MarioWiki:Proposals/Archive/39

From the Super Mario Wiki, the Mario encyclopedia
< MarioWiki:Proposals‎ | Archive
Revision as of 13:54, May 2, 2014 by Yoshi876 (talk | contribs) (Archiving)
Jump to navigationJump to search
All past proposals are archived here. Please add archived proposals to the bottom of the page.
Previous proposals

Change the MarioWiki:Signature rules

DON'T CHANGE 1-14

See: Draft

I'm proposing a change to the current Signature policy, the changes help reading and reduce the distracting signature does. The following are the rules that got changed, all other rules are unchanged..

First of any thing: Reduce the height of the signatures, The current signature is awfully very tall (See this for example: User:Dashbot/Sandbox). I'm proposing this for multiple reasons, the strongest reason is that signatures higher than 20px in height disrupt the normal spacing between rows of text. Adding ugly unnecessary spacing. This applies for text and images, thus you cannot use any html tags that increase the text size, including but not limited to <big>, <br> and <div>. The second reason I'm proposing this is that the bigger the signature is, the much more it would be disruptive catching the eye out of the message itself.

Second: You want to use image, as you wish.. but don't use mainspace images, simple! Just use any external or any personal image. That is because the unnecessary linking in the file page.

Third: Use whichever font you want, as long as it is not higher than normal font. It must be easily readable, also.

Fourth: A minor change, you are now required to link to your talk page, instead of requiring you to link to your userpage. 98% of the time I click on a signature is to visit the talk page. You still can have links to your userpage, contributions, etc

Fifth: Another minor change, You are no longer allowed to link to real articles directly.. Most of you guys are already not doing that, just adding that for the record. If you really must link to a real article, use an external link.

Sixth: No External Links such as advertising or any other websites are allowed, Use your userpage for such things. Like the current system, you are allowed for maximum of five word links.

Last and most importantly: Don't make your signature very disruptive.

You can use disruptive, long, anything signature as raw code in other user's talk pages, ONLY if they say okay. If this passes, there will be a week-to-month time until {{sigfix}} get issued.

Proposer: Dashbot (talk)
Deadline: April 5, 2014, 23:59 GMT.

Support

  1. Dashbot (talk) We are an encyclopedia, we don't host fancy signatures. Signature should only be used for personality identifications, However, you can still have some good designs, if you adhere to those rules.

Oppose

  1. Epic Rosalina (talk) I'm fine with everything except the height rule; it seems okay as it is and you would hardly be able to see the pictures of Rosalina in my signature if you made the height requirement tighter.
  2. Randombob-omb4761 (talk) I don't think this would be great, many people will receive a sigfix warning. Per Epic Rosalina.
  3. Tails777 (talk) I think the rules are fine the way they are.
  4. Walkazo (talk) - While I am somewhat irritated by how spacing gets screwed up by sigs, I just shrug it off as something that can't be helped. Making images (and text) no taller than 12pt font is too draconian, and given how long the old dimensions have been established for, it's a bit late to try and change them now. Besides, we're an encyclopedia: messy talk pages aren't the end of the world as long as the mainspace and policy pages are solid. And on that note, the proposed MW:SIG draft is way too bulky; even if some things get changed to the policy down the road, the page should stay nice and compact like it is now.
  5. Ashley and Red (talk)Awful. The rules are good as they are. Also, why not use mainspace images?
  6. TVTrash (talk) Per Why Bother.
  7. driftmaster130 (talk) Per all, it would be a hassle to get everyone to fix their signatures quickly.
  8. Mario (talk) I strongly disagree with the second rule. I like the appearance of my signature very much, and I don't want to waste potential personal image slots and possible go over it just because of that rule. And using external links is not the best idea because you can't resize them. In all, this proposal creates more problems than it solves, I don't really hate the spacing and such. I just kind of ignore it.
  9. World10 (talk) I think the current rules are fine and I don't see any problems with the spacing.
  10. bluetoad63 (talk) I personally thought they were too strict as they are at one point. Per all.
  11. Baby Luigi (talk) This crap is WAYYY freaking stringent for my tastes. Per all.
  12. SuperYoshiBros (talk) No no no, absolutely not. There's no reason we can't have these. Per all.
  13. Super Mario Bros. (talk) — Per Ghost Jam's comments and Walkazo's vote. The overall impact of this proposal is too extensive and the current policy page is neater and concise. While some of the individual ideas might have merit, they should be discussed in the Wiki Collaborations board on the forum so that there is more time to make them into workable policies.
  14. Mario4Ever (talk) Per Super Mario Bros.

Comments

I agree with parts, but I see no reason for why mainspace images can't be used. Yoshi876 (talk)

I agree that our current signature policy could probably stand a to be reviewed in some parts, and I do like some of your suggestions. However, this isn't like moving an article or banning something everyone is sick of, this is a site wide policy that a large section of our userbase takes advantage of. I feel that the proposals section is the wrong venue for this, you're not going to get the level of discussion really needed for a change of this scale here. More likely, it's going to fail because it only has a week get it's point across (and this is a fairly involved point) and proposals function less like discussions and more like "yes or no" affairs. My suggestion? Move this to the General Discussion forums (perhaps even the Wiki Collaborations sub-forum), get a discussion rolling. Once it's been narrowed down what people like, don't like and the compromises therein, bring it back to proposals as "yes or no" type of thing. -- Ghost Jam (talk)

Actually, writing guideline proposals last for two weeks, however, seeing as they can only be rewritten within the first three days and there are probably a few points that need to be ironed out and as Ghost Jam said the discussion for that probably wouldn't happen within that timeframe it would probably be best to discuss then propose. Yoshi876 (talk)
Even at two weeks, I'd put money on this snowballing to the "nope" side. Ghost Jam (talk)

I don't see why we can't use Mainspace Images, i don't see anything wrong with them. ~~ Boo4761

Look at the file usage for File:Booboo.gif, you can still normally use an external link by using something like http://www.mariowiki.com/images/a/ad/Booboo.gif Booboo.gif --
User:MegadarderyUser talk:MegadarderyDashbot signature
 04:59, 22 March 2014 (EDT)

@Ghost Jam: That's a pretty good idea, I think.. When this proposal reaches the deadline, We will have four weeks to discuss and settle this..
@Epic Rosalina: If you used another image, maybe this, this, if cropped, or this. It would appear better.
@Walkazo: The draft can be changed anytime. While it can be too draconian as you said, the talk pages are pretty disrupting, catching my eye out of the main message. The spacing looks ugly, I can't just throw this idea out myself.

--
User:MegadarderyUser talk:MegadarderyDashbot signature
 04:59, 22 March 2014 (EDT)

Pie for Everyone (revisit)

VETOED BY THE ADMINISTRATORS
Nah, too much trouble. If you want pie, make it yourself. Any flavour you want: go crazy, it's your pie. Or, if you want cake, make that instead - we won't stop you. And if you don't want pie or cake, then that's fine too. Freedom is delicious, and this way, everyone wins.

Roughly seven years ago, I came to this very proposal page with an idea. Well, a hope, really. A hope for a better tomorrow. A hope for a more complete wiki. A hope for a happier editor. A hope....for pie.

Now, the idea was (and still is) simple. Basically, a pie button would be coded into the top bar that would send a signal to one of our sysops (the original proposal had Wayoshi being the baker of these pies, but I feel that we have sufficiently talented staff now that the work can be evenly divided with no issues), who would then prepare and deliver a piece of warm pie.

As one might expect, there were issues with this idea. Some people liked it (in fact, the proposal passed 12 to 10), others didn't (I recall at least one administrator at the time having a bit of a fit over the whole thing). And I understand. Change is a hard thing to swallow sometimes (unlike pie) and we are a bit of an argumentative bunch. Not to mention that there are some legitimate concerns with this plan. It'll be hard to code, hard to coordinate and could get fairly expensive fairly quickly. On the other hand, if executed with the level of precision and expertise we've developed over the last seven years, I believe that it's well within our current abilities. In fact, this may be something we can eventually take to NIWA and help other wikis grow. So, I bring this proposal back here today because we are a much different MarioWiki than in 2007. We've grown, in more ways than one and I think it's time to reconsider.

The actual division of labor of the idea will be discussed among the administrative staff come the passing of the proposal, but the basics read as follows:

  • A single editor may only make use of the pie button once every 72 hours, due to time constraints on part of the administrative staff.
  • Each piece of pie will cost $3 American. This is to cover basic delivery services. This price may need to be adjusted as the project fleshes itself out.
  • Third point to help make proposal look less like I just suddenly decided to do it at 3am and am basically bull$*@!ing it as I go.
  • Flavors of pie can be decided upon (via community input) at a later date, but the current plans are for cherry, blueberry, freedom and Randy Savage.

I encourage discussion and am more than willing to answer any design related questions the community might have. All I ask is that we keep it civil and work towards a better, pie filled tomorrow.

Proposer: Ghost Jam (talk)
Deadline: April 8, 2014, 23:59 GMT

Delicious Pie

  1. Ghost Jam (talk) as the proposer.
  2. YoshiKong (talk) IT'S PIE DAY, PIE DAY, GOTTA GET DOWN ON PIE DAY.
  3. Yoshi876 (talk) I'd per YoshiKong but due to an intense hatred of that song I'll per the proposal.
  4. Super Mario Bros. (talk) — Ghost Jam has clearly come up with a workable system that will be extremely beneficial to the community. My only concern is where we will get the money to start the program, but I assume we can either borrow some from the MarioWiki's ad revenue or take out a loan. The Super Mario Wiki has always prided itself on being one of the premier Mario resources on the Internet, and implementing this project will solidify our status once and for all. The "Pie for Everyone" feature will increase editor productivity and community morale, (eventually) increase the Super Mario Wiki's revenue, and allow us to expand our appeal. I urge everybody that cares for the future success of the wiki to support this proposal.
  5. Lord Grammaticus (talk) Let them eat pie.
  6. Marshal Dan Troop (talk) I support because I feel this will bring Randomyoshi back.
  7. Tails777 (talk) Pie is a great idea, we shouldn't keep the users from their pie. Pie for everyone!
  8. Walkazo (talk) - I have regretted opposing the first pie proposal every day of my life. Never again. Pie for everyone, forever!
  9. Gamefreak75 (talk) - Pie is superior to all other desserts.
  10. Randombob-omb4761 (talk) PIEPIEPIEPIEPIEPIEPIEPIEIPEIPIEIPIE
  11. Phoenix (talk) Give me pie or give me death.
  12. Green 6017 King Of The Slowpoke (talk) I retired a while ago, then I heard the the pie button was returning... PIE FORE EVRYONE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1
  13. bluetoad63 (talk) You convinced me SMB. BUT IT MUST BE CHOCOLATE PIE, OR I WONT HAVE ANY.
  14. Vommack (talk) Let them eat pie.
  15. SuperYoshiBros (talk) Pie will keep productivity up, and people can edit longer without having to worry about fainting from hunger. Plus it's pie. What more could you ask for?
  16. Blue CosmicToad (talk) I do have a particular craving for chocolate cream pie...
  17. MrConcreteDonkey (talk) - The flaws of the original proposal have been vastly improved upon. This will definitely bring both a greater sense of democracy and also a greater sense of echantment with the MarioWiki administrative staff.
  18. bumpynintendo (talk) I. Think a pie dilevery service would be yummy and delicious!!!
  19. GBAToad (talk) Per all, pie for all.

No Pie for You

  1. Glowsquid (talk) - No delicious fruit pie = no per.
  2. Mario4Ever (talk) If the members of the administration are responsible for making and delivering the pies, then the flavors of pie to be offered should be determined via an administrative consensus and not via community input. The only way I can see that changing is if we accept minimum monetary donations of $20 for every pie flavor that is not currently offered.
  3. Mario (talk) Cake is better.
  4. DaisyLuigi (talk) Per Mario!
  5. Baby Luigi (talk) Pie gives me indigestion
  6. Dashbot (talk) Per Mario and Glowsquid-o.
  7. NSY (talk) Don't like pie,
  8. bluetoad63 (talk) I didn't have pie for my birthday on 5 March, I had CAKE! I WANT CAKE! I WANT CAKE!
  9. YoshiKong (talk) Per all.
  10. Ashley and Red (talk)I've never eated pie *-*
  11. Icemario (talk) Per Mario, chocolate cake FTW.

Comments

Additionally, as this has proven to be something of a hot button issue, I'm further suggesting that, should this proposal fail, the overturn rule (point #7) be extended for this topic alone from four weeks to a full year. That will basically give everyone a year to discuss and then reconvene on April 1st. -- Ghost Jam (talk)

I think there should be a rota for which admin delivers the pies. Yoshi876 (talk)

Definitely workable. -- Ghost Jam (talk)

@Glowsquid The proposed list of flavors includes a few fruits. However, if you're suggesting we replace baked pies with those little packaged fruit pies.....that would certainly be cheaper and easier to deliver, but I'm not sure how the community would react to that. Anyone else have an opinion? -- Ghost Jam (talk)

It depends if you use real fruits or not. BabyLuigiFire.png Ray Trace(T|C) 13:34, 1 April 2014 (EDT)
I'll support if you can hook everyone up with a free sample first. --driftmaster130 (Talk • Edits) 13:49, 1 April 2014 (EDT)
Free samples require $2 for shipping and handling. Mario4Ever (talk)
This is a scam! BabyLuigiFire.png Ray Trace(T|C) 14:11, 1 April 2014 (EDT)
The admin team does scam, we are 100% truthful the entire time. Yoshi876 (talk)
So wait, why is everyone trusting scammers to bake the pies? How do we know they won't poison them or something? --driftmaster130 (Talk • Edits) 14:53, 1 April 2014 (EDT)
Oops, looks my random miss out a word thing happened again :/. Besides why we would poison you? Yoshi876 (talk)
Hey, if you guys want to handle the production and distribution of pies, be our guests, though I should mention that transferring responsibility also incurs a monetary fee. It's less work for us. Mario4Ever (talk)
Is this proposal an April Fool's Joke? Today is April 1st and I don't find it likely to order pie from a wiki. In fact, pies in the face have been used a lot in comedy. SeanWheeler (talk) 17:35, 1 April 2014 (EDT)
It'd be passing a lot better if it was an April Fool's joke. Yoshi876 (talk)

@YK It's do a hop. R O Y 17:43, 1 April 2014 (EDT)

Aye? Dafaq you talkin bout Willis?! 'Shroom Spotlight Shokora (talk · edits) 07:17, 2 April 2014 (EDT)

Now how long will this take until it moves to the BJAODN? Green 6017 King Of The Slowpoke (talk)

Aw, don't ruin the fun! Blue Toad jumping in New Super Mario Bros. UBluetoad63Blue Toad on Red Yoshi artwork 09:17, 2 April 2014 (EDT)

YoshiKong, why have you voted twice? Yoshi876 (talk)

Because he wants to! There's no rule against it, after all. · SMB (Talk) · 14:33, 2 April 2014 (EDT)
Rules, schmoolz, I don't give a hoot about 'em. Icon showing how many lives Mario has left. From Super Mario 64 DS. It's me, Mario! (Talk / Stalk) 14:36, 2 April 2014 (EDT)
Really, I don't either. Sometimes. Blue Toad jumping in New Super Mario Bros. UBluetoad63Blue Toad on Red Yoshi artwork 08:30, 3 April 2014 (EDT)

@Bluetoad63: Forget the cake: the cake is a lie. Phoenix (talk) 12:48, 5 April 2014 (EDT)

It's still delicious just thinking about it. :) Icon showing how many lives Mario has left. From Super Mario 64 DS. It's me, Mario! (Talk / Stalk) 14:28, 5 April 2014 (EDT)
That's what I'm counting on. Phoenix (talk) 15:34, 5 April 2014 (EDT)
But i like cake! WHAAAA-*shot* Blue Toad jumping in New Super Mario Bros. UBluetoad63Blue Toad on Red Yoshi artwork 11:13, 8 April 2014 (EDT)

To address opposing votes, I hereby suggest the Vommack Amendment to the Pie for Everyone Act:

  • Any flavor of pie may be ordered; however, pies not currently listed as an available pie will be considered a "custom pie" and extra money will be charged, depending on availability of supplies, etc.
  • The Administrator Bakery will be expanded to allow for the baking of cakes. All restrictions relating to ordering of pies extends to the ordering of cakes. Cake may or may not be a lie.

Vommack (talk) 17:51, 5 April 2014 (EDT)

Does it adhere to current government regulations? Icon showing how many lives Mario has left. From Super Mario 64 DS. It's me, Mario! (Talk / Stalk) 17:52, 5 April 2014 (EDT)
Which regulations are you referring to? Vommack (talk) 17:54, 5 April 2014 (EDT)
Wiki Manual, Section B, Paragraph 19, Subheader 4. Blue Toad jumping in New Super Mario Bros. UBluetoad63Blue Toad on Red Yoshi artwork 11:14, 8 April 2014 (EDT)
Why yes, yes it does, Mr. Toad.--Vommack (talk) 15:27, 8 April 2014 (EDT)

I am so confused. What do you mean by administrators delivering pie? This may sound stupid, but I don't really understand. Could someone please explain? Artwork of Bowser in Fortune Street (also used in Mario & Sonic at the Rio 2016 Olympic Games)M a r i oArtwork of the Lucky Seven symbol.(talkϟedits) 20:05, 8 April 2014 (EDT)

Explanation: seven days ago was April 1, seven years ago was fun times, and pie is awesome. - Walkazo (talk)

Create an "Regional Differences" Page

SECTIONS ONLY 1-6

As far as I know, some games series like Mario Party , Mario Kart and sports spin-offs have some/lots of regional differences in all the world. An example is myself: Ashley in Japan is 8, but in USA she is 15. Also, the majority of the Mario games released on hand-held consoles have differences. Sawaru Meifo in Wario (WarioWare Touched!) has LOTS of differences between all the releases: The american one is totally different from the Japanese's one. I suggest to these pages be called like: List of (name of the game) Regional differences.

Proposer: Ashley and Red (talk)
Deadline: April 13, 2014, 23:59 GMT

Support

  1. Koopinator (talk)Per proposal

Oppose

  1. bluetoad63 (talk) Per Walkazo in the comments.
  2. Vommack (talk) Per Walkazo.
  3. Ghost Jam (talk) Per Walkazo.
  4. Mario4Ever (talk) Per all.
  5. Walkazo (talk) - Per me (in the comments). Make the pages someday, but keep the priority on getting the info down in the sections for now.
  6. driftmaster130 (talk) Per Walkazo.

Comments

I honestly think it would be better if we merged it with the article itself, unless the regional differences is very substantial or something. BabyLuigiFire.png Ray Trace(T|C) 13:16, 6 April 2014 (EDT)

We already have a policy for version differences, including regional differences (a broader scope is better, since more info can be covered). The policy only talks about the creation of sections for now; I suppose it could be expanded to have another class of ex-subpages, but perhaps not until we have more information of the sort built up: right now, I feel like we'd only have a few pages, and most of them would be small. - Walkazo (talk)
Yes. Games that has lots of differences (e.i WarioWare games) should have an subpage like Quotes. Games with only a few of differences (e.i Super Princess Peach) should have only a section. What about?User:Ashley anEoTselkie/sig
Eventually, that would be ideal, but again, I feel like we should try to build up the information first and then start making subpages, rather than adding provisions for a whole new subpage class now, only for it to be sparsely populated for the longest time. You cite the WarioWare series as having tonnes of differences, but none of those pages even have sections yet. It would be best to make a Wiki Collab to try and generate more interest in making sections, with the goal being to make enough coverage to move a handful of those sections onto subpages. - Walkazo (talk)

Create separate articles for Standard Kart and Standard Bike

CREATE 10-0

Looking back at my last proposal of splitting the Pipe Frame and Gold Standard from Kart, I was thinking we should give the Standard Karts and Standard Bike their own articles. The Kart and Bike articles can cover Karts and Bikes as a whole. This is how I think it can be laid out:

  • The Standard Kart page would cover the information and stats of the Standard Karts from Mario Kart DS, Mario Kart Wii, Mario Kart 7 and the upcoming Mario Kart 8.
  • The Kart page can simply cover Karts as a whole, not necessarily the stats of each one. We can also add pictures of karts from the various MK titles much like how the Double Dash!! section does.
  • The Standard Bike page would, like the Standard Kart, list the stats of said bikes from Mario Kart Wii and Mario Kart 8 while the Bike article covers bikes as a whole, such as showing pictures of each bike from Mario Kart Wii and bike part from Mario Kart 8.

I feel this should be done for consistency sakes, as all other karts have their own article and the Standards should be no different. I know most of the info is just covered in Kart and Bike, but those can cover the vehicles as a whole instead.

Proposer: Tails777 (talk)
Deadline: April 14, 2014, 23:59 GMT

Support

  1. Tails777 (talk) Per me
  2. bluetoad63 (talk) Per...you? (Tails777)
  3. Mario (talk) The standards are their own parts/karts, so they should get a different article rather than being lumped into the generic kart article.
  4. Mario7 (talk) They are 2 different vehicles; per all.
  5. Koopinator (talk) Per proposal
  6. Randombob-omb4761 (talk) Per All.
  7. Baby Luigi (talk) The term "Kart" is a umbrella term for all the 4-wheeled, car-like vehicles used in Mario Kart games. It shouldn't exclusively mean the go-karts. Sure, the article should definitely cover the karts used in the first few Mario Kart games, but it should stop covering just the go-kart-like karts post Mario Kart Double Dash. This applies to "bike" as well. The term "Bike" should apply to ALL bikes, not just the Standard Bikes.
  8. Ghost Jam (talk) Having seen an example of the proposed end result, per Tails777.
  9. driftmaster130 (talk) Per all.
  10. Walkazo (talk) - Per all.

Oppose

Comments

Shouldn't this be a TPP? Artwork of Bowser in Fortune Street (also used in Mario & Sonic at the Rio 2016 Olympic Games)M a r i oArtwork of the Lucky Seven symbol.(talkϟedits) 20:06, 8 April 2014 (EDT)

It could be, but it covers 2 different topics so I put it here. Sprite of Yoshi's stock icon from Super Smash Bros. Ultimate Tails777 Talk to me!Robin's stock icon from Super Smash Bros. Ultimate

It seems unnecessarily fiddly to break down Kart just to copy and paste the same information to another article, not really seeing the benefit here. And just going off the information currently up in Bike, we'd be breaking it down into a stub to create another stub, when the current host article seems to serve the purpose well enough. I'm not going to vote until someone explains to me what the end goal really is here, what is the actual benefit of breaking these two articles down further. -- Ghost Jam (talk)

The goal is to basically move the stats and information on the general Standard parts into their own article while the Kart and Bike articles cover the 2 vehicles as a whole. The current kart page covers the Karts from all games (looking at the Double Dash!! as it has a picture of all the karts in the game) while covering the information about a single kart/part. Why keep the information on the Standard in the generic kart article when we can have a separate article for said part like all the other karts/parts have? Sprite of Yoshi's stock icon from Super Smash Bros. Ultimate Tails777 Talk to me!Robin's stock icon from Super Smash Bros. Ultimate
@Ghost Jam, short articles are NOT stubs. I'd rather have short articles organized nicely w/o padding than large articles that a large, bloated, and are padded out on this wiki. BabyLuigiFire.png Ray Trace(T|C) 22:30, 10 April 2014 (EDT)
  • @Tails777 I follow the reasoning and the logic, and in principle I believe I agree. What's bothering me is the creation of stub or fluff articles. Can you guarantee that there is enough information available to make this worth the trouble? If yes, then I guess I'm behind it.
  • @Baby Luigi The line between "this article is short" and "this article is a stub" is pretty thin and has been something editors have argued about since the start of this wiki. A bloated article is just as bad as a sparse one, both can be dealt with by stepping in before it happens.

-- Ghost Jam (talk)

I've written down here what the Standard Kart article would look like, basically a draft of it. Sprite of Yoshi's stock icon from Super Smash Bros. Ultimate Tails777 Talk to me!Robin's stock icon from Super Smash Bros. Ultimate
Ok, you've got my support. -- Ghost Jam (talk)
Actually, there's a pretty notable difference between a stub and a short article. A stub is an article that lacks sufficient information. Most stubs are short articles, yes, but not all short articles are stubs. They're short because that's all that can be said about them without having to pad the articles out. An article about the level that does not have any further information other than basic information would definitely be classified as a stub because it lacks sufficient information to get an understanding of the subject. Sufficiency and completeness is the key, not the length of the article. BabyLuigiFire.png Ray Trace(T|C) 23:07, 10 April 2014 (EDT)
Correction, all stubs are short articles (and/or sections, although we see far less of that on MarioWiki than, as an example, Bulbapedia), which is why we have more peer review for short articles and subjects that lack more than passing information. Additionally, you're thinking too hard about the precise words I'm using here. I'm not insinuating that any and all short articles are stubs, rather that they are more prone to becoming stubs, either at creation or due to over specialization. It's not about padding an article (in fact, if you have to pad an article to reach a point where people aren't going to start slapping "fix this" templates on it, it either needs to be merged into another article or dropped), it's about proving that a subject is worth having a separate article. You prove this by supplying context and showing relevance. If that can be done in a few sentences, well done, but that can't be and shouldn't be blanket applied to everything.
As we are very quickly moving off subject, I'm going to ask that we end this here and move it to either the forums or talk pages. -- Ghost Jam (talk)

The Fate of WFC Glitches

KEEP 1-13

I know it's a bit early, but might as well clear the air now.
As we all know, support for Nintendo WFC is ending May 20. That means no more online features for basically every game on the Wii and DSi. The question is, what are we going to do about glitches that we have listed on glitch lists of a certain game that happen only in wi-fi? No one will be able to do a glitch for themselves anymore, nor could anyone add any glitches, so I'm not totally sure if we should keep them all, or delete them on May 20.

Proposer: Lord Bowser (talk)
Deadline: April 19, 2014, 23:59 GMT

Delete them

  1. Lord Bowser (talk) I honestly don't see much of a point in keeping them.

Keep them

  1. YoshiKong (talk) – Once a glitch, always a glitch.
  2. Vommack (talk) Seriously? This is like Wikipedia deleting a page on Windows XP because support has been dropped. There is absolutely no reason to delete these glitches.
  3. Baby Luigi (talk) There are modders who are working to set up their own servers in Mario Kart Wii so it won't be 100% eliminated. There's absolutely no reason to delete history of them, though they may be questionable if they lack evidence we cannot acquire.
  4. Randombob-omb4761 (talk) Per All.
  5. Ghost Jam (talk) It's not an uncommon practice for encyclopedias to keep a historical record of otherwise outdated information, so I don't see keeping them as a problem. The only issues I see arising are the provability moving forward, as mentioned by Baby Luigi above. But we'll cross that bridge when/if we come to it.
  6. Walkazo (talk) - Per all. If anything, preserving this info is becoming more important now that the official sources are being taken away. You don't burn your history books.
  7. Turboo (talk) - Per all.
  8. driftmaster130 (talk) Per all.
  9. Yoshi876 (talk) - Per YoshiKong and Vommack.
  10. SuperYoshiBros (talk) Per all. Maybe we could move them to their own section on the page though.
  11. Mario4Ever (talk) Per all.
  12. bluetoad63 (talk) Per all
  13. Dashbot (talk) Per all, especially Walkazo.

Comments

Since it seems that many are in agreement to keep them listed, it might be a good idea to further our coverage a tad. Make sure we have images or videos of our soon to be inaccessible glitches (perhaps suggesting same to the rest of NIWA as a courtesy). We have a rare opportunity in knowing in advance that sources are about to vanish, best to document what we can while we can. -- Ghost Jam (talk)

Disambiguation minimum

DELETED BY THE PROPOSER

I have noticed many of the orphaned pages on the wiki are disambiguation. These pages have only two pages on them, and those pages have links to each other already, making the disambig page useless. What I think is that disambiguation pages should have at least three instead of two page links in order to be made and as for the ones that have less, they should either have another page link added or be deleted.

Proposer: Koopakoolklub (talk)
Deadline: April 30, 2014, 23:59 GMT

Support-Change limit

  1. Koopakoolklub (talk) Per my own proposal.

Oppose-Keep it as it is

  1. Yoshi876 (talk) Per Vommack's comment. There needs to be a default term for people to be linked to. Removing these could potentially make it harder for people to navigate the wiki.
  2. Vommack (talk)Per Yoshi. Which makes it per me in a way, I suppose.
  3. Ninelevendo (talk) If I look up 'Luma', what would it go to? Species, or character? This is why we need those pages.
  4. Walkazo (talk) Per all. If a term has two equally prominent uses, a disambig page is the only way to go. There is nothing wrong with disambiguation pages being orphaned: they're for helping searches, after all, just like redirects.
  5. Ghost Jam (talk) System works fine and as intended as is.

Comments

And what would you default to if you searched for a term with two meanings?--Vommack (talk) 16:53, 23 April 2014 (EDT)

I see your point. Now, how do we make them un-orphaned if the two pages already have links to each other? Bowser Jr., in Mario & Luigi: Paper Jam.Triple K, Skye 17:33, 23 April 2014 (EDT)
I'd say they don't necessarily have to be. While there shouldn't be normal pages lying around in the orphanage, some disambiguation pages will inevitably end up there. There's not really anywhere to link to them, but they need to stay for the sake of navigation.--Vommack (talk) 17:40, 23 April 2014 (EDT)
Basically what we're saying is that these pages don't need to be un-orphaned, they have a use in the search bar. - Ninelevendo's Sig Image 17:56, 23 April 2014 (EDT)

It's unsurprising that a disambiguation page would be orphaned as well. Orphaned pages are pages that no other page links to. Due to the nature and use of a disambiguation page, it makes sense that nothing would link directly to them. Adding more to the page itself won't solve that, although I'm sure linking back could be jury-rigged into existing articles (IE: "To read more about [TOPIC], see here: [LINK TO DISAMBIGUATION PAGE FOR TOPIC].). I don't see it as a necessity, however.-- Ghost Jam (talk)

Names with more than two meanings often/usually link to the disambig page in the articleabout (rather than listing everything there), but if there's only one other meaning, it makes more sense to link directly to the other article: cutting out the middle man, and all. - Walkazo (talk)
Figured we already did it, just couldn't think of any examples off the top of my head. :D - Ghost Jam (talk)
Try things like Yoshi and Luma, and everyone should get the point. Searching Luma will put you on the disamxhjdujbc page, whereas the Yoshi page sends you to the disamxhjdujbc page. - Ninelevendo's Sig Image 21:30, 23 April 2014 (EDT)

Course, Courts and Tracks

DON'T CHANGE 2-8

I've noticed a bit of an incorrection ( or so I think ) with things such as Mario Kart courses, which should be called tracks, as in 'Racing Track'. 'Course' should refer to 'Golf Course', because we do say that Golf areas are courses, not racing areas. Therefore I propose that pages, articles and sections with an incorrect reafearal to 'Course' s should be moved or changed to 'Tracks'.

Proposer: Ninelevendo (talk)
Deadline: April 26, 2014, 23:59 GMT

Support - Change to 'Tracks'

  1. Ninelevendo (talk) per proposal
  2. John G (talk) per proposal

Oppose - Keep as 'Courses'

  1. Mario4Ever (talk) I've seen a number of articles that use "course" and "track" interchangeably. People know what is meant regardless of the word used. To go through and change one to the other is just nitpicking and doesn't really affect the accuracy of any particular article.
  2. Vommack (talk) Per Mario4Ever. This wouldn't really have any constructive effect.
  3. Ashley and Red (talk)Per Mario4Ever. An Track is a Course.Even in Golf Games, you can call, for example: "Peach's Golf Course" as "Peach's Golf track". We understand that in the same way.
  4. Dashbot (talk) "Course" can mean the track on which a race is run. Per Mario4Ever.
  5. Walkazo (talk) - The official game manuals call them "courses" (at least the MK Wii and MK:DD ones do - it's even a header in the Table of Contents for the latter one).
  6. Yoshi876 (talk) - Per Walkazo.
  7. Koopakoolklub (talk) The two words can be synonyms. Per all.
  8. SeanWheeler (talk) They are the same thing!

Comments

Meh, the proposal is a bit vague for my liking. What exactly constitutes as an "incorrect" referral to "course" anyway? I'd like some more clarity on that. BabyLuigiFire.png Ray Trace(T|C) 11:42, 19 April 2014 (EDT)

This is like making a proposal to change capitals to lower case in subsection titles. There's no point in making it universal, and the effort we have to concentrate to enact such minor changes is not very productive. Courses have been nomenclature for a while; its being correct or not isn't really clear-cut since it can be used interchangeably. Icon showing how many lives Mario has left. From Super Mario 64 DS. It's me, Mario! (Talk / Stalk) 12:19, 19 April 2014 (EDT)

So basically your saying that this isn't important enough, do it yourself? And 'incorrect' refers to any Mario Kart reference to course that should actually be called tracks. If you oppose, just oppose, that's why it's here. - Ninelevendo's Sig Image 16:45, 19 April 2014 (EDT)
You made the proposal today, and since this isn't a Writing Guideline or Talk Page Proposal, the deadline is in a week, not two, so I fixed it for you. Mario4Ever (talk)
My saying that this is way too trivial to warrant a proposal. Icon showing how many lives Mario has left. From Super Mario 64 DS. It's me, Mario! (Talk / Stalk) 20:26, 19 April 2014 (EDT)

This isn't something that requires input from the entire community, it's a minor editorial dispute at best. Might be better to bring this up on individual talk pages or on the general discussion forums. I have no opinion on the subject itself. -- Ghost Jam (talk)

Yeah, didn't really know where to put this, this was the only place I could think of. I wouldn't describe this a nitpicky, more if just getting a bit of order to pages, but anyway if this doesn't really makes anyone else a slight bit confused/annoyed, there isn't a real propose to keep this up, but we could just wait and see. - Ninelevendo's Sig Image 05:16, 20 April 2014 (EDT)
While it might've been better as a discussion in the Wiki Collabs forum board, seeing as the term is used on large numbers of pages (including templates and categories), it's not a minor change being suggested here, so the Proposals isn't a bad place to go with the issue: it's certainly better than trying to host it on one or more talk pages. - Walkazo (talk) 19:43, 21 April 2014 (EDT)

The two words can be synonmyms. I honestly don't think it makes the biggest difference. Bowser Jr., in Mario & Luigi: Paper Jam.Triple K, Skye 18:30, 22 April 2014 (EDT)

McDonalds

DON'T CREATE 1-6

Nintendo has had a couple of licenses with McDonalds for about 20 years, but there is no official page/pages about these licenses on the wikipedia. I propose that a page be made on the Happy Meal Lines.

Proposer: John G (talk)
Deadline: April 29, 2014, 23:59 GMT

Support - Create Page/Pages

  1. John G (talk) per my proposal

Oppose - Don't do anything!

  1. Vommack (talk) Firstly, they are listed here. Second, unlike the K'NEX sets, there really aren't enough of these to justify creating an entire new page on them.
  2. Randombob-omb4761 (talk) Per Vommack.
  3. Ninelevendo (talk) Seriously, we don't need a page on cheap merchandise that doesn't have any real purpose or function aside from being thrown in the garbage by parents. Also, per Vommack.
  4. Koopakoolklub (talk) Per Vommack and Ninelevendo.
  5. Ghost Jam (talk) Per Vommack. Feel free to add to the articles mentioned if you have new information, though.
  6. SuperYoshiBros (talk) Per all.

Comments

If you have enough info, go ahead and create it. There is no need for a proposal in tgis case.User:Ashley anEoTselkie/sig

This should be a TPP.--Vommack (talk) 14:18, 22 April 2014 (EDT)

This doesn't need a proposal. If the merchandise is official and real, then go add it to the merchandise page. BabyLuigiFire.png Ray Trace(T|C) 14:51, 22 April 2014 (EDT)

It's actually already on this page. He's saying it warrants an entire new article.--Vommack (talk) 15:04, 22 April 2014 (EDT)

Move Rosalina to Princess Rosalina

DELETED BY THE PROPOSER

So, I know that lots of users had proposed that, but once again I will propose it: Move Rosalina's page to "Princess Rosalina". I would say that because she is a princess, and I'm not saying this because of her crown or even her dress. Her Super Mario Galaxy's bio states:
"Not much is known about Rosalina, the lonely princess who wanders the cosmos in the Comet Observatory, a giant starship that travels the celestial expanse. She is a great friend of the Luma, taking them in and caring for them as if they were her children. But there is a sadness behind her eyes. What has she lost out among the stars?" Also her Mario Kart 8's bio (that is shared with Pink Gold Peach bio)states:
"Baby Rosalina and Pink Gold Peach. Hit the road as a bouncing baby princess or a metallic mystery woman!"

Proposer: Ashley and Red (talk)
Deadline: May 8, 2014, 23:59 GMT

Support

  1. Ashley and Red (talk)Per proposal.

Oppose

  1. Ghost Jam (talk) Per standard procedure. As was mentioned in the comments, this should be a TTP.
  2. SuperYoshiBros (talk) Per the supernatural jelly.

Comments

This should be a talk page proposal BabyLuigiFire.png Ray Trace(T|C) 11:57, 1 May 2014 (EDT)

Retrieved from "https://www.mariowiki.com/index.php?title=MarioWiki:Proposals/Archive/39&oldid=1672175"