MarioWiki:Proposals/Archive/25: Difference between revisions
Time Turner (talk | contribs) mNo edit summary |
Yoshiwaker (talk | contribs) (Archiving) |
||
Line 151: | Line 151: | ||
I think Robo Koopa should keep its own article, and FA status - if it's long enough and good enough, what's the point of merging and losing a great article. Instead, we can just use <nowiki>{{main}}</nowiki>. If we merge it, we're bound to lose some information and that's not good for the Wiki. {{User|MrConcreteDonkey}} | I think Robo Koopa should keep its own article, and FA status - if it's long enough and good enough, what's the point of merging and losing a great article. Instead, we can just use <nowiki>{{main}}</nowiki>. If we merge it, we're bound to lose some information and that's not good for the Wiki. {{User|MrConcreteDonkey}} | ||
:But that would be inconsistent. Besides, all the information can easily be saved. [[Robo Koopa (episode)]] already has a complete record of events, so shortening the alter ego's History into a summary isn't an issue. The Trivia about the ''RoboCop'' and ''Terminator'' reference can also go into the episode page, and the Powers and Abilities chart can go into [[Robo Suit]] (along with the other Trivia point about the "destroy you miserable little meddlers" button). So the only thing we'd be losing is an entry in out list of FAs, but that's a small price to pay for a much more efficient and consistent organization of Koopa's 30+ alter egos. - {{User|Walkazo}} | :But that would be inconsistent. Besides, all the information can easily be saved. [[Robo Koopa (episode)]] already has a complete record of events, so shortening the alter ego's History into a summary isn't an issue. The Trivia about the ''RoboCop'' and ''Terminator'' reference can also go into the episode page, and the Powers and Abilities chart can go into [[Robo Suit]] (along with the other Trivia point about the "destroy you miserable little meddlers" button). So the only thing we'd be losing is an entry in out list of FAs, but that's a small price to pay for a much more efficient and consistent organization of Koopa's 30+ alter egos. - {{User|Walkazo}} | ||
}} | |||
===Merge Minor NPCs with their location=== | |||
There are a lot of articles for minor NPCs in RPGs that are too minor to be their own article. I believe we should merge them with the location where they are, so they can be found easily. Also, many of these articles are stubs anyway, so it would also get rid of some stubs. | |||
{{scrollbox|content= | |||
'''Proposer''': {{User|Yoshiwaker}}<br> | |||
'''Voting start''': March 27, 1:00 GMT<br> | |||
'''Deadline''': April 3, 23:59 GMT | |||
====Support==== | |||
#{{User|Yoshiwaker}} - Per my proposal. | |||
<!-- Please do not vote until the starting time has passed --> | |||
====Oppose==== | |||
#{{User|Zero777}} Per opposing comments. | |||
#{{User|Reversinator}} Per Zero. | |||
#{{User|New Super Mario}} Per Zero | |||
#{{User|Edofenrir}} - It might get rid of a few stubs, but it would also get rid of some pretty decent articles. I also think the location articles wouldn't really benefit from having those NPCs slapped on them. | |||
#{{User|Reddragon19k}} No way! Per all! | |||
#{{User|SWFlash}} Per Zero. | |||
#{{User|Iggykoopa}} per zero | |||
#{{User|Magikrazy51}} What's your definition of minor NPC? If it's "a character that has little to nothing to do with the main plot", that would include Culex, Jinx, and etc. I don't want any of these merged! If not, let me know in the comments and I'll change my vote. | |||
#{{User|Walkazo}} - Per all, including the anti-merging stuff being said in the comments. | |||
#{{User|Bowser's luma}} Per al. Who's al? All. | |||
#{{User|Luigi is OSAM}} Per All. Even if they are minor and non-playable, they still are characters. CJARACTERS ARE IMPORTANT, MINOR AND NON-PLAYABLE OR NOT! | |||
#{{User|UltraMario3000}} Per the purple dragon with green hair. | |||
#{{User|Nicke8}} Per all. | |||
#{{User|Bop1996}} Per Zero. | |||
#{{User|Ultrahammer5365}} Per Zero's comments. | |||
#{{User|Mario4Ever}} Per Zero. | |||
====Comments==== | |||
I hate the trigger-happy people on this wiki that shout "MERGE!" to all stubs. First of all, '''at least three hundred articles on this wiki, if not more, are minor characters.''' That's a lot of articles. Second, while they are minor, they are still characters, and they are officially named, and thus, they deserve an article. Third, how would this be better? I mean, a lot of the minor character articles are actually decently sized, and merging them would require some trimming, thus reducing quality. Fourth, why their location? Considering the amount of minor NPCs in a town, the articles would look cluttered. {{User|Reversinator}} | |||
:Also, small articles are not automatically bad: they might not even be stubs if all the information we could possibly find has been added (stubs are pages ''lacking'' info). It makes sense to merge characters who are attached at the hip (it cuts down on repetition and may boost comprehensiveness if all the info is together), and sometimes it is done for the sake of organization and consistency (like King Koopa's alter egos), but none of that is applicable to minor NPCs. - {{User|Walkazo}} | |||
::I agree with you 100%, though I do find it funny that you made a proposal to merge all the minor Mario Golf characters into one article and now you're against merging minor characters. --[[User:Reversinator|Reversinator]] 22:32, 25 March 2011 (EDT) | |||
:::Really? That must've been a while ago, because I can't remember doing that at all... - {{User|Walkazo}} | |||
::::Archive 18. I made a mistake though, you only supported it. You were the only one though, aside from Zero. --[[User:Reversinator|Reversinator]] 22:42, 25 March 2011 (EDT) | |||
:::::Ah, that makes more sense; I ''was'' a big supporter of making big lists of stuff back them, but I was pretty sure I hadn't made any proposals about it (the closest I came to one had something to do with Keys, iirc). Anyway, 2009's ''ancient'' history now: I'm not nearly as zealous about merging these days (well, depending on the situation, at least). - {{User|Walkazo}} | |||
@Reversinator: It's not just because they're stubs, but also that they are EXTREMELY minor. Most of them just say a couple of lines and do nothing else. {{User|Yoshiwaker}} | |||
:Walkazo: Didn't you co-write that with SMB? Anyways, to all users, if you see an article marked as a stub and it's off a (as this guy puts it) "minor NPC" then, unless the article has like two sentences or something like that, remove the template. It is the ''easiest'' way to get rid of stubs. When I'm bored and looking for something to do, I go to [[PipeProject:Unstubify|this page]] and just click random things on the list and get rid of any unnecessary stub templates. {{User|Marioguy1}} | |||
::Yeah, we were working together on it together, but I didn't think we ever came forward with a proposal, in the end: I got swamped by RL stuff, or something. Anyway, like you said, Stub templates are definitely put on things that aren't stubs all the time and fixing that is a very good thing to do, but I'd like to emphasize that people should look at them on a case-by-case basis (like most things on the wiki, really). One paragraph is probably fine for a lot of NPCs (or whatever), but some "minor" characters could have a lot of random info attached to them, and in those cases, a paragraph might indeed be short-changing the readers, in which case it would be a legitimate stub. Or at least, that's how I look at it. (Also, [[MarioWiki:Minor NPCs|"minor NPC"]] has been a term around the wiki for years: this guy didn't come up with it.) - {{User|Walkazo}} | |||
:::"working together on it together"? Aaanyways, do you think we could make a list of Minor NPCs? It wouldn't (necessarily) have to be in a mainspace article, but I think I'd like a list telling me what is and what isn't a minor NPC. {{User|Marioguy1}} | |||
::::You mean make a category for Minor NPCs? {{User|Bop1996}} | |||
@MG1: I considor "Minor NPC"s to be characters who do not help you in any way and have no relevance to the plot. {{User|Yoshiwaker}} | |||
:@Yoshiwaker: That definition is ''incredibly'' vague. What about a character who contributes to a minor side quest only taken upon by completionists, but if you complete that side quest, you can get a hint as to the main plot? That type of character is not uncommon in RPGs, so if I were to support this, I would want to have a clear, concise definition. {{User|Bop1996}} | |||
At least my proposal to merge all generic humans into one article had more good reasons then just they're all small/stubs and it will look good. Merging them all into a location article is as random as that TPP that wanted to merge Bozzo with Watchitt and NO it will not make the articles nicer, it will make it look cluttered-up, unorganized, and unprofessional. And plus, WE ARE USERS, NOT AMERICANS, what do we do when we notice a list of related articles are stubs, we either add information to expand it or do something to them (like merging) with very good logic and support, we don't lazily decide let's merge them all because I don't know a thing about about the article or I'm too lazy so I'll do the easiest thing that comes to mind without thinking over it. (P.s. No offense, and this wasn't directed only towards the proposer.) {{User|Zero777}} | |||
::::"working together on it together"... yeaaah, I was ''really'' tired when I wrote that last comment: I'm just glad that was the ''only'' mistake ^_^; Anyway, in its strictest sense, I'd say a minor NPC is a character who you don't ever need to interact with in order to complete a game, including side-quests. For example, almost everyone in [[:Category:Flip-Flop_Folk]] is a "minor NPC", with exceptions like [[Red and Green (Super Paper Mario)]], [[Saffron]], [[Old Man Watchitt]], [[Pook]], etc. However, this is just a very basic definition: there's probably lots of exceptions, and any single blanket statement probably isn't the way to go about this; a list in MarioWiki namespace might be a more solid approach, but I don't really see any benefits of it: so we'd know they're "minor NPCs", so what? A basic knowledge of the games should tell people whether or not the pages are lacking info or not and should or shouldn't be labeled as Stubs, so a list isn't needed for that (for example); if we were going to delete all the pages and wanted to show people what not to write about, an inventory would make sense, but if the proposal fails, that's obviously not a factor. A category would not be a good idea, since labeling things as "minor NPCs" is a value judgement; that's okay for deciding what we do behind-the-scenes, but that sorta thing shouldn't go into mainspace: it's akin to speculation. - {{User|Walkazo}} | |||
:::::That was the point I was trying to make. The term "Minor NPCs" is so subjective, there would have to be one concise definition used if we pass this proposal. {{User|Bop1996}} | |||
::::::I think my definition was quite concise. I also clarified/changed the proposal to make it easier to show that the main purpose isn't because of them being stubs.{{User|Yoshiwaker}} | |||
:::::::You might want to put your definition right in the proposal itself (so readers don't have to comb through the comments to figure out what exactly will be merged). You should also explain ''why'' you think they're too minor for articles: simply saying "''There are a lot of articles for minor NPCs in RPGs that are too minor to be their own article[s].''" is rather tautological, leaving the "they're stubs" argument as the only thing to go on (the bit about finding things more easily doesn't relate to the "they're too minor for pages" aspect). - {{User|Walkazo}} | |||
If I'm right on the definition, you want Culex, Jinx and Monstermana merged with Monstro Town, Toadofsky merged with Tadpole Pond and The Sunglasses Salesman and Doot-Doot Sisters merged with Isle Delfino? They have nothing to do with the main plot. {{User|Magikrazy51}} | |||
}} | }} |
Revision as of 06:56, April 4, 2011
MarioWiki:Proposals/Archive Template
Allow autoconfirmed users edit other users' userpagesDON'T ALLOW 1-34 Recently I have seen red links, redirect links, etc. on other peoples userpages along with deleted images and I was wondering if us autoconfirmed users can edit their userpages for errors, etc. It really doesn't make sense that only sysops get to edit this so I set up this proposal. Also, on Wikia we get to edit others' userpages along with most other wikis. Proposer: Kaptain K. Rool (talk) Support
Oppose
Comments@Yoshiwaker: We can revert vandalism if they do put junk on our userpages and we do need to help the community too. Kaptain K. Rool (talk)
I think we would need to talk to Steve about this even if the proposal did pass... Marioguy1 (talk)
Imagine a vandal coming onto your userpage and replacing all of your personal information with fake, unnecessary and inappropriate information that could be offensive to you. This. What if people go to my user page and say "I hate (insert any Nintendo character here)!"? It offends me a lot when Kirby or Diddy Kong gets insulted. DK and Diddy Kong vs Bowser and Bowser Jr. (talk) Basically, if a user page has any red links, let the Sysops handle that stuff. That's why the Sysops are here; if you want a user page fixed, just contact me or any other Sysop. M&SG (talk) @Kaptain K. Rool - Adding on to what I said above: you say we need to "help out the community" by "removing red links, redirect links...along with deleted images," but technically, userpages are not really part of the community in this context. Pretty much the whole point of it being your userpage is that it's, well, your userpage. If other people start editing it left and right, then it's not really just yours anymore is it? That's the one thing that sets userpages apart from every other article on this wiki. In your argument, it seems to me that you're almost saying that the prospect of complete (and possibly recurring) userpage obliteration is better than some of the fairly minor problems you list above. Long story short: the only part of the wiki that we are responsible for improving is the articles. Phoenix (talk) 17:48, 19 March 2011 (EDT)
I can see it possibly working if you could lock off sections of a page. Which would be FANTASTIC! for many articles. E.g. All of the stuff like release dates for past games that aren't going to change could be locked off. But until then...No. Geniusguy445 (talk)
Merge all of King Koopa's alter egos into one articleMerge to King Koopa's alter egos 20-3-0 On The Super Mario Bros. Super Show! King Koopa has many alter egos. These alter egos are just him in a different costume. The costumes don't give him any extra abilities, they are only seen for one episode, and while wearing the costumes, King Koopa is no different from when he's not wearing the costumes. Thus, I propose to merge the alter-egos of King Koopa that currently have an article (Al Koopone, Captain Koopa, Emperor Augustus Septemberus Octoberus Koopa,Kid Koopa, Koopa Khan, Koopa Klaus (alter ego), Moon Man Koopa, and Robo Koopa (alter ego)) into a single article. I'd prefer merging them to King Koopa's alter egos, but I'll also add a section to merge them to Bowser. Proposer: Reversinator (talk) Merge to King Koopa's alter egos
Merge to Bowser
Leave them splitCommentsI agree. Just as how the Super Strikes and Mega Strikes were merged together, these alter egos should be merged together. DK and Diddy Kong vs Bowser and Bowser Jr. (talk) How are you planning on merging? Are you going to add a new column to the table, or do something altogether different. Bop1996 (talk)
Before merging King Koopa, I suggest that you merge Robo Koopa to Robo Suit, because I feel that information belongs there rather than being deleted. Also, what are we going to do with the Featured Article status on Robo Koopa if this proposal passes? BabyLuigiOnFire (talk)
Although I believe the pages have enough information to stand by themselves, I'll stay open to any opinions before voting, as I never watched The Super Mario Bros. Super Show!. Paper Yoshi (talk)
While this is going on, how about merging all of the pages on the (sort of borrowing my brother's idea here, please don't add a megabyte of protests to my userpage, again) Super Paper Mario people, and other single-appearance things? Mpeng (talk)
I think Robo Koopa should keep its own article, and FA status - if it's long enough and good enough, what's the point of merging and losing a great article. Instead, we can just use {{main}}. If we merge it, we're bound to lose some information and that's not good for the Wiki. MrConcreteDonkey (talk)
Merge Minor NPCs with their locationThere are a lot of articles for minor NPCs in RPGs that are too minor to be their own article. I believe we should merge them with the location where they are, so they can be found easily. Also, many of these articles are stubs anyway, so it would also get rid of some stubs. |