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

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 Guideline proposals must include a link to the draft page.
2. 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.
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. 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.
6. No proposal can overturn the decision of a previous proposal that is less than 4 weeks (28 days) old.
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. All proposals that end up in a tie will be extended for another week.
9. 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.
10. 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.
11. 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.
12. 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. Please note that cancelled proposals must also be archived.
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. 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.
15. Proposals cannot be made about promotions and demotions. Users can only be promoted and demoted by the will of the administration.
16. 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.

Rules

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

• Move Cyan Yoshi to Template:Fakelink (Discuss) Deadline: October 26, 2011, 23:59 GMT
• Split Template:Fakelink from Toad Town and merge it to Toad Town Tunnels or into it's own article (Discuss) Deadline: October 29, 2011, 23:59 GMT
• Move Mario Tennis (Nintendo 64) to Template:Fakelink (Discuss) Deadline: November 1, 2011, 23:59 GMT
• Move Mario Golf (Nintendo 64) to Template:Fakelink (Discuss) Deadline: November 1, 2011, 23:59 GMT

Writing Guidelines

Animation errors and cartoon episodes pages

The pages for the individual episodes of the three DIC cartoons and the CGI Donkey Kong Country series often lists the animation goofs (stuff like "Luigi has three eyes in one shot") and minor continuity errors, and due to the shoddy animation of all four shows, the listings can get quite big. However, the way they are organised isn't consistent, with most pages listing the errors in the Trivia section and an handful other putting them in their own separate sections. Either way, it needs to be more consistent.

Proposer: Glowsquid (talk)
Deadline: October 29, 2011, 23:59 GMT

Have a "Animation and Continuity error" section and move the relevant info there

1. Glowsquid (talk) - I find this preferable because the animation errors are numerous and recurring enough to be distinct from the one-off anecdotes that the trivia sections are for.
2. Nintendo64Fan (talk) - Per Glowsquid.
3. Lindsay151 (talk) - A section would be good, Per all.
4. LeftyGreenMario (talk) It makes the trivia section too big. I think these goofs deserve their own section.
5. Bop1996 (talk) Overdone trivia looks really bad, so this would help with fixing a lot of this. Per all.
6. M&SG (talk) - This would help clean up the Trivia sections a lot.
7. Dry-Petey (talk) - They really are cluttered.

New Features

Create Template:Fakelink

This template would be similar to this, and has one main use; to anchor a section link to a specific part of a page, without adding it into the table of contents or affecting the table's appearance in any way. For example, linking to [[Badge#Fire Shield]], would go straight to the badge's table entry, without actually changing the appearance of the article as a result of the template. This would also be used on other pages with large lists of entries in tables, such as Pokémon, and any other articles that might benefit from it.

Proposer: Bop1996 (talk)
Deadline: October 23, 2011, 23:59 GMT

Support

1. Bop1996 (talk) As I stated above, this would allow us to link directly to an entry in a long table, including in redirects. This could be potentially very helpful, and takes very little effort to add to pages.
2. Baby Mario Bloops (talk) - It would be very effective on pages that link to Badge or Clothing page, and direct it even further than what it is now. This would be very good indeed.
3. Jazama (talk) I am surprised that we did not have this already! Per all
4. Mario & Luigi (talk) I guess after I read the comments, well, per all...
5. Super Mario Bros. (talk) – I think this is a great idea. Per Bop1996.
6. Mario4Ever (talk) Per proposal.
7. Phoenix (talk) Per all. I can definitely think of a few pages where this could be incorporated to our advantage.
8. MrConcreteDonkey (talk) - Per proposal.
9. M&SG (talk) - This might work, if made correctly.
10. RandomYoshi (talk) - Per all.
11. Bowser's luma (talk) Perfect. I've always liked how Bulbapedia does that, now I know how and think we should do it too!
12. Walkazo (talk) - Per all. Being able to link directly to table entries will be a great asset to wiki navigation.
13. Lakituthequick (talk) Per all.
14. Fawfulfury65 (talk) Per all. It will be easier to navigate with this.
15. Rise Up Above It (talk) Per all. This is a great idea.

Oppose

1. Wildgoose (talk)-This is more of a disimprovement, rather than an improvement. It would probably cause tons of navigation errors,and cause a crash or two. Bop1996, could you leave Mariowiki alone?

Comments

The only problem I see in this is 2 things - a) even though you say it will be easy, how will we incorporate it? and b) what will qualify something to be from [[Page#Subtitle]] to [[Page#anchor]], as that needs to be stated clearer on what can and cannot be anchored. Also, a more personal question, what you have something that is shown twice in the page (i.e. - [[Badge#Spike Shield]] as there is one for the PM game and PM: TTYD game)? Baby Mario Bloops (talk)

All you do is go to the subject entry in the table, type in {{anchor|Badge name here}}, and the template does the rest. From that point on, any time you link to [[Badge#Badge name here]], it will go to that section, just like it would a normal section on any regular page. For the multiple name thing, I see no problem with using Spike Shield and Spike Shield 2. Bop1996 (talk)

That is what I thought. And for that first part, I was confused on how it would work as in how we would get anchor set up but I figured it from Bulbapedia. There is still the problem of what qualifies for anchoring. Baby Mario Bloops (talk)

In any instance where there will be a large amount of links to that page, and while we would normally link to a section there, there is no header there to link with. I've only investigated uses on MetroidWiki, where we use it so that pages like this can have their table entry linked with anchor in templates such as this one. However, in tables such as these, there aren't enough links referencing that specific entry, so we didn't put anchor there. See what I mean? Bop1996 (talk)

Oh, I understand. Partly I'm asking these questions so that we can clearly define how to use these before it take effect. Baby Mario Bloops (talk)

Yeah, it makes sense, I'd do the same thing probably.

@Mario & Luigi: Reread the proposal. What this does is makes a practically invisible section link we can use anywhere in an article. This is useful for long tables such as those on Badge, as all those Badge pages redirect to the closest header in the article, but not the badge's entry itself. You can't link to Badge#Fire Shield properly currently, as it's in a table, but you can if you use this template. Bop1996 (talk)

For the tables you can use id variable to the row or the cell, there's no point for this template to be made, as adding "id=[txt]" is much shorter than the template. Example here. SWFlash (talk)

@SWFlash: This isn't restricted to just tables, and multitasks fairly well (even though I don't have any immediate plans for it), so I think creating it would reveal some other uses.

@Wildgoose: Actually, it doesn't cause any troubles at all, unless you mess up when using it. Bop1996 (talk)

Bop1996, I know more than you think. One thing I know is that your "improvement" will cause technical glitches, navigation errors, and computer crashes. Can you just stop this silly proposal? Wildgoose (talk)

I doubt that, by your pompous-yet-only-slightly-impolite behaviour. Please try not to be like that if you want to be taken more seriously. Sorry, I'm probably waffling on now. x_X But Bop, this seems like a great idea. Navigation will become even qucker. Rise Up Above It (talk)

I'm sure that we can handle things if it starts causing unnexpected errors, but until then, we don't have any proof it will. We can't stop a possible advancement with "what if"s and "maybe"s. Marioguy1 (talk)

Aside from the non-specificity of the "technical glitches" mentioned, I've used this template myself on Metroid Wiki, as well as seen it in action on Bulbapedia, so I'm fairly certain it doesn't cause any problems at all. Bop1996 (talk)

Removals

None at the moment.

Changes

None at the moment.

Miscellaneous

None at the moment.