MarioWiki:Proposals: Difference between revisions

From the Super Mario Wiki, the Mario encyclopedia
Jump to navigationJump to search
Tags: Mobile edit Advanced mobile edit
 
Line 1: Line 1:
<center>http://i143.photobucket.com/albums/r149/Deadringerforlove/dessert1.jpg</center>
{{/Header}}
<br clear="all">
==Writing guidelines==
{| align="center" style="width: 85%; background-color: #f1f1de; border: 2px solid #996; padding: 5px; color:black"
''None at the moment''
|'''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>.


This page observes the [[MarioWiki:No-Signature Policy|No-Signature Policy]].
==New features==
''None at the moment.''


<h2 style="color:black">How To</h2>
==Removals==
#Actions that users feel are appropriate to have community approval first can be added by anyone, but they must have a strong argument.
===Remove the [[Template:a|a]] and [[Template:id|id]] templates===
#Users then vote and discuss on the issue during that week. The "deadline" for the proposal is one week from posting at:
{{early notice|May 24, 2025}}
#*Monday to Thursday: 17:00 (5pm)
Back in December, both the [[Template:a|a]] and [[Template:id|id]] templates were created. One of them was from a [[Mariowiki:Proposals/Archive/72#Add an abbreviation template to type out full game titles|proposal]], and maybe the second one too? I don't know, I couldn't find it in the archives.
#*Friday and Saturday: 20:00 (8pm)
#*Sunday: 15:00 (3pm)
#Every vote should have a reason accompanying it.
#At any time a vote may be rejected if at least '''three''' active users believe the vote truly has no merit or was cast in bad faith. However, there must be strong reasons supporting the invalidation.
#"<nowiki>#&nbsp;</nowiki>" should be added under the last vote of each support/oppose section to show another blank line.
#All proposals that end up in a tie will be extended for another week.
#If a proposal has more than ten votes, it can only pass or fail by a margin of '''three''' votes. If a proposal reaches the deadline and the total number of votes for each option differ by two or less votes, the deadline will be extended for another week.
#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.
#No proposal can overturn the decision of a previous proposal that is less than '''4 weeks''' ('''28 days''') old.
#Proposals can only be rewritten or deleted by their proposer within the first three days of their creation. However, the proposer can request that their proposal be deleted by a [[MarioWiki:Administrators|Sysop]] at any time, provided they have a valid reason for it.
#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 shouldn't be proposals about creating articles on a underrepresented or completely absent subject, unless there is major disagreement about whether the content should be included. To organize efforts about completing articles on missing subjects, try creating a [[MarioWiki:PipeProject|PipeProject]].
#Proposals can not be made about [[MarioWiki:Administrators|System Operator]] promotions and demotions. Sysops can only be promoted and demoted by the will of [[MarioWiki:Bureaucrats|Bureaucrats]].
#If the Sysops 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.
#No joke proposals. Proposals are serious wiki matters, and should be handled professionally. Joke proposals will be deleted on sight.


The times are in EDT (UTC -4:00), 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.
Anyways, both of these templates aren't really used at all. The a template was created for the purpose of shortening game titles, but I have not seen anyone actually use it. Same thing with the id template. Many users are used to typing out the entire game articles anyway, myself included.


__TOC__
This proposal aims to remove both templates and fix the articles that have them.


<center><span style="font-size:200%">CURRENTLY: '''{{LOCALTIME}}, {{LOCALDAY}} {{LOCALMONTHNAME}} {{LOCALYEAR}} (EDT)'''</span></center>
'''Proposer''': {{User|Sparks}}<br>
'''Deadline''': May 31, 2025, 23:59 GMT


==New Features==
====Delete them both!====
===User Highlights===
#{{User|Sparks}} Someone needs to put these templates out of their misery.
I know Mario Wiki isn't Userpedia, but I feel guilty when I find out somebody's prrromotion to a higher user rank just happened and I didn't congratulate them is an annoyance. The same with birthdays. Yes, I am a Userpedia user, but I'm thinking more about people limited to only Mario Wiki.<br>
#{{User|Xiahou Ba, The Nasty Warrior}} I'll take care of these templates, no problem! Do I have a plan? ...Not really, but I'll do fine, I'm sure!
It could just be a small box showing something, (sorry about putting myself in this, but oh well: "Hyper Guy's Birthday is coming up on___" or "User___ has reached Sysop rank) just a small box with a bit of information about the users, who could be recognized for their efforts on Mario Wiki, might make our community look much, much better by giving users credit, no matter how small the alert is. (NOTE: I'm not talking about edits! Just marking important moments for our brilliant users) THANKS FOR READING THIS!
#{{User|Technetium|T}} These templates are so confusing man. Like my name in this vote! That's how it feels trying to edit pages with these templates on them.
#{{User|Nintendo101}} I don't see "id" used too often, but "a" has been actively detrimental to articles.
#{{User|Mario4Ever}} Per proposal.
#{{User|Camwoodstock|Ctccm}} These templates, which ostensibly exist for ease of editing, have only really served to make it ''more'' confusing for editors. Your average editor shouldn't have to memorize which abbreviation is which to edit a page, especially when ''some'' abbreviations already require further elaboration as-is, and the list used lacks parity between the actual abbreviations we commonly use for redirects. Does "MF" lead to ''[[Mario Factory]]'', ''[[Mario's FUNdamentals]]'', or ''[[Mario Family]]''? Trick question--MF ''isn't in the list at all''. On the other hand, "W" is used as the abbreviation for [[Wii]], but [[W]] is actually a redirect for [[Wario]], thanks to [https://web.archive.org/web/20010429172148/http://www.warioland3.com/strategy/body.asp?key_id=N2_SILVER&land_id=N2 an old guide on the ''Wario Land 3'' website]. And considering that deprecating this template could easily be done by siccing PorpleBot on the task... Yeah, we can't say we're endeared to it. It should be deprecated, left with an Abandoned tag so that page histories don't become unreadable, and ''maybe'' we could repurpose a version of [[Template:A/list|the list subpage]] as a maintenance page, to properly showcase the abbreviations we use for games and consoles, when they actually exist; it actually has a rather decent form factor, the list is just... entirely proprietary to the abbreviations we actually use.
#{{User|Pseudo}} Both of these templates seem likely to cause more confusion than anything else. I can see the reasons that one might want to keep them but I don't think they're good enough to justify the potential harm caused by these, especially "a".
#{{User|Hewer}} These remind me of Bulbapedia's linking templates, which is not a good thing. Per Camwoodstock and Pseudo.
#{{User|EvieMaybe}} the minute benefits these templates add aren't enough to counteract how unwieldy they are to use. per all
#{{User|Kaptain Skurvy}} Are we really THAT lazy that we can't be bothered to type out the full title of a page? Per all.
#{{User|Jdtendo}} These templates may be handy when you are the one who type them, but they're cumbersome for all other editors that will encounter them afterwards.
#{{User|Altendo}} Per EvieMaybe (see comments). EDIT on 12:22, May 20, 2025 (EDT): The pipelinking for fully-typed out game titles with the identifier and certain italics don't really matter to me, as even though they are somewhat of a burden, I already don't really type out the identifier in whole when linking these types of pages.
#{{User|Mario}} In this case, the longer route is the shortest way home. Trying to figure out what "YCW" is seeing the latest appearance in an infobox from <code><nowiki>{{a|YCW|l}}</nowiki></code> wastes my time, as well as my expressing bafflement at the 1 parameter here, not immediately knowing what the hell "1" does. If that's a bureaucrat's editing here for 15+ years reaction to this, have mercy on newer editors. I've expressed annoyance at the inefficiency dealing with these templates.[https://www.mariowiki.com/index.php?title=Skeleton_Goonie&diff=4896199&oldid=4896191] At first, I thought it might be a good idea to try to shorten some abbreviations here but the execution is taking an axe to a relatively localized problem. Maybe there are better answers to writing out "Mario & Sonic at the Melting 2025 Winter Olympics at Antarctica" but right now, the solution here creates more problems in the process.
#{{User|Nelsonic}} Per Mario. These templates can indeed be helpful, but the parameters can end up being very confusing. I... also may have voted yes on the proposal to bring one of these into existence.
#{{User|Platform}} I've made my objections in the comments.


'''Proposer''': {{User|Hyper Guy|Hyper Guy}}<br>
====Delete a, keep id====
'''Deadline''': August 28, 2009, 20:00
#{{User|Ahemtoday}} So, here's the thing with me — I make fairly frequent use of {{tem|id}}... but it's ''never'' been for its abbreviation functionality. I use it purely as a quick way to avoid having to type pipe-link text that's just the same thing as the article text. And I think that's a great template to have. It's convenient; it saves space; it gets rid of an annoying redundancy. I have an edit comment somewhere where I say I like the template, unprompted, just because I like it that much. But again: none of that has anything to do with the game abbreviations part of the template. I never interfaced with any of that stuff because it seems cumbersome and I don't understand why you'd want to use it. I expect {{tem|a}} shares its backend with that somehow (maybe it's literally part of {{tem|id}} somewhere) so that functionality would probably break if {{tem|a}} went, but I'd be perfectly fine with that. Getting rid of the repetition in linking to, say, {{id|Captain Toad: Treasure Tracker|microgame}} the microgame is what the use case of {{tem|id}} is to me, and it's a fantastic thing to have a template for. Let's not throw that out with {{tem|a}}.
<s>#{{User|Altendo}} Weak support now. To clarify, the identifier template was created by Porple through [[MarioWiki Talk:Proposals#Identifier template?|a discussion]] relating to [[Category talk:Game series#Remove "(series)" identifier from titles that don't need it|a tied proposal]] that I sided for. The main point of me proposing this template (which I went back to after [[/Archive/72#Add an abbreviation template to type out full game titles|the abbreviation proposal passed]]) was to avoid pipelinking, which I agreed with as I didn't want to write the name of the title, the identifier, and the title again (see [[User:SeanWheeler|SeanWheeler]]'s comment) just to avoid a redirect or writing the title multiple times. While I do get the point of identifiers for these specifically existing so people don't have to memorize which pages have the identifiers or not, I think that pipelinking is just tiring, especially when dealing with multiple of them. EDIT on 12:34, May 19, 2025 (EDT): I still feel like this template has a bit of merit for a certain use (see my comment below), but now that Evie's comment explained how to bypass this in the first place (mooting the discussion surrounding the creation of this template), this is no longer my primary choice.</s>
====Delete id, keep a====
#{{User|Salmancer}} I guess if we want template clutter down...
<s>#{{User|Altendo}} Weak support, if we have to keep one of these. The point of a template made to ease editing is that they are ''optional'', and experienced editors don't necessarily have to use them; both templates show that they are not required to be used, but I still use both on an occasional basis when adding new stuff (I previously replaced links with these templates before I realized the template told me not to do so for preexisting links and only for newly added ones).</s>
====Keep both====
#{{User|Salmancer}} I've used them, and they'd probably have more widespread use if not for the fact using "a" in a section header is discouraged. (That forces people to type out full game names at least once, which as one might expect encourages copy and pasting that.) Anyhow shortform versions of long phrases are helpful when you're in a hurry and have lots of text to write. Especially if you need to go back and forth between base game and remake behavior, or are in similar situations. Clipboards can only carry one phrase at a time, which makes copy and pasting from the section header much slower when juggling multiple games. "id" is generally less useful due to "link autocomplete" and the "pipe trick", but I believe "link autocomplete" is optional and therefore "id" serves a niche for people who are not using the autocomplete.
#{{User|Ahemtoday}} Per my other vote. I strongly believe {{tem|id}} is a good and useful template. It's not for {{tem|a}}-related reasons, but if keeping {{tem|a}} is the only way to keep {{tem|id}}, I'll do it.
#{{User|Tails777}} I for sure get the idea behind this, but I feel like we need more guidelines on their use. Using them for something as small as Nintendo DS or Wii is not something that should be encouraged, but using them for titles like ''[[Mario & Luigi: Bowser's Inside Story + Bowser Jr.'s Journey]]'' or ''[[Mario & Sonic at the Sochi 2014 Olympic Winter Games]]'' is still a sense of convenience at least. I'd rather create some rules on their use before flat out removing them.
<s>#{{User|Altendo}} I often use {{tem|a}} in conjunction with {{tem|id}}, especially since it saves a lot of bytes on a page and shortens subjects even more. I mean, I'm ''fine'' with getting rid of {{tem|a}}, but it does further ease the {{tem|id}} template, especially since names are shortened even more. I don't want to type out "<nowiki>[[Captain Goomba (Mario & Luigi series)|Captain Goomba]]</nowiki>". I want to shorten it by writing "<nowiki>{{id|Captain Goomba|M&LSERIES}}</nowiki>". It's a lot easier and shorter.Weak support, I guess, per an unsolved(?) question in the comments.</s>
<s>#{{user|Koopa con Carne}} "both of these templates aren't really used at all." I mean, false. I've been using {{tem|a}} a lot (*cough* when I remember it exists). The reason it doesn't seem used all that much is because its documentation discourages users from reformatting existing game titles with it, and with the site going on 20 years even before the template was created, yeah, obviously the previous method is gonna be way more widespread. As for "id", the reason I haven't used it is simply because I wasn't aware of it.</s>


====Support====
====Comments====
#{{User|Hyper Guy|Hyper Guy}}
These templates would actually be worthwhile if there were a way to automatically substitute <code><nowiki>{{a|SMB}}</nowiki></code> with <code><nowiki>''Super Mario Bros.''</nowiki></code> when the page is saved, in the same way that <code><nowiki>~~~~</nowiki></code> gets substituted with the user's signature; but I'm not sure that this is technically possible. {{User:Jdtendo/sig}} 06:43, May 17, 2025 (EDT)


====Oppose====
I'm not too familiar with these templates but my experience with them has been negative. When articles get renamed, merged, or split, the templates break or get linked to the wrong article.--[[User:Platform|Platform]] ([[User talk:Platform|talk]]) 10:59, May 17, 2025 (EDT)
#{{User|Super Mario Bros.}} If you mean a box on the Main Page, it isn't necessary. For the promotion issue you stated, the promotion is usually listed in the Pipe Plaza, usually as, "'''*Insert User Name Here* has been promoted to *insert rank here*! Congratulations!'''" And the problem with the birthdays can be solved with the 'Shroom (we have the calendar, one of the sections is for birthdays). If anybody is not content with what we have, then that is too bad for them.
:Pretty sure we can just use <nowiki>{{subst:a|SMB}}</nowiki>. This will save it as the full link upon saving the page. [[User:Altendo|Al]][[User talk:Altendo|ten]][[Special:Contributions/Altendo|do]] 11:05, May 17, 2025 (EDT)
#{{User|Cobold}} The wiki isn't a forum, so we will not have a database for something like birthdays - creating an automatic system or handling it manual sounds like too much work for me. If you want to congratulate certain users, write down those users' birthdays on your own list. SysOp promotions are noted on the Pipe Plaza.
#{{user|Yoshario}} &ndash; Per Cobold
#{{User|Time Q}}: Per all.
#{{User|Walkazo}} - Per all.
#{{User|T.c.w7468}} Per all.
#{{User|MechaWave}} - It's simple, not a forum, there's already one that exists for the site. Per Cobold.
#{{User|Luigi 128}}Per all the Main page is for the wiki not the users


====Comments====
::TEST: <!---{{#if:{{a/list|SMB}}|
{{#if:|
[[{{#replace:{{#replace:{{a/list|SMB}}|'''}}|''}}|{{#ifeq:{{{2}}}|l|{{PAGETITLE|{{#replace:{{#replace:{{a/list|SMB}}|(series)|series}}|(franchise)|franchise}}}}|{{{2}}}}}]]
|
{{PAGETITLE|{{#replace:{{#replace:{{a/list|SMB}}|(series)|series}}|(franchise)|franchise}}}}
}}|SMB{{#if:||<sup style="font-weight:normal;font-style:normal">[invalid parameter]</sup>{{#if:{{CONTENTPAGE}}|[[Category:Articles with invalid template parameters]]}}}}}}---> EDIT on 12:34, May 19, 2025 (EDT): Removed coding per Evie's comment.


==Removals==
::Oh, wow. It did ''not'' go as planned, as it copied the entire template code onto the page, instead of just the link. Visibly, this doesn't look any different, but on the inside, it looks ugly. [[User:Altendo|Al]][[User talk:Altendo|ten]][[Special:Contributions/Altendo|do]] 11:07, May 17, 2025 (EDT)
'None at the moment.


==Splits & Merges==
:So ask Porplemontage to tinker with the related parameter when that happens. {{User:Koopa con Carne/Sig}} 11:36, May 17, 2025 (EDT)
===Merge Keys Articles===
Yeah, I was just looking at the articles linked to this [[Template:Key|template]], and most of them are stubs. That is why I am suggesting that the community allows me to go ahead and merge them, as well as turn the original articles into redirects and changing the links so that they lead to the merged article. An example can be found [[User:Super Mario Bros./Key|here]], and the [[User talk:Super Mario Bros./Key|discussion page]] will be a replica at first, but it will be so that users can change it as opposed to suggesting changes to me (such as moving images, sections, fixing links, etc.). So, to reiterate, if you want to suggest a change to my example, do the change on the talk page. If you have other comments, put them below on this page. '''NO COMMENTS GO ON THE TALK PAGE!'''<br>
''Note: A change in the proposed article has been made. See my large comment below.''<br>
'''Proposer:''' {{User|Super Mario Bros.}}<br>
'''Deadline:''' Saturday, 22 August 2009, 20:00<br>
'''Extended:''' Saturday, 29 August 2009, 20:00


====Support====
i want to point out that you can type any link with an identifier as <code><nowiki>[[World 1-1 (Super Mario Bros.)|]]</nowiki></code>, with the vertical bar at the end, and it'll come out as "[[World 1-1 (Super Mario Bros.)|World 1-1]]" when submitted. <br>
#{{User|Super Mario Bros.}} I think this will improve the articles. Per Walkazo.
also, {{@|Altendo}}, whatever your test did is messing with the automatic syntax highlighting add-on. {{User:EvieMaybe/sig}} 10:32, May 19, 2025 (EDT)
#{{User|Marioguy1}} - I like your article. It's long and combines a bunch of stubs. To Time Q below, the need would be that there are currently too many stubs. <s>but I saw a problem. There is only supposed to be one image requested tag at the top if you have multiple sections because at the top it says "It has been requested that image'''(s)''' be added to this '''article'''/section" See what I mean (it says image'''s''').</s>
:Wai-WHAAAT? How long has ''that'' been a thing? [[User:Doc von Schmeltwick|Doc von Schmeltwick]] ([[User talk:Doc von Schmeltwick|talk]]) 10:41, May 19, 2025 (EDT)
#{{User|Random User}} Per SMB.
::Second test: ''[[Super Mario RPG (Nintendo Switch)|Super Mario RPG]]''
#{{User|Vyro}} Yeah, what's with all the keys anyway? The articles are terrible!
#{{User|Walkazo}} - Per my comments below. Supplementing the nameless key list in [[Key]] with "List of Keys in the Paper Mario series" and  "List of Keys in Super Mario 64 DS" pages in place of numerous stubs seems a more organized way of doing things. Use <nowiki><br clear=all></nowiki> (and {{tem|Main}} in the sections for the few keys who merit full articles) to make the lists presentable.


====Oppose====
::Well, that actually worked! I might still see a bit of usage in the {{tem|id}} template as sometimes pipelinking is ''required'' (like when italicizing game titles with identifiers where the full title should be shown, which requires writing the page name twice but the second game name is italicized, if there is also a way to bypass this it would be great), but now that I know about this, it should simplify things a lot more!  [[User:Altendo|Al]][[User talk:Altendo|ten]][[Special:Contributions/Altendo|do]] 12:34, May 19, 2025 (EDT)
#{{User|Time Q}}: I see no need for doing this change. Those keys are unrelated to each other, they all deserve their own articles (or at least some of them, which means we can't merge them all together). If they're stubs, we should expand them rather than cramming them all together in a rather unattractive list.
::Doc, I seriously don't know if you're just playing it up or not. I knew about the parenthesis {{wp|Help:Pipe trick|pipe trick}} for YEARS... {{User:Arend/sig}} 12:50, May 19, 2025 (EDT)
#{{User|Twentytwofiftyseven}}: Per Time Q. Additionally, as you have it set up, all the categories and navboxes are applied to the article as a whole, which is rather imprecise. To someone who's unfamiliar with what's going on, it may seem that (e.g.) [[:Category:Animate Objects]] applies to ''all'' of the items on that list. In fact, it applies to just two. And having some items under the subheader "key" when the article itself is also called "key" is redundant.
:::I actually didn't know that just adding the pipe (which I didn't know was "<nowiki/>|") and nothing more would display the page title without the parenthesis... I thought it would have just made blank space. If I knew this earlier, I wouldn't have even made the id template discussion to begin with. [[User:Altendo|Al]][[User talk:Altendo|ten]][[Special:Contributions/Altendo|do]] 13:12, May 19, 2025 (EDT)
#{{User|Baby Mario Bloops}}: Per All!
::::I can excuse you for not knowing, you've only joined the wiki in 2022, while Doc joined in 2017. But I suppose I might as well be the jaded one here, I first joined the wiki in 2006/2007 after all. Not to mention that I recently found out (as in, a couple months ago I think?) that commas also trigger a pipe trick, so maybe I'm just stupid for assuming that people should know better. {{User:Arend/sig}} 13:45, May 19, 2025 (EDT)
#{{user|Yoshario}} - Per all.
:Well, I went down a bit of a rabbithole investigating exactly how long this feature has been a thing... Turns out it's so old it's [https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/plugins/gitiles/mediawiki/core/+/d82c14fb4fbac288b42ca5918b0a72f33ecb1e69/includes/Article.php#1444 in the very oldest version of the MediaWiki source code available in its git repository,] which [https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/plugins/gitiles/mediawiki/core/+/d82c14fb4fbac288b42ca5918b0a72f33ecb1e69 dates back to April '''2003'''.] So, to say the least, it's not new. [[User:AmossGuy|AmossGuy]] ([[User talk:AmossGuy|talk]]) 13:34, May 19, 2025 (EDT)
#{{User|Itachi 96}} - Per all
:Huh. That definitely seems to cover the use case I was using {{tem|id}} for. [[User:Ahemtoday|Ahemtoday]] ([[User talk:Ahemtoday|talk]]) 12:37, May 19, 2025 (EDT)
#{{User|Ralphfan}} Per all.
::I definitely wasn't aware of this feature. Deleted my vote entirely because, eh, I don't actually care that much what happens to the other template. Auto-fill is useful, too. {{User:Koopa con Carne/Sig}} 16:24, May 19, 2025 (EDT)
#{{user|Arend}} per all.
{{@|Nelsonic}} I don't think you voted on the proposal for the {{tem|a}} template or discussed the {{tem|id}} template, either. [[User:Altendo|Al]][[User talk:Altendo|ten]][[Special:Contributions/Altendo|do]] 12:22, May 20, 2025 (EDT)
#{{user|MechaWave}} - Some keys may need to be merged, but not ''all'' of them, like you suggest. Per Time Q.
:{{@|Altendo}} Ah. Okay. I remember seeing it when it was active, I just wasn't sure whether I had voted or not. [[User:Nelsonic|Nelsonic]] ([[User talk:Nelsonic|talk]]) 12:25, May 20, 2025 (EDT)
#{{User|Alan Warp Zone}} Yes they could be in an "Other Keys" article, but there are some important keys.
#{{User|Vini64}} Per all.
#{{User?Randoman123456789}} - Per all.


====Comments====
==Changes==
Marioguy1, I fixed the problem. Does it look good now? {{User|Super Mario Bros.}}
===Move back from the "Multimedia:" prefix===
:Yup, I was there when you fixed it. I'll <s>strike</s> that point in my article. {{User|Marioguy1}}
{{proposal check|early=yes|14|1}}
So apparently, PorpleBot moved the page from "List of WarioWare, Inc.: Mega Microgame$! media" to "Multimedia:WarioWare, Inc.: Mega Microgame$!". And yes, it's just an example, because all other media pages have been moved to use the "Multimedia:" prefix! And yes, this is my first proposal so I'm sorry if the proposal is very informal. But anyways, every pages involving media files currently has the "Multimedia:" prefix. That makes no sense to me, especially when the old title is "List of WarioWare, Inc.: Mega Microgame$! '''media'''" for example, and the "media" in the title already makes it clear that it's a page about media files (in this case, WarioWare Inc. media files). This "Camwoodstock" guy said that it's for parity but since the gallery pages are formatted "Gallery:WarioWare: Touched!" for example, it makes no sense to do just the same for the media pages.


I think the [[Key]] article itself should stay (and the introduction should be expanded a bit to explain more about the essense of ''Mario'' keys), with the rest of the keys going into a "List of Keys" page. [[Yakkey]] should keep his seperate page, since he's a character, not just an item. [[Skeleton Key]] also has enough appearances and information (plus, its animate) to merit its own article as well. The list entries for Key, Skeleton Key and Yakkey would all use {{tem|main}} to link to the separate articles. - {{User|Walkazo}}
'''Proposer''': {{User|Alphabetlorefan2003}}<br>
'''Deadline''': May 29, 2025, 23:59 GMT


I think Marioguy1's vote is invalid. The only reason he states is "I like your article", which is not enough. Why would it be a change for the better? Please expand your vote, otherwise I vote for its removal. {{User|Time Q}}
====Media Page Supporters:====
#{{User|Alphabetlorefan2003}} Per proposal.


Ok, hopefully I fixed most of the problems. The minor Paper Mario keys would all be merged, as well as a few of the other ''[[Super Mario 64 DS]]'' keys ([[Mario Key]], [[Luigi Key]], [[Wario Key]]). The bigger [[Key]] article, as well as the [[Skeleton Key]] article and the [[Yakkey]] article would be left alone as seperate articles. This would allow {{tem|Key}} to stay, and the [[:Category:Keys|Keys category]] to remain as well. Any more suggestions? {{User|Super Mario Bros.}}
====Wario, the Opposers:====
#{{User|Jdtendo}} It makes sense to have a dedicated "Multimedia:" namespace for galleries of media akin to the "Gallery:" namespace for galleries of images, and I don't see the point of reverting to "List of X media" pages.
#{{User|Xiahou Ba, The Nasty Warrior}} Per Jdtendo.
#{{User|Arend|Multimedia:Arend}} Per Jdtendo, and my comments down below.
#{{User|Camwoodstock|Multimedia:Camwoodstock}} <small>first of all why did you use "scarequotes" for us.</small> It's far easier to search for a game's Multimedia page with the namespace rather than to have to write "List of ''x'' media", and it's easier to search for changes to them in Recent Changes/the watchlist. And as for the point of "Gallery: has existed for years, but Multimedia: is new"... Well, yeah. Things change all the time on a wiki, and sometimes, the gaps between certain changes are very large. That's kind of a given with a collaborative writing project. We don't even really understand the point about parity "not making sense"; there's literally a [[Multimedia:WarioWare: Touched!]] to go alongside [[Gallery:WarioWare: Touched!]]. The two match, when they formerly did not, and one was a namespace and one was a list despite the two being functionally companions to one another. And, pray tell, to what end? If this was a push to cut back on dedicated namespaces, why ''only'' the Multimedia pages? Granted, we can't see a proposal to convert all Gallery pages to "List of ''x'' images" going over well...
#{{User|Altendo|List of Altendo media}} Per all.
#{{User|EvieMaybe|EvieMedia}} per these "Camwoodstock" guys
#{{User|Rainbow Road Drifter}} These are collections of audio files in the same way galleries are collections of pictures. They should be named this way to distinguish them from traditional articles.
#{{User|Okapii}} I think those "Camwoodstock" folks were onto something.
#{{User|YoYo}} i don't see your reasoning here... you say it the claim its for "parity" makes no sense, then immediately say an example of it showing said parity?? per all.
#{{User|SGoW}} I love Wario, what a great character. If an option in a proposal is named after him I will certainly be voting for it.
#{{User|Kaptain Skurvy|This "Kaptain Skurvy" guy}} Wario is funny so im voting his option <small>(jk...per all.)</small>
#{{User|Nelsonic}} Per all. To use an additional example, we already refer to the grouping of [[Play Nintendo]] images, videos, and wallpapers as "Multimedia" (granted, the website does as well, in a sense, as it refers to them as "Media").
#{{User|Hewer|Hewario}} Get Wario'd!
#{{User|BMfan08|BMfan08:Multimedia}} Ehh, maybe Wario has a point <s>for once</s>...


:That still suggests that (eg) "Wario Key" falls under "Paper Mario: The Thousand-Year Door Special Items," which is wrong. And the fact that there's really no simple way to get to [[Key]], [[Skeleton Key]], or [[Yakkey]] from that article is also inconvenient. {{User|Twentytwofiftyseven}}
====Kat and Ana Comments====
::What? We have the {{tem|Key}} to link to [[Key]], [[Skeleton Key]], and [[Yakkey]]. So, should we split the list into two lists (one for the ''Super Mario 64 DS'' keys and one for the ''Paper Mario'' keys)? We could still have the ''Paper Mario series'' keys on one article, even though they would share categories, I think it would be easy to tell due to the beginning of each paragraph having the game it appears in. {{User|Super Mario Bros.}}
From what I can gather, Camwoodstock actually was for a regular Media: namespace, as seen [[MarioWiki:Proposals/Archive/75#Create new "Media:" namespace for media subpages|here]], but since Media: is already a namespace that's in use (as an alternative to the File: namespace), the proposal has been vetoed, and it was decided to have the new namespace be called "Multimedia:" instead.<br>Anyway, I don't entirely understand why you want to revert it back? You say that Camwoodstock's reasoning for parity makes no sense because the Gallery: namespace exists... but doesn't that ''corroborate'' to his point? Because, you know, ''it's also a namespace?'' Are you bothered it's ''multi''media now instead of simply "media"? What's exactly your problem with these media pages being its own namespace instead of regular list pages? {{User:Arend/sig}} 05:58, May 15, 2025 (EDT)
:::Actually, there's been talk that templates like {{tem|Key}} should be scrapped, seeing as they're just categories in template form, and are often based on "common sense" as opposed to canon (i.e. {{tem|undead}} vs. {{tem|LM}} and {{tem|Boos}}). But that's beside the point: as I said before, those other independent articles should be linked to via {{tem|main}} in the list, though with the two lists idea, that'd only be needed for [[Yakkey]], since [[Skeleton Key]]  has a series unto itself (barring the conspicuously pageless [[Bowser Key]]s). Considering how the three ''SM64DS'' Keys can almost be combined as-is, I think the two list idea is good. I'm always a fan of combining stubs and saving space; all that can be done to expand those key articles is writing their ''exact'' locations (Walkthrough fare, IMO) and maybe some more context - but after a point, it starts to look off-topic and/or reachy. Also, the "if it's named it gets an article" mantra seems to be an underlying part of this discussion; to be frank, I've always felt that ideal was misguided. The keys in ''Luigi's Mansion'' essentially play the same role as the [[Fortress Key]]s and [[Ruins Key]]s, except the named ''PM'' keys get stubs while the plain ''LM'' key merely gets a [[Key#Luigi's Mansion|section of the Key article]]. If the "Key"s from ''LM'', ''SMB2'', ''SMW'', ''SMW2:YI'', ''SM64'' and ''SSBB'' are shoved together, why not the "___ Key"s from the ''Paper Mario'' series? It's a double-standard born of the desire to not have dozens of "Key (game X)" pages, which is understandable, but also fixable if we weren't so bent on having dozens of "___ Key" pages instead. The list(s) just needs some fixing-up; with proper retooling, it won't look so bad. - {{User|Walkazo}}
:The "Gallery:" prefix has existed for years so adding it now makes no sense. [[User:Alphabetlorefan2003|Alphabetlorefan2003]] ([[User talk:Alphabetlorefan2003|talk]]) 10:07, May 15, 2025 (EDT)
::What's the problem with adding the Multimedia prefix now? The wiki is always adding new features and articles. How does that "make no sense"? {{User:LadySophie17/sig}} 10:15, May 15, 2025 (EDT)
::Perring Lady Sophie here. Just because the Gallery: namespace has existed for years while the Multimedia: one has not, doesn't mean the latter cannot be added later or ever again. This honestly feels like one of those "I don't like change, everything should stay the same" types of complaint. {{User:Arend/sig}} 11:05, May 15, 2025 (EDT)
:For some context, since part of this was on the Discord. Porplemontage explained the full reason behind why Media: was unavailable (it's a default namespace used by MediaWiki internally for handling files, so inserting something into the Media: namespace would have... ''Consequences'' behind the scenes, which is why it doesn't let you do that and just redirects you to a File: page if you try.), and after a conversation, he suggested "Multimedia:" instead, as an alternative that ''doesn't'' run into problems behind the scenes. We were fine with that new name, and offered to remake the proposal, but Porple decided to implement it himself without needing to re-run the proposal for the tweaked, internally-sound name; you'd have to ask him for his reasoning for that one, as we're obviously not him.<br>In short, the idea of a dedicated namespace for Multimedia subpages was our idea, but Porple ultimately chose the name we landed on (with our approval), and he was the one who ultimately helped implement it. (To be honest, the text on the original proposal should probably say "CANCELLED, ALTERNATIVE VERSION PUT INTO EFFECT IMMEDIATELY" or something like that, rather than just "VETOED BY THE ADMINISTRATORS" with the clarification that the proposal was put into effect immediately with a differing name being a small font subtitle--it'd be far clearer for your average user what happened without them having to consult the archive list and see that it's teal. ;P) {{User:Camwoodstock/sig}} 14:00, May 15, 2025 (EDT)
WAAAH? There are more Wario's than there are supporters? [[User:Alphabetlorefan2003|Alphabetlorefan2003]] ([[User talk:Alphabetlorefan2003|talk]]) 19:10, May 15, 2025 (EDT)
:<s>Yeah, we pick WAAAAARIOOOOOO</s> But seriously, you have read our reasonings and do understand why we think it's pointless to change it back, right? {{User:Arend/sig}} 03:47, May 16, 2025 (EDT)
:This implies you named the option "Wario" to steer people away from it, which is not really a good way to structure a proposal. {{User:RealStuffMister/sig}} 11:39, May 20, 2025 (EDT)
::If that's true, then yeah, that's not good at all. It introduces bias by saying one is an objectively bad option, when all options are supposed to be objectively equal. Hell, I'd argue it's even a poorly designed way to say an option is objectively bad because people actually ''like'' Wario and thus would be more inclined to choose the Wario option over the boring "return back to the previous status quo" option, backfiring the proposer completely.<br>However, I'm sure it's just coincidence, right? I'm certain that the oppose option is only named after Wario since the proposal has been using WarioWare pages as examples of the proposer's issue. I mean, why else would this very comment section be named after Kat and Ana, then? {{User:Arend/sig}} 05:01, May 21, 2025 (EDT)
How the heck do I close proposals
[[User:Alphabetlorefan2003|Alphabetlorefan2003]] ([[User talk:Alphabetlorefan2003|talk]]) 03:46, May 22, 2025 (EDT)


==Changes==
==Miscellaneous==
===Allowing YouTube Videos Outside Userpages===
===Tighten the definition of "item" used by some games' subcategories===
Before you all think, "It's been like that for a good while, why should it be changed?!", think about how better articles could look. Sometimes when I make edits, like I've been editing the [[Pyoro]] pages recently, I don't want to keep on writing things I know don't make much sense, but I can't show a viewer of the page an example of how the game would be played, and so that users can check if I'm right or not. It could also encourage people who don't want to read long articles. Instead of sitting on a chair for hours on end, they can scroll down the page until they find a YouTube video explaining it for them.<br>
Within the context of, say, ''Paper Mario: The Thousand-Year Door'', an "item" is a specific class of game entity that goes in its own tab on the pause menu and tab in the battle UI, and can be used in and out of battle. However, this specificity is not reflected in our category system, under which [[:Category:Paper Mario: The Thousand-Year Door items]] contains the likes of [[Badge]], [[Hammer]], [[Heart (item)]], and [[Star Piece (Paper Mario series)]]. I think things like these sharing a category with the games' definition of "item" is counterintuitive. Should this proposal pass, "items" such as these, no longer contained within the tightened definition, will be placed into the main category; or their own subcategory if there are enough (though I'm not sure what such a category would be called).
I'm not saying we should stop writing and just spam YouTube videos on the pages, but this idea came to me when a friend asked me the other day, while I was showing him an article so he could see what you can do when you join, he asked "Y'know, I'm not actually reading all this c**p, can you just add a YouTube video on here or something?". After that, I started thinking about other people's opinions on this, and I personally think adding YouTube Videos to pages outside user pages would be like adding pictures to a book!
 
'''Proposer''': {{User|Hyper Guy}}<br>
'''Deadline''': August 30, 2009, 15:00


====Support====
If it's preferable that the "items" label be kept consistent with the rest of the wiki, I would also be fine with splitting these items off into a subcategory (or simply renaming the category if the "normal items" are too few in number) — {{Fake link|Category:Paper Mario: The Thousand-Year Door consumable items}}, for instance.
#{{User|Hyper Guy}} - Per above.
#{{User|Clyde1998}} - Why Not, per Hyper Guy!
#{{User|Booman}} Per all.
#{{User|Zero777}} I am Zero! It depends on what video, it's quality, is proffesionally done, and how small is the article, because, if the article is big then it will take a longer time to load. Zero signing out.
#{{User|YellowYoshi127}} Yoshi! I think they should extend it to Shroom pages.
#{{User|RKOSpriteYoshi}}Per HG


====Oppose====
Games and series for which I believe this should be done include:
#{{User|Itachi 96}} Some pages, like Mario's, and really big, and, for some computers, are long to load. With Youtube videos, these pages will be extremely long to load.
*''[[Super Mario RPG]]'', the ''{{id|Paper Mario|series}}'' series, the ''{{id|Mario & Luigi|series}}'' series, and ''[[Mario + Rabbids Sparks of Hope]]''. These all share the definition of "item" used in the example at the top of the proposal.
#{{User|Yoshario}} &ndash; Per Itachi 96. We can always external link to YouTube videos.
*Various games in the ''{{id|Mario Party|series}}'' series, wherein items are specific things that can be acquired and used at the start of your turn.
#{{User|Cobold}} see comment section
*''[[Mario is Missing!]]'' and ''[[Mario's Time Machine]]'' (though the latter already seems to abide by this). I'm more familiar with the former, but [[taxi token]]s and [[walkie-talkie]]s being mixed in with these games' fetch quest items. Mario is Missing tends to use "artifacts" for these objects, so maybe that's the term we should be using here.
#{{User|Dark Lakitu 789}} Per all
#{{user|Tucayo}} - Per Steve comments
#{{User|Walkazo}} - Per all.
#{{User|T.c.w7468}} - Per all.
#{{User|Paper Yoshi}} - Per Itachi 96 and Steve's comment below.
#{{User|MechaWave}} - Itachi 96, your reason is invalid to me. Per my reasons below.
#{{User|Alan Warp Zone}} Per Itachi... (about the comment about "per all"...) Yes It´s true some old computers and the memory fulled this would be a nightmare.


====Comments====
'''Proposer''': {{User|Ahemtoday}}<br>
An external link would work fine in your example. Right now we host all our content when it comes to articles--the text and images. Embedding videos and making them part of the actual article means we are outsourcing content which relies on YouTube and their servers, as well as the user who uploaded the video. Having embedded Flash in the articles looks sloppy. Most everything can be described in words and if videos are an option we could rely on them too much; "This video shows how the gameplay works." Blah Blah {{User|Porplemontage}}
'''Deadline''': May 27, 2025, 23:59 GMT
:I agree. YouTube videos would also take away content from the article, as people might say they don't need to describe what is shown in the video. - {{User|Cobold}}


It's a wiki, it's supposed to have content in usually a text form, a reference to an external link TO a YouTube video is better. The video would extend loading time, like on [[Princess Peach|Peach]]'s page mainly, and content and formatting may be harder to replicate. Also, just a little off-topic note, I hate it when someone says "Per all." {{User|MechaWave}}
====Tighten the "item" category on these games====
#{{User|Ahemtoday}} Per proposal.
#{{User|Altendo|Itemdo}} Sounds good from what I can see.


==Miscellaneous==
====Split these item classes into their own categories====
''None at the moment.''
#{{User|Ahemtoday}} Oh, I meant to vote here as well but forgot.
#{{User|Pseudo}} Distinguishing these items from other types of item is useful and important, but I would strongly contend that stuff like Badges and Star Pieces ''are'' items, just a different category from consumable items that are sometimes labeled as just "items".
#{{User|Camwoodstock}} We prefer this, personally. It'd be nice to have a clear distinction between types of items found in RPGs aside from just... "Item". Mario Party also has a few color-coded categories for [[Orb]]s in ''5'' to ''7'', and [[Candy (Mario Party 8)|Candy]] in ''8'', which we could potentially distinguish with this.
#{{User|Altendo|Altem Class}} Second choice, per all.
#{{User|Rainbow Road Drifter}} The term is used in RPGs to refer to something that can be bought or sold in a shop, used as the action during the player's turn, and is listed in an Items section in the menu. If an object isn't considered an "item" in the game, it should be in a separate category.


<!-- Please do not remove, archive or place comments below this message. -->
====Do nothing====
&nbsp;
====Comments (item category proposal)====

Latest revision as of 03:46, May 22, 2025

Image used as a banner for the proposals page
Current time:
Thursday, May 22nd, 07:46 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.
  • Voting periods last for two weeks, but can close early or be extended (see below).
  • Any autoconfirmed user can support or oppose, but must have a strong reason for doing so.
  • 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.

If you would like to get feedback on an idea before formally proposing it here, you may do so on the proposals talk. For talk page proposals, you can discuss the changes on the talk page itself before creating the TPP there.

How to

If someone has 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 other users, who will then vote on whether or not they think the idea should be implemented. 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}}.

Rules

  1. Only autoconfirmed users may create or vote on proposals. Proposals can be created by one user or co-authored by two users.
  2. A given user may author/co-author a maximum of five total ongoing/unimplemented proposals. Any new proposals over this limit will be immediately canceled.
  3. Anyone is free to comment on proposals (provided that the page's protection level allows them to edit).
  4. Proposals conclude at the end of the day (23:59) two weeks after voting starts (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 two weeks later on Monday, August 15, at 23:59 GMT.
  5. Users may vote for more than one option, but they may not vote for every option available. Keep in mind that we use approval voting, so all of your votes count equally regardless of preferred order.
  6. Every vote should have a strong, sensible reason accompanying it. Agreeing with a previously mentioned reason given by another user is acceptable (including "per" votes), but tangential comments, heavy sarcasm, and other misleading or irrelevant quips are just as invalid as providing no reason at all.
  7. 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 wiki staff.
    • 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.
  8. 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 "(blocked)" 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.
  9. Proposals cannot contradict an already ongoing proposal or overturn the decision of a previous proposal that concluded less than four weeks (28 days) ago.
  10. If one week before a proposal's initial deadline, the first place option is ahead of the second place option by eight or more votes and the first place option has at least 80% approval, then the proposal concludes early. Wiki staff may tag a proposal with "Do not close early" at any time to prevent an early close, if needed.
    • Tag the proposal with {{early notice}} if it is on track for an early close. Use {{proposal check|early=yes}} to perform the check.
  11. 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.
  12. If a proposal reaches its deadline and there is a tie for first place, then the proposal is extended for another week.
  13. 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% approval to win. If the margin is only one or two votes, then the first place option must have at least 60% approval to win. If the required approval threshold is not met, then the proposal is extended for another week.
    • Use {{proposal check}} to automate this calculation; see the template page for usage instructions and examples.
  14. Proposals can be extended a maximum of three times. If a consensus has not been reached by the fourth deadline, then the proposal fails and cannot be re-proposed until at least four weeks after the last deadline.
  15. 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.
  16. After a proposal passes, it is added to the appropriate list of "unimplemented proposals" below and is removed once it has been sufficiently implemented.
  17. If the wiki staff deem a proposal unnecessary or potentially detrimental to the upkeep of the Super Mario Wiki, they have the right to cancel it at any time.
  18. Proposals can only be rewritten or canceled by their proposer within the first four days of their creation. However, proposers can request that their proposal be canceled by a staff member at any time, provided they have a valid reason for it. Please note that canceled proposals must also be archived.
  19. 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.
  20. Proposals cannot be made about promotions and demotions. Staff changes are discussed internally and handled by the bureaucrats.
  21. No joke proposals. Proposals are serious wiki matters and should be handled professionally. Joke proposals will be deleted on sight.
  22. Proposals must have a status quo option (e.g. Oppose, Do nothing) unless the status quo itself violates policy.

Basic proposal formatting

Copy and paste the formatting below to get started; your username and the proposal deadline will automatically be substituted when you save the page. Update the bracketed variables with actual information, and be sure to replace the whole variable including the square brackets, so "[insert info here]" becomes "This is the inserted information" and not "[This is the inserted information]". Proposals presenting multiple alternative courses of action can have more than two voting options, but the objective(s) of each voting option 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|{{subst:REVISIONUSER}}}}<br>
'''Deadline''': {{subst:#time:F j, Y|+2 weeks}}, 23:59 GMT

====[option title (e.g. Support, Option 1)]: [brief summary of option]====
#{{User|{{subst:REVISIONUSER}}}} Per proposal.

====[option title (e.g. Oppose, Option 2)]: [brief summary of option]====

====Comments ([brief proposal title])====

Autoconfirmed users will now be able to vote on your proposal. Remember that you can vote on your own proposal just like the others.

To vote for an option, just insert #{{User|[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 simply say "Per proposal."

Poll proposal formatting

As an alternative to the basic proposal format, users may choose to create a poll proposal when one larger issue can be broken down into multiple subissues that can be resolved independently of each other. Poll proposals concerning multiple pages must have good justification for using the poll proposal format rather than individual talk page proposals or else will be canceled (for example, in the case of the princesses poll proposal, there are valid consistency concerns which make it worthwhile to consider these three articles simultaneously, but for routine article size splits, there is no need to abandon using standard TPPs for each).

In a poll proposal, each option is essentially its own mini-proposal with a deadline and suboption headings. A poll proposal can have a maximum of 20 options, and the rules above apply to each option as if it were its own proposal: users may vote on any number of options they wish, and individual options may close early or be extended separately from the rest. If an option fails to achieve quorum or reach a consensus after three extensions, then the status quo wins for that option by default. If all options fail, then nothing will be done.

To create a poll proposal, copy and paste the formatting below to get started; your username and the option deadlines will automatically be substituted when you save the page. Update the bracketed variables with actual information, and be sure to replace the whole variable including the square brackets, so "[insert info here]" becomes "This is the inserted information" and not "[This is the inserted information]". 

===[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|{{subst:REVISIONUSER}}}}

====[option title (e.g. Option 1)]: [brief summary of option]====
'''Deadline''': {{subst:#time:F j, Y|+2 weeks}}, 23:59 GMT

;Support
#{{User|{{subst:REVISIONUSER}}}} Per proposal.

;Oppose

====[option title (e.g. Option 2)]: [brief summary of option]====
'''Deadline''': {{subst:#time:F j, Y|+2 weeks}}, 23:59 GMT

;Support
#{{User|{{subst:REVISIONUSER}}}} Per proposal.

;Oppose

====[option title (e.g. Option 3)]: [brief summary of option]====
'''Deadline''': {{subst:#time:F j, Y|+2 weeks}}, 23:59 GMT

;Support
#{{User|{{subst:REVISIONUSER}}}} Per proposal.

;Oppose

====Comments ([brief proposal title])====

For the purposes of the ongoing proposals list, a poll proposal's deadline is the latest deadline of any ongoing option(s). A poll proposal is archived after all of its options have settled, and it is listed as one single proposal in the archive. It is considered to have "passed" if one or more options were approved by voters (resulting in a change from the status quo), and it is considered to have "failed" if all options were rejected by voters and no change in the status quo was made.

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. All of the above proposal rules also apply to talk page proposals. Place {{TPP}} under the section's heading, and once the proposal is over, replace the template with {{settled TPP}}. Proposals dealing with a large amount of splits, merges, or deletions across the wiki should still be held on this page.

All active talk page proposals must be listed below in chronological order (new proposals go at the bottom) using {{ongoing TPP}}. Include a brief description of the proposal while also mentioning any pages affected by it, a link to the talk page housing the discussion, the proposal author(s), 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.

List of ongoing talk page proposals

Deletions

Merges

Splits

Miscellaneous

Unimplemented proposals

Proposals

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 Super Mario Maker titles and Super Mario Run.
Use the classic and classic link templates when discussing classic courses in Mario Kart Tour, YoYo (ended October 2, 2024)
Split major RPG appearances of recurring locations, EvieMaybe (ended December 16, 2024)
Split Mario & Luigi badges and remaining accessories, Camwoodstock (ended February 1, 2025)
Merge intro/outro sections, rename Gameplay section to "Overview" for Mario Party minigame articles, ToxBoxity64 (ended March 1, 2025)
Allow English Super Mario Bros. Encyclopedia names to be mentioned on articles where they are not the title, Hewer (ended March 27, 2025)
Change previous and next entries cell in infoboxes to include actual entry names and change directory link, Bro Hammer (ended April 18, 2025)
Make a guideline for covering generic subjects that have a recurring and recognizable design in the Mario series, Koopa con Carne (ended May 4, 2025)
Rework "References" sections, EvieMaybe (ended May 5, 2025)
Create a separate list for physical games, Nelsonic (ended May 20, 2025)

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)
Create articles for specified special buildings in Super Mario Run, Salmancer (ended November 15, 2024)
Merge False Character and Fighting Polygon/Wireframe/Alloy/Mii Teams into List of Super Smash Bros. series bosses, Doc von Schmeltwick (ended December 2, 2024)
Create a catch-all Poltergust article, Blinker (ended January 21, 2025)
Give the Cluck-A-Pop Prizes articles, Camwoodstock (ended January 31, 2025)
Reverse the proposal to trim White Shy Guy, Waluigi Time (ended February 8, 2025)
Split the Animal Crossing series (now Crossovers with Animal Crossing), Kaptain Skurvy (ended February 12, 2025)
Split the modes in the Battles page, Mario (ended February 15, 2025)
Count ongoing serialized comics for latest appearances, Rykitu (ended March 2, 2025)
Split Super Mario Maker helmets from Buzzy Shell and Spiny Shell (red), PopitTart (ended March 12, 2025)
Merge Mario Party 4 hosts with their species, Kirby the Formling (ended March 23, 2025)
Split Super Luigi subjects into a dedicated list article, EvieMaybe (ended April 3, 2025)
Merge the list of references to Super Mario Bros. with Super Mario Bros., Waluigi Time (ended April 6, 2025)
Split Hammer (move) from Hammer, Blinker (ended April 10, 2025)
Deciding the fate of the last two episodes of Super Mario Maker 2 Challenges!, Rykitu (ended April 27, 2025)
Merge Coin Area and Coin Block Area, Altendo (ended May 9, 2025)
Restore general coverage for Pyramid, Doc von Schmeltwick (ended May 9, 2025)
Split the Story Mode chapters from Mario & Sonic at the Olympic Games Tokyo 2020, Kaptain Skurvy (ended May 13, 2025)
Clean up Prohibited Command, PrincessPeachFan (ended May 13, 2025)
Split the individual Picross NP volumes from Picross NP, Nelsonic (ended May 14, 2025)
Reduce Super Mario Maker info from giant cannon, LinkTheLefty (ended May 15, 2025)
Move SMB3 info from Floor (block) to Floor, and move Floor (block) to Mario Bros. Block, PopitTart (ended May 21, 2025)

Writing guidelines

None at the moment

New features

None at the moment.

Removals

Remove the a and id templates

Based on the vote so far, this proposal may be eligible to close one week early. Please use {{proposal check|early=yes}} on May 24, 2025 at 23:59 GMT and close the proposal if applicable.

Back in December, both the a and id templates were created. One of them was from a proposal, and maybe the second one too? I don't know, I couldn't find it in the archives.

Anyways, both of these templates aren't really used at all. The a template was created for the purpose of shortening game titles, but I have not seen anyone actually use it. Same thing with the id template. Many users are used to typing out the entire game articles anyway, myself included.

This proposal aims to remove both templates and fix the articles that have them.

Proposer: Sparks (talk)
Deadline: May 31, 2025, 23:59 GMT

Delete them both!

  1. Sparks (talk) Someone needs to put these templates out of their misery.
  2. Xiahou Ba, The Nasty Warrior (talk) I'll take care of these templates, no problem! Do I have a plan? ...Not really, but I'll do fine, I'm sure!
  3. T (talk) These templates are so confusing man. Like my name in this vote! That's how it feels trying to edit pages with these templates on them.
  4. Nintendo101 (talk) I don't see "id" used too often, but "a" has been actively detrimental to articles.
  5. Mario4Ever (talk) Per proposal.
  6. Ctccm (talk) These templates, which ostensibly exist for ease of editing, have only really served to make it more confusing for editors. Your average editor shouldn't have to memorize which abbreviation is which to edit a page, especially when some abbreviations already require further elaboration as-is, and the list used lacks parity between the actual abbreviations we commonly use for redirects. Does "MF" lead to Mario Factory, Mario's FUNdamentals, or Mario Family? Trick question--MF isn't in the list at all. On the other hand, "W" is used as the abbreviation for Wii, but W is actually a redirect for Wario, thanks to an old guide on the Wario Land 3 website. And considering that deprecating this template could easily be done by siccing PorpleBot on the task... Yeah, we can't say we're endeared to it. It should be deprecated, left with an Abandoned tag so that page histories don't become unreadable, and maybe we could repurpose a version of the list subpage as a maintenance page, to properly showcase the abbreviations we use for games and consoles, when they actually exist; it actually has a rather decent form factor, the list is just... entirely proprietary to the abbreviations we actually use.
  7. Pseudo (talk) Both of these templates seem likely to cause more confusion than anything else. I can see the reasons that one might want to keep them but I don't think they're good enough to justify the potential harm caused by these, especially "a".
  8. Hewer (talk) These remind me of Bulbapedia's linking templates, which is not a good thing. Per Camwoodstock and Pseudo.
  9. EvieMaybe (talk) the minute benefits these templates add aren't enough to counteract how unwieldy they are to use. per all
  10. Kaptain Skurvy (talk) Are we really THAT lazy that we can't be bothered to type out the full title of a page? Per all.
  11. Jdtendo (talk) These templates may be handy when you are the one who type them, but they're cumbersome for all other editors that will encounter them afterwards.
  12. Altendo (talk) Per EvieMaybe (see comments). EDIT on 12:22, May 20, 2025 (EDT): The pipelinking for fully-typed out game titles with the identifier and certain italics don't really matter to me, as even though they are somewhat of a burden, I already don't really type out the identifier in whole when linking these types of pages.
  13. Mario (talk) In this case, the longer route is the shortest way home. Trying to figure out what "YCW" is seeing the latest appearance in an infobox from {{a|YCW|l}} wastes my time, as well as my expressing bafflement at the 1 parameter here, not immediately knowing what the hell "1" does. If that's a bureaucrat's editing here for 15+ years reaction to this, have mercy on newer editors. I've expressed annoyance at the inefficiency dealing with these templates.[1] At first, I thought it might be a good idea to try to shorten some abbreviations here but the execution is taking an axe to a relatively localized problem. Maybe there are better answers to writing out "Mario & Sonic at the Melting 2025 Winter Olympics at Antarctica" but right now, the solution here creates more problems in the process.
  14. Nelsonic (talk) Per Mario. These templates can indeed be helpful, but the parameters can end up being very confusing. I... also may have voted yes on the proposal to bring one of these into existence.
  15. Platform (talk) I've made my objections in the comments.

Delete a, keep id

  1. Ahemtoday (talk) So, here's the thing with me — I make fairly frequent use of {{id}}... but it's never been for its abbreviation functionality. I use it purely as a quick way to avoid having to type pipe-link text that's just the same thing as the article text. And I think that's a great template to have. It's convenient; it saves space; it gets rid of an annoying redundancy. I have an edit comment somewhere where I say I like the template, unprompted, just because I like it that much. But again: none of that has anything to do with the game abbreviations part of the template. I never interfaced with any of that stuff because it seems cumbersome and I don't understand why you'd want to use it. I expect {{a}} shares its backend with that somehow (maybe it's literally part of {{id}} somewhere) so that functionality would probably break if {{a}} went, but I'd be perfectly fine with that. Getting rid of the repetition in linking to, say, Captain Toad: Treasure Tracker the microgame is what the use case of {{id}} is to me, and it's a fantastic thing to have a template for. Let's not throw that out with {{a}}.

#Altendo (talk) Weak support now. To clarify, the identifier template was created by Porple through a discussion relating to a tied proposal that I sided for. The main point of me proposing this template (which I went back to after the abbreviation proposal passed) was to avoid pipelinking, which I agreed with as I didn't want to write the name of the title, the identifier, and the title again (see SeanWheeler's comment) just to avoid a redirect or writing the title multiple times. While I do get the point of identifiers for these specifically existing so people don't have to memorize which pages have the identifiers or not, I think that pipelinking is just tiring, especially when dealing with multiple of them. EDIT on 12:34, May 19, 2025 (EDT): I still feel like this template has a bit of merit for a certain use (see my comment below), but now that Evie's comment explained how to bypass this in the first place (mooting the discussion surrounding the creation of this template), this is no longer my primary choice.

Delete id, keep a

  1. Salmancer (talk) I guess if we want template clutter down...

#Altendo (talk) Weak support, if we have to keep one of these. The point of a template made to ease editing is that they are optional, and experienced editors don't necessarily have to use them; both templates show that they are not required to be used, but I still use both on an occasional basis when adding new stuff (I previously replaced links with these templates before I realized the template told me not to do so for preexisting links and only for newly added ones).

Keep both

  1. Salmancer (talk) I've used them, and they'd probably have more widespread use if not for the fact using "a" in a section header is discouraged. (That forces people to type out full game names at least once, which as one might expect encourages copy and pasting that.) Anyhow shortform versions of long phrases are helpful when you're in a hurry and have lots of text to write. Especially if you need to go back and forth between base game and remake behavior, or are in similar situations. Clipboards can only carry one phrase at a time, which makes copy and pasting from the section header much slower when juggling multiple games. "id" is generally less useful due to "link autocomplete" and the "pipe trick", but I believe "link autocomplete" is optional and therefore "id" serves a niche for people who are not using the autocomplete.
  2. Ahemtoday (talk) Per my other vote. I strongly believe {{id}} is a good and useful template. It's not for {{a}}-related reasons, but if keeping {{a}} is the only way to keep {{id}}, I'll do it.
  3. Tails777 (talk) I for sure get the idea behind this, but I feel like we need more guidelines on their use. Using them for something as small as Nintendo DS or Wii is not something that should be encouraged, but using them for titles like Mario & Luigi: Bowser's Inside Story + Bowser Jr.'s Journey or Mario & Sonic at the Sochi 2014 Olympic Winter Games is still a sense of convenience at least. I'd rather create some rules on their use before flat out removing them.

#Altendo (talk) I often use {{a}} in conjunction with {{id}}, especially since it saves a lot of bytes on a page and shortens subjects even more. I mean, I'm fine with getting rid of {{a}}, but it does further ease the {{id}} template, especially since names are shortened even more. I don't want to type out "[[Captain Goomba (Mario & Luigi series)|Captain Goomba]]". I want to shorten it by writing "{{id|Captain Goomba|M&LSERIES}}". It's a lot easier and shorter.Weak support, I guess, per an unsolved(?) question in the comments. #Koopa con Carne (talk) "both of these templates aren't really used at all." I mean, false. I've been using {{a}} a lot (*cough* when I remember it exists). The reason it doesn't seem used all that much is because its documentation discourages users from reformatting existing game titles with it, and with the site going on 20 years even before the template was created, yeah, obviously the previous method is gonna be way more widespread. As for "id", the reason I haven't used it is simply because I wasn't aware of it.

Comments

These templates would actually be worthwhile if there were a way to automatically substitute {{a|SMB}} with ''Super Mario Bros.'' when the page is saved, in the same way that ~~~~ gets substituted with the user's signature; but I'm not sure that this is technically possible. Jdtendo(T|C) 06:43, May 17, 2025 (EDT)

I'm not too familiar with these templates but my experience with them has been negative. When articles get renamed, merged, or split, the templates break or get linked to the wrong article.--Platform (talk) 10:59, May 17, 2025 (EDT)

Pretty sure we can just use {{subst:a|SMB}}. This will save it as the full link upon saving the page. Altendo 11:05, May 17, 2025 (EDT)
TEST: EDIT on 12:34, May 19, 2025 (EDT): Removed coding per Evie's comment.
Oh, wow. It did not go as planned, as it copied the entire template code onto the page, instead of just the link. Visibly, this doesn't look any different, but on the inside, it looks ugly. Altendo 11:07, May 17, 2025 (EDT)
So ask Porplemontage to tinker with the related parameter when that happens. -- KOOPA CON CARNE 11:36, May 17, 2025 (EDT)

i want to point out that you can type any link with an identifier as [[World 1-1 (Super Mario Bros.)|]], with the vertical bar at the end, and it'll come out as "World 1-1" when submitted.
also, @Altendo, whatever your test did is messing with the automatic syntax highlighting add-on. — Super Leaf stamp from Super Mario 3D World + Bowser's Fury.eviemaybe (talk / contributions) 10:32, May 19, 2025 (EDT)

Wai-WHAAAT? How long has that been a thing? Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 10:41, May 19, 2025 (EDT)
Second test: Super Mario RPG
Well, that actually worked! I might still see a bit of usage in the {{id}} template as sometimes pipelinking is required (like when italicizing game titles with identifiers where the full title should be shown, which requires writing the page name twice but the second game name is italicized, if there is also a way to bypass this it would be great), but now that I know about this, it should simplify things a lot more! Altendo 12:34, May 19, 2025 (EDT)
Doc, I seriously don't know if you're just playing it up or not. I knew about the parenthesis pipe trick for YEARS... ArendLogoTransparent.pngrend (talk) (edits) 12:50, May 19, 2025 (EDT)
I actually didn't know that just adding the pipe (which I didn't know was "|") and nothing more would display the page title without the parenthesis... I thought it would have just made blank space. If I knew this earlier, I wouldn't have even made the id template discussion to begin with. Altendo 13:12, May 19, 2025 (EDT)
I can excuse you for not knowing, you've only joined the wiki in 2022, while Doc joined in 2017. But I suppose I might as well be the jaded one here, I first joined the wiki in 2006/2007 after all. Not to mention that I recently found out (as in, a couple months ago I think?) that commas also trigger a pipe trick, so maybe I'm just stupid for assuming that people should know better. ArendLogoTransparent.pngrend (talk) (edits) 13:45, May 19, 2025 (EDT)
Well, I went down a bit of a rabbithole investigating exactly how long this feature has been a thing... Turns out it's so old it's in the very oldest version of the MediaWiki source code available in its git repository, which dates back to April 2003. So, to say the least, it's not new. AmossGuy (talk) 13:34, May 19, 2025 (EDT)
Huh. That definitely seems to cover the use case I was using {{id}} for. Ahemtoday (talk) 12:37, May 19, 2025 (EDT)
I definitely wasn't aware of this feature. Deleted my vote entirely because, eh, I don't actually care that much what happens to the other template. Auto-fill is useful, too. -- KOOPA CON CARNE 16:24, May 19, 2025 (EDT)

@Nelsonic I don't think you voted on the proposal for the {{a}} template or discussed the {{id}} template, either. Altendo 12:22, May 20, 2025 (EDT)

@Altendo Ah. Okay. I remember seeing it when it was active, I just wasn't sure whether I had voted or not. Nelsonic (talk) 12:25, May 20, 2025 (EDT)

Changes

Move back from the "Multimedia:" prefix

With a margin of 13 votes, at least 80% approval is required to close one week early. 93.3% approve the first place option. CLOSE EARLY

So apparently, PorpleBot moved the page from "List of WarioWare, Inc.: Mega Microgame$! media" to "Multimedia:WarioWare, Inc.: Mega Microgame$!". And yes, it's just an example, because all other media pages have been moved to use the "Multimedia:" prefix! And yes, this is my first proposal so I'm sorry if the proposal is very informal. But anyways, every pages involving media files currently has the "Multimedia:" prefix. That makes no sense to me, especially when the old title is "List of WarioWare, Inc.: Mega Microgame$! media" for example, and the "media" in the title already makes it clear that it's a page about media files (in this case, WarioWare Inc. media files). This "Camwoodstock" guy said that it's for parity but since the gallery pages are formatted "Gallery:WarioWare: Touched!" for example, it makes no sense to do just the same for the media pages.

Proposer: Alphabetlorefan2003 (talk)
Deadline: May 29, 2025, 23:59 GMT

Media Page Supporters:

  1. Alphabetlorefan2003 (talk) Per proposal.

Wario, the Opposers:

  1. Jdtendo (talk) It makes sense to have a dedicated "Multimedia:" namespace for galleries of media akin to the "Gallery:" namespace for galleries of images, and I don't see the point of reverting to "List of X media" pages.
  2. Xiahou Ba, The Nasty Warrior (talk) Per Jdtendo.
  3. Multimedia:Arend (talk) Per Jdtendo, and my comments down below.
  4. Multimedia:Camwoodstock (talk) first of all why did you use "scarequotes" for us. It's far easier to search for a game's Multimedia page with the namespace rather than to have to write "List of x media", and it's easier to search for changes to them in Recent Changes/the watchlist. And as for the point of "Gallery: has existed for years, but Multimedia: is new"... Well, yeah. Things change all the time on a wiki, and sometimes, the gaps between certain changes are very large. That's kind of a given with a collaborative writing project. We don't even really understand the point about parity "not making sense"; there's literally a Multimedia:WarioWare: Touched! to go alongside Gallery:WarioWare: Touched!. The two match, when they formerly did not, and one was a namespace and one was a list despite the two being functionally companions to one another. And, pray tell, to what end? If this was a push to cut back on dedicated namespaces, why only the Multimedia pages? Granted, we can't see a proposal to convert all Gallery pages to "List of x images" going over well...
  5. List of Altendo media (talk) Per all.
  6. EvieMedia (talk) per these "Camwoodstock" guys
  7. Rainbow Road Drifter (talk) These are collections of audio files in the same way galleries are collections of pictures. They should be named this way to distinguish them from traditional articles.
  8. Okapii (talk) I think those "Camwoodstock" folks were onto something.
  9. YoYo (talk) i don't see your reasoning here... you say it the claim its for "parity" makes no sense, then immediately say an example of it showing said parity?? per all.
  10. SGoW (talk) I love Wario, what a great character. If an option in a proposal is named after him I will certainly be voting for it.
  11. This "Kaptain Skurvy" guy (talk) Wario is funny so im voting his option (jk...per all.)
  12. Nelsonic (talk) Per all. To use an additional example, we already refer to the grouping of Play Nintendo images, videos, and wallpapers as "Multimedia" (granted, the website does as well, in a sense, as it refers to them as "Media").
  13. Hewario (talk) Get Wario'd!
  14. BMfan08:Multimedia (talk) Ehh, maybe Wario has a point for once...

Kat and Ana Comments

From what I can gather, Camwoodstock actually was for a regular Media: namespace, as seen here, but since Media: is already a namespace that's in use (as an alternative to the File: namespace), the proposal has been vetoed, and it was decided to have the new namespace be called "Multimedia:" instead.
Anyway, I don't entirely understand why you want to revert it back? You say that Camwoodstock's reasoning for parity makes no sense because the Gallery: namespace exists... but doesn't that corroborate to his point? Because, you know, it's also a namespace? Are you bothered it's multimedia now instead of simply "media"? What's exactly your problem with these media pages being its own namespace instead of regular list pages? ArendLogoTransparent.pngrend (talk) (edits) 05:58, May 15, 2025 (EDT)

The "Gallery:" prefix has existed for years so adding it now makes no sense. Alphabetlorefan2003 (talk) 10:07, May 15, 2025 (EDT)
What's the problem with adding the Multimedia prefix now? The wiki is always adding new features and articles. How does that "make no sense"? — Lady Sophie Wiggler Sophie.png (T|C) 10:15, May 15, 2025 (EDT)
Perring Lady Sophie here. Just because the Gallery: namespace has existed for years while the Multimedia: one has not, doesn't mean the latter cannot be added later or ever again. This honestly feels like one of those "I don't like change, everything should stay the same" types of complaint. ArendLogoTransparent.pngrend (talk) (edits) 11:05, May 15, 2025 (EDT)
For some context, since part of this was on the Discord. Porplemontage explained the full reason behind why Media: was unavailable (it's a default namespace used by MediaWiki internally for handling files, so inserting something into the Media: namespace would have... Consequences behind the scenes, which is why it doesn't let you do that and just redirects you to a File: page if you try.), and after a conversation, he suggested "Multimedia:" instead, as an alternative that doesn't run into problems behind the scenes. We were fine with that new name, and offered to remake the proposal, but Porple decided to implement it himself without needing to re-run the proposal for the tweaked, internally-sound name; you'd have to ask him for his reasoning for that one, as we're obviously not him.
In short, the idea of a dedicated namespace for Multimedia subpages was our idea, but Porple ultimately chose the name we landed on (with our approval), and he was the one who ultimately helped implement it. (To be honest, the text on the original proposal should probably say "CANCELLED, ALTERNATIVE VERSION PUT INTO EFFECT IMMEDIATELY" or something like that, rather than just "VETOED BY THE ADMINISTRATORS" with the clarification that the proposal was put into effect immediately with a differing name being a small font subtitle--it'd be far clearer for your average user what happened without them having to consult the archive list and see that it's teal. ;P) Camwoodstock-sigicon.png~Camwoodstock ( talk ☯ contribs ) Camwoodstock-sigicon2.png 14:00, May 15, 2025 (EDT)

WAAAH? There are more Wario's than there are supporters? Alphabetlorefan2003 (talk) 19:10, May 15, 2025 (EDT)

Yeah, we pick WAAAAARIOOOOOO But seriously, you have read our reasonings and do understand why we think it's pointless to change it back, right? ArendLogoTransparent.pngrend (talk) (edits) 03:47, May 16, 2025 (EDT)
This implies you named the option "Wario" to steer people away from it, which is not really a good way to structure a proposal. - YoYo Yoshi Head (light blue) from Mario Kart: Super Circuit (Talk) 11:39, May 20, 2025 (EDT)
If that's true, then yeah, that's not good at all. It introduces bias by saying one is an objectively bad option, when all options are supposed to be objectively equal. Hell, I'd argue it's even a poorly designed way to say an option is objectively bad because people actually like Wario and thus would be more inclined to choose the Wario option over the boring "return back to the previous status quo" option, backfiring the proposer completely.
However, I'm sure it's just coincidence, right? I'm certain that the oppose option is only named after Wario since the proposal has been using WarioWare pages as examples of the proposer's issue. I mean, why else would this very comment section be named after Kat and Ana, then? ArendLogoTransparent.pngrend (talk) (edits) 05:01, May 21, 2025 (EDT)

How the heck do I close proposals Alphabetlorefan2003 (talk) 03:46, May 22, 2025 (EDT)

Miscellaneous

Tighten the definition of "item" used by some games' subcategories

Within the context of, say, Paper Mario: The Thousand-Year Door, an "item" is a specific class of game entity that goes in its own tab on the pause menu and tab in the battle UI, and can be used in and out of battle. However, this specificity is not reflected in our category system, under which Category:Paper Mario: The Thousand-Year Door items contains the likes of Badge, Hammer, Heart (item), and Star Piece (Paper Mario series). I think things like these sharing a category with the games' definition of "item" is counterintuitive. Should this proposal pass, "items" such as these, no longer contained within the tightened definition, will be placed into the main category; or their own subcategory if there are enough (though I'm not sure what such a category would be called).

If it's preferable that the "items" label be kept consistent with the rest of the wiki, I would also be fine with splitting these items off into a subcategory (or simply renaming the category if the "normal items" are too few in number) — Category:Paper Mario: The Thousand-Year Door consumable items, for instance.

Games and series for which I believe this should be done include:

Proposer: Ahemtoday (talk)
Deadline: May 27, 2025, 23:59 GMT

Tighten the "item" category on these games

  1. Ahemtoday (talk) Per proposal.
  2. Itemdo (talk) Sounds good from what I can see.

Split these item classes into their own categories

  1. Ahemtoday (talk) Oh, I meant to vote here as well but forgot.
  2. Pseudo (talk) Distinguishing these items from other types of item is useful and important, but I would strongly contend that stuff like Badges and Star Pieces are items, just a different category from consumable items that are sometimes labeled as just "items".
  3. Camwoodstock (talk) We prefer this, personally. It'd be nice to have a clear distinction between types of items found in RPGs aside from just... "Item". Mario Party also has a few color-coded categories for Orbs in 5 to 7, and Candy in 8, which we could potentially distinguish with this.
  4. Altem Class (talk) Second choice, per all.
  5. Rainbow Road Drifter (talk) The term is used in RPGs to refer to something that can be bought or sold in a shop, used as the action during the player's turn, and is listed in an Items section in the menu. If an object isn't considered an "item" in the game, it should be in a separate category.

Do nothing

Comments (item category proposal)

Retrieved from "https://www.mariowiki.com/index.php?title=MarioWiki:Proposals&oldid=4903914"