Template talk:SMB3 levels: Difference between revisions
From the Super Mario Wiki, the Mario encyclopedia
Jump to navigationJump to search
m (→Oppose) |
m (Text replacement - "{{ProposalOutcome" to "{{proposal outcome") |
||
| (15 intermediate revisions by 13 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
==Delete this template== | ==Delete this template== | ||
{{TPP}} | {{settled TPP}} | ||
{{proposal outcome|failed|1-10|keep}} | |||
I honestly think that this template should be deleted, as only three levels on it have been created, and this is only found on two of them. This is just unnecessary at the moment, but if the levels get created, we can bring it back. | I honestly think that this template should be deleted, as only three levels on it have been created, and this is only found on two of them. This is just unnecessary at the moment, but if the levels get created, we can bring it back. | ||
'''Proposer:''' {{User|Goomba}}<br> | '''Proposer:''' {{User|Goomba}}<br> | ||
'''Deadline:''' | '''Deadline:''' May 27, 2013, 23:59 GMT | ||
===Support=== | ===Support=== | ||
#{{User|Goomba}} Per proposal. | #{{User|Goomba}} Per proposal. | ||
===Oppose=== | ===Oppose=== | ||
#{{User|YoshiKong}} – We should only delete something if it is unnecessary and serves so purpose. That's not the case here at all: the template is there to provide navigation between the level articles, and it's perfectly allowed, even if most of the articles haven't been created. And what would be the point of deleting it if we had to code it all again <!--or alternatively restore it, but that defeats my argument-->when the articles are created? And how many articles must be created before the template is considered "necessary"? Think of it as a checklist, where a blue link is complete, and a red link still needs to be taken care of. Having the red links sitting there would at least let users know that those articles are needed. Not having them there at all would leave users in the dark that such articles need to be written. If we had a red link on a page, would we say to remove it until the page is created? Taking the approach that you are proposing is likely to make this seem like the best way to do things throughout the whole wiki, which it isn't. And Freakworld, you're saying that the level articles are redundant anyway, as they are already included in the world articles? This would go against [[MarioWiki:New | #{{User|YoshiKong}} – We should only delete something if it is unnecessary and serves so purpose. That's not the case here at all: the template is there to provide navigation between the level articles, and it's perfectly allowed, even if most of the articles haven't been created. And what would be the point of deleting it if we had to code it all again <!--or alternatively restore it, but that defeats my argument-->when the articles are created? And how many articles must be created before the template is considered "necessary"? Think of it as a checklist, where a blue link is complete, and a red link still needs to be taken care of. Having the red links sitting there would at least let users know that those articles are needed. Not having them there at all would leave users in the dark that such articles need to be written. If we had a red link on a page, would we say to remove it until the page is created? Taking the approach that you are proposing is likely to make this seem like the best way to do things throughout the whole wiki, which it isn't. And Freakworld, you're saying that the level articles are redundant anyway, as they are already included in the world articles? This would go against [[MarioWiki:New articles#Level Articles|our policy on level articles]] and [[mb:threads/21100|this forum collab. thread]], which deems that all individual game levels must have it's own article. | ||
#{{User|King Pikante}} Per YoshiKong. | #{{User|King Pikante}} Per YoshiKong. | ||
#{{User|Yoshi876}} Per YoshiKong. | #{{User|Yoshi876}} Per YoshiKong. | ||
#{{User|LeftyGreenMario}} Per YoshiKong. All game levels must have it is own articles. | |||
#{{User|BowserJunior}} Per YoshiKong. | |||
#{{User|Mariotime11}} Per YoshiKong. | |||
#{{User|NewSMBU}} what YK said. | |||
#{{User|C.G.4.U.}}Per YoshiKong. | |||
#{{User|Iggy Koopa Jr}}Per all. | |||
#{{User|Walkazo}} - Per YoshiKong. | |||
===Comments=== | ===Comments=== | ||
I have removed my oppose, because the template really is unnecessary (see above). -{{User|Freakworld}} | I have removed my oppose, because the template really is unnecessary (see above). -{{User|Freakworld}} | ||
@YoshiKong Sorry, I didn't know that policy existed. I guess I will just leave this topic untouched as I don't want to violate anything. -{{User|Freakworld}} | |||
== Super Mario Bros. 3 Stage Names == | |||
Pretty much all the levels of the game are given unique individual titles in the ''Super Mario Bros. 3'' Nintendo Power Strategy Guide. Should they be listed? [[User:LinkTheLefty|LinkTheLefty]] ([[User talk:LinkTheLefty|talk]]) 13:40, 21 December 2014 (EST) | |||
Latest revision as of 15:51, May 31, 2024
Delete this template[edit]
|
This talk page proposal has already been settled. Please do not edit any of the sections in the proposal. If you wish to discuss the article, do so in a new header below the proposal. |
keep 1-10
I honestly think that this template should be deleted, as only three levels on it have been created, and this is only found on two of them. This is just unnecessary at the moment, but if the levels get created, we can bring it back.
Proposer: Goomba (talk)
Deadline: May 27, 2013, 23:59 GMT
Support[edit]
Oppose[edit]
- YoshiKong (talk) – We should only delete something if it is unnecessary and serves so purpose. That's not the case here at all: the template is there to provide navigation between the level articles, and it's perfectly allowed, even if most of the articles haven't been created. And what would be the point of deleting it if we had to code it all again when the articles are created? And how many articles must be created before the template is considered "necessary"? Think of it as a checklist, where a blue link is complete, and a red link still needs to be taken care of. Having the red links sitting there would at least let users know that those articles are needed. Not having them there at all would leave users in the dark that such articles need to be written. If we had a red link on a page, would we say to remove it until the page is created? Taking the approach that you are proposing is likely to make this seem like the best way to do things throughout the whole wiki, which it isn't. And Freakworld, you're saying that the level articles are redundant anyway, as they are already included in the world articles? This would go against our policy on level articles and this forum collab. thread, which deems that all individual game levels must have it's own article.
- King Pikante (talk) Per YoshiKong.
- Yoshi876 (talk) Per YoshiKong.
- LeftyGreenMario (talk) Per YoshiKong. All game levels must have it is own articles.
- BowserJunior (talk) Per YoshiKong.
- Mariotime11 (talk) Per YoshiKong.
- NewSMBU (talk) what YK said.
- C.G.4.U. (talk)Per YoshiKong.
- Iggy Koopa Jr (talk)Per all.
- Walkazo (talk) - Per YoshiKong.
Comments[edit]
I have removed my oppose, because the template really is unnecessary (see above). -Freakworld (talk)
@YoshiKong Sorry, I didn't know that policy existed. I guess I will just leave this topic untouched as I don't want to violate anything. -Freakworld (talk)
Super Mario Bros. 3 Stage Names[edit]
Pretty much all the levels of the game are given unique individual titles in the Super Mario Bros. 3 Nintendo Power Strategy Guide. Should they be listed? LinkTheLefty (talk) 13:40, 21 December 2014 (EST)
