Editing MarioWiki:Proposals/Archive/65

From the Super Mario Wiki, the Mario encyclopedia
Jump to navigationJump to search
You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you log in or create an account, your edits will be attributed to your username, along with other benefits.

The edit can be undone. Please check the comparison below to verify that this is what you want to do, and then publish the changes below to finish undoing the edit.

Latest revision Your text
Line 1: Line 1:
{{MarioWiki:Proposals/Archive/Template}}
{{MarioWiki:Proposals/Archive/Template|current=yes}}


<div style="font-size:95%">__TOC__</div>
<div style="font-size:95%">__TOC__</div>
===Rewrite cited quotes into a new style===
===Rewrite cited quotes into a new style===
{{Proposal outcome|failed|4-7|Do not change}}
{{ProposalOutcome|failed|4-7|Do not change}}
It's been two years since the <code><nowiki>{{ref quote}}</nowiki></code> was deleted. This time, I was wondering if there's a possibility to rewrite the cited quotes into a new style to match the Wikipedia citation templates <code><nowiki>{{</nowiki>{{wp|Template:Cite video game|Cite video game}}<nowiki>}}</nowiki></code>, <code><nowiki>{{</nowiki>{{wp|Template:Cite episode|Cite episode}}<nowiki>}}</nowiki></code>, and <code><nowiki>{{</nowiki>{{wp|Template:AV media|AV media}}<nowiki>}}</nowiki></code>. Here are some examples:
It's been two years since the <code><nowiki>{{ref quote}}</nowiki></code> was deleted. This time, I was wondering if there's a possibility to rewrite the cited quotes into a new style to match the Wikipedia citation templates <code><nowiki>{{</nowiki>{{wp|Template:Cite video game|Cite video game}}<nowiki>}}</nowiki></code>, <code><nowiki>{{</nowiki>{{wp|Template:Cite episode|Cite episode}}<nowiki>}}</nowiki></code>, and <code><nowiki>{{</nowiki>{{wp|Template:AV media|AV media}}<nowiki>}}</nowiki></code>. Here are some examples:


Line 65: Line 65:


===Create two specific citation templates===
===Create two specific citation templates===
{{Proposal outcome|passed|3-5-1|Create one template for all types of citations}}
{{ProposalOutcome|passed|3-5-1|Create one template for all types of citations}}
This proposal similarly deals with citation templates, but proposes the creation of a few not covered within the scope of a different currently active proposal.
This proposal similarly deals with citation templates, but proposes the creation of a few not covered within the scope of a different currently active proposal.


Line 120: Line 120:


===Add minecraft.wiki as an interwiki link===
===Add minecraft.wiki as an interwiki link===
{{Proposal outcome|passed|11-0|Add}}
{{ProposalOutcome|passed|11-0|Add}}
This isn't so much a "feature" rather than a simple quality-of-life addition to the wiki. This proposal proposes to add an interwiki link to minecraft.wiki (i.e. <code><nowiki>[[minecraftwiki:]]</nowiki></code>), especially considering the multitude of subjects in ''[[Minecraft]]''{{'}}s Super Mario Mash-up pack with ''[[Super Mario (franchise)|Super Mario]]''-themed reskins. At the moment, when linking to articles on a Minecraft wiki, it is the most convenient to do so by means of using the {{tem|Fandom}} template to link to the Fandom wiki when there's a higher quality independent alternative available that a majority of the community has left to. I try to avoid adding direct urls into wiki articles in general. If there was an instance where someone added urls to minecraft.wiki throughout every article where it could apply, this would be a multitude of urls that one would have to manually fix, due to the Super Mario Mash-up pack existing.
This isn't so much a "feature" rather than a simple quality-of-life addition to the wiki. This proposal proposes to add an interwiki link to minecraft.wiki (i.e. <code><nowiki>[[minecraftwiki:]]</nowiki></code>), especially considering the multitude of subjects in ''[[Minecraft]]''{{'}}s Super Mario Mash-up pack with ''[[Super Mario (franchise)|Super Mario]]''-themed reskins. At the moment, when linking to articles on a Minecraft wiki, it is the most convenient to do so by means of using the {{tem|Fandom}} template to link to the Fandom wiki when there's a higher quality independent alternative available that a majority of the community has left to. I try to avoid adding direct urls into wiki articles in general. If there was an instance where someone added urls to minecraft.wiki throughout every article where it could apply, this would be a multitude of urls that one would have to manually fix, due to the Super Mario Mash-up pack existing.


Line 147: Line 147:


===Allow staff warnings to be appealed===
===Allow staff warnings to be appealed===
{{Proposal outcome|passed|18-0|Allow}}
{{ProposalOutcome|passed|18-0|Allow}}
See [[MarioWiki:Appeals]]
See [[MarioWiki:Appeals]]


Line 165: Line 165:
*[[:Template:Reminder]]: "''If this reminder was not issued by an administrator or patroller and you feel it was undeserved, you may appeal it.''"<br>⬇️changed to⬇️ <br> "''If you feel this reminder was undeserved, you may appeal it.''"  
*[[:Template:Reminder]]: "''If this reminder was not issued by an administrator or patroller and you feel it was undeserved, you may appeal it.''"<br>⬇️changed to⬇️ <br> "''If you feel this reminder was undeserved, you may appeal it.''"  
*[[:Template:Warning]]: "''If this warning was not issued by an administrator or patroller and you feel it was undeserved, you may appeal it.''"<br>⬇️changed to⬇️ <br> "''If you feel this warning was undeserved, you may appeal it.''"  
*[[:Template:Warning]]: "''If this warning was not issued by an administrator or patroller and you feel it was undeserved, you may appeal it.''"<br>⬇️changed to⬇️ <br> "''If you feel this warning was undeserved, you may appeal it.''"  
*[[:Template:Last warning]]: "''If this last warning was not issued by an administrator or patroller and you feel it was undeserved, you may appeal it.''"<br>⬇️changed to⬇️ <br> "''If you feel this last warning was undeserved, you may appeal it.''"
*[[:Template:Lastwarn]]: "''If this last warning was not issued by an administrator or patroller and you feel it was undeserved, you may appeal it.''"<br>⬇️changed to⬇️ <br> "''If you feel this last warning was undeserved, you may appeal it.''"
*[[MarioWiki:Warning policy]]: "''If you were given a warning/reminder for discourteous behavior that you feel should have only merited an unofficial notice as outlined above, you can appeal to have the template removed. However, keep in mind that excessive impolite or disruptive behavior may earn you a warning right off the bat; if the administrators feel that you should have known better than to act the way you did even without an unofficial request to stop, your warning will not be removed. <s>You cannot appeal a warning given by an administrator or patroller; if one is deemed inappropriately given, it will be handled within the staff team accordingly.</s>''"
*[[MarioWiki:Warning policy]]: "''If you were given a warning/reminder for discourteous behavior that you feel should have only merited an unofficial notice as outlined above, you can appeal to have the template removed. However, keep in mind that excessive impolite or disruptive behavior may earn you a warning right off the bat; if the administrators feel that you should have known better than to act the way you did even without an unofficial request to stop, your warning will not be removed. <s>You cannot appeal a warning given by an administrator or patroller; if one is deemed inappropriately given, it will be handled within the staff team accordingly.</s>''"
**Q. I don't think I deserve my warning. What should I do?<br>A. If you feel you don't deserve the warning, you have the option to appeal it <s>as long as the warning in question was not given by an administrator</s>. When appealing warnings, it is best to do so as soon as possible.
**Q. I don't think I deserve my warning. What should I do?<br>A. If you feel you don't deserve the warning, you have the option to appeal it <s>as long as the warning in question was not given by an administrator</s>. When appealing warnings, it is best to do so as soon as possible.
Line 207: Line 207:


===Create interwiki link for RayWiki===
===Create interwiki link for RayWiki===
{{Proposal outcome|passed|11-0|create}}
{{ProposalOutcome|passed|11-0|create}}
This is similar to, and inspired by the Minecraft.wiki interwiki link proposal above, but with the [https://raymanpc.com/wiki/en/ RayWiki] instead. The ''Rayman'' series has gotten relevance in the ''Super Mario'' franchise thanks to the [[Rayman in the Phantom Show]] DLC campaign for ''[[Mario + Rabbids Sparks of Hope]]''. The DLC campaign harbors a multitude of ''Rayman'' cameos and references, and currently, we can only link to articles of the most relevant wiki for ''Rayman'' using external weblinks, which... doesn't look all too great on an article, IMO.
This is similar to, and inspired by the Minecraft.wiki interwiki link proposal above, but with the [https://raymanpc.com/wiki/en/ RayWiki] instead. The ''Rayman'' series has gotten relevance in the ''Super Mario'' franchise thanks to the [[Rayman in the Phantom Show]] DLC campaign for ''[[Mario + Rabbids Sparks of Hope]]''. The DLC campaign harbors a multitude of ''Rayman'' cameos and references, and currently, we can only link to articles of the most relevant wiki for ''Rayman'' using external weblinks, which... doesn't look all too great on an article, IMO.


Line 235: Line 235:


===Make a YouTube Disambiguation(!!!) page===
===Make a YouTube Disambiguation(!!!) page===
{{Proposal outcome|passed|1-8-0|Create YouTube category}}
{{ProposalOutcome|passed|1-8-0|Create YouTube category}}
[[File:Luigi Runs the Nintendo 2DS Factory for a Day.jpg|thumb|200px|Pictured: How we feel after trying to make a half-comprehensive list of YouTube videos by Nintendo.]]
[[File:Luigi Runs the Nintendo 2DS Factory for a Day.jpg|thumb|200px|Pictured: How we feel after trying to make a half-comprehensive list of YouTube videos by Nintendo.]]
Before you hit "Oppose (edit)" and scream "NOT AGAIN", hear us out here.
Before you hit "Oppose (edit)" and scream "NOT AGAIN", hear us out here.
Line 299: Line 299:


===Broaden the scope of the <nowiki>{{promo-photo}}</nowiki> template===
===Broaden the scope of the <nowiki>{{promo-photo}}</nowiki> template===
{{Proposal outcome|passed|7-0|Broaden the scope}}
{{ProposalOutcome|passed|7-0|Broaden the scope}}
Currently, the licensing template used for photographs uploaded to the wiki is [[:Template:Promo-photo]], henceforth referred to as <nowiki>{{promo-photo}}</nowiki>. All photographs uploaded to the wiki are listed under the template's corresponding category, [[:Category:Promotional photos]]. This template is supposedly only meant to be used for publicity photos "known to have come from a press kit"; however, a ''lot'' of the photos in this category, most commonly images of [[List of merchandise|merchandise]], were taken by ordinary people who have no relation to a formal organization for news or media distribution; to put it simply, many images with this template don't come from a press kit.
Currently, the licensing template used for photographs uploaded to the wiki is [[:Template:Promo-photo]], henceforth referred to as <nowiki>{{promo-photo}}</nowiki>. All photographs uploaded to the wiki are listed under the template's corresponding category, [[:Category:Promotional photos]]. This template is supposedly only meant to be used for publicity photos "known to have come from a press kit"; however, a ''lot'' of the photos in this category, most commonly images of [[List of merchandise|merchandise]], were taken by ordinary people who have no relation to a formal organization for news or media distribution; to put it simply, many images with this template don't come from a press kit.


Line 356: Line 356:


===Decide how to format the <nowiki>{{cite}}</nowiki> template and update citation guidelines accordingly===
===Decide how to format the <nowiki>{{cite}}</nowiki> template and update citation guidelines accordingly===
{{Proposal outcome|passed|7-0|Update citation guidelines}}
{{ProposalOutcome|passed|7-0|Update citation guidelines}}
Now that [[MarioWiki:Proposals/Archive/65#Create two specific citation templates|this proposal]] has instated the creation of a single <nowiki>{{cite}}</nowiki> template for citations, it's time to decide how this template should be formatted.
Now that [[MarioWiki:Proposals/Archive/65#Create two specific citation templates|this proposal]] has instated the creation of a single <nowiki>{{cite}}</nowiki> template for citations, it's time to decide how this template should be formatted.


Line 508: Line 508:


===Consistent formatting for the Other Languages section===
===Consistent formatting for the Other Languages section===
{{Proposal outcome|passed|0-5|Second option}}
{{ProposalOutcome|passed|0-5|Second option}}
Alright, so since this is starting to get really annoying, I'm going to put this proposal here. Here are two inconsistent ways that the meaning of names in the "Names In Other Languages" section are listed on the wiki:
Alright, so since this is starting to get really annoying, I'm going to put this proposal here. Here are two inconsistent ways that the meaning of names in the "Names In Other Languages" section are listed on the wiki:


Line 551: Line 551:


===Provide more context as to ''Mario'' entities' roles in ''Minecraft''===
===Provide more context as to ''Mario'' entities' roles in ''Minecraft''===
{{Proposal outcome|failed|7-13|do nothing}}
{{ProposalOutcome|failed|7-13|do nothing}}
In ''[[Minecraft]]''{{'}}s ''Super Mario Mashup'', which gets (relatively) full coverage here, many familiar ''Mario'' entities get appearances replacing traditional ''Minecraft'' mobs and items, and their respective pages reflect that. The problem is, they are relegated to what amounts to a footnote of a section and do not provide any further context as to what they replace, which is unhelpful if you do not know what the original thing does in vanilla ''Minecraft''. For example,
In ''[[Minecraft]]''{{'}}s ''Super Mario Mashup'', which gets (relatively) full coverage here, many familiar ''Mario'' entities get appearances replacing traditional ''Minecraft'' mobs and items, and their respective pages reflect that. The problem is, they are relegated to what amounts to a footnote of a section and do not provide any further context as to what they replace, which is unhelpful if you do not know what the original thing does in vanilla ''Minecraft''. For example,
{{quote|In the Super Mario Mash-up in Minecraft, Spiders are replaced by Scuttlebugs, using their New Super Mario Bros. 2 appearance.|current Scuttlebug page}}
{{quote2|In the Super Mario Mash-up in Minecraft, Spiders are replaced by Scuttlebugs, using their New Super Mario Bros. 2 appearance.|current Scuttlebug page}}
Tells us nothing about how they actually act. What this proposal aims to do is, for example, make this one say
Tells us nothing about how they actually act. What this proposal aims to do is, for example, make this one say
{{quote|In the Super Mario Mash-up in Minecraft, Spiders are replaced by Scuttlebugs, using their New Super Mario Bros. 2 appearance. As such, they appear primarily in overworld areas, becoming hostile in darkness. When defeated, they may drop strings or [[Tarantox]]'s eyes.|my intended Scuttlebug page}}
{{quote2|In the Super Mario Mash-up in Minecraft, Spiders are replaced by Scuttlebugs, using their New Super Mario Bros. 2 appearance. As such, they appear primarily in overworld areas, becoming hostile in darkness. When defeated, they may drop strings or [[Tarantox]]'s eyes.|my intended Scuttlebug page}}
This should clear up any confusion readers may have on the subject.
This should clear up any confusion readers may have on the subject.


Line 599: Line 599:


===Rename [[:Category:Twitter images]] and [[:Category:Twitter media files]] to {{fake link|Category:X images}} and {{fake link|Category:X media files}} respectively===
===Rename [[:Category:Twitter images]] and [[:Category:Twitter media files]] to {{fake link|Category:X images}} and {{fake link|Category:X media files}} respectively===
{{Proposal outcome|passed|13-1|Rename}}
{{ProposalOutcome|passed|13-1|Rename}}
This proposal is simple. Twitter has been renamed to "X" several months back, and people have become increasingly adjusted to the change over time. On Wikipedia, it even says that "{{wp|Twitter}}" is both the former and the colloquial name.
This proposal is simple. Twitter has been renamed to "X" several months back, and people have become increasingly adjusted to the change over time. On Wikipedia, it even says that "{{wp|Twitter}}" is both the former and the colloquial name.


Line 639: Line 639:


===Rename <nowiki>{{promo-photo}}</nowiki> and [[:Category:Promotional photos]] to <nowiki>{{photo}}</nowiki> and {{fake link|Category:Photos}} respectively===
===Rename <nowiki>{{promo-photo}}</nowiki> and [[:Category:Promotional photos]] to <nowiki>{{photo}}</nowiki> and {{fake link|Category:Photos}} respectively===
{{Proposal outcome|passed|7-0|Rename}}
{{ProposalOutcome|passed|7-0|Rename}}
Now that [[MarioWiki:Proposals/Archive/65#Broaden_the_scope_of_the_.7B.7Bpromo-photo.7D.7D_template|this proposal]] has passed, which broadens the scope of [[:Template:Promo-photo]] to cover more than just promotional photographs, the name of the template and its corresponding category should be updated accordingly.
Now that [[MarioWiki:Proposals/Archive/65#Broaden_the_scope_of_the_.7B.7Bpromo-photo.7D.7D_template|this proposal]] has passed, which broadens the scope of [[:Template:Promo-photo]] to cover more than just promotional photographs, the name of the template and its corresponding category should be updated accordingly.


Line 661: Line 661:


===Standardize a "Cameo appearances" section===
===Standardize a "Cameo appearances" section===
{{Proposal outcome|failed|1-4|do not standardize}}
{{ProposalOutcome|failed|1-4|do not standardize}}
Following in the footsteps of [[MarioWiki:Proposals/Archive/57#Define_the_scope_of_.22Other_appearances.22_sections|this proposal]], I'm creating another to standardize a "Cameo appearances" subsection of a History section of instances when something ONLY cameos or is referenced within ''[[Super Mario (franchise)|Super Mario]]'' media. If there's an existing "Other appearances" subsection, the "Cameo appearances" one would precede it, as this is a ''Super Mario'' wiki.
Following in the footsteps of [[MarioWiki:Proposals/Archive/57#Define_the_scope_of_.22Other_appearances.22_sections|this proposal]], I'm creating another to standardize a "Cameo appearances" subsection of a History section of instances when something ONLY cameos or is referenced within ''[[Super Mario (franchise)|Super Mario]]'' media. If there's an existing "Other appearances" subsection, the "Cameo appearances" one would precede it, as this is a ''Super Mario'' wiki.


Line 688: Line 688:


===Standardize the "Other appearances" scope to include anything that's not a ''Super Mario'' game===
===Standardize the "Other appearances" scope to include anything that's not a ''Super Mario'' game===
{{Proposal outcome|failed|1-4|do not standardize}}
{{ProposalOutcome|failed|1-4|do not standardize}}
This proposal adds on to my "Cameo appearances" proposal. This proposal aims to standardize an increased scope of the "Other appearances" subsection to include anything that isn't a ''Super Mario'' game. It helps affirm the idea that this is a ''Super Mario'' wiki and helps the non-''Super Mario'' appearances stand out to readers more easily.
This proposal adds on to my "Cameo appearances" proposal. This proposal aims to standardize an increased scope of the "Other appearances" subsection to include anything that isn't a ''Super Mario'' game. It helps affirm the idea that this is a ''Super Mario'' wiki and helps the non-''Super Mario'' appearances stand out to readers more easily.


Line 716: Line 716:


===Decide how to incorporate Wonder Effects in ''Super Mario Bros. Wonder'' course articles===
===Decide how to incorporate Wonder Effects in ''Super Mario Bros. Wonder'' course articles===
{{Proposal outcome|passed|8-1-0|Implement Wonder Effects into "layout" section of articles}}
{{ProposalOutcome|passed|8-1-0|Implement Wonder Effects into "layout" section of articles}}
With more and more course articles being created for ''[[Super Mario Bros. Wonder]]'' (hooray!), there’s a consistency issue going on - how the [[Wonder Effect]]s are incorporated into the articles. Some articles have them in the "layout" section of the article, while others have their own section dedicated to the Wonder Effect of the course.
With more and more course articles being created for ''[[Super Mario Bros. Wonder]]'' (hooray!), there’s a consistency issue going on - how the [[Wonder Effect]]s are incorporated into the articles. Some articles have them in the "layout" section of the article, while others have their own section dedicated to the Wonder Effect of the course.


Line 755: Line 755:


===Decide how to handle the toy enemies from across the ''Mario vs. Donkey Kong'' series===
===Decide how to handle the toy enemies from across the ''Mario vs. Donkey Kong'' series===
{{Proposal outcome|passed|11-0-0-1|merge all applicable articles}}
{{ProposalOutcome|passed|11-0-0-1|merge all applicable articles}}
The remake of ''Mario vs. Donkey Kong'' redesigned a number of enemies from the original release, namely Thwomps, Thwimps, and Boos, to have a toy-like appearance, while giving the [[Bird (toy)|Bird]] enemy an organic appearance in contrast to its clockwork incarnations from the series. The wiki is currently set up such that the series' toy enemies are split from their original counterparts, though, seemingly, this is less due to gameplay and identification reasons and more to have a consistency with how the playable [[Mini]] toys are handled in relation to their base characters. While there have been proposals here and there on handling particular ''Mario vs. DK'' toys in certain ways, the consensus on their general set-up seems to be pieced together from these smaller discussions rather than something formal. It would therefore be consistent with the current status quo to give the remake's redesigns their own pages solely on the basis that they're now toys rather than the real deal.
The remake of ''Mario vs. Donkey Kong'' redesigned a number of enemies from the original release, namely Thwomps, Thwimps, and Boos, to have a toy-like appearance, while giving the [[Bird (toy)|Bird]] enemy an organic appearance in contrast to its clockwork incarnations from the series. The wiki is currently set up such that the series' toy enemies are split from their original counterparts, though, seemingly, this is less due to gameplay and identification reasons and more to have a consistency with how the playable [[Mini]] toys are handled in relation to their base characters. While there have been proposals here and there on handling particular ''Mario vs. DK'' toys in certain ways, the consensus on their general set-up seems to be pieced together from these smaller discussions rather than something formal. It would therefore be consistent with the current status quo to give the remake's redesigns their own pages solely on the basis that they're now toys rather than the real deal.


Line 834: Line 834:


@Qyzxf: Snapjaw is included for the same reason as Thwomp, Thwimp, and Bird: it will be split if option 3 passes and kept merged if option 1 or 2 pass. Tane Pakkun and Katakata Kaen Heihō are excluded from the proposal. And, uh, are the enemies consistently named differently? Because I'd probably also oppose this if they were, but they aren't in English, and if the names in other languages sections are anything to go by, they don't seem to be in Japanese either. That leaves the toy design as the only potential reason to keep these split, which you yourself already denounced as counterproductive...after using it as an argument a few sentences earlier. {{User:Hewer/sig}} 06:21, February 18, 2024 (EST)
@Qyzxf: Snapjaw is included for the same reason as Thwomp, Thwimp, and Bird: it will be split if option 3 passes and kept merged if option 1 or 2 pass. Tane Pakkun and Katakata Kaen Heihō are excluded from the proposal. And, uh, are the enemies consistently named differently? Because I'd probably also oppose this if they were, but they aren't in English, and if the names in other languages sections are anything to go by, they don't seem to be in Japanese either. That leaves the toy design as the only potential reason to keep these split, which you yourself already denounced as counterproductive...after using it as an argument a few sentences earlier. {{User:Hewer/sig}} 06:21, February 18, 2024 (EST)
:Auxiliary Japanese material for the original release of ''MvDK'' has a trend give toy enemies the qualifier ''katakata'', which loosely translates to "mechanical"; you have Shy Guy toys being called "Mechanical Shy Guys" in the [https://www.nintendo.co.jp/data/software/manual/man_PAGJ_00.pdf instruction manual], and Ninji toys being called "Mechanical Ninjis" in the {{file link|Mvsdk_book_ii.jpg|Shogakukan guide}}. With that said, mechanical Shy Guys went on to be consistently referred to as simply "Shy Guys" (''Heiho'') in future games, and mechanical Ninjis hadn't reappeared until the recent remake, meaning that whether their original "katakana" qualifier is meant to truly distinguish them conceptually from live Ninjis is pretty moot in my opinion. Worth noting is that said Japanese material for the GBA release isn't even consistent with itself, as [[Monchee]], the toy version of [[Monkikki]], is simply named after its live counterpart, rather than something like ''katakata Monkikki''. Point being, I don't personally think we should let those one-off qualifiers decide how these enemies are handled on this wiki. {{User:Koopa con Carne/Sig}} 08:32, February 18, 2024 (EST)
:Auxiliary Japanese material for the original release of ''MvDK'' has a trend give toy enemies the qualifier ''katakata'', which loosely translates to "mechanical"; you have Shy Guy toys being called "Mechanical Shy Guys" in the [https://www.nintendo.co.jp/data/software/manual/man_PAGJ_00.pdf instruction manual], and Ninji toys being called "Mechanical Ninjis" in the {{media link|Mvsdk_book_ii.jpg|Shogakukan guide}}. With that said, mechanical Shy Guys went on to be consistently referred to as simply "Shy Guys" (''Heiho'') in future games, and mechanical Ninjis hadn't reappeared until the recent remake, meaning that whether their original "katakana" qualifier is meant to truly distinguish them conceptually from live Ninjis is pretty moot in my opinion. Worth noting is that said Japanese material for the GBA release isn't even consistent with itself, as [[Monchee]], the toy version of [[Monkikki]], is simply named after its live counterpart, rather than something like ''katakata Monkikki''. Point being, I don't personally think we should let those one-off qualifiers decide how these enemies are handled on this wiki. {{User:Koopa con Carne/Sig}} 08:32, February 18, 2024 (EST)
::Upon more extensive research they have been consistently named as such in the Japanese releases but not the English ones. The main Japanese release that differs is MvDK2 in which none of them have unique names. Additionally the "katakata" denominator is used in the Switch remake as well, which is the most recent release, and could therefore be seen as a "current stance" on Nintendo's part as you could indeed argue that old third party guides are somewhat unreliable sources... but the Katakata Heihou name (the Japanese name for Mini Shy Guys) being used officially in the latest game is already an argument in favour of keeping it in my opinion, or we'd be counteracting something that official material has just clarified for us. [[User:Qyzxf|Qyzxf]] ([[User talk:Qyzxf|talk]]) 12:44, February 18, 2024 (EST)
::Upon more extensive research they have been consistently named as such in the Japanese releases but not the English ones. The main Japanese release that differs is MvDK2 in which none of them have unique names. Additionally the "katakata" denominator is used in the Switch remake as well, which is the most recent release, and could therefore be seen as a "current stance" on Nintendo's part as you could indeed argue that old third party guides are somewhat unreliable sources... but the Katakata Heihou name (the Japanese name for Mini Shy Guys) being used officially in the latest game is already an argument in favour of keeping it in my opinion, or we'd be counteracting something that official material has just clarified for us. [[User:Qyzxf|Qyzxf]] ([[User talk:Qyzxf|talk]]) 12:44, February 18, 2024 (EST)
:::"The main Japanese release that differs is MvDK2 in which none of them have unique names." Did you check the other games in the series as well? "Additionally the 'katakata' denominator is used in the Switch remake." Even if that's true (a source would help), remember that the Switch remake, just like all the other MvDK games in the series, was developed in the US, not in Japan, and the [[List of Mario vs. Donkey Kong (Nintendo Switch) staff|in-game credits]] don't seem to make clear which localization team drafted the game's script. You can make a point about Japanese names only if the original script is Japanese; that's when they lend clues to the creative intent and development behind a subject, and can be used here as a pointer towards how info on that subject is organized. With Mini Shy Guys, literally all games save for one, as well as their extra material, have called them "Shy Guys" in non-Japanese languages, with English being presumed to be the "source" language of the games; at that point, whether or not Japanese localizations truly push their own interpretation of the character isn't decisive in the matter just by virtue of being the Japanese interpretation. Anyway, [https://twitter.com/NintendoAmerica/status/1758521869760659520 here's an ad for the remake] (twitter.com) that plainly makes reference to "Shy Guys" and "Thwomps" without referring to them as toys. {{User:Koopa con Carne/Sig}} 19:12, February 18, 2024 (EST)
:::"The main Japanese release that differs is MvDK2 in which none of them have unique names." Did you check the other games in the series as well? "Additionally the 'katakata' denominator is used in the Switch remake." Even if that's true (a source would help), remember that the Switch remake, just like all the other MvDK games in the series, was developed in the US, not in Japan, and the [[List of Mario vs. Donkey Kong (Nintendo Switch) staff|in-game credits]] don't seem to make clear which localization team drafted the game's script. You can make a point about Japanese names only if the original script is Japanese; that's when they lend clues to the creative intent and development behind a subject, and can be used here as a pointer towards how info on that subject is organized. With Mini Shy Guys, literally all games save for one, as well as their extra material, have called them "Shy Guys" in non-Japanese languages, with English being presumed to be the "source" language of the games; at that point, whether or not Japanese localizations truly push their own interpretation of the character isn't decisive in the matter just by virtue of being the Japanese interpretation. Anyway, [https://twitter.com/NintendoAmerica/status/1758521869760659520 here's an ad for the remake] (twitter.com) that plainly makes reference to "Shy Guys" and "Thwomps" without referring to them as toys. {{User:Koopa con Carne/Sig}} 19:12, February 18, 2024 (EST)
Line 840: Line 840:


===Add the "Talk page proposal and support/oppose format" to the "Talk page proposals" section===
===Add the "Talk page proposal and support/oppose format" to the "Talk page proposals" section===
{{Proposal outcome|failed|1-9|keep as is}}
{{ProposalOutcome|failed|1-9|keep as is}}
The "[[MarioWiki:Proposals/Header#Talk page proposals|Talk page proposals]]" section in the header is missing a talk page proposal and support/oppose format, and that is confusing. I was just wondering if there is a possibility to add the format to the talk page proposals section.
The "[[MarioWiki:Proposals/Header#Talk page proposals|Talk page proposals]]" section in the header is missing a talk page proposal and support/oppose format, and that is confusing. I was just wondering if there is a possibility to add the format to the talk page proposals section.


Line 849: Line 849:
The first paragraph will read as follows:
The first paragraph will read as follows:


{{quote|This is an example of what your talk page 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 after starting a new fitting section and paste it into that section. Then replace the [subject] - variables with information to customize your talk page proposal, so it says what you wish. If you insert the information, be sure to <u>replace the whole variable ''including'' the squared brackets</u>, so "[insert info here]" becomes "This is the inserted information", not "[This is the inserted information]". Talk page 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. Such options should also be kept ''to a minimum'', and if something comes up in the comments, the talk page proposal can be amended as necessary.|First paragraph}}
{{quote2|This is an example of what your talk page 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 after starting a new fitting section and paste it into that section. Then replace the [subject] - variables with information to customize your talk page proposal, so it says what you wish. If you insert the information, be sure to <u>replace the whole variable ''including'' the squared brackets</u>, so "[insert info here]" becomes "This is the inserted information", not "[This is the inserted information]". Talk page 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. Such options should also be kept ''to a minimum'', and if something comes up in the comments, the talk page proposal can be amended as necessary.|First paragraph}}


This is what the example placed after the first paragraph will be as follows:
This is what the example placed after the first paragraph will be as follows:
Line 867: Line 867:
-----
-----
The paragraph placed after the example will read as follows:
The paragraph placed after the example will read as follows:
{{quote|Users will now be able to vote on your talk page proposal, until the set deadline is reached. Remember, you are a user as well, so you can vote on your own talk page proposal just like the others.|Paragraph placed after the example}}
{{quote2|Users will now be able to vote on your talk page proposal, until the set deadline is reached. Remember, you are a user as well, so you can vote on your own talk page proposal just like the others.|Paragraph placed after the example}}


The final paragraph will read as follows:
The final paragraph will read as follows:


{{quote|To support, or oppose, just insert "<nowiki>#{{User|[add your username here]}}</nowiki>" 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 talk proposal. If you are voting on your own talk proposal, you can just say "Per my proposal".|Final paragraph}}
{{quote2|To support, or oppose, just insert "<nowiki>#{{User|[add your username here]}}</nowiki>" 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 talk proposal. If you are voting on your own talk proposal, you can just say "Per my proposal".|Final paragraph}}


And that's what the new section for the talk page proposal and support/oppose format will look like. In addition, a parenthesized reading from the [[MarioWiki:Proposals/Header#Basic proposal and support/oppose format|basic proposal and support/oppose format section]] will be changed from "14 for [[MarioWiki:Writing guidelines|writing guidelines]] and [[MarioWiki:Proposals#Talk page proposals|talk page proposals]]" to "14 for [[MarioWiki:Writing guidelines|writing guidelines]]". Would that example be a better idea when making talk page proposals?
And that's what the new section for the talk page proposal and support/oppose format will look like. In addition, a parenthesized reading from the [[MarioWiki:Proposals/Header#Basic proposal and support/oppose format|basic proposal and support/oppose format section]] will be changed from "14 for [[MarioWiki:Writing guidelines|writing guidelines]] and [[MarioWiki:Proposals#Talk page proposals|talk page proposals]]" to "14 for [[MarioWiki:Writing guidelines|writing guidelines]]". Would that example be a better idea when making talk page proposals?
Line 896: Line 896:


So, I disagree with including the whole section twice on the same page, but would it not be helpful to explain how to use the TPP template? [[User:MegaBowser64|MegaBowser64]] ([[User talk:MegaBowser64|talk]]) 11:07, February 17, 2024 (EST)
So, I disagree with including the whole section twice on the same page, but would it not be helpful to explain how to use the TPP template? [[User:MegaBowser64|MegaBowser64]] ([[User talk:MegaBowser64|talk]]) 11:07, February 17, 2024 (EST)
:The final sentence of [[MarioWiki:Proposals#Rules 2|TPP rule 1]] already explains where to place {{tem|TPP}}, and also states to replace it with {{tem|Settled TPP}} when the proposal is over, so that's also already covered. The most we can add without being too redundant is to simply copy the code if you don't know how to include a template, but I think the wiki trusts a novice proposer that they'd know how templates work... {{User:Arend/sig}} 16:35, February 18, 2024 (EST)
:The final sentence of [[MarioWiki:Proposals#Rules 2|TPP rule 1]] already explains where to place {{tem|TPP}}, and also states to replace it with {{tem|SettledTPP}} when the proposal is over, so that's also already covered. The most we can add without being too redundant is to simply copy the code if you don't know how to include a template, but I think the wiki trusts a novice proposer that they'd know how templates work... {{User:Arend/sig}} 16:35, February 18, 2024 (EST)
:: Ah, I see. In that case, we've got pretty much everything covered already, so yeah this is definitely unnecessary. [[User:MegaBowser64|MegaBowser64]] ([[User talk:MegaBowser64|talk]]) 18:20, February 18, 2024 (EST)
:: Ah, I see. In that case, we've got pretty much everything covered already, so yeah this is definitely unnecessary. [[User:MegaBowser64|MegaBowser64]] ([[User talk:MegaBowser64|talk]]) 18:20, February 18, 2024 (EST)


===Trim or remove various ''Smash'' franchise-specific subcategories===
===Trim or remove various ''Smash'' franchise-specific subcategories===
{{Proposal outcome|passed|1-4-0-1|prune all Smash-related redirects, delete all categories except for the given exceptions}}
{{ProposalOutcome|passed|1-4-0-1|prune all Smash-related redirects, delete all categories except for the given exceptions}}
This is what I'd consider part one to a few proposals I'd like to hopefully make later down the road. This is about the following categories, and if you'd like to humor us for a second, pick one of these at random and take a look at them:
This is what I'd consider part one to a few proposals I'd like to hopefully make later down the road. This is about the following categories, and if you'd like to humor us for a second, pick one of these at random and take a look at them:
*[[:Category:Animal Crossing series]]
*[[:Category:Animal Crossing series]]
Line 981: Line 981:


====Comments====
====Comments====
===Reserve April Fools' joke proposals to a new section===
{{Proposal outcome|failed|0-5-11|Do nothing}}
I'm working on the assumption that joke proposals aren't actually banned entirely and are allowed on April Fools.
I'm not against the concept, however, I feel like there should be a specialized area for these things. Easy as it may be to tell such jokes from serious matters (ymmv on how serious of a pursuit you find editing a Mario fansite to be), the fact of the matter is that they have no business mingling with each other. April Fools content, at large, is already being separated from the rest of the wiki, albeit seamlessly so (it's being directly presented on the home page, but not linked from the mainspace), and you're still not allowed to vandalize actual articles on that day--shouldn't a similar restriction be applied to proposals? This here proposal aims to introduce a brand-new section on this very page (alongside "Writing guidelines", "New features" etc.) that will only be instated on April Fools day and will be reserved for joke proposals. (To clarify: it won't be a permanent part of this page, just on that day of the year.)
Option 1 of this proposal is to name this section the "April Fools' Day proposals" section. Prim, proper, self-explanatory. Option 2 is to give it a more jokey title, to which I raise "Extremely important proposals". Option 3 is to not add a section and let joke proposals wander about the page.
Neither of the first two options would actually "kill" any joke. The entire "punchline" of these joke proposals is the silly interactions between users, and, looking at their history, these proposals tend to be so clearly frivolous that they're easy to tell from the actual proposals. There's no surprise to ruin by putting these in their own section, but it's beneficial in actually drawing a line between them and the actual wiki discussion, and minimizing potential spillover into the latter.
TLDR [https://www.mariowiki.com/index.php?title=MarioWiki:Proposals&diff=prev&oldid=2418254 having genuine stuff crammed with jokey stuff looks bad]
'''Proposer''': {{User|Koopa con Carne}}<br>
'''Deadline''': March 3, 2024, 23:59 GMT
====Option 1 (add section, name it "April Fools' Day proposals")====
<del>#{{User|PnnyCrygr}} A more straight forward and formal title. Makes sense in context.</del>
====Option 2 (add section, name it "Extremely important proposals")====
#{{User|Koopa con Carne}} Fuck pies
#{{User|Hewer}} Per proposal, non-agresivelly.
#{{User|SolemnStormcloud}} SolemnStormcloud's Vote is a vote made by SolemnStormcloud. (Per all.)
#{{User|Tails777}} Honestly, I agree the most with the statement of being a means of preserving the humorous interactions between the users. We put in a lot of work on this site, giving it an air of profession as we strive to gather and show as much information on the Mario series. I like the idea that it's less about preserving the jokes and more for preserving the, shall we call it, off-stage behavior of the users. So let us have our <s>pie</s> fun <small>(I'm still waiting for the pie though... it's been years).</small> In short: Per proposal.
#{{User|Axis}} Per proposal
<del>#{{User|BMfan08}} While the other option does make more logical sense, I think this option would be fitting for the joke-filled nature of the proposals. <small>Now can someone help me with my comic project on [[N Gang]] and [[Club Nintendo (magazine)|Club Nintendo]]?</small><del>
====Option 3 (do nothing)====
#{{User|Glowsquid}} - It's April Fools. Having to preface it's a joke, kills the joke.
#{{User|Nintendo101}} - Per above.
#{{User|MCD}} - Per Glowsquid. It's one day a year.
#{{User|PnnyCrygr}} Stating that it's a non-serious, jokish proposal <i>before</i> adding in the funny April Fool (which is only once per year) proposal itself obviously, leaves the humor out of the bag. Captain Obvious kills the cat's humor. So forth, per the glow squid.
#{{User|YoYo}} per Glowsquid
#{{User|BMfan08}} Glowsquid and PnnyCrygr have a good point, so I'm changing my vote. <small>I still need help with the comic project on [[N Gang]] and [[Club Nintendo (magazine)|Club Nintendo]] by the way</small>
#{{User|OmegaRuby}} Per all.
#{{User|Sdman213}} Per all.
#{{User|Drago}} Per Glowsquid.
#{{User|Mario}} Nah. This isn't a big deal.
#{{User|FanOfRosalina2007}} Per all.
====Comments====
<s>KCC if you don't make an april fool's proposal this year we're gonna be so sad</s> We'd honestly prefer if there was no section, but it was disclosed to an admin that yes, it is indeed a joke or is an actually serious proposal--that way, the joke doesn't get "ruined" for most people, but there's at least someone who's able to, y'know, make sure if things get out of hand for what's meant to be a serious proposal/if things get too serious for what's meant to be a joke proposal, they can intervene. {{User:Camwoodstock/sig}} 18:09, February 25, 2024 (EST)
@Glowsquid @Camwoodstock, option 2 directly addresses that issue. Either way, the point of joke proposals is less the "joke" itself and more to get others in on the play house and goof around. The "punchline" is the entire community interaction itself. That kind of stuff should not share a corner with Very Serious wiki discussion, the same way the wiki's April Fools campaigns should not be a part of the actual knowledge repository. {{User:Koopa con Carne/Sig}} 18:59, February 25, 2024 (EST)
:I don't think Option 2 actually addresses the issue because nearly everyone who sees something titled "extremely important proposals" would immediately know it is anything but. - [[User:Nintendo101|Nintendo101]] ([[User talk:Nintendo101|talk]]) 19:36, February 25, 2024 (EST)
::Sure but the point of a joke proposal isn't to ''actually fool people into thinking it's a real proposal''. It's to goof around something outlandish. The "Extremely important proposals" title does not ruin that goal, especially since looking at the history of these proposals, they tend to be obvious jokes from the onset ("Remove removals", "Pie for everyone", "Create SUPREME rank" etc.) {{User:Koopa con Carne/Sig}} 19:58, February 25, 2024 (EST)
Just a quick question; has the issue this proposal intends to address (joke proposals appearing simultaneously with real ones on April 1st) actually occurred before? I've only been on here since late spring of 2021, so my perspective is rather limited, but I don't think that's been the case since at least then. Last year (2023) when I made my 「ウィキを青にしてマフィンを焼く」joke proposal, it was the only one up on the Proposal page that entire day; and the year before that (2022), there weren't any joke proposals made, and serious ones were on the page. {{User:Somethingone/sig}} 19:41, February 25, 2024 (EST)
:[[Special:Diff/2418295|2018]], [[Special:Diff/2630774|2019]], [[Special:Diff/3162423|2021]] had them. I only just skimmed the revision log, though, so there should be more instances. {{User:Koopa con Carne/Sig}} 19:58, February 25, 2024 (EST)
I take it the opposition didn't read my comments or what I added to the proposal. {{User:Koopa con Carne/Sig}} 13:27, February 28, 2024 (EST)
:We saw, we just personally don't really agree; we personally feel the element of surprise is, indeed, part of the joke. Hence, while we'd still prefer our option of "tell an admin and nobody else", we abstained from both any form of support as well as a direct oppose for the time being. {{User:Camwoodstock/sig}}
::Is this supposed element of surprise (whose existence is debatable) really [https://www.mariowiki.com/index.php?title=MarioWiki:Proposals&diff=prev&oldid=2418254 worth bogging down actual discussion]? As I said, moving these to their own section could help minimize these jokes spilling over into the real deal. Even if it's only one day a year, that's enough time to have a joke vote or something to that degree worm its way where it shouldn't be and go undetected. {{User:Koopa con Carne/Sig}} 18:27, February 28, 2024 (EST)
:::I read it. I don't think the problem being identified is a problem and I don't think the solutions being offered is necessary. {{User:Mario/sig}} 20:37, February 29, 2024 (EST)
To be honest, I misunderstood the proposal and assumed these proposals would be added to BJAODN <s>if you couldn't tell by my quick-edit</s>. I wouldn't mind having these proposals there instead, as some of them already are, though admittedly it should be considered whether to differentiate from the other joke proposals there or not. [[User:BMfan08|BMfan08]] ([[User talk:BMfan08|talk]]) 00:27, February 29, 2024 (EST)
:To be honest, it IS kinda weird why we don't do that already. We preserve April Fool's Day main pages as well as funnily bad proposals at BJAODN, so why not the April Fool's proposals? Would it violate the "don't write badly on purpose" rule? Then why are the April Fool's pages preserved there anyway?<br> To me, it certainly would be less of a hassle to just find them at BJAODN than manually going through countless pages of revision history. {{User:Arend/sig}} 11:20, February 29, 2024 (EST)
::I agree that we should do that. Perhaps we could create a subpage for [[MarioWiki:BJAODN/Proposals]] similar to the three [[MarioWiki:BJAODN/DK Wiki|DK Wiki]] subpages? [[User:SolemnStormcloud|SolemnStormcloud]] ([[User talk:SolemnStormcloud|talk]]) 19:26, February 29, 2024 (EST)
:::[[MarioWiki talk:BJAODN#Allow section(s) for certain April Fools' proposals|There was this proposal about it]], but to be honest I also agree that it would be good to archive the April Fools' proposals in BJAODN. {{User:Hewer/sig}} 19:44, February 29, 2024 (EST)
===Split game series articles into sub-series articles===
{{Proposal outcome|failed|1-12|Do not split}}
My [[Talk:Super Mario (series)#Move this page to "Super Mario Bros. (series)"|proposal]] to move the [[Super Mario (series)|''Super Mario'' series]] article to the name of the ''Super Mario Bros.'' series has been declined last year, so I had to make a follow-up proposal after five months since the last proposal was declined.
The following pages being split are as follows:
*[[Super Mario (series)|''Super Mario'' (series)]] will be split into the {{fake link|''Super Mario Bros.'' (sub-series)|Super Mario Bros. (sub-series)}}.
*[[Mario Kart (series)|''Mario Kart'' (series)]] will be split into {{fake link|''Mario Kart Arcade GP'' (sub-series)|Mario Kart Arcade GP (sub-series)}}.
'''Proposer''': {{User|GuntherBB}}<br>
'''Deadline''': March 7, 2024, 23:59 GMT
====Support====
#{{User|GuntherBB}} Per proposal
====Oppose====
#{{User|Tails777}} While I did support the idea of the ''New Super Mario Bros. series'' getting it's own sub-series article, I can understand why it isn't. And if that series can't get a sub-series article, I fail to see how the ''Super Mario Galaxy'' games can. They're all apart of the same overall series so I don't see why we need to divide things up further.
#{{User|Hewer}} I previously supported New Super Mario Bros. getting an article because I thought it would be the most eligible sub-series at four([[New Super Luigi U|ish]]) entries. But since then, Super Mario Land had its article merged, and now that we have all these sub-series merged (Super Mario Advance gets to stay the only exception since it covers Yoshi's Island as well), I feel like this is a much better choice for organisation when they're all just part of one series, splitting them all out would feel messy and [[MarioWiki:Once and only once|redundant]]. It also calls into question the criteria for splitting sub-series - if Mario Galaxy is eligible, why not "Super Mario 3D" which also has two games? Or the aforementioned New Super Mario Bros. and Super Mario Land? Better to avoid the headache and stay consistent by merging all of them.
#{{User|Nightwicked Bowser}} I may support splitting just Super Mario Bros. since with Wonder it's been given further distinction from the 3D games as a series, however if supporting that here means splitting Galaxy and Maker as well, then I'm gonna have to oppose per all.
#{{User|Camwoodstock}} Per Nightwicked Bowser. Splitting the ''Maker'' and ''Galaxy'' games in specific when they are strictly duologies is especially overkill to us.
#{{User|Sdman213}} Per all.
#{{user|Doc von Schmeltwick}} - Per NwB's comment below and my response.
#{{User|Nintendo101}} Per Nightwicked Bowser and Doc von Schmeltwick. Maybe individual "subseries" articles could be raised ''alongside'' the main series article, but not at the expense of breaking up the understanding of this as a discrete series of platform games. ''Super Mario Bros.'', ''Super Mario Galaxy'', ''Super Mario Maker'', and ''New Super Mario Bros. 2'' are all part of the mainline ''Super Mario'' series and it artificially dilutes their cohesion by suggesting they are unrelated to one another.
#{{User|Archivist Toadette}} This is just too vague on all fronts. What does and doesn't classify as a subseries? That's the question that must be answered before any discussion can happen. Per all.
#{{User|FanOfYoshi}} Per all.
#{{User|MegaBowser64}} Way too vague. Per all.
#{{User|ExoRosalina}} Per all, and yeah it will be unquestionable.
#{{User|Killer Moth}} Per all.
====Comments====
This should really be either a case-by-case or have multiple options rather than all-at-once or none at all. {{User:Swallow/sig}} 19:16, February 29, 2024 (EST)
:Indeed. I have draft pages with empty tables for [[User:Doc von Schmeltwick/Projects/Super Mario Bros. (series)|''Super Mario Bros.'' series]] (including the NSMB games) and [[User:Doc von Schmeltwick/Projects/Super Mario 3D (series)|''Super Mario 3D'' series]] (including the SMG games), but I think it needs more thought and discussion rather than trying to rush it through without any prior planning. [[User:Doc von Schmeltwick|Doc von Schmeltwick]] ([[User talk:Doc von Schmeltwick|talk]]) 21:22, February 29, 2024 (EST)
This proposal has now been updated to not split the Galaxy and Maker games into a subseries, however there's still the matter of Super Mario Bros and the Mario Kart Arcade games both being split if the proposal is supported with no one-or-the-other. These especially should be entirely seperate cases. {{User:Swallow/sig}} 11:26, March 1, 2024 (EST)
:I think this changes the scope of the original proposal too much. I would not have changed it. But I fail to understand the rationale of this new one anyways. Why ''Super Mario Bros.'' (sub-series)? Why not ''Super Mario Bros.'' (series)? Why change the name in the first place? - [[User:Nintendo101|Nintendo101]] ([[User talk:Nintendo101|talk]]) 17:32, March 1, 2024 (EST)
Hmmm... I'm not opposed to splitting into sub-series, the definition of sub-series is "a series that is part of a larger series." So, we could still have sub-series articles. We wouldn't be saying that ''[[Super Mario 64]]'' and ''[[Super Mario Bros. Wonder]]'' aren't part of the same series, they are. But I do get some of the reasoning used by the opposition. Redundancy would be a problem, as would criteria, though we would need a limit to how many games can constitute a series of sub-series, though ''[[Super Mario Land|Super]] [[Super Mario Land 2: 6 Golden Coins|Mario]] [[Wario Land (series)|Land]]'' could be a ''[[Super Mario Advance (series)|Super Mario Advance]]''-esque situation, because of the ''[[Wario Land (series)|Wario Land series]]''. {{User|SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)}} 08:58, March 4, 2024 (CST)
:The Super Mario Land series used to have its own article that got merged by [[Talk:Super Mario Land (series)#Merge to the main series page|this proposal]]. We do have a page for [[Mario + Rabbids (series)|Mario + Rabbids]] despite only having two games, so it could get arbitrary if we do decide on the number of games a series would need for it to have a page. {{User:Nightwicked Bowser/sig}} 10:13, March 4, 2024 (EST)
::Ok, you have a point. *Makes mental note to make proposal on April 4th* {{User|SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)}} 07:23, March 5, 2024 (CST)
:::Hey, I was looking through here, this "comment thread" or something (I don't know the exact name, but you might know), and when I went to the ''[[Super Mario Advance (series)|Super Mario Advance (series)]]'' page, I saw that it said, "The '''''Super Mario Advance''''' series is a [[Super Mario (series)|''Super Mario'']] '''''subseries''''' which consists of video game [[reissue]]s released only on the [[Game Boy Advance]]. It is a successor to ''[[Super Mario Bros. Deluxe]]'' on the [[Game Boy Color]], itself an indirect successor to ''[[Donkey Kong (Game Boy)|Donkey Kong]]'' on the [[Game Boy]]." That's right, '''''subseries'''''. So we already have a sub-series article. So what's going to happen to that article? Will it stay, or not? Even if this proposal fails (I'll probably make a successor to that proposal that is better than this one, there will be multiple options), I think it should stay, because of ''[[Yoshi's Island: Super Mario Advance 3|Yoshi's Island: Super Mario Advance 3]]''. {{User|SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)}} 07:32, March 6, 2024 (CST)
::::I think it should stay, might as well. [[File:Bowsersm64.png|35px]] [[User:MegaBowser64|MegaBowser64]] ([[User talk:MegaBowser64|talk]]) [[File:BowserNSMBU.png|35px]] 10:42, March 6, 2024 (EST)

Please note that all contributions to the Super Mario Wiki are considered to be released under the Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported license (see MarioWiki:Copyrights for details). If you don't want your writing to be edited mercilessly and redistributed at will, then don't submit it here. You are also promising us that you wrote this yourself, or copied it from a public domain or similar free resource. Do not submit copyrighted work without permission!

Cancel Editing help (opens in new window)