MarioWiki talk:Proposals

Proposals talk
Archive 1 (1-67) Archive 2 (68-101)

Welcome to the proposals talk. Feel free to discuss the proposal system, or get feedback on an idea before formally proposing it.

Identifier template?

A month ago, there was a proposal that aimed at removing identifiers from series that didn't need it. It was a draw at 13-13, and I do understand a lot of the points against removing the identifier, such as the fact that some people might think that a game simply known as "Mario Kart" exists. However, I did support the proposal, and one of the points that made a lot of sense was that it made it easier to link to the series page without pipelinking. There were some good points like having to remember which pages had the identifier or not, as some game series shared the name with the franchise. Therefore, I am going to give an idea (not propose it yet) on making a template (which I currently call {{ID}}) to directly link to pages with identifiers while the identifier is normally not shown visibly; not just for series, but for most pages with identifiers. This is my current code:

[[{{{1}}} ({{{2}}})|{{#if:{{{it|}}}|''{{{1}}}''|{{#switch: {{{2}}}|franchise|series|pinball|film|activity books|manga|Game & Watch|Nintendo Entertainment System|Game Boy|Nelsonic Game Watch|Super Nintendo Entertainment System|Gamewatch Boy|Nintendo 64|Game Boy Color|Game Boy Advance|Nintendo DS|Wii|Wii U|Nintendo Switch|game=''{{{1}}}''|#default={{{1}}}}}}}{{#if:{{{name|}}}|<nowiki/> {{#switch:{{{2}}}|Game & Watch|Nintendo Entertainment System|Game Boy|Nelsonic Game Watch|Super Nintendo Entertainment System|Gamewatch Boy|Nintendo 64|Game Boy Color|Game Boy Advance|Nintendo DS|Wii|Wii U|Nintendo Switch=for the <nowiki/>|#default=}}{{{2}}}|{{#if:{{{id|}}}|<nowiki/> ({{{2}}})}}}}]]

{{#ifeq:{{{it}}}|0||{{#if:{{{name|}}}||{{#if:{{{id|}}}||{{#if:{{{it|}}}|''|{{#switch: {{{2}}}|franchise|series|pinball|film|activity books|manga|Game & Watch|Nintendo Entertainment System|Game Boy|Nelsonic Game Watch|Super Nintendo Entertainment System|Gamewatch Boy|Nintendo 64|Game Boy Color|Game Boy Advance|Nintendo DS|Wii|Wii U|Nintendo Switch|game=''|#default=}}}}}}}}}}[[{{{1}}} ({{{2}}})|{{#ifeq:{{{it}}}|0|{{{1}}}|{{#if:{{{name|}}}|{{#if:{{{it|}}}|''{{{1}}}''|{{#switch: {{{2}}}|franchise|series|pinball|film|activity books|manga|Game & Watch|Nintendo Entertainment System|Game Boy|Nelsonic Game Watch|Super Nintendo Entertainment System|Gamewatch Boy|Nintendo 64|Game Boy Color|Game Boy Advance|Nintendo DS|Wii|Wii U|Nintendo Switch|game=''{{{1}}}''|#default=}}}}|{{#if:{{{id|}}}|''{{{1}}}''|{{{1}}}}}}}}}{{#if:{{{name|}}}|<nowiki/> for the {{{2}}}|{{#if:{{{id|}}}|<nowiki/> ({{{2}}})}}}}]]{{#ifeq:{{{it}}}|0||{{#if:{{{name|}}}||{{#if:{{{id|}}}||{{#if:{{{it|}}}|''|{{#switch: {{{2}}}|franchise|series|pinball|film|activity books|manga|Game & Watch|Nintendo Entertainment System|Game Boy|Nelsonic Game Watch|Super Nintendo Entertainment System|Gamewatch Boy|Nintendo 64|Game Boy Color|Game Boy Advance|Nintendo DS|Wii|Wii U|Nintendo Switch|game=''|#default=}}}}}}}}}}

Parameters include:

• it - If set to 1, it italicizes the name. This is just in case there is a formal name that I somehow didn't put in (yet). If set to 0, formal names are deitalicized.
• name - Adds the name loosely to the end of the linked area. For console identifiers, this adds "for the" between the {{{1}}} and {{{2}}} visible link. Adds the words "for the (console)".
• id - Adds back the identifier. While this sounds useless and against the point of this template, this allows formal names with identifiers to keep their italics without pipelinking just to add them only to the area outside the identifier.

I tested this out on this wiki using the "Show Preview" function, and they work perfectly; any mistakes I found were later fixed.

Here are some examples:

• {{ID|Mario Kart|series}} is a shortened version of ''[[Mario Kart (series)|Mario Kart]]''
• {{ID|Mario Kart|series|name=1}} is a shortened version of [[Mario Kart (series)|''Mario Kart'' series]] Edit: Crossed this out due to Porple's comment below.
• {{ID|Mario Kart|series|id=1}} is a shortened version of [[Mario Kart (series)|''Mario Kart'' (series)]]
• {{ID|Mario Kart|series|it=0}} is a shortened version of [[Mario Kart (series)|Mario Kart]]
• {{ID|Super Mario RPG|Nintendo Switch}} is a shortened version of ''[[Super Mario RPG (Nintendo Switch)|Super Mario RPG]]''
• {{ID|Super Mario RPG|Nintendo Switch|name=1}} is a shortened version of [[Super Mario RPG (Nintendo Switch)|''Super Mario RPG'' for the Nintendo Switch]]
• {{ID|Super Mario RPG|Nintendo Switch|id=1}} is a shortened version of [[Super Mario RPG (Nintendo Switch)|''Super Mario RPG'' (Nintendo Switch)]]
• {{ID|Super Mario RPG|Nintendo Switch|it=0}} is a shortened version of [[Super Mario RPG (Nintendo Switch)|Super Mario RPG]]
• {{ID|Super Mario RPG|Nintendo Switch|name=1|it=0}} is a shortened version of [[Super Mario RPG (Nintendo Switch)|Super Mario RPG for the Nintendo Switch]]

There are also some other possible ones, like {{ID|Super Mario RPG|Nintendo Switch|id=1|it=0}}, which is a shortened version of [[Super Mario RPG (Nintendo Switch)|Super Mario RPG (Nintendo Switch)]], but seeing as how that is basically [[Super Mario RPG (Nintendo Switch)]] without pipelinking, that is basically useless and in that case might actually make it harder to link than easier, while in the other cases, it is easier.

I'm open on feedback; I might open a proposal about this in the future. I also have some more convenience templates in mind, like a section template that links to the section and uses that section name as the link name without having to pipelink, but I'll focus on this first. Altendo 17:00, December 18, 2024 (EST)

I'd love having such a template. Super Mario RPG (talk) 17:04, December 18, 2024 (EST)

Keep in mind that the more things like this you have in the page source, the harder it is to bot link replacements since you're just adding more and more different ways to accomplish the same task of linking to a page. And template parameters don't work with LinkSuggest, but starting a link with [[ does. I know you can't pipe trick the "for the Nintendo Switch" ones, but for the rest of them, it's the reason I prefer to format links in this way (italics and second "franchise" outside the link): ''[[Super Mario (franchise)|]]'' franchise. --Steve (talk) 17:30, December 18, 2024 (EST)

That's something I am willing to change or remove. As for LinkSuggest, I wonder why templates like {{Peach}} and {{Daisy}} exist if so. Altendo 17:43, December 18, 2024 (EST)

@Altendo They were based on the Koopalings templates (e.g. Template:Larry), but those were apparently deleted because their shortened title proposals had passed. Odd that LinkSuggest has been brought up, since there's an ongoing proposal regarding its inclusion. Super Mario RPG (talk) 17:47, December 18, 2024 (EST)

In light of this template being highly supported, I might actually create this proposal. Altendo 21:20, December 23, 2024 (EST)

I made {{id}} btw --Steve (talk) 21:22, December 23, 2024 (EST)

Oh, okay then. Nevermind! Altendo 22:00, December 23, 2024 (EST)

Curators

Note that I am keeping rule 19 in mind, so this is more of a title, similar to but different than autoconfirmed. However, I do wonder what others think about the idea of a Curators title: Basically, non-staff members who are more experienced at handling content on the wiki so that newer users can notice some of the more established and recurring editors on this wiki. Because I've noticed non-staff members do large-scale projects on the wiki, but at the same time it feels there's more scrutiny toward newer users who attempt it. If the idea is approved, "Curators" could be a precedent to perhaps establish more titles based on a user's niches on the wiki.

On a side note, I wondered if there could be more clarity or distinction with non-staff who are formally authorized to give warnings on user talk pages. Super Mario RPG (talk) 09:49, March 21, 2025 (EDT)

This seems like it'd bring more confusion if anything. If editors want to discuss their niches, they can mention them on their user pages. Adding more roles just overcomplicates things. I also have no trouble noticing non-staff active users - I'm sure many others feel the same. And what do you mean by more "scrutiny"? This whole idea could just make new editors more intimidated to try larger projects. Technetium (talk) 10:01, March 21, 2025 (EDT)

Do we want newer users to try large projects? I got warned before for making sweeping changes. Super Mario RPG (talk) 10:04, March 21, 2025 (EDT)

Considering people have apparently had grievances with projects I've attempted, I can say that "newness" has nothing to do with it in the long run. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 10:07, March 21, 2025 (EDT)

I feel strongly that we should not discourage new users from contributing, even with large-scale edits; and that creating a higher class of user that is "allowed" to do large-scale editing projects would be a huge mistake. Ahemtoday (talk) 13:01, March 21, 2025 (EDT)

Hard agree. This would create a big barrier for new users to get involved with the wiki. -- Pseudo (talk, contributions) 13:07, March 21, 2025 (EDT)

It's also just unclear what counts as a "large-scale change". Consider the work we did on Wario Blast: Featuring Bomberman!, which basically doubled in size from the start of the year to now. But at what point did it hit "large scale"? Was it adding tables? Adding sample level maps to the zone pages? Adding basically double the amount of sprites and screenshots? What would you do after awhile? Do you just revert to a halfway implemented state and say, "come back when you're a Curator"? Do you revert it all? Do you permit it only if the edits were made incrementally, negating the point of being Curator if you just pace yourself? Even if the point is for somebody to check large-scale edits, that's part of why we have Patrollers, which is a much healthier system for that purpose. ~Camwoodstock ( talk • contribs ) 13:31, March 21, 2025 (EDT)

Okay, so I'll remove the talk template since there's enough feedback not in favor of it. Super Mario RPG (talk) 13:41, March 21, 2025 (EDT)

Archive

I am currently working on 2025's April Fool's Day archive page for BJAODN. Just thought I should probably mention this somewhere. Nelsonic (talk) 20:04, April 1, 2025 (EDT)

Dark mode issues

Trying to enter this page on dark mode and it seems like this page was not configured for dark mode properly, as it is hurting my eyes.

Can someone please address this? Thanks. -- PanchamBro (talk • contributions) 01:13, April 2, 2025 (EDT)

How does it look on your end? On mine, it looks like any other page in dark mode, with the only thing that's annoyingly bright being the image at the top. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 02:08, April 2, 2025 (EDT)

Judging by a Discord message they sent, this seems to be an issue exclusive to the Vector site skin, where the light mode background pattern will appear on darkmode. On MonoBook (the site default), though, the light mode's background pattern is disabled. ~Camwoodstock ( talk • contribs ) 02:18, April 2, 2025 (EDT)

Content advisory template

Per here and here, I think it would be a good idea to implement a template that warns readers of potentially unsuitable content. I made an outline of the template in my sandbox. Maw-Ray Master (talk) 03:39, April 18, 2025 (EDT)

I think that's a good idea too! Should we make a proposal about this? Yoshi18 (talk/contribs) 09:53, April 18, 2025 (EDT)

In theory I also think the idea is good. Its implementation per se would promote the idea that less palatable subjects are expected to emerge in discussions over a censorship-free information resource, and encourage people not to find such discussions inherently outrageous should they be initiated in good faith. (I like the screaming Luigi too, lol)
My question is, with how unlikely the Mario wiki is bound to approach such subjects, is such a tag really warranted? I don't foresee much application for it. -- KOOPA CON CARNE 10:40, April 18, 2025 (EDT)

Seconding KCC, in regards to skepticism for there being enough of a use-case. The only instances we can think of where this could be used in good faith would be the Super Hornio Section of List of unofficial media acknowledged by Nintendo, and maybe Shitamachi Ninjō Gekijō? It doesn't help that, yesterday on the Discord, someone shared they found another Mario-related wiki which had a "sensitive content that may be inappropriate for children" warning for... Birdo's gender. We don't need to tell you why that usage in particular would be a bad idea, right?? ~Camwoodstock ( talk • contribs ) 11:06, April 18, 2025 (EDT)

Yikes. When I brought up the idea in the proposals that Maw-Ray Master mentioned, I had not considered someone could misuse the template for pages that mention (or even slightly hint at) transgenderism. I guess it might still be sensitive to some people though (e.g. bigots). Still, I do think it's worth discussing about whether or not to implement a mature content warning template, but it's fair if some people don't want that in that case it stirs more trouble than it's worth (like say, more edit warring on Vivian). rend (talk) (edits) 14:31, April 18, 2025 (EDT)

I think some of the Super Mario-kun stuff could use this template. Nelsonic (talk) 13:33, April 18, 2025 (EDT)

It's a children's series in Japan. Technetium (talk) 14:33, April 18, 2025 (EDT)

I made a list of articles which could possibly receive the template. Maw-Ray Master (talk) 21:38, April 18, 2025 (EDT)

We... Don't think we enjoy this list that much, frankly. Running down our reasons against inclusions:

• We do not feel strong language warrants a "sensitive content" warning, so no Bob Hoskins, no Nintendo Kōshiki Guidebook Super Mario World as the nudity is only mentioned, no List of references in music, no Reptiles in the Rose Garden, no Princess Toadstool for President, and especially no mentions of Hell, so no Mario's Magic Carpet or Legend of the Crystal Coconut--Hell isn't even really a swear, it's a place. We've had many proposals about how foul language is perfectly acceptable if it's in the pursuit of accuracy; we don't think we need to, for lack of a better term, baby readers by alerting them that Bob Hoskins had a potty mouth.
• We don't think that King Koopa's Kool Kartoons being marked due to allegations against an actor in it makes much sense; not that we particularly care to put a disclaimer in the article for said actor in the first place, as it's not that much worse than Bob Hoskins in terms of intensity; sure, what Christopher Collins apparently did behind the scenes is a lot worse of a crime than just, being a potty-mouth, but explaining it is just as free an action either way.
• The majority of "List of controversies" does not really fit with this--the fact that the first entry is Birdo's gender identity, literally the example we cited for "potentially horrible misuse", is enough to have us enormously skeptical, and the only entry we can imagine really warranting an outright warning would be, at a stretch, GamerGate, just for the origin of that in particular, and that sounds fair... Until you remember that 4chan is also the source of a good few Mario memes, and the idea of labelling everything from 4chan is... Impractical at best. You could argue sections like "Animal Cruelty" could warrant it for gore, but it's no more extreme than something like the Anthology of the Killer section in List of references in third-party video games, which, when we asked about it in the Discord when first adding that reference, nobody seemed to think it warranted a notice or nothing; we can't imagine PETA's chicanery warrants it either.

This would once again leave us with just Shitamachi Ninjō Gekijō and the Super Hornio Bros. section. Even stranger, this lacks Super Mario (Kodansha manga), which honestly has an even stronger argument for it than Super Mario Kun does; albeit, that one still is targeted towards younger audiences, so that's a bit of a moot point. And with just two articles we could understand it being on--both of which, the content in question being limited to only a few sections, rather than the whole page--it begs the question of what exactly is the use-case for a template that will only be used on 2 pages, and only in sections for both. ~Camwoodstock ( talk • contribs ) 22:15, April 18, 2025 (EDT)

Agreed with all of this, Camwoodstock. -- Pseudo (talk, contributions) 23:09, April 18, 2025 (EDT)

I'm surprised nothing related to Donkey Kong Planet is mentioned in that list, given the crude humor it sometimes has. Heck, there was insensitive humor during the production of the DKC TV series before Medialab asked Nelvana to rewrite their stuff. Not that I think either entry should be listed, but still. rend (talk) (edits) 11:59, April 19, 2025 (EDT)

I... think if this were proposed, I would have to oppose it. I find few of the given use cases existing — I don't really think foul language is a good reason to put the template given that the swears themselves will take up far less space on the screen than the template will, and counting references to Hell under the template is stretching it really far. Others bring up a good point about misuse as well. In the end, I just think the template would be rarely used, fuzzily defined, potentially abusable, and... honestly, I don't even think making these kinds of value judgments is our job. We're here to report information, not decide who it is and isn't suitable for. Ahemtoday (talk) 22:29, April 18, 2025 (EDT)

Well, based on this feedback, I feel that we should probably abandon this idea entirely; a rarely used, vague, and potentially abusable template serves no purpose on this wiki, and the wiki's job is not to moderate information based on its content. Maw-Ray Master (talk) 19:38, April 19, 2025 (EDT)

@Camwoodstock I think Ask Uncle Tusk could probably benefit from this template. Nelsonic (talk) 17:09, April 19, 2025 (EDT)

Given the conversation has already resolved, admittedly, there's not much a reason to give our own two cents, but just for the sake of being thorough, having skimmed the article... Not really?? Outside of Uncle Tusk coming from a more mature game, it's no more crass than any of the usual 90s promotional materials tend to be, and "being from a video game that was rated M" has not stopped characters like Bayonetta from getting Smash coverage, or an absolute deluge of titles from being mentioned in the List of references in third-party video games, from being entirely uncontested in this conversation as "not worth giving a sensitive content warning". It's nowhere near the level of Shitamachi Ninjō Gekijō or Super Hornio Bros., for sure. ~Camwoodstock ( talk • contribs ) 18:41, April 19, 2025 (EDT)