MarioWiki:Proposals

Proposals can be new features (such as an extension), removals of previously added features that have tired out, or new policies that must be approved via consensus before any action is taken. 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. 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.
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 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.

---

===[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

• Seperate each badge from the Badge article (Discuss) Deadline: February 18, 2012, 23:59 GMT
• Change the appearance of the buttons template. (Discuss) Deadline: February 22, 2012, 23:59 GMT
• Merge Whacka with Monty Mole (Discuss) Deadline: February 18, 2012, 23:59 GMT

Writing Guidelines

None at the moment.

New Features

None at the moment.

Removals

Removal of all non-punctuation redirects

While lurking throughout certain articles, I've noticed redirects for article titles that have a punctuation in them that don't include the punctuation, which really bugs me. For example, Super Mario Bros being a redirect of Super Mario Bros. and 9 Volt being a redirect of 9-Volt. It just seems rather unprofessional in my opinion.

Proposer: UltraMario3000 (talk)
Deadline: February 13, 2012, 23:59 GMT

Support

1. UltraMario3000 (talk) Read above. (Note: I'm not very good at deadlines, so correct me if I'm wrong.)
2. M&L (talk) Per UltraMario3000.

Oppose

1. Raven Effect (talk) I don't see any reason to remove these redirects after all it's really easy to forget the . in Super Mario Bros.
2. New Super Yoshi (talk) Actaully over 50% of people who use our wiki type in Super Mario Bros not Super Mario Bros. and we need to have them tacked straight to the page they wanted just like you typed in Mario which will take you strIight to the page he/she wanted to see. It would be unfair to see people type in Super Mario Bros and get taken straight to the search page for no reason.
3. Bop1996 (talk) Per my comment below.
4. Tails777 (talk) Per New Super Yoshi and Raven Effect. Some people don't bother to remember the punctuation.
5. Jazama (talk) Per all
6. Walkazo (talk) - We should stick with our current policy (see MarioWiki:Redirect): it recognizes that punctuation is often omitted or mixed up, and a few redirects to help searchers out is a small price to pay for making the wiki easy to use.
7. Mario4Ever (talk) Per all.
8. Phoenix (talk) Per all, MarioWiki:Redirect explains why these types of redirects are necessary.
9. Bowser's luma (talk) Can't argue policy. Per all.

Comments

@Opposers: Is it the actual name of the game though? No, it isn't. Abbreviation redirects are an exception though.--UltraMario3000 (talk)

So it's more professional to type in SMB than Super Mario Bros Raven Effect (talk)

If you wanted to search SMB to get to the article faster, yes, it is. Titles without punctuation aren't exactly faster to type in anyway. Gosh, one character away. It's like making Mari a redirect of Mario. Why? To get to the article faster of course.--UltraMario3000 (talk)

The difference is a . and it's very easy to forget a period it's not easy to forget to o in Mario Raven Effect (talk)

Well, you're missing my first point anyhow. "If you wanted to search SMB to get to the article faster, yes, it is. Titles without punctuation aren't exactly faster to type in anyway. Gosh, one character away.--UltraMario3000 (talk)

What's the difference between typing SMB and Super Mario Bros why should you be able to type in SMB to get to an article but not Super Mario Bros Raven Effect (talk)

Because Super Mario Bros only removes one character from Super Mario Bros.. People shouldn't be that lazy to forget about the. However, punctuation redirects such as 9 Volt are just awful and should at least be removed. It's easier to forget the period in Super Mario Bros. than the dash in 9-Volt. I guess punctuation redirects could be an except any articles that are not about games.--UltraMario3000 (talk)

The example title includes punctuation marks, which are one the largest stumbling blocks for searchers. In this case, they can forget the colon and/or one or both of the exclamation marks. For that reason, we have the redirects "Mario Kart Double Dash", "Mario Kart Double Dash!", "Mario Kart Double Dash!!", "Mario Kart: Double Dash", and "Mario Kart: Double Dash!".

This makes it pretty clear why we allow such redirects, and far outweighs the arguments against. Bop1996 (talk)

Ok, but using my point from my reply to GS, redirects like 9 Volt should at least be removed. I assume punctuation redirects are ok in game articles though.--UltraMario3000 (talk)

Also, what about removing redirects in game articles that don't use apostrophes?--UltraMario3000 (talk)

@NSY:"over 50% of people who use our wiki type in Super Mario Bros not Super Mario Bros." Template:Refneeded--UltraMario3000 (talk)

@UltraMario3000: Redirects using hyphens such as 9 Volt are necessary if they're used to redirect people from a commonly-used search term to the actual article. Bop1996 (talk)

@Bop: Didn't know that. I think you ignored this statement though: "what about removing redirects in game articles that don't use apostrophes?" Also, to add to that statement, I think article redirects that don't include the apostrophes or commas like the article they're redirecting to should probably be removed. If not removing the ones without commas, then at least the ones without apostrophes should be removed, as they're grammatically incorrect anyways.--UltraMario3000 (talk)

From the Spelling section of MarioWiki:Redirect (which also provided Bop's earlier quotation):

Leaving out apostrophes in contractions or in the possessive case (i.e. "Marios" instead of "Mario's") is considered an unacceptable spelling mistake.

Policy pages are here for a reason: read them. - Walkazo (talk)

Well, I've seen quite a majority of those kinds of redirects, so I assume it's safe to put a delete template on all of them.-UltraMario3000 (talk)

Changes

Change Special:WhosOnline

So I've had this idea in mind about doing major renovations to Who's Online. First things first, I think it should be much similar to the Who's Online of our forums, just without viewing guests. It's quite a hassle to inform someone you replied to their comment on a certain discussion in a talkpage/proposal without having known that he/she has currently been typing up a reply on the talkpage/proposal that you previously mentioned. With a Who's Online like the forums', you could actually know what page he/she is viewing, replying to a comment on a talkpage/proposal, or just generally editing an article without having to have wasted your time of the latter. Also, if you're viewing Who's Online via Recent Changes, there could be a show/hide button for you to click that shows extensive details on what they're viewing or commenting on so you can change it to fit your own preferences. Also, there could be a button like this, just replacing Members with Autoconfirmed Users (I'm not sure if there's a term for users who don't have special ranks like Sysops, Bureaucrats, and Patrollers other than Autconfirmed Users), removing Guests, and adding sections for Sysops, Bureaucrats, and Patrollers.

Proposer: UltraMario3000 (talk)
Deadline: February 13, 2012, 23:59 GMT

Support

1. UltraMario3000 (talk) Read above.
2. Yoshidude99 (talk) It would be a good feature.

Oppose

1. Raven Effect (talk) I don't see any reason to make this change (nor do i know if it's possible.
2. M&L (talk) Per Raven Effect. It's good enough the way it is.
3. Tails777 (talk) Per all. It's fine the way it is.
4. Bop1996 (talk) Per my comment below.
5. Mario4Ever (talk) Per Bop1996.
6. New Super Yoshi (talk). Per All.
7. Bowser's luma (talk) Per all

Comments

That'd have to be done via extension, and there isn't a feature similar to WhosOnline that I know of that could do that. The WhosOnline only shows users viewing pages on the wiki while logged in, and there's not a feature in there to do what you suggest.

Aside from the arguments I have against actually using this feature at all, this probably isn't possible, unless you have some method planned of doing so. The forum version is run by SMF, and this is run by MediaWiki, so it's not like it's some built-in feature we've just been neglecting. Bop1996 (talk)

I like the idea, but I doubt if such MediaWiki extension exists, if we can make one, or if Steve agrees. Lakituthequick (talk)

Miscellaneous

None at the moment.