MarioWiki:Proposals/Archive/13

Any proposal decided and past is archived here. Use the scroll box to see votes and comments. This page is protected to maintain the discussion as was. Please add archived proposals to the bottom of the page. All past proposals are archived here. This page is protected to maintain the discussion as was. Previous proposals Archive 1 Archive 2 Archive 3 Archive 4 Archive 5 Archive 6 Archive 7 Archive 8 Archive 9 Archive 10 Archive 11 Archive 12 Archive 13 Archive 14 Archive 15 Archive 16 Archive 17 Archive 18 Archive 19 Archive 20 Archive 21 Archive 22 Archive 23 Archive 24 Archive 25 Archive 26 Archive 27 Archive 28 Archive 29 Archive 30 Archive 31 Archive 32 Archive 33 Archive 34 Archive 35 Archive 36 Archive 37 Archive 38 Archive 39 Archive 40 Archive 41 Archive 42 Archive 43 Archive 44 Archive 45 Archive 46 Archive 47 Archive 48 Archive 49 Archive 50 Archive 51 Archive 52 Archive 53 Archive 54 Archive 55 Archive 56 Archive 57 Archive 58 Archive 59 Archive 60 Archive 61 Archive 62 Archive 63 Archive 64 Archive 65 Archive 66 Mario Kart Name Changes NO CHANGE 1-12 okay... I have noticed that all the articles on the wii karts all have their european names. Why? What's wrong with the american ones? They used to have american names! and so, I propose we change the article names... Deadline: March 3, 2009, 17:00 Proposer: Dryest bowser (talk) Change them Dryest bowser (talk)- per myself Leave them Son of Suns (talk) - Per the recent proposal that just passed changing the names. Both names are listed at the beginning of the article, and both are even included in the Mario Kart Wii vehicles template. We are simply using the first English title in order to keep consistency and be fair to our international friends. Stumpers (talk) - See below. Paper Yoshi (talk) - Per all. Clyde1998 (talk) - Per the First English Artical Name. Everthing was changed to it's first English Name. So Mario Kart Wii Kart and Bike names changed to its first english name. So Nostalgia 1 was Classic Dragster. Zafum (talk) - I really hate that the European name proposal got through, and I wish we could reverse it, but I have to agree with Stumpers. After 6 months, I hope somebody immediately makes a proposal to reverse it. Walkazo (talk) - Per Zafum. M&SG (talk) - I asked the same question myself. Son of Suns mentioned that the reason for the European names is so that we're fair to the European gamers. Keep note that Mario Kart Wii was released in America AFTER it was released in Europe. If America got the game first, then the American names would be used instead. Yoshario (talk) - Per SoS. Really. We just had this proposal not a short while ago. ToadetteAnime4evur (talk) - per Zafum. R.O.B 128 (talk) - European names > American names at times. Mario5x (talk) - Per all. Arend (talk) - The Mario Kart Wii names we now use on Mario Wiki arn't just used in Europe, but also in Australia, New Zealand, South Africa and Japan. Comments In accordance with a previous proposal, for six months following a given proposal, no proposals can be made to overturn it. For example, we just had the proposal to use European names for subjects which first appeared in games that were released in Europe first. It passed, and so, for the next six months, we can't make proposals to overturn it. Therefore, this proposal is invalid, but there's no way you could have been expected to know... sorry about this. Stumpers (talk) (Hey Stumpers, have you found a link for that six-month rule? It would be nice if we could point to something in writing.) -- Son of Suns (talk) I can't remember such a rule, to be honest. Time Q (talk) Me neither. It's a pretty good-sounding rule to me, though. Although, 6 months is quite a long time. Bloc Partier (talk) Yeah, we really need to find if such a policy has ever really been established by proposal. And I agree, six months (half a year!) is a long time regardless. -- Son of Suns (talk) We operated on it - I remember several proposals being shot down because of it, but if no one remembers it, and I can't find it, perhaps we should make a proposal about it. :P Stumpers (talk) If we do, however, it should be a shorter time, like 1-3 months. 6 months is too long. ToadetteAnime4evur (talk) I definitely agree with that. -- Son of Suns (talk) As do I. Stumpers (talk) Agreed. 3 months tops. Anyone want to make it? Bloc Partier (talk) Well it was Stumpers' idea. Maybe he wants to make it. ToadetteAnime4evur (talk) Arend: Those aren't the Japanese names. o_O ToadetteAnime4evur (talk) The PAL version uses more names that are identical with the Japanese names or that are closer to them. For example, the B Dasher Mk. 2 has its original name, and the kart "Hot Rally" is known as Rally Romper in the PAL version. The American version removes the namely references to the B Dasher and to the 3D Hot Rally vehicle Monster by calling them "Sprinter" and "Tiny Titan." --Grandy02 (talk) Oicic. That's one of the things I don't like about NoA. ToadetteAnime4evur (talk) Personally, why the hell was it changed anyways? Doesn't that just screw things up for us Americans? :/ --The Blue Dragon (talk) It was decided in a proposal some days ago. Check the archive. Paper Yoshi (talk) I know that, P_Y. But where did the idea come from in the first place? --The Blue Dragon (talk) In the words of proposer Son of Suns, "This should help us curb American cultural imperialism at the wiki while simultaneously fostering a spirit of internationalism." The proposal passed by one vote after a long discussion with many insults against Americans and no insults sent back (unless "go USA" said once is an insult). :P Go figure, right? If it's any consolation, Blue, the proposal only affects a handful of titles, so it's not like it even matters that much to us in the US (lol), but, based on what was said during the proposal it apparently means a lot to people in Europe. Stumpers (talk) Change Six-Month Proposal Reversal Rule to 60 Days ALLOW REVERSAL OF PROPOSALS AFTER 60 DAYS 18-0 I recently learned of a rule that says proposals cannot be reversed for six months. However, six months seems like a ridiculously long wait, and some of these proposals really do need to be reversed. Simply, it only makes sense to change the limit to 60 days. Deadline: March 9, 2009, 17:00 Proposer: Ralphfan (talk) Change limit Ralphfan (talk) Per above! Corka Cola (talk) An actually really great idea. 6 months seens like more than enough of a trial period. 1.5 months is a great trial period!! Stumpers (talk) - Two months sounds good to me. I'd be up for anything from 2-3 months, but I'm happy as long as we have some policy to go by now. My apologies for propagating something that someone somehow made policy without it really being policy or whatever. (see below) P.S. to Corka: 60 days is 2 months, not 1.5 Per all ToadetteAnime4evur (talk) Tucayo (talk) - Per all MeritC (talk) - Per all; there is a situation that is REALLY nagging to me that I can't mention on this part of the proposal. Mario5x (talk) - Per Ralphfan Yoshario (talk) - Per Stumps Bloc Partier (talk) - Per all. White Knight (talk) - Per all. Walkazo (talk) - Per all. Generally after 6 months the proposals are either forgotten or so deeply entrenched in the way things are run that people just accept them; in the dynamic reality of an Internet community, being stagnant does not fly. Luigi 128 (talk) - Per all. Zafum (talk) - I completely agree! 6 months is such a long time, and there are certain proposals which really need to be reversed faster than that. The Great Gonzales (talk) - Change it. 6 months is unnecessarily long. 60 days is good, but I think 30 days would be even better. One month is more than enough time for people to make up their minds about almost any change. I'm in! I just read 6 months and jumped on the bandwagon! NEEDS CHANGING! Hyper Guy (talk) Per all Luigifan123 (talk) Mercury Mech (talk) - Per The Great Gonzales. Randoman123456789 (talk) - 6 months is ridiculously long, but 60 days is approximately two months, which is still an unnecessary amount of time. 30 days (approximately one month) is a neat idea. Per The Great Gonzales. Leave as is Comments Look at the proposal above! Ralphfan (talk) There's no actual rule about the time limit to revert a proposal, the sixth month thing is completely made up. So yeah, this proposal should be about setting the rule. --Blitzwing 12:04, 2 March 2009 (EST) Yeah, so if this proposal does not pass, there would be no rule about reverting proposals (as opposed to us "leaving as is" a six month rule, which apparently we never had). -- Son of Suns (talk) Yeah. And you should put the amount of months, not days. (60 days=2 months) ToadetteAnime4evur (talk) Yup, I was just parroting what I was told by people who were sysops and bureaucrats way before I was, so really there's no weight to the six month rule... I'd like to be able to assume that everything told to me is true, but alas. :3 Blitz, were you a sysop when that idea came about? You'd probably know more about how the notion came about and why it was used to block some proposals even when it wasn't policy than I would. Stumpers (talk) There was never any real idea of a "time limit" for reverting proposals. If someone saw a proposal didn't quite work out, they would just make another proposition and that's it. --Blitzwing 16:06, 3 March 2009 (EST) Except for the two or so proposals about Banjo and Conker articles that were shot down based on the fact that they were released so shortly after each other. :P Whatever - doesn't matter now. Stumpers (talk) Toadette: "60 days" is far more accurate because months are different amounts of days and if we say "two months from July 22*" that can be interpreted in a few different ways, such as two 30-day periods, two month name-changes, etc. So I'd go for days. Bloc Partier (talk) *Totally random. Okay, we'll do it... and then change it back 60 days later! :D DoctorWho 1995 (talk) Create a Dispute Resolution Committee DON'T CREATE 0-6 So, I've been browsing Wookieepedia and have noticed they have a sysop's noticeboard. I think we should have something like this to alert sysops of important things and solve disputes between users. We would call this the "Dispute Resolution Committee". Proposer: Yoshario (talk) Deadline: March 16, 2009 17:00 Support Oppose YellowYoshi398 (talk) - A public record of issues may do more harm than good. Sysops can already discuss things on their forum board. Super-Yoshi (talk) Per YY. Stooben Rooben (talk) - Per YY. Randoman123456789 (talk) - YellowYoshi398 does have a point. So per YY. Walkazo (talk) - Per YY. per YY Lu-igi board (talk) Comments I think we need this so regular users may alert sysops, since regular users do not have access to the sysop boards. Yoshario (talk) I used to and still do use the main talk page when the matter is public, and before I was buro or sysop and I wanted to keep something quiet (like an interuser dispute) I just dropped a note on a sysop's page. If this feature was updated and I had something I didn't want to get full blown I'd probably just use the sysop's talk page anyway... What I want to know is, how would it be different from the main page? We still have a smallish Wiki so I think we might be able to make do with that. :) Stumpers (talk) Change Log-In NO CHANGES 3-8 1 hour ago I just had a horrible experience.My computer had somehow forgot my password for this Wiki,thus I took 1 hour trying to remember it,as I had lost the piece of paper the password was written on.So to stop this experience happening to anyone else,we could maybe have two options,like a question? Instead of a password? Are we allowed this? Do you want it? I'll be waiting! Proposer: Hyper Guy (talk) Deadline: March 16, 2009, 17:00 Something Different! Hyper Guy (talk) Huzzah! per above. Tucayo (talk) - SOunds good, maybe adding a security question Darkhand (talk) - I'm Yoshikart, and I've got a severe problem, I entered my password, and IT WOULDN'T LOG ME IN. So I had to resort to my backup account. Leave as is! Nerdy Guy (talk) - Um... You guys do realise this will lead to sockpupeting and people being able to log in as other users. So this is one heck of a bad idea. Super-Yoshi (talk) - Umm, no. You can store your passwords in like a secret text document, but losing your password would be kinda silly amirite? If you choose a password that you cant remember well, then choose a password thats both secure and you can remember it from the top of your head. Mistakes happen, I know. I don't think there's a MediaWiki extension for a second log-in thingy. Dom (talk) - If someone forgets their password, it's their fault and their problem. If you know you have memory issues (AMNESIA for example...), then save the password in a text document somewhere on your computer. Users must take responsibility for their own account issues. Paper Yoshi (talk) - Per all. Randoman123456789 (talk) - It's better to keep the passwords rather than just add questions, because, as Nerdy Guy said above, this would lead other users into logging onto accounts that don't belong to them, and therefore hacking in to them. Per all. Dark Lakitu 789 (talk) - Per all,We rather have an user who have to make ten accounts because the user forgot the password for the other nine,other then to block an user for what someone else did. Walkazo (talk) - Per all. Even if it is possible to implement something like this, it's too much trouble just to accomodate a few people who can't remember a password. To avoid forgetting, simply choose something easy to remember, and if necessary, store it in multiple places on and off the computer; logging-in shouldn't be a challenge. Yoshario (talk) - Per all. Comments Is the password thing something all Wikis HAVE to do? if it is,ignore this.Hyper Guy (talk) Hmmm... I'm not entirely sure I understand the proposal. Do you mean two accounts? That's what I think you are saying. Bloc Partier (talk) No, it means two ways to log in Tucayo (talk) You're going to have to specify that second way. You mentioned security questions as an idea in the proposal, but right now we're just voting for "something" to happen. You'll need to reword it, otherwise we're voting on whether or not to give you a blank slate to work with as far as log ins are concerned. Stumpers (talk) 22:44, 9 March 2009 (EDT) Ok,I added an example.This IS my first proposal.Hyper Guy (talk) Much better - and I'm sorry if I came off strict. :) Stumpers (talk) Woo-hoo! I'm logged in correctly now! Yoshikart (talk)