| Latest revision |
Your text |
| Line 191: |
Line 191: |
| I think we should do something about the flood of comments on this page. Most of them are totally unfunny and just make the page ridiculously long. {{User:Time Q/sig}} 06:19, 6 September 2009 (EDT) | | I think we should do something about the flood of comments on this page. Most of them are totally unfunny and just make the page ridiculously long. {{User:Time Q/sig}} 06:19, 6 September 2009 (EDT) |
| :I agree. Originally the idea was to only have comments that were directly associated with the article, like the text entered in the deletion log by a Sysop or in the original edit summary. It never was intended as a place for everybody to drop their own comments afterwards. I think we should get rid of at least some comments, if not all of them. - {{User:Cobold/sig}} 08:10, 6 September 2009 (EDT) | | :I agree. Originally the idea was to only have comments that were directly associated with the article, like the text entered in the deletion log by a Sysop or in the original edit summary. It never was intended as a place for everybody to drop their own comments afterwards. I think we should get rid of at least some comments, if not all of them. - {{User:Cobold/sig}} 08:10, 6 September 2009 (EDT) |
| ::I agree, we should delete all useless comments NOW --[http://www.mariowiki.com/User:Tucayo Tucayo]([[User talk:Tucayo|talk]]) [[The 'Shroom:Main Page|<span style="font-family:font; color:Green; cursor:crosshair"><font>The 'Shroom</font></span> ]] 12:48, 10 September 2009 (EDT) | | ::I agree, we should delete all useless comments NOW --[http://www.mariowiki.com/User:Tucayo Tucayo]([[User talk:Tucayo|talk]]) [[MarioWiki:The_'Shroom|<span style="font-family:font; color:Green; cursor:crosshair"><font>The 'Shroom</font></span> ]] 12:48, 10 September 2009 (EDT) |
| :::As the old version of the rules said, comments that are nothing than "WTF is DIZ", "WOW THIS SUCKS" and "YOU GOT TO BE KIDDING ME" should be deleted, everything else, if it's funny or informative, should stay. But I guess it's too late to voice my views. --[[User:Glowsquid|Glowsquid]] 18:12, 6 October 2009 (EDT) | | :::As the old version of the rules said, comments that are nothing than "WTF is DIZ", "WOW THIS SUCKS" and "YOU GOT TO BE KIDDING ME" should be deleted, everything else, if it's funny or informative, should stay. But I guess it's too late to voice my views. --[[User:Glowsquid|Glowsquid]] 18:12, 6 October 2009 (EDT) |
| :::It was too full. We decided on #mwikistaff to remove them. Comments could go to the talk page if you really need them. - {{User:Cobold/sig}} 18:13, 6 October 2009 (EDT) | | :::It was too full. We decided on #mwikistaff to remove them. Comments could go to the talk page if you really need them. - {{User:Cobold/sig}} 18:13, 6 October 2009 (EDT) |
| Line 264: |
Line 264: |
| {{br|right}} | | {{br|right}} |
| == User commentary on sections == | | == User commentary on sections == |
| {{Settled TPP}} | | {{SettledTPP}} |
| {{Proposal outcome|gray|withdrawn by proposer}} | | {{ProposalOutcome|gray|withdrawn by proposer}} |
| <blockquote> | | <blockquote> |
| Commentaries by users are now '''''strongly discouraged''''' due to overload. | | Commentaries by users are now '''''strongly discouraged''''' due to overload. |
| Line 294: |
Line 294: |
|
| |
|
| ==User commentary on sections (re-proposing)== | | ==User commentary on sections (re-proposing)== |
| {{Settled TPP}} | | {{SettledTPP}} |
| {{Proposal outcome|green|allow comments 9-0}} | | {{ProposalOutcome|green|allow comments 9-0}} |
| <blockquote> | | <blockquote> |
| Commentaries by users are now '''''strongly discouraged''''' due to overload. | | Commentaries by users are now '''''strongly discouraged''''' due to overload. |
| Line 342: |
Line 342: |
|
| |
|
| ==Make a separate subpage for levels== | | ==Make a separate subpage for levels== |
| {{Settled TPP}} | | {{SettledTPP}} |
| {{Proposal outcome|red|do not make subpage for levels 1-7}} | | {{ProposalOutcome|red|do not make subpage for levels 1-7}} |
| If there's a subpage for games, why not one for levels? I've seen plenty of silly things on level articles, so I think a separate subpage for levels should be created. | | If there's a subpage for games, why not one for levels? I've seen plenty of silly things on level articles, so I think a separate subpage for levels should be created. |
|
| |
|
| Line 365: |
Line 365: |
|
| |
|
| ==Make a separate subpage for places== | | ==Make a separate subpage for places== |
| {{Settled TPP}} | | {{SettledTPP}} |
| {{Proposal outcome|green|split 9-0}} | | {{ProposalOutcome|green|split 9-0}} |
| I've noticed that quite a lot of the [[MarioWiki:BJAODN/Other|Other]] section contains quite a lot of places. My proposal is simple, we create a subpage for places and place all the places in there. | | I've noticed that quite a lot of the [[MarioWiki:BJAODN/Other|Other]] section contains quite a lot of places. My proposal is simple, we create a subpage for places and place all the places in there. |
|
| |
|
| Line 478: |
Line 478: |
|
| |
|
| == Allow section(s) for certain April Fools' proposals == | | == Allow section(s) for certain April Fools' proposals == |
| {{Settled TPP}} | | {{SettledTPP}} |
| {{Proposal outcome|canceled}} | | {{ProposalOutcome|canceled}} |
| This is something I've noticed twice now during April Fools (including this year's). Why is the main content of each April Fools' event archived but not the proposals? I propose that we also archive the various joke proposals as part of April Fools' on BJAODN (not '''every''' joke proposal that fits this category, obviously), though I'm also laying out two options for this: | | This is something I've noticed twice now during April Fools (including this year's). Why is the main content of each April Fools' event archived but not the proposals? I propose that we also archive the various joke proposals as part of April Fools' on BJAODN (not '''every''' joke proposal that fits this category, obviously), though I'm also laying out two options for this: |
| *'''Option 1:''' Archive as {{fake link|MarioWiki:BJAODN/April Fools' 20XX/Proposals}}. | | *'''Option 1:''' Archive as {{fake link|MarioWiki:BJAODN/April Fools' 20XX/Proposals}}. |
| Line 650: |
Line 650: |
| == The user comments kinda suck == | | == The user comments kinda suck == |
|
| |
|
| | {{talk}} |
| I've never been a fan of how comments are integrated among BJAODN entries, because it's often done with reckless abandon which causes them to blend into the rest of their respective entries. The comments, imo, should be more neatly incorporated; I was thinking that we should reach a consensus on a more suitable format for these comments. I'd personally favor giving them a forum-y touch, so my idea is to encase them in a cream-colored box, separate them with lines, and (where applicable) move each comment's signature above the comment itself, like so: | | I've never been a fan of how comments are integrated among BJAODN entries, because it's often done with reckless abandon which causes them to blend into the rest of their respective entries. The comments, imo, should be more neatly incorporated; I was thinking that we should reach a consensus on a more suitable format for these comments. I'd personally favor giving them a forum-y touch, so my idea is to encase them in a cream-colored box, separate them with lines, and (where applicable) move each comment's signature above the comment itself, like so: |
|
| |
|
| Line 720: |
Line 721: |
| :I'd be up for a proposal! [[User:SolemnStormcloud|SolemnStormcloud]] ([[User talk:SolemnStormcloud|talk]]) 18:05, January 21, 2024 (EST) | | :I'd be up for a proposal! [[User:SolemnStormcloud|SolemnStormcloud]] ([[User talk:SolemnStormcloud|talk]]) 18:05, January 21, 2024 (EST) |
| ::I understand the concern for readability, but I think these colored boxes draw attention to the commentary rather than the content they're riffing on, which the content I think should be the focus of these pages. {{User:Mario/sig}} 18:52, January 22, 2024 (EST) | | ::I understand the concern for readability, but I think these colored boxes draw attention to the commentary rather than the content they're riffing on, which the content I think should be the focus of these pages. {{User:Mario/sig}} 18:52, January 22, 2024 (EST) |
| :::Yeah, even before you added your comment I was having second thoughts about this addition. The post-it format fills up too much space and, although not garish, still hampers readability. The original format, despite its shortcomings, has the net advantage of being more discreet, and has endured for so long because there's seldom anything you could do to improve it without adding superfluous elements. (Wikipedia's BJAODN uses pretty much the same comment "system" except it seems to have a bespoke "reply" button.) I will admit: this topic was more of a stream-of-consciousness than a well thought-out and researched proposition. I decided I won't set up a proposal anymore, but seeing as though the suggested format still got some positive reception, I'd be okay with somebody else making a proposal in my stead. {{User:Koopa con Carne/Sig}} 20:12, January 22, 2024 (EST)
| |
|
| |
| == Misspelled Mario ==
| |
|
| |
| In the first sentence it says, “The bad jokes and other deleted nonsense archive is the fun and controversy archive on the super mairo wiki. Its purpose? To have the most bad works documented. for fun!” it said super mairo wiki. Please fix.
| |
| {{unsigned|BowserJr Ya}}
| |
| :It's written badly on purpose, indicated by the poor grammar. {{User:Mario/sig}} 22:58, September 26, 2024 (EDT)
| |
|
| |
| == Add {{fake link|Follow Toad}} to [[BJAODN]] ==
| |
| {{settled TPP}}
| |
| {{proposal outcome|cancelled}}
| |
|
| |
| Follow Toad was a very conjectural and speculative article that existed in 2006. It was quickly deleted and the info was merged to [[Toad|Toad's]] page. I believe the deleted article should be added to BJAODN given it's an example to not create articles based purely on speculation. This would have to be added by the admins since they are the only ones with access to deleted contributions but if they're game, I believe it'd be cool to see a piece of early [[Super Mario Wiki]] history in this article.
| |
|
| |
| '''Proposer''': {{User|Pizza Master}}<br>
| |
| '''Deadline''': December 5, 2024, 23:59 GMT
| |
|
| |
| ===Support===
| |
| #{{User|Pizza Master}} Per my proposal.
| |
| ===Oppose===
| |
|
| |
| ===Comments===
| |
| ...we don't think you need a proposal to add something to BJAODN. {{User:Camwoodstock/sig}} 19:53, November 20, 2024 (EST)
| |
|
| |
| <s>Maybe not, but this will likely be effective at garnering attention from other users.</s> --{{User:Pizza Master/sig}} 20:01, November 20, 2024 (EST)
| |
|
| |
| {{@|Camwoodstock}} You're right. I'll post a collaboration thread on the Super Mario Boards to get the ball rolling on this.--{{User:Pizza Master/sig}} 20:24, November 20, 2024 (EST)
| |
|
| |
| == Make a Recipes collection? ==
| |
|
| |
| I'm wondering if we should split off Recipes from the Items collection. There might be enough already there to warrant it, given how Vehicles is split, and I'm only going to find more BJAODN worthy descriptions to add as I continue editing ingredient and recipe pages. If we do split, the current description for Items ("Thought Trial Stew or Mistake were useless? See these!") would be moved to the Recipes collection, and a new one would be made for the Items collection. I'm kinda 50/50 on a split, but I thought I'd bring it up anyway. [[User:Technetium|Technetium]] ([[User talk:Technetium|talk]]) 22:30, January 25, 2025 (EST)
| |
| :I do rather keep the amount of splits to a minimum. I had some trouble revisiting older entries sometimes. {{User:Mario/sig}} 22:38, January 25, 2025 (EST)
| |
| ::Fair, fair. [[User:Technetium|Technetium]] ([[User talk:Technetium|talk]]) 22:40, January 25, 2025 (EST)
| |
|
| |
| ==Allow comments to be made collapsible==
| |
| {{settled TPP}}
| |
| {{proposal outcome|passed|8-0|Allow}}
| |
| It has been brought up on the Wiki Discord that in many cases, commentary on an entry takes away from the entry itself, especially when a comment is long, there are many comments, or if there's a conversation. At the same time, humor is subjective, and often comments like this aren't "commenting for the sake of commenting" and shouldn't necessarily be removed. So, what do we do when some users enjoy the comments and others don't? Well, we make seeing the comments optional by making them collapsible. This way, none of these comments have to be removed, but they don't have to take away from the entry they're commenting from.
| |
|
| |
| It would look something like this:
| |
| {{fake heading|3|[[MarioWiki:BJAODN|BJAODN Rules]]}}
| |
| *Also, newbie bashing is not tolerated. There is a difference between poorly written articles newbies are susceptible to '''makeing''' and something so cretinous and devoid of information that you become suspicious of the sanity of the writer. We only accept the '''later''' variety.
| |
|
| |
| <div class="contentbox mw-collapsible mw-collapsed"data-expandtext="Show comments"data-collapsetext="Hide comments">
| |
| ("''A typo in the rules for a page about bad writing? That's just... sad. And ironic.''" - {{User|Walkazo}})
| |
| :"''Actually, the original version of the rules [http://www.mariowiki.com/index.php?title=MarioWiki%3ABJAODN&diff=501558&oldid=482833 had even more grammar mistakes¸]... I wrote those.''" - {{User|Blitzwing}})
| |
| ::"''Yeah, I wrote that. Whoops. In my defense though, it certainly made more sense than what was there before;''"
| |
|
| |
| ::*Also, newbie bashing is not tolerated, there is a difference between poor articles newbie are susceptible to make and something so cretinous and devoid of information enough to makes you suspecting of the sanity of the writer: We only accept the later variety.
| |
| :: - {{User|Twentytwofiftyseven}})
| |
| </div>
| |
|
| |
| Now, originally my idea here was to make an objective guideline as to when to make comments collapsible (either all comments are even if there's only one, or only sections with more than 2 or 3 get them). However, I now think it would be better to just have collapsible comments be an option for people, just as adding comments is. That is, if you feel an entry would be improved with collapsible comments, you can go ahead and edit that in. But if a comment enhances an entry, then you can keep it as is. For example:
| |
|
| |
| {{fake heading|3|[[Black hole|Black Hole]]}}
| |
| Under the planet a [[Black hole|Black Hole]] can be found just in case Mario falls off.
| |
|
| |
| ("''Yes, we wouldn't want Mario living, now would we?''")
| |
|
| |
| So, to recap, if this proposal passes, editors will be allowed to make the comments on an entry collapsible, but this is entirely optional and should not be done for every single entry. It's just giving editors the choice to do so if they feel it will improve the humor of the entry.
| |
|
| |
| '''Proposer''': {{User|Technetium}}<br>
| |
| '''Deadline''': <s>February 12, 2025, 23:59 GMT</s> Closed early on February 5, 2025, 23:59 GMT
| |
|
| |
| ===Ready or not, here I come (Support)===
| |
| #{{User|Technetium}} <div class="contentbox mw-collapsible mw-collapsed"data-expandtext="Show reason"data-collapsetext="Hide reason">I'm a master, you see. I love sneaking and hiding so much, I just never stop! It WAS a hobby, but I kept hiding...and soon I was known as the Hide-'n'-Seek Cactus!</div>
| |
| #{{User|Tails777}} I myself greatly enjoy the entries of the BJAODN and I also enjoy the comments made by others. But to be respectful of the "Humor is subjective" concept, I believe having these options is important. Per proposal.
| |
| #{{User|Rykitu}} Great idea! Now my cringy comments I made from first joining the wiki will be seen less! (I thought Pirate Goomba was peak comedy)
| |
| #{{User|Arend}} I've been thinking about specifically this implementation from time to time, to make it easier to recognize and separate the comments from the entries... but that's kinda where it ended, so I'm happy someone else came to this suggestion. [[#The user comments kinda suck|Suggestions to improve the comments have been made before]], and while I like the idea discussed there, it ultimately makes the comments even more of a highlight, so a simple show/hide button would be more ideal.
| |
| #{{User|ThePowerPlayer}} Like the rest of the wiki, this helps keep the focus on the actual content and the user's interpretation of said content, rather than existing commentary.
| |
| #{{User|FanOfYoshi}} <div class="contentbox mw-collapsible mw-collapsed"data-expandtext="Show reason"data-collapsetext="Hide reason">Per all.</div>
| |
| #{{User|Mushroom Head}} <div class="contentbox mw-collapsible mw-collapsed"data-expandtext="Per all. Click to see the other reason."data-collapsetext="Hide reason">It's fun. Still, Per all.</div>
| |
| #{{User|Nelsonic}} Per all.
| |
|
| |
| ===Come out, come out wherever you are (Oppose)===
| |
|
| |
|
| |
| ===Comments on comments===
| |
| You can use {{tem|hide}} btw:
| |
| {{hide|show=Show comments|hide=Hide comments|content=
| |
| ("''A typo in the rules for a page about bad writing? That's just... sad. And ironic.''" - {{User|Walkazo}})
| |
| :"''Actually, the original version of the rules [http://www.mariowiki.com/index.php?title=MarioWiki%3ABJAODN&diff=501558&oldid=482833 had even more grammar mistakes¸]... I wrote those.''" - {{User|Blitzwing}})
| |
| ::"''Yeah, I wrote that. Whoops. In my defense though, it certainly made more sense than what was there before;''"
| |
|
| |
| ::*Also, newbie bashing is not tolerated, there is a difference between poor articles newbie are susceptible to make and something so cretinous and devoid of information enough to makes you suspecting of the sanity of the writer: We only accept the later variety.
| |
| :: - {{User|Twentytwofiftyseven}})
| |
| }} --{{User:Porplemontage/sig}} 12:07, February 4, 2025 (EST)
| |
