MarioWiki:Proposals: Difference between revisions

From the Super Mario Wiki, the Mario encyclopedia
Jump to navigationJump to search
No edit summary
 
Line 1: Line 1:
<table style="background:#fefffe;color:black;-moz-border-radius:8px;border:2px solid black;padding:4px" width=100%><tr><td>
{{/Header}}
<div class="proposal">
<center>http://img33.picoodle.com/img/img33/9/9/17/f_propcopym_9045f2d.png</center>
<br clear="all">
{| align="center" style="width: 85%; background-color: #f1f1de; border: 2px solid #996; padding: 5px; color:black"
|'''Proposals''' can be new features (such as an extension), removal of a previously added feature that has tired out, or new policies that must be approved via [[Wikipedia:Wikipedia:Consensus|consensus]] before any action(s) are done.
*Any user can support or oppose, but must have a strong reason for doing so, not, e.g., "I like this idea!"
*"Vote" periods last for one week.
*All past proposals are [[/Archive|archived]].
|}
A proposal section works like a discussion page: comments are brought up and replied to using indents (colons, such as : or ::::) and all edits are signed using the code <nowiki>{{user|</nowiki>''User name''<nowiki>}}</nowiki>. '''Signing with the signature code <nowiki>~~~(~)</nowiki> is not allowed''' due to technical issues.


<h2 style="color:black">How To</h2>
==Writing guidelines==
#Actions that users feel are appropriate to have community approval first can be added by anyone, but they must have a strong argument.
===Change how "infinitely respawning" enemies are counted in level enemy tables===
#Users then vote and discuss on the issue during that week. The "deadline" for the proposal is one week from posting at:
Currently, the wiki lists enemy counts for each level in tables located in that level's article. This is all well and good, but the problem arises when infinitely respawning ones (like piped ones) are included. As seen [[World 6-B (New Super Mario Bros.)|here]], this is awkwardly written as
##Monday to Thursday: 17:00 (5pm)
*"[number] (not including the infinite [enemy] spawning from [number] [method]),"
##Friday and Saturday: 20:00 (8pm)
and why shouldn't it include them? That method of writing is ungainly, misleading, and bloats the table's width unnecessarily. Therefore, I propose the alternate writing of
##Sunday: 15:00 (3pm)
*"[number] + (∞ x [number]),"
#Every vote should have a reason accompanying it.
with the "x [number]" and parentheses being removed if there is only one case. So in the linked example, it would be "6 + ∞," which says the same thing without contradicting itself with a lengthy diatribe.
#At any time a vote may be rejected if at least '''three''' active users believe the vote truly has no merit or was cast in bad faith. However, there must be strong reasons supporting the invalidation.
<br>(Also I had to restrain myself from using * rather than x because that's how I'm used to writing multiplication in equations. Thanks, higher-level math classes defaulting to "X" as a variable! But the asterisk could be used too, anyway.)
#"<nowiki>#&nbsp;</nowiki>" should be added under the last vote of each support/oppose section to show another blank line.
#At the deadline, the validity of each vote and the discussion is reviewed by the community.
#Any proposal that has three votes or less at deadline will automatically be listed as "[[Wikipedia:Quorum|NO QUORUM]]." The original proposer then has the option to relist said proposal to generate more discussion.
#All proposals are archived. The original proposer must '''''take action''''' accordingly if the outcome of the proposal dictates it. If it requires the help of a sysop, the proposer can ask for that help.


The times are in EDT, and are set so that the user is more likely to be online at those times (after school, weekend nights).
'''Proposer''': {{User|Doc von Schmeltwick}}<br>
'''Deadline''': September 23, 2024, 23:59 GMT


So for example, if a proposal is added on Saturday night at 11:59 PM EDT, the deadline is the next Saturday night at 8:00 PM. If it is indeed a minute later, the deadline is a day plus 15 hours (Sunday), as opposed to a day minus 4 hours.  
====Support====
#{{User|Doc von Schmeltwick}} - Per
#{{User|Altendo}} - This doesn't sound like a bad idea, although I do think there should be an asterisk like "*" instead which leads to a note saying "not including the infinite [enemy] spawning from [number] [method]", as enemies can spawn in different ways, and showing how they spawn could still be useful. If we just show "∞ x [number]", it wouldn't show how Goombas are spawned in (the linked page doesn't specify how they are spawned in otherwise). But I do like the idea of shortening the "count" section of tables.
#{{User|ThePowerPlayer}} Per Altendo. This formatting is much better, but I also think some note of where the infinite enemy spawner(s) originate from should be preserved.
#{{User|Super Mario RPG}} Per all.


Also,
====Oppose====
<br><span style="font-family:sans-serif;font-size:30px;line-height:30px;font-weight:900;">NO PROPOSALS ABOUT HAVING BANJO AND CONKER ARTICLES</span> -The Management.
#{{User|Hewer}} I don't see the benefit of changing this. The current wording is straightforward and succinct, I'd expect the reader to understand "6 (not including the infinite Goombas spawning from one Warp Pipe)" easily. Changing it to "6 + ∞" just makes it less clear for no reason, I'd definitely be confused if I saw that and didn't know this specific context. The fact that the other support votes have also brought up how doing this risks losing the specific information completely (and suggested a more long-winded solution that seems to contradict the proposal) compels me to oppose this more.


__TOC__
====Comments====
{{@|Hewer}} - "succinct" would generally imply "short, sweet, and to-the-point," of which the current method is the exact opposite. I'm fine with including an asterisk-note next to the infinity, but the current one is much too bloated, outright admits to stating false information, and since the tables are center-aligned with that horizontal-bloat, it makes it look incredibly awkward. [[User:Doc von Schmeltwick|Doc von Schmeltwick]] ([[User talk:Doc von Schmeltwick|talk]]) 12:41, September 17, 2024 (EDT)
:I guess we just have totally opposing opinions on this one, because I don't personally find ten words of explanation to be "much too bloated", would rather "state false information" (not really what's happening because it's immediately clarified and the only way not to state any "false" info would be to just put "∞" which helps no one) than obscure the meaning of what we're trying to say, and I don't at all think the somewhat wider tables look "incredibly awkward". This is a case where I feel giving more explanation than "6 + ∞" is necessary for the sake of conveying clear information, so I'd rather prioritise that over having a thin table (which I still don't really see why that's so desirable). {{User:Hewer/sig}} 03:19, September 18, 2024 (EDT)


<center><span style="font-size:200%">CURRENTLY: '''{{LOCALTIME}}, {{LOCALDAY}} {{LOCALMONTHNAME}} {{LOCALYEAR}} (EDT)'''</span></center>
==New features==
===Add {{iw|mw|Extension:WikiLove|WikiLove}} extension (includes templates)===
Inspired by my recently passed Thanks proposal and engagement with editors over time, I think a precedent has been set to add more [[Wikipedia:WikiLove|WikiLove]] features on to the wiki so that (willing) members may enjoy engaging with one another and feel motivated when others compliment their work, or just personal appreciations.


==New Features==
The main thing this proposal is focused on is the {{iw|mw|Extension:WikiLove|MediaWiki extension}}, which is called WikiLove. On the rationale of the {{iw|mw|WikiLove}} page, it says that lesser experienced users may feel discouraged when looked down upon by more experienced editors as they try to figure out how to do wikis, and this could help motivate not only newer editors, but also more experienced editors.
''None at the moment.


==Removals==
It says one can make custom WikiLove messages. Being a wiki on ''Super Mario'', I think this wiki could aim to do WikiLove messages themed around the ''Super Mario'' franchise. The community can decide on WikiLove messages if this proposal passes (e.g., one message could say like "You're a super star like Mario"), as well as personalized ones toward editors. But if others do not want involvement, the courtesy policy can be updated to reflect this.
''None at the moment.


==Splits & Merges==
I wish there were more images to show, but here's a [[mw:File:WikiLove-screenshot-2014.png|representative image]] to show how WikiLove would look. Would it be worth giving this a try?
===Orange Yoshi & Brown Yoshi===
On this Wiki, we currently have articles that are technically conjecturally named: [[Orange Yoshi]] and [[Brown Yoshi]].  They are named in the same pattern as we saw in ''[[Yoshi's Story]]'' for the green, red, yellow, pink, blue, and light blue Yoshis.  The articles say that Brown Yoshi appears in ''[[Super Mario World 2: Yoshi's Island]]'' and ''[[Yoshi's Island: Super Mario Advance 3]]''.  In the latter his shoes and saddle were recolored to match the current shoes and sattle of Orange Yoshi. The article claims that Brown Yoshi was replaced by Orange Yoshi in ''[[Yoshi's Island DS]]''.  Yet, in all of the artwork for both of the games we claim Brown Yoshi to be in depict Orange Yoshi instead of Brown Yoshi.  This includes the soundtrack album as well.  Another claim is that Brown Yoshi made a cameo in the ''[[Yoshi's Story]]'' introduction.  Take a look:[http://i124.photobucket.com/albums/p38/StumpersII/BrownYoshi.jpg]  That's Orange Yoshi, without a doubt.  I've also noticed that all of the in-game artwork of Brown Yoshi (seen only in the Japanese version) appear to have replaced Orange Yoshi with Brown Yoshi!


So what does this all mean?  Provided that no one has an official source that I don't know about, there is no proof that Orange Yoshi and Brown Yoshi are simply a recoloring of the same character, done as a result of technical limitations of the ''Yoshi's Island'' engine. My biggest support is that all artwork outside of the game shows Orange Yoshi.  If there really were two different characters, why would Nintendo choose to draw Orange Yoshi rather than Brown Yoshi in promotional artwork?  Or to chose Orange Yoshi instead of Brown Yoshi for the ''[[Yoshi's Story]]'' cameo?
'''Edit:''' For clarity, if this proposal passes, this also means WikiLove templates will be created, like how Wikipedia has them. It can be what the community decides, and categorical examples could include {{iw|wikipedia|Template:Happy New Year|seasonal}}, {{iw|wikipedia|Template:Doggy|animals}}, {{iw|wikipedia|Template:Glass of milk|drinks}}, or {{iw|wikipedia|Template:Friend|expressing friendships}}, and obviously ''Super Mario''.


The proposal: I'd like us to merge the two articles together under the title "Orange Yoshi."  Of course, we'd need to include info regarding how Orange Yoshi looked Brown.
'''Proposer''': {{User|Super Mario RPG}}<br>
'''Deadline''': September 20, 2024, 23:59 GMT


'''Proposer:''' {{User|Stumpers}}<br>
====Support====
'''Deadline:''' June 18, 2008, 17:00
#{{User|Super Mario RPG}} Per.
#{{User|ThePowerPlayer}} This would be a great form of positive feedback to counter the struggles faced by new and existing editors alike, since learning how to use a wiki is more difficult than you might expect. Ultimately, this should increase the feeling of community around the wiki to keep editing from feeling like a chore.
# {{User|Derekblue1}} I know people are happy with what I do ever since I update the Discord server on my progress on ''Mario is Missing!''. The WikiLove extension will make people feel more connected. I see this as a boost of encouragement just like the Thanks extension.
#{{User|Technetium}} Seems really fun, especially if we go full on Mario theming with it!
#{{User|Sparks}} Hooray for more positivity!
#{{User|DryBonesBandit}} <s>give me my glass o' milk now</s> This seems like it would be a nice addition to the wiki. Per all!
#{{User|FanOfRosalina2007}} I know I had a rough time when I first joined some of the websites I'm currently on today, so I'm all for this! I just love having the option to thank people and encourage them! Per all!
#{{User|BMfan08}} Sure! I'm all for kittens (I could even make do with [[Kitten|Mario kittens]]). Per all!


====Support (merge)====
====Oppose====
#{{User|Stumpers}} My reasoning is above.  In my opinion, we have simply mistaken the color intended to be orange to be brown instead.
#[[User:Ultimatetoad|Ultimatetoad]]. (Stumpers' note: his reason is below.)
#[[User:Ninjayoshi|Ninjayoshi]] - Only these Yoshi articles should be merged.  Otherwise, per Stumpers.
#{{user|InfectedShroom}} - Per Stupmers and the fact that Brown Yoshi is a ''tiny'' article.
#{{User|Walkazo}} - Per all. Plus, having all the conjecture, controversy and subjective images on one page will make it easier for readers to understand the matter and make their own deductons.
 
====Oppose (keep separate)====
#{{user|HyperToad}} I see no reason for this. It hasn't been proven they are the same, and I think they should have their own articles.


====Comments====
====Comments====
Just a note to everyone who doesn't want all Yoshi's merged, you should know that I am a separatist in light of the six Yoshi characters in ''[[Yoshi's Story]]''.  This proposal has nothing to do with that. :) {{User|Stumpers}}
{{@|ThePowerPlayer}} I realized WikiLove templates could fit into the scope of this proposal, so it's been updated, if your "Support" will count towards voting for those as well. [[User:Super Mario RPG|Super Mario RPG]] ([[User talk:Super Mario RPG|talk]]) 22:24, September 13, 2024 (EDT)


I removed my above comment to try to avoid confusing peoples........ but, yeah, I always thought the [[Orange Yoshi]] article was weird... - [[User:Ultimatetoad|Ultimatetoad]]
I really like this, but does Porplemontage know about this proposal? I know he approved and implemented the "Thanks" extension, but I just wanna be sure! {{User:Sparks/sig}} 22:37, September 13, 2024 (EDT)
:{{@|Sparks}} The proposal is easily viewable on this page. And the proposal basically concerns a WikiLove system in general (since I updated it to also mention templates), so something like {{fake link|MarioWiki:WikiLove}} page can be set up with the corresponding templates. [[User:Super Mario RPG|Super Mario RPG]] ([[User talk:Super Mario RPG|talk]]) 08:17, September 14, 2024 (EDT)
::Alrighty! Good to know. {{User:Sparks/sig}} 08:52, September 14, 2024 (EDT)


===Forms===
==Removals==
''None at the moment.''


I've been wanting to do this for a while, ao I'll be blunt: having articles like [[Fire Mario]] is stupuid. It's Mario with a Fire Flower: all of that info belongs in the [[Fire Flower]] article. The same goes for all Mario's forms: [[Ice Mario]], [[Wing Mario]], etc., and quite a few "subspecies": [[Beach Koopa]]s (Koopa's without their shells) and [[Fishin' Lakitu]]s (lakitus with Fishing Poles). I never did quite understand why these articles were needed. My proposal is that we merge all of these "form" articles with their respective power-up/character.
==Changes==
===Rename the remaining baseball teams to their current titles===
One thing is certain: ''Mario Super Sluggers'' was first released in Japan almost three years after ''Mario Superstar Baseball'' was first released in said country. In this case, I humbly suggest that there's a possibility to move the remaining baseball team pages with their ''Mario Superstar Baseball'' name to their current name from ''Mario Super Sluggers''. So far, the current names already in use are the [[Peach Monarchs]] and [[Bowser Monsters]].


Please note that full-fledged alter-egos (like [[Dr. Mario]]) should certainly stay, as should "forms" that are treated like seperate characters ([[Dry Bowser]] and [[Giga Bowser]]); but there are limits, people.
The following of the remaining pages will be affected by the move:
*[[Mario Sunshines]] → {{fake link|Mario Fireballs}}
*[[Yoshi Islanders]] → {{fake link|Yoshi Eggs (team)}}
*[[Wario Greats]] → {{fake link|Wario Muscles}}
*[[DK Kongs]] → {{fake link|DK Wilds}}


'''Proposer''': [[User:Ultimatetoad|Ultimatetoad]]
Once this proposal passes, we'll be able to move the remaining baseball teams with their ''Mario Superstar Baseball'' names to their current ''Mario Super Sluggers'' titles.


'''Deadline''': Next Thursday, 11:54 A.M.
'''Proposer''': {{User|GuntherBayBeee}}<br>
'''Deadline''': September 19, 2024, 23:59 GMT


====Support====
====Support====
#[[User:Ultimatetoad|Ultimatetoad]]per proposal
#{{User|GuntherBayBeee}} Per proposal.
#[[User:Doc von Schmeltwick|Doc von Schmeltwick]] ([[User talk:Doc von Schmeltwick|talk]]) - Kept forgetting to do this during my ongoing sports project.
#{{User|Jdtendo}} The most recent names should be prioritized.
#{{User|Super Mario RPG}} Definitely.
#{{User|ThePowerPlayer}} Per (baseb)all.
#{{User|Hewer}} Don't see why not.
#{{User|Killer Moth}} Per proposal. Sounds like a good idea.
#{{User|Technetium}} Per proposal.
#{{User|Windy}} Per all.
#{{User|BMfan08}} Per all. <s>I wish we had more than just one team in ''Sluggers''</s>
#{{User|FanOfRosalina2007}} Consistency. Per all.


====Oppose====
====Oppose====
#{{User|MegaMario9910}} The forms are different from what the main character is. Each form has played a role in a game(s), so its not much minor.
#{{user|InfectedShroom}} - Per myself in the comments.
#{{User|Stumpers}} - I could see this maybe for minor transformations, but something like Fire Mario?  That's come up in a huge number of games in a huge number of forms... for instance the revival in SMG.
#Per the smart people above me. {{user|Toadette 4evur}}
#[[User:Ninjayoshi|Ninjayoshi]] - Per all, especially InfectedShroom.
#{{User|Goomb-omb}} if we can provide separate articles for each, each one providing encyclopedic information, why shouldn't we?


====Comments====
====Comments====
OK, I have two reasons for opposing this proposal. 1) They (they being the other forms) have official names, have long enough articles to be stubs, and are a different part of the Mario Universe. For example, Fishin' Lakitus are more different than one would think. They will not attack Mario unless he grabs the Mushrooom, making them harmless until the player takes action. Also, take the Mario forms thing as an example. Statue Mario would not fit under the Tanooki suit article. This is because the Tanooki Suit article explains what the Tanooki Suit ''does'', while the Statue Mario article explains what Statue Mario ''is''. 2) This proposal is too vague. You did not specify which articles would need this, as some people may agree on some articles but not on others. This must be a long, article by article process if everyone is to agree. Sorry to bore you with such a long explanation, but there's my opinion. {{user|InfectedShroom}}
===Decide how to handle the "latest portrayal" section in infoboxes===
Currently, in infoboxes, the "latest portrayal" section of it is inconsistent across characters. When ''[[Paper Mario: The Thousand-Year Door (Nintendo Switch)|Paper Mario: The Thousand-Year Door]]'' came out, for example, it listed both [[Kevin Afghani]] (Mario's current voice actor) and [[Charles Martinet]] (who voices Mario in ''The Thousand-Year Door'' from original archival voicing) as Mario's latest portrayals, yet [[Jen Taylor]] (whose voice clips were also reused) wasn't added to Peach's latest portrayal. Therefore, to make these infoboxes consistent for characters with multiple voice actors, I am proposing several options:
*Option 1: Only add in the current voice actor for the character (reissues with archival voices from retired voice actors will not be added).
*Option 2: Only add in the voice actor for the character in the most recent game (reissues with archival voices will overtake the "current" voice actor if the latest one did not record voice lines for the character, the current voice actor will be re-added to the infobox following the release of a game with voices from the current voice actor).
*Option 3: Add both the current voice actor and the voice actor for the latest release (this puts two voice actors in the "latest portrayal" section if the character is voiced via archival footage from a retired voice actor, but the current voice actor also gets to remain. When a new game comes out with new voice lines from the current voice actor, the voice actor from the previous release will be removed).
*Option 4: Do nothing (infoboxes with both actors will not change, and same with infoboxes with the current actor even if a game featuring archival voicing from a retired voice actor is the latest one).


Um.... the [[Statue Mario]] page is already merged with Tanooki suit. I will reply to both of you'r opposals in order:
With regards to mixed use of voices, if multiple voice actors voice a single character in a single game, the latest person who voiced the character as of the game's release takes priority, meaning that archival voices from retired actors will not appear in the infobox if the character in that game is also (and especially mostly) voiced by the current actor for that character. As for other media (like ''[[The Super Mario Bros. Movie]]''), whether or not the game/other media actor takes priority or if both should be listed is also of question, but I will likely wait until the [[Untitled The Super Mario Bros. Movie follow-up|follow-up]] to create that proposal.


1. Statue Mario is.... Mario turned into a statue. If that info does not belong on the Tanooki suit page then at least it can be merged into the Mario page.
'''EDIT:''' With regards to [[User:Tails777|Tails777]]'s vote, I don't know exactly how it will play out if Option 3 passes, although I will say if a game (like a compilation) does have a single character voiced by more than one voice actor who isn't the current one, the latest voice actor whose voice clips are used in the game as of the game's release will be the second option added to the infobox (like Peach in ''3D All-Stars'', who would've listes Samantha Kelly as her current and ''Galaxy'' voice actress, as well as Jen Taylor as her ''Sunshine'' voice actress, although I don't think it would be that consistent because it would exclude Leslie Swan, her ''64'' voice actress, but since Jen Taylor was the more recent of the two, she is the one who is listed).


2. Which articles am i talking about? well, for a beggining, we could do all of the articles in the Mario Forms template. Those are the ones that this proposal is mainly about. The Beach Koopa and Fishing Lakitu thing is debatable: I might remove them from the proposal, especially after that little tidbit you gace me just now. My real problem with these articles is that, when you get right down to it, whther it behaves differently or not, it is still just a lakitu with a fishing pole. Maybe it does'nt attack Mario because it's hands are full.... - [[User:Ultimatetoad|Ultimatetoad]]
'''Proposer''': {{User|Altendo}}<br>
:Ah. Shoulda checked my sources on the Statue Mario thing. My bad. But the point still stands. The "Mario" article tells what it ''is'', and the power-up article tells what it ''does''. And I still don't think that the enemies should be merged simply because they ''do'' behave differently... {{user|InfectedShroom}}
'''Deadline''': September 21, 2024, 23:59 GMT


===Prevent loss of information (Recipes)===
====Only add in the current voice actor====
A previously passed proposal (which can be found [[MarioWiki:Proposals/Archive_7#Recipes|here]]) called for the merging of the [[:Category:Recipes|Recipes articles]] into one long page. While I'm not particularly bothered about this, I fear the possibility of information (such as notable trivia or complete lists of combinations) being removed so as to avoid an overly long page. (The second sentence of [[User:Xzelion/Recipes|what appears to be Xzelion's page for working on the merge]] suggests an intention to not include every combination, for instance.) I propose that it be set down that '''if any merge of the Recipes pages does eventually take place, ''all possible recipe combinations and all pieces of important trivia'' must remain somewhere easily accessible on the wiki''', such as a separate page for combinations. (The combinations page is ''only a suggestion'' and not part of the proposal.) My reasoning is that useful information should not be removed from this wiki for the sake of convenience, that the wiki should be a compendium of all things Mario-related, and that one should not have to visit another fansite to find out recipe combinations.<br />
#{{User|Altendo}} Primary choice. "Latest portrayal", to me, means the person who last voiced the character, and I don't think archival voices should count as this, especially since those voices were recorded before the current voice actor. This also avoids the issues of multiple voice actors voicing a single character in compilations and switching/adding or removing voice actors when reissues and original games come out (as described below).
<br />
#{{User|Shadow2}} Re-using old sound clips has no bearing on a character's "Latest portrayal". Charles does not voice Mario anymore, and to list him as such just because of older re-used sound clips is misrepresentative.
'''Proposer:''' [[User:Soler|Soler]]<br />
#{{User|Hewer}} Per both, this is the less misleading option (the infobox doesn't specify whether the "latest" voice actor was just re-usage of old voice clips, so  listing both Charles and Kevin gives the impression that they're both actively voicing Mario, which is wrong).
'''Deadline:''' 20:00, Friday June 20, 2008 A.D. (EDT)
#{{User|Super Mario RPG}} Per all.


====Rule that a merge cannot lead to loss of information (Support)====
====Only add in the the voice actor for the "latest" game====
#{{User|Soler}} (I am the proposer: my reasons are above.)
#{{User|Altendo}} Tertiary choice. If "Latest portrayal" really means the person who voiced the character in the latest game, regardless of said actor's as-of-game-release status, then maybe archival voices can count because it is the voice of the character in the "latest" game. I do not recommend this option as this will cause a lot of infobox editing and switching voice actors when reissues (particularly ports and remasters) do inevitably come out, and if a compilation game (like ''[[Super Mario 3D All-Stars]]'') comes out, multiple voice actors who voice the same character in a single compilation (like [[Princess Peach]], who had [[Leslie Swan|three]] [[Jen Taylor|voice]] [[Samantha Kelly|actresses]] in a single compilation) will stack up in the infoboxes. And when a new game comes out, all of that is thrown out the window, reverting to their current voice actor. [[MarioWiki:Proposals/Archive/63#Rename "Latest portrayal" section in character infobox to "Notable portrayals"|This is why some were against enforcing the absolute "latest" portrayals in a previous proposal]]. The only reason why I am for this is consistency.
#{{User|Super-Yoshi}} Per Soler.
====Add both current and latest voice actor====
#{{User|Bob-omb buddy}}-If it is on one page then it should be good enough for the next one.
#{{User|Altendo}} Secondary choice. It feels nice to respect both the voice actor who is currently voicing the character and the person whose voices, even in archival, are the sole ones used in the latest game. However, my point about voice actor switching, while not as big as an issue because archival voice actors will only be added rather than replace the current one, still kind of stands because reissues will add the archival voice actor for one game, only to remove it when a new game comes out. Additionally, if compilations ''only'' contain voices from retired voice actors, this will stack it up even more (although for ''3D All-Stars'', it still wouldn't change much due to Peach's ''[[Super Mario Galaxy]]'' voice actress still being her current one). Still, this does make the infoboxes consistent.
#[[User:Ninjayoshi|Ninjayoshi]]- Per my comments below.
#{{User|Tails777}} I agree with this one more; it's best to keep it up to date when it comes to VAs, but it isn't uncommon for various games to recycle voice clips (TTYD once again being a good example). I feel it is best to at least acknowledge if voice clips get recycled in this respect, though I also feel this should be limited to one at a time, in case there are examples where someone had more than even two voice actors.


====Allow loss of information (Oppose)====
====Do nothing====


====Comments====
====Comments====
  I think that we should have two pages for the Recipes: Recipes and Recipes (Trivia).  Recipes (Trivia) will list the Recipe, then game, and finally the trivia.  No descriptions on the Trivia page. [[User:Ninjayoshi|Ninjayoshi]]
I'm conflicted between simply listing only whoever is currently voicing the character vs. potentially opening a can of worms by listing multiple actors from archival clips, even though that would respect the portrayals from the most recent game whether it used newly recorded or archived voices. No matter how this proposal ends up, I think that a future proposal should consider standardizing the "Portrayals" header in the character articles themselves. For Mario, the list of portrayals does a great job at comprehensively documenting everyone who has officially voiced Mario, but falters in conveying the inconceivable magnitude of media in which Martinet has voiced Mario, and how much he has contributed to the character's brand recognition to the point where many people will continue to see him as ''the'' voice of Mario, even moving forward as Kevin Afghani takes on that role. {{User:ThePowerPlayer/sig}} 23:57, September 16, 2024 (EDT)
 
==Changes==
=== Last names from Super Mario Movie ===
For some time now, I've seen last names for Mario and Luigi to be Mario Mario, or Luigi Mario, taken from the movie. I don't really consider the movie canon, because they were never proven in games. So I am proposing that we take away the last names from the movie.<br />
<br />
'''Proposer:''' [[User:Clay Mario|Clay Mario]]<br />
'''Deadline:''' June 14, 2008, 20:00
 
==== Take away the last names from the movie ====
#{{User|Clay Mario}} - Per my proposal
#{{User|KP Shadow}} - Per Clay Mario.
#{{User|Glitchman}} - Per Clay Mario.
#{{User|Yoshitheawesome}} - Per all.
#[[User:Dryest bowser|Dryest bowser]]-per CM
#{{User|Bob-omb buddy}}-Per Clay mario. They may only call them mario bros. because mario is more recognised, and usally the main one.
#{{User|Starry Parakarry}}- Per Clay Mario.
 
==== Keep the last names from the movie ====
# {{User|Tucayo}} Well, actually the last names '''are''' Mario, because when they say Mario Bros., they are saying that they are the Mario brothers, that makes them Mario Mario and Luigi Mario.
#{{User|Toadette 4evur}} Per Tucayo.
#{{User|MegaMario9910}} Per Tucayo. All the info has to come from something Mario related, and which the movie is related.
# [[User: Booster|Booster]] -- Their last name isn't from the truest canon, but they ''are'' the Mario Bros. TSMBSS also used Mario as their last name. Also, nothing seems to dispove this theory, aside from the fact that their last name is never mentioned in any game.
#{{User|Cobold}} - content from the movie is alternate canon, and we already have rules how to deal with it. When the last name is mentioned somewhere, there should be a note that it is indeed from the movie and not from the games. It also should only appear in the initial section and in the movie section, perhaps in the personal description section, but not anywhere else.
#{{User|Pikax}}Per Tucayo - that Mario bros. point is impossible to object to.
#{{user|InfectedShroom}} - per all. As a very small side note, Nintendo Power also said the last names are "Mario."
#{{User|MelissaMarioSister}} - per all. And InfectedShroom is right; Nintendo Power did say their surname was "Mario." Although... I just found a video from 1988 where Inside Edition does a segment on SMB, and they interviewed NOA's head of advertising at the time. He said Mario and Luigi didn't have a last name. I found the video at [http://www.devilducky.com/media/52030/ DevilDucky.com]. Still, it could have been retconned since then.
#[[User:Ultimatetoad|Ultimatetoad]] ''(see comment below)''
#{{User|Stumpers}} - The movie is as "official" as any game.  That means, regardless of it being canon or not to the games, it still has a place on this Wiki. That includes names.  However, I would support a proposal that would make separate articles for the movie incarnations of the characters, because they are so different and deserve individual personality and history sections.  But this proposal?  No way.  The Wiki should preserve all of Mario's history, not just video games.
#[[User:MC Hammer Bro.|MC Hammer Bro.]] Per Stumpers ''(and see comment below)''
#{{User|DragonFeather}} Per Tucayo.
# [[User:Ninjayoshi|Ninjayoshi]] - Per all.  Also, InfectedShroom is right.
# {{User|Shroobario}} It's the Mario Bros. what makes Mario be Mario Mario and Luigi be Luigi Mario, They didn't invent that in the movie.
# {{User|Paper Jorge}} Per all, mostly Stumpers. The Mario Movie may not have been canon but it exists so we have to mention that it at least exists.
# {{User|Dzamper}} Actually, they're '''Mario''' Brothers. So, e.g. if I'm called ''Bimmy Nerd'' and my brother name's ''Jimmy Nerd'', we're ''Nerd brothers''. ;)
#{{User|Rouge2}} They are the Mario Bros.  The first game was titled [[Mario Bros.]] and the series is the Super Mario Bros.  which means Mario and Luigi's last names is Mario.
#{{User|The.Real.Izkat}} No way! The movie may not be canon but it's part of the legacy that is Mario! You can't take that away! A mario fan should know not even to bring upsomething so ridiculous! plus its the only thing we have towards their names so lets keep that way!
#{{User|Laebear12}} i agree they are known as the '''mario bros.''' so the name should stay the same. unless the nitendo company gives them a last name it should stay as mario
#[[User:Toadster_04|Toadster_04]] It is Mario. Confirmed by Nintendo on the old Nsider forums, if that counts for anything. Their house in Paper Mario/TTYD also has their last name (MARIO) on it.
# {{User|LBD Nytetrayn}} I vote to keep it, as there seems to be more argument that it would be Mario, and nothing really disproving it, other than a 20-year old Inside Edition newscast that's likely been overruled.  And why is it always the movie given precedence on this?  The Super Show did it first.
# {{User|Lavender}}Why would they be called "Mario bros" if it wasn't there last name? Almost everything in these games are never directly pointed out, but the hints make it pretty obvious.
#{{User|Walkazo}} - Per all the points listed above by variuous users using slightly different wording.
#{{User|Goomb-omb}} Aren't Mario and Luigi's parents called Mr.Mario and Mrs.Mario in Yoshi's Island?  I know that their mom is at least Mama Mario.  Wouldn't that make Mario their last name?
 
==== Make a seperate Section/Article for Non-game info ====
#{{User|Garlic Man}} - Per comments below.
 
==== Comments ====
 
Uh... KP, you can't do that. {{User|MegaMario9910}}
 
Double votes I'm sure is against MarioWiki Policy. {{user|Clay Mario}}
:Plus you probably used <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>, which can't be used. {{User|MegaMario9910}}
 
actually, I use <nowiki>~~~</nowiki> because I don't have time to make a sig subpage. So, I just use the user template. {{user|Clay Mario}}
:<nowiki>~~~</nowiki> is fine when you don't have a personalized sig in it. - {{User|Cobold}}
::I didn't notice, but I put you... sorry... I mean KP. He used his sig. {{User|MegaMario9910}}
 
I think that even if if was in the tsmbss it still may not be true. because the show was not made directly by nintendo. {{User|Dryest_bowser}}
:All Sports games except for Mario Kart, all Mario RPGs and Mario Party, all Donkey Kong games before Jungle Beat, and the Yoshi games were also not directly made by Nintendo. Not to mention the crossover titles. That's not really an argument. - {{User|Cobold}} 11:31, 7 June 2008 (EDT)
 
Well, is there any proof from the games that the last name is Mario? If there isn't, I'd support. Sure, they are the Mario Bros., but maybe they're just called that since Mario's the leader. If we put "Mario" for Mario's name in the infobox, it's not saying his last name definitely isn't Mario, it's just saying that his first name is all we're sure of. And that seems true now, with this controversy. The question is, why would parents name their kid Mario Mario? Well, things in Mario don't have to make sense, actually. {{User|CrystalYoshi}}
 
I guess there is slight evidence because, in Dr. Mario, his name is Dr. Mario. Usually the last name would follow the title. But then again, things in mario don't have to make sense, it could be his first name. {{user|Clay Mario}}
:The Dr. title preceds both the given name and the family name, so it can be both. - {{User|Cobold}} 11:33, 7 June 2008 (EDT)
 
:However,in Dr. Mario, Princess Peach goes by her last name (family name) (nurse Toadstool and not "nurse Peach"). {{User|MC Hammer Bro.}}
::Even Mario calls her "Toadstool" sometimes, and you wouldn't expect him to call her by her last name, so that argument doesn't really count. {{User|Time Q}} 08:30, 8 June 2008 (EDT)
 
Cobold has a point, sometimes Mario games are made by third-party developers. But when its made by third-party developers, usually, there are no significant changes. For example, Mario Superstar Basbeball, developed by Namco doesn't feature new enemies or characters. {{user|Clay Mario}}
:Almost. These are what you call ''second''-party developers. They create games (/TV shows) using Nintendo's property. What would be the use of the term "third party" if there wasn't a second? - {{User|Cobold}}
 
In the SMA comic, Bowser calls Mario & Luigi "The Mario's" keep-em. - [[User:Ultimatetoad|Ultimatetoad]]
 
Well if you look at many websites and other media (mario fan based or not) the last name of "Mario" has been used. Plus why would nintendo call the game " Mario Bros. " if Luigi had just been introduced (without knowing wheather or not he'd be the "side kick" and or "the new leader")? One more question: what is the way the Japanease would call to brothers in this manner? Would they use the older brother's first name? Beats me. Ok I'm done!- [[User:MC Hammer Bro.|MC Hammer Bro.]]
:Considering Mario Party team names such as "Green Bros." for Luigi & Yoshi, I think that "Mario Bros." actually isn't meant to say that Mario is their last name, but Mario is the main guy. See "Baby Mario Bros." etc. - {{User|Cobold}} 17:08, 7 June 2008 (EDT)
::But Luigi and Yoshi aren't really brothers, either.- {{User|LBD_Nytetrayn}}
 
I'd like to challenge this proposal's validity to a certain extent, and feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.  It was my impression that proposals were here so that we could discuss the way information is presented (merges, splits, features, placing spin-off information in separate sections, etc.), right?  Another area we could vote on is how in depth to go. (include Banjo articles, include cries and other noises in the quote section, Snufit Ball, etc.)  Originally I just assumed that this proposal was one of the latter, but what I'm thinking now is that this proposal really isn't fair.  It would be fair to vote for movie information to be separated from main character pages (after all, the storyline is different, personalities are different, backstories, even species... the list goes on.) say onto a different page like "Mario Mario (film character)" or something.  However, this article is saying that we would be allowed to mention all movie information in a character's article except for their full names according to the movie.  Not only would this confuse readers and new editors, it's a little flawed.
 
We shouldn't be selectively chosing what points of information are included and are not.  Either all official video games should be here or they shouldn't be.  Either the movie should be here or it shouldn't be.  Not mentioning "Mario Mario" as a full name would only be acceptable if the movie was not covered by this Wiki.  Otherwise it's confusing.  We'd need to change our policy to say, "We cover the Mario video games, comics, and TV shows completly.  We also cover the movie, except for Mario and Luigi's names in the film."
 
To wrap this up: we can limit the number and type of pictures or quotes we post.  We can chose not to cover the strategy of each level.  All this is because of our job as a Wiki: to create an easy-access method for Mario fans to immerse themselves into the complete series.  However, failing to mention a key fact, such as Mario's full name in the movie, is big.  What if we didn't mention the history behind Princess Peach's name change?  How about the change in Yoshi's voice?  It's about time that we on this Wiki acknowledged a key fact: There is canon and there is nonfictional history.  Who completely different things that the Wiki must cover, lest we be forced to call ourselves a "guide to what, as established throuh proposals, our users feel is canon to the Mario storyline" instead of a "Complete guide to the complete Mario series".  Which would you rather read? {{User|Stumpers}} 03:15, 8 June 2008 (EDT)
:Well then, why not have a section about the two possibilities? Even though we cover the movie, that doesn't mean we consider the movie to be part of the continuity. {{User|CrystalYoshi}} 07:56, 8 June 2008 (EDT)
::I haven't voted yet, because this proposal needs another section; I agree with Crystal Yoshi here. I think the article should have a sepreate section, with everything non-gamical in there; comics, cartoons, Movie, etc. But the main infobox at the top of the article should stay Mario. The diferrent non-game section could perhaps have Mario Mario. Or, as suggested somewhere else, we could make a seperate article. {{fakelink|Mario (movie)}} or something, I guess. EDIT: A new section following CrystalYoshi's comment has been created.{{User|Garlic Man}}
:::If it was JUST the movie, sure, but it seems to have become far more widespread than that.{{User|LBD_Nytetrayn}}
 
I strongly disagree with making a new section for every different incarnation of Mario. They're doing that right now on Wikipedia with Sonic the Hedgehog characters, and it's an extremly stupid process. They are the SAME person. - [[User:Ultimatetoad|Ultimatetoad]]
:The reason I would support splitting articles up into Mario and Mario (film character) would be if the situation would be like on the Daisy article: the movie section is huge, and splitting would be a way of shortening the article.  We would need to include a blurb on the main article including the main article template with a link to the movie article, though.  This whole thing about different incarnations of Mario appearing in different mediums is all fanon, which is not allowed on the Wiki.  Seriously, just expand those sections you want off the article to a crazy extent and then it will make sense from a Wiki standpoint to split them.  Canon doesn't have to come into play at all. {{User|Stumpers}}
::Actually, I agree with Ultimatoad. They represent the same person (even though they might be in different continuities). I didn't really realize what I was voting for. Here's what I think would be the best solution: in the infobox we should just put "Mario" (I think someone said that Nintendo stated that Mario and Luigi don't have last names, anyway). And, we should have a section on the page that talks about Mario's last name being "Mario" as a possibility (and maybe other non-game possibilities as well). It's just that [[MarioWiki:Canonicity]] says that the movie is alternate-canon, so we should try to have Mario's information from ''games'' be the one we use for stuff like this. {{User|CrystalYoshi}}
 
Well, at the same time, I don't think that movie & game info should be mixed. They should each have their own seperate section, just in the same article (see [[Princess Daisy]]). Maybe we should just make the intro to the Mario article look like this "''Mario'' (''Mario Mario'' in some Media...."
I should mention that I also oppose the recent mixing of cartoon show & game info in the Mario article. They should be discussed seperately, just in the same article. - [[User:Ultimatetoad|Ultimatetoad]]
:I'd like to hear your reasoning for that last point. {{User|Stumpers}} 11:01, 11 June 2008 (EDT)
 
Well, lets see if I can do that without babbling or confusing myself:
 
1. The Mario from the Super Mario Bros. series, the Mario from the Super Mario Bros. Super Show! Series, and the Mario from the Super Mario Bros. Movie are all the same character, just put into different situations.
 
2. Mario does not have a real "backstory" inside the games, any more than Mickey Mouse or Kermit the Frog has one in their respective shows. Notice how each game can easily stand by itself: You don't need to have played Super Mario 64 to understand Sunshine. There is no real "Mario Continunuity" or timeline (no official one, at any rate).
 
3. Thus, every appearence Mario makes should looked at as a "canonical" appearence.
 
4. So, the Mario article should not be grouped according to appearence, but Media type: Appearences in:
 
Games
Televsion
Theater
Movies
 
etc. - [[User:Ultimatetoad|Ultimatetoad]]
 
:Thanks for explaining!  I would support you in this except that the biography section for Mario is in chronological and release date order (Yoshi's Island first, and so on).  Many (not all) of the alternate media sources have their own place in respect to certain games.  Just as Yoshi's Island comes before Super Mario Bros., The Adventures of Super Mario Bros. 3 occurs just after Super Mario Bros. 3.  So, either we just list by release date and medium, or we attempt to keep chronological order and then we have to include all sources in one section. {{User|Stumpers}}
::Can we just say "Mario (Mario Mario in some sources)" in the infobox? That would make things a lot easier than having this long, complicated discussion. But honestly, Nintendo created Mario, and has Nintendo ever said that his last name is Mario? If not, I'm voting support. {{User|CrystalYoshi}} 13:45, 12 June 2008 (EDT)
:::Well, I'm not sure what you mean by, "Nintendo," since Nintendo is a huge company incapable of speach, but an "Official Nintendo Source" (I'm assuming that's what you mean, right?) has.  It happened in Nintendo Power.  The reason I'm being a stickler is because the movie is one of the official Nintendo-affiliated creations, so one could see the movie the movie as "Nintendo" saying that the last name is Mario. {{User|Stumpers}} 10:17, 13 June 2008 (EDT)
:::::I mean has an official Nintendo source, or has someone who's part of Nintendo, ever said that their last names are Mario? Think about it this way: Toad's article doesn't say, "Toad is a human who plays guitar and turned into a Goomba" in the main section. It does in the movie section, only. So we can say "In the movie, Mario's last name is Mario", but we shouldn't consider that to be the case except in the movie section. Unless, of course, this has been confirmed by Nintendo. {{User|CrystalYoshi}} 18:23, 13 June 2008 (EDT)
::::Okay, I got ya.  All I have for you is the Nintendo Power thing, then.  I think your solution is fine.  This whole proposal is going craaaaazy! {{User|Stumpers}}
:::Nintendo Power is not the most fantastic source, BTW. I think that they even said that "Mario Mario" was just an assumed surname. Just thought I'd point that out... {{user|InfectedShroom}}
::I read=lly don't see what's wrong with "Mario (Mario Mario in some sources)". But I'll let the others decide for this one. {{User|CrystalYoshi}} 08:59, 14 June 2008 (EDT)


==Miscellaneous==
==Miscellaneous==
=== Insert info from Games ===
''None at the moment.''
 
Alright. I was happening to look through [[Shadow the Hedgehog]]'s article, and had edited something that was info from the games. I thought maybe, why not put info from the games into the articles (i e. Like add Sonic Rush info in Sonic, Tails, Blaze, Amy, Eggman, Cream, and Knuckles articles). This will also help some stub articles. This is overview, not in-depth. Add information from games, or don't add information from games?
 
*'''Proposer:''' {{User|MegaMario9910}}
*'''Deadline:''' June 19, 2008; 15:00
 
==== Add Information from Games ====
 
#{{User|MegaMario9910}} I'm the proposer, so per me.
 
==== Don't Add Information from Games ====
#{{user|Purple Yoshi}} - Um, no. This isn't a Sonic wiki, or even a third-party wiki. The games have NOTHING to do with Mario.
#{{User|Pokemon DP}} - No, just no. BRIEF, I repeat, BRIEF descriptions about the characters personality and debut appearance from his/her original series are fine, but no way in HELL should we allow large amounts of outside information. It's just not right. And there are other Wiki's to link to about this stuff, ya know.
#{{User|Blitzwing}} - This rpoposal has been brought up at least twice before. Per DP.
#Per DP version of Pokemon (heh heh). {{User|Toadette 4evur}}
# [[User:Ninjayoshi|Ninjayoshi]] - Per Pokemon DP.
#{{user|HyperToad}} Per DP and PY.
#{{user|Bob-omb buddy}}-I think peapole are clever enough to search for the games.
#{{user|Clay Mario}} - Per my comment below.
==== Comments ====
This will be my first successful proposal. {{User|MegaMario9910}}
:I would agree like this if we're talking about generalities, so like, for Sonic, it would read: <blockquote>'''[[wikipedia:Sonic the Hedgehog (character)|Sonic the Hedgehog]]''' is the main character of the ''Sonic the Hedgehog'' series of video games.  Since the beginning of the series, Sonic has been the champion of peace, risking his life to stop the plots of a variety of violent foes, particularly [[Dr. Eggman]], in order to establish worldwide peace.  Along the way, he has been aided by many characters, including his friends [[Miles "Tails" Prower]],[[Knuckles the Echidna]], [[Amy Rose]], and occassionally [[Shadow the Hedgehog]].  Sonic's greatest asset is his ability to run at supersonic speeds.  However, he is  Sonic's fame rivals that of Mario, and like Mario, Sonic the Hedgehog's series has also spawned television shows, comic series, and even original video animations.</blockquote> I think any more than that make us unfocused the Mario series.  However, I've always been one to think that this Wiki should at least provide some background (not a lot) for the chrossover characters.  If you could edit your proposal to say that this would be an overview thing rather than an in-depth (ala [http://sonic.wikia.com Sonic News Network]) then you'd have my support and doubtless the support of many others.  Even if this doesn't go through, you are currently allowed to use information from Mario and Super Smash Bros. games, including trophy information in ''Brawl'', to write about crossover characters.  A significant portion of the above example could be compiled based on those. {{User|Stumpers}} 23:27, 10 June 2008 (EDT)
::Done. {{User|MegaMario9910}}
:::At least according to DP, brief information is ok... I think maybe your proposal, with your change, may already be acceptable!  Time to get to work, both of us. {{User|Stumpers}} 11:39, 11 June 2008 (EDT)
:Hmm... I'm kind of agreeing with the supporters here. But the opposers have a point, as too much info would suck. What would be an example of what you would put in, say, the Sonic article under this new system? {{user|InfectedShroom}}
::Err... wait, whatta mean, Stumpers? And... maybe some info about his history through the games, and a bit of info about those games, IS. {{User|MegaMario9910}}
:::I mean that the example I gave is already approved for use in the articles. {{User|Stumpers}}
::::Yay. Now, let's go this work done. {{User|MegaMario9910}}
:::::Oh. Duh. I guess I didn't really read your example. My bad. And yeah, it's a great idea. {{User|InfectedShroom}}
::::::Uh... not really has there been two proposals brought up before. One was to make articles for the crossovers, and the other one was to make a list. Care to explain why you said that, Blitz? {{User|MegaMario9910}}
:::::::Because both were about to add unrelated info to a specific group of article, '''duh'''. {{User|Blitzwing}}
::::::Yeesh!  Why do proposals always get people riled up? {{User|Stumpers}}
:::::If voting to support this proposal will be result in general series/character summaries like your example then you're right, people are getting way too distraught. It's not gonna turn us into Sonic Wiki or whatever, it'll just add to general knowledge of gaming and save our readers the trouble of going elsewhere for the bare basics (and who knows, maybe they'll get preoccupiued wherever they went for further reading and we lose our audience). Being elitist never helped anyone. - {{User|Walkazo}}
::::::Thanks, Walkazo. {{User|Stumpers}}
 
::"NO PROPOSALS ABOUT HAVING BANJO AND CONKER ARTICLES-- The Management" Hmm... I wonder if this also applies to sonic. There is a sonic wiki. We only have a sonic article because hes included in brawl and Olympic Games. For non-mario brawl characters, don't go to much in-depth. Just give information about them in brawl and Olympic games. {{user|Clay Mario}}
:::That message means that we will not cover all topics in Banjo or Conker games, only those whom have appeared in Mario media.  Likewise, we won't be covering Princess Elise or the SatAM TV show from the Sonic series, but we will cover Sonic, Tails, Knuckles, etc. Don't forget: Brawl gives information from the series' too, so that would work as well. {{User|Stumpers}}

Latest revision as of 12:49, September 18, 2024

Image used as a banner for the Proposals page
Current time:
Thursday, September 19th, 10:02 GMT
Proposals can be new features, the removal of previously-added features that have tired out, or new policies that must be approved via consensus before any action is taken.
  • "Vote" periods last for one week.
  • Any user can support or oppose, but must have a strong reason for doing so (not, e.g., "I like this idea!").
  • All proposals must be approved by a majority of voters, including proposals with more than two options.
  • For past proposals, see the proposal archive and the talk page proposal archive.

A proposal section works like a discussion page: comments are brought up and replied to using indents (colons, such as : or ::::) and all edits are signed using the code {{User|User name}}.

How to

Rules

  1. If users have an idea about improving the wiki or managing its community, but feel that they need community approval before acting upon that idea, they may make a proposal about it. They must have a strong argument supporting their idea and be willing to discuss it in detail with the other users, who will then vote about whether or not they think the idea should be used. Proposals should include links to all relevant pages and writing guidelines. Proposals must include a link to the draft page. Any pages that would be largely affected by the proposal should be marked with {{proposal notice}}.
  2. Only registered, autoconfirmed users can create, comment in, or vote on proposals and talk page proposals. Users may vote for more than one option, but they may not vote for every option available.
  3. Proposals end at the end of the day (23:59) one week after voting starts, except for writing guidelines and talk page proposals, which run for two weeks (all times GMT).
    • For example, if a proposal is added at any time on Monday, August 1, 2011, the voting starts immediately and the deadline is one week later on Monday, August 8, at 23:59 GMT.
  4. Every vote should have a strong, sensible reason accompanying it. Agreeing with a previously mentioned reason given by another user is accepted (including "per" votes), but tangential comments, heavy sarcasm, and other misleading or irrelevant quips are just as invalid as providing no reason at all.
  5. Users who feel that certain votes were cast in bad faith or which truly have no merit can address the votes in the comments section. Users can ask a voter to clarify their position, point out mistakes or flaws in their arguments, or call for the outright removal of the vote if it lacks sufficient reasoning. Users may not remove or alter the content of anyone else's votes. Voters can remove or rewrite their own vote(s) at any time, but the final decision to remove another user's vote lies solely with the administrators.
    • Users can also use the comments section to bring up any concerns or mistakes in regards to the proposal itself. In such cases, it's important the proposer addresses any concerns raised as soon as possible. Even if the supporting side might be winning by a wide margin, that should be no reason for such questions to be left unanswered. They may point out any missing details that might have been overlooked by the proposer, so it's a good idea as the proposer to check them frequently to achieve the most accurate outcome possible.
  6. If a user makes a vote and is subsequently blocked for any amount of time, their vote is removed. However, if the block ends before the proposal ends, then the user in question holds the right to re-cast their vote. If a proposer is blocked, their vote is removed and "(banned)" is added next to their name in the "Proposer:" line of the proposal, which runs until its deadline as normal. If the proposal passes, it falls to the supporters of the idea to enact any changes in a timely manner.
  7. No proposal can overturn the decision of a previous proposal that is less than 4 weeks (28 days) old.
  8. Any proposal where none of the options have at least four votes will be extended for another week. If after three extensions, no options have at least four votes, the proposal will be listed as "NO QUORUM." The original proposer then has the option to relist said proposal to generate more discussion.
  9. If a proposal reaches its deadline and there is a tie for first place, then the proposal is extended for another week.
  10. If a proposal reaches its deadline and the first place option is ahead of the second place option by three or more votes, then the first place option must have over 50% support to win. If the margin is only one or two votes, then the first place option must have at least 60% support to win. If the required support threshold is not met, then the proposal is extended for another week.
    • Use the {{proposal check}} tool to automate this calculation; see the template page for usage instructions and examples.
  11. Proposals can only be extended up to three times. If a consensus has not been reached by the fourth deadline, then the proposal fails and can only be re-proposed after four weeks (at the earliest).
  12. All proposals are archived. The original proposer must take action accordingly if the outcome of the proposal dictates it. If it requires the help of an administrator, the proposer can ask for that help.
  13. If the administrators deem a proposal unnecessary or potentially detrimental to the upkeep of the Super Mario Wiki, they have the right to remove it at any time.
  14. Proposals can only be rewritten or canceled by their proposer within the first three days of their creation (six days for talk page proposals). However, proposers can request that their proposal be canceled by an administrator at any time, provided they have a valid reason for it. Please note that canceled proposals must also be archived.
  15. Unless there is major disagreement about whether certain content should be included, there should not be proposals about creating, expanding, rewriting, or otherwise fixing up pages. To organize efforts about improving articles on neglected or completely missing subjects, try setting up a collaboration thread on the forums.
  16. Proposals cannot be made about promotions and demotions. Users can only be promoted and demoted by the will of the administration.
  17. No joke proposals. Proposals are serious wiki matters and should be handled professionally. Joke proposals will be deleted on sight.
  18. Proposals must have a status quo option (e.g. Oppose, Do nothing) unless the status quo itself violates policy.

Basic proposal and support/oppose format

This is an example of what your proposal must look like, if you want it to be acknowledged. If you are inexperienced or unsure how to set up this format, simply copy the following and paste it into the fitting section. Then replace the [subject] - variables with information to customize your proposal, so it says what you wish. If you insert the information, be sure to replace the whole variable including the squared brackets, so "[insert info here]" becomes "This is the inserted information", not "[This is the inserted information]". Proposals presenting multiple alternative courses of action can have more than two voting options, but what each voting section is supporting must be clearly defined. Such options should also be kept to a minimum, and if something comes up in the comments, the proposal can be amended as necessary.

===[insert a title for your proposal here]===
[describe what issue this proposal is about and what changes you think should be made to improve how the wiki handles that issue]

'''Proposer''': {{User|[enter your username here]}}<br>
'''Deadline''': [insert a deadline here, 7 days after the proposal was created (14 for writing guidelines and talk page proposals), at 23:59 GMT, in the format: "September 19, 2024, 23:59 GMT"]

====Support====
#{{User|[enter your username here]}} [make a statement indicating that you support your proposal]

====Oppose====

====Comments====

Users will now be able to vote on your proposal, until the set deadline is reached. Remember, you are a user as well, so you can vote on your own proposal just like the others.

To support, or oppose, just insert "#{{User|[add your username here]}}" at the bottom of the section of your choice. Just don't forget to add a valid reason for your vote behind that tag if you are voting on another user's proposal. If you are voting on your own proposal, you can just say "Per my proposal".

Talk page proposals

Proposals concerning a single page or a limited group of pages are held on the most relevant talk page regarding the matter. Proposals dealing with a large amount of splits, merges, or deletions across the wiki should still be held on this page.

For a list of all settled talk page proposals, see MarioWiki:Proposals/TPP archive and Category:Settled talk page proposals.

Rules

  1. All active talk page proposals must be listed below in chronological order (new proposals go at the bottom) using {{TPP discuss}}. Include a brief description of the proposal while also mentioning any pages affected by it, a link to the talk page housing the discussion, and the deadline. If the proposal involves a page that is not yet made, use {{fake link}} to communicate its title in the description. Linking to pages not directly involved in the talk page proposal is not recommended, as it clutters the list with unnecessary links. Place {{TPP}} under the section's header, and once the proposal is over, replace the template with {{settled TPP}}.
  2. All rules for talk page proposals are the same as mainspace proposals (see the "How to" section above), with the exceptions made by Rules 3 and 4 as follows:
  3. Voting in talk page proposals will be open for two weeks, not one (all times GMT).
    • For example, if a proposal is added at any time on Monday, August 1, 2011, it ends two weeks later on Monday, August 15, 2011, at 23:59 GMT.
  4. The talk page proposal must pertain to the subject page of the talk page it is posted on.
  5. When a talk page proposal passes, it should be removed from this list and included in the list under the "Unimplemented proposals" section until the proposed changes have been enacted.

List of ongoing talk page proposals

  • Split Bowser's Flame from Fire Breath (discuss) Deadline: September 18, 2024, 23:59 GMT
  • Split Banana Peel from Banana (discuss) Deadline: September 18, 2024, 23:59 GMT
  • Consider the "Blurp" and "Deep Cheep" in the Super Mario Maker games an alternate design of Cheep Cheep with the former twos' designs as a cameo rather than a full appearance of the former two, in line with the game's own classification (discuss) Deadline: September 18, 2024, 23:59 GMT
  • Split truck into cargo truck and pickup truck (discuss) Deadline: September 21, 2024, 23:59 GMT
  • Split the navigation template for Donkey Kong between arcade and Game Boy versions (discuss) Deadline: September 21, 2024, 23:59 GMT
  • Merge Crocodile Isle (Donkey Kong 64) to Crocodile Isle (discuss) Deadline: September 21, 2024, 23:59 GMT
  • Prune "sports" games from Black Shy Guy in line with White Shy Guy and Red Boo (discuss) Deadline: September 21, 2024, 23:59 GMT
  • Determine what to do with the feather item from Super Mario 64 DS (currently on Wing Cap) (discuss) Deadline: September 21, 2024, 23:59 GMT
  • Add English to {{foreign names}} and retitle to {{international names}} (discuss) Deadline: September 26, 2024, 23:59 GMT
  • Allow usage of {{Release}} as a generic "flag list" template (discuss) Deadline: September 27, 2024, 23:59 GMT
  • Merge Preying Mantas with Jellyfish (discuss) Deadline: September 28, 2024, 23:59 GMT
  • Create article(s) for the SM64DS character rooms (discuss) Deadline: September 30, 2024, 23:59 GMT
  • Create an article for the Peach doll from Super Mario RPG: Legend of the Seven Stars (discuss) Deadline: September 30, 2024, 23:59 GMT
  • Remove the remaining non-Super Mario "stage gimmicks and hazards" from Super Smash Bros. (discuss) Deadline: October 1, 2024, 23:59 GMT
  • Remove non-Super Mario "stage cameos" from Super Smash Bros. (discuss) Deadline: October 1, 2024, 23:59 GMT

Unimplemented proposals

Proposals

Establish a standard for long course listings in articles for characters/enemies/items/etc., Koopa con Carne (ended June 8, 2023)
Break alphabetical order in enemy lists to list enemy variants below their base form, EvieMaybe (ended May 21, 2024)
Standardize sectioning for Super Mario series game articles, Nintendo101 (ended July 3, 2024)
^ NOTE: Not yet integrated for the New Super Mario Bros. games, the Super Mario Maker games, Super Mario Run, or Super Mario Bros. Wonder
Expand use of "rawsize" gallery class, Doc von Schmeltwick (ended July 19, 2024)
Do not use t-posing models as infobox images, Nightwicked Bowser (ended September 1, 2024)
Create new sections for gallery pages to cover "unused/pre-release/prototype/etc." graphics separate from the ones that appear in the finalized games, Doc von Schmeltwick (ended September 2, 2024)
Tag sections regarding the unofficially named planets/area in Super Mario Galaxy games with "Conjecture" and "Dev data" templates, GuntherBayBeee (ended September 10, 2024)

Talk page proposals

Split all the clothing, Doc von Schmeltwick (ended September 12, 2021)
Split machine parts, Robo-Rabbit, and flag from Super Duel Mode, Doc von Schmeltwick (ended September 30, 2022)
Make bestiary list pages for the Minion Quest and Bowser Jr.'s Journey modes, Doc von Schmeltwick (ended January 11, 2024)
Allow separate articles for Diddy Kong Pilot (2003)'s subjects, Doc von Schmeltwick (ended August 3, 2024)

Writing guidelines

Change how "infinitely respawning" enemies are counted in level enemy tables

Currently, the wiki lists enemy counts for each level in tables located in that level's article. This is all well and good, but the problem arises when infinitely respawning ones (like piped ones) are included. As seen here, this is awkwardly written as

  • "[number] (not including the infinite [enemy] spawning from [number] [method]),"

and why shouldn't it include them? That method of writing is ungainly, misleading, and bloats the table's width unnecessarily. Therefore, I propose the alternate writing of

  • "[number] + (∞ x [number]),"

with the "x [number]" and parentheses being removed if there is only one case. So in the linked example, it would be "6 + ∞," which says the same thing without contradicting itself with a lengthy diatribe.
(Also I had to restrain myself from using * rather than x because that's how I'm used to writing multiplication in equations. Thanks, higher-level math classes defaulting to "X" as a variable! But the asterisk could be used too, anyway.)

Proposer: Doc von Schmeltwick (talk)
Deadline: September 23, 2024, 23:59 GMT

Support

  1. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) - Per
  2. Altendo (talk) - This doesn't sound like a bad idea, although I do think there should be an asterisk like "*" instead which leads to a note saying "not including the infinite [enemy] spawning from [number] [method]", as enemies can spawn in different ways, and showing how they spawn could still be useful. If we just show "∞ x [number]", it wouldn't show how Goombas are spawned in (the linked page doesn't specify how they are spawned in otherwise). But I do like the idea of shortening the "count" section of tables.
  3. ThePowerPlayer (talk) Per Altendo. This formatting is much better, but I also think some note of where the infinite enemy spawner(s) originate from should be preserved.
  4. Super Mario RPG (talk) Per all.

Oppose

  1. Hewer (talk) I don't see the benefit of changing this. The current wording is straightforward and succinct, I'd expect the reader to understand "6 (not including the infinite Goombas spawning from one Warp Pipe)" easily. Changing it to "6 + ∞" just makes it less clear for no reason, I'd definitely be confused if I saw that and didn't know this specific context. The fact that the other support votes have also brought up how doing this risks losing the specific information completely (and suggested a more long-winded solution that seems to contradict the proposal) compels me to oppose this more.

Comments

@Hewer - "succinct" would generally imply "short, sweet, and to-the-point," of which the current method is the exact opposite. I'm fine with including an asterisk-note next to the infinity, but the current one is much too bloated, outright admits to stating false information, and since the tables are center-aligned with that horizontal-bloat, it makes it look incredibly awkward. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 12:41, September 17, 2024 (EDT)

I guess we just have totally opposing opinions on this one, because I don't personally find ten words of explanation to be "much too bloated", would rather "state false information" (not really what's happening because it's immediately clarified and the only way not to state any "false" info would be to just put "∞" which helps no one) than obscure the meaning of what we're trying to say, and I don't at all think the somewhat wider tables look "incredibly awkward". This is a case where I feel giving more explanation than "6 + ∞" is necessary for the sake of conveying clear information, so I'd rather prioritise that over having a thin table (which I still don't really see why that's so desirable). Hewer (talk · contributions · edit count) 03:19, September 18, 2024 (EDT)

New features

Add WikiLove extension (includes templates)

Inspired by my recently passed Thanks proposal and engagement with editors over time, I think a precedent has been set to add more WikiLove features on to the wiki so that (willing) members may enjoy engaging with one another and feel motivated when others compliment their work, or just personal appreciations.

The main thing this proposal is focused on is the MediaWiki extension, which is called WikiLove. On the rationale of the WikiLove page, it says that lesser experienced users may feel discouraged when looked down upon by more experienced editors as they try to figure out how to do wikis, and this could help motivate not only newer editors, but also more experienced editors.

It says one can make custom WikiLove messages. Being a wiki on Super Mario, I think this wiki could aim to do WikiLove messages themed around the Super Mario franchise. The community can decide on WikiLove messages if this proposal passes (e.g., one message could say like "You're a super star like Mario"), as well as personalized ones toward editors. But if others do not want involvement, the courtesy policy can be updated to reflect this.

I wish there were more images to show, but here's a representative image to show how WikiLove would look. Would it be worth giving this a try?

Edit: For clarity, if this proposal passes, this also means WikiLove templates will be created, like how Wikipedia has them. It can be what the community decides, and categorical examples could include seasonal, animals, drinks, or expressing friendships, and obviously Super Mario.

Proposer: Super Mario RPG (talk)
Deadline: September 20, 2024, 23:59 GMT

Support

  1. Super Mario RPG (talk) Per.
  2. ThePowerPlayer (talk) This would be a great form of positive feedback to counter the struggles faced by new and existing editors alike, since learning how to use a wiki is more difficult than you might expect. Ultimately, this should increase the feeling of community around the wiki to keep editing from feeling like a chore.
  3. Derekblue1 (talk) I know people are happy with what I do ever since I update the Discord server on my progress on Mario is Missing!. The WikiLove extension will make people feel more connected. I see this as a boost of encouragement just like the Thanks extension.
  4. Technetium (talk) Seems really fun, especially if we go full on Mario theming with it!
  5. Sparks (talk) Hooray for more positivity!
  6. DryBonesBandit (talk) give me my glass o' milk now This seems like it would be a nice addition to the wiki. Per all!
  7. FanOfRosalina2007 (talk) I know I had a rough time when I first joined some of the websites I'm currently on today, so I'm all for this! I just love having the option to thank people and encourage them! Per all!
  8. BMfan08 (talk) Sure! I'm all for kittens (I could even make do with Mario kittens). Per all!

Oppose

Comments

@ThePowerPlayer I realized WikiLove templates could fit into the scope of this proposal, so it's been updated, if your "Support" will count towards voting for those as well. Super Mario RPG (talk) 22:24, September 13, 2024 (EDT)

I really like this, but does Porplemontage know about this proposal? I know he approved and implemented the "Thanks" extension, but I just wanna be sure! link:User:Sparks Sparks (talk) link:User:Sparks 22:37, September 13, 2024 (EDT)

@Sparks The proposal is easily viewable on this page. And the proposal basically concerns a WikiLove system in general (since I updated it to also mention templates), so something like MarioWiki:WikiLove page can be set up with the corresponding templates. Super Mario RPG (talk) 08:17, September 14, 2024 (EDT)
Alrighty! Good to know. link:User:Sparks Sparks (talk) link:User:Sparks 08:52, September 14, 2024 (EDT)

Removals

None at the moment.

Changes

Rename the remaining baseball teams to their current titles

One thing is certain: Mario Super Sluggers was first released in Japan almost three years after Mario Superstar Baseball was first released in said country. In this case, I humbly suggest that there's a possibility to move the remaining baseball team pages with their Mario Superstar Baseball name to their current name from Mario Super Sluggers. So far, the current names already in use are the Peach Monarchs and Bowser Monsters.

The following of the remaining pages will be affected by the move:

Once this proposal passes, we'll be able to move the remaining baseball teams with their Mario Superstar Baseball names to their current Mario Super Sluggers titles.

Proposer: GuntherBayBeee (talk)
Deadline: September 19, 2024, 23:59 GMT

Support

  1. GuntherBayBeee (talk) Per proposal.
  2. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) - Kept forgetting to do this during my ongoing sports project.
  3. Jdtendo (talk) The most recent names should be prioritized.
  4. Super Mario RPG (talk) Definitely.
  5. ThePowerPlayer (talk) Per (baseb)all.
  6. Hewer (talk) Don't see why not.
  7. Killer Moth (talk) Per proposal. Sounds like a good idea.
  8. Technetium (talk) Per proposal.
  9. Windy (talk) Per all.
  10. BMfan08 (talk) Per all. I wish we had more than just one team in Sluggers
  11. FanOfRosalina2007 (talk) Consistency. Per all.

Oppose

Comments

Decide how to handle the "latest portrayal" section in infoboxes

Currently, in infoboxes, the "latest portrayal" section of it is inconsistent across characters. When Paper Mario: The Thousand-Year Door came out, for example, it listed both Kevin Afghani (Mario's current voice actor) and Charles Martinet (who voices Mario in The Thousand-Year Door from original archival voicing) as Mario's latest portrayals, yet Jen Taylor (whose voice clips were also reused) wasn't added to Peach's latest portrayal. Therefore, to make these infoboxes consistent for characters with multiple voice actors, I am proposing several options:

  • Option 1: Only add in the current voice actor for the character (reissues with archival voices from retired voice actors will not be added).
  • Option 2: Only add in the voice actor for the character in the most recent game (reissues with archival voices will overtake the "current" voice actor if the latest one did not record voice lines for the character, the current voice actor will be re-added to the infobox following the release of a game with voices from the current voice actor).
  • Option 3: Add both the current voice actor and the voice actor for the latest release (this puts two voice actors in the "latest portrayal" section if the character is voiced via archival footage from a retired voice actor, but the current voice actor also gets to remain. When a new game comes out with new voice lines from the current voice actor, the voice actor from the previous release will be removed).
  • Option 4: Do nothing (infoboxes with both actors will not change, and same with infoboxes with the current actor even if a game featuring archival voicing from a retired voice actor is the latest one).

With regards to mixed use of voices, if multiple voice actors voice a single character in a single game, the latest person who voiced the character as of the game's release takes priority, meaning that archival voices from retired actors will not appear in the infobox if the character in that game is also (and especially mostly) voiced by the current actor for that character. As for other media (like The Super Mario Bros. Movie), whether or not the game/other media actor takes priority or if both should be listed is also of question, but I will likely wait until the follow-up to create that proposal.

EDIT: With regards to Tails777's vote, I don't know exactly how it will play out if Option 3 passes, although I will say if a game (like a compilation) does have a single character voiced by more than one voice actor who isn't the current one, the latest voice actor whose voice clips are used in the game as of the game's release will be the second option added to the infobox (like Peach in 3D All-Stars, who would've listes Samantha Kelly as her current and Galaxy voice actress, as well as Jen Taylor as her Sunshine voice actress, although I don't think it would be that consistent because it would exclude Leslie Swan, her 64 voice actress, but since Jen Taylor was the more recent of the two, she is the one who is listed).

Proposer: Altendo (talk)
Deadline: September 21, 2024, 23:59 GMT

Only add in the current voice actor

  1. Altendo (talk) Primary choice. "Latest portrayal", to me, means the person who last voiced the character, and I don't think archival voices should count as this, especially since those voices were recorded before the current voice actor. This also avoids the issues of multiple voice actors voicing a single character in compilations and switching/adding or removing voice actors when reissues and original games come out (as described below).
  2. Shadow2 (talk) Re-using old sound clips has no bearing on a character's "Latest portrayal". Charles does not voice Mario anymore, and to list him as such just because of older re-used sound clips is misrepresentative.
  3. Hewer (talk) Per both, this is the less misleading option (the infobox doesn't specify whether the "latest" voice actor was just re-usage of old voice clips, so listing both Charles and Kevin gives the impression that they're both actively voicing Mario, which is wrong).
  4. Super Mario RPG (talk) Per all.

Only add in the the voice actor for the "latest" game

  1. Altendo (talk) Tertiary choice. If "Latest portrayal" really means the person who voiced the character in the latest game, regardless of said actor's as-of-game-release status, then maybe archival voices can count because it is the voice of the character in the "latest" game. I do not recommend this option as this will cause a lot of infobox editing and switching voice actors when reissues (particularly ports and remasters) do inevitably come out, and if a compilation game (like Super Mario 3D All-Stars) comes out, multiple voice actors who voice the same character in a single compilation (like Princess Peach, who had three voice actresses in a single compilation) will stack up in the infoboxes. And when a new game comes out, all of that is thrown out the window, reverting to their current voice actor. This is why some were against enforcing the absolute "latest" portrayals in a previous proposal. The only reason why I am for this is consistency.

Add both current and latest voice actor

  1. Altendo (talk) Secondary choice. It feels nice to respect both the voice actor who is currently voicing the character and the person whose voices, even in archival, are the sole ones used in the latest game. However, my point about voice actor switching, while not as big as an issue because archival voice actors will only be added rather than replace the current one, still kind of stands because reissues will add the archival voice actor for one game, only to remove it when a new game comes out. Additionally, if compilations only contain voices from retired voice actors, this will stack it up even more (although for 3D All-Stars, it still wouldn't change much due to Peach's Super Mario Galaxy voice actress still being her current one). Still, this does make the infoboxes consistent.
  2. Tails777 (talk) I agree with this one more; it's best to keep it up to date when it comes to VAs, but it isn't uncommon for various games to recycle voice clips (TTYD once again being a good example). I feel it is best to at least acknowledge if voice clips get recycled in this respect, though I also feel this should be limited to one at a time, in case there are examples where someone had more than even two voice actors.

Do nothing

Comments

I'm conflicted between simply listing only whoever is currently voicing the character vs. potentially opening a can of worms by listing multiple actors from archival clips, even though that would respect the portrayals from the most recent game whether it used newly recorded or archived voices. No matter how this proposal ends up, I think that a future proposal should consider standardizing the "Portrayals" header in the character articles themselves. For Mario, the list of portrayals does a great job at comprehensively documenting everyone who has officially voiced Mario, but falters in conveying the inconceivable magnitude of media in which Martinet has voiced Mario, and how much he has contributed to the character's brand recognition to the point where many people will continue to see him as the voice of Mario, even moving forward as Kevin Afghani takes on that role. ThePowerPlayer Slug.png ThePowerPlayer 23:57, September 16, 2024 (EDT)

Miscellaneous

None at the moment.

Retrieved from "https://www.mariowiki.com/index.php?title=MarioWiki:Proposals&oldid=4369000"