MarioWiki:Proposals/Archive/59: Difference between revisions
7feetunder (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
(Archiving proposal, 12/19 voters supported option 2) |
||
Line 969: | Line 969: | ||
:The problem with Spectrogram's argument is that technically, a gender-neutral term for a king or queen simply ''doesn't exist'' (as far as I know, anyway). The closest term would be monarch, but as I stated before, there's multiple types of sovereigns that count as a monarch (such as dukes/duchesses and emperors/empresses), not ''just'' kings and queens. Princes and princesses have the exact same issue, including the fact that these are also counted as monarchs. I hate it too, but there's simply not a gender-neutral term for kings/queens that covers ''only'' kings and queens. The simplest thing to do would be just to stick these in the Royalty category, like Waluigi Time said. {{User:Arend/sig}} 06:18, September 27, 2022 (EDT) | :The problem with Spectrogram's argument is that technically, a gender-neutral term for a king or queen simply ''doesn't exist'' (as far as I know, anyway). The closest term would be monarch, but as I stated before, there's multiple types of sovereigns that count as a monarch (such as dukes/duchesses and emperors/empresses), not ''just'' kings and queens. Princes and princesses have the exact same issue, including the fact that these are also counted as monarchs. I hate it too, but there's simply not a gender-neutral term for kings/queens that covers ''only'' kings and queens. The simplest thing to do would be just to stick these in the Royalty category, like Waluigi Time said. {{User:Arend/sig}} 06:18, September 27, 2022 (EDT) | ||
===Re-merge the ''Mario Party Advance'' "generic species representative character" articles back into their respective "species" articles=== | |||
{{ProposalOutcome|passed|7-12-5|merge English matches}} | |||
These were split a long time ago, and seemingly not by a proposal as I cannot find it in either archive. The justification for these splits were that saying that the "generic species" characters deserved as much individualized writing as the game's more specific characters, like Goombetty or Mushbert. I beg to differ on this. Many of these are the sole representative of the species in the game, which we don't use as justification to split, say, the single normal [[Blooper]] in ''Paper Mario'' or the inconsistent dividuality of [[Big Boo]]. With the recent full merging of the character/species articles for Birdo and Boom-Boom, this prompts further scrutiny. Do we really need a "[[Klepto (character)]]" article only about the MPA guy and not the singular one in SM64? (also Dorrie and Hoot ain't split.) It seems more like arbitrarily placing information of a random game's NPCs on a separate page, thus making it more inconvenient to read about the subject's appearances. | |||
There are two ways to go about this, depending on how one treats the inconsistent localization. | |||
# Merge all based on Japanese language-of-origin | |||
# Merge only those that match the English version | |||
This list has all that will be merged for both options: | |||
*[[Amp (character)]] to [[Amp]] | |||
*[[Blooper (character)]] to [[Blooper]] | |||
*[[Bob-omb (Mario Party Advance)]] to [[Bob-omb]] | |||
*[[Boo (Mario Party Advance)]] to [[Boo]] (treated as a random Boo of several) | |||
*[[Bullet Bill (character)]] to [[Bullet Bill]] | |||
*[[Chain Chomp (character)]] to [[Chain Chomp]] | |||
*[[Cheep Cheep (character)]] to [[Cheep Cheep]] | |||
*[[Dolphin (character)]] to [[Dolphin]] | |||
*[[Flutter (character)]] to [[Flutter]] | |||
*[[Fly Guy (character)]] to [[Fly Guy]] | |||
*[[Goomba (Mario Party Advance)]] to [[Goomba]] | |||
*[[Hammer Bro (Mario Party Advance)]] to [[Hammer Bro]] | |||
*[[Klepto (character)]] to [[Klepto]] | |||
*[[Koopa (Mario Party Advance)]] to [[Koopa Troopa]] | |||
*[[Lakitu (character)]] to [[Lakitu]] | |||
*[[Lantern Ghost (character)]] to [[Lantern Ghost]] | |||
*[[Mechakoopa (character)]] to [[Mechakoopa]] | |||
*[[Monty Mole (character)]] to [[Monty Mole]] | |||
*[[Mouser (Mario Party Advance)]] to [[Little Mouser]] (their name was all over the place at the time) | |||
*[[Mr. Blizzard (character)]] to [[Mr. Blizzard]] | |||
*[[Mr. I (character)]] to [[Mr. I]] | |||
*[[Ninji (character)]] to [[Ninji]] | |||
*[[Paratroopa (character)]] to [[Koopa Paratroopa]] | |||
*[[Penguin (character)]] to [[Penguin]] | |||
*[[Petal Guy (character)]] to [[Petal Guy]] (retroactive(?) name change) | |||
*[[Piranha Plant (character)]] to [[Piranha Plant]] (this one isn't even a character, it's a random plant) | |||
*[[Pokey (character)]] to [[Pokey]] | |||
*[[Shy Guy (Mario Party Advance)]] to [[Shy Guy]] | |||
*[[Snifit (character)]] to [[Snifit]] | |||
*[[Spear Guy (character)]] to [[Spear Guy]] | |||
*[[Sushi (character)]] to [[Sushi]] | |||
*[[Thwomp (character)]] to [[Thwomp]] | |||
*[[Toady (character)]] to [[Toady]] | |||
*[[Ukiki (character)]] to [[Ukiki]] | |||
*[[Whomp (character)]] to [[Whomp]] | |||
This list has only ones that would be merged with option 1: | |||
*[[Bob-omba]] to [[Bob-omb Buddy]] | |||
*[[Goombob]] to [[Galoomba]] | |||
*[[Hulu]] to [[Bamboo dancers]] (keeping the original page name per source priority exception) | |||
Naturally, [[Kamek]] and [[Toad]] are exempt due to their more complicated situations. | |||
'''Proposer''': {{user|Doc von Schmeltwick}}<br> | |||
'''Deadline''': September 29, 2022, 23:59 GMT | |||
====Option 1: Merge all==== | |||
#{{user|Doc von Schmeltwick}} - per | |||
#{{User|Ray Trace}} Per all, all information specific to the Advance characters can easily fit into the page and the piping generally is a nightmare for these articles. | |||
#{{user|Koopa con Carne}} Per all | |||
#{{user|Wikiboy10}} This has been an idea for quite a while, and it's about time we finally do it. A character referred to singularly is quite common in many games. ''Mario Party Advance'' doesn't do much on their personality. Not too much different from the ''[[Mario Baseball (series)|Mario Baseball]]'' games, where some enemies have personalities but still keep the names of their original species. | |||
#{{user|7feetunder}} We merged the Wigglers from ''Sticker Star'' and ''Paper Jam'' despite them being pretty notable characters in their respective games. I fail to see how these are any different than that. ''TOK'' Bob-omb isn't the only Bob-omb in the game, and he has a distinct personality, backstory, and character arc, so his article's existence does not justify keeping these split. | |||
#{{User|Arend}} Keeping these split would mean we'd have to split the ''[[Mario Party DS]]'' versions of [[Piranha Plant]], [[Hammer Bro]], [[Dry Bones]], [[Wiggler]], and [[Koopa Troopa]] from their respective species (all of which are separate characters in MPDS's story mode), as well as the Koopa Troopa from ''[[Mario Party]]'' and ''[[Mario Party Superstars]]'' (which may also be the same Koopa Troopa from the Koopa Bank in ''[[Mario Party 2]]'' and ''[[Mario Party 3]]''; if not, that Koopa Troopa needs to be split as well). A lot of these are minor characters, and a lot of the above listed NPCs from ''Mario Part Advance'' are even MORE minor than any characters I just mentioned, so I don't see why these should be split. | |||
#{{User|LinkTheLefty}} Siding with this for now. | |||
====Option 2: Just merge English matches==== | |||
#{{user|Spectrogram}} They are officially named NPCs, most if not all minor NPCs with an official name deserve an article. | |||
#{{user|Killer Moth}} Per Spectrogram. The minor NPCs that are named should have an article. But the ones that are unnamed do not need there own article especially since it would be more coinvent to cover their information on their species page. | |||
#{{User|7feetunder}} Second choice. | |||
#{{User|Hewer}} Second option - if we're going to merge then I think we should at least stick to the [[MarioWiki:Minor NPCs|rule]] of giving named NPCs pages. | |||
#{{User|Arend}} Secondary choice; mostly because they have distinct names in English and Hulu is by all means a Dancing Spear Guy which Japanese name just so happens to be the same as that of the Bamboo dancers. The rest should be merged as per my primary choice. | |||
#{{User|Tails777}} Primary choice, since these examples have actual names and if pretty much every Toad in ''Paper Mario'' can have their own articles due to having names, so can these guys. | |||
#{{User|TheFlameChomp}} Per all. I think it makes sense to merge many of these articles, as I do feel that this a comparable situation to the ''Sticker Star'' and ''Paper Jam'' Wigglers mentioned by 7feetunder. However, I do feel that merging the uniquely named characters might be more likely to violate the [[MarioWiki:Minor NPCs|minor NPCs]] policy, as they are officially given their own names, even if it is true that the Japanese version does not share that trait. | |||
#{{User|Waluigi Time}} Per TheFlameChomp. | |||
#{{User|Swallow}} Started to realise my oppose reasoning was a bit crap so per all here. | |||
#{{User|Archivist Toadette}} I'm fine with this option too. | |||
#{{User|ThePowerPlayer}} Per [[MarioWiki:Minor NPCs]]. | |||
#{{User|SmokedChili}} Per all. | |||
====Do nothing==== | |||
#{{User|Spectrogram}} Second option, I think they're fine on their own. | |||
#{{User|Archivist Toadette}} They're still named NPCs (even if it is their species name), so there's no reason to merge them. | |||
#{{User|Hewer}} It would feel inconsistent to merge just the generically-named ones when their notability is basically identical to that of the uniquely-named ones, and since named NPCs always get split I think this is still the most consistent option. | |||
#{{User|Somethingone}} Per all. | |||
#{{user|WildWario}} Per all. | |||
<del>{{User|Swallow}} Per all. We've even been splitting minor conjectually named NPCs from other games ([[Attack Piece Toad|one example]], my attempt to merge [[Ruddy Road Paint Guy|this one]] failed). Not sure if this is the best comparison, but [[Bob-omb (Paper Mario: The Origami King)]] was also split despite sharing the name as its species and looks exactly like one too, even if he is more of a major character.</del> | |||
====Comments==== | |||
So is Akiki going to get merged? I think it's okay to leave the named ones split while the generic ones are merged. {{User:Bazooka Mario/sig}} 04:56, September 23, 2022 (EDT) | |||
:I was going to assume it stays put like Goombetty, but that's a good question since Akiki's Japanese name is based on ''Super Mario 64'''s "bad" Ukkiki. Maybe that begs a closer look. Also, is Hulu unique enough to stand on her own? Bamboo dancer'''s''' always come in pairs, whereas Hulu is clearly a single one. [[User:LinkTheLefty|LinkTheLefty]] ([[User talk:LinkTheLefty|talk]]) 08:06, September 23, 2022 (EDT) | |||
::Ones I didn't list stay put, though I didn't realize "Wakiki" had any basis. Since that one's a bit spotty, we can deal with it later. As for Hulu, no more than paired vs singular Hammer Bros., I'd say. [[User:Doc von Schmeltwick|Doc von Schmeltwick]] ([[User talk:Doc von Schmeltwick|talk]]) 09:50, September 23, 2022 (EDT) | |||
@Opposition: You're forgetting that many of these appear by themselves rather than together with other generic members of the same species. In fact, checking the screenshot in the Piranha Plant character article in particular, even when it appears in a field of other Piranha Plants, it's referred to as "a" random Piranha Plant, not Piranha Plant by name. <small>Merging the solo members would probably be a decent follow-up proposal if this fails.</small> [[User:LinkTheLefty|LinkTheLefty]] ([[User talk:LinkTheLefty|talk]]) 09:43, September 23, 2022 (EDT) | |||
:Also apparently ignoring the example of <tt>"Many of these are the sole representative of the species in the game, which we don't use as justification to split, say, the single normal Blooper in Paper Mario or the inconsistent dividuality of Big Boo"</tt> I used, along with the also-mentioned Birdo and Boom-Boom (and Koopa Kid and Dorrie) situation. On that note, how about the various individual "Mega" bosses in later MP games we list with the standard "Big" counterparts, the '''playable''' generic singular enemies in ''many'' spinoffs (including ''Party''), and the seemingly recurring Shy Away in SMRPG? I still fail to see why they can be merged but these minor NPCs with no outstanding characteristics (no, "likes a TV show" is not an "outstanding characteristic") from a completely random game get splitting priority. TOK's Bob-omb was at least a major cast member. These guys are practically incidental. [[User:Doc von Schmeltwick|Doc von Schmeltwick]] ([[User talk:Doc von Schmeltwick|talk]]) 13:19, September 23, 2022 (EDT) | |||
:I'm not voting to merge them all just because some of them are more generic than others. [[User:Spectrogram|Spectrogram]] ([[User talk:Spectrogram|talk]]) 14:58, September 23, 2022 (EDT) | |||
::One thing also worth noting is that the Bullet Bill and Mechakoopa characters are shown to be capable of speech, despite the fact that this goes completely contrary to nearly all other portrayals of common Bullet Bills and Mechakoopas. {{User:Archivist Toadette/sig}} 17:44, September 23, 2022 (EDT) | |||
On another note, if the proposal fails, [[Lakitu (character)]] would possibly have to be moved to {{fake link|Lakitu (Mario Party Advance)}} anyway. [[Talk:Fishin' Lakitu#Move Mario Kart series information back to this page|A current proposal regarding Fishin' Lakitu in Mario Kart]] has an option to create an article for {{fake link|Lakitu (referee)}} and move the Mario Kart information there. The Lakitu referee from ''Mario Kart'' is one of the most well-known depictions of Lakitu in the entire Mario series, so when visitors see "[[Lakitu (character)]], they might probably think of the Mario Kart iteration first, and ''not'' of a minor NPC that only appeared in ''Mario Party Advance''. In fact, to avoid general confusion, perhaps all of these NPCs would have to use the (Mario Party Advance) identifier over the (character) one. {{User:Arend/sig}} 08:20, September 24, 2022 (EDT) | |||
@Arend: The [[Koopa (Mario Party DS)|Koopa]] from Mario Party DS ''is'' split, as are the [[Koopa Troopa (Mario Party 4)|Koopa Troopa]], [[Shy Guy (Mario Party 4)|Shy Guy]], [[Boo (Mario Party 4)|Boo]], and [[Goomba (Mario Party 4)|Goomba]] from Mario Party 4, plus other similar cases like [[Goomba (Super Mario RPG: Legend of the Seven Stars character)]] and [[Goomba (Super Paper Mario character)]], so it's not like Mario Party Advance is the only game for which we have NPCs split like this as you're making it out to be (also side note I was actually planning on a proposal to split the MPDS Wiggler before this one started). {{User:Hewer/sig}} 09:05, September 24, 2022 (EDT) | |||
:The SMRPG one is a localization blunder, and I plan on getting to MPDS Koopa some time. The MP4 hosts may be distinct enough. [[User:Doc von Schmeltwick|Doc von Schmeltwick]] ([[User talk:Doc von Schmeltwick|talk]]) 09:13, September 24, 2022 (EDT) | |||
For those wondering, the ones covered by option 1 but not option 2 would say along the lines of "a [species], localized in English as [name], appears in ''Mario Party Advance''" (and honestly, "Goombob" may easily be an early attempt to rename SMW Goombas before "Galoomba" stuck; note how the '''Italian''' names are the same as each other too, and this situation seems to be exactly what happened for [[Petal Guy]], formerly Mufti Guy). Also, "bamboo dancer" is certainly not a coincidence (and considering Spear Guy had an alternate JP name for PM64, it's not much of a stretch for bamboo dancer to have been an alternate name for Dancing Spear Guy that didn't stick, but that's a separate discussion). [[User:Doc von Schmeltwick|Doc von Schmeltwick]] ([[User talk:Doc von Schmeltwick|talk]]) 13:58, September 26, 2022 (EDT) |
Revision as of 16:46, September 30, 2022
Decide how to cover Mario Kart Tour bonus challenges on course articlesTemplate:ProposalOutcome The layout of each bonus challenge in Mario Kart Tour (e.g. Ring Race) depends on the course in which it is set. It tracks, therefore, that these challenges should be covered in detail on their relevant course articles in addition to their parent article. If you wish to see how a course article would look with coverage of its bonus challenges, scroll down to the "Mario Kart Tour" section in the "History" section here. However, bonus challenges have been observed to appear multiple times across the game's tours, sometimes with changed objectives, which prompts wiki users to regularly update their list entries. Simply copying and pasting these entries onto another article would make it more difficult for users to be aware of which needs to be updated where. On the other hand, adding a way to transclude entire entries (allow information entered on a page to be automatically transferred to another) would spaghettify the original code and potentially deter users from updating it with new information. For instance, this is how the code for an average bonus challenge entry currently looks: |- |[[File:MKT Tour1 YoshiCupChallenge.png|200px]] |[[New York Minute]] |[[File:MKT Icon Yoshi.png|50px]]<br>[[Yoshi]] |[[File:MKT Icon PipeFrameLimeGreen.png|50px]]<br>[[Pipe Frame]] |[[File:MKT Icon SuperGliderLimeGreen.png|50px]]<br>[[Super Glider]] | *5 *8 *12 |[[New York Tour]] (source: Do Jump Boosts article) and this is how it would look with a transclusion mechanism in place: <onlyinclude>{{#ifeq:{{{transcludesection|Do Jump Boosts New York Minute}}}|Do Jump Boosts New York Minute| {{!}}- {{!}}[[File:MKT Tour1 YoshiCupChallenge.png|200px]] {{!}} {{#ifeq:{{PAGENAME}}|Do Jump Boosts|[[New York Minute]]|Regular}} {{!}}[[File:MKT Icon Yoshi.png|50px]]<br>[[Yoshi]] {{!}}[[File:MKT Icon PipeFrameLimeGreen.png|50px]]<br>[[Pipe Frame]] {{!}}[[File:MKT Icon SuperGliderLimeGreen.png|50px]]<br>[[Super Glider]] {{!}} *5 *8 *12 {{!}}[[New York Tour]]}}</onlyinclude> A bit ugly, innit? On average, this would only save a small number of bytes on the target article--less than 100, really. Picture, now, an entire table with the same code plastered repeatedly. I believe the wiki should account for editor friendliness too, especially when the returns of optimisation are disappointing. I am not sure how to proceed here. I am unwilling to go ahead with either option unless I have a clear-cut vision of each one's net advantages. I will thus be resorting to the community's choice. Proposer: Koopa con Carne (talk) Copy-paste table sectionsTransclude sections
Leave as is (bonus challenges will continue to be listed in image galleries)
CommentsMario Kart Tour's tables tend to be pretty sloppy overall (no offense but this ranked cup table is rather monstrous though other tables don't fare much better) though I'm not really understanding this proposal. Probably repetitive content? Maybe the table format just isn't suitable for this sort of thing? It's me, Mario! (Talk / Stalk) 10:55, June 9, 2022 (EDT)
Do not use Mario + Rabbids "introductory taglines" as top quotes in articlesTemplate:ProposalOutcome The main reason I am proposing this is because in every one of these pages, not only is the tagline used as the page's top quote, but that same tagline also appears in two other areas of the same article: the splash screen image and statboxes, the former of which is often towards the top as well. To me, it makes it look like we're forcing these onto readers by having it as a quote as well, especially on the Rabbid Kong article which uses that and another quote. If Mario + Rabbids Sparks of Hope does this as well, then this proposal will also apply with that game's subjects. Proposer: Swallow (talk) Support
OpposeCommentsNot really sure this needs to be a proposal to be honest, I think we can just use discretion to remove them if they're already displayed elsewhere. -- Too Bad! Waluigi Time! 13:27, July 17, 2022 (EDT)
Stop considering reissues to be a reference to the original game and vice versaTemplate:ProposalOutcome This issue is something that is somewhat bothering me. On the Super Mario Wiki, a reference is when something unique in a previous game returns in a later one. For example, the Super Mario Bros. 2 ground theme in later Mario games references that game. We know that because, unlike the ground theme from SMB1, it isn't part of a character's theme song or anything. What isn't considered a reference is when something in a previous game appears quite often. For example, Yoshi appearing in a game isn't a reference to Super Mario World because he has become a significant part of the franchise. The same applies to sequels and follow-ups, such as Super Mario Galaxy 2 not being a reference to Super Mario Galaxy. Reissues, on the other hand, don't get this exception. On both of the pages that talk about Super Mario 64 and its remake, both articles list the remake and original game, respectively. The same also applies to Diddy Kong Racing and its remake. Referring to the same game in the article, oddly, does not apply to Super Mario 3D World and its rerelease nor NSMBU with its reissue. The thing is, it's pretty evident that a reissue is going to take elements from the game it is copying. We don't need to mention it in the references sections of the articles. What this proposal suggests doing is to stop considering reissues as references, just as much as we don't consider sequels, prequels, or any follow-ups as references because that's what most of these follow-ups do. It's like if we consider the Star Wars Special Edition to be a reference to A New Hope. Also, we should put this in the guidelines for for the page regarding references.
Support
OpposeCommentsI do want to say that DKC2 GBA lampshading how Kerozene wasn't in the original should stay. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 20:59, July 16, 2022 (EDT)
I mostly agree with the proposal, but I would argue this about Yoshi in Super Mario 64 DS. His appearance is recontextualized such that having him on the castle's roof in the opening sequence (rather than the very end) is a reference to the original game in a new subplot, not content rereleased verbatim. Still, I'm conflicted on whether it's sensible to list such details in references sections. What do you all think? AgentMuffin (talk) 20:27, July 17, 2022 (EDT)
Fix how we handle infobox relations on generic speciesTemplate:ProposalOutcome No, not "change" or "decide", fix.
So with this in mind, we should ideally be using "variants" for the specific species that are based on a real-world species, but that is not what we do; we instead list the specific species as merely "comparable" to the broader generic species, despite the specific species being a type of said generic species.
1. List the specific species as variants on the R.W.S. page. This is the most accurate way of depicting the relation between R.W.S. and the specific species based on it, because...I just said why a lot of times, didn't I? 2. List the specific species as relatives on the R.W.S. page. You could say that using "variant" between R.W.S. and specific species is confusing compared to how we use it for specific species to other specific species, since Nintendo probably wasn't thinking of the R.W.S. as a specific parent and instead as just an R.W.S. to base the enemies on. This method will account for that while still stating the relationships correctly. 3. Use an about on the top of the R.W.S. page. Let's be honest, these parameters were designed with unique species in mind. Mixing R.W.S. up with unique enemy species is what caused this confusing happenstance to happen, and with this method, we'd be making things a whole lot simpler. Take the Clown page for instance; instead of listing every clown in the greater Mario franchise as "comparable" to the Wario World enemy, we have an about on the top saying to check Category:Clowns for clowns across the Mario franchises. This method will do that for all the R.W.S., simplifying things and also helping us clean up whatever happened with Dragon (which is a specific Yoshi's Story species and not exactly meant to be representative of all dragons, but the comparable conundrum is also there somehow.). EDIT: Doc suggested to repurpose the subject_origin parameter to link to the R.W.S. On the individual species pages, and since options 1 & 2 would counter this I'm adding it to option 3. EDIT 2: Also adding another option just for the subject_origin itself. 4. Do nothing. We all collectively agree that it is fine as it is now and leave the infobox saying that all the specific species are "similar to x-real-world-species but aren't actually an x-R.-W.-S." except for that one YS Bumblebee which has a special status for...no reason at all. So, with that all said and done, let's answer this question; How do we list specific species on the infoboxes of R.W.S. pages? Proposer: Somethingone (talk) List specific species as variants of R.W.S.List specific species as relatives of R.W.S.Repurpose subject_origin for the specific species pages, use an about template for the R.W.S. Pages
Just repurpose the subject_origin for the species pages
List specific species as comparable to R.W.S. (Do Nothing)CommentsThere is actually a "subject_origin" parameter last I checked that is the remnants of the old "species_origin" parameter, and as it is now, it is barely used. Course, it may be removed now, but seems like a good compromise. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 14:12, July 17, 2022 (EDT)
Decide on the article titles for the golf courses from Mario Golf (GBC) and Mario Golf: Advance TourTemplate:ProposalOutcome Currently, our articles on the main tournament courses in these games (excluding the Mushroom Kingdom ones, which are different for each game) title them as simply "Marion", "Palms", "Dunes", and "Links". There's more to it than that though. The Game Boy Color game is rather consistent about it. The courses are all called "[X] Club" - "Marion Club", "Palm Club" (note singular), "Dune Club" (again note singular), and "Links Club". Mario Golf: Advance Tour is way more flip-floppy about it. The in-game menus use "[X] Course" - "Marion Course", "Palms Course", "Dunes Course", and "Links Course". The "Course" part is capitalized in the menus, but not in dialogue, because screw consistency. The clubs that house the courses in story mode are still called "[X] Club", albeit with Palms and Dunes now pluralized. There is also at least one instance of an NPC calling the Marion Club the "Marion Golf Club", because again, screw consistency. The one-word variants are sometimes used by NPCs, but that seems more like shorthand than anything. So which of these names do we use for the articles? My vote goes to the "Course" names; that would make them consistent with the Mushroom Course, which does not have a "Club" name associated with it (its "club" is Peach's Castle). I plan to expand these articles in the future, so I want to solve this conundrum beforehand. Proposer: 7feetunder (talk) Use "Course" names
Use "Club" names
Use single-word names (leave as is)CommentsMerge city course and Kalimari Desert layoutsTemplate:ProposalOutcome Mario Kart 8 Deluxe's version of N64 Kalimari Desert combines the Mario Kart Tour layouts in the same way as it does with Tour's city courses, which I think warrants a reexamination of our policy surrounding these types of tracks. Under that policy, we should have a separate article for the MK8DX version of this course, distinct from both N64 Kalimari Desert and N64 Kalimari Desert 2. We currently don't - however, I take this as less of a call to make one, and more of a sign that our current policy isn't built for this situation. I make the argument that we should be considering courses with multiple layouts as one course instead of multiple, for the following reasons (many of which I've also stated above):
As such, I propose a full merge of main-series multi-layout tracks, which will entail the following:
(If you want to read further discussion on this topic, it has also been discussed here and here.) Proposer: Ahemtoday (talk) Do as proposed
Split the MK8DX section into its own article insteadLeave as-isCommentsIn case one is confused at what Ahemtoday is talking about with "As discussed above", this proposal was originally posted on Talk:N64 Kalimari Desert. I suggest looking there for previous discussion points. Furthermore, I would like to ask if this also affects this section on the Mario Kart Tour article. Arend (talk) 03:34, August 6, 2022 (EDT)
Hey, so: if this passes, the only track left in the 8 Deluxe section of the race courses template will be Sky-High Sundae. Do we keep it there since there's always the chance of more tracks like it, or should we scrap that section entirely and move Sky-High Sundae to the Tour section? It is, after all, apparently being treated as a new track for both games. Ahemtoday (talk) 01:31, August 9, 2022 (EDT)
one thing that hasn't been addressed here is how are the pages actually going to be merged? will they be like my takes on merged articles (examples: New York Minute, Tokyo Blur, Singapore Speedway) or will they be merged in a different way? - RSM 22:31, August 12, 2022 (EDT)
Remove the 15th infraction for why a reminder can be issued (changing American spellings and grammar conventions to British standards)Template:ProposalOutcome Please see MarioWiki:Warning policy before voting. Ok, now there are multiple reasons why someone can get a reminder, but this particular infraction stands out to me because not everyone who has English as their first language uses American English. People all over the world edit the MarioWiki, and that includes people from the United Kingdom who use British English as their primary language. I feel like a reminder is too harsh for this, especially since changing American spelling and grammar conventions to British standards does not negatively affect the article in the long run. If the article is looked at from a bigger point of view, it's still readable and not super difficult to follow through. All that was changed was a single word that can still be understood by many people. As for inserting speculation, unnecessary information or trivia, false information, into an article or vandalizing it, I understand how those offenses are warnable to varying degrees. But a good faith user should not be issued a reminder solely because they barely changed a word (simply by adding a letter to it) and left its meaning the same. Changing a word for its American spelling to its British spelling does not damage or degrade the quality of an article, so why should it be a warnable offense to begin with? I have seen only one user get warned (and blocked) for this while browsing this wiki, but the fact that users can get a reminder for this infraction surprises me, and I'm surprised this infraction was not brought up sooner. In case users do not want to remove the infraction but also do not want to keep the wording for the infraction as is, I've added an option to modify the infraction without entirely removing it. So there are three ways this proposal can go: 1. Support (and remove the infraction): This option removes the "changing American spellings and grammar conventions to British standards" from the list of infractions that deserve a reminder template. 2. Modify the infraction without entirely removing it: This option keeps the infraction while allowing it to be modified to make it more clear. If you feel that this infraction should stay, then making a few productive changes to it won't hurt. 3. Oppose (and keep the infraction as is): This option does what it says on the tin. The infraction will be left as is, and good-faith users from the United Kingdom have something to dwell about (apparently because American spellings are preferred to be used on articles over their spellings). I suggest we do not choose this option. Proposer: Mari0fan100 (talk) Support (and remove the infraction)
Modify the infraction without entirely removing it
Oppose (and keep the infraction as is)
CommentsIt is stated on the Manual of Style that the reason American spelling and names are prioritised is because the majority of readers come from North America. Just pointing out that I am from the UK though. Nightwicked Bowser 20:45, August 15, 2022 (EDT) I'm not sure exactly what this proposal is trying to accomplish. If all this is doing it as removing it specifically from the warning policy... well, whether it's listed there or not, if someone repeatedly ignores the Manual of Style, we're going to have to do something, including potentially issuing reminders/warnings (this is already covered under "Failure to follow the writing guidelines" immediately below, which makes it a bit redundant actually). To achieve the proposal's desired effect of not giving out reminders for this, it would probably have to be removed from the Manual of Style entirely, which I wouldn't support. -- Too Bad! Waluigi Time! 21:32, August 15, 2022 (EDT)
@Somethingone: It was proposed, but then the proposer themselves cancelled it. Although we did not technically agree to being okay with British spelling before, this proposal gives an opportunity to make it happen. Mari0fan100 (talk) 22:15, August 15, 2022 (EDT) I want to point out one thing: choosing between British English and American English is not just a matter of spelling of words. There are still elements, such as courses or species, that are named differently in British English compared to American English. The kart, tires and courses in the Mario Kart games, including Mario Kart 8, are the most prominent example, but there's also the case of the naming of all the Magikoopas as Kamek in British English, reflecting their Japanese name. Even many Mario & Luigi games were named differently in British English. Therefore the choice of one English or the other has a lot of implications, and once we decided to stay with the American English, you can expect the rest of the page to follow through to keep consistency, as a page written in British English about a subject that has a different name in British English would look rather confusing to the readers.--Mister Wu (talk) 08:50, August 19, 2022 (EDT) @Koopa con Carne, @Spectrogram, @Somethingone: I hope I'm not coming off as rude here, but are there any reasons you suddenly decided to change your mind and completely countered this proposal? I'm sure you had great reasons, but none of the edits give a reasonable justification, nor did you give off reasons to change your votes. It seems peculiar that all of you were in massive support of this whole thing and then decided to change your minds for no given reason completely. Wikiboy10 (talk) 08:51, August 19, 2022 (EDT)
@TheFlameChomp: The points you brought motivated me to add the "Oppose, but move the infraction under the "Failure to follow the writing guidelines" infraction" as a possible option. I feel that if this infraction should stay, then it shouldn't be a standalone. Rather, I suggest that the infraction should be seen as an example of a "failure to follow the writing guidelines" and (potentially) have it moved under there. Mari0fan100 (talk) 17:26, August 19, 2022 (EDT)
While we're on the subject of this guideline, it has been misconstrued to mean "this is an American wiki", which is untrue; much like Wikipedia, it's an international wiki that just happens to have its servers in the US. RickTommy (talk) 11:16, August 21, 2022 (EDT) Change "NS" to "Switch"Template:ProposalOutcome I saw that the official Nintendo website officially has Nintendo Switch abbreviated "Switch". I wonder if the abbreviation "NS" is an error? I'm going to make a proposal for the change just in case the official Nintendo website is right (which are most cases is).
Proposer: Teh Other (talk) Support
Oppose
CommentsThe inner data of Mario Kart 8 Deluxe Booster Course Pass refer their courses with the abbreviation "nsw" (Nintendo Switch) as the platform code, as noted here. Probably not the most accurate thing because some of the abbreviations are only used for the Japanese versions of Mario Kart, and then there's also just "u" for the original Wii U courses, but "nsw" is one of the few official abbreviations we got for the Nintendo Switch regardless, so that's some food for thought. Arend (talk) 07:15, August 20, 2022 (EDT) Can there be an option to do this without having to rename every file that uses the abbreviation? That feels excessive to me. -- Too Bad! Waluigi Time! 13:04, August 21, 2022 (EDT) I agree with Waluigi Time. I'd support this proposal if it didn't suggest renaming every single file with the "NS" abbreviation. Renaming the templates is easy, but searching for and adjusting every filename is far more trouble than it's worth. ThePowerPlayer 17:30, August 21, 2022 (EDT) I also agree with Waluigi Time. Renaming every filename usage of "NS" to "Switch" just feels like gatekeeping what filenames can use in them. I don't see anyone arguing if filenames should use "GCN", "NGC", "GC", "Nintendo GameCube", or "GameCube" for all GameCube related file names. S o m e t h i n g o n e ! 17:50, August 22, 2022 (EDT) I went ahead and made these changes, excluding the filenames. --Steve (talk) 10:32, August 23, 2022 (EDT)
Template:ProposalOutcome Good evening! Smash Bros. series features plenty of items and objects. Most of these objects have nothing to do with Mario, and it honestly feels like reading Zelda Wiki while browsing through these wonderful articles, considering the actual amount of Mario-related objects and items is really small. Even though most of them really do not fit into Mario Wiki, there is a sizable opposition to outright removing them, which is understandable. I propose we merge (not remove!) items and objects from the Smash Bros. series that have otherwise nothing to do with Mario into two list articles: List of Super Smash Bros. series objects and List of Super Smash Bros. series items. They really feel out of place, especially after previous cut-cut-cut proposals have passed. Q: Why don't we merge them into list articles for each game (such as "List of Super Smash Bros. Ultimate objects")? A: As it turned out, the Smash Bros. series doesn't have that many objects that are exclusive to one game: most of them recur from one game to the other, it would just be repetition in most cases. I've also compiled a list of affected articles by this proposal, from which I've also removed several gray area entries that somewhat relate to the Mario series one way or the other. The excluded entries (example: Party Ball (item)) can always be dealt with individually at a later date, as I believe they fall out of the scale of this proposal and what it's trying to achieve. Note that I do not consider an item changing color to red if Mario holds it a good justification to keep an article. This proposal also does not target the remaining enemy articles, most of which were merged a long time ago.
If this proposal passes, the following changes will be implemented:
List MIt may seem like a lot, but it really isn't.
Notable excluded entriesThese pages will remain untouched if the proposal passes. Note that this isn't a full list, just the more notable pages: That's about it. As I said above, if you disagree with a certain entry, I can exclude it from the list, there's always a good chance I've missed something. Proposer: Spectrogram (talk) Merge the List M entries
No changeCommentsWhy is Lip's Stick excluded? AFAIK its only relation to Mario is that it was in a game that became a Mario game; it doesn't actually have anything to do with Mario. It's not like we have an article on Lip, and even our article on Panel de Pon itself was merged with Tetris Attack via proposal. 17:06, August 19, 2022 (EDT)
Parasol should have honestly been reworked in the first place, so in case of a move to a redirect, the page should probably redirect to Peach's Parasol. Ray Trace(T|C) 17:38, August 19, 2022 (EDT) Question: how would the list articles look like? Would it be a standard table-with-text list or would we make it like the Subspace Army page where the articles are turned into page segments complete with images and NIOLs? Also, it seems that Mr. Saturn does appear as an unlockable costume in SMM, so how would that information be moved? Other than that, I like this approach at remodeling our Smash coverage. S o m e t h i n g o n e ! 11:37, August 20, 2022 (EDT)
"Yes, but I personally feel like the fact that Mr. Saturn appears as a costume in SMM is enough to exclude it by this proposal's standards," I don't. We previously established appearances in stuff like WarioWare microgames or other crossovers wasn't enough to give characters like Mother Brain their own page, and also that the Costume Mario appearances are too insubstantial to warrant separate articles. The Star Rod stuff is different, because it's actually plot relevant to that Mario-kun volume. --Glowsquid (talk) 12:28, August 20, 2022 (EDT)
I assume the F-Zero Racers aren't on this list because of Mario-related comic cameos. In that case, would the Arwing's cameo in Super Mario RPG be sufficient to keep the article? It does seem a touch more notable than the Wolfen. LinkTheLefty (talk) 21:59, August 21, 2022 (EDT)
Decide what to do with GreenhouseTemplate:ProposalOutcome Good morning! Recently, a proposal has passed, aiming to trim non-Mario Game & Watch coverage (and yes, I'm aware the changes have not yet been implemented). This proposal notably excluded Greenhouse, as despite not being a Mario game, it features a character Stanley the Bugman who later plays a major role in Donkey Kong 3, makes cameo appearances in WarioWare series, and Smash Bros. series. He also appears in the episode Greenhouse Gorilla. Stanley did not appear in any other non-Mario media. So the way I see it, either Greenhouse is in or out. Here are three options:
Proposer: Spectrogram (talk) Part of the franchise
Not a part of the franchiseHistorically significant
CommentsI have given this topic some thought of the past few months and came up with the same options. All three are valid in my opinion. I also came up with a more radical and perhaps controversial fourth option. There exists a Stanley franchise within the Mario franchise, which consists of only four games: Green House, DK3, its G&W counterpart, and Dai Gyakushū. Nintendo had some sort of plan to grow Stanley into a more prominent character but it was curtailed when DK3 flopped.--Platform (talk) 11:50, August 26, 2022 (EDT)
Merge or delete Super Smash Bros. series general technique articlesTemplate:ProposalOutcome We currently have articles on multiple general techniques used by fighters in Smash. Namely:
I don't see a reason to keep these short and largely tangential articles, especially since we just passed a proposal to merge non-Mario items in Smash. There are a few ways we can deal with this. Merge these articles into a list page: Self-explanatory. The list will also include general techniques we do not have articles for, such as the aforementioned spot dodging. Delete these articles: No list will be created. Explanations of the universal techniques will be left to gameplay sections for the games, with glide and tether recovery being explained on the pages of the fighters who have them. Delete glide and tether recovery, but leave the other articles alone: Unlike the other three, these aren't even usable by Mario characters, so they have zero relevance to the Mario franchise. We merged all the non-Mario characters' special moves (B moves) to their fighters' pages, so we should at least get rid of these. Do nothing: Even glide and tether recovery get to stay, creating the inconsistency described above, so I don't recommend this. The scopes of jump, roll, and taunt extend far beyond Smash, so these articles stay no matter what. Proposer: 7feetunder (talk) Merge these articles into a list page
Delete these articles
Delete glide and tether recovery, but leave the other articles alone
Do nothingCommentsSplit Bowser's Castle (Mario Kart Arcade GP) and Bowser's Factory, as well as Castle Wall and Bowser's Castle (Mario Kart Arcade GP DX)Template:ProposalOutcome Okay, this has been bothering me for quite a while. As you may or may not know, the base courses in Mario Kart Arcade GP DX use the same (or slightly redesigned) minimap layouts from the courses of the previous Arcade GP entries, Mario Kart Arcade GP and Mario Kart Arcade GP 2. However, the tracks have all new names, music, themes and aesthetics, so generally, the wiki considers these as different courses altogether. That is, except for Bowser's Factory and the Arcade GP DX version of Bowser's Castle, which have been merged with the Arcade GP 1/2 version of Bowser's Castle and Castle Wall, respectively (which in turn have assumed the names of the AGPDX courses since). This bothers me to no end, because even though they start similarly, and have the general Bowser's Castle theme, these courses still have completely different names and music, and the aesthetics are even quite different, especially after these courses' hairpin turns. For example, the throne room in AGP1's Bowser's Castle is completely gone in Bowser's Factory, as its corresponding section is now part of the factory half of the Bowser's Factory course (it's specifically been replaced by a Bob-omb factory section), which, as you might've guessed, AGP1's Bowser's Castle doesn't have. Half of the Castle Wall course also takes place on the, well, high castle wall, which is also completely absent in AGPDX's Bowser's Castle, replacing it with a curved path next to a giant Koopa Clown Car-like structure, a straight Glider section high above a (comparatively very low) rocky path surrounded by boiling lava, and another path inside with a Kamek hologram. Aside from the aesthetics, the courses also differ in obstacles and elevations. If it weren't for the beginning (which is also quite different, with the head of the Bowser statue at the gate being slanted over the gate), the courses would be nothing alike! I get that these are all Bowser Cup courses, but with all these different songs, names, aesthetics, elevations and such, the only thing that is the same are the course maps – which are also altered in DX (most notably, the hairpin turn at the beginning is slanted in DX). All these differences essentially make them different courses altogether like the other courses of Arcade GP DX, and probably were intended to be considered different courses by Bandai Namco Games, so I believe the Wiki should consider them as different courses, too. I also understand that classic courses may get heavy redesigns as of Mario Kart 8, but the problem is that Arcade GP DX not only is developed and published by a different team (and essentially aren't part of the mainline Mario Kart series), but AGPDX also came out before MK8 did, so the most recent title up to that point was still Mario Kart 7, which, aside from adding glider and underwater sections, still hadn't implemented heavy course redesigns yet. And the classic courses from Mario Kart 8 also kept their course names and had their songs remixed – all the Arcade GP DX had completely different names and brand new compositions that sounded nothing like the course music from the previous Arcade GP courses. Because of that, I believe the Wiki shouldn't consider this as a case of returning classic courses either. What especially boggles my mind is that, while Bowser's Factory and Bowser Castle AGPDX are merged with Bowser's Castle AGP1 and Castle Wall (respectively), Splash Circuit and Tropical Coast are NOT merged with Mario Highway and Mario Beach (respectively) at all, despite it being the exact same case here with similar minimaps and theme (coastal Mario courses), but different names, aesthetics and songs. Heck, the beginning of these courses are ALSO similar to each other! So why are Bowser's Factory and Bowser's Castle AGPDX not getting the same treatment. So here's what I propose: we split off the AGPDX Bowser courses from the AGP1 Bowser courses; treat them as different courses, like all the other courses from AGPDX. We first rename the articles back to Bowser's Castle (Mario Kart Arcade GP) and Castle Wall, since the articles originally started as such, then we make full articles of Bowser's Factory and Bowser's Castle (Mario Kart Arcade GP DX), moving the relevant info from the AGP1 articles to those pages. I found videos of these courses in Mario Kart Arcade GP and Mario Kart Arcade GP DX, in case you want to compare the courses yourself. Alternatively, we could also merge Splash Circuit and Tropical Coast to Mario Highway and Mario Beach, respectively. If the Bowser courses are not allowed to be split off, then the Mario courses shouldn't either: it would only be fair. However, I'm personally not inclined to support this option and still prefer the Bowser courses to be split, because like the Bowser courses, the Mario courses also have their fair share of differences when it comes to music, names, aesthetics and elevations (e.g. you go into a wrecked ship in Tropical Coast, which is completely absent from Mario Beach). I also found videos for these courses in Mario Kart Arcade GP and Mario Kart Arcade GP DX for comparison. I feel like the rest of the courses from Arcade GP DX should be left alone, as their only similarities really are the course minimaps and nothing else. We could merge them all together regardless, but that would be the same as merging all the enemy variants in Wario World back together. Proposer: Arend (talk) Split the Bowser courses, as proposed
Merge the Mario courses insteadDo nothingCommentsThis may be a bit early for me to do, but I already made example pages (as user subpages) for what they could look like post-split. This is also partially done so the procedure doesn't have to take as long if the proposal succeeds. Have a look and tell me what you think:
Arend (talk) 16:17, August 30, 2022 (EDT) On a side note, once the proposal does succeed, I might need an admin's help first before I'd be able to begin. Merging Smash Bros. objects: Round 2!Template:ProposalOutcome Good day! My recent proposal aimed at merging unrelated to Mario items and objects has passed, however, as it turned out, the list wasn't full -- there are still objects that should have been merged. So, why don't we finish what we started? As established earlier, cameo appearances do not justify keeping an article. If you find more objects/items that I've missed, leave a comment so I can add them in the list. List NThe following entries will be merged with the rest of Smash Bros. objects:
Now the question is, should F-Zero Racer also be merged? Is it cameo appearance or not? Proposer: Spectrogram (talk) Merge only the List N entries
Merge the List N entries, including F-Zero Racer
No changeCommentsI am a bit iffy on Unira since early appearances of Urchin were treated as either them themselves or at least a derivative (though granted Octorok has a ton of variants in Mario and we no longer have a page on it...) Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 21:44, August 29, 2022 (EDT) I have two questions:
ShootingStar7X (talk) 11:28, August 31, 2022 (EDT)
Move Flying Goomba (Super Mario World) to Paragaloomba, Para-Goomba (Super Mario World) to Parachute Galoomba, Parabomb to Parachute Bob-OmbThe Super Mario World section of the Japanese Mario Portal calls the Flying Goomba "Paragaloomba" and the Para-Goomba "Parachute Galoomba". These names should take priority over their current names as they are more recent, more accurate to the original Japanese and also help clear up a currently very counter-intuitive group of pages. Firstly, Galoombas were separate enemies from the Goombas since their inception, being called kuribon as opposed to kuribō. Secondly, a well established pattern in both English and Japanese dictates that winged variants of enemies receive a Para- or Pata- prefix, respectively (Paragoombas being Patakuribō, Para-Biddybuds being Patatenten, Para-Beetles being Patametto, Parabones being Patakaron, etc). "Flying Goombas" are called Patakuri in Japanese, and were accordingly named "Paragaloombas" in the new website. "Para-goomba", on the other hand, are called Parakuri in Japanese (coincidently the same prefix as the English word, despite having different meanings) and were thus named "Parachute Galoombas" in the new website. Their new names fix both of those inconsistencies, and would make the pages more intuitive to understand. Parabomb would also be moved as to be consistent with the new Parachute Galoomba name. Proposer: LadySophie17 (talk) Move all pages
Move Flying Goomba and Para-Goomba, but not Parabomb
Don't move the pagesCommentsThe Para-Goomba (Mario Clash) page would unfortunately remain unchanged, as Mario Clash was not featured in the new website. — Lady Sophie (T|C) Could there be an option to move the Galoombas only? While Parabomb could be renamed, I'd rather we wait until a new game uses Parachute Bob-omb before moving that one, like how Boomer/Bomber Bill is being approached. (And if we really wanted to, we could just use "Para-Goombah" for the Mario Clash Para-Goomba. It'd be a silly way to remove an identifier, but I think we can work with it.) LinkTheLefty (talk) 23:08, August 29, 2022 (EDT)
Template:ProposalOutcome Good evening! The list of unimplemented proposals is amazing. It is a helpful tool for editors to know what else should be worked on. However, I've noticed a small issue with the way two recent guest appearance proposals were handled: this edit. MarioWiki:Coverage features a list of media currently classified as a guest appearance. This list is incomplete for one small reason: these two games weren't added in because their proposals got removed from the list of unimplemented proposals before staff noticed that they should also be added in the list, causing the list to remain incomplete. So I propose we stop considering important coverage-related proposals (guest appearances, crossover coverage, historically significant games, etc.) as "implemented" before they get a mention in MarioWiki:Coverage. Not only after their page is created, but also after the policy page gets updated. Hope you have a great rest of your day! Proposer: Spectrogram (talk) Support
OpposeCommentsI feel like this a bit too minor for a proposal, you could just bring up on the policy's talk page if it's outdated as all that needs to be done is a small update. Hewer (talk · contributions · edit count) 18:00, September 4, 2022 (EDT) Make classic course prefixes in titles consistent for Mario Kart courses/stagesTemplate:ProposalOutcomeSolution 1 is actually current policy (see the Mario Kart: Super Circuit classic courses), so this is an error I'm fixing right away. In Mario Kart DS there are two retro battle courses, N64 Block Fort and GCN Pipe Plaza. In game, they are never assigned a prefix, being the only battle stages with this distinction. Of course, to remain consistent with the classic race courses, this wiki labels them with prefixes. However, this results in the titles of the articles inconsistent with the game. Now, the solution sounds simple, remove the prefixes so they're identical to their names in game and call it a day. However, there's seemingly one big problem with that solution: Ninja Hideaway. Ninja Hideaway is classic course in Mario Kart 8 Deluxe that doesn't use a prefix, just like the battle stages in Mario Kart DS. On this wiki, however, the article is not given a prefix in its title, making it consistent with Mario Kart 8 Deluxe, but not at all consistent with how we handle the retro battle stages from Mario Kart DS. This is the issue this proposal is tackling. These article titles are inconsistent, and that must be fixed. Now we have a few solutions to this problem:
I apologize if I phrased this weirdly, if there is any confusion then please comment below and I will try my best to explain. Proposer: RealStuffMister (talk) Remove prefixes
Add prefixes to other articles
Leave as isCommentsChange how RPG enemy infoboxes classify roleSo for SMRPG, the Paper games, the M&L games, and M+R:KB, the bestiary infoboxes have a weird arbitrary system where name formatting (bold, italic, underline, etc.) is used to convey what type of encounter an enemy is (enemy, miniboss, major boss, boss helper). Not only is this useless without the keys at the top of each bestiary page, but plenty of enemies have multiple roles at different points that this system cannot handle, and it completely leaves out "training" battles (ie the "timed hits" Goomba from SMRPG; Bowser, Fawful, and Hammerhead Bros. in Superstar Saga; and Bowser, Jr. Troopa, Goombario, and Eldstar in Paper Mario) that occur to teach game mechanics and otherwise don't really fit with the other categories (a "boss" that cannot be lost to is hardly a boss, ditto the unwinnable Bowser in PM). What I propose is to turn this into a standard listing like everything else covered on the tables, as this solves all three problems. Proposer: Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) Support
OpposeCommentsMerging non-Mario Smash Bros. series bosses and the remaining enemies. Round 3!Template:ProposalOutcome Good evening! I think this is going to be my last Smash Bros. proposal, see the other two here and also here too. The Super Smash Bros. series has had several bosses and enemies. Most enemies have already been merged a long time ago, however, some still remain and should probably be merged as well. I also propose to merge bosses that have nothing to do with Mario (Giga Bowser and Giant Donkey Kong (the page is yet to be recreated at the time of writing this per another proposal) will be untouched). It was also previously established that cameo appearances do not justify keeping a page. Some bosses like Dracula appeared in Captain N, but it's a guest appearance, so it doesn't count. Also some bosses have quite a bit of information, but I did check how it'd look as one page and it looks alright. As always, if I made a mistake or you want something removed/changed/added from/in this list, leave a comment and I'll change this proposal accordingly. Also feel free to comment asking for a new option to be added. List OThe following bosses will be merged into a collective article:
Non-bosses:
Proposer: Spectrogram (talk) Merge all
Merge all except Crazy Hand, Dharkon, Master Hand, Master Core, Galeem, Tabuu
No change
CommentWhy is Fighting Mii Team being merged with the list of Smash Run enemies? Yes, they appeared in Smash Run, but they also appeared in Classic Mode and in their own game mode in Smash Wii U. Wouldn't it make more sense to merge them with the Mii article if anything? S o m e t h i n g o n e ! 16:37, September 14, 2022 (EDT)
I think false characters should be left alone since three of them are Mario-relevant. -- Too Bad! Waluigi Time! 17:32, September 14, 2022 (EDT) Actually I'd be fine with merging the non-bosses specifically for consistency with everything else, I'm just iffy on the bosses.S o m e t h i n g o n e ! 20:13, September 14, 2022 (EDT) Thing is, why are we putting more stock into these characters just because they are plot relevant or that they are characters? From strictly a gameplay standpoint, I'd argue that they are less relevant to Mario as a whole than the gameplay-altering items that all got merged into one article. In fact, you could argue that the stages are less plot relevant than the bosses and should get merged, but I'd argue against merging those in that I view them with secondary enough importance after playable characters. Ray Trace(T|C) 20:13, September 14, 2022 (EDT)
I would like to add that I have no plans to make further Smash proposals, especially when it comes to fighters or regular stages. Fighters were already merged with their attacks. Spectrogram (talk) 00:58, September 15, 2022 (EDT) Shadow Bug should have been merged with objects, since it's ultimately just a substance. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 04:11, September 15, 2022 (EDT)
Could you include an option to not split Crazy Hand, Dharkon, Master Hand, Galeem, and Tabuu? I feel since this is a crossover game, I feel we should include the plot-relevant villains in these games. The other characters I didn't mention here that are Smash originals don't really play that significant of a role. Everything else I feel is just fine to split off since they are mostly just generic mooks. Wikiboy10 (talk) 14:55, September 15, 2022 (EDT)
Merge Kings and QueensTemplate:ProposalOutcome When it comes to categories, we forbid using gender-based ones due to them being broad. Yet kings and queens (which cover male and female monarchs) are the exceptions right now. Princes and princesses also have this same problem, but I feel we might as well cover these first. Here are two ideas I proposed. Merge them into Royalty Merge both and create a new category: Monarchs Proposer: Wikiboy10 (talk) Merge into Royalty
Merge into Monarchs
Keep as is
Comments@Archivist Toadette: I really don't see where you're coming from here, there's plenty of perfectly valid comparable subcategories with less entries than that. It well exceeds the minimum standards set by MarioWiki:Categories for something of this type ("Non-series/game/console/etc.-specific categories need a minimum of five entries (including any subcategories' entries), however they should have many more than that, since small lists can simply be placed on an article that's central to the subject at hand"). Disagreeing is one thing, but I'd caution against saying that our reasoning is "completely flawed" when the Queens category is well within our guidelines and you're basing your statement solely off of personal opinion and preference. On a separate note, I'd also like to add that merging these categories will make navigation more difficult. Right now, you can easily look for kings or queens, but if they were all tossed together, that's made much more difficult, especially since a lot of these characters don't have their titles in their page names. Merging princes and princesses into this category in the future will make things even worse, and there's other titles not accounted for that would increase the category size even further - keep in mind that emperors, dukes, etc. can be monarchs as well. In that sense, I think the proposal may be doing exactly the opposite of its original intentions by creating an overly broad category. The current setup is fine, we have four decently-sized categories for distinct titles and positions. This proposal passing will throw those out and eventually create a much less useful category of at least 147 pages if we bring Princes and Princesses into this as well, with no distinctions between what titles we're actually trying to look at. How is that any better and "less broad" than what we have now? -- Too Bad! Waluigi Time! 14:42, September 23, 2022 (EDT)
The reason I believe these two categories need merging is because of general problems with gender. What if gender is unconfirmed for a monarch? What if Nintendo said they're NB? How would we decide which category a character should be in then? Spectrogram (talk) 14:27, September 26, 2022 (EDT)
Re-merge the Mario Party Advance "generic species representative character" articles back into their respective "species" articlesTemplate:ProposalOutcome These were split a long time ago, and seemingly not by a proposal as I cannot find it in either archive. The justification for these splits were that saying that the "generic species" characters deserved as much individualized writing as the game's more specific characters, like Goombetty or Mushbert. I beg to differ on this. Many of these are the sole representative of the species in the game, which we don't use as justification to split, say, the single normal Blooper in Paper Mario or the inconsistent dividuality of Big Boo. With the recent full merging of the character/species articles for Birdo and Boom-Boom, this prompts further scrutiny. Do we really need a "Klepto (character)" article only about the MPA guy and not the singular one in SM64? (also Dorrie and Hoot ain't split.) It seems more like arbitrarily placing information of a random game's NPCs on a separate page, thus making it more inconvenient to read about the subject's appearances. There are two ways to go about this, depending on how one treats the inconsistent localization.
This list has all that will be merged for both options:
This list has only ones that would be merged with option 1:
Naturally, Kamek and Toad are exempt due to their more complicated situations. Proposer: Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) Option 1: Merge all
Option 2: Just merge English matches
Do nothing
CommentsSo is Akiki going to get merged? I think it's okay to leave the named ones split while the generic ones are merged. It's me, Mario! (Talk / Stalk) 04:56, September 23, 2022 (EDT)
@Opposition: You're forgetting that many of these appear by themselves rather than together with other generic members of the same species. In fact, checking the screenshot in the Piranha Plant character article in particular, even when it appears in a field of other Piranha Plants, it's referred to as "a" random Piranha Plant, not Piranha Plant by name. Merging the solo members would probably be a decent follow-up proposal if this fails. LinkTheLefty (talk) 09:43, September 23, 2022 (EDT)
On another note, if the proposal fails, Lakitu (character) would possibly have to be moved to Lakitu (Mario Party Advance) anyway. A current proposal regarding Fishin' Lakitu in Mario Kart has an option to create an article for Lakitu (referee) and move the Mario Kart information there. The Lakitu referee from Mario Kart is one of the most well-known depictions of Lakitu in the entire Mario series, so when visitors see "Lakitu (character), they might probably think of the Mario Kart iteration first, and not of a minor NPC that only appeared in Mario Party Advance. In fact, to avoid general confusion, perhaps all of these NPCs would have to use the (Mario Party Advance) identifier over the (character) one. rend (talk) (edits) 08:20, September 24, 2022 (EDT) @Arend: The Koopa from Mario Party DS is split, as are the Koopa Troopa, Shy Guy, Boo, and Goomba from Mario Party 4, plus other similar cases like Goomba (Super Mario RPG: Legend of the Seven Stars character) and Goomba (Super Paper Mario character), so it's not like Mario Party Advance is the only game for which we have NPCs split like this as you're making it out to be (also side note I was actually planning on a proposal to split the MPDS Wiggler before this one started). Hewer (talk · contributions · edit count) 09:05, September 24, 2022 (EDT)
For those wondering, the ones covered by option 1 but not option 2 would say along the lines of "a [species], localized in English as [name], appears in Mario Party Advance" (and honestly, "Goombob" may easily be an early attempt to rename SMW Goombas before "Galoomba" stuck; note how the Italian names are the same as each other too, and this situation seems to be exactly what happened for Petal Guy, formerly Mufti Guy). Also, "bamboo dancer" is certainly not a coincidence (and considering Spear Guy had an alternate JP name for PM64, it's not much of a stretch for bamboo dancer to have been an alternate name for Dancing Spear Guy that didn't stick, but that's a separate discussion). Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 13:58, September 26, 2022 (EDT) |