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}}. Signing with the signature code ~~~(~) is not allowed due to technical issues. How To Actions that users feel are appropriate to have community approval first can be added by anyone, but they must have a strong argument. 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. "# " 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 "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 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. CURRENTLY: 08:52, 7 May 2024 (EST) New Features None at the moment. Removals None at the moment. Splits & Merges 3-in-1 Super Mario Bros./Duck Hunt/World Class Track Meet We should get rid of this page and put the picture, along with a short summary, on the Super Mario Bros. article. Resons are as follows: The game was a complatsion cartrige, which means it was just a 3 games stuffed into a cartridge to save money. It's not realy a Mario series game, it's a cartridge with a Mario game inside. The article is short and just takes up sever space. The people on the talk page are disscusing to get rid of it. Despite there being only 3 resons, I think I make a strong point. Proposer: Nerdy Guy (talk) Deadline: December 5, 2008, 20:00 Support Nerdy Guy (talk) per above. I hope this doesn't go the way my Captian Rainbow perpososal went. Stumpers (talk) - I agree that something should be done with the page. However, as is the case with all merges, rather than just delete the page ("get rid of") we should replace it with a redirect to the page it was merged with: Super Mario Bros. I also don't support a merge just because the page is short, etc., but rather because if we don't, we're obligated to make a new page for every port of SMB that's out there, including Classic NES Series and so on. Stooben Rooben (talk) - Gah, edit conflict. Well, my reasonings were gonna be pretty much the same as Stumpers', so per him. Princess Grapes Butterfly (talk)Per all You have my support. Grandy02 (talk) - Per all, but a redirect instead of deletion. The same should go for Super Mario Bros./Tetris/Nintendo World Cup. Garlic Man (talk) - Yes, redirect. But I think the brief description should stay on the Super Mario Bros. article. Walkazo (talk) - Per everyone who voted redirect. Randoman123456789 (talk) - Per all. Cobold (talk) - just as we don't have articles for the virtual console releases of all of the games. When there's absolutely nothing changed, we don't really need an article. Super-Yoshi (talk) - Per Cobold. Those articles were just packed into one cartridge, it doesn't make them Mario related at all. Tucayo (talk) - I agree, and we shoul add a trivia about it in Super Mario Bros' page. Oppose Comments To everboby who said redirect: that's what I ment by "Get rid of". --Nerdy Guy (talk) Cool - just be sure to specify next time! Stumpers (talk) Splitting the Capsule article There's something strange around here: The capsule from SSB and the capsule from Mario Party series are merged INTO ONE ARTICLE, but, THEY'RE COMPLETELY DIFFERENT! I think we shoud split in into two articles: Orb, because it IS the Mario Party Capsule; and Capsule (SSB). Now you see, Orb is the redirect page, but this mustn't be a redirect; instead, the remaining article after the split will be an disambiguation of course. Still thinking to remain it so? There are reasons to split it: They look different (SSB capsules are looking like those medicine capsules (look at the Megavitamin), MP capsules and orbs are just... round capsules. You can even see what in a MP capsule/orb contains, never in a capsule). They ALSO work different, even because the game style differs (Orbs and MP capsules are placed on spaces, SSB capsules can be thrown anywhere). Effects are different TOO (SSB capsule: 1 o' the 8 chance it explodes, other seven will contain items, MP capsules and orbs will change the selected space in a Character Space, which effect will start when been stopped on). Color variations (The SSB capsule will always stay White/Red, the MP capsule/orb has a transperent part and a part which differs what for sort effect it has). Have I proven truth now? Do you think so as I? Give your own opinion. Proposer: Arend (talk) Deadline: December 11, 2008, 17:00 Support Arend (talk) - Per myself, of course Blitzwing (talk) - Per Arend. Stumpers (talk) - The merging of two subjects who share a name but are different characters is something we should be combating per the results of the Star Rod proposal awhile back. Oppose Comments Changes Change Count Bleck to Blumiere and Tippi to Lady Timpani I say they should be changed, because blumiere and timpani are they real names, while the other one are fake, so they shuold be moved so they are each one with their correct name Proposer: Tucayo (talk) Deadline: Tuesday, December 9th, 5:00pm Support Tucayo (talk) - Per me Oppose Son of Suns (talk) - Both names should appear in the intro, but we should use the most common name as the article's title. This is what they are known by throughout the game. They are not "false" names and indeed may be more "real" than the other name, as this is the name they are called by most if not all other characters. Also, Geno's real name is ♥♪!? but we shouldn't change the article title to that, as everyone just calls him Geno. Stooben Rooben (talk) - Per Son of Suns. Stumpers (talk) - Per Son of Suns. Arg... I have this intense need to say something more. Princess Grapes Butterfly (talk) Per Son of Suns. There like nicknames. White Knight (talk) Per all, particularly Son of Sons. Per all. -Canama Comments I'd like to note that Count Bleck's real full name is Lord Blumiere, not just Blumiere. Stooben Rooben (talk) Template:Endspoiler Miscellaneous None at the moment.