MarioWiki:Proposals: Difference between revisions

From the Super Mario Wiki, the Mario encyclopedia
Jump to navigationJump to search
No edit summary
 
Line 1: Line 1:
<table style="background:#fefffe;color:black;-moz-border-radius:8px;border:2px solid black;padding:4px" width=100%><tr><td>
{{/Header}}
<div class="proposal">
<center>http://img33.picoodle.com/img/img33/9/9/17/f_propcopym_9045f2d.png</center>
<br clear="all">
{| align="center" style="width: 85%; background-color: #f1f1de; border: 2px solid #996; padding: 5px; color:black"
|'''Proposals''' can be new features (such as an extension), removal of a previously added feature that has tired out, or new policies that must be approved via [[Wikipedia:Wikipedia:Consensus|consensus]] before any action(s) are done.
*Any user can support or oppose, but must have a strong reason for doing so, not, e.g., "I like this idea!"
*"Vote" periods last for one week.
*All past proposals are [[/Archive|archived]].
|}
A proposal section works like a discussion page: comments are brought up and replied to using indents (colons, such as : or ::::) and all edits are signed using the code <nowiki>{{user|</nowiki>''User name''<nowiki>}}</nowiki>. '''Signing with the signature code <nowiki>~~~(~)</nowiki> is not allowed''' due to technical issues.


<h2 style="color:black">How To</h2>
==Writing guidelines==
#Actions that users feel are appropriate to have community approval first can be added by anyone, but they must have a strong argument.
===Change how "infinitely respawning" enemies are counted in level enemy tables===
#Users then vote and discuss on the issue during that week. The "deadline" for the proposal is one week from posting at:
Currently, the wiki lists enemy counts for each level in tables located in that level's article. This is all well and good, but the problem arises when infinitely respawning ones (like piped ones) are included. As seen [[World 6-B (New Super Mario Bros.)|here]], this is awkwardly written as
##Monday to Thursday: 17:00 (5pm)
*"[number] (not including the infinite [enemy] spawning from [number] [method]),"
##Friday and Saturday: 20:00 (8pm)
and why shouldn't it include them? That method of writing is ungainly, misleading, and bloats the table's width unnecessarily. Therefore, I propose the alternate writing of
##Sunday: 15:00 (3pm)
*"[number] + (∞ x [number]),"
#Every vote should have a reason accompanying it.
with the "x [number]" and parentheses being removed if there is only one case. So in the linked example, it would be "6 + ∞," which says the same thing without contradicting itself with a lengthy diatribe.
#At any time a vote may be rejected if at least '''three''' active users believe the vote truly has no merit or was cast in bad faith. However, there must be strong reasons supporting the invalidation.
<br>(Also I had to restrain myself from using * rather than x because that's how I'm used to writing multiplication in equations. Thanks, higher-level math classes defaulting to "X" as a variable! But the asterisk could be used too, anyway.)
#"<nowiki>#&nbsp;</nowiki>" should be added under the last vote of each support/oppose section to show another blank line.
#Any proposal that has three votes or less at deadline will automatically be listed as "[[Wikipedia:Quorum|NO QUORUM]]." The original proposer then has the option to relist said proposal to generate more discussion.
#All proposals are archived. The original proposer must '''''take action''''' accordingly if the outcome of the proposal dictates it. If it requires the help of a sysop, the proposer can ask for that help.
#There are two topics that cannot be decided on through a proposal: the first is sysop promotions and demotions, which are decided by [[MarioWiki:Bureaucrats|Bureaucrats]]. Secondly, no proposals calling for the creation of Banjo, Conker or Sonic series articles are allowed (several proposals supporting them have failed in recent history).


The times are in EDT, and are set so that the user is more likely to be online at those times (after work/school, weekend nights).  If a proposal is added on Saturday night at 11:59 PM EDT, the deadline is the next Saturday night at 8:00 PM. If it is a minute later, the deadline is a day plus 15 hours (Sunday), as opposed to a day minus 4 hours.
'''Proposer''': {{User|Doc von Schmeltwick}}<br>
'''Deadline''': September 23, 2024, 23:59 GMT


__TOC__
====Support====
#{{User|Doc von Schmeltwick}} - Per
#{{User|Altendo}} - This doesn't sound like a bad idea, although I do think there should be an asterisk like "*" instead which leads to a note saying "not including the infinite [enemy] spawning from [number] [method]", as enemies can spawn in different ways, and showing how they spawn could still be useful. If we just show "∞ x [number]", it wouldn't show how Goombas are spawned in (the linked page doesn't specify how they are spawned in otherwise). But I do like the idea of shortening the "count" section of tables.
====Oppose====


<center><span style="font-size:200%">CURRENTLY: '''{{LOCALTIME}}, {{LOCALDAY}} {{LOCALMONTHNAME}} {{LOCALYEAR}} (EDT)'''</span></center>
====Comments====


==New Features==
==New features==
''None at the moment.
===Add {{iw|mw|Extension:WikiLove|WikiLove}} extension (includes templates)===
Inspired by my recently passed Thanks proposal and engagement with editors over time, I think a precedent has been set to add more [[Wikipedia:WikiLove|WikiLove]] features on to the wiki so that (willing) members may enjoy engaging with one another and feel motivated when others compliment their work, or just personal appreciations.


==Removals==
The main thing this proposal is focused on is the {{iw|mw|Extension:WikiLove|MediaWiki extension}}, which is called WikiLove. On the rationale of the {{iw|mw|WikiLove}} page, it says that lesser experienced users may feel discouraged when looked down upon by more experienced editors as they try to figure out how to do wikis, and this could help motivate not only newer editors, but also more experienced editors.
''None at the moment.


==Splits & Merges==
It says one can make custom WikiLove messages. Being a wiki on ''Super Mario'', I think this wiki could aim to do WikiLove messages themed around the ''Super Mario'' franchise. The community can decide on WikiLove messages if this proposal passes (e.g., one message could say like "You're a super star like Mario"), as well as personalized ones toward editors. But if others do not want involvement, the courtesy policy can be updated to reflect this.
===''Smash Bros.'' Moves===
In light of recent applications of our [[MarioWiki:Importance Policy|importance policy]], many users would like to see minor ''[[Super Smash Bros. (series)|Super Smash Bros.]]'' subjects merged. One such suggestion has been to merge the special moves with the characters’ pages. For example, [[Hand Grenade]], [[Remote Controlled Missile]], [[Cypher]], [[C4]], and [[Grenade Launcher]] would be merged with [[Solid Snake]].


This merge would decrease the emphasis placed ''Smash Bros.'' while still retaining all ''Super Smash Bros.'' content.  If this proposal passes, the following assurances are granted (1) ALL content from a special move page must be transferred to its respective character page BEFORE the special move page is blanked.  This includes pictures. (2) ALL special move pages affected will become redirects to their appropriate section in their characters' articles.  In other words, you will still be able to easily look up each special move.  It will simply no longer have its own page. (3) The [[Super Smash Bros. Special Moves|''Super Smash Bros.'' Special Moves]] page will still be in place.
I wish there were more images to show, but here's a [[mw:File:WikiLove-screenshot-2014.png|representative image]] to show how WikiLove would look. Would it be worth giving this a try?


If you would like an example of how this would look, please see [[User:Stumpers/Test|here]].  Please note how the image templates and stub templates carried over.  Trophy information when applicable has now been moved down to the larger trophy information section. The only real change is that images have been made smaller.  For the purpose of example, I have including the SSB Moves template at the bottom of the section.  Unless people really want it to be there, when/if I merge the moves, I will not be including the template.  Let me know.
'''Edit:''' For clarity, if this proposal passes, this also means WikiLove templates will be created, like how Wikipedia has them. It can be what the community decides, and categorical examples could include {{iw|wikipedia|Template:Happy New Year|seasonal}}, {{iw|wikipedia|Template:Doggy|animals}}, {{iw|wikipedia|Template:Glass of milk|drinks}}, or {{iw|wikipedia|Template:Friend|expressing friendships}}, and obviously ''Super Mario''.


'''Proposer:''' {{User|Stumpers}}<br>
'''Proposer''': {{User|Super Mario RPG}}<br>
'''Deadline:''' 17:00, October 2, 2008
'''Deadline''': September 20, 2024, 23:59 GMT


====Support====
====Support====
#{{User|Stumpers}} - Per myself above.  This merge will retain all information about the Smash Bros. series, but it will present it in a way that will not give unequal attention to the ''Smash Bros.'' series over other cross-overs.  We need to either follow the importance policy by measures such as the one described in the proposal or we need to modify the importance policy.
#{{User|Super Mario RPG}} Per.
#{{User|Uniju :D}} - I completely agree with Stumpers.
#{{User|ThePowerPlayer}} This would be a great form of positive feedback to counter the struggles faced by new and existing editors alike, since learning how to use a wiki is more difficult than you might expect. Ultimately, this should increase the feeling of community around the wiki to keep editing from feeling like a chore.
#{{User|R.O.B 128}} - You have my full support on this incentive. It's about time this happened.
# {{User|Derekblue1}} I know people are happy with what I do ever since I update the Discord server on my progress on ''Mario is Missing!''. The WikiLove extension will make people feel more connected. I see this as a boost of encouragement just like the Thanks extension.
#{{User|Booster}} - I'm all for this. From what I gather, moves pertaining to Mario characters will be merged as well, yes?
#{{User|Technetium}} Seems really fun, especially if we go full on Mario theming with it!
#{{User|Stooben Rooben}} - This is a great idea. The wiki needs a little less focus on the SSB series, and some more on the Mario series; I don't want anything to drastic to be changed, so this seems like just the right way to do things.
#{{User|Sparks}} Hooray for more positivity!
#{{User|Super-Yoshi}} - Per all.
#{{User|DryBonesBandit}} <s>give me my glass o' milk now</s> This seems like it would be a nice addition to the wiki. Per all!
#{{User|Cobold}} - I suggested this ages ago. I didn't want to create a proposal after the debate didn't work out. This step should be all right to put some weight onto the Importance Policy, it was only a theory before.
#{{User|FanOfRosalina2007}} I know I had a rough time when I first joined some of the websites I'm currently on today, so I'm all for this! I just love having the option to thank people and encourage them! Per all!
#{{User|tanokki}} -I didn't like this initially but when I looked a stumpers test page It made sense.Per all.
#{{User|BMfan08}} Sure! I'm all for kittens (I could even make do with [[Kitten|Mario kittens]]). Per all!
#{{User|White Knight}} - For those who want the Smash series info, it is still there, and for those who want less focus on the Smash series, there would be fewer pages about it.
#{{User|Walkazo}} - Per all. It'll make navigating the ''SSB'' information easier as well.
#{{User|Xluidi}} - Per all. It makes navigation more easy, and less stubs.
#{{User|Yoshikart}} - Per all. Could look up on SmashWiki.
#{{User|Canama}} - Per all
#{{User|Shrikeswind}} - This is the Mario Wiki, not the Smash Wiki or the Nintendo Wiki.  Merge 'em.
#{{User|Magitroopa}} I'm pretty much tired of them.
#{{User|M&SG}} I highly agree on all of this.  Making separate articles about special moves is foolish and a big waste.  After all, they're THAT character's moves, so place them in THAT character's article.  Already I merged [[Lucario|Lucario's]] special moves onto its main article.
#{{User|Karatekid5}} I agree. It is much more orginized. And a few are stubs.
#Iggykoopa Im useuale ageinst mergeing but this is not smash wiki.
#{{User|Lemonnlime}} I agree with this proposal, lets merge and keep it mainly Mario related.


====Oppose====
====Oppose====
#{{User|Phailure}} It's not like the move articles are stubs or anything, they can stay.


====Comment====
====Comments====
Just a question to those responsible for the random quote generator: many Final Smash articles include quotes from Masahiro Sakurai.  Will we need to remove these in the event that the character page has a quote at the top?  Alternatively, we could merge quotes into the actual text, like so: In his Super Smash Bros. Dojo! entry for Peach Blossom, Masahiro comments, "[insert quote here]." {{User|Stumpers}}
{{@|ThePowerPlayer}} I realized WikiLove templates could fit into the scope of this proposal, so it's been updated, if your "Support" will count towards voting for those as well. [[User:Super Mario RPG|Super Mario RPG]] ([[User talk:Super Mario RPG|talk]]) 22:24, September 13, 2024 (EDT)


Booster: It does also apply to Mario characters. {{User|Stumpers}} 23:19, 25 September 2008 (EDT)
I really like this, but does Porplemontage know about this proposal? I know he approved and implemented the "Thanks" extension, but I just wanna be sure! {{User:Sparks/sig}} 22:37, September 13, 2024 (EDT)
:About your first comment, you could just use {{tem|LLquote}} {{User|Stooben Rooben}} 23:41, 25 September 2008 (EDT)
:{{@|Sparks}} The proposal is easily viewable on this page. And the proposal basically concerns a WikiLove system in general (since I updated it to also mention templates), so something like {{fake link|MarioWiki:WikiLove}} page can be set up with the corresponding templates. [[User:Super Mario RPG|Super Mario RPG]] ([[User talk:Super Mario RPG|talk]]) 08:17, September 14, 2024 (EDT)
::Alrighty! Good to know. {{User:Sparks/sig}} 08:52, September 14, 2024 (EDT)


Well, this what I've actually wanted (and some others) and this will definately prevent vandalism. Srsly, we would have to patrol 195 articles if there isn't a merge. Plus, I think somebody went a little too far when they put that Diddy Kong can perform "Diddycide". That's a technique that is only meant to be on Smash Wiki. Are you going to merge the moves for the Mario series characters too, Stumpers? {{User|R.O.B 128}}
==Removals==
:I was considering only merging non-Mario characters, but then Blitzwing and Stooben suggested to me that we merge all the moves.  So, yes - that is the current plan: Fireball, Cape, Mario Tornado, and Jump Punch will all be merged with Mario.  If anyone would rather this not be the case, please speak up. {{User|Stumpers}}
''None at the moment.''
::Say wut? Fireball is in more than just Smash Bros., you know. <s>Screw the importance policy.</s>{{User|Phailure}}
 
:::Please try to remain civil. {{User|Stooben Rooben}}
==Changes==
::::Just as Mario's cape form from ''Super Mario World'' will not be merged with Mario, neither will the article [[Fireball]].  We will be merging the ''SSB'' section from the article into Mario, but in its place we will be lightly mentioning that fireball became an attack, with a link to the Fireball section in the Mario article. As much as its worth, I can tell you that it is not my intention that this proposal lead to all major Smash Bros. elements being merged.  I'd like to refer you to [[Yangus]], [[White Mage]], and [[Knuckles]].  They have articles, and so I see no reason why we should merge characters from ''Smash Bros.''. {{User|Stumpers}}
===Rename the remaining baseball teams to their current titles===
:::::Sorry about <s>giving my honest opinion</s> being rude. Anyway, I'm all for Stumper's last comment, although i think Final Smashes should have there own pages. Another option could be to make an article like "<Character Name here> Movesets (Super Smash Bros.)". {{User|Phailure}}
One thing is certain: ''Mario Super Sluggers'' was first released in Japan almost three years after ''Mario Superstar Baseball'' was first released in said country. In this case, I humbly suggest that there's a possibility to move the remaining baseball team pages with their ''Mario Superstar Baseball'' name to their current name from ''Mario Super Sluggers''. So far, the current names already in use are the [[Peach Monarchs]] and [[Bowser Monsters]].
::::::I'm going to say that this idea of yours will not work. FSs will be merged with teh characters. {{unsigned|R.O.B 128}}
:::::Actually, it might work.  It's an idea I toyed around with after Cobold brought up the topic of merging ''SSB'' articles.  Phailure: don't forget that you can make your own proposal even if this one passes that would change the way we present data. So, for example, if this proposal passes and we merge the pages as shown above, you could then make another proposal offering up an alternate solution.  Just some advice from having watched a bunch of proposals going down: give people time to get used to this proposal and to weigh the pros and cons before you put forth another proposal.  If people are just starting to use a new system that they just approved of, they're unlikely to notice its defects, and therefore more unlikely to vote for a new system right away. {{User|Stumpers}}
::::::Stumpers:Works for me. R.O.B. 128: Fine... but at least [[Giga Bowser]] should get a page, since he was a boss in Melee. {{User|Phailure}}
:::::Noted.  I'll be sure to only merge the Final Smash portion of the article.  If you'd like a mock-up done I'd be more than happy. {{User|Stumpers}}


M&SG: Please do not act upon a proposal until it has passed.  Did you make sure that all text and images were transferred over? {{User|Stumpers}}
The following of the remaining pages will be affected by the move:
*[[Mario Sunshines]] → {{fake link|Mario Fireballs}}
*[[Yoshi Islanders]] → {{fake link|Yoshi Eggs (team)}}
*[[Wario Greats]] → {{fake link|Wario Muscles}}
*[[DK Kongs]] → {{fake link|DK Wilds}}


===''New Super Mario Bros.'' Level Articles===
Once this proposal passes, we'll be able to move the remaining baseball teams with their ''Mario Superstar Baseball'' names to their current ''Mario Super Sluggers'' titles.
Looking through the site, I noticed we have some articles on each level of ''[[New Super Mario Bros.]]''. I'm not exactly sure why. The levels of ''Super Mario Bros'', ''Super Mario Bros. 3'', ''The Lost Levels'', etcetera, are all merged with their respective world article. (Ex: World 1-1 (SMB) is non-existent because it is already in [[World 1 (SMB)]]). So here's my proposal: merge the NSMB level articles with their respective world articles, just as we have done with the aforementioned articles. While many NSMB level articles have yet to be created, some look like [[World 2-4 (NSMB)|this]] or [[World 2-Castle (NSMB)|this]]. Please take [[User:Stooben Rooben/Proposal Example|this]] as a rough example of what the world articles would look like merged.


'''Proposer''': {{User|Stooben Rooben}}<br>
'''Proposer''': {{User|GuntherBayBeee}}<br>
'''Deadline''': 17:00, October 2, 2008
'''Deadline''': September 19, 2024, 23:59 GMT


====Merge====
====Support====
#{{User|Stooben Rooben}} - Per my statement above.
#{{User|GuntherBayBeee}} Per proposal.
#{{User|Super-Yoshi}} - Per St00by.
#[[User:Doc von Schmeltwick|Doc von Schmeltwick]] ([[User talk:Doc von Schmeltwick|talk]]) - Kept forgetting to do this during my ongoing sports project.
#{{User|The Dark Doggy 2}} - There's no back story or info or even a name for ''NSMB'' levels except that what their theme is (eg forest or snow), and who will go to ''Mario Wiki'' to find that out?
#{{User|Jdtendo}} The most recent names should be prioritized.
#{{User|Blue koopa}} - There is very little info that can be put into those articles and all the levels in a world are prety much the same.
#{{User|Super Mario RPG}} Definitely.
#{{User|Walkazo}} - See below comment.
#{{User|ThePowerPlayer}} Per (baseb)all.
#{{User|R.O.B 128}} - This wiki doesn't need articles for every little thing. Those would be to many stubs! I support this just as I support the merge for the Special Moves.
#{{User|Hewer}} Don't see why not.
#{{User|Stumpers}} - Changing my mind because of the featured article thing.  Plus, the mock-up shoes that it's a better system to drift around gathering information.
#{{User|Killer Moth}} Per proposal. Sounds like a good idea.
#{{User|Uniju :D}} - Per all above.
#{{User|Storm Yoshi}} - Per all above. ._.
#{{user|Luigi001}} Per all!
#{{User|Princess Grapes Butterfly}} Per all! This sounds like a Brilliant idea!


====Keep Separate====
====Oppose====
#{{user|Time Q}}: First, what makes a level article-worthy? ''[[Super Mario World]]'' levels all get articles (which I think is good), so why not do the same for ''NSMB'', ''SMB'', etc.? The only difference here is that they don't have proper names, but most ''SMW'' level names only consist of the world name and a number as well. Levels definitely have enough content to write about in separate articles, so IMO we should allow level articles for any game. Secondly, we're talking about levels (you can write so much about them!) of a ''main Mario game'', so I don't feel they should be merged into one single page. Finally, if we do merge them, we can't put the single levels into separate categories (such as "Castles and Fortresses", "Grasslands", ...).
#{{user|Bob-omb buddy}}-Per Time Q,and I have found that merging levels loses info.
#{{user|Garlic Man}} - Per Time Q; in fact, if the proposal is declined, we could start a PipeProject to complete all of these levels.
#{{user|The Writing Guy}} - Per TimeQ.
#{{User|Grandy02}} - Per all.
#{{User|Palkia47}} - Per all. We are a Mario Wiki, and we have and need the most Mario info we can get, and just having like two sentences on the World article isn't info; a description of the level in an article is info :D
#{{User|Magitroopa}} Per all.
#{{user|InfectedShroom}} - Per Time Q. All levels, IMO, should have their own page.
#{{user|Iggykoopa}} Look there is no reason to merge levels we have enough information to create separete pages!
#{{User|Mateus 23}} Per all.


====Comments====
====Comments====
'''Time Q''': I do see your point, and I actually expected someone to point this out. The reason why I didn't propose that SMW levels get merged, is because they do consist of more that solely numbers. Ex: SMB, SMB2, SMB3, TLL, YI, YIDS, NSMB, SPP, and probably a few others each have levels titled "World 1-1", or "World 2-1", etcetera. SMW does actually name their levels, albeit some of the names are less "wordy" than others. But, SMW has levels with titles like "Awesome", "Gnarly", and even "Yoshi's Island 2". While the all games have official level names (even if they are just a sequence of numbers), SMW is the only one to give their levels more original names. If we were to separate every "World 1-1", "World 1-2", "World 1-3", and so on into their own articles, we would have at least 32 disambiguation pages with the aforementioned titles. So, in this aspect, I find merging the NSMB level articles to their respective world articles makes navigation all-the-more easier. {{User|Stooben Rooben}} 02:29, 26 September 2008 (EDT)
===Decide how to handle the "latest portrayal" section in infoboxes===
:You've got a point here, but I don't think navigation would be that much of a problem. How would having disambiguation pages make navigation more difficult? I'm still all for putting brief level summaries into their respective world articles (and linking to the actual level articles). The only thing that separates the "article-worthiness" of ''NSMB'' levels from the "article-worthiness" of ''SMW'' levels is that the former do not get names. But we have a lot of articles about things that don't have (official) names. {{user|Time Q}}
Currently, in infoboxes, the "latest portrayal" section of it is inconsistent across characters. When ''[[Paper Mario: The Thousand-Year Door (Nintendo Switch)|Paper Mario: The Thousand-Year Door]]'' came out, for example, it listed both [[Kevin Afghani]] (Mario's current voice actor) and [[Charles Martinet]] (who voices Mario in ''The Thousand-Year Door'' from original archival voicing) as Mario's latest portrayals, yet [[Jen Taylor]] (whose voice clips were also reused) wasn't added to Peach's latest portrayal. Therefore, to make these infoboxes consistent for characters with multiple voice actors, I am proposing several options:
*Option 1: Only add in the current voice actor for the character (reissues with archival voices from retired voice actors will not be added).
*Option 2: Only add in the voice actor for the character in the most recent game (reissues with archival voices will overtake the "current" voice actor if the latest one did not record voice lines for the character, the current voice actor will be re-added to the infobox following the release of a game with voices from the current voice actor).
*Option 3: Add both the current voice actor and the voice actor for the latest release (this puts two voice actors in the "latest portrayal" section if the character is voiced via archival footage from a retired voice actor, but the current voice actor also gets to remain. When a new game comes out with new voice lines from the current voice actor, the voice actor from the previous release will be removed).
*Option 4: Do nothing (infoboxes with both actors will not change, and same with infoboxes with the current actor even if a game featuring archival voicing from a retired voice actor is the latest one).


How is there a disambig,And dosent every one of the pages list the levels at the end of the page?{{user|Bob-omb buddy}}
With regards to mixed use of voices, if multiple voice actors voice a single character in a single game, the latest person who voiced the character as of the game's release takes priority, meaning that archival voices from retired actors will not appear in the infobox if the character in that game is also (and especially mostly) voiced by the current actor for that character. As for other media (like ''[[The Super Mario Bros. Movie]]''), whether or not the game/other media actor takes priority or if both should be listed is also of question, but I will likely wait until the [[Untitled The Super Mario Bros. Movie follow-up|follow-up]] to create that proposal.


World 1 (SMB) isn't even complete yet! Before we consider whether to carry this action out or not, shouldn't someone complete all of the incomplete world/level articles first? {{User|Pikax}}
'''EDIT:''' With regards to [[User:Tails777|Tails777]]'s vote, I don't know exactly how it will play out if Option 3 passes, although I will say if a game (like a compilation) does have a single character voiced by more than one voice actor who isn't the current one, the latest voice actor whose voice clips are used in the game as of the game's release will be the second option added to the infobox (like Peach in ''3D All-Stars'', who would've listes Samantha Kelly as her current and ''Galaxy'' voice actress, as well as Jen Taylor as her ''Sunshine'' voice actress, although I don't think it would be that consistent because it would exclude Leslie Swan, her ''64'' voice actress, but since Jen Taylor was the more recent of the two, she is the one who is listed).
:'''Time Q''': The excess amount of navigation templates and disambig pages seem rather unnecessary. (I do admit I have created a lot of navigation templates. :P) We would have at least 32 disambiguation pages if we are to separate ''all'' levels from their respective world articles. Take [[SMB3]]'s world articles for example: [[Grass Land]] is a nice, long article that gives a descriptive entry for each level in that world; not to mention SMB3's levels have practically the same level names. In my opinion, it would be better to have eight long, descriptive articles on worlds and their levels, rather than around 40-60 stubs. Expansion is possible on the level articles, but if we were to do that, we might as well separate any and all levels from their respective world article. '''Bob-omb Buddy''': 1) Merging articles does not always mean loss of information. It depends on who's doing the merging and how it's being done. Take for example when I merged controller articles to their respective console article: I left the lengthy description of each controller exactly as it was and merely implemented it into the respective console article. '''Pikax''': I can finish [[World 1 (SMB)]]. {{User|Stooben Rooben}} 17:12, 26 September 2008 (EDT)
::I agree that a few long articles are better than dozens of stubs. In fact, I'd even like to see the ''SMW'' levels merged, because empty articles like [[Chocolate Island]] with a list of stubs like [[Chocolate Island 3]] are, frankly, irritating: you hope for information, but get next to nothing. If people want in-depth descriptions of each and every article, they should use Walkthroughs or FAQs (which we should find for them and link to, in order to continue to be a helpful, worthwhile resource for them); if they want to understand the ''Mario'' series as a whole, the sections within the larger world articles should be enough. However, Time Q's "what makes a level article-worthy?" point is valid: all levels should get merged, or none at all; because inconsitancy is just as distasteful. And finally, I think the numerous disambiguation pages can't be phased out anyway: because, people are still going to search for "World 1-1", and it will still apply to a multitude of articles, even if  "1-1" is only the name of a single section within an overworld title. - {{User|Walkazo}}


ZOMG to Garlic's comment! I was about to work on the level/world articles, but then this Proposal popped up. That's weird :blink: {{User|Palkia47}}
'''Proposer''': {{User|Altendo}}<br>
:Ah, then if it turns out that we will have to expand on those articles, I shall help as well :D! {{User|Garlic Man}}
'''Deadline''': September 21, 2024, 23:59 GMT
::Well, since a good portion of the opposers believe that the world articles wouldn't give enough level description (as opposed to the level articles staying separate), why don't you guys take [[User:Stooben Rooben/Proposal Example|this]] as an example of what I intend said world articles to look like? Though it currently contains only two level descriptions, I think you can get the gist of what the world articles would look like. {{User|Stooben Rooben}} 20:53, 26 September 2008 (EDT)
:::St00by thats a great idea. Of course, we would have to expand on the sections alot, but it won't take that long. If alot of NSMB players put their effort into it, that article would become huge. - {{User|Super-Yoshi}}
::::Thank you, Super-Yoshi! As you can see, I've expanded the example even more. I even added a section for the world's cannon. As of now, the article is over 8,500 bytes, and it is only halfway completed. So, if the article were to be written in this format, it would roughly be around 15,000-17,000 bytes, which is more than long enough to be a Featured Article. The article lacks several images, sure, but with enough searching I'm fairly sure we could find level maps or screenshots for each level. {{User|Stooben Rooben}}


What would be the problem about doing it like [[World 1 (YI)|here]]? Brief level descriptions in the world article (that could be longer than in the ''Yoshi's Island'' example), with links to in-depth articles. This looks just fine to me and navigation is easy too. I really don't like the idea of merging stuff that has so much content you can write about. Plus, it's from a main Mario game, so it is of major importance. Plus, if we merge all levels into world articles, we can't put the single levels into separate categories. {{user|Time Q}}
====Only add in the current voice actor====
:I agree with TimeQ. Plus if we keep the images, wouldn't they make the pages' appearence look worse? {{User|The Writing Guy}}
#{{User|Altendo}} Primary choice. "Latest portrayal", to me, means the person who last voiced the character, and I don't think archival voices should count as this, especially since those voices were recorded before the current voice actor. This also avoids the issues of multiple voice actors voicing a single character in compilations and switching/adding or removing voice actors when reissues and original games come out (as described below).
::'''Time Q''': That is a fine idea, but as Walkazo said, "inconsistency is distasteful". The brief level info can be hard to do, especially when summing up many levels that have similarities. The levels in NSMB all have the same atmosphere, enemies, and all that &ndash; the only difference being that they require different strategies to make it through the levels. IMO, the level summaries in [[World 1 (YI)]] are pretty poor. (No offense.) '''TWG''': Well, take [[World 9]] for example; each level has a map image, but they are laid out tastefully, just like [[World A]]. And, if that weren't to work, we could always do it like in [[Tree Zone|this article]]. {{User|Stooben Rooben}}
#{{User|Shadow2}} Re-using old sound clips has no bearing on a character's "Latest portrayal". Charles does not voice Mario anymore, and to list him as such just because of older re-used sound clips is misrepresentative.
:::I'm not understanding why Stages with names are superior to those without names. For instance DKC level articles are not affected by this proposal, while having about the same, if not less, information contained in the article itself. I don't beleive that names are what makes some articles inferior and less important, but rather the content, which can indeed be improved, if enough users work on it. I will contribute to NSMB, SMB, and other games that I may have. After all, levels could be anywhere from 1-1 in Super Mario Bros, or Bob-omb Battlefiled from Super Mario 64. All should be treated equally, not discriminated by game. {{User|Garlic Man}}
#{{User|Hewer}} Per both, this is the less misleading option (the infobox doesn't specify whether the "latest" voice actor was just re-usage of old voice clips, so  listing both Charles and Kevin gives the impression that they're both actively voicing Mario, which is wrong).
::::They're not superior. I just didn't think about it at the time. :P Also, I don't think the paintings in ''SM64'' are really levels. I think their worlds...<small>Correct me if I'm wrong.</small> {{User|Stooben Rooben}}
:::::Well, technically, they are "Courses"; but no other game, I don't think, uses that name, so. Also, even "Galaxies", are part of "Domes", which may be considered as Worlds, and the galaxies as levels within the domes and areas. I also noticed that I think the proposal changed to just NSMB now... {{User|Garlic Man}}
::::::Well, unless anyone objects, I think this can cover SMW, YI, and DKC level articles as well. It seems like a good portion of peoples' reasoning for this proposal is that they ''are'' levels, (that operates in both support and oppose). As for SMG and SM64, Maybe we should make another proposal pertaining solely to those. {{User|Stooben Rooben}}
Iggykoopa there is no reason to merge levels we have enough information to create sepreate pages
:The proposal should contain a link to one of the New Super Mario Bros. level pages. - {{User|Cobold}} 13:12, 30 September 2008 (EDT)
::'''Cobold''': Good idea. I did so. '''Iggykoopa''': I'm not sure if you're referring to all levels, or just NSMB levels. If you look at the level descriptions for the ''Super Mario Bros.'' worlds, they are fairly short, but almost as informative as possible. NSMB level articles can have a little more information, (as seen [[World 2-5 (NSMB)|here]]), but it doesn't seem like many users are determined enough to ''make'' the articles that long. If we leave them separate, many users may just leave the levels as are &ndash; as stubs. If we merge the levels into their respective world articles, the whole article will be long, thus not a stub. Of course, once merged, the articles could always use some expansion, but I feel that it would be much better to have '''eight''' neatly-written, relatively long articles, than forty-something stubs out there. {{User|Stooben Rooben}}


We also have enough information to split off the biography sections of the character articles, but we don't. Having all the information on one page is much more accessible and also makes for great Featured Articles - which is the main reason I'm supporting this proposal.  We need to see more effort for the level articles, and allowing for potential FA status would help beef them up, I'm all for it. Think about what we have as FAs right now: games, characters, and series.  Why aren't their locations up there?  It's because there are only a few, such as the Mushroom and Beanbean Kingdoms, that would be large enough for FAs, even with all of their information. When you break down a location, like one of these worlds, into smaller articles as we have been doing, there's not enough information left!  So let's merge, be inspired, write our hearts out, and get these featured and move on to more articles! {{User|Stumpers}}
====Only add in the the voice actor for the "latest" game====
:Well said, Stumpers! {{User|Stooben Rooben}}
#{{User|Altendo}} Tertiary choice. If "Latest portrayal" really means the person who voiced the character in the latest game, regardless of said actor's as-of-game-release status, then maybe archival voices can count because it is the voice of the character in the "latest" game. I do not recommend this option as this will cause a lot of infobox editing and switching voice actors when reissues (particularly ports and remasters) do inevitably come out, and if a compilation game (like ''[[Super Mario 3D All-Stars]]'') comes out, multiple voice actors who voice the same character in a single compilation (like [[Princess Peach]], who had [[Leslie Swan|three]] [[Jen Taylor|voice]] [[Samantha Kelly|actresses]] in a single compilation) will stack up in the infoboxes. And when a new game comes out, all of that is thrown out the window, reverting to their current voice actor. [[MarioWiki:Proposals/Archive/63#Rename "Latest portrayal" section in character infobox to "Notable portrayals"|This is why some were against enforcing the absolute "latest" portrayals in a previous proposal]]. The only reason why I am for this is consistency.
However, it still comes down to the fact that expansion is possible, and that merging together a bunch of small articles does not necessarily give you a good-quality article. For instance, [[Cheep-Cheep]], having 13 sections, is a semi-long article. However, each section lacks information, and cannot be said that it has good quality. From seeing the example level articles up in the proposals, if images are added, the articles would become easier to understand, and overall informative. There still is a chance for those articles, and if be needed, there are many users who are willing to do the work for 4 informative articles, rather than a grouping of section stubs. {{User|Garlic Man}}
====Add both current and latest voice actor====
::'''Garlic Man''': Expansion is always possible; I never said it wasn't. I agree that merging multiple small articles into one doesn't make the article "good-quality", but it makes it 1) more efficient than multiple stubs, 2) it makes navigation easier, and 3) it makes the wiki look a little more professional. Now, let me elaborate on #3: The Cheep-Cheep article may need more information in certain sections, but it looks much better than a stub. Multiple stubs without images ''might'' make the place look to some; whereas if we were to merge the articles, it would be visible that the larger article still needed work, but it would have at least one image (the [[world]]'s map), a descriptive infobox, several subsections &ndash; each describing the many levels in said world, and it would make it easier to traverse across the website for newer users, (and possibly some older users as well). Also take note of what Stumpers said: the biography sections are large enough to split off, however, we don't do that. Wouldn't you find the MarioWiki more appeasing and more professional if it had more articles worthy of being Featured? I for one get tired of seeing articles commonly repeated on the Main Page as Featured &ndash; and they're always pertaining to characters and games (occasionally game series). Locations are a vital part of the Marioverse. Look at the [[World 2 (NSMB)]] page: it's only as long as it's level articles. If we can expand the world articles by merging it's respective levels within it, and then expand those sections, the articles could be amazing. If done, the world articles could then be roughly 15,000-20,000+ bytes, as opposed to 1,000-2,000 bytes per world and level. {{User|Stooben Rooben}}
#{{User|Altendo}} Secondary choice. It feels nice to respect both the voice actor who is currently voicing the character and the person whose voices, even in archival, are the sole ones used in the latest game. However, my point about voice actor switching, while not as big as an issue because archival voice actors will only be added rather than replace the current one, still kind of stands because reissues will add the archival voice actor for one game, only to remove it when a new game comes out. Additionally, if compilations ''only'' contain voices from retired voice actors, this will stack it up even more (although for ''3D All-Stars'', it still wouldn't change much due to Peach's ''[[Super Mario Galaxy]]'' voice actress still being her current one). Still, this does make the infoboxes consistent.
:::Actually, in my opinion, I don't really know if a group of stubs look better than a single stub article. Also, seeing the example articles, I don't see them as stubs. They have sufficient information. Of course, we can implement infoboxes into the level articles if it will help the article. I also had the impression you  were stressing the fact that if we made world articles, they could become featured status. Seeing your proposal example, no offence intended, I don't see how it could become featured in that state; now don't get me wrong, because articles can be improved. Additionally, I don't think counting in "bytes" is very appropriate for articles, for it is not how many characters were used in templates, categories, etc, but rather the text and meat of the article itself. As for featured article status, I could point out each mistake on your article, but since they could be easily fixed(while lacking images), I will not; after all, this proposal is not to get those articles featured. It would be nice to see more articles qualified for Featured Nomination, but currently, I don't see potential in the example article, and don't see how we would be any better off, because I personally don't find much more information on the single article than the separate ones. {{User|Garlic Man}}
#{{User|Tails777}} I agree with this one more; it's best to keep it up to date when it comes to VAs, but it isn't uncommon for various games to recycle voice clips (TTYD once again being a good example). I feel it is best to at least acknowledge if voice clips get recycled in this respect, though I also feel this should be limited to one at a time, in case there are examples where someone had more than even two voice actors.


===''Mario Kart Arcade GP 2'' Special Items===
====Do nothing====
I propose that we should merge all the items for foreign Mario characters (such as Mametchi and Pac-Man) into one page, since we cannot expand them too much. They aren't really needed, and just keeping them on one page would be the right thing to do since most of them are stubs. For example, the [[Mame Block]] contains such little information, a template, and a picture. Pac-Man and stuff aren't even related to Mario, except for the fact that they did appear in MKAGP. But thats it, so why should we have all these new articles? We shouldn't be expanding on little articles like that, we should be focusing on more Mario related things such as [[Chocolate Island 2]] or stuff. I propose we merge all these items into one page.
 
'''Proposer:''' {{User|Super-Yoshi}}<br>
'''Deadline:''' 14:00, October 4, 2008
 
====Support====
#{{User|Super-Yoshi}} - Per my comment above.
#{{User|Stooben Rooben}} -Per S-Y and my brief comment below.
#{{User|Paper Jorge}} - Per S-Y.
#{{User|Tucayo}} - Yeah, they should all be in one page and the old pages should be redirects
#{{User|Dark Lakitu 789}}Per S-Y No matter what we can't write more on the Pac-man page with out telling every game he has been in or tell about his charter saying some Mario related.
#{{User|Walkazo}} - Per all. Half the items don't have articles yet anyway.
#<s>{{User|Stumpers}} - [[Pauline's Items]] were merged, and she's a Mario character.  It's both about importance and amount of information, both of which are working against these items having separate articles.  As long as all the information is kept, just in a merged form, I am fine with this.</s>
#{{User|R.O.B 128}} - I've never played any of the GP games, but this is a good idea. You have my support.
 
====Oppose====
#{{User|Iggykoopa}} - The reason i oppose is because they are part of the mario universe just like mario vs wario
#{{User|Cobold}} - Pauline's items are a bad example of totally minor items without effect. They're generic. They can hardly be distinguished at all. The special items have a clear effect. That's something different. They're the same as a [[Giant Banana]].
#{{User|Garlic Man}} - Per Cobold.
#{{User|Stumpers}} - Point taken Cobold.  Something else that's bothered me is that, since I've voted, Super-Yoshi has confirmed that he did mean that foreign did refer to non-American countries, and I think that is a very bad precedent - Japanese versions of games and Japanese-only sources are very important.
#{{User|The Gravitator}} - Just because these items can't be used by Mario characters doesn't mean they don't deserve articles. They play just as big a part in the game as the other items do.


====Comments====
====Comments====
Well, we do have articles on foreign character items in ''Super Smash Bros.'', so aren't they technically at the same level according to the importance policy? {{User|Garlic Man}}
:Example, please. {{User|Super-Yoshi}}
::'''Garlic Man''': Yes and no: while they are from foreign games, any Marioverse character can use them. {{User|Stooben Rooben}}
:::I was just about to say "Yea but items such as [[Poke Ball]]s can be used by Mario or Yoshi and anyone else, but these items cannot." when I got an edit conflict XP {{User|Super-Yoshi}}
::::Iggykoopa, can you rephrase your comment? I do not seem to understand what your trying to say, sorry. {{User|Super-Yoshi}}
It seems like you are saying that the game charecters are not that importent because they were never released in america but your wrong even though they were never released here they are still part of the mario universe and should be treated as such. {{User|Iggykoopa}}
:No im not saying the game characters arent important, and Tamagotchi and Pac-Man are in the Americas. Im saying that we arent going to expand on those articles, since such few MWikians live in Japan, and most of them I guess are inactive. So, the best possibility to save space and other stuff would be to merge these articles into one. Also please sign your comments with <nowiki>{{User|Iggykoopa}}</nowiki> {{User|Super-Yoshi}}
::Ok but then it gets down to what is important and whats not and then before you know it this becomes wikepidia {{User|Iggykoopa}}
:::Im not really getting your point, please rephrase it. {{User|Super-Yoshi}}
::::'''S-Y''': Oh, I didn't know that Mario characters cannot use the foreign items. I understand now :). {{User|Garlic Man}}
To Iggykoopa on the topic of us becoming like Wikipedia, several things should be addressed (1) Whether something has appeared in one region (such as Japan) or in multiple regions is of no importance: American, Japanese, European, etc. exclusive content all should get equal treatment.  Our inability to do so because most of the editors are American does not mean that we cannot ''strive'' to make it so.  I believe the proposer misused foreign - he probably meant non-Mario series. (2) There is a big difference between the Mario universe and the Mario series.  The Mario universe is connected to many other fictional universes, including Legend of Zelda, Sonic, Pac-Man, etc.  However, this does not mean that the Legend of Zelda series is part of the Mario series: they are two independent series of games that have occasionally crossed-over with one another.  The Super Mario Wiki covers the Mario ''series'', not the Mario ''universe''.  There is simply too much content to cover if we covered the entire multiverse of which Mario is one small part.  Giving equal coverage to, say, Legend of Zelda as we did to Mario would require that we have articles for the Hookshot, Midna, and Legend of Zelda: Link's Awakening to name a few subjects.  However, these crossovers are still part of the Mario series, and so to accommodate that we cover any part of a non-Mario series that has crossed over, such as these items.  However, we do not give equal coverage.  We would not go in-depth talking about all the many times Link saved Hyrule, just his involvement in Super Mario RPG, Smash Bros., etc.  Because we cannot go so in-depth we sometimes need to merge articles together because they are so short.  This is one such case.  The subjects will still be given the same treatment as before, people will still be able to search for them and be brought to the appropriate page, and so one and so forth.  The only difference is that they are on the same page. {{User|Stumpers}} 00:30, 28 September 2008 (EDT)
:'''Garlic''': Thanks for understanding. '''Stumpers''': Thanks for telling Iggykoopa about this. {{User|Super-Yoshi}}
::Of course.  The fact that we're a Wiki about a series rather than the universe is a little hard to grasp - especially for new users, so I'm happy to describe it. {{User|Stumpers}}
:::what i was saying is that if we decide what is important then other things start geting merged such as the super luigi storys charecters {{User|Iggykoppa}}
::::But Super Luigi Stories is '''''Mario''''' related, while these are not. They've breifly just appeared in one game along with Mario and the gang. - {{User|Super-Yoshi}}
Super luigi is only in one game while there are to mario kart gp games {{User|Iggykoopa}}
:::::Yes but he is part of the Big Eight, so he should have an article about him. The other characters from MKAGP DO NOT appear in any other Mario game, just one. Super Luigi has its own article because a character thats actually from the Mushroom Kingdom can use that. Now do you see what Im trying to say? {{User|Super-Yoshi}}
:Iggy, your fear of us going merge happy is appreciated, but you don't need to worry about it: it's an issue that has already been thoroughly discussed and decided upon.  Yes, we do merge [[List of Implied Characters|implied characters]] and characters who are inseparable, such as [[Ashley and Red]], but we draw the line there.  You don't see us merging [[Penguin Patrol]] with other minor ''[[Paper Mario]]'' characters, for example. {{User|Stumpers}}
Iggykoopa Ok but think about this do the races take place in the mushroom world.
:No one's going to deny that. ;) We just got over a big discussion about what could be considered canon and non-canon, and the verdict was that no fan opinions should make something be considered non-canon, so no one is about to call those items non-canon. {{User|Stumpers}}
Iggykoopa But the problem is if you do that what happens to the rest of the items also some items still appear in mario kart wii
:Yes but thats a diffrent game. THIS game is only in Japan, and we don't have many users who played it. They are MINOR items, so Im proposing we should merge them.... {{User|Super-Yoshi}}
::Super-Yoshi - this merge should be made because the items are minor, not because they're in a Japan-only game.  We have plenty of Japanese content on the Wiki - for example, Mario vs. Wario items. {{User|Stumpers}} 10:20, 30 September 2008 (EDT)
==Changes==
''None at the moment.


==Miscellaneous==
==Miscellaneous==
''None at the moment.
''None at the moment.''

Latest revision as of 15:38, September 16, 2024

Image used as a banner for the Proposals page
Current time:
Monday, September 16th, 20:14 GMT
Proposals can be new features, the removal of previously-added features that have tired out, or new policies that must be approved via consensus before any action is taken.
  • "Vote" periods last for one week.
  • Any user can support or oppose, but must have a strong reason for doing so (not, e.g., "I like this idea!").
  • All proposals must be approved by a majority of voters, including proposals with more than two options.
  • For past proposals, see the proposal archive and the talk page proposal archive.

A proposal section works like a discussion page: comments are brought up and replied to using indents (colons, such as : or ::::) and all edits are signed using the code {{User|User name}}.

How to

Rules

  1. If users have an idea about improving the wiki or managing its community, but feel that they need community approval before acting upon that idea, they may make a proposal about it. They must have a strong argument supporting their idea and be willing to discuss it in detail with the other users, who will then vote about whether or not they think the idea should be used. Proposals should include links to all relevant pages and writing guidelines. Proposals must include a link to the draft page. Any pages that would be largely affected by the proposal should be marked with {{proposal notice}}.
  2. Only registered, autoconfirmed users can create, comment in, or vote on proposals and talk page proposals. Users may vote for more than one option, but they may not vote for every option available.
  3. Proposals end at the end of the day (23:59) one week after voting starts, except for writing guidelines and talk page proposals, which run for two weeks (all times GMT).
    • For example, if a proposal is added at any time on Monday, August 1, 2011, the voting starts immediately and the deadline is one week later on Monday, August 8, at 23:59 GMT.
  4. Every vote should have a strong, sensible reason accompanying it. Agreeing with a previously mentioned reason given by another user is accepted (including "per" votes), but tangential comments, heavy sarcasm, and other misleading or irrelevant quips are just as invalid as providing no reason at all.
  5. Users who feel that certain votes were cast in bad faith or which truly have no merit can address the votes in the comments section. Users can ask a voter to clarify their position, point out mistakes or flaws in their arguments, or call for the outright removal of the vote if it lacks sufficient reasoning. Users may not remove or alter the content of anyone else's votes. Voters can remove or rewrite their own vote(s) at any time, but the final decision to remove another user's vote lies solely with the administrators.
    • Users can also use the comments section to bring up any concerns or mistakes in regards to the proposal itself. In such cases, it's important the proposer addresses any concerns raised as soon as possible. Even if the supporting side might be winning by a wide margin, that should be no reason for such questions to be left unanswered. They may point out any missing details that might have been overlooked by the proposer, so it's a good idea as the proposer to check them frequently to achieve the most accurate outcome possible.
  6. If a user makes a vote and is subsequently blocked for any amount of time, their vote is removed. However, if the block ends before the proposal ends, then the user in question holds the right to re-cast their vote. If a proposer is blocked, their vote is removed and "(banned)" is added next to their name in the "Proposer:" line of the proposal, which runs until its deadline as normal. If the proposal passes, it falls to the supporters of the idea to enact any changes in a timely manner.
  7. No proposal can overturn the decision of a previous proposal that is less than 4 weeks (28 days) old.
  8. Any proposal where none of the options have at least four votes will be extended for another week. If after three extensions, no options have at least four votes, the proposal will be listed as "NO QUORUM." The original proposer then has the option to relist said proposal to generate more discussion.
  9. If a proposal reaches its deadline and there is a tie for first place, then the proposal is extended for another week.
  10. If a proposal reaches its deadline and the first place option is ahead of the second place option by three or more votes, then the first place option must have over 50% support to win. If the margin is only one or two votes, then the first place option must have at least 60% support to win. If the required support threshold is not met, then the proposal is extended for another week.
    • Use the {{proposal check}} tool to automate this calculation; see the template page for usage instructions and examples.
  11. Proposals can only be extended up to three times. If a consensus has not been reached by the fourth deadline, then the proposal fails and can only be re-proposed after four weeks (at the earliest).
  12. All proposals are archived. The original proposer must take action accordingly if the outcome of the proposal dictates it. If it requires the help of an administrator, the proposer can ask for that help.
  13. If the administrators deem a proposal unnecessary or potentially detrimental to the upkeep of the Super Mario Wiki, they have the right to remove it at any time.
  14. Proposals can only be rewritten or canceled by their proposer within the first three days of their creation (six days for talk page proposals). However, proposers can request that their proposal be canceled by an administrator at any time, provided they have a valid reason for it. Please note that canceled proposals must also be archived.
  15. Unless there is major disagreement about whether certain content should be included, there should not be proposals about creating, expanding, rewriting, or otherwise fixing up pages. To organize efforts about improving articles on neglected or completely missing subjects, try setting up a collaboration thread on the forums.
  16. Proposals cannot be made about promotions and demotions. Users can only be promoted and demoted by the will of the administration.
  17. No joke proposals. Proposals are serious wiki matters and should be handled professionally. Joke proposals will be deleted on sight.
  18. Proposals must have a status quo option (e.g. Oppose, Do nothing) unless the status quo itself violates policy.

Basic proposal and support/oppose format

This is an example of what your proposal must look like, if you want it to be acknowledged. If you are inexperienced or unsure how to set up this format, simply copy the following and paste it into the fitting section. Then replace the [subject] - variables with information to customize your proposal, so it says what you wish. If you insert the information, be sure to replace the whole variable including the squared brackets, so "[insert info here]" becomes "This is the inserted information", not "[This is the inserted information]". Proposals presenting multiple alternative courses of action can have more than two voting options, but what each voting section is supporting must be clearly defined. Such options should also be kept to a minimum, and if something comes up in the comments, the proposal can be amended as necessary.

===[insert a title for your proposal here]===
[describe what issue this proposal is about and what changes you think should be made to improve how the wiki handles that issue]

'''Proposer''': {{User|[enter your username here]}}<br>
'''Deadline''': [insert a deadline here, 7 days after the proposal was created (14 for writing guidelines and talk page proposals), at 23:59 GMT, in the format: "September 16, 2024, 23:59 GMT"]

====Support====
#{{User|[enter your username here]}} [make a statement indicating that you support your proposal]

====Oppose====

====Comments====

Users will now be able to vote on your proposal, until the set deadline is reached. Remember, you are a user as well, so you can vote on your own proposal just like the others.

To support, or oppose, just insert "#{{User|[add your username here]}}" at the bottom of the section of your choice. Just don't forget to add a valid reason for your vote behind that tag if you are voting on another user's proposal. If you are voting on your own proposal, you can just say "Per my proposal".

Talk page proposals

Proposals concerning a single page or a limited group of pages are held on the most relevant talk page regarding the matter. Proposals dealing with a large amount of splits, merges, or deletions across the wiki should still be held on this page.

For a list of all settled talk page proposals, see MarioWiki:Proposals/TPP archive and Category:Settled talk page proposals.

Rules

  1. All active talk page proposals must be listed below in chronological order (new proposals go at the bottom) using {{TPP discuss}}. Include a brief description of the proposal while also mentioning any pages affected by it, a link to the talk page housing the discussion, and the deadline. If the proposal involves a page that is not yet made, use {{fake link}} to communicate its title in the description. Linking to pages not directly involved in the talk page proposal is not recommended, as it clutters the list with unnecessary links. Place {{TPP}} under the section's header, and once the proposal is over, replace the template with {{settled TPP}}.
  2. All rules for talk page proposals are the same as mainspace proposals (see the "How to" section above), with the exceptions made by Rules 3 and 4 as follows:
  3. Voting in talk page proposals will be open for two weeks, not one (all times GMT).
    • For example, if a proposal is added at any time on Monday, August 1, 2011, it ends two weeks later on Monday, August 15, 2011, at 23:59 GMT.
  4. The talk page proposal must pertain to the subject page of the talk page it is posted on.
  5. When a talk page proposal passes, it should be removed from this list and included in the list under the "Unimplemented proposals" section until the proposed changes have been enacted.

List of ongoing talk page proposals

  • Move TEC-XX to TEC (discuss) Deadline: September 16, 2024, 23:59 GMT
  • Split Bowser's Flame from Fire Breath (discuss) Deadline: September 18, 2024, 23:59 GMT
  • Split Banana Peel from Banana (discuss) Deadline: September 18, 2024, 23:59 GMT
  • Consider the "Blurp" and "Deep Cheep" in the Super Mario Maker games an alternate design of Cheep Cheep with the former twos' designs as a cameo rather than a full appearance of the former two, in line with the game's own classification (discuss) Deadline: September 18, 2024, 23:59 GMT
  • Split truck into cargo truck and pickup truck (discuss) Deadline: September 21, 2024, 23:59 GMT
  • Split the navigation template for Donkey Kong between arcade and Game Boy versions (discuss) Deadline: September 21, 2024, 23:59 GMT
  • Merge Crocodile Isle (Donkey Kong 64) to Crocodile Isle (discuss) Deadline: September 21, 2024, 23:59 GMT
  • Prune "sports" games from Black Shy Guy in line with White Shy Guy and Red Boo (discuss) Deadline: September 21, 2024, 23:59 GMT
  • Determine what to do with the feather item from Super Mario 64 DS (currently on Wing Cap) (discuss) Deadline: September 21, 2024, 23:59 GMT
  • Add English to {{foreign names}} and retitle to {{international names}} (discuss) Deadline: September 26, 2024, 23:59 GMT
  • Allow usage of {{Release}} as a generic "flag list" template (discuss) Deadline: September 27, 2024, 23:59 GMT
  • Merge Preying Mantas with Jellyfish (discuss) Deadline: September 28, 2024, 23:59 GMT

Unimplemented proposals

Proposals

Split Mario Kart Tour character variants into list articles, Tails777 (ended May 4, 2022)
Establish a standard for long course listings in articles for characters/enemies/items/etc., Koopa con Carne (ended June 8, 2023)
Break alphabetical order in enemy lists to list enemy variants below their base form, EvieMaybe (ended May 21, 2024)
Standardize sectioning for Super Mario series game articles, Nintendo101 (ended July 3, 2024)
^ NOTE: Not yet integrated for the New Super Mario Bros. games, the Super Mario Maker games, Super Mario Run, or Super Mario Bros. Wonder
Expand use of "rawsize" gallery class, Doc von Schmeltwick (ended July 19, 2024)
Do not use t-posing models as infobox images, Nightwicked Bowser (ended September 1, 2024)
Create new sections for gallery pages to cover "unused/pre-release/prototype/etc." graphics separate from the ones that appear in the finalized games, Doc von Schmeltwick (ended September 2, 2024)
Tag sections regarding the unofficially named planets/area in Super Mario Galaxy games with "Conjecture" and "Dev data" templates, GuntherBayBeee (ended September 10, 2024)

Talk page proposals

Split all the clothing, Doc von Schmeltwick (ended September 12, 2021)
Split machine parts, Robo-Rabbit, and flag from Super Duel Mode, Doc von Schmeltwick (ended September 30, 2022)
Make bestiary list pages for the Minion Quest and Bowser Jr.'s Journey modes, Doc von Schmeltwick (ended January 11, 2024)
Allow separate articles for Diddy Kong Pilot (2003)'s subjects, Doc von Schmeltwick (ended August 3, 2024)

Writing guidelines

Change how "infinitely respawning" enemies are counted in level enemy tables

Currently, the wiki lists enemy counts for each level in tables located in that level's article. This is all well and good, but the problem arises when infinitely respawning ones (like piped ones) are included. As seen here, this is awkwardly written as

  • "[number] (not including the infinite [enemy] spawning from [number] [method]),"

and why shouldn't it include them? That method of writing is ungainly, misleading, and bloats the table's width unnecessarily. Therefore, I propose the alternate writing of

  • "[number] + (∞ x [number]),"

with the "x [number]" and parentheses being removed if there is only one case. So in the linked example, it would be "6 + ∞," which says the same thing without contradicting itself with a lengthy diatribe.
(Also I had to restrain myself from using * rather than x because that's how I'm used to writing multiplication in equations. Thanks, higher-level math classes defaulting to "X" as a variable! But the asterisk could be used too, anyway.)

Proposer: Doc von Schmeltwick (talk)
Deadline: September 23, 2024, 23:59 GMT

Support

  1. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) - Per
  2. Altendo (talk) - This doesn't sound like a bad idea, although I do think there should be an asterisk like "*" instead which leads to a note saying "not including the infinite [enemy] spawning from [number] [method]", as enemies can spawn in different ways, and showing how they spawn could still be useful. If we just show "∞ x [number]", it wouldn't show how Goombas are spawned in (the linked page doesn't specify how they are spawned in otherwise). But I do like the idea of shortening the "count" section of tables.

Oppose

Comments

New features

Add WikiLove extension (includes templates)

Inspired by my recently passed Thanks proposal and engagement with editors over time, I think a precedent has been set to add more WikiLove features on to the wiki so that (willing) members may enjoy engaging with one another and feel motivated when others compliment their work, or just personal appreciations.

The main thing this proposal is focused on is the MediaWiki extension, which is called WikiLove. On the rationale of the WikiLove page, it says that lesser experienced users may feel discouraged when looked down upon by more experienced editors as they try to figure out how to do wikis, and this could help motivate not only newer editors, but also more experienced editors.

It says one can make custom WikiLove messages. Being a wiki on Super Mario, I think this wiki could aim to do WikiLove messages themed around the Super Mario franchise. The community can decide on WikiLove messages if this proposal passes (e.g., one message could say like "You're a super star like Mario"), as well as personalized ones toward editors. But if others do not want involvement, the courtesy policy can be updated to reflect this.

I wish there were more images to show, but here's a representative image to show how WikiLove would look. Would it be worth giving this a try?

Edit: For clarity, if this proposal passes, this also means WikiLove templates will be created, like how Wikipedia has them. It can be what the community decides, and categorical examples could include seasonal, animals, drinks, or expressing friendships, and obviously Super Mario.

Proposer: Super Mario RPG (talk)
Deadline: September 20, 2024, 23:59 GMT

Support

  1. Super Mario RPG (talk) Per.
  2. ThePowerPlayer (talk) This would be a great form of positive feedback to counter the struggles faced by new and existing editors alike, since learning how to use a wiki is more difficult than you might expect. Ultimately, this should increase the feeling of community around the wiki to keep editing from feeling like a chore.
  3. Derekblue1 (talk) I know people are happy with what I do ever since I update the Discord server on my progress on Mario is Missing!. The WikiLove extension will make people feel more connected. I see this as a boost of encouragement just like the Thanks extension.
  4. Technetium (talk) Seems really fun, especially if we go full on Mario theming with it!
  5. Sparks (talk) Hooray for more positivity!
  6. DryBonesBandit (talk) give me my glass o' milk now This seems like it would be a nice addition to the wiki. Per all!
  7. FanOfRosalina2007 (talk) I know I had a rough time when I first joined some of the websites I'm currently on today, so I'm all for this! I just love having the option to thank people and encourage them! Per all!
  8. BMfan08 (talk) Sure! I'm all for kittens (I could even make do with Mario kittens). Per all!

Oppose

Comments

@ThePowerPlayer I realized WikiLove templates could fit into the scope of this proposal, so it's been updated, if your "Support" will count towards voting for those as well. Super Mario RPG (talk) 22:24, September 13, 2024 (EDT)

I really like this, but does Porplemontage know about this proposal? I know he approved and implemented the "Thanks" extension, but I just wanna be sure! link:User:Sparks Sparks (talk) link:User:Sparks 22:37, September 13, 2024 (EDT)

@Sparks The proposal is easily viewable on this page. And the proposal basically concerns a WikiLove system in general (since I updated it to also mention templates), so something like MarioWiki:WikiLove page can be set up with the corresponding templates. Super Mario RPG (talk) 08:17, September 14, 2024 (EDT)
Alrighty! Good to know. link:User:Sparks Sparks (talk) link:User:Sparks 08:52, September 14, 2024 (EDT)

Removals

None at the moment.

Changes

Rename the remaining baseball teams to their current titles

One thing is certain: Mario Super Sluggers was first released in Japan almost three years after Mario Superstar Baseball was first released in said country. In this case, I humbly suggest that there's a possibility to move the remaining baseball team pages with their Mario Superstar Baseball name to their current name from Mario Super Sluggers. So far, the current names already in use are the Peach Monarchs and Bowser Monsters.

The following of the remaining pages will be affected by the move:

Once this proposal passes, we'll be able to move the remaining baseball teams with their Mario Superstar Baseball names to their current Mario Super Sluggers titles.

Proposer: GuntherBayBeee (talk)
Deadline: September 19, 2024, 23:59 GMT

Support

  1. GuntherBayBeee (talk) Per proposal.
  2. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) - Kept forgetting to do this during my ongoing sports project.
  3. Jdtendo (talk) The most recent names should be prioritized.
  4. Super Mario RPG (talk) Definitely.
  5. ThePowerPlayer (talk) Per (baseb)all.
  6. Hewer (talk) Don't see why not.
  7. Killer Moth (talk) Per proposal. Sounds like a good idea.

Oppose

Comments

Decide how to handle the "latest portrayal" section in infoboxes

Currently, in infoboxes, the "latest portrayal" section of it is inconsistent across characters. When Paper Mario: The Thousand-Year Door came out, for example, it listed both Kevin Afghani (Mario's current voice actor) and Charles Martinet (who voices Mario in The Thousand-Year Door from original archival voicing) as Mario's latest portrayals, yet Jen Taylor (whose voice clips were also reused) wasn't added to Peach's latest portrayal. Therefore, to make these infoboxes consistent for characters with multiple voice actors, I am proposing several options:

  • Option 1: Only add in the current voice actor for the character (reissues with archival voices from retired voice actors will not be added).
  • Option 2: Only add in the voice actor for the character in the most recent game (reissues with archival voices will overtake the "current" voice actor if the latest one did not record voice lines for the character, the current voice actor will be re-added to the infobox following the release of a game with voices from the current voice actor).
  • Option 3: Add both the current voice actor and the voice actor for the latest release (this puts two voice actors in the "latest portrayal" section if the character is voiced via archival footage from a retired voice actor, but the current voice actor also gets to remain. When a new game comes out with new voice lines from the current voice actor, the voice actor from the previous release will be removed).
  • Option 4: Do nothing (infoboxes with both actors will not change, and same with infoboxes with the current actor even if a game featuring archival voicing from a retired voice actor is the latest one).

With regards to mixed use of voices, if multiple voice actors voice a single character in a single game, the latest person who voiced the character as of the game's release takes priority, meaning that archival voices from retired actors will not appear in the infobox if the character in that game is also (and especially mostly) voiced by the current actor for that character. As for other media (like The Super Mario Bros. Movie), whether or not the game/other media actor takes priority or if both should be listed is also of question, but I will likely wait until the follow-up to create that proposal.

EDIT: With regards to Tails777's vote, I don't know exactly how it will play out if Option 3 passes, although I will say if a game (like a compilation) does have a single character voiced by more than one voice actor who isn't the current one, the latest voice actor whose voice clips are used in the game as of the game's release will be the second option added to the infobox (like Peach in 3D All-Stars, who would've listes Samantha Kelly as her current and Galaxy voice actress, as well as Jen Taylor as her Sunshine voice actress, although I don't think it would be that consistent because it would exclude Leslie Swan, her 64 voice actress, but since Jen Taylor was the more recent of the two, she is the one who is listed).

Proposer: Altendo (talk)
Deadline: September 21, 2024, 23:59 GMT

Only add in the current voice actor

  1. Altendo (talk) Primary choice. "Latest portrayal", to me, means the person who last voiced the character, and I don't think archival voices should count as this, especially since those voices were recorded before the current voice actor. This also avoids the issues of multiple voice actors voicing a single character in compilations and switching/adding or removing voice actors when reissues and original games come out (as described below).
  2. Shadow2 (talk) Re-using old sound clips has no bearing on a character's "Latest portrayal". Charles does not voice Mario anymore, and to list him as such just because of older re-used sound clips is misrepresentative.
  3. Hewer (talk) Per both, this is the less misleading option (the infobox doesn't specify whether the "latest" voice actor was just re-usage of old voice clips, so listing both Charles and Kevin gives the impression that they're both actively voicing Mario, which is wrong).

Only add in the the voice actor for the "latest" game

  1. Altendo (talk) Tertiary choice. If "Latest portrayal" really means the person who voiced the character in the latest game, regardless of said actor's as-of-game-release status, then maybe archival voices can count because it is the voice of the character in the "latest" game. I do not recommend this option as this will cause a lot of infobox editing and switching voice actors when reissues (particularly ports and remasters) do inevitably come out, and if a compilation game (like Super Mario 3D All-Stars) comes out, multiple voice actors who voice the same character in a single compilation (like Princess Peach, who had three voice actresses in a single compilation) will stack up in the infoboxes. And when a new game comes out, all of that is thrown out the window, reverting to their current voice actor. This is why some were against enforcing the absolute "latest" portrayals in a previous proposal. The only reason why I am for this is consistency.

Add both current and latest voice actor

  1. Altendo (talk) Secondary choice. It feels nice to respect both the voice actor who is currently voicing the character and the person whose voices, even in archival, are the sole ones used in the latest game. However, my point about voice actor switching, while not as big as an issue because archival voice actors will only be added rather than replace the current one, still kind of stands because reissues will add the archival voice actor for one game, only to remove it when a new game comes out. Additionally, if compilations only contain voices from retired voice actors, this will stack it up even more (although for 3D All-Stars, it still wouldn't change much due to Peach's Super Mario Galaxy voice actress still being her current one). Still, this does make the infoboxes consistent.
  2. Tails777 (talk) I agree with this one more; it's best to keep it up to date when it comes to VAs, but it isn't uncommon for various games to recycle voice clips (TTYD once again being a good example). I feel it is best to at least acknowledge if voice clips get recycled in this respect, though I also feel this should be limited to one at a time, in case there are examples where someone had more than even two voice actors.

Do nothing

Comments

Miscellaneous

None at the moment.

Retrieved from "https://www.mariowiki.com/index.php?title=MarioWiki:Proposals&oldid=4367329"