfan08|BMfan08]] ([[User talk:BMfan08|talk]]) 11:39, May 20, 2024 (EDT)
::i figured "changing how we list enemies across the whole wiki" counted as a writing guideline, sorry [[User:EvieMaybe|EvieMaybe]] ([[User talk:EvieMaybe|talk]]) 12:00, May 20, 2024 (EDT)
::@BMfan: Oh, you're right. I was being bad at math for a moment - my mistake.<br>@EvieMaybe: I'm personally unsure whether "change how we sort enemies on game articles" counts as a writing guideline or not ([[MarioWiki:Writing guidelines|perhaps I should pay more attention reading this]]), but I do know that proposals about writing guidelines should be listed under [[MarioWiki:Proposals#Writing guidelines|its appropriate header]]. {{User:Arend/sig}} 12:16, May 20, 2024 (EDT)
 
{{@|EvieMaybe}} while I like the idea of organization being loosened a bit for more curatorial discretion, I think the alphabetization of enemies emerged organically from utility. You even see this in Nintendo's officially produced guidebooks and Mario Portal, where enemies are more often than not alphabetized. Some games have literally hundreds of enemies, and what is a "variant" or "relative" of another creature is sometimes subjective. It is also is not always clear which member of clearly related enemies (like [[Spoing]] and [[Sprangler]]; [[Octoomba]] and [[Rocto]]) is derivative of which. What would you recommend in these cases? - [[User:Nintendo101|Nintendo101]] ([[User talk:Nintendo101|talk]]) 10:08, May 20, 2024 (EDT)
:that's a good point. i don't think i should be the sole arbiter of what counts as a minor variant, though. maybe we could make a proposal defining it? in the meantime, small, big and alternate colored variants (stuff like [[Fire Spike]]) definitely do [[User:EvieMaybe|EvieMaybe]] ([[User talk:EvieMaybe|talk]]) 12:05, May 20, 2024 (EDT)
:I feel like it would make most sense to just list alphabetically as usual if there's uncertainty surrounding what's a variant of what, and only make the exception for enemies that are certainly variants. {{User:Hewer/sig}} 12:11, May 20, 2024 (EDT)
::I have implemented (what I understand to be) the changes called for in this proposal to the ''Super Mario Galaxy'' enemy tables in my sandbox [[User:Nintendo101/flowerpot|here]]. Does this look alright to folks? - [[User:Nintendo101|Nintendo101]] ([[User talk:Nintendo101|talk]]) 21:45, May 20, 2024 (EDT)
:::that's exactly what i was picturing![[User:EvieMaybe|EvieMaybe]] ([[User talk:EvieMaybe|talk]]) 23:26, May 20, 2024 (EDT)
 
===Decide whether to merge the {{tem|more images}}, {{tem|more media}}, and/or {{tem|more refs needed}}===
I may have created the <code>{{tem|more refs needed}}</code> template, but I later saw a discussion for merging it with <code>{{tem|unreferenced}}</code>. That inspired me to plan on merging <code>{{tem|more images}}</code> and <code>{{tem|more media}}</code> with <code>{{tem|image}}</code> and <code>{{tem|media missing}}</code> respectively, so I decided to make a proposal containing three options:
 
;Option 1: Merge <code><nowiki>{{more images}}</nowiki></code>, <code><nowiki>{{more media}}</nowiki></code>, and <code><nowiki>{{more refs needed}}</nowiki></code> with <code><nowiki>{{image}}</nowiki></code>, <code><nowiki>{{media missing}}</nowiki></code>, and <code><nowiki>{{unreferenced}}</nowiki></code> respectively AND create the categories {{fake link|Articles with sections that need more images|Category:Articles with sections that need more images}}, {{fake link|Articles with sections that need more images|Category:Articles with sections that need more media}}.
;Option 2: ONLY merge <code><nowiki>{{more refs needed}}</nowiki></code> with <code><nowiki>{{unreferenced}}</nowiki></code>.
;Option 3: Keep as they are.
 
Here are some examples:
 
<span style="font-size: 150%">Template:Image</span>
----
<pre>
<div class="notice-template maintenance" style="background:#FF6;border:1px solid #630">
It has been requested that {{#if:{{{more|}}}|'''more images'''|at least one '''image'''}} be [[Special:Upload|uploaded]] for this {{#if:{{{section|}}}|section|article}}. Remove this notice only after the {{#if:{{{more|}}}|additional images|image(s)}} have been added. {{#if:{{{reason|{{{1|}}}}}}|'''Specific(s):''' {{{reason|{{{1}}}}}}}}
</div><includeonly>{{#switch:{{NAMESPACE}}||Gallery=[[Category:Articles {{#if:{{{section|}}}|with sections}} that need {{#if:{{{more|}}}|more images|an image}}]]}}</includeonly>
</pre>


OK, to the opposers: '''IT'S AN ARTICLE ABOUT THE STORY OF A GAME!''' We may as well call it: Story (Mario Super Sluggers). And who really cares if it make the article too long? No one's complaining about the length of the [[SSBB]] or [[Mario]] articles! I mean seriously! Even if we put every last bit of information from the article in the MSS article, it would barely be half the size of either of the two mentioned articles! And what's so bad about taking long? There's no time limit to how long an approved proposal must take to complete it! All you have to do is copy & paste, then edit it to fit in the MSS article! Do you get my point, opposers? {{user|Luigi001}}
<code><nowiki>{{image|more=yes|section=yes|Sprites}}</nowiki></code>
:Yes, I do get your point. However, if I had total control over this wiki, I would split up the Mario and SSBB pages myself. And actually, you'd probably copy it, find a spot for it, and ''then'' paste it. 'Least, it's what I'd do. {{User|InfectedShroom}}
::But the fact is, they're ''not'' split like the MSS one. I still think that the cutscenes could, and should, be shortened if it's merged. -{{User|Moonshine}}


I've looked at the reasons for people opposing and it may just be my way of thinking, but I don't think any of them are actually good reasons. {{User|Pikax}}
=
:I agree Pikax. Too long, too many spoilers, etc are not really good reasons. {{user|Luigi001}} (No offense.)
::I'm moving my list of reasons for the oppose votes being terrible down here so that I can format it better. {{User|Pikax}}


Why I object to the objections:
<div class="notice-template maintenance" style="background:#FF6;border:1px solid #630">
It has been requested that '''more images''' be [[Special:Upload|uploaded]] for this section. Remove this notice only after the additional images have been added. '''Specific(s):''' Sprites
</div>


'''Arend'''<br>
<span style="font-size: 150%">Template:Media missing</span>
An article about a game should have all of the information about the game. I can understand if, for example, the [[Mario Kart: Double Dash]] article only has information about each vehicle's statistics and not why they look like what they look like because such information does not pertain to the game. A game's story, however, ''does'' pertain to the game, therefore it should be shown in the game's article and not given a separate article.
----
<pre>
{| class="notice-template maintenance" style="background:#C88AFF;border:1px solid #630"
|style="padding-right:10px"|[[File:Soundx.png|25px|class=invert-dark]]
|style="padding-top:3px"| It has been requested that {{#if:{{{more|}}}|'''more audio and/or video files'''|at least one '''audio and/or video file'''}} related to this {{#if:{{{section|}}}|section|article}} be uploaded. {{#if:{{{reason|{{{1|}}}}}}|'''Specific(s):''' {{{reason|{{{1}}}}}}|<includeonly>{{#switch:{{NAMESPACE}}||Gallery=[[Category:Articles with incomplete maintenance tags]]}}<br><small>Please upload all related music, sound effects, voice clips, or any videos for this {{#if:{{{section|}}}|section|article}}. See the [[Help:Media|help]] page for information on how to get started.</small>
|}<includeonly>{{#switch:{{NAMESPACE}}||Gallery=[[Category:Articles {{#if:{{{section|}}}|with sections}} that need {{#if:{{{more|}}}|more media|media}}]]}}</includeonly>
</pre>


'''tanokkitails'''<br>
<code><nowiki>{{media missing|more=yes|section=yes|Voice clips}}</nowiki></code>
Surely merging two articles together means that all of the information from both articles remains, except possibly very unimportant information, and the information that isn't removed is reformatted if necessary, which is exactly what Luigi001 says will happen. Arguing that the process will take a while is just plain stupid. Typing up [[Mario]]'s article probably took a while. Would you have opposed to the creation of Mario's article? I didn't think so.


'''Merit C'''<br>
=
As well as my reasons for objecting to Arend's vote, I noticed that you said that the merge will make the article too long. Since when has an article's length actually mattered (apart from a minimum length to be suitable for FA status)? In fact, an article being long implies that it has plenty of information. I know you can argue that copying and pasting "I like cheese" umpteen times makes the article longer without adding information, the cutscene article isn't just a load of waffle.


'''ForeverDaisy09'''<br>
{| class="notice-template maintenance" style="background:#C88AFF;border:1px solid #630"
Aside from the reasons I opposed tanokkitails' vote, several game articles ([[Mario Kart DS]] and [[Super Smash Bros. Brawl]], for example) have spoilers in them. Why should Mario Super Sluggers be any different?
|style="padding-right:10px"|[[File:Soundx.png|25px|class=invert-dark]]
|style="padding-top:3px"| It has been requested that '''more audio and/or video files''' related to this section be uploaded. '''Specific(s):''' Voice clips<br><small>Please upload all related music, sound effects, voice clips, or any videos for this section. See the [[Help:Media|help]] page for information on how to get started.</small>
|}


Let me know if you disagree with anything I've said. {{User|Pikax}}
<code><nowiki>{{media missing|more=yes|Videos}}</nowiki></code>


Oh, what the heck. I don't even care about this proposal. I withdraw. {{User|InfectedShroom}}
=


==Changes==
{| class="notice-template maintenance" style="background:#C88AFF;border:1px solid #630"
===Princess?===
|style="padding-right:10px"|[[File:Soundx.png|25px|class=invert-dark]]
Currently, [[Rosalina]]'s page is just called ''Rosalina'' because she is never called a princess in the games.
|style="padding-top:3px"| It has been requested that '''more audio and/or video files''' related to this article be uploaded. '''Specific(s):''' Videos<br><small>Please upload all related music, sound effects, voice clips, or any videos for this article. See the [[Help:Media|help]] page for information on how to get started.</small>
But I found official proof. This is the first part of Rosalina's bio in [[Super Mario Galaxy]]. The whole bio can be found at the end of Rosalina's page.
|}
 
<span style="font-size: 150%">Template:Unreferenced</span>
----
<pre>
<div class="notice-template maintenance" style="background:#FC5;border:1px solid #f22">
This {{#if:{{{section|}}}|section|article}} '''{{#if:{{{more|}}}|needs additional citations for [[MarioWiki:Citations|verification]]|does not [[MarioWiki:Citations|cite any sources]]}}'''. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. {{#if:{{{reason|{{{1|}}}}}}|'''Specific(s):''' {{{reason|{{{1}}}}}}|<includeonly>{{#switch:{{NAMESPACE}}||Gallery=[[Category:Articles with incomplete maintenance tags]]}}</includeonly>}}<br><small>Please help {{plain link|1=[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} improve this {{#if:{{{section|}}}|section|article}}]}} by [[MarioWiki:Citations#How to add references|adding citations from reliable sources]].</small>
</div><includeonly>{{#switch:{{NAMESPACE}}||Gallery=[[Category:Articles {{#if:{{{more|}}}|{{#if:{{{section|}}}|with sections}} that need more citations|with {{#if:{{{section|}}}|unsourced sections|no sources}}}}]]}}</includeonly>
</pre>
 
<code><nowiki>{{unreferenced|more=yes|section=yes|Spanish and German names}}</nowiki></code>
 
<div class="notice-template maintenance" style="background:#FC5;border:1px solid #f22">
This section '''needs additional citations for [[MarioWiki:Citations|verification]]'''. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. '''Specific(s):''' Spanish and German names<br><small>Please help {{plain link|1=[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} improve this section]}} by [[MarioWiki:Citations#How to add references|adding citations from reliable sources]].</small>
</div>


''Not much is known about Rosalina, the lonely '''princess''' who wanders the cosmos in the Comet Observatory, a giant starship that travels the celestial expanse.''
Once the proposal ends with Option 1, we'll be able to merge these templates and then replace the <code><nowiki>{{more images</nowiki></code>, <code><nowiki>{{more media</nowiki></code>, and <code><nowiki>{{more refs needed</nowiki></code> syntax with the <code><nowiki>{{image|more=yes</nowiki></code>, <code><nowiki>{{media missing|more=yes</nowiki></code>, and <code><nowiki>{{unreferenced|more=yes</nowiki></code> syntax respectively. However, once the proposal ends with Option 2, we'll only be able to merge the {{tem|more refs needed}} template and then replace the <code><nowiki>{{more refs needed</nowiki></code> syntax with the <code><nowiki>{{unreferenced|more=yes</nowiki></code> syntax. Once the proposal ends with Option 3, we'll keep the <code><nowiki>{{more refs needed</nowiki></code> template and protect it.


Now we found proof, I think we can move the page. But before doing anything, users must agree with this. What shall we do?
'''Proposer''': {{User|GuntherBayBeee}}<br>
'''Deadline''': May 28, 2024, 23:59 GMT


'''Proposer''': {{User|Arend}}<br>
====Option 1====
'''Deadline''': August 28th, 2008, 17:00
#{{User|GuntherBayBeee}} Per proposal
#{{User|Super Mario RPG}} I like the idea of integrating the functionality of the aforementioned templates.


====Change to ''Princess Rosalina''====
====Option 2====
#{{User|Arend}} Super Mario Galaxy has spoken.
#{{User|Tucayo}} Per Arend,and because she wears a crown
#{{user|King Mario}}- Per Mr.Arend
#{{user|YoshiAndMe10}} if shes a princess than call her princess rosalina pretty simple.
#{{user|Dry Funky}} I agree with all above.
#{{user|Mr. Br Mario}} I agree with that. After all, he's using canonical information. Canonical information is the most precious information that could belong to Super Mario Wiki. So, let's do this!
#{{user|BeeBop!}} I agree with all above. As per (Princess) Rosalina's bio, she is known as a 'Princess' in [[Super Mario Galaxy]]
#{{user|Myaca}} I have beaten the game at least three times, and in all three times she is revered to as Princess, so, as is the scientific experimental proposal, three times is the charm, and makes it one of the laws of nature. Nof sed


====Keep ''Rosalina''====
====Option 3====
#{{User|Master Lucario}} Wearing a crown means nothing. I get a crown in my Burger King Kid's Meal. Am I a king? No. She's not royalty of any sort. I oppose this proposal.
#{{User|Garlic Man}} -- Whoa, whoa, wait up, here. Just because it says she IS a princess, the game never calls her by the title "Princess Rosalina". It calls her Rosalina. You know how Bowser is not [[King Bowser]]? Yeah, because he's Bowser. Nowhere is Rosalina ever fully called "Princess Rosalina". I oppose. (obviously)
#{{User|YellowYoshi398}} - Per Garlic. Plus, even if we did discover an official mention of "Princess Rosalina," just plain Rosalina would outweigh it because it is used more often.
#{{User|Time Q}}: Per Garlic Man. Just because she ''is'' something doesn't mean the article should be called that.
#{{User|Booster}} -- Per Garlic Man.
#{{User|Palkia47}} - Per Garlic and AgentCH (below). If its not seen in the game or manual, then it probably had to be from a guide. We don't exactly allow information from guides (ie. seen in the MKWii Guide as Peach and Daisy are cousins).
#{{User|Stooben Rooben}} - Per Garlic Man. There are no citations anywhere on that page to prove that she is '''in fact''' a princess. If Nintendo has given no proof, then it is clearly speculation.
#{{user|LinkTheLefty}} - It's probably a translation error. If anyone remembers the travesty that is Sonic 2006, Blaze was called a Queen in that game's profile, yet she's supposed to be a princess. It could be a one-time thing. That, and the fact that Rosalina was a princess in concept development before ties with Peach were broken off. I think we should, however, mention it in the article... Provided it's from a tangible source (second or third party sources shouldn't make a difference).
#{{User|Walkazo}} - Per all.
#{{user|Moonshine}} - Per all. Another example being Mario. We all know he's a plumber, but we don't call him "Mario the Plumber" in the title.
#{{user|InfectedShroom}} - Per all. "Princess" is not her official title.
#{{user|MC Hammer Bro.}}- per all and see comment.
#{{User|Pikax}} - Per Garlic. We don't call [[Baby Daisy]] and [[Baby Peach]] "Baby Princess Daisy" and "Baby Princess Peach" because they're not given such titles in the games they appear in.
#{{User|Bob-omb buddy}}Per all. princess dosen't have to mean royalty. It can be discription, not a title.
#{{User|Dom}} Per all, including Master Lucario's LOL comment, and in particular Garlic Man's comment.
#{{user|AgentCH}} - Per Garlic and my own reason below.
#{{user|Yoshikart}}- I have no proof.
#{{User|Myles}} - Per Garlic Man and Pikax. I'd also like to add that we don't call Mario: Mario Mario, or Luigi: Luigi Mario. We call them what they are usually called. It should however be noted that she is a princess.
#{{user|Super Fuelbot}} - Per Garlic Man.
#{{user|Cobold}} - no source given. Check my comment below.
#{{user|1337Yoshi}} - Per all.
#{{user|Super-Yoshi}} - Per All.
#{{user|Clay Mario}} - Per Garlic


====Comments====
====Comments====
I'm leaning toward opposing, since "Princess Rosalina" is not her official title. But I'd like to hear a few more opinions, considering she ''is'' a princess. {{user|InfectedShroom}}
:I have placed a part of Rosalina's '''Official''' bio in the proposal. She is called a princess in the bio. {{User|Arend}}
::Just where is this official bio from? As has been said before, it's not said in-game that she's a princess, and I just checked the manual and it doesn't say anything either. Is this from a guide? A ''Prima'' guide, perhaps? {{user|AgentCH}}
::I agree with AgentCH. Prima puts fake stuff in their guides. For example look at the MKWii guide. They say Waluigi owns Waluigi Industries and Daisy is Peach's cousin. Totally fake. No Proof from NP. {{User|Yoshikart}}
Wow, after I placed my oppose, there was a rush of opposes following mine... I feel Special. :P  Anyway, I do also agree with AgentCH, because if it's not in-game or in-manual, then it's probably not our most reliable source. We may as well move [[Mario]] to {{fakelink|Plumber Mario}} (hey, a red link!). {{User|Garlic Man}}


The term '''princess''' could be just a "nick name" and not a true title. The "princess that wonders the stars" ''Princess'' could be saying that she is a legondary person. Or maybe just because she is beautiful (I never said that. I've just heard people say she is ;) ). I think that it is just a play on words. {{User|MC Hammer Bro.}}
===Create a category for teenagers===
:Oh, then should [[Princess Peach]] move to Peach, and [[Princess Daisy]] to Daisy. {{user|Arend}}
One thing that feels strange to me on this wiki is the current age categories. We have [[:Category:Children|children]] and [[:Category:Babies|babies]]. However, when it comes to teenagers, it either goes to the children category or doesn't go there at all. Granted, both are underage, but it does not help the average user who wants to find all the teenage characters on this wiki. I mean, if we are okay with creating the categories for the previous underaged characters, a third one one wouldn't hurt. For this to count, I looked for every character that was considered to be a teenager in the ''Super Mario'' franchise at one point. We have enough categories for them to be put in, having about ten ''Super Mario'' characters to count. I'm probably missing a couple and if so, please let me know in the comments. The exact criteria are thirteen to seventeen years old or confirmed to be one. Characters like Tiny Kong wouldn't make it in this category as she was never confirmed to be a teenager in her [[Diddy Kong Racing DS|recent design]].
::No, because (from what I know) they are both referred to as "Princess Peach" and "Princess Daisy", respectively, in the games. Rosalina is never referred to as "Princess Rosalina". {{User|Time Q}}
 
:::Peach is called a princess, but Daisy is never called princess in every game she appeard in. In Super Mario Land, Mario just calls her Daisy. Other games she appeard in are spin-offs. Daisy (and Peach) aren't called princesses in these games. Daisy is only called a princess in game manuals. {{User|Arend}}
Below is a list of Super Mario characters who are or were teenagers.
::::But she is given at least once the title "Princess Daisy", isn't she? Because if she isn't, maybe we should think about moving her page to "Daisy" indeed. {{User|Time Q}}
*[[Ashley]]<ref group="a" name="Ashley">[http://ms.nintendo-europe.com/wariowaretouched/enGB/index.html ''WarioWare: Touched!'' European website] She is "fifteen going on 500".</ref>
:::::I did a little research. On the European Mario site (who doesn't exist enymore), Daisy wasn't called (unlike Peach) a princess. Nintendo said ''Daisy isn't called a princess in later appearences''. But even in Super Mario Land, Mario didn't call her a princess. However, in Daisy's Smash Bros Melee a trophy discription, she is in one line called ''Princess Daisy'' (this is the only time she is called Princess Daisy in a game), but the title of the trophy still is just Daisy. Manuals also make great use of ''Princess Daisy''. This is the '''only''' in game refearence I found. I Mario Smash Football/Super Mario Strikers, when you select Peach, Peach will say ''Pricess Peach'', but if you select Daisy, Daisy will say just ''Daisy''. {{User|Arend}}
*[[Axem Rangers]]<ref group="a" name="Axem Rangers">Pelland, Scott, and Kent Miller. Super Mario RPG: Legend of the Seven Stars Player's Guide. Page 4.</ref>
::::::I agree with you that Daisy's trophy description shouldn't be taken as proof, because I heard they often contain mistakes. But I believe manuals are perfectly valid and reason enough to keep her article as "Princess Daisy". {{User|Time Q}}
**[[Axem Red]]
**[[Axem Black]]
**[[Axem Green]]
**[[Axem Pink]]
**[[Axem Yellow]]
*[[Mona]]
*[[Muffy]]
*[[Tommy Treehugger]]


Bio where? Page what? The proposal fails to cite its references. The question in the comments wasn't answered. Enough reason to oppose. - {{User|Cobold}} 16:43, 23 August 2008 (EDT)
And here is a list of non-''Super Mario'' characters who would be affected by this proposal. '''This only applies if they were portrayed as teenagers within said game. For example, [[Vector|Vector the Crocodile]] was labeled as one in his earlier appearances but is considered an adult in later games, including all ''Mario & Sonic'' games.'''
:I found this bio on Rosalina's page. I thought it was from the American game manual. I don't live in the US or UK. Game manuals can differ per region. I was wrong. {{User|Arend}}
*[[Inkling]]
*[[Pac-Man]]<ref group="a" name="pacster">''[[Mario Kart Arcade GP DX]]'' uses the ''Ghostly Adventures'' design of Pacster, who is a teenager in that show.</ref>
*[[Blaze|Blaze the Cat]]
*[[Espio|Espio the Chameleon]]
*[[Jet (Sonic the Hedgehog)|Jet the Hawk]]
*[[Knuckles|Knuckles the Echidna]]
*[[Silver|Silver the Hedgehog]]
*[[Sonic|Sonic the Hedgehog]]
*[[List of fighters debuting in Super Smash Bros.#Ness|Ness]]<ref group="a" name="earthbound"> His age is listed as twelve to thirteen years old.</ref>
*[[List of fighters debuting in Super Smash Bros. Melee#Roy|Roy]] from ''Fire Emblem''
*[[List of fighters debuting in Super Smash Bros. for Nintendo 3DS / Wii U#Little Mac|Little Mac]]
*[[List of fighters debuting in Super Smash Bros. Ultimate#Sora|Sora]]
*[[List of Assist Trophy characters#Issac|Isaac]]
*[[List of Assist Trophy characters#Jeff|Jeff]]<ref group="a" name="earthbound"></ref>
*[[List of Assist Trophy characters#Lyn|Lyn]]<ref group="a" name="lyn"> Depending on the languages of her games, she is either of teenage age or adult age.</ref>


Considering more often than not, Peach is referred to as Princess Peach on official sites, and Daisy is just called Daisy, I don't think Rosalina should be called Princess here. Think about it on a leveled set of the terms use.{{User|ForeverDaisy09}}
I don't know any potential counterarguments in disfavor of this, because this would be much more helpful and less broad than having any underage character be sent to the children category, especially when that's rare, as some of the above-mentioned characters are not put in that category. Plus, it would be weird to call Little Mac or Mona a child. Yes, I know people sometimes describe teens as kids, but it's a lot more misleading if put in those categories.  


I would just like to state if you oppose her being Princess Rosalina, you don't deserve to be a Mario fan.{{user|The.Real.Izkat}}
'''Proposer''': {{User|TheUndescribableGhost}}<br>
:So do you want us to call Bowser "King Bowser" as well? {{User|Pikax}}
'''Deadline''': May 28, 2024, 23:59 GMT
::IF YOU DONT THINK MARIO IS ITALIAN YOURE NOT A TRUE FAN


IF YOU DONT THINK BOWSER TRUE NAME IS "GREAT DEMON KING", YOURE NOT A TRUE FAN
====Support====
#{{User|TheUndescribableGhost}} Per proposal


IF YOU DONT THINK LUGI IS IN SM64 YOURE NOT A TRUE FAN
====Oppose====
#[[User:Doc von Schmeltwick|Doc von Schmeltwick]] ([[User talk:Doc von Schmeltwick|talk]]) - The main reason we have the "babies" category is the ''Yoshi's Island'' games having the baby counterparts. There's no teen-focused variation of the ''Mario'' cast (knock on wood, there)
#{{User|SolemnStormcloud}} As someone who feels [[:Category:Children]] doesn't have much of a reason to exist, a category for teenagers would have even less of a reason to.


I would just like to state that if you use the same broken way of thinking as The.Real.Izkat, You're a, true, moron. --[[User:Blitzwing|Blitzwing]] 16:41, 24 August 2008 (EDT)
====Comments====
Not sure if I did the references right for this. [[User:TheUndescribableGhost|TheUndescribableGhost]] ([[User talk:TheUndescribableGhost|talk]]) 22:54, May 21, 2024 (EDT)


I would like to note that in the story book thing she reads to thhe lumas there's a castle in the background this is probably a conicedince and if not she's still only called rosilina in the game.tanokkitails.
====References====
<references group="a"/>


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

Latest revision as of 23:33, May 21, 2024

Image used as a banner for the Proposals page
Current time:
Wednesday, May 22nd, 08:02 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: "May 22, 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 {{TPPDiscuss}}. 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 {{SettledTPP}}.
  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

Merge the Wrecking Crew and VS. Wrecking Crew phases into list articles, Axis (ended February 24, 2022)
Do not consider usage of classic recurring themes as references to the game of origin, Swallow (ended March 9, 2022)
Split Mario Kart Tour character variants into list articles, Tails777 (ended May 4, 2022)
Enforce WCAG Level AA standards to mainspace and template content, PanchamBro (ended May 29, 2022)
Change how RPG enemy infoboxes classify role, Doc von Schmeltwick (ended September 18, 2022)
Trim away detailed special move information for all non-Mario fighters, Koopa con Carne (ended January 30, 2023)
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)
Consider filenames as sources and create redirects, Axis (ended August 24, 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)
Standardize the formatting of foreign and explanatory words and phrases in "Names in other languages" tables, Annalisa10 (ended February 7, 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)
Trim Mario Kart course galleries of excess Tour stuff, Shadow2 (ended May 18, 2024)

Talk page proposals

Split all the clothing, Doc von Schmeltwick (ended September 12, 2021)
Split the various reissues of Mario Bros., Doc von Schmeltwick (ended April 22, 2022)
Split machine parts, Robo-Rabbit, and flag from Super Duel Mode, Doc von Schmeltwick (ended September 30, 2022)
Expand source priority exception to include regional English differences, LinkTheLefty (ended January 14, 2023)
Add product IDs in game infoboxes, Windy (ended March 18, 2023)
Remove the list of Super Smash Bros. series objects, Axis (ended May 10, 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)
Change the Super Mario 64 DS level section to include more specific character requirements, Altendo (ended December 20, 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)
Merge the ghost Bats and Mice from Luigi's Mansion to their respective organic counterparts from the later games, Doc von Schmeltwick (ended January 20, 2024)
Split Strobomb from Robomb, Doc von Schmeltwick (ended January 20, 2024)
Split the NES and SNES releases of Wario's Woods, SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA) (ended March 27, 2024)
Merge Mii Brawler, Mii Swordfighter, and Mii Gunner to Mii, TheUndescribableGhost (ended March 28, 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)
Merge Stompybot 3000 with Colonel Pluck, DrippingYellow (ended May 4, 2024)
Split "Team Dinosaur" from The Dinosaurs, Blinker (ended May 15, 2024)
Rename Moneybags to Moneybag (enemy), Hewer (ended May 20, 2024)

Writing guidelines

Consider "humorous" and other related terms as frequently misused in MarioWiki:Good writing

A writing quirk that seems to pop up everywhere (particularly in the Mario RPG pages/sections) that always drives me nuts is referring to a situation or action as "comical" or "humorous". Generally, these words are used to describe something that is percieved to be amusing, which is obviously subjective and should not be present in encyclopediac writing. However, usage of these words on here seems to follow an improper, "objective" pattern of referring to features intended by the developers as gags or jokes. Examples of blatant misuse:

From the Minion Quest: The Search for Bowser article:

The group runs into Prince Peasley, and after a battle ensues with a few Piranha Beans, Captain Goomba humorously sends out one of them to attack Prince Peasley.

Who says Captain Goomba is trying to make a joke out of sending monsters out to fight an ego-centric prince? In Captain Goomba's eyes, he's practically fighting for his life trying not to be eaten. The only one who could find this humorous is the viewer, and since this is a story synopsis in an encyclopedia, there shouldn't be any viewer.

From Goomba Mask:

In Paper Mario: The Origami King, a different Goomba Mask resembling a Paper Macho Goomba appears in the Shogun Studios storage area. If Mario wears it, he spins around and causes the mask's eyes to roll, with the humorous appearance making Olivia laugh.

Even though there is actually an in-game audience this time, the wording still implies that the writer thinks it is humorous. In order to emphasize that it's Olivia who thinks it is funny, I changed the last sentence to:

If Mario wears it, he spins around and causes the mask's eyes to roll, which Olivia finds amusing to the point of laughter.

The article for Kruller has quite possibly the most egregious usage of "humorously" I've ever seen:

When Luigi enters the office afterward, Kruller briefly faints from shock at Luigi entering, before entering the next room to find a suitable weapon to defend himself (humorously getting stuck on his back mid-roll) [...] Gooigi then retrieves the Mezzanine's elevator button, with it being humorously revealed that Luigi slept through the entire battle [...] After defeating Kruller in two-player mode, Luigi, who was watching the battle from outside, takes all the credit saying that he did it, after which Gooigi humorously copies Luigi as he had actually defeated Kruller [...]

All of these are jokes meant for the audience. And once again, because this is a synopsis in an encyclopedia, there shouldn't be an audience.

And there's way more that I haven't mentioned (just look up the word "humorous" on here and you'll see what I mean). To summarize how I feel this term has been frequently misused, in a form easily copyable for the rules:

Humorous/Comical/etc.
"Humorous", along with other similar words, is used from an observational perspective to describe something one finds amusing or funny, which is, of course, subjective on the part of the writer and should be avoided in an encyclopedia. However, it is commonly misused to refer to anything that is specifically written to be a joke or a gag by the authors of a piece of media. These kinds of words should generally be used only when a character or person relevant to the article finds something amusing. Not to be confused with "comedic", a word that simply means something relates to comedy in general, and is fine to use if a joke is deliberate on the part of a character (or, in case of references to the media's development, a developer).

Proposer: DrippingYellow (talk)
Deadline: May 26, 2024, 23:59 GMT

Support

  1. DrippingYellow (talk) This whole situation is, dare I say it... "humorous". Per proposal.
  2. Camwoodstock (talk) Per proposal. Flowery writing is no laughing matter!
  3. Hewer (talk) I'd add that "comedic" should be used instead to get across that something is meant to be funny while using more objective language, but otherwise, sure, I'll humour this idea.
  4. Ray Trace (talk) We should just get rid of that subjective adjective altogether, let readers decide from the context of the quote if it's humorous or not, we don't need to write an editorial about it (ie sentences such as "Patrick gets caught by Sandy's lasso and dragged back, resulting in a nuclear explosion" already conveys to the reader that it's comedic)
  5. TheFlameChomp (talk) Per all.

Oppose

Comments

"Comical" and "comedic" should be fine, as those simply mean relating to comedy. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 19:31, May 12, 2024 (EDT)

"Comedic" is definitely fine, but in multiple dictionary sources I've come across, the definition of "comical" meaning "relating to comedy" is either listed as obsolete and deprecated, or absent altogether. DrippingYellow (talk) 19:43, May 12, 2024 (EDT)

@Ray Trace That was a really good example of obvious comedy. SpongeBob itself is comedy, so that was a good idea to use that as an example! SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA) (talk) 08:12, May 15, 2024 (EDT)

@Hewer I updated the rules blurb, is it good now? DrippingYellow (talk) 11:34, May 15, 2024 (EDT)

Yeah, that works. Hewer (talk · contributions · edit count) 11:43, May 15, 2024 (EDT)

Standardize "History in the Super Mario franchise" headings under certain conditions

Inspired by Nintendo101's flowerpot subpage (from an earlier revision, before it had been removed), this proposal aims to standardize the use of ==History in the Super Mario franchise== over ==History==. This will help make it clear to readers what is Super Mario and what is not while reading articles, and prevent potential disputes once a standard has been set. Please note that this proposal is NOT about the DK, Yoshi, or Wario subfranchises.

For an article to apply for the ==History in the Super Mario franchise== heading, the article should meet one of the following criteria:

  1. It is a generic subject (e.g. Grapes) or something from real life, like a person, with a fictional portrayal in Super Mario media, such as Thomas Jefferson. An example of this was on the Dinosaur article before being reverted.
  2. It is from the Super Mario franchise BUT has also appeared in non-Super Mario media, popular examples being the Super Smash Bros. series and the Minecraft textures. Everything that isn't Super Mario would be subheadings of ==History in other games==, or ==History in other media== if the subject also (or instead) appeared in publications, television shows, etc. not in Super Mario franchise. An example of this can be seen on the History of Luigi article.
  3. Crossover content, including Nintendo products, as they appear in Super Mario media. Examples can be seen on the Game Boy, Link, and Egg Pawn pages.

For the first bullet point, this would help establish that real and generic subjects are not from Super Mario and makes the History heading less ambiguous. On the Dinosaur article, for example, are we reading about history of dinosaurs as they exist in real life, up to the point of extinction, or from the Super Mario franchise? It's the latter. For George Washington, are we reading history about him from the 18th century or as he exists in the Super Mario franchise? It's also the latter, clearly.

For the second bullet point, this would help eliminate the popular misconception that Super Smash Bros. is part of the Super Mario franchise and help better contextualize Super Mario as it exists in other media, like sometimes Zelda or Minecraft, rather than being integral to the same degree as their main appearances in Super Mario media itself.

For the third bullet point, this would eliminate confusion that the history is talking about Nintendo products in general, like when they were produced, the amount of sales generated, etc. and rather mention its appearances within the Super Mario franchise itself. History on Nintendo products themselves can be found on NintendoWiki. Similarly, for articles like Link, it helps when the History section specifies it is of Link as he appears in the Super Mario franchise. Then connections to Super Mario go under the "History in other media" heading.

To make it short, if this proposal passes, and ==History== is changed to ==History in the ''Super Mario'' franchise== (and split into a separate ==History in other media== in the case of criteria #2) on an article that can be categorized by any of the three numbered bullet points above, users will not be allowed to revert it back to the initial ==History== heading, like in the aforementioned case involving the Dinosaur article.

Proposer: Super Mario RPG (talk)
Deadline: May 31, 2024, 23:59 GMT

Support for all three options

  1. Super Mario RPG (talk) I'm for this option.
  2. SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA) (talk) Yes. Also, for the flowerpot thing, I have that saved (with a few tweaks) here.

Apply to only crossover content and real products

Oppose

  1. Hewer (talk) Similar to your previous proposals about reorganising history sections, I don't really see what we'd gain from this. For the first and third bullet points, the edit summary that removed it from the Dinosaur page sums up my thoughts: "This is obvious and unnecessary". Of course we're only going to be covering the subject's history that's within our scope, I don't think anyone's visiting the Dinosaur page seeking a complete history of the Mesozoic Era only to be disappointed when they don't find it. For the second bullet point, I ask the same question as your last attempt to split up non-Mario appearances: why does it not being a Mario game make it worth splitting up? The assertion that they're not "integral to the same degree as their main appearances in Super Mario media itself" feels wrong, games like Smash are major appearances of the Mario characters and are important to their histories, sometimes moreso than appearances in actual Mario games (Smash Melee introducing Yoshi's Egg Roll, Smash Ultimate being K. Rool's first physical appearance in a decade, etc.). I also again question whether "the popular misconception that Super Smash Bros. is part of the Super Mario franchise" exists or is worth "fixing" in such an indirect way (we already don't consider them Mario games to my knowledge anyway). The Game Boy example is the only one given where I see some merit in doing this, since we do give some coverage to the actual histories of Nintendo hardware and it could be worth distinguishing the history of their in-universe appearances from that.
  2. Nintendo101 (talk) Because this is the Super Mario Wiki, the inherent assumption is that any subject with an article appears in the franchise (including Link and Sonic), and that the "History" section would only cover its appearance in the Super Mario franchise. What else would it be about? If a "history in the Super Mario franchise" was to be implemented anywhere, I feel like it only makes sense for recurring subjects that debuted in the Super Mario franchise, but make recurring appearances elsewhere (like Chain Chomps, which make some a few appearances in Zelda). But even in that context, I don't know if it would be appropriate. (I also don't agree with the premise that any in-game subject is "generic", regardless of its name or design. The grapes in Yoshi's Story are just as derived from the real article as the Sour Bunch.)
  3. Nightwicked Bowser (talk) Per my edit summary Hewer quoted.

Comments

For clarity, when I say "standardize," (not to be confused with "allow," since I don't think there's anything in the rules that explicitly forbids formatting in the aforementioned three cases), it means if a page is formatted that way, others aren't allowed to revert it, since it's the standard for how said articles should look. Also, @SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA), glad to see that flowerpot page. Super Mario RPG (talk) 14:32, May 17, 2024 (EDT)

"For clarity, when I say "standardize," (not to be confused with "allow," since I don't think there's anything in the rules that explicitly forbids formatting in the aforementioned three cases), it means if a page is formatted that way, others aren't allowed to revert it, since it's the standard for how said articles should look." Thanks for the clarification! My support will still be there. "Also, @SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA), glad to see that flowerpot page." Thanks! I wanted to keep/expand on it as a subpage of my userpage, b/c I didn't want any edit conflicts. You and @Nintendo101 are free to edit it if you want. SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA) (talk) 14:43, May 17, 2024 (EDT)

Wasn't there a proposal about roughly the same thing not too long ago? You're meant to wait 28 days between proposals on the same thing, so if that's the case, we don't exactly wanna wait for a substantial amount of votes before calling attention to it. ~Camwoodstock (talk) 15:12, May 17, 2024 (EDT)

No, I think this is different. That one had to do with removing franchise headers, which this one doesn't. SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA) (talk) 15:23, May 17, 2024 (EDT)
Yeah, this one is not about removing headings. It's about modifying "History" to "History in the Super Mario franchise" in one of three case, and in one case (if there's appearances outside of Super Mario), splitting "History in other games/media" into its own history heading. See what I did on Don Bongo as an example. Super Mario RPG (talk) 15:39, May 17, 2024 (EDT)

Where would appearances in things like Smash and Captain N go in this case? -- KOOPA CON CARNE 15:40, May 17, 2024 (EDT)

"History in other media" (see Link article). Super Mario RPG (talk) 15:41, May 17, 2024 (EDT)
Makes sense. SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA) (talk) 15:48, May 17, 2024 (EDT)

@Hewer @Nintendo101 @Nightwicked Bowser I thought "This is a Super Mario Wiki" as a argument was getting old, but that's what you 3 are using! What happened in between? Is it not a old argument anymore? SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA) (talk) 09:04, May 20, 2024 (EDT)

I don't think anything in the comment you reference contradicts any of the sentiments made here. No one is arguing subjects that originated outside of the Super Mario franchise (like Link, Sonic, Mad Scienstein, Wart, etc.) should not receive coverage, nor that appearances made by subjects that did emerged within the franchise should not be noted (like Link's Awakening, Smash Bros., Tetris, Qix, etc.). Rather, because of the inherent scope of the wiki, it is assumed that a "History" section on this site encompasses the subject of the article's appearances in the Super Mario franchise and it is unclear to me why that needs further clarification. - Nintendo101 (talk) 09:35, May 20, 2024 (EDT)
But you said yourself in your oppose vote "Because this is the Super Mario Wiki", which, again, I thought was getting old as an argument. Hewer himself in the linked proposal said it! I'm just confused about what changed in between that and now. SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA) (talk) 09:38, May 20, 2024 (EDT)
First off, why are you getting on Nintendo101's case for an argument that I made in a proposal they didn't even take part in? Second, my point when I made that comment was that "This is a Super Mario wiki" is getting old as an argument on its own to trim, reorganise, or otherwise alter crossover content like Smash, as Super Mario RPG keeps trying to do, whereas Nintendo101's argument is that, because this is a Super Mario wiki, we don't need to specify that our content is about Super Mario. The same words may have been used, but the context of the arguments is different. Hewer (talk · contributions · edit count) 11:54, May 20, 2024 (EDT)
First off, I'm not. Second, I didn't know that the CONTEXT was different, I only paid attention to the words, not the context. Third, a "History" section only covering the Super Mario franchise kinda neglects the references and cameos. SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA) (talk) 12:01, May 20, 2024 (EDT)
Isn't the point of this proposal (which you're supporting) to have history sections that only cover the Super Mario franchise? Hewer (talk · contributions · edit count) 12:05, May 20, 2024 (EDT)
I would like to redirect you to point 2 of the proposal. SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA) (talk) 12:31, May 20, 2024 (EDT)
Does that not just prove my point? Hewer (talk · contributions · edit count) 12:34, May 20, 2024 (EDT)
The history section is going to be split. That's the point of this proposal. YOUR point is just around 1/2 of the point of this proposal. SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA) (talk) 12:45, May 20, 2024 (EDT)

New features

None at the moment.

Removals

None at the moment

Changes

Create seperate pages for Level themes

I think there should be seperate pages for level themes for example: Grass lands. Not just as categories. And it should not be listed alphabetical, but rather after a game for extram all Grass land levels in Super Mario World. Than another page for different Desert levels, sorted by games.

Proposer: Big Super Mario Fan (talk) (banned)
Deadline: May 21, 2024, 23:59 GMT

Support

#Big Super Mario Fan (talk) - Per my proposal.

  1. SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA) (talk) Well, the proposer said it wasn't for repetition, so sure.
  2. MegaBowser64 (talk) Per proposal

Oppose

  1. Sparks (talk) Categories are enough. If there were to be articles of different level themes across all Mario games, it would get much too repetitive. Adding category identifications to the bottom of level articles sorts them all without the need for many extra pages.
  2. Camwoodstock (talk) Per Sparks. These would get very repetitive, very quickly.
  3. Mario (talk) I'm not going to support a proposal that's poorly put together. Elucidate your course of action.
  4. Ray Trace (talk) The Level page I feel is already adequate for covering the themes (could maybe use an expansion). As for the Airship, Ghost House, etc. those are at least marked with a unique icon in the world map whereas a generic snow course isn't so I feel those are exceptions rather than the rule.
  5. Sdman213 (talk) Per all.
  6. Nintendo101 (talk) Per Ray Trace.

BMfan08 (talk) We already have a Level page to discuss nuances of the types of levels. Making separate pages for these would be repetitive, as Sparks and Camwoodstock said, and I fear that the listing of the levels would be longer than the description of the themes.

Comments

To be fair, we do have pages for Airship, Ghost House, Fortress, Tower, and Castle. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 22:44, May 13, 2024 (EDT)

@ Doc von Schmeltwick: Yes, why can't we make pages for the other level themes too. This would also be helpful for the Super Mario Maker articles. Big Super Mario Fan (talk) 22:51, May 13, 2024 (EDT)

@Doc von Schmeltwick: That is a valid point, though I'd like to point out that only one of those pages actually lists all the levels of that type (which, if I'm not mistaken, is what the proposer wants to do with these articles).
@Big Super Mario Fan: What do you mean by helpful for the Super Mario Maker articles? BMfan08 (talk) 22:55, May 13, 2024 (EDT)

@BMfan08:For example in the Super Mario Maker 2 article you can click on the levels themes Ghosthouse , Airships, Castles. To than see the history of those on their own articles. I think this should also be done for orher level themes. Because that's really interesting to know. For example on YouTube there are also videos about the evolution of Grass land levels or Dessert levels, etc. Big Super Mario Fan (talk) 23:05, May 13, 2024 (EDT)

I'm stuck here. On the one hand, the opposition has a point. On the other hand, both Doc & BSMF have good points too. SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA) (talk) 08:41, May 14, 2024 (EDT)

This is why I'm abstaining for now. As Doc points out, we have several articles on specific level themes already, so making articles on other recurring level themes such as Ground/Grassland/Overworld and Underground would be obvious. On the other hand, it could be seen as becoming quickly repetitive, and something like Level already covers all themes without the repetition. It would also bring into question whether courses such asWorld 1-3 (Super Mario Bros.) should be counted as ground levels or sky levels. ArendLogoTransparent.pngrend (talk) (edits) 12:36, May 14, 2024 (EDT)
True, true. As for the 1-3 thing, I personally view it as both. SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA) (talk) 13:40, May 14, 2024 (EDT)
Yeah, after giving things some thought from everyone here, I'm removing my vote for the time being. I'll abstain though, only cause I'm not entirely sure what the proposer has in mind for such articles. I'm not interested if the end goal is repetition for the sake of it. BMfan08 (talk) 14:05, May 14, 2024 (EDT)
I don't really know WHAT the proposer has in mind, which is why I'm abstaining. SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA) (talk) 14:11, May 14, 2024 (EDT)

@SONIC123CDMANIA: I tell you what I have in mind. There should be pages for level themes likes Grass lands, Deserts, etc. They should be structured like the pages about Ghosthouse, Airship and Castle. Big Super Mario Fan (talk) 17:45, May 14, 2024 (EDT)

(facepalm) I knew THAT, I'm talking about the other comments. Is this just for repetition, or not? SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA) (talk) 08:38, May 15, 2024 (EDT)

No, it's not just for reptition. It's also interesting to know about such things. Big Super Mario Fan (talk) 18:42, May 15, 2024 (EDT)

Ah, ok. Thanks. SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA) (talk) 08:44, May 16, 2024 (EDT)

@Mario: As I wrote. The Proposal is about creating pages for Grassland, Dessert, Water Level themes (History, Apperances), that a built like the pages for Ghost House, Airship, Castle. Big Super Mario Fan (talk) 20:55, May 16, 2024 (EDT)

Break alphabetical order in enemy lists to list enemy variants below their base form

bit of a wordy title, so let me explain.

as they stand, enemy lists in game articles are sorted purely alphabetically. this causes some minor organization issues, for example: the "B" section of every enemy list being crowded with just about every Big variant in the game. i think that's not a useful communication of information. what i propose is that instead, variations such as Big Goombas, Horned Ant Troopers, that usually don't appear on their own, would be listed right after the base form even if it breaks alphabetical order. of course, since there can be more than one variation of an enemy, those would then be listed alphabetically, placing Big Goomba before Mini Goomba.

some games split new enemies into their own table, so if a game introduces a new variation (such as something like a Big Gamboo) they would just be on the new enemy table.

Proposer: EvieMaybe (talk)
Deadline: May 21, 2024, 23:59 GMT

Support

  1. EvieMaybe (talk) as proposer.
  2. SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA) (talk) Yeah, sure
  3. JanMisali (talk) Per proposal.
  4. Super Mario RPG (talk) Yeah, I'm fine with this.
  5. Jazama (talk) Per all
  6. ThePowerPlayer (talk) Per proposal.
  7. Yook Bab-imba (talk) This is something that has bothered me forever, so I agree wholeheartedly.

Big Super Mario Fan (talk) I think that's really a good idea.

Oppose

#Megadardery (talk) As the proposal currently stands, it doesn't offer a well-established alternative to the alphabetical order. I assume you mean that you want to merge the following as well (Paratroopas is grouped with Koopa Troopa, King Bob-omb is grouped with Bob-ombs, etc). Doesn't this mean, we are just grouping by species? List of species kind of already fills this purpose. Alphabetical order makes the most sense for an uncategorized exhaustive list of enemies, where List of species page fills other purposes.

Comments

Would you be open to drafting an example of what you'd like to see changed on your userpage or a sandbox? I'm kinda visually oriented. - Nintendo101 (talk) 19:48, May 14, 2024 (EDT)

Some time ago I formatted the New Super Mario Bros. 2#Enemies and obstacles in a manner similar to this proposal. This game has the gold variants, and having them clumped together just because they all begin with "gold" was odd (in fact, most enemies in this game are just variants), so I took the liberty to rearrange it. Yook Bab-imba 12:58, May 17, 2024 (EDT)

@Megadardery: I'm pretty sure Evie is just talking about enemy lists on game articles (e.g. Super Mario Bros. Wonder), which tend to always list enemies in alphabetical order regardless of enemy variants. Evie mentions how enemies are listed on games a lot. ArendLogoTransparent.pngrend (talk) (edits) 20:09, May 14, 2024 (EDT)

indeed, i kind of forgot to specify. retouched phrasing to clarify. EvieMaybe (talk) 23:42, May 14, 2024 (EDT)
Oh, I apologize, I thought this referred to List of enemies. I'll redact my vote, I agree that alphabetical order in articles is clunky, but I think chronological order (order by appearance in levels) makes the most intuitive sense. As it's less "subjective" than other forms of grouping--
User:MegadarderyUser talk:MegadarderyDashbot signature
 06:47, May 15, 2024 (EDT)
You know, that's not a bad idea either. We'll have to see what Evie thinks of it, though. ArendLogoTransparent.pngrend (talk) (edits) 07:25, May 15, 2024 (EDT)
Weird, I remember looking at the linked page once and that was how it was structured! Did something change since then, or was that a different page? Maybe it was this?? SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA) (talk) 08:41, May 15, 2024 (EDT)

I don't know how this wasn't noticed by anyone before (including myself), but it appears this proposal was set to two weeks after its creation. Only talk page proposals and writing guideline proposals can last up to two weeks without extension, so I changed the deadline to one week after its creation (...which is today). It doesn't look like it needs an extension anyway if the current standing indicates anything. ArendLogoTransparent.pngrend (talk) (edits) 08:49, May 20, 2024 (EDT)

You would be correct that this proposal would only last one week instead of two. However, I looked at the Proposals history and it appears to have been created on the 14th, meaning that this proposal would really be finished on the 21st. The proposal above this one also has an end date of the 21st, so unless the order was somehow broken it would fit chronologically. BMfan08 (talk) 11:39, May 20, 2024 (EDT)
i figured "changing how we list enemies across the whole wiki" counted as a writing guideline, sorry EvieMaybe (talk) 12:00, May 20, 2024 (EDT)
@BMfan: Oh, you're right. I was being bad at math for a moment - my mistake.
@EvieMaybe: I'm personally unsure whether "change how we sort enemies on game articles" counts as a writing guideline or not (perhaps I should pay more attention reading this), but I do know that proposals about writing guidelines should be listed under its appropriate header. ArendLogoTransparent.pngrend (talk) (edits) 12:16, May 20, 2024 (EDT)

@EvieMaybe while I like the idea of organization being loosened a bit for more curatorial discretion, I think the alphabetization of enemies emerged organically from utility. You even see this in Nintendo's officially produced guidebooks and Mario Portal, where enemies are more often than not alphabetized. Some games have literally hundreds of enemies, and what is a "variant" or "relative" of another creature is sometimes subjective. It is also is not always clear which member of clearly related enemies (like Spoing and Sprangler; Octoomba and Rocto) is derivative of which. What would you recommend in these cases? - Nintendo101 (talk) 10:08, May 20, 2024 (EDT)

that's a good point. i don't think i should be the sole arbiter of what counts as a minor variant, though. maybe we could make a proposal defining it? in the meantime, small, big and alternate colored variants (stuff like Fire Spike) definitely do EvieMaybe (talk) 12:05, May 20, 2024 (EDT)
I feel like it would make most sense to just list alphabetically as usual if there's uncertainty surrounding what's a variant of what, and only make the exception for enemies that are certainly variants. Hewer (talk · contributions · edit count) 12:11, May 20, 2024 (EDT)
I have implemented (what I understand to be) the changes called for in this proposal to the Super Mario Galaxy enemy tables in my sandbox here. Does this look alright to folks? - Nintendo101 (talk) 21:45, May 20, 2024 (EDT)
that's exactly what i was picturing!EvieMaybe (talk) 23:26, May 20, 2024 (EDT)

Decide whether to merge the {{more images}}, {{more media}}, and/or {{more refs needed}}

I may have created the {{more refs needed}} template, but I later saw a discussion for merging it with {{unreferenced}}. That inspired me to plan on merging {{more images}} and {{more media}} with {{image}} and {{media missing}} respectively, so I decided to make a proposal containing three options:

Option 1
Merge {{more images}}, {{more media}}, and {{more refs needed}} with {{image}}, {{media missing}}, and {{unreferenced}} respectively AND create the categories Articles with sections that need more images, Articles with sections that need more images.
Option 2
ONLY merge {{more refs needed}} with {{unreferenced}}.
Option 3
Keep as they are.

Here are some examples:

Template:Image 

<div class="notice-template maintenance" style="background:#FF6;border:1px solid #630">
It has been requested that {{#if:{{{more|}}}|'''more images'''|at least one '''image'''}} be [[Special:Upload|uploaded]] for this {{#if:{{{section|}}}|section|article}}. Remove this notice only after the {{#if:{{{more|}}}|additional images|image(s)}} have been added. {{#if:{{{reason|{{{1|}}}}}}|'''Specific(s):''' {{{reason|{{{1}}}}}}}}
</div><includeonly>{{#switch:{{NAMESPACE}}||Gallery=[[Category:Articles {{#if:{{{section|}}}|with sections}} that need {{#if:{{{more|}}}|more images|an image}}]]}}</includeonly>

{{image|more=yes|section=yes|Sprites}}

=

It has been requested that more images be uploaded for this section. Remove this notice only after the additional images have been added. Specific(s): Sprites

Template:Media missing 

{| class="notice-template maintenance" style="background:#C88AFF;border:1px solid #630"
|style="padding-right:10px"|[[File:Soundx.png|25px|class=invert-dark]]
|style="padding-top:3px"| It has been requested that {{#if:{{{more|}}}|'''more audio and/or video files'''|at least one '''audio and/or video file'''}} related to this {{#if:{{{section|}}}|section|article}} be uploaded. {{#if:{{{reason|{{{1|}}}}}}|'''Specific(s):''' {{{reason|{{{1}}}}}}|<includeonly>{{#switch:{{NAMESPACE}}||Gallery=[[Category:Articles with incomplete maintenance tags]]}}<br><small>Please upload all related music, sound effects, voice clips, or any videos for this {{#if:{{{section|}}}|section|article}}. See the [[Help:Media|help]] page for information on how to get started.</small>
|}<includeonly>{{#switch:{{NAMESPACE}}||Gallery=[[Category:Articles {{#if:{{{section|}}}|with sections}} that need {{#if:{{{more|}}}|more media|media}}]]}}</includeonly>

{{media missing|more=yes|section=yes|Voice clips}}

=

Soundx.png It has been requested that more audio and/or video files related to this section be uploaded. Specific(s): Voice clips
Please upload all related music, sound effects, voice clips, or any videos for this section. See the help page for information on how to get started.

{{media missing|more=yes|Videos}}

=

Soundx.png It has been requested that more audio and/or video files related to this article be uploaded. Specific(s): Videos
Please upload all related music, sound effects, voice clips, or any videos for this article. See the help page for information on how to get started.

Template:Unreferenced 

<div class="notice-template maintenance" style="background:#FC5;border:1px solid #f22">
This {{#if:{{{section|}}}|section|article}} '''{{#if:{{{more|}}}|needs additional citations for [[MarioWiki:Citations|verification]]|does not [[MarioWiki:Citations|cite any sources]]}}'''. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. {{#if:{{{reason|{{{1|}}}}}}|'''Specific(s):''' {{{reason|{{{1}}}}}}|<includeonly>{{#switch:{{NAMESPACE}}||Gallery=[[Category:Articles with incomplete maintenance tags]]}}</includeonly>}}<br><small>Please help {{plain link|1=[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} improve this {{#if:{{{section|}}}|section|article}}]}} by [[MarioWiki:Citations#How to add references|adding citations from reliable sources]].</small>
</div><includeonly>{{#switch:{{NAMESPACE}}||Gallery=[[Category:Articles {{#if:{{{more|}}}|{{#if:{{{section|}}}|with sections}} that need more citations|with {{#if:{{{section|}}}|unsourced sections|no sources}}}}]]}}</includeonly>

{{unreferenced|more=yes|section=yes|Spanish and German names}}

This section needs additional citations for verification. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. Specific(s): Spanish and German names
Please help improve this section by adding citations from reliable sources.

Once the proposal ends with Option 1, we'll be able to merge these templates and then replace the {{more images, {{more media, and {{more refs needed syntax with the {{image|more=yes, {{media missing|more=yes, and {{unreferenced|more=yes syntax respectively. However, once the proposal ends with Option 2, we'll only be able to merge the {{more refs needed}} template and then replace the {{more refs needed syntax with the {{unreferenced|more=yes syntax. Once the proposal ends with Option 3, we'll keep the {{more refs needed template and protect it.

Proposer: GuntherBayBeee (talk)
Deadline: May 28, 2024, 23:59 GMT

Option 1

  1. GuntherBayBeee (talk) Per proposal
  2. Super Mario RPG (talk) I like the idea of integrating the functionality of the aforementioned templates.

Option 2

Option 3

Comments

Create a category for teenagers

One thing that feels strange to me on this wiki is the current age categories. We have children and babies. However, when it comes to teenagers, it either goes to the children category or doesn't go there at all. Granted, both are underage, but it does not help the average user who wants to find all the teenage characters on this wiki. I mean, if we are okay with creating the categories for the previous underaged characters, a third one one wouldn't hurt. For this to count, I looked for every character that was considered to be a teenager in the Super Mario franchise at one point. We have enough categories for them to be put in, having about ten Super Mario characters to count. I'm probably missing a couple and if so, please let me know in the comments. The exact criteria are thirteen to seventeen years old or confirmed to be one. Characters like Tiny Kong wouldn't make it in this category as she was never confirmed to be a teenager in her recent design.

Below is a list of Super Mario characters who are or were teenagers.

And here is a list of non-Super Mario characters who would be affected by this proposal. This only applies if they were portrayed as teenagers within said game. For example, Vector the Crocodile was labeled as one in his earlier appearances but is considered an adult in later games, including all Mario & Sonic games.

I don't know any potential counterarguments in disfavor of this, because this would be much more helpful and less broad than having any underage character be sent to the children category, especially when that's rare, as some of the above-mentioned characters are not put in that category. Plus, it would be weird to call Little Mac or Mona a child. Yes, I know people sometimes describe teens as kids, but it's a lot more misleading if put in those categories.

Proposer: TheUndescribableGhost (talk)
Deadline: May 28, 2024, 23:59 GMT

Support

  1. TheUndescribableGhost (talk) Per proposal

Oppose

  1. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) - The main reason we have the "babies" category is the Yoshi's Island games having the baby counterparts. There's no teen-focused variation of the Mario cast (knock on wood, there)
  2. SolemnStormcloud (talk) As someone who feels Category:Children doesn't have much of a reason to exist, a category for teenagers would have even less of a reason to.

Comments

Not sure if I did the references right for this. TheUndescribableGhost (talk) 22:54, May 21, 2024 (EDT)

References

  1. ^ WarioWare: Touched! European website She is "fifteen going on 500".
  2. ^ Pelland, Scott, and Kent Miller. Super Mario RPG: Legend of the Seven Stars Player's Guide. Page 4.
  3. ^ Mario Kart Arcade GP DX uses the Ghostly Adventures design of Pacster, who is a teenager in that show.
  4. ^ a b His age is listed as twelve to thirteen years old.
  5. ^ Depending on the languages of her games, she is either of teenage age or adult age.

Miscellaneous

None at the moment.

Retrieved from "https://www.mariowiki.com/index.php?title=MarioWiki:Proposals&oldid=4221391"