MarioWiki:Proposals

From the Super Mario Wiki, the Mario encyclopedia
Jump to navigationJump to search
dessert1.jpg


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 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 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 {{User|User name}}.

This page observes the No-Signature Policy.

How To

  1. Actions that users feel are appropriate to have community approval first can be added by anyone, but they must have a strong argument.
  2. 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.) Each proposal ends at the end of the day one week after voting start. (All times GMT).
  3. Every vote should have a reason accompanying it. Agreeing or seconding a previously mentioned reason given by another user is accepted.
  4. 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 his/her own vote at any time, but the final decision to remove another User's vote lies solely with the Administrators.
  5. All proposals that end up in a tie will be extended for another week.
  6. 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.
  7. Any proposal that has three votes or less at deadline will automatically be listed as "NO QUORUM." The original proposer then has the option to relist said proposal to generate more discussion.
  8. No proposal can overturn the decision of a previous proposal that is less than 4 weeks (28 days) old.
  9. 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 Sysop at any time, provided they have a valid reason for it.
  10. 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.
  11. 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 PipeProject.
  12. Proposals cannot be made about System Operator promotions and demotions. Sysops can only be promoted and demoted by the will of Bureaucrats.
  13. 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.
  14. No joke proposals. Proposals are serious wiki matters, and should be handled professionally. Joke proposals will be deleted on sight.

The times are in 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 23:59 GMT, the deadline is the night of the Tuesday of the next week at 23:59 PM. If it is posted a minute later, the deadline is 23:59 PM of the Wednesday of the next week, since midnight is considered to be part of the next day, as 00:00 AM.

Basic Proposal and Support/Oppose Format

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 replace the whole variable including the squared brackets, so "[insert info here]" becomes "This is the inserted information", 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|[enter your username here]}}<br>
'''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>
'''Deadline''': [insert a deadline here, 7 days after the voting start, at 23:59 GMT.]

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

====Oppose====

====Comments====

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

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




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

  1. 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 "(Template:Fakelink)". If the proposal involved a page that is not yet made, use {{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 {{TPP}} under the heading.
  2. All rules for talk page proposals are the same as mainspace proposals (see the "How To" section above), with the exceptions made by Rules 3 and 4 as follows:
  3. Voting in talk page proposals will be open for two weeks, not one. There is no 24 hour delay between the posting of a talk page proposal and the commencement of voting.
  4. Talk page proposals may closed by the proposer if both the support and the oppose sides each have fewer than five votes.
  5. The talk page proposal must pertain to the article it is posted on.

List of Talk Page Proposals

New Features

Translator

Back when we knew nothing english about M&L:BIS, we had japanese names. Now, this kind of thing should be implanted: a Translator. Namely, a copy of the wiki in another language. Also, I'm proposing that if the user got the welcome message the user who sent it is from the same country. This way, the user would understand everything about the wiki without learning english. Also arn't we an INTERNATIONAL wiki?

Proposer: LuigiMania (talk)
Voting Start: 5AM, 3rd August, 2010
Deadline: 5AM, 10th August, 2010

Implant Translator & Country-only Welcomes

  1. LuigiMania (talk) Per....above and ME!

Implant Country-only Welcomes

Implant Translator

Don't implant anything

Discussion (Comments)

OK, I don't get the welcome-country thing but I really think you should talk this over with Porple... Marioguy1 (talk)

Hello, can someone change the time into GMT instead of AM? LeftyGreenMario (talk)

This proposal has came up every now and then, but why no change? I believe that our new logo shouldn't be Mario but mushrooms. There would be several pictures of different types of mushrooms,(this includes bee mushroom,green mushrooms,etc)through out the ages of Mario games. Each picture would be randomly picked for each page every time users visit the page. That way seeing the same old picture, every time you visit the homepage and any other page, is the thing of the past.Its the mushrooms the fans want and without it,Mario will be like any other platformer.

Proposer: Hyper1025595 (talk)
Voting start: 19:00, August 1, 2010
Deadline: 19:00, August 8, 2010

I agree

  1. BobombFuses (talk) I like the cutesy-eyed mushrooms. Oh, and Booderdash, mushrooms sound PERFECT.

I disagree

  1. Booderdash (talk) Absolutely not! That is the dumbest thing I ever heard! Seriously, mushrooms? The logo is fine as is. Plus, there was already 3 of these awhile ago, they all failed and I think this proposal should be deleted.
  2. Fawfulfury65 (talk) What? Are we going to die if we don't have a new logo or something (not to be mean)? This is completely unneeded, and you can just change it for yourself on the monobook thing (however you do that X_x).
  3. Zero777 (talk) I am Zero! NO! Even though I agree we should change the logo, I had a better idea then this, Per all. Zero signing out.
  4. T.c.w7468 (talk) I agree with changing the logo, but this changing-mushroom idea is overkill.
  5. Emperor Yoshi (talk) Well, the current logo is only a year or two old, and Mushrooms do not describe this wiki very well. Also, mushrooms are not major enough to be used as the logo of the wiki, we also were not made by Nintendo.
  6. Mario4Ever (talk) I voted on this when I first saw it two days ago, and my vote must have gotten deleted, so I'll just repeat what I said. This is the Super Mario Wiki, not the Super Mushroom Wiki. Therefore, the logo should have Mario in it. Besides, mushrooms are not what make the games memorable, and even if they did, we're here to provide information, not create logos just to appeal to a supposed fan-base. Per all, specifically Booderdash.
  7. Morgomir96 (talk) I'm okay changing the logo to anything but mushrooms *-*. Per all.
  8. LeftyGreenMario (talk) If you really hate the boring square, use a monobook. It's simpler than it looks.

Comments

Well, wasn't there a proposal like this one, two, or three weeks ago, so if I am correct in my assumptions, this proposal can not exist yet. Emperor Yoshi (talk)

Didn't someone propose changing the logo to Mario's head, and it resembled Starship Mario and was made out of puzzle pieces? Mario4Ever (talk)
Baby Mario Bloops (talk) - Did you guys know that there is a code for your monobooks that allows you to change the logo on the top left? We also can't start copying everyone's logos even if they look cool, that is not right.
You want a new logo, then make one and change it yourself. Mario4Ever: Yes. I proposed it too, but using a monobook instead was a much better idea. LeftyGreenMario (talk)

Its the mushrooms the fans want and without it,Mario will be like any other platformer. Any proof? I like Mario more than mushrooms. LeftyGreenMario (talk)

I don't recall ever wanting to play a Mario game based on the mushrooms it had, even Galaxy 2. If mushrooms were what defined the series, I don't think this wiki would exist. Mario tops mushrooms any day. :D Mario4Ever (talk)

New Video Page

I don't know if this is really a proposal (it is more like an idea) but why not make a page where Users can post videos of gameplay etc. I think it would be cool to show people new skills, action, and ideas.

Proposer:New Super Mario (talk)
Voting start:12:15, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
Deadline: 24:00, 4 August 2010 (UTC)

I like it

  1. New Super Mario (talk) I think this is a great idea. It may be a lot like youtube but, some people don't go on youtube.
  2. Koopayoshi (talk)That is a really good Idea!
  3. Mukumukuluma (talk) Per all.
  4. Fuzzipede27 (talk) The channel will be called MarioWiki:Videos and per all.
  5. BobombFuses (talk) Good idea anyway.
  6. WigglerWhoopin'Warrior135 (talk) Great idea! We could have rules on what content you can and can't put in videos (i.e. you can say "crap" but not any cuss words). If someone puts something offensive in a video people can flag it. If the video gets flagged sysops can review the video, delete it and give the user who posted it a warning.
  7. Iramatak (talk) Per all.
  8. Morgomir96 (talk) Per all.

I dislike it

  1. BabyLuigiOnFire (talk) This idea has been suggested before and opposed to. We have YouTube for this. Go to YouTube and upload videos there. If people also want to view videos, they shouldn't be here.
  2. Marwikedor (talk) Horrible idea to have Youtube videos on our wiki per BLOF.
  3. LeftyGreenMario (talk) I hate Youtube, though. Per all.
  4. Booderdash (talk) We had this before. Stupid idea. Mariowiki isn't as famous so it NEEDS a youtube page anyways. People can just create individual accounts.
  5. Zero777 (talk) I am Zero! That is a horrible idea, why do we need that; the SMW is not a chat/forum to share stuff on large scales. Zero signing out.
  6. LuigiMania (talk) Basically per BLOF. Though the OTHER one had 3 users vote for to have it, that (I think) was outmatched by 16. And my comment as well goes for a matter... (The LOADING TIME! Videos would more or likely slow to a browser time-out.)
  7. Fawfulfury65 (talk) If we do this, I will probably not be able to browse the wiki as much on my DSi Browser (it can't load videos very well). And per all.
  8. MrConcreteDonkey (talk) Per All. Apart from LGM, because I love YouTube. If people want to learn new skills, it's much more fair that they can find them out for themselves
  9. 4DJONG (talk) Well, we do not need a page of YouTube videos, we are not a social website, we are an encyclopedia. If we were to make a page like that, it would be decremental to our quality as an encyclopedia.
  10. Yoshi's Island (talk) Per 4DJONG.
  11. MeritC (talk) Per all.
  12. Tomz123 (talk) You could just have another window.
  13. Mario4Ever (talk) Per all.
  14. Dry dry king (talk)Per LuigiMania, Marwikedor, 4DJONG, Booderdash, BabyLuigiOnFire, Gamefreak75, and Zero777!
  15. Ralphfan (talk) – This is a factual Wiki. Link to your YouTube profile on your userpage, but don't create a page for this stuff.
  16. Gamefreak75 (talk) That would basically kill the whole purpose of this wiki.
  17. Frostyfireyoshi (talk) Per all.
  18. T.c.w7468 (talk) Per all.

Comments

I don't actually dislike the idea, but the idea of the video is not needed here. You should change the headers. BabyLuigiOnFire (talk)

Or delete this proposal and put the youtube videos onto your userpage. KS3 (talk)
@KS3: What makes you think those places allow youtube videos? I know ZW and youtube do and IDK about WK but I know UP doesn't. Marioguy1 (talk)

I am Zero! Would this be considered a joke proposal? Zero signing out. Zero777 (talk)

Seems pointless...and if we even HAD one, the loading time would go haywire...LuigiMania (talk)

Why just youtube though? Youtube is a worse source than wikipedia, and admins call wikipedia a bad source for things like release dates and the such. Booderdash (talk)

That's the only video site I know. There are tons of others out there. The internet is not only limited to YouTube. BabyLuigiOnFire (talk)

No, this is a horrible idea because there are A MILLION videos of Mario out there, and people will try to post a million different videos on the page; its just not worth it. Go on youtube itself and search it up. Booderdash (talk)

Set a day for the DYK section to be updated

The original proposer got his account banned and his proposal deleted because of that privilege. However, this proposal brings up a good point, that's why I'm reproposing this. It's just as exactly the same as the last one, just that I'm proposing this. What day shall we update the DYK?

Proposer: BabyLuigiOnFire (talk)
Voting start: 23:29, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
Deadline: 24:00, 4 August 2010 (UTC)

Set day for DYK section to be updated

Monday
  1. Booderdash (talk) Start of the week, perfect. Besides whats so "groggy" about it? Its just a DYK.
  2. GalacticPetey (talk) per Booderdash. it just seems right.
  3. Zero777 (talk) I am Zero! Per Booderdash, I was going to say Tuesday because of the same reason as the other proposal but your right it's just DYK, just a small section, it's not like the whole main page. Zero signing out.
  4. Ralphfan (talk) – Per all.
  5. Mario4Ever (talk) How long does it take to do it anyway? Per all.
Tuesday
Wednesday
Thursday
Friday
Saturday
  1. Fawfulfury65 (talk) Weekdays are too busy with school, most users can edit more on this day.
  2. Fuzzipede27 (talk) i agree with fawfulfury65. That or sunday is good.
  3. Emperor Yoshi (talk) Well, since weekdays have school, and most of our users are children, we should should use a day where they have the most time available to them.
  4. LuigiMania (talk) Per EY.
  5. MrConcreteDonkey (talk) Per all.
  6. Baby Mario Bloops (talk) - Easiest day as it is the day we are mostly free on.
  7. Morgomir96 (talk) Per all.
  8. Dry dry king (talk) per BMB
Sunday

Keep upgrading DYK section randomly

Comments

BLOF, you still have to describe it in the descriptions, so people who haven't read the old one can understand this. Booderdash (talk)

Saturday, the school-free day. Definitely the best choice for most users when summer is over. Fawfulfury65 (talk)

Not for everyone, I heard alot of people have school on Saturday too. How about Sunday? Or do people go to church too much on that day? Booderdash (talk)

I'm usually busy on Sundays. Also, I've never heard of anyone who goes to school on weekends. Fawfulfury65 (talk)

Are you serious? Most european people do, and asian people do too. Plus American people who want to be really successful in life do too, but those are like 4% of America. Booderdash (talk)

In America, you don't even get a choice as to what days you go to school until after high school (12th grade), so you cannot assume that Americans are unsuccessful just because they do not go on weekends. It also depends on how you define successful.Mario4Ever (talk)
To go in a top 10 college is my definition. But alot of americans are successful, I never mentioned that they weren't. Booderdash (talk)
Ok, sorry, but you did imply that 96% of Americans have no desire to be successful. Even if one does end up going to a top 10 college, there's not much one can do with a degree if factoring in the present state of the economy. I'm just saying that it's incorrect to classify a mere 4% of America of wanting to be really successful. I'm done being off-topic now. Mario4Ever (talk)
Here in England no-one goes to school on Saturday/Sunday. In France they definitely do, but only for half a day. Not sure about the rest of the UK and the rest of Europe. MrConcreteDonkey (talk)

I've never heard of that, I'm not European or Asian. But I did hear of very few schools that have classes on weekends. Most of the users here are from North America, though, so most of us don't have school on weekends. Fawfulfury65 (talk)

Still, though its a international wiki and some of our own sysops came from places other than North America. (Grandy02} Booderdash (talk)

Yeah, I heard Europeans don't go to school on Wednesdays or Sundays, but go there every other day, but then again, I could be wrong. People that have school on Saturday (in USA) are usually (not ALWAYS!) failing students. BabyLuigiOnFire (talk)

Not those people who are "nerdy" and work their buttocks off 7 hours a day. Booderdash (talk)

Why do we care who edits more? This is the DYK. As far as I know, its Steve who does it.Anyways, for Monday we get the pleasure if looking at it for a real week, Saturday is awkward and new users might get confused. Booderdash (talk)

"Not those people who are "nerdy" and work their buttocks off 7 hours a day." -_-' ReallY?

Saturday school is for those people who failed classes and are trying to earn credits in order to not have to retake the class again. Anyways, let's get back on topic, please. Gamefreak75 (talk)

What about those ace people who do extra work on weekends for extra credit to get a good scholorship to get into harvard or one of the top 10 colleges? But I think we can go back on topic. I mean its just a DYK.Booderdash (talk)

Removals

None at the moment.

Changes

Merge all sport moves for each character to their respective articles.

People have been asking this for a long time so I'll just put it here. All individual sport moves each character has like Iron Hammer should be merged into their respective article that the sport move is, which in this case is Offensive Power Shot. This will help prevent stubs and can make navigating alot easier. The main thing is to prevent stubs however, and most of them can't be expanded anymore.

Proposer: Booderdash (talk)
Voting start: : 7/30/2010 1:00 GMT
Deadline: 8/6/2010 23:59 GMT

Support

  1. Booderdash (talk) Per proposal
  2. New Super Mario (talk) I'll say yes
  3. Emperor Yoshi (talk) Well, the sport moves do not deserve pages because they are not notable enough.
  4. LeftyGreenMario (talk) Duh, I made a talk page proposal about this.
  5. Zero777 (talk) I am Zero! Per proposal and per all. Zero signing out.
  6. Dry dry king (talk) Per all. It would also be a lot easier to access. Once when I was trying to view all the special moves in Mario Super Sluggers, I had to click all these links to find them. So frustrating!
  7. Ralphfan (talk) – Per all.
  8. Mario4Ever (talk) Per all.
  9. Baby Mario Bloops (talk) - The users that did all those pages did a great job, but do we really need them? Sorry to compare them to the Mushroom Proposals I did, but they are stubs and are depended on their main aricles.
  10. Fuzzipede27 (talk) It will get rid of a lot of stubs.
  11. Morgomir96 (talk) Per all exept Emperor Yoshi.

Oppose

  1. BluePikminKong497 (talk) Per Knife in the TPP. It would affect much too many articles. also, if we already have a TPP, can this be deleted? I don't see any reason to merge them since none are stubs.
  2. Fawfulfury65 (talk) A great deal can be added to those articles. What does the character do when using it? What does it do? How do you use it? All that can be added to not make a stub and also make it long enough to have its own article. They work absolutely fine how they are now, in fact, hardly any one of them seem to be stubs at all.

Comments

BPK, yes, it affects too many articles hence why its now a MAIN PAGE PROPOSAL! It was bad in a talk page proposal because it affected too many but its perfectly fine for a main page proposal. Booderdash (talk)

It can make navigating alot easier. Booderdash (talk)

65: It's not only the matter of stubs; it's also the matter of how convenient this is. I find it very inconvenient because I have to keep on clicking on links. LeftyGreenMario (talk)

FA Archiving Policy

OK, there's been some confusion over the archiving policy of articles...anyways, I want to get a system down. I think we had one before but then there were several people doing the system differently and now I have three seperate versions of how to archive. In all three versions when a proposal passes it is moved to MarioWiki:Featured Articles/A/Article but when it fails one of these three options happen...

  1. Move them to MarioWiki:Featured Articles/N1/Article and then, after one month, delete them.
  2. Move them to MarioWiki:Featured Articles/A/Article and never delete them.
  3. Same thing as #2 but instead of MarioWiki:Featured Articles/A/Article, move them to MarioWiki:Featured Articles/N1/Article and then /N2/Article and then /N3/Article and so on...

And then of course there's the leave as is option.

Proposer: Marioguy1 (talk)
Voting Start: August 3rd, 2010 (19:43)
Deadline: August 10th, 2010 (24:00)

Use Option 1

Use Option 2

Use Option 3

Leave as is

Comments

Right now even I'm indecisive. All the options look good to me (except #2)...anyways, I'll probably vote soon but right now I'm leaning towards #1. Marioguy1 (talk)

I'm more or less new to being involved in the wiki. What's the current procedure? Mario4Ever (talk)

Miscellaneous

Revamp PAIR system

Not really sure where to put this... Anyways, some of you old users might know that we used to have a way to review articles known as PAIR. However, it was put on hiatus for some reason. It was a really great way to review articles for FA, and, due to the lack of good FA nominees latley, I am proposing we restart the PAIR system with a whole new team of users.

Proposer: BluePikminKong497 (talk)
Voting Start: 21:36, 29 July 2010
Deadline: 23:59, August 5, 2010

Support

  1. BluePikminKong497 (talk) Per proposal.
  2. New Super Mario (talk) Sounds great even though I haven't done it before.
  3. Mario4Ever (talk) Per New Super Mario. Revamping the PAIR system would ensure that only the best articles (quality-wise) get nominated, resulting in fewer objections.
  4. Dry dry king (talk) Per proposal. I have seen way too many unfeatures recently. If the articles could just be the best from the start, they could stay featured! Sure, there would be less featured, only the very best, but they could stay featured!
  5. Ralphfan (talk) – Per all.
  6. LuigiMania (talk) Per all.

Oppose

  1. Booderdash (talk) Old, not needed, fas are doing fine without it, and its too complicated to get it up and going. Way too hard to do, mainly only sysops will be working on this
  2. Super Mario Bros. (talk) – You say that you're going to revamp the system. How, exactly? Also, it didn't really work the first time, and we had editors just as dedicated to the wiki as the current ones. I just don't see it working.
  3. Baby Mario Bloops (talk) - May I just ask why we would need them right now? I have not seen many FA's that were not meant to be an FA. Sure a user is going left and right and nomination pages as if they were bunnies, but that is not a reason for PAIR reviews. And Booderdash is correct that it is way to sophisticated to do.
  4. Morgomir96 (talk) Per all.
  5. Lu-igi board per all

Comments

What are we going to revamp? (P.S. If this proposal passes, make sure the list thingy follows the No-signature policy. LeftyGreenMario (talk)

We're revamping PAIR. BluePikminKong497 (talk)
I know we are revamping it, but WHAT part of PAIR is needing a revamp? LeftyGreenMario (talk)
Pretty much all of it. You guys know how many articles KS# nominated.... BluePikminKong497 (talk)

...This is incredibly old. Saudy is there and hes been banned for more than 2 years. Booderdash (talk)

Thats cause its OLD. If you will do something as big as this, then you have to say what you will do to improve it. Tucayo (talk)

What about new users like me? What is the PAIR system? New Super Mario (talk)

Read this to find out. BluePikminKong497 (talk)

@Booderdash: Too complicated? I said i would start it all up myself. BluePikminKong497 (talk)

No offense BPK, but you're 11, you were complaining that you didn't know the rules on Tucayo's page that you were just 11, yet you can all of a sudden want to do this huge task? Booderdash (talk)
It's not that huge, and besides, your only 12, and age doesnt matter. i'm very smart for my age. BluePikminKong497 (talk)
I'm sure you are and as am I, but since you were complaining on how young you were on his page, I thought you wouldn't be up for this. -_-. Booderdash (talk)

Um, try not to pass judgements on people based upon their ages. It's not nice to say "You're too young" - if he's up for the task, let him do it. Marioguy1 (talk)

I know, I'm not stopping him, just wondering. Booderdash (talk)

I think this is like the third time there's a proposal to ressurect PAIR: Our current policy is "Do it if you want" - but you just can't force people to do it. --Glowsquid 14:54, 31 July 2010 (UTC)

Didn't it go on hiatus because nobody was interested in it? Fawfulfury65 (talk)

And it isn't needed. Our Fas are fine as it is. This is just like Narce's make Fa rules stricter thing. We'll have to unfeature most of our fas. Booderdash (talk)

Or we can just fix them so they don't need to be unfeatured. Dry dry king (talk)
@Dry Dry king: Or we can't do it just like Wikipedia since we don't have millions of people viewing it everyday, thousands upon thousands of users, and that anyone can edit!!!!! Also, not all nom's are bad, yes the KS3 (no offense KS3) nominated are not prepared, but not ALL of them. NARCE was just used to Wikipedia, and if we followed NARCE, then we would be all blocked for a year. I just saying, you can't call all nom's bad. Baby Mario Bloops (talk)
I'm not calling all nom's bad, I'd just like a chance to try it. I think it's worth a shot, and it doesn't seem too sophisticated or complicated to me. But then again, it's only my opinion. Dry dry king (talk)

Guys, the PAIR system isn't here to criticize the FAs, nor is it to make stricter rules. It's here for people to review how they are before they are nominated. Then we wouldn't have so many terrible nominations. Fawfulfury65 (talk)

I still don't see the need for this. For instance, if we had had this, many articles like Dry Bones, Sir grodus, and Shadow Queen wouldn't be nomianted in the first place, but since its already featured, when someone nominates it for unfeaturing people would say there's no need for unfeaturing, there's problems but it can be fixed, but when its in the PROCESS of nominating, people would oppose it for problems that can be fixed. Besides most votes are fan votes anyways. Booderdash (talk)

I don't understand your reasoning. I don't know why... This is just a way to review articles, and the review is optional for articles. Fawfulfury65 (talk)

I think this proposal is to make it nonoptional. Booderdash (talk)
No, the proposal is simply revamping it, bringing it back as it was before. Fawfulfury65 (talk)

 

Retrieved from "https://www.mariowiki.com/index.php?title=MarioWiki:Proposals&oldid=817197"