Editing Talk:Nitpicker

From the Super Mario Wiki, the Mario encyclopedia
Jump to navigationJump to search
You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you log in or create an account, your edits will be attributed to your username, along with other benefits.

The edit can be undone. Please check the comparison below to verify that this is what you want to do, and then publish the changes below to finish undoing the edit.

Latest revision Your text
Line 1: Line 1:
==Split the toy from the article==
==Split the toy from the article==
{{Settled TPP}}
{{SettledTPP}}
{{Proposal outcome|no quorum|3-0}}
{{ProposalOutcome|no quorum|3-0}}
This proposal is meant for consistency with the other toy versions of enemies being split from their main counterparts, such as Shy Guy, Snifit, Pokey, Monchee, etc. While they aren't outwardly shown as such in the original game, the Nitpicker is depicted as having metallic wing joints in ''Mario vs. Donkey Kong 2: March of the Minis'' and ''Mario vs. Donkey Kong: Minis March Again!''. The ''Mario vs. Donkey Kong'' appearance is a bit hard to make out, but it appears to be the same design used in future games. Additionally, the toy enemy is, to my knowledge, not referred to as a Nitpicker.
This proposal is meant for consistency with the other toy versions of enemies being split from their main counterparts, such as Shy Guy, Snifit, Pokey, Monchee, etc. While they aren't outwardly shown as such in the original game, the Nitpicker is depicted as having metallic wing joints in ''Mario vs. Donkey Kong 2: March of the Minis'' and ''Mario vs. Donkey Kong: Minis March Again!''. The ''Mario vs. Donkey Kong'' appearance is a bit hard to make out, but it appears to be the same design used in future games. Additionally, the toy enemy is, to my knowledge, not referred to as a Nitpicker.


Line 18: Line 18:


== Regarding the above ==
== Regarding the above ==
So, seeing that there are only 3 voters, it means we should wait 4 weeks to reopen the thing, right? --{{User:FanOfYoshi/sig}} 02:38, February 6, 2020 (EST)
So, seeing that there are only 3 voters, it means we should wait 4 weeks to reopen the thing, right? --{{User:FanOfYoshi/sig}} 02:38, February 6, 2020 (EST)
:To be honest, I don't think there will be be any problems if we just go ahead with the proposed change anyway - there was no opposition and it's only consistent with similar ''Mario vs. Donkey Kong'' series pages so I don't imagine it'd be controversial at all. You can always say that Doc's vote was in spirit. [[User:LinkTheLefty|LinkTheLefty]] ([[User talk:LinkTheLefty|talk]]) 09:43, February 6, 2020 (EST)
:To be honest, I don't think there will be be any problems if we just go ahead with the proposed change anyway - there was no opposition and it's only consistent with similar ''Mario vs. Donkey Kong'' series pages so I don't imagine it'd be controversial at all. You can always say that Doc's vote was in spirit. [[User:LinkTheLefty|LinkTheLefty]] ([[User talk:LinkTheLefty|talk]]) 09:43, February 6, 2020 (EST)
::Yeah, but the rules say that you should restart a proposal at least 4 weeks after the initial thing. --{{User:FanOfYoshi/sig}} 12:05, February 7, 2020 (EST)
::Yeah, but the rules say that you should restart a proposal at least 4 weeks after the initial thing. --{{User:FanOfYoshi/sig}} 12:05, February 7, 2020 (EST)
:::"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." {{User:TheDarkStar/sig}} 12:06, February 7, 2020 (EST)
::::As I understand it, "''no quorum''" only means that there is no formal motion to go forward with the proposed change '''or ''not''''', effectively nullifying the proposal. It's not the same result as opposition winning, and as we can see, there was/is no opposition: it was [[#Comments|pushing]] 4-0, and it follows an established precedent. This proposal might not have even been necessary in the first place given how clear-cut it is. Yes, there is the option of making another proposal as specified in the rules, but technically, I'm fairly certain it's treated as if a proposal didn't happen so much as a discussion to gauge support, which I think made it fulfill its purpose. [[User:LinkTheLefty|LinkTheLefty]] ([[User talk:LinkTheLefty|talk]]) 09:00, February 8, 2020 (EST)
I did not see the proposal, otherwise I would have supported it. The proposed change only seems logical. I'm partly to blame for burying you in my Play Nintendo uploads on the "recent changes" log... {{User:Bye Guy/Sig}} 09:11, February 8, 2020 (EST)
:::::Yeah, i guess we can just go with the proposed change. --{{User:FanOfYoshi/sig}} 11:25, March 4, 2020 (EST)

Please note that all contributions to the Super Mario Wiki are considered to be released under the Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported license (see MarioWiki:Copyrights for details). If you don't want your writing to be edited mercilessly and redistributed at will, then don't submit it here. You are also promising us that you wrote this yourself, or copied it from a public domain or similar free resource. Do not submit copyrighted work without permission!

Cancel Editing help (opens in new window)