MarioWiki:Proposals/Archive/13

Any proposal decided and past is archived here. Use the scroll box to see votes and comments. This page is protected to maintain the discussion as was. Please add archived proposals to the bottom of the page. Mario Kart Name Changes NO CHANGE 1-12 okay... I have noticed that all the articles on the wii karts all have their european names. Why? What's wrong with the american ones? They used to have american names! and so, I propose we change the article names... Deadline: March 3, 2009, 17:00 Proposer: Dryest bowser (talk) Change them Dryest bowser (talk)- per myself Leave them Son of Suns (talk) - Per the recent proposal that just passed changing the names. Both names are listed at the beginning of the article, and both are even included in the Mario Kart Wii vehicles template. We are simply using the first English title in order to keep consistency and be fair to our international friends. Stumpers (talk) - See below. Paper Yoshi (talk) - Per all. Clyde1998 (talk) - Per the First English Artical Name. Everthing was changed to it's first English Name. So Mario Kart Wii Kart and Bike names changed to its first english name. So Nostalgia 1 was Classic Dragster. Zafum (talk) - I really hate that the European name proposal got through, and I wish we could reverse it, but I have to agree with Stumpers. After 6 months, I hope somebody immediately makes a proposal to reverse it. Walkazo (talk) - Per Zafum. M&SG (talk) - I asked the same question myself. Son of Suns mentioned that the reason for the European names is so that we're fair to the European gamers. Keep note that Mario Kart Wii was released in America AFTER it was released in Europe. If America got the game first, then the American names would be used instead. Yoshario (talk) - Per SoS. Really. We just had this proposal not a short while ago. ToadetteAnime4evur (talk) - per Zafum. R.O.B 128 (talk) - European names > American names at times. Mario5x (talk) - Per all. Arend (talk) - The Mario Kart Wii names we now use on Mario Wiki arn't just used in Europe, but also in Australia, New Zealand, South Africa and Japan. Comments In accordance with a previous proposal, for six months following a given proposal, no proposals can be made to overturn it. For example, we just had the proposal to use European names for subjects which first appeared in games that were released in Europe first. It passed, and so, for the next six months, we can't make proposals to overturn it. Therefore, this proposal is invalid, but there's no way you could have been expected to know... sorry about this. Stumpers (talk) (Hey Stumpers, have you found a link for that six-month rule? It would be nice if we could point to something in writing.) -- Son of Suns (talk) I can't remember such a rule, to be honest. Time Q (talk) Me neither. It's a pretty good-sounding rule to me, though. Although, 6 months is quite a long time. Bloc Partier (talk) Yeah, we really need to find if such a policy has ever really been established by proposal. And I agree, six months (half a year!) is a long time regardless. -- Son of Suns (talk) We operated on it - I remember several proposals being shot down because of it, but if no one remembers it, and I can't find it, perhaps we should make a proposal about it. :P Stumpers (talk) If we do, however, it should be a shorter time, like 1-3 months. 6 months is too long. ToadetteAnime4evur (talk) I definitely agree with that. -- Son of Suns (talk) As do I. Stumpers (talk) Agreed. 3 months tops. Anyone want to make it? Bloc Partier (talk) Well it was Stumpers' idea. Maybe he wants to make it. ToadetteAnime4evur (talk) Arend: Those aren't the Japanese names. o_O ToadetteAnime4evur (talk) The PAL version uses more names that are identical with the Japanese names or that are closer to them. For example, the B Dasher Mk. 2 has its original name, and the kart "Hot Rally" is known as Rally Romper in the PAL version. The American version removes the namely references to the B Dasher and to the 3D Hot Rally vehicle Monster by calling them "Sprinter" and "Tiny Titan." --Grandy02 (talk) Oicic. That's one of the things I don't like about NoA. ToadetteAnime4evur (talk) Personally, why the hell was it changed anyways? Doesn't that just screw things up for us Americans? :/ --The Blue Dragon (talk) It was decided in a proposal some days ago. Check the archive. Paper Yoshi (talk) I know that, P_Y. But where did the idea come from in the first place? --The Blue Dragon (talk) In the words of proposer Son of Suns, "This should help us curb American cultural imperialism at the wiki while simultaneously fostering a spirit of internationalism." The proposal passed by one vote after a long discussion with many insults against Americans and no insults sent back (unless "go USA" said once is an insult). :P Go figure, right? If it's any consolation, Blue, the proposal only affects a handful of titles, so it's not like it even matters that much to us in the US (lol), but, based on what was said during the proposal it apparently means a lot to people in Europe. Stumpers (talk) Change Six-Month Proposal Reversal Rule to 60 Days ALLOW REVERSAL OF PROPOSALS AFTER 60 DAYS 18-0 I recently learned of a rule that says proposals cannot be reversed for six months. However, six months seems like a ridiculously long wait, and some of these proposals really do need to be reversed. Simply, it only makes sense to change the limit to 60 days. Deadline: March 9, 2009, 17:00 Proposer: Ralphfan (talk) Change limit Ralphfan (talk) Per above! Corka Cola (talk) An actually really great idea. 6 months seens like more than enough of a trial period. 1.5 months is a great trial period!! Stumpers (talk) - Two months sounds good to me. I'd be up for anything from 2-3 months, but I'm happy as long as we have some policy to go by now. My apologies for propagating something that someone somehow made policy without it really being policy or whatever. (see below) P.S. to Corka: 60 days is 2 months, not 1.5 Per all ToadetteAnime4evur (talk) Tucayo (talk) - Per all MeritC (talk) - Per all; there is a situation that is REALLY nagging to me that I can't mention on this part of the proposal. Mario5x (talk) - Per Ralphfan Yoshario (talk) - Per Stumps Bloc Partier (talk) - Per all. White Knight (talk) - Per all. Walkazo (talk) - Per all. Generally after 6 months the proposals are either forgotten or so deeply entrenched in the way things are run that people just accept them; in the dynamic reality of an Internet community, being stagnant does not fly. Luigi 128 (talk) - Per all. Zafum (talk) - I completely agree! 6 months is such a long time, and there are certain proposals which really need to be reversed faster than that. The Great Gonzales (talk) - Change it. 6 months is unnecessarily long. 60 days is good, but I think 30 days would be even better. One month is more than enough time for people to make up their minds about almost any change. I'm in! I just read 6 months and jumped on the bandwagon! NEEDS CHANGING! Hyper Guy (talk) Per all Luigifan123 (talk) Mercury Mech (talk) - Per The Great Gonzales. Randoman123456789 (talk) - 6 months is ridiculously long, but 60 days is approximately two months, which is still an unnecessary amount of time. 30 days (approximately one month) is a neat idea. Per The Great Gonzales. Leave as is Comments Look at the proposal above! Ralphfan (talk) There's no actual rule about the time limit to revert a proposal, the sixth month thing is completely made up. So yeah, this proposal should be about setting the rule. --Blitzwing 12:04, 2 March 2009 (EST) Yeah, so if this proposal does not pass, there would be no rule about reverting proposals (as opposed to us "leaving as is" a six month rule, which apparently we never had). -- Son of Suns (talk) Yeah. And you should put the amount of months, not days. (60 days=2 months) ToadetteAnime4evur (talk) Yup, I was just parroting what I was told by people who were sysops and bureaucrats way before I was, so really there's no weight to the six month rule... I'd like to be able to assume that everything told to me is true, but alas. :3 Blitz, were you a sysop when that idea came about? You'd probably know more about how the notion came about and why it was used to block some proposals even when it wasn't policy than I would. Stumpers (talk) There was never any real idea of a "time limit" for reverting proposals. If someone saw a proposal didn't quite work out, they would just make another proposition and that's it. --Blitzwing 16:06, 3 March 2009 (EST) Except for the two or so proposals about Banjo and Conker articles that were shot down based on the fact that they were released so shortly after each other. :P Whatever - doesn't matter now. Stumpers (talk) Toadette: "60 days" is far more accurate because months are different amounts of days and if we say "two months from July 22*" that can be interpreted in a few different ways, such as two 30-day periods, two month name-changes, etc. So I'd go for days. Bloc Partier (talk) *Totally random. Okay, we'll do it... and then change it back 60 days later! :D DoctorWho 1995 (talk)