MarioWiki:Proposals: Difference between revisions

From the Super Mario Wiki, the Mario encyclopedia
Jump to navigationJump to search
 
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 start to discuss on the issue. 24 hours after posting the proposal (rounding up or down to the next or previous full hour, respectively, is allowed), the voting period begins. (The proposer is allowed to support their proposal right after posting.) The "deadline" for the proposal is one week from voting start at: ('''All times GMT''')
{{early notice|May 24, 2025}}
#*Monday to Thursday: 23:00 (11pm)
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: 2:00 (2 am) of the next day. A proposal posted on a Thursday ends the following Saturday morning; a proposal posted on a Friday ends the following Sunday morning.
#*Sunday: 21:00 (9pm)
#Every vote should have a reason accompanying it.
#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. The voter can remove or rewrite their own vote at any time, but the final decision to remove another User's vote lies solely with the [[MarioWiki:Administrators|Administrators]].
#"<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 cannot 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 [[wikipedia:GMT|GMT]], 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 Monday night at 11:59 PM GMT, the deadline is the next Monday night at 11:00 PM. If it is posted a minute later, the deadline is a week Tuesday, since midnight is considered to be part of the next day, as 00:00 AM.


===Basic Proposal and Support/Oppose Format===
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 is an example how your proposal should 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 <u>replace the whole variable including the squared brackets</u>, so "[insert info here]" becomes "This is the inserted information", not "[This is the inserted information]".
-----
<nowiki>===[insert a title for your Proposal here]===</nowiki><br>
<nowiki>[describe what you want this Proposal to be like, what changes you would suggest and what this is about]</nowiki>


<nowiki>'''Proposer''': {{User|[enter your username here]}}<br></nowiki><br>
This proposal aims to remove both templates and fix the articles that have them.
<nowiki>'''Voting start''': [insert a voting start time here, f.e. "2 January, 2010, 14:00". Voting start times are 24 hours after the time at which the proposal was posted, as described in Rule 2 above.]<br></nowiki><br>
<nowiki>'''Deadline''': [insert a deadline here, f.e. "8 January, 2010, 23:00". Rule 2 above explains how to determine a deadline.]</nowiki>


<nowiki>====Support====</nowiki>
'''Proposer''': {{User|Sparks}}<br>
'''Deadline''': May 31, 2025, 23:59 GMT


<nowiki>====Oppose====</nowiki>
====Delete them both!====
#{{User|Sparks}} Someone needs to put these templates out of their misery.
#{{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!
#{{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.


<nowiki>====Comments====</nowiki>
====Delete a, keep id====
-----
#{{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}}.
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.
<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====
To support, or oppose, just insert "<nowiki>#{{User|[add your username here]}}</nowiki> at the bottom of the  section of your choice. Just don't forget to add a valid reason for your vote behind that tag if you are voting on anoother user's Proposal. If you are voting on your own Proposal, you can just say "Per my Proposal".
#{{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>
__TOC__
====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.
<!--<center><span style="font-size:200%">CURRENTLY: '''{{#time: H:i, d M Y}} (GMT)'''</span></center>-->
#{{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>
<br>
 
==Talk Page Proposals==
All proposals dealing with a single article or a specific group of articles are held on the talk page of one of the articles in question. Proposals dealing with massive amounts of splits, merges or deletions across the Wiki should still be held on this page.
 
===How To===
#All active talk page proposals must be listed below in chronological order (new proposals go at the bottom). All pages effected must be mentioned in the ''brief'' description, with the talk page housing the discussion linked to directly via "({{fakelink|Discuss}})". If the proposal involved a page that is not yet made, use {{tem|fakelink}} to communicate its title. The '''Deadline''' must also be included in the entry. Linking to pages not directly involved in the talk page proposal is not recommended, as it clutters the list with unnecessary links. Place {{tem|TPP}} under the heading.
#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, 4 and 5, as follows:
#Voting in talk page proposals will be open for two weeks, not one. There is no 24 hour delay between the posting of a talk page proposal and the commencement of voting.
#Talk page proposals may closed by the proposer if both the support ''and'' the oppose sides each have fewer than five votes.
#After two weeks, a clear majority of three votes is required. Without the majority, the talk page proposal will be listed as "NO QUORUM".
#The talk page proposal '''must''' pertain to the article it is posted on.
 
===List of Talk Page Proposals===
*Merge information pertaining to generic Blue and Yellow Toads into [[Toad (species)]] and [[Toad Brigade]], leaving the separate [[Blue Toad]] and [[Yellow Toad]] pages for the specific Toad characters that appeared in ''New Super Mario Bros. Wii''. Whether or not these pages will be named "{{fakelink|Blue Toad (New Super Mario Bros. Wii)}}" and "{{fakelink|Yellow Toad (New Super Mario Bros. Wii)}}" or "{{fakelink|Bucken-Berry}}" and "{{fakelink|Ala-Gold}}" is also being voted on. ([[Talk:Yellow Toad|Discuss]]) '''Passed''' 
*Merge [[Banana Bunch]] into [[Banana]]. ([[Talk:Banana Bunch|Discuss]]) '''Passed'''   
*Split [[SSX on Tour]] from [[Video game references]]. ([[Talk:SSX on Tour|Discuss]]) '''Passed'''   
*Merge [[Triple Bananas]] and [[Giant Banana]] into [[Banana]]. ([[Talk:Banana|Discuss]]) '''Passed''' 
*Split [[Mushroom]] (Super Mario RPG info) into [[Mushroom]] and {{Fakelink|Mushroom (Status effect)}} ([[Talk:Mushroom|Discuss]]) '''Passed'''
*Merge [[Mushroom]] (SMRPG info), [[Bad Mushroom]], [[Mid Mushroom]], [[Max Mushroom]] onto one page. ([[Talk:Mushroom|Discuss]]) '''Passed'''
*Split [[Dark Koopa]] into [[Dark Koopa]] and {{fakelink|Dark Koopa (Super Paper Mario)}}. ([[Talk:Dark Koopa|Discuss]]) '''Deadline:''' 2 March 2010, 23:00
*Merge [[Turtle (Super Smash Bros.)]] into [[Trophy Descriptions (Super Smash Bros. Melee) ]] ([[Talk:Turtle (Super Smash Bros.)|Discuss]]) '''Deadline:''' 7 March 2010, 2:00
*Merge [[King Bulblin and Lord Bullbo]] into [[Bridge of Eldin]] ([[Talk:King Bulblin and Lord Bullbo|Discuss]]) '''Deadline:''' 7 March 2010, 2:00
*Merge [[Special Kit 3]] into [[Mario vs. Donkey Kong 2: March of the Minis]]. ([[Talk:Special Kit 3|Discuss]]) '''Deadline:''' 7 March 2010, 2:00
*Split [[Pauline's items]] into {{Fakelink|Parasol}}, {{Fakelink|Bag}}, and {{Fakelink|Hat}}. ([[Talk:Pauline's items|Discuss]]) '''Deadline:''' 9 March 2010, 23:00
*Delete [[Spipoopy]]. ([[Talk:Spipoopy|Discuss]]) '''Deadline:''' 10 March 2010, 23:00
*Merge [[Rainbow Boost]] into [[Boost Pad]]. ([[Talk:Rainbow Boost|Discuss]]) '''Deadline:''' 11 March 2010, 23:00
*Split [[Dragon]] into {{fakelink|Dragon (Yoshi series)}} and {{fakelink|Dragon (species)}}. ([[Talk:Dragon|Discuss]]) '''Deadline:''' 13 March 2010, 2:00
*Split [[Entei]]'s info into [[Pokémon]] and {{fakelink|Trophy Tussle}}. ([[Talk:Entei|Discuss]]) '''Deadline:''' 13 March 2010, 2:00
*Merge the Yoshi eggs sections of the [[Egg]] article into [[Yoshi Egg]]. ([[Talk:Egg|Discuss]]) '''Deadline:''' 14 March 2010, 2:00
*Merge all Gnat Attack Enemies into [[Gnat Attack]]. ([[Talk:Dragonfly (Mario Paint)|Discuss]]) '''Deadline:''' 14 March 2010, 2:00
*Merge [[Item Roulette]] into [[Item Box]] ([[Talk:Item Roulette|Discuss]]) '''Deadline:''' 15 March 2010, 23:00
*Merge relevant information from [[Baby Yoshi]] into [[Yoshi (species)]]. ([[Talk:Baby Yoshi|Discuss]]) '''Deadline:''' 15 March 2010, 23:00
 
==New Features==
===Add Quote of the Week (or Featured Quote) to the Main Page===
There are a lot of quotes out there that are great. If we have the featured Articles and the Featured Images, there are a lot of quotes that are wise and this might make our wiki seem that there is more than "this weird person who rides on ugly froglike creatures killing people just to save his girlfriend" (I was just giving an example Sorry if I insulted Yoshi but that's what some people actually think). We can put it under the Featured Images and move the Did You Know section down. There will be a separate page for voting to see which ones are the best (like the FA and FI)
 
'''Proposer:''' {{User|KS3}} <br>
'''Deadline:''' March 2 2010, 23:00
 
====Add new feature====
#{{User|KS3}} Per proposal.
#{{User|MATEOELBACAN}} Per Proposal (But don't say that of Yoshi...people he's a dinosaur!)
#{{User|Mr bones}} Per proposal.
#[[User:LucariosAura|LucariosAura (used to be specialk)]] I agree with MATEOELBACAN, yoshi is cool. And per proposal.
 
====Don't add====
#{{User|T.c.w7468}} Didn't we knock the quote of the day thing down a few months ago because it slowed everything up? Besides, many of the quotes that end up on this are pretty bad, and it doesn't add much to the page anyway. +Oh, and per Time Q and Marioguy1, below.
#{{user|Bloc Partier}} -- Per all. <s>Plus, no one ever puts the quotes in right so we always have to edit the pages themselves to keep the Main Page template working.</s> My bad. Voting is an even worse idea than using the template. It will make (like FI's) another complicated, annoying page for things to go wrong.
#{{User|Baby Mario Bloops}} - I knew people would come over to the don't add side. Anyways, we got rid of the quotes for many reasons (like I said in the comments): 1 - Takes forever to get to the Main Page, plus all the broken links it can cause. 2 - It can glitch a lot when doing some quotes that is more than one sentence, making it not that useful. 3 - We have plentiful things about our wiki that tells info on the Mario things.
#{{User|Time Q}}: Nah, don't add more to the Main Page before removing something from it. Also, I'm opposing this for the same reason I opposed the Featured Images for: quotes are not our work, so it makes little sense to "feature" them.
#{{User|Marioguy1}} - We had this quote before, it slowed loading time and showed a different quote every time someone looked at it - that isn't even a "Featured" quote! I definitely don't think we should create Mariowiki:Featured Quote as we  have enough featured content already, besides - a quote is too minor to be nominated and then we go through a whole process over about 10 words.
#{{User|Fawfulfury65}} It will make the main page take longer to load. And do we really need it? I mean, are we gonna like choose a featured quote or something? I don't think this will really help anything.
#{{User|Zero777}} I am Zero! There was a reason it was removed, it caused a seven second delay to load up the main page for a fast computer, seven seconds for fast ones but longer for slow ones. Zero signing out.
#{{User|Stooben Rooben}} -- Per all.
#{{User|Gamefreak75}} - I could get one as short as Fawful's "I have FURY!" or you can get one as long as a paragraph, like Wario's. It's all random, and my crappy computer likes freezing on me. :/ Per all.
#{{user|Reversinator}} It's pointless.
#{{User|Walkazo}} - Per all.
#{{user|Coincollector}} - We removed the quote section because it took a lot of time to load the main page. Also, I don't see why featuring a quote since all of them are trivial.
#{{User|MechaWave}} -- I don't understand why everyone's saying "because it took a long time to load the Main Page." That was because of the quotes always switching, but this is a '''Featured''' quote, which would probably mean a limit of quotes that wouldn't use a code to grab them from articles, thus making the Main Page ''only slightly'' slower. However, I think it's just pointless.


====Comments====
====Comments====
Can I see what the new main page would look like? The main page is half informational, half aesthetic (probably the only page that is). {{User|Marioguy1}}
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)
 
:LOL, LeftyGreenMario said that. Anyway, did you know that there was a proposal to remove that Quote of the Day thingy because of loading time? Just for your information. {{User|BabyLuigiOnFire}}
::Just like BLOF said above, the loading time took forever to get onto MarioWiki, and for many users like me it caused the broken link to appear more often. Also, wasn't there a glitch with the template for the quotes when it used more than one quote? {{User|Baby Mario Bloops}}
 
@LucariosAura Can you please use the form <nowiki> {{User|LucariosAura}} </nowiki> We don't need to know that You used to be specialK. -{{User|KS3}}
 
:@Baby Mario Bloops: Yes. That was the glitch that I was talking about in my vote. {{user|Bloc Partier}}
::@KS3: Actually, he doesn't have too - according to the [[Mariowiki:No-Signature Policy|no-sig policy]], he's allowed to do <nowiki>[[User:LucariosAura|XYZ]]</nowiki>. {{User|Marioguy1}}
 
@Baby Mario Bloops: We aren't going to use the template. We are going to vote on the quotes like the images for the FI, so 1. we won't get any bad quotes, and 2. this won't cause the glitch.
 
Opposers, Read the Proposal!!! Only Marioguy1 has a valid vote (and the ones that says per all). Which is 3. The Proposal says that we are going to vote on quotes on the page MarioWiki:Featured Quote . {{User|KS3}}
:KS3 is correct. He doesn't propose to bring the old template back that caused slowdowns. {{User|Time Q}}
::Not entirely correct. I do, in fact, have a legitimate vote. "Per all" constitutes a real vote. But I'll change it for you anyway. {{user|Bloc Partier}}
@KS3 that is my signiture by the way, and will stay like that for a while. [[User:LucariosAura|LucariosAura (used to be specialk)]] 09:35, 28 February 2010 (EST)
:I think this place observes the Non-Signature Policy {{User|T.c.w7468}}
::And according to the non-signature policy he is allowed to do that {{User|Marioguy1}}
 
===Bring back Weekly Polls===
We used to have weekly polls, and they are very good. We still have [[MarioWiki:Weekly Polls|this page]]. But instead of doing only one poll, we will be doing 3 polls. The reason why is because let's say the poll is "What is the easiest stage in Platformer games", and you only own Spinoffs and RPGs, then you can't answer the poll, while if you have 3, then you can at least answer one.
 
'''Proposer:''' {{User|KS3}}<br>
'''Voting start:''' 25 February 2010, 23:00<br>
'''Deadline:''' 4 March 2010, 23:00


====Bring them back====
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|KS3}} Per proposal.
: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|MATEOELBACAN}}- Per Proposal, I mean, They were funny :D.
#{{User|Zero777}} I am Zero! Although I don't know the reason why it was removed in the first place I will LOVE it if comes back, that what made the SMW fun that time and it will most likely still be fun if this pass (you notice I said love with all capitals, as most people know Zero NEVER used all capitals except for that one). Zero signing out.
#{{User|luvluv321}} Per proposal.


====Don't bring them back====
::TEST: <!---{{#if:{{a/list|SMB}}|
#{{user|Tucayo}} - Sorry, but no. Your proposal doesnt propose anything to make them better, they will fall into chaos again. They were rmeoved for a reason.
{{#if:|
#{{User|Time Q}}: Per Tucayo.
[[{{#replace:{{#replace:{{a/list|SMB}}|'''}}|''}}|{{#ifeq:{{{2}}}|l|{{PAGETITLE|{{#replace:{{#replace:{{a/list|SMB}}|(series)|series}}|(franchise)|franchise}}}}|{{{2}}}}}]]
#{{user|Reversinator}} Per Tucayo.
|
#{{User|Marioguy1}} - Per Tucayo, you can't ''force'' someone to vote on a certain poll, people will vote on any poll they want. The more rules there are, the more they will get broken is my frame of mind - I'm afraid this rule falls right under that category.
{{PAGETITLE|{{#replace:{{#replace:{{a/list|SMB}}|(series)|series}}|(franchise)|franchise}}}}
#{{User|Walkazo}} - Per Tucayo.
}}|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.
#{{User|Baby Mario Bloops}} - I see that you are still partly new. I think you want to see the main page as it was before all that got voted out, yet for good reasoning. The Main Page is better without this since it can be troublesome for updating. Per all.
#{{user|Coincollector}} - Per Tuck. It was chaotic and the poll system on the main page looked the portal so informal.


====Comments====
::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)
It got removed because it was too bustling with activity ONLY with that Poll page. I may be fond of the Poll of the Day, but we don't get it our way all the time. {{User|BabyLuigiOnFire}}


''Maybe'' if the whole poll process was completely revamped, it would be easier to maintain. But I still think it should stay off the wiki for the time being. -- {{User|Stooben Rooben}}
:So ask Porplemontage to tinker with the related parameter when that happens. {{User:Koopa con Carne/Sig}} 11:36, May 17, 2025 (EDT)
:Per Stooby. WHats with all the "bring back" proposals... I think people are getting nostalgic {{user|Tucayo}}


I am Zero! If this proposal does pass I think all the previous polls should be deleted and the page should start new and fresh. Zero signing out. {{User|Zero777}}
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>
also, {{@|Altendo}}, whatever your test did is messing with the automatic syntax highlighting add-on. {{User:EvieMaybe/sig}} 10:32, May 19, 2025 (EDT)
: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)
::Second test: ''[[Super Mario RPG (Nintendo Switch)|Super Mario RPG]]''


===Bring Back Soundtracks===
::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)
I was looking at the List of PipeProjects and found one that says that it can't pass without a proposal bringing back the Soundtracks. PipeProjects are important to the MarioWiki and makes it a better place. Besides, we have images, why not soundtracks???
::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)
 
:::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)
'''Proposer''': {{User|KS3}}<br>
::::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)
'''Voting start''': 2 March 2010, 6:30<br>
: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)
'''Deadline''': 9 March 2010, 23:00
: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)
 
::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)
====Support====
{{@|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)
 
:{{@|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)
====Oppose====
 
====Comments====
 
==Removals==
''None at the moment.


==Changes==
==Changes==
===Proposals Should End At The end of the day one week after voting starts (In GMT)===
===Move back from the "Multimedia:" prefix===
It's a really long title, but here's what it's trying to say. Currently, after proposals are posted, there's a 24-hour delay, and then voting starts. Depending on when the voting period starts, the voting could end anywhere from 7 to 8 days from when voting starts. I don't like this, because I realise that the times (5 p.m. and 7 p.m. I think they were) were adjusted for the GMT proposal, but now the times are 11 p.m. and 2 a.m. of ''the next day''. I believe the proposals, from the beginning of voting should end at 23:59:59 of the same weekday 7 days later. (i.e. From the proposal itself, +8 days and however many hours until 11:59 p.m. GMT). So, for instance, (for our purposes, let's just pretend that today is a Friday.) the voting for this proposal (it is currently 23:16, 23 February 2010), would end at the end of the day (23:59 or 0:00 depending on how you see it) of 2 March 2010, rather than 2:00 of 3 March 2010. I believe this would simplify the process a lot more, not to mention that the whole ending time difference was so it's more convenient for people living on the East Coast to vote for. I apologize if the whole "end-of-the-day" thing is confusing; I tried my best to explain it. Feel free to ask questions in the comments before and after voting starts.  
{{Early notice|May 22, 2025}}
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:''' {{User|Garlic Man}}<br>
'''Proposer''': {{User|Alphabetlorefan2003}}<br>
'''Voting start:''' 24 February 23:16<br>
'''Deadline''': May 29, 2025, 23:59 GMT
'''Deadline:''' 3 March, 2010, 23:00
====Support====
#{{User|Garlic Man}} -- Per proposal.
#{{User|Time Q}}: Sounds like a good way to make things much less complicated.
#{{user|Tucayo}} - Per Time Q
#{{User|KS3}} It should really be 23:59:59.99999999999999... . Per all (and proposal.
#{{User|MATEOELBACAN}}- Per all.
#{{User|Walkazo}} - Per all.
#{{User|T.c.w7468}} Per all, especially Time Q.


====Oppose====
====Media Page Supporters:====
#{{User|Alphabetlorefan2003}} Per proposal.


====Comments====
====Wario, the Opposers:====
Actually, there is no difference with the GMT time, proposals end at exactly the same hour. Sorry if I didn't understand the proposal. {{user|Tucayo}}
#{{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.
:He's proposing we scrap those ending hours and simply use midnight as the deadlines. I never liked how different days of the week had different ending times - it always seemed superfluous, and now that the conversion to GMT has pushed the weekend times into the following day, it's even more confusing. The proposal's example is a little hard to follow too, but if I understand correctly, simply put, Garlic Man is saying that the new system will be: "Proposal written on Day 1 at X:AB o'clock, voting starts on Day 2 at X:00 o'clock, deadline at Day 8 at 24:00 o'clock (which is also Day 9, 00:00); the day of the week doesn't matter." ...right? - {{User|Walkazo}}
#{{User|Xiahou Ba, The Nasty Warrior}} Per Jdtendo.
::Thanks Walka :) I udnerstand now. Seems a good idea {{user|Tucayo}}
#{{User|Arend|Multimedia:Arend}} Per Jdtendo, and my comments down below.
Yes, that is correct. --{{User|Garlic Man}}
#{{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...
:OK, this is kinda related - what will we do when voting opens? Remove the Voting Opens thing? Cross it out? Leave it as is? {{User|Marioguy1}}
#{{User|Altendo|List of Altendo media}} Per all.
::Uh, leave it as is. There would be no reason to change it. This proposal says nothing about changing it, so we would be unable to touch it. {{user|Bloc Partier}}
#{{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!


===Deciding Birdo's Sex===
====Kat and Ana Comments====
We had 2 Proposals about deciding Birdo's Sex (here's one) [http://www.mariowiki.com/MarioWiki:Proposals/Archive#Birdo.27s_Sex_Revisited]. This is an international wiki, not an American Wiki. In Japan, people call Birdo male, and in the US, people call [[Birdo]] female. I propose that we call Birdo he. Don't forget that multiple birdos appeared in crowds and in [[The Super Mario Bros. Super Show!]] In the [[Birdo (species)]] article, it says that it is common for male birdos to wear ties on top of their head. In [[Mario and Luigi: Superstar Saga]], Birdo attempts to be a girl, therefore Birdo is a man. And also per the old reasons.
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)
: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)


'''Proposer:''' {{User|KS3}}<br>
==Miscellaneous==
'''Voting start:''' 26 February 2010, 23:00<br>
===What is a game? 2: electric boogaloo===
'''Deadline:''' 5 March 2010, 23:00
Per some of the oppose votes on the previous proposal. I can understand not adding these games to the [[list of games]], though I personally do not think they should remain classified as merchandise, either. Because of this, I think these games should have their own spot somewhere, instead of remaining in a list/gallery that covers a wide range of things. I believe these games should move to a dedicated {{fake link|list of physical games}} or something along the lines of that.
 
(To note, I do not believe this contradicts the recent previous proposal, since this proposal is asking where physical games go, acting semi-independently of the original proposal, though I will temporarily withdraw it if it does contradict/overturn the previous decision.)
====Because this is an international wiki, call Birdo Male====
 
====Call Birdo it because of the old proposal====
 
====Just Call Birdo Female====
#{{user|Tucayo}} - She is a female, if "he" wants to be so, then we call Birdo a female. And no need to remove or move this proposal to the BJAODN, it is valid, I think.
#{{user|Reversinator}} Per Tucayo.
#{{User|Fawfulfury65}} Per all.
#{{User|Vellidragon}} - Per Tucayo and comment below.
#{{User|MATEOELBACAN}}- No, Birdo always has been female in mmy opinion, for example if she is "male", why she acts like the girlfriend of Yoshi? Why she uses a ribbon? Why in Super Mario Advance she has feminine voice? , simply the fact that the SMB2 manual, among others called she male; we cannot say that is male, What present game call she male?, also per BabyLuigiOnFire in the comments.
#{{User|Mr bones}} Ow come on!There's a lot of proofs which makes her female the ribbon,her acting in M&L:SSS,and like MATEOELBACAN said:her acting as Yoshi's girlfriend.
#{{User|T.c.w7468}} Oh please. Per all. Oh yeah, aren't the option titles a little biased?
#{{User|MeritC}} Per all; this case REALLY needs to get closed here, right now.
#{{User|Gamefreak75}}...-_-' Per all.
#{{User|Supermariofan14}} - Let me think about it... A regular man with a ribbon, a ring, a bow and a pink body?
 
====Comments====
Another issue dealing with Birdo's gender? Look, Birdo wants to be treated as a female, as she states in her description, so we better call her a "she". Besides, we're dealing with a single Birdo, Birdo, the character who appears as playable in spin-offs. Besides, does she look ANYTHING like a man? She wears a large, red ribbon, has some lipstick, has feminine team names, wears rings, etc? Besides, Nintendo wouldn't make transsexual characters anyway, despite their craziness. They always make genders obvious. Why should Birdo be any different? {{User|BabyLuigiOnFire}}
: This is Birdo's Sex, not gender. {{User|KS3}}
::Sex and Gender are the same thing. {{User|Reversinator}}
:::No, [http://www.who.int/gender/whatisgender/en/index.html not necessarily]. {{User|Time Q}}
:It's not my fault Nintendo didn't clear things up. The Japanese should start calling Birdo she if this should come up again. {{User|KS3}}
 
On the other proposal we agreed that calling Birdo an it was discriminatory. {{user|Tucayo}}
 
This looks like BJAODN material to me. {{User|LeftyGreenMario}}
 
''"This is an international wiki, not an American Wiki."''
 
No, it's an English wiki (English as in the language, not the country). In all the English games, Birdo is a female. Infact, I think Japan is the only country that calls her a he. {{User|Homestar Runner}}
 
What, this proposal again? :\ As I stated the last time this came up, calling a male-to-female transgender person "he" just because they were born male is offensive and nobody profits from it if we start doing that anyway. The gender issue is already being addressed in the article, I don't think there's any need to emphasise it like that. This has nothing to do with the internationality of the Wiki, but simply with what makes sense and what doesn't and what can be taken as offensive and what won't.--[[User:Vellidragon|vellidragon]] 10:17, 26 February 2010 (EST)
 
I don't see the point in this proposal. Proposals made on this issue have turned out in favor of calling Birdo a female consistently in recent times. {{User:Super Mario Bros./sig}} 17:16, 26 February 2010 (EST)
:Can we move this to BJAODN now? I mean, do we really need a whole proposal just for the gender of a character? {{User|Reversinator}}
::Um...this is the third one of that type...{{User|Marioguy1}}
 
Ugh, I wonder how did I make this proposal, but I regret it. Can someone help me move it to the BJAODN??? {{User|KS3}}
:This is not BJAODN material. You can remove it if you want to. {{user|Tucayo}}
 
If they call her "He" in japan,then we just add that in her gender in the infobox:(In japan:Male,other region female {{User|Mr bones}}


I am Zero! I think there should be a fourth section for refering Birdo as it or she. Birdo is a species and not all of them are female, but to the point: I think if it refers to Birdo as Yoshi's girlfriend or the game makes it a 100% clear it's female then refer to it as "she", but if it refers to a random Birdo then refer to it as "it", if users aren't sure then they could have a discussion on the talk page to see if Birdo is she or it in that section of the article. I don't think they ever refer to Birdo as male but if it does in the future then refer to it as "he". Zero signing out. {{User|Zero777}}
'''Proposer''': {{User|Nelsonic}}<br>
'''Deadline''': May 20, 2025, 23:59 GMT


===TPP Archiving===
====Create a dedicated list for only physical games====
OK, I was looking at the list of TPPs and I found that the list was taking up about as much space as about two whole proposals and that is way too much space just based on TPPs IMO so I decided that I would make a proposal to shorten it in one of three other options. Now, I heard from {{User|Reversinator}} that the rules say that TPPs aren't deleted off that list until the appropriate action has been taken (E.g. The articles have been merged) and I think that this idea is keeping it way too long, even if this quiets down another one is bound to arise because nobody is actually merging their proposal articles...
#{{User|Nelsonic}} Per proposal.
#{{User|Rykitu}} Per proposal.
#{{User|Rainbow Road Drifter}} These should be listed in a single article, and they aren't video games.
#{{User|Koopa con Carne}} Per all.
#{{User|Camwoodstock}} Our only wonder is if board games will be on this "List of physical games"; our board game coverage is kind of terrible at the moment. Even still, this definitely makes sense, and if board games can't be on "List of games" for not being video games, there's ''no'' reason various water ring toys ''should''--that should likely be split.


Anyhow, here are my three resolutions (and one non-resolution)
====Create a catch all list of games with both video and physical games====
#Move all TPP ''results'' to "Mariowiki:Proposals/Talk Page Proposals" and leave them there for all of eternity so that people can easily see where the archives of their TPPs are and not clog up the proposals page (though eventually we'd have to archive that page too after 100 proposals<nowiki>*</nowiki>). The proposals that have not passed/failed yet would stay in the TPP section of the proposals page but there would be a link off of there to the archives.
#{{User|Nelsonic}} This also works.
#The section resolution is to just remove the proposals when they pass and kick them off the proposals page so that they can't clog up space and this is the easiest of the resolutions. It will keep the list short and to the point and people will not be confused about what to do when they archive a TPP.
#{{User|Rykitu}} I like this option as well.
#The third (and final) resolution is to remove TPPs one week<nowiki>*</nowiki> after the proposals have passed whether or not the action has been taken so as to not leave them sitting for ever and ever. This will not clog up the page (though it will clog it up more than the second option would) and it would give proposers one week to merge their articles and then it is deleted off the page (though after it is deleted they can still merge, the reminder just won't be there). It gives users time to archive but keeps the TPP section short and simple.
#The fourth option (not resolution) is to do nothing, this is most definitely the easiest option but not the most productive...


<nowiki>*</nowiki>These numbers are up to debate in the comments section
====Do not move physical games from their current location====


'''Proposer:''' {{User|Marioguy1}}<br>
====The Comment Games 2====
'''Voting Opens:''' March 2nd (23:00 GMT)<br>
Don't you have to wait 28 days before a follow-up proposal? {{User:Camwoodstock/sig}} 16:04, May 7, 2025 (EDT)
'''Deadline:''' March 7th 11:00 PM
:{{@|Camwoodstock}} Yes, but I believe that is if the follow-up proposal contradicts or reverses the option on which consensus was reached from the original proposal. [[User:Nelsonic|Nelsonic]] ([[User talk:Nelsonic|talk]]) 16:07, May 7, 2025 (EDT)
::The phrasing implies it just can't interfere with a concluded proposal less than 28 days ago at all, not just if that proposal passed. Otherwise, if a proposal failed, someone could just.... Create another proposal about the same thing. Immediately. And keep doing that until it passes in their favor. {{User:Camwoodstock/sig}} 16:11, May 7, 2025 (EDT)
:{{@|Camwoodstock}} Understood, though I was trying to make a proposal on something that was discussed in the original proposal that, while it does relate to physical games, isn't strictly a continuation of the original proposal. I did title the proposal as a sequel, and it does continue discussion on the topic, but I was trying to figure out whether a separate list should be made for these as opposed to placing them on the list of games, since all that was decided in the previous proposal was to not place them on the list of games. I will withdraw the proposal temporarily if this contradicts the outcome of that proposal. [[User:Nelsonic|Nelsonic]] ([[User talk:Nelsonic|talk]]) 16:20, May 7, 2025 (EDT)
::yeah, this does not contradict the previous proposal in the slightest. should be fine {{User:EvieMaybe/sig}} 17:49, May 7, 2025 (EDT)


====Move to New Page====
Wait a sec...if there ends up being a separate page for physical games, shouldn't there logically be a third page for games that don't fit in either page? [[User:SONIC123CDMANIA+&#38;K(B&#38;ATSA)|SONIC123CDMANIA+&#38;K(B&#38;ATSA)]] ([[User talk:SONIC123CDMANIA+&#38;K(B&#38;ATSA)|talk]]) 08:30, May 19, 2025 (EDT)
:What games are there that fit into neither list? {{User:Hewer/sig}} 08:34, May 19, 2025 (EDT)
::I don't have any specific examples...but I'm sure there's at least one in the previous proposal (the big one with stuff like rides and water games (those MIGHT count for the "don't fit on either page" thing, but I don't know)). [[User:SONIC123CDMANIA+&#38;K(B&#38;ATSA)|SONIC123CDMANIA+&#38;K(B&#38;ATSA)]] ([[User talk:SONIC123CDMANIA+&#38;K(B&#38;ATSA)|talk]]) 17:36, May 19, 2025 (EDT)
:::Things that aren't games at all (such as rides) don't fit on any list of games. {{User:Hewer/sig}} 18:44, May 19, 2025 (EDT)
:{{@|Camwoodstock}} Yeah, I was gonna move the water games and other similar things over (if that works) if this proposal passes, since the resulting list would encompass all physical games. [[User:Nelsonic|Nelsonic]] ([[User talk:Nelsonic|talk]]) 16:50, May 20, 2025 (EDT)


====Kick off Immediately====
===Tighten the definition of "item" used by some games' subcategories===
#[[User:LucariosAura|LucariosAura (used to be specialk)]] 11:12, 1 March 2010 (EST) per proposal
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).


====Remove after one Week====
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.


====Do Nothing====
Games and series for which I believe this should be done include:
*''[[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.
*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.
*''[[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.


====Comments====
'''Proposer''': {{User|Ahemtoday}}<br>
I'm gonna vote later because I'm currently tied between two of my options. {{User|Marioguy1}}
'''Deadline''': May 27, 2025, 23:59 GMT


If we just remove them, then nobody will merge/split the said articles of the proposal and it will stay like that forever. If we put them all into an archive, then nobody will care about it and the same thing will happen. I could go with removing them after a week, but that doesn't seem long enough. Perhaps two weeks? {{User|Reversinator}}
====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 06:30, May 21, 2025

Image used as a banner for the proposals page

Current time:
Wednesday, May 21st, 12:09 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

Moves

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)

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 Animal Crossing (game), 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)
Give Nathaniel's Fun Factory full coverage, Nelsonic (ended April 12, 2025)
Split Kongo Bongo Island and Jungle Kingdom from Donkey Kong Island, Kaptain Skurvy (ended April 20, 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)

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

Based on the vote so far, this proposal may be eligible to close one week early. Please use {{proposal check|early=yes}} on May 22, 2025 at 23:59 GMT and close the proposal if applicable.

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!

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)

Miscellaneous

What is a game? 2: electric boogaloo

Per some of the oppose votes on the previous proposal. I can understand not adding these games to the list of games, though I personally do not think they should remain classified as merchandise, either. Because of this, I think these games should have their own spot somewhere, instead of remaining in a list/gallery that covers a wide range of things. I believe these games should move to a dedicated list of physical games or something along the lines of that. (To note, I do not believe this contradicts the recent previous proposal, since this proposal is asking where physical games go, acting semi-independently of the original proposal, though I will temporarily withdraw it if it does contradict/overturn the previous decision.)

Proposer: Nelsonic (talk)
Deadline: May 20, 2025, 23:59 GMT

Create a dedicated list for only physical games

  1. Nelsonic (talk) Per proposal.
  2. Rykitu (talk) Per proposal.
  3. Rainbow Road Drifter (talk) These should be listed in a single article, and they aren't video games.
  4. Koopa con Carne (talk) Per all.
  5. Camwoodstock (talk) Our only wonder is if board games will be on this "List of physical games"; our board game coverage is kind of terrible at the moment. Even still, this definitely makes sense, and if board games can't be on "List of games" for not being video games, there's no reason various water ring toys should--that should likely be split.

Create a catch all list of games with both video and physical games

  1. Nelsonic (talk) This also works.
  2. Rykitu (talk) I like this option as well.

Do not move physical games from their current location

The Comment Games 2

Don't you have to wait 28 days before a follow-up proposal? Camwoodstock-sigicon.png~Camwoodstock ( talk contribs ) Camwoodstock-sigicon2.png 16:04, May 7, 2025 (EDT)

@Camwoodstock Yes, but I believe that is if the follow-up proposal contradicts or reverses the option on which consensus was reached from the original proposal. Nelsonic (talk) 16:07, May 7, 2025 (EDT)
The phrasing implies it just can't interfere with a concluded proposal less than 28 days ago at all, not just if that proposal passed. Otherwise, if a proposal failed, someone could just.... Create another proposal about the same thing. Immediately. And keep doing that until it passes in their favor. Camwoodstock-sigicon.png~Camwoodstock ( talk contribs ) Camwoodstock-sigicon2.png 16:11, May 7, 2025 (EDT)
@Camwoodstock Understood, though I was trying to make a proposal on something that was discussed in the original proposal that, while it does relate to physical games, isn't strictly a continuation of the original proposal. I did title the proposal as a sequel, and it does continue discussion on the topic, but I was trying to figure out whether a separate list should be made for these as opposed to placing them on the list of games, since all that was decided in the previous proposal was to not place them on the list of games. I will withdraw the proposal temporarily if this contradicts the outcome of that proposal. Nelsonic (talk) 16:20, May 7, 2025 (EDT)
yeah, this does not contradict the previous proposal in the slightest. should be fine — Super Leaf stamp from Super Mario 3D World + Bowser's Fury.eviemaybe (talk / contributions) 17:49, May 7, 2025 (EDT)

Wait a sec...if there ends up being a separate page for physical games, shouldn't there logically be a third page for games that don't fit in either page? SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA) (talk) 08:30, May 19, 2025 (EDT)

What games are there that fit into neither list? Hewer (talk · contributions · edit count) 08:34, May 19, 2025 (EDT)
I don't have any specific examples...but I'm sure there's at least one in the previous proposal (the big one with stuff like rides and water games (those MIGHT count for the "don't fit on either page" thing, but I don't know)). SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA) (talk) 17:36, May 19, 2025 (EDT)
Things that aren't games at all (such as rides) don't fit on any list of games. Hewer (talk · contributions · edit count) 18:44, May 19, 2025 (EDT)
@Camwoodstock Yeah, I was gonna move the water games and other similar things over (if that works) if this proposal passes, since the resulting list would encompass all physical games. Nelsonic (talk) 16:50, May 20, 2025 (EDT)

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)