MarioWiki:Proposals

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 consensus before any action(s) are done. 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. All past proposals are archived.

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}}.

This page observes the No-Signature Policy.

How To

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.
2. Proposals end at the end of the day (23:59) one week after voting starts. (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.
3. Every vote should have a reason accompanying it. Agreeing with or seconding a previously mentioned reason given by another user is accepted.
4. 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.
5. All proposals that end up in a tie will be extended for another week.
6. If a proposal has more than ten votes, it can only pass or fail by a margin of three votes. If a proposal reaches the deadline and the total number of votes for each option differ by two or less votes, the deadline will be extended for another week.
7. Any proposal that has three votes or less at deadline will automatically be listed as "NO QUORUM." The original proposer then has the option to relist said proposal to generate more discussion.
8. No proposal can overturn the decision of a previous proposal that is less than 4 weeks (28 days) old.
9. Proposals can only be rewritten or deleted by their proposer within the first three days of their creation. However, proposers can request that their proposal be deleted by an administrator at any time, provided they have a valid reason for it.
10. 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.
11. There should not be proposals about creating articles on an underrepresented or completely absent subject, unless there is major disagreement about whether the content should be included. To organize efforts about completing articles on missing subjects, try creating a PipeProject.
12. Proposals cannot be made about promotions and demotions. Users can only be promoted and demoted by the will of the administration.
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. No joke proposals. Proposals are serious wiki matters and should be handled professionally. Joke proposals will be deleted on sight.

Basic Proposal and Support/Oppose Format

This is an example of what your proposal should 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]".

---

===[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, at 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 here.

How To

1. All active talk page proposals must be listed below in chronological order (new proposals go at the bottom). All pages affected must be mentioned in the brief description, with the talk page housing the discussion linked to directly via "(Template:Fakelink)". If the proposal involved a page that is not yet made, use {{fakelink}} to communicate its title. The Deadline must also be included in the entry. 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 heading.
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. Talk page proposals may be closed by the proposer at any time if both the support and the oppose sides each have fewer than five votes.
5. The talk page proposal must pertain to the article it is posted on.

List of Talk Page Proposals

• Merge Kraid with Brinstar Depths (Discuss) Passed
• Split Pale Piranha from Piranha Plant and merge Piranha Plant (Paper Mario: The Thousand-Year Door) with Piranha Plant (Discuss) Deadline: May 10, 2011, 23:59 GMT
• Merge Whispy Woods with Green Greens and Dream Land (Discuss) Deadline: May 11, 2011, 23:59 GMT
• Split Badge into a badge page for each game (Discuss) Deadline: May 12, 2011, 23:59 GMT
• Merge Double Dash!! to Rocket Start (Discuss) Deadline: April 29, 2011, 23:59 GMT Extended: May 6, 2011, 23:59 GMT Extended: May 13, 2011, 23:59 GMT
• Merge Fish (Balloon Fight) with Summit (Discuss) Deadline: May 17, 2011, 23:59 GMT
• Split Densetsu no Stafy 3 from Video game references (Discuss) Deadline: May 19, 2011, 23:59 GMT
• Merge relevant information from Starfy to Assist Trophy and Cameos (Discuss) Deadline: May 21, 2011, 23:59 GMT
• Remove mention of Pyoro from MarioWiki:Coverage (Discuss) Deadline: May 21, 2011, 23:59 GMT

New Features

Require FA Support Reason

Lately, I've seen some supports for FA Nominations where the user accidentally gave a reason. However, some of these have been reasons that are completely unrelated to the quality of the article, such as, "Boo is a main enemy so he should be a FA". Votes like this would be completely invalid if a reason was required. Also, reasons are required for unfeature opposes, which are kind of like feature supports

Proposer: Yoshiwaker (talk)
Deadline: May 14, 23:59 GMT

Support

1. Yoshiwaker (talk) This would prevent articles from being featured just because a lot of people liked the character, or something of the like.

Oppose

1. LeftyGreenMario (talk) Supports USED to have a reason to go along, but we removed them because they are unnecessary. What can you say when you support other than "Per" or "I like this article"? Supports also do no harm at all other than bumping the nomination. Once we have an oppose vote, the article will not be featured or unfeatured until the oppose vote is removed, basically. We might need a rule for nominations that go on for nearly a year (like Luigi, how many fans does he have?), due to fans continuously bumping the nomination but I don't see exactly why we need reason for support. This fan voting controversy has been going on for a a long time, and I think this is the way to go. I will state it again: support votes do not make the article featured. I think it is more of the lack of oppose votes that make an article featured.
2. Mario4Ever (talk) Per LGM
3. Superfiremario (talk) Per Lgm.
4. Magikrazy51 (talk) LGM FTW (for the win). Per her.
5. Zero777 (talk) Per LGM
6. UltraMario3000 (talk) Per LGM.

Comments

wouldnt it be easier to make it so articles with missing games or improvmant templates were completly banned i mean how many reasons are there to support something Goomba's Shoe15 (talk)

A.That would be for a different proposal and B. Most invalid reasons accidentally given are like, "___ is awesome so it should be a FA." or something like that. Yoshiwaker (talk)

i think that Featured article nominations should be removable if they are missing info on games or have those improvment templates ya know fix the article first than nominate it Goomba's Shoe15 (talk)

As I said, that's not what this proposal is about. Yoshiwaker (talk)

i understand that im just saying what stops fan boys from just saying per above Goomba's Shoe15 (talk)

Annoying as it seems, it doesn't really do any harm to the wiki, and anybody can fix to remove those templates any time. Sometimes, I'd like to see nominations as another way to improve articles. LeftyGreenMario (talk)

Removals

None at the moment.

Changes

Create articles for the multiple Nintendo's development divisions

Long ago, I came to notice we had the article for both Nintendo and Nintendo EAD (which I suggest to change the title into the complete: Nintendo Entertainment Analysis and Development), but when I checked the last aforementioned, I noticed Mario Sports Mix and many other games were listed there as games created and developed by that division. As long as I know, Mario Sports Mix was co-developed between Square Enix and Nintendo SPD Group 4. In addition, I noticed Nintendo R&D redirects to Nintendo EAD and even though this division no longer exists (as it was merged with EAD), it developed some Mario games, like Super Mario Land, without assistance from EAD (Miyamoto was not involved). Thus, by this proposal, I think we should create articles for the multiple Nintendo division's that have developed at least one Mario game, as well, as sorting every Mario game in the Nintendo EAD's article, into the respective division. In case this proposal passed, I think the articles we would need are:

• Nintendo Research & Development 1 (Super Mario Land series and Wario Land series)
• Nintendo Research & Development 2 (Super Mario Advance series)
  • I think these two can be merged in the same article.
• Nintendo Software Planning & Development (WarioWare series with Intelligent Systems)
• Nintendo Network Service Development (BS Super Mario USA and Mario Party-e)
• Nintendo Software Technology (Mario vs. Donkey Kong series)
• Nintendo Entertainment Analysis and Development (I added it to remind all this proposal also suggest the name change).

Proposer: Byllant (talk)
Deadline: May 12, 2011 23:59 GMT

Create them

1. Byllant (talk) - Per my proposal, in case an article is relatively short, I guess we should creat some kind of List of Nintendo's development divisions.
2. SWFlash (talk) Per proposal
3. Arend (talk) Per all.
4. Superfiremario (talk) Per proposal.
5. Bowser's luma (talk) Per all.
6. Mario4Ever (talk) Per all.
7. Magikrazy51 (talk) Per proposal.
8. Reddragon19k (talk) - That's awesome! If Nintendo has an article for itself, why not these! So... PER ALL!
9. M&SG (talk) - Ditto.
10. Loxo (talk) PER ALL!!!
11. UltraMario3000 (talk) Per all.
12. Paperphailurethemariomonster99 (talk) Per all! If you keep them all the same, it would be like not having seperate articles for the many types of Shy Guy, which I know because I am a Shy Guy. BTW, did I say PER ALL!?
13. Master Koopakid (talk) More articles=Awesomer wiki

Comments

Does this proposal include adding the names of the people that were/are part of a given division, or is it just going as far as "[insert division name here] was involved in the production of [insert game title here]?" Mario4Ever (talk)

Key people maybe added into the page as they are involved, I guess. Byllant (talk)

Miscellaneous

Make standard template names for like friend templates instead of always having to type the code

Hi. Would it be easier if you had just a simple template name. Like for let's say, Phoenix's friend template, we could move it to Template:Friend Of Phoenix in stead of having to type all those codes.

Proposer: Tom The Atum (talk)
Deadline: May 14, 23:59 GMT

Support

1. Tom The Atum (talk) I mean, have a link, like User:Tom The Atum/Friend Template. Also, for other ones, like This user thinks this is a funny gif or This user can dance very well, and there could be a category marked user templates made for those specific purposes, like when I was at Club Penguin Wiki before my one year four months ban.

Oppose

1. SWFlash (talk) The user-only templates should be located nowhere outside of the userspace.
2. Fawfulfury65 (talk) Userboxes do not help the mainspace in any way and they belong only on userspace. Also, it's a waste of space when you can just copy and paste the code for the userbox easily.
3. UltraMario3000 (talk) Per FF65 and SW.
4. Mariomario64 (talk) And this would help how? Per the three above me, especially Fawfulfury65.
5. Mario4Ever (talk) Per FF65. If you don't want to type code, you can either copy someone else's and use it as is (as in the case of a friend userbox) or modify it to make a new one.
6. Xzelion (talk) – Per All.
7. Phoenix (talk) Per all. (Lol, how'd I get mixed up in this...?)
8. Superfiremario (talk) Userboxes are big user things in wikis so no.
9. Yoshiyoshiyoshi (talk) This is confusing. It's fine the way it is. And you dont have to type it. You can copy and paste them. Its way easier.
10. Bop1996 (talk) Per FF65
11. Byllant (talk) - Sounds kindly useless.

Comments

I think I fixed the formatting. Bop1996 (talk)

I don't really understand this proposal. Clarification? BabyLuigiOnFire (talk)

I think he wants for there to be a template for each userbox in existence, so that instead of using the userbox template, you just type in {{User:Phoenix/Friend Template}}. Bop1996 (talk)

They shall only be used for userspace, not main. Club Penguin Wiki does the same thing. Tom The Atum (talk)

Well of course they'd only be used for userspace, what else would we put it in? "Mario is a friend of Phoenix". Xzelion (talk)

"Mario is a friend of Phoenix"? Why'd ya type that? Phoenix (talk) 03:33, 8 May 2011 (EDT)

@Phoenix They just mean the username is a friend of Phoenix. Superfiremario (talk)

@Phoenix: You seem to have been the unfortunate example listed here... Bop1996 (talk)