MarioWiki:Proposals: Difference between revisions

From the Super Mario Wiki, the Mario encyclopedia
Jump to navigationJump to search
 
Line 1: Line 1:
<center>http://i143.photobucket.com/albums/r149/Deadringerforlove/dessert1.jpg</center>
{{/Header}}
<br clear="all">
==Writing guidelines==
{| align="center" style="width: 85%; background-color: #f1f1de; border: 2px solid #996; padding: 5px; color:black" ( The new Picture url http://www.mariowiki.com/File:Wikipedesketch1.png )
''None at the moment.''
|'''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!"
==New features==
*"Vote" periods last for one week.
===Noting the Switch 2 Editions===
*All past proposals are [[/Archive|archived]].
I have seen that it's kind of a mystery how we should note the [[Nintendo Switch 2#Nintendo Switch 2 Edition games|Switch 2 Edition of a game]]. This question caused some controversy when I asked it in [[Talk:Super Mario Party Jamboree]], so I have decided to involve the whole community in this to see what everyone thinks and so we all know what we should do in the future, when more Switch 2 Editions will follow.
|}
 
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>.
'''Proposer''': {{User|Yoshi18}}<br>
'''Deadline''': April 20, 2025, 23:59 GMT
 
====We give Switch 2 Editions their own articles====
#{{User|memoryman3}} Switch 2 Editions are unique game builds that Nintendo gives you the option to upgrade to, and as such should be treated as unique games. Determining whether a game deserves a separate article should be treated on a case-by-case basis, similar to other reissues. This would be no different from distinguishing a game like [[Luigi's Mansion 2 HD]] or [[Donkey Kong Country Returns HD]] as unique titles, unless the changes are so minimal that the games are classified as ports.
 
====We give Switch 2 Editions their own section in their base games' article====
#{{User|CarlosYoshiBoi}} I’m in for this one.
 
====We make a Switch 2 Edition page where the Switch 2 Editions have their own respective sections====
 
====Propose in the games' talk page based on what the Switch 2 Edition adds====
 
====Re-propose this when we're closer to release of the Switch 2====
#{{User|LinkTheLefty}} Ideally, we should wait until after launch since there's still much we don't know. From what I understand, they don't even have their own physical versions when seemingly everything else does (literally just the original Switch copy with a one-time download-code, or for all intents and purposes, DLC). If these "upgrade packs" act just like DLC does on previous consoles, then I think we should treat them as such, but that's to be determined at a later time.
#{{User|Camwoodstock}} Yeah, no, we should definitely wait on this until the Switch 2 releases. Otherwise, we might end up pre-emptively codifying a ton of articles with nothing substantial to them beyond "It's exactly the same as Switch 1, the gameplay functions, visuals, text, audio, and everything are all the same, but it just runs smoother." We'd like to refer to the PC-88 and Sharp X1 versions of ''[[Super Mario Bros. Special]]'', not just because it's fresh on our mind, but it is genuinely relevant to the subject; that is a game that very expressly has a performance-related different release on another platform, but outside of the very obvious audiovisual elements, there just isn't enough to warrant splitting on the gameplay side. We could very easily see the Switch 2 Editions being similar to this, where the gameplay is entirely intact with no unique mechanics or mild substitutions due to hardware improvements, but the vast majority of the differences are just "uh, it looks different and runs smoother", which is not particularly substantial.
#{{User|Tails777}} Per all. Too early at this point.
#{{User|EvieMaybe}} per all, and per my comment below
#{{User|Yoshi18}} Per proposal and all.
#{{User|TheFlameChomp}} Per all.
#{{User|Nintendo101}} per everyone. No need to jump the shark.
 
====Comments====
We know so little about what a Switch 2 Edition will mean that I don't think a decision can be made right now. [[User:Salmancer|Salmancer]] ([[User talk:Salmancer|talk]]) 12:05, April 6, 2025 (EDT)
:Seconding this--wouldn't it be better to just wait for the Switch 2 to actually release to see how the Switch 2 editions actually work? We're highly skeptical they would actually feature exclusive content in the first place, mind you, but without a Switch 2 edition having actually released, we're kind of voting in the dark here. {{User:Camwoodstock/sig}} 12:07, April 6, 2025 (EDT)
::i want to point out the "Switch 2 Edition" moniker is specifically reserved for versions which have actual content changes (ie, not what Odyssey is getting, which is just a free compatibility update). however, i still think we should wait more before deciding what to do, and that it might be better to case-by-case it {{User:EvieMaybe/sig}} 14:12, April 6, 2025 (EDT)
 
Case-by-case where we only split ones with significant new content might be the way to go. This reminds me of how ''[[New Play Control! Donkey Kong Jungle Beat]]'' is split while ''[[New Play Control! Mario Power Tennis]]'' isn't. As for determining which ones have enough new content, it seems like the titles can help with that - so far, ones that are mainly just graphical improvements are just called "''Game – Nintendo Switch 2 Edition''", while ones that have more content added have another bit on the end of the title after a "＋" (like ''Super Mario Party Jamboree – Nintendo Switch 2 Edition ＋ Jamboree TV''). I guess the option closest to this is the fourth one, except I'd rather not strictly require a proposal to determine it in cases where it's obvious (though of course we'd be allowed to have one if it's not). {{User:Hewer/sig}} 16:50, April 6, 2025 (EDT)
 
I understand everyone's argument about this but I feel like we already know enough about the Switch 2 Edition of Jamboree to make this proposal. {{User:Yoshi18/sig}} 15:27, April 7, 2025 (EDT)
 
It is weird personally to have a "table this proposal" voting option when this wiki doesn't have a policy preventing it from being proposed again. A proposal being put up again after some time has passed is fairly normal. Well, there is the four week rule but surely no one would enforce that if the Switch 2 Edition games released within that window. [[User:Salmancer|Salmancer]] ([[User talk:Salmancer|talk]]) 13:45, April 11, 2025 (EDT)
:I guess it's meant to be the equivalent of a "do nothing" option. {{User:Hewer/sig}} 02:59, April 12, 2025 (EDT)
:Maybe it should have been "re-discuss" instead of "re-propose" so it doesn't have to have another proposal. Oh well. [[User:LinkTheLefty|LinkTheLefty]] ([[User talk:LinkTheLefty|talk]]) 08:20, April 12, 2025 (EDT)
Hey guys, I have a question. When this proposal ends, which color do I have to give it in the [[MarioWiki:Proposal/Archive|proposal archive]] page? Because it doesn’t seem like any of those fit. Should I color it Grey/Gray? {{User:Yoshi18/sig}} 07:14, April 15, 2025 (EDT)
:I'd say red, assuming the last option passes. {{User:Hewer/sig}} 10:05, April 15, 2025 (EDT)
But this'll get re-proposed when the Switch 2 (or the first Switch 2 Edition releases) so doesn’t that technically mean it passed, because the option that passed is that we'll discuss it later. Because if it didn't pass, no change would've been made, ever. But this time there will be a change made. Just not now, but like, it'll still happen this year. {{User:Yoshi18/sig}} 11:25, April 15, 2025 (EDT)
:It'd be red because the option that passed was to not take action yet. If a later proposal decides on a change then the change is attributed to that proposal and this one could switch to the blue colour. {{User:Hewer/sig}} 11:38, April 15, 2025 (EDT)
That's actually not a bad idea! {{User:Yoshi18/sig}} 18:13, April 15, 2025 (EDT)
 
==Removals==
''None at the moment.''
 
==Changes==
''None at the moment.''
 
==Miscellaneous==
===What is a game?===
Per {{@|Camwoodstock}}'s comments on the ongoing [[Talk:List of games#A location for the water games, pocket pinball machines, Water Teaser, and other similar items|electronic water-related proposal on the list of games]]. The way that a game is considered a game is currently arbitrary, with board games being split to one list, card games being relegated elsewhere, [[Play Nintendo]] getting its own list, and [[Nintendo Today!]] quizzes all being merged into the app's article. This proposal aims to decide what gets on the [[list of games]] article, since there isn't anything on that page that explicitly states that the games listed have to be video games (minus the text "organized by video game system", but this can be changed). To note, this proposal is not suggesting that anything should be removed from the list, the goal of this proposal is to figure out whether or not anything should be added to the list of games.
 
'''Proposer''': {{User|Nelsonic}}
 
====Do board games move to the list?====
'''Deadline''': April 19, 2025, 23:59 GMT
 
;Yes
#{{User|Nelsonic}} Per proposal.
#{{User|Camwoodstock}} Per ourselves in the original comments; this feels like kind of a no-brainer, and we're surprised these have been excluded from the Games list for as long as they have been. Board games are like, a known concept, they've been around for millennia, and heck, games like [[Mario Party-e]] exist as a hybrid board game/video game. Excluding board games feels very arbitrary, just because they aren't "video" games, but we've included the ''Game & Watch'' titles for forever, with basically no contention whatsoever, despite those not technically meeting the definition of being a "video" game.
#{{User|Rykitu}} Per Camwoodstock.
#{{User|Kaptain Skurvy}} The article is titled the "list of games," not the "list of ''VIDEO'' games." It'd be nice if this page just covered every game of every type, especially seeing how I consider board games (or anything of the sort) to be closer to games than merchandise. Besides, they are called board ''GAMES'', so why shouldn't they be included on the "list of ''GAMES''"?
#{{User|JanMisali}} Per all. Board games are pretty unambiguously "games".
#{{User|Pseudo}} Per Camwoodstock. While I understand Nintendo101's point about board games often being promotional tie-in products, they are still Mario franchise media in their own right, and a kind of game at that.
#{{User|Yoshi18}} Per all. As a big Mario Party fan. I feel like board games fit to the category of games
 
;No
#{{User|Nintendo101}} This is not to disparage board games or other types of media of this nature, but I think it would be healthier for our site to have distinction between a "video game" and "promotional tie-in media and products." I do not think being interactive is enough for it count as a "game" within the context of a video game-oriented franchise, in the same way I would not include instruction booklets in a list of books because they have readable text. This kind of stuff should be supported on the site, but not here.
#{{User|Koopa con Carne}} per Nintendo101. There are a lot of different mediums for games in this world, but it's indisputable that the Mario franchise manifests itself most often in video games, and I believe this specific list is better off focusing on those, with an appropriate move to "List of ''video'' games". I can see the appeal and use of a page for Mario games that are not video games, though, and I support creating that. The wiki currently considers these games to be "merchandise", which I consider apt for some (like the shampoo bottles) but something of a stretch for others (board games).
#{{User|Hewer}} Per Koopa con Carne. I'm not denying that board games are games, but they're not ''video'' games, and I think "List of video games" would be a more useful page for this wiki about a primarily video game franchise than "List of games".
#{{User|SGoW}} Per all. I would rather the wiki not mix the core media of the Mario franchise (video games) with miscellaneous pieces of merchandise such as board games.
#{{User|Ahemtoday}} Per all.
 
====Do card games move to the list?====
'''Deadline''': April 19, 2025, 23:59 GMT
 
;Yes
#{{User|Nelsonic}} Per proposal.
#{{User|Camwoodstock}} Per ourselves in the original comments, and the same rationale behind board games. Sure, it's not a "video" game, but this is List of Games, not List of Video Games.
#{{User|Rykitu}} Per Camwoodstock again.
#{{User|Kaptain Skurvy}} Per my board game vote.
#{{User|JanMisali}} Per proposal.
#{{User|Pseudo}} Per Camwoodstock and my above vote for board games.
 
;No
#{{User|Nintendo101}} per my board game vote.
#{{User|Koopa con Carne}} Per Nintendo 101 and my board game vote.
#{{User|Hewer}} Same as the board game vote.
#{{User|SGoW}} Per all.
#{{User|Ahemtoday}} Per all.
 
====Do party games (i.e. Jenga) move to the list?====
'''Deadline''': April 19, 2025, 23:59 GMT
 
;Yes
#{{User|Nelsonic}} Per proposal.
#{{User|Camwoodstock}} Per ourselves in the original comments, and the rationale behind board games. This is gonna be appearing a few more times...
#{{User|Rykitu}} Per Camwoodstock yet again.
#{{User|Kaptain Skurvy}} Also per my board game vote.
#{{User|JanMisali}} Per proposal.
#{{User|Pseudo}} Also a mere semantic distinction between party games like this and board games, in my view.
#{{User|Yoshi18}} Things like Jenga are such family games, like ''Mario Party''. I have the feeling they should've already been classified as games long ago.
 
;No
#{{User|Nintendo101}} per my board game vote. (You also do not italicize Jenga.)
#{{User|Koopa con Carne}} Per Nintendo 101 and my board game vote.
#{{User|Hewer}} Same as the card game vote.
#{{User|SGoW}} Per all.
#{{User|Ahemtoday}} Per all.
 
====Do physical games (i.e. ''Barrel of Monkeys''-style things with physical characters and pieces) move to the list?====
'''Deadline''': April 19, 2025, 23:59 GMT
 
;Yes
#{{User|Nelsonic}} Per proposal.
#{{User|Camwoodstock}} Per ourselves in the original comments, and the rationale behind board games. You get it, right?
#{{User|Rykitu}} Per Camwoodstock once more.
#{{User|Kaptain Skurvy}} Yet again per my board game vote.
#{{User|JanMisali}} Per proposal.
#{{User|Pseudo}} Per my other "yes" votes.
 
;No
#{{User|Nintendo101}} per my board game vote.
#{{User|Koopa con Carne}} Per Nintendo 101 and my board game vote.
#{{User|Hewer}} Same as the party game vote.
#{{User|SGoW}} Per all.
#{{User|Ahemtoday}} Per all.
 
====Does ''Super Mario Ride'' move to the list?====
'''Deadline''': April 19, 2025, 23:59 GMT
 
;Yes
#{{User|Nelsonic}} Per proposal. It is currently listed under "Other Super Mario-themed games" on the [[list of merchandise]].
#{{User|JanMisali}} Per proposal. I'm a maximal inclusivist when it comes to these things, so I think anything anyone could plausibly conceptualize as "a game" ought to be classified as a game for navigational purposes.
 
;No
#{{User|Camwoodstock}} From the looks of it, those are toy cars; those are toys, not games. Them being listed as "other Super Mario-themed games" feels like a bit of a misnomer.
#{{User|Nintendo101}} per my board game vote above.
#{{User|Rykitu}} Rides are not games.
#{{User|Pseudo}} If it's a toy and not a game, it probably shouldn't count. This is a slightly different category of item.
#{{User|Yoshi18}} Per all.
#{{User|Koopa con Carne}} Per Nintendo 101 and my board game vote.
#{{User|SGoW}} Per all.
#{{User|Ahemtoday}} Per all.
 
====Do ''Play Nintendo'' games move to the list?====
'''Deadline''': April 19, 2025, 23:59 GMT
 
;Yes
#{{User|Nelsonic}} Per proposal. There's a dedicated HTML section now.
#{{User|Camwoodstock}} With an HTML section in tow, we feel it's only fair.
#{{User|Rykitu}} Sure.
#{{User|Kaptain Skurvy}} We have other browser games on the list, why not these?
#{{User|JanMisali}} Per proposal. Even if the term we were using was "video game" instead of just "game" I would think these should count.
#{{User|Pseudo}} These seems like games as much as a typical Flash game of old, [[List of games#Adobe Flash|which we already include in the list of games]], so this seems more clear cut than any of the others.
#{{User|Yoshi18}} Per Nelsonic and Camwoodstock.
 
;No
 
====Does ''Nintendo Today!'' move to the list?====
'''Deadline''': April 19, 2025, 23:59 GMT
 
;Yes
#{{User|Nelsonic}} Per proposal. It has many interactive elements, such as quizzes.
#{{User|JanMisali}} Per proposal. I understand everyone else's hesitation, but Nelsonic has a point!
 
;No
#{{User|1468z}} The only thing that comes the closest to the definition of game and is related to ''Mario'' is the silhouette quizzes, which despite their name are actually just articles with a profile of a character without any interactive elements. It's not that different from something you would find on Nintendo's website.
#{{User|Camwoodstock}} To be honest, we're a bit on the fence, but we're leaning on this for now. Maybe if there were more active game elements to them, but as it stands, these are ''just'' articles at the moment with no real interactive elements aside from. Clicking it and reading it.
#{{User|Nintendo101}} per my board game vote.
#{{User|Hewer}} Per Shinya Takahashi ("[https://www.youtube.com/live/9OqoRxXUjGA?t=34m58s <nowiki>[Nintendo Today]</nowiki> is something a little different that's not a game]").
#{{User|Rykitu}} Per all. If you really think about it, if we count Nintendo Today as a game, that would mean the Super Mario Wiki would be considered a game.
#{{User|Pseudo}} This seems like not so much of a game to me as a platform for games (in addition to other media); at most, I'd support adding this app's individual included games to the list.
#{{User|Yoshi18}} Per all. ''Nintendo Today!'' is basically just a daily newspaper (similar to ''[[The 'Shroom:Main Page|The 'Shroom]]'').
#{{User|SGoW}} Per all.
#{{User|Ahemtoday}} Per all.
 
====Does ''[[Super Mario World: Mario to Yoshi no Bōken Land]]'' move to the list?====
'''Deadline''': April 19, 2025, 23:59 GMT
 
;Yes
#{{User|Nelsonic}} Per proposal. It was an interactive VHS tape that required the user to press buttons at certain points.
#{{User|Camwoodstock}} By our own definition of it being an "interactive game", yes, even if it's just a VHS analogue to those Play Nintendo quizzes, you can get a question wrong and stuff will still happen.
#{{User|Rykitu}} Per all.
#{{User|Kaptain Skurvy}} Per all.
#{{User|JanMisali}} Per all. Somewhat surprised it wasn't already being considered a game.
#{{User|Pseudo}} Eh, more or less? It's sort of an edge case but it's still primarily intended as interactive, just in an unusual format. It is definitely a "game" that relies on "video" for displaying its contents.
#{{User|Koopa con Carne}} Checks both the "video" and the "game" parts of "video game". As long as {{wp|Dragon's Lair (1983 video game)|''Dragon's Lair''}} is considered a video game, this should too.
 
;No
#{{User|Nintendo101}} per my board game vote.
#{{User|Yoshi18}} I have mixed feelings  about this one, but I'm turning more to the "No" side. I just don't feel like interactive cartoons can be considered games.
 
====Do [[Gallery:Miscellaneous_merchandise#Rides|rides]] move to the list?====
'''Deadline''': April 19, 2025, 23:59 GMT
 
;Yes
#{{User|Nelsonic}} Per proposal. They were made by [[Banpresto]], usable in arcades, and required money to play.
#{{User|JanMisali}} Per proposal, and per my ''Super Mario Ride'' vote.
 
;No
#{{User|Camwoodstock}} You don't really interact with it aside from sitting on it; if there was a more game-ified aspect to it, kinda like Waku Waku Sonic Patrol Car, maybe? But as it stands, this is a little too non-interactive.
#{{User|Nintendo101}} per my board game vote.
#{{User|Rykitu}} Once again, rides are not games. Except ''[[Būbū Mario]]''. That is a game.
#{{User|Pseudo}} Seems like not so much a game as an automated experience; games require interactivity of some kind, I'd think.
#{{User|Yoshi18}} Once again per Camwoodstock and Rykitu.
#{{User|SGoW}} Per all.
#{{User|Ahemtoday}} Per all.
 
====Do the remaining water games on the list of merchandise move to the list?====
'''Deadline''': April 19, 2025, 23:59 GMT


This page observes the [[MarioWiki:No-Signature Policy|No-Signature Policy]].
;Yes
#{{User|Nelsonic}} Per proposal.
#{{User|Camwoodstock}} Per ourselves in the original proposal's comments; they are interactive games with a blatant physical, mechanical element to them. The lack of "video" isn't a hurdle so long as the ''Game & Watch'' games exist.
#{{User|Rykitu}} Per Camwoodstock twice more.
#{{User|Kaptain Skurvy}} Per all.
#{{User|JanMisali}} Per all.
#{{User|Pseudo}} Yeah, it's pretty much a type of game. Per Camwoodstock's comparison to Game & Watch.
#{{User|Yoshi18}} Per all.


<h2 style="color:black">How To</h2>
;No
#Actions that users feel are appropriate to have community approval first can be added by anyone, but they must have a strong argument.
#{{User|Nintendo101}} per my board game vote. This is not comparable to Game & Watch.
#Users then start to discuss on the issue. 24 hours after posting the proposal (rounding up or down to the next or previous full hour, respectively, is allowed), the voting period begins. (The proposer is allowed to support their proposal right after posting.) Each proposal ends at the end of the day one week after voting start. ('''All times GMT''').
#{{User|Koopa con Carne}} Per Nintendo 101 and my board game vote.
#Every vote should have a reason accompanying it. Agreeing or seconding a previously mentioned reason given by another user is accepted.
#{{User|SGoW}} Per all.
#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. The voter can remove or rewrite his/her own vote at any time, but the final decision to remove another User's vote lies solely with the [[MarioWiki:Administrators|Administrators]].
#{{User|Ahemtoday}} Per all.
#All proposals that end up in a tie will be extended for another week.
#If a proposal has more than ten votes, it can only pass or fail by a margin of '''three''' votes. If a proposal reaches the deadline and the total number of votes for each option differ by two or less votes, the deadline will be extended for another week.
#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.
#No proposal can overturn the decision of a previous proposal that is less than '''4 weeks''' ('''28 days''') old.
#Proposals can only be rewritten or deleted by their proposer within the first three days of their creation. However, the proposer can request that their proposal be deleted by a [[MarioWiki:Administrators|Sysop]] at any time, provided they have a valid reason for it.
#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.
#There shouldn't be proposals about creating articles on a underrepresented or completely absent subject, unless there is major disagreement about whether the content should be included. To organize efforts about completing articles on missing subjects, try creating a [[MarioWiki:PipeProject|PipeProject]].
#Proposals cannot be made about [[MarioWiki:Administrators|System Operator]] promotions and demotions. Sysops can only be promoted and demoted by the will of [[MarioWiki:Bureaucrats|Bureaucrats]].
#If the Sysops 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.
#No joke proposals. Proposals are serious wiki matters, and should be handled professionally. Joke proposals will be deleted on sight.


The times are in [[wikipedia:GMT|GMT]], and are set so that the user is more likely to be online at those times (after work/school, weekend nights). If a proposal is added on Monday night at 23:59 GMT, the deadline is the night of the Tuesday of the next week at 23:59 PM. If it is posted a minute later, the deadline is 23:59 PM of the Wednesday of the next week, since midnight is considered to be part of the next day, as 00:00 AM.
====The Comment Games====
{{@|Nintendo101}}, unless us and everyone we know has been using it ''very'' wrong, we don't really see how the board game vote applies to [[Nintendo Today!]]... ;P <s>not that it matters, as we agree that Nintendo Today! would be overkill to include either way unless they were more interactive, but y'know,</s> {{User:Camwoodstock/sig}} 20:23, April 5, 2025 (EDT)
:Also, Wikipedia does italicise ''{{wp|Jenga}}''. {{User:Hewer/sig}} 20:30, April 5, 2025 (EDT)


===Basic Proposal and Support/Oppose Format===
If we decide to keep the non-video games off the list of games, I feel like a name change to "List of video games" might be a good idea (though the link on the main page can keep it shortened to "Games" for simplicity if need be). {{User:Hewer/sig}} 20:43, April 5, 2025 (EDT)
This is an example how your proposal should 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 <u>replace the whole variable including the squared brackets</u>, so "[insert info here]" becomes "This is the inserted information", not "[This is the inserted information]".
-----
<nowiki>===[insert a title for your Proposal here]===</nowiki><br>
<nowiki>[describe what issue this Proposal is about and what changes you think should be made to improve how the Wiki handles that issue]</nowiki>


<nowiki>'''Proposer''': {{User|[enter your username here]}}<br></nowiki><br>
:{{@|Hewer}} I have an idea. Could we add a new header on the list of games (underneath the iOS stuff and the ''LEGO Super Mario'' Roku/Sky Italia games) for "physical games" or "non-electronic games", thus keeping the base list intact up to said section? [[User:Nelsonic|Nelsonic]] ([[User talk:Nelsonic|talk]]) 13:21, April 8, 2025 (EDT)
<nowiki>'''Voting start''': [insert a voting start time here, f.e. "2 January, 2010, 14:00". Voting start times are 24 hours after the time at which the proposal was posted, as described in Rule 2 above.]<br></nowiki><br>
::I suppose that'd work too. {{User:Hewer/sig}} 13:25, April 9, 2025 (EDT)
<nowiki>'''Deadline''': [insert a deadline here, 7 days after the voting start, at 23:59 GMT.]</nowiki>


<nowiki>====Support====</nowiki><br>
If [[Play Nintendo]] is added to the list, would we include every game in the "Play" category or will we also include the quizzes, polls, puzzles, matching and painting games? If that is the case, I am warning you that there are hundreds of those and would probably take like 75% of the whole page. {{User:Rykitu/sig}}
<nowiki>#{{User|[enter your username here]}} [make a statement indicating that you support your proposal]</nowiki>


<nowiki>====Oppose====</nowiki>
:{{@|Rykitu}} I was thinking that for the duplicates, we could link to a handful of the most relevant ones and then stick something along the lines of "''For a complete list of [[Play Nintendo]] quizzes, see [[list of Play Nintendo skill quizzes]]''" underneath the segment. [[User:Nelsonic|Nelsonic]] ([[User talk:Nelsonic|talk]]) 13:11, April 9, 2025 (EDT)
::Ok, that works! {{User:Rykitu/sig}}


<nowiki>====Comments====</nowiki>
@JanMisali: I think Nelsonic was mistaken about the amount of interactivity in Nintendo Today. The misleadingly named "quizzes" are just pages that describe a character, with no more interactivity than [https://mario.nintendo.com/characters/ the websites that the descriptions come from]. At that point, what piece of software ''wouldn't'' you consider a game? Is [[Nintendo Music]] a game? {{User:Hewer/sig}} 10:17, April 15, 2025 (EDT)
-----
:I fully sincerely believe anything with any amount of interactivity at all can be considered a game. Websites, apps, web browsers, activity books, DVD menus, and pretty much all software. I think it's better to cast a wide net and include things that 99% of people would say aren't games than it is to be too narrow and exclude things 1% of people would say are games. {{User:JanMisali/sig}} 10:27, April 15, 2025 (EDT)
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.
::That's how you make a definition so broad that it's useless. {{User:Hewer/sig}} 11:11, April 15, 2025 (EDT)


To support, or oppose, just insert "<nowiki>#{{User|[add your username here]}}</nowiki> 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 anoother user's Proposal. If you are voting on your own Proposal, you can just say "Per my Proposal".
===Uniformly indicate subjects' work of origin in infobox headers===
For some infoboxes like [[Template:M&LSS enemy|RPG enemy infoboxes]] or [[Template:DKC TV episode infobox|show episode infoboxes]], the work is displayed in a header (like "''Paper Mario'' enemy" or "''Super Mario World'' episode"). Others, like the generic [[Template:Level infobox|level infobox]] (which has only "Level" in a header) and the [[Template:Minigame infobox|minigame]] infobox, indicate the game in a regular field.


__TOC__
I propose all subject infoboxes with a "Game" field or similar (exceptions and specific details below) adopt the work-in-header-cell format (like "''Super Mario World'' level"), and the "Game" or "Appears in" field be changed to "Reappearances" (present only in cases where the subject reappears, like retro ''Mario Kart'' courses or returning ''WarioWare'' microgames).


<!--<center><span style="font-size:200%">CURRENTLY: '''{{#time: H:i, d M Y}} (GMT)'''</span></center>-->
Why do that? In order to maintain consistency in the presentation of this type of info, and also because it makes more sense than having the work be indicated in a regular field, as the work is not an internal attribute of the subject (like a level's time or code, or an enemy's stats), but part of its context. Also, making work identification more clear is useful when the same infoboxes are widely used for subjects belonging to different games and series.


That would affect every infobox that has a "Game" field currently, the [[Template:Course infobox|course infobox]], and infoboxes for specific games.


In the end, the infoboxes affected by this change would be:
*[[Template:Board infobox]]
*[[Template:Course infobox]]
*[[Template:DDRMM song infobox]]
*[[Template:DK64 level infobox]]
*[[Template:DKC level infobox]]
*[[Template:DKC3 world infobox]]
*[[Template:DKJB kingdom infobox]]
*[[Template:DKR course infobox]]
*[[Template:DLC infobox]]
*[[Template:Golf course infobox]]
*[[Template:Kart infobox]]
*[[Template:Level infobox]]
*[[Template:LM ghost infobox]]
*[[Template:LM portrait infobox]]
*[[Template:LM room infobox]]
*[[Template:Minigame infobox]]
*[[Template:Mission infobox]]
*[[Template:M&L attack infobox]]
*[[Template:M&S episode infobox]]
*[[Template:M&S event infobox]]
*[[Template:M+RSOH planet infobox]]
*[[Template:MKDD kart infobox]]
*[[Template:MSM court infobox]]
*[[Template:PM item infobox]]
*[[Template:PMCS location infobox]]
*[[Template:PMTOK location infobox]]
*[[Template:Power Shot infobox]]
*[[Template:Race course infobox]]
*[[Template:SMG boss infobox]]
*[[Template:Space infobox]]
*[[Template:Tennis court infobox]]
*[[Template:Tour infobox]]
*[[Template:World infobox]]


<br>
(As for [[Template:Space infobox|spaces]], [[Template:Kart infobox|karts and kart parts]], [[Template:PM item infobox|''Paper Mario'' item]] and [[Template:Power Shot infobox|power shots]], which have an "Appears in" field, I suggest we indicate the ''series'' in the header instead (''Mario Party'', ''Mario Kart'', ''Paper Mario'' and ''Mario Tennis''), since they are not really "tied" to the game they debuted in, but are series-wide elements.)


==Talk Page Proposals==
'''Proposer''': {{User|Bro Hammer}}<br/>
All proposals dealing with a single article or a specific group of articles are held on the talk page of one of the articles in question. Proposals dealing with massive amounts of splits, merges or deletions across the Wiki should still be held on this page.
'''Deadline''': April 21, 2025, 23:59 GMT


===How To===
====Support: replace regular "Game" fields and similar in infoboxes with a header cell====
#All active talk page proposals must be listed below in chronological order (new proposals go at the bottom). All pages effected must be mentioned in the ''brief'' description, with the talk page housing the discussion linked to directly via "({{fakelink|Discuss}})". If the proposal involved a page that is not yet made, use {{tem|fakelink}} to communicate its title. The '''Deadline''' must also be included in the entry. Linking to pages not directly involved in the talk page proposal is not recommended, as it clutters the list with unnecessary links. Place {{tem|TPP}} under the heading.
#{{User|Bro Hammer}} Per proposal.
#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:
#{{User|Ahemtoday}} I like uniformity.
#Voting in talk page proposals will be open for two weeks, not one. There is no 24 hour delay between the posting of a talk page proposal and the commencement of voting.
#{{User|Salmancer}} I see the appeal.
#Talk page proposals may closed by the proposer if both the support ''and'' the oppose sides each have fewer than five votes.
#The talk page proposal '''must''' pertain to the article it is posted on.


===List of Talk Page Proposals===
====Oppose: do not change any infoboxes====
*Merge [[Memory Master]] with [[Memory Match (Super Mario 64 DS)|Memory Match]] ([[Talk:Memory Master|Discuss]]) '''Deadline:''' 15 August 2010, 24:00 GMT.
*Merge [[Pair-a-Gone]] with [[Pair-a-Gone and On]] ([[Talk:Pair-a-Gone|Discuss]]) '''Deadline:''' August 16, 2010 at 24:00 GMT.
*Merge [[Coincentration]] into [[Intense Coincentration]] ([[Talk:Intense Coincentration|Discuss]]) '''Deadline:''' August 20, 2010 at 24:00 GMT.
*Merge [[5-Volt]] into [[List of Implied Characters]] ([[Talk:5-Volt|Discuss]]) '''Deadline:''' <s>August 14 2010</s> August 21, 2010 24:00 GMT.
*Split {{fakelink|Dark Star Core}} from [[Dark Fawful]] ([[Talk:Dark Fawful|Discuss]]) '''Deadline:''' August 24, 2010 at 24:00 GMT.
*Merge [[Cheep-Cheep School]] into [[Cheep-Cheep]] ([[Talk:Cheep-Cheep School|Discuss]]) '''Deadline:''' August 25, 2010 at 23:59 GMT.
*Merge [[Lakitu Travel]] into [[List of Implied Organizations]] ([[Talk:Lakitu Travel|Discuss]]) '''Deadline:''' August 26, 2010 at 24:00 GMT.
*Split [[Ashley and Red]] ([[Talk:Ashley and Red|Discuss]]) '''Deadline''' August 26 2010 at 24:00 GMT.
*Merge [[Spookum]] and [[Snifit]] ([[Talk:Spookum|Discuss]]) '''Deadline''' August 29th, 2010 at 24:00 GMT.
*Merge [[Final 5 Frenzy]] into [[Last Five Turns Event]] ([[Talk:Final 5 Frenzy|Discuss]]) '''Deadline:''' August 30th, 2010 at 24:00 GMT.
*Merge [[KP Koopa]] into [[Koopa Troopa]] or [[KP Koopas]] ([[Talk:KP Koopa|Discuss]]) '''Deadline:''' September 2, 2010 at 24:00 GMT.


==New Features==
====Comments (Uniformly indicate subjects' work of origin in infobox headers)====
''None at the moment''
My understanding is that Power Shots are exclusive to exactly two Mario Tennis games, ''[[Mario Power Tennis]]'' and ''[[Mario Tennis: Power Tour]]''. And of them, only twelve appear in both games. At that point, you might as well just have those twelve them say "Mario Power Tennis Power Shot" and say they reappear in ''Mario Tennis: Power Tour''. [[User:Salmancer|Salmancer]] ([[User talk:Salmancer|talk]]) 13:45, April 11, 2025 (EDT)


==Removals==
===Change previous and next entries cell in infoboxes to include actual entry names and change directory link===
''None at the moment.''
{{early notice|April 18, 2025}}
Currently, the previous and next cell in infoboxes for TV show episodes, levels and worlds have a few issues:
*The previous and next entries are displayed as "<<" and ">>", which make it more cumbersome to simply figure out what they are, since one may have to hover the cursor over it, and it is even worse on mobile, where you may have to open the link to learn what it is);
*It gets always more confusing and messy when more than one entry is displayed, especially for levels that link to secret levels, displayed as "**", as it is not immediately understandable what that means;
*Levels and worlds have a "directory of levels/worlds" link which just links to the [[:Category:Levels|Level category]] or [[World|World article]]. It is kind of pointless.


==Changes==
I propose we change that section to another format that:
===Crossover policy===
*Includes a header labeling the section;
Mariowiki's intention is to cover as much information as possible regarding the Mario series. For the most part, there is no disagreement about this. However, there is disagreement about what constitutes as the "Mario series". Spin offs, like Donkey Kong, Yoshi, and Wario obviously belong, but what about crossovers? Especially regarding the Super Smash Brothers series. Should we include information about that? The following is my proposal.
*Uses "previous" and "next" labels;
Information directly relating to the Mario elements of the series should be kept, such as information about Mario's Final smash, etc. Information regarding the series plot should be put on on the article about the series. Information about enemies in the series should be placed into one article, as with items and bosses. Information about other characters in the game should be grouped into articles regarding each series. For example, we could merge all the articles concerning the Zelda Series into one article about the series, and then list all it's relevence to Mario and it's crossovers on that page. With these changes, we can keep up Mariowiki's reputation of being one of the most detailed wikis, yet also keep all information relevent to Mario.
*Lists the names for the entries, and, for secret levels, attach a "(secret)" note to it.
*Links to the relevant section listing the entries in the specific article for the work;


'''Proposer:''' {{User|Mr. Anon}}<br>
Since some articles may have longer lists of entries (such as [[The Desert Mystery|some levels]] in ''[[Super Mario Bros. Wonder]]'', we can have an alternate format that stacks the previous and next cells instead, since it appears laid out more nicely. It may make that section take a lot more space, but cases like these are very few compared to most which have just one or two entries each side.
'''Voting Start:''' August 15, 2010 (16:37)<br>
'''Deadline:''' August 21, 2010 (24:00)


====Support====
{| class="mw-collapsible mw-collapsed"
#{{User|SuperMario67}}-That is a great idea that will help expand mario wiki to an extent
|-
!colspan=3 style="background: pink;" | See examples
|- style="vertical-align: top;"
|
{| class="infobox" style="width:220px;background:#f7f8ff;border-color:#88a;--darkborder:#7a8596;--darkbannerbg:#525864;--darksubbannerbg:#3d424b;--darkrowbg:none;--darkfooterbg:#292C32;--darkbg:#141619"
! colspan="2" style="font-size:120%;background:#bbccea" | Level
|-
| colspan="2" style="font-size:125%;background:#ccddfa;text-align:center" | Donut Ghost House
|-
| colspan="2" style="text-align:center" | [[File:Donut Ghost House.png]]
|-
| '''World'''
| [[Donut Plains]]
|-
|'''Time limit'''
| 300 seconds
|- style="background:#bcf;"
!colspan=2 | Level sequence
|- style="text-align:center"
| style="width: 50%;" | '''← Previous'''<br>[[Donut Plains 2]]<br>[[Donut Secret 1]]
|'''Next →'''<br>[[Donut Plains 3]]<br>[[Top Secret Area]] (secret)
|-
|colspan=2 style="text-align: center;" | [[Super Mario World#Worlds and levels|List of levels]]
|}
|
{| class="infobox" style="width:220px;background:#f7f8ff;border-color:#88a;--darkborder:#7a8596;--darkbannerbg:#525864;--darksubbannerbg:#3d424b;--darkrowbg:none;--darkfooterbg:#292C32;--darkbg:#141619"
! colspan="2" style="font-size:120%;background:#DEA600" | ''{{Color link|#000|Donkey Kong Country (television series)|Donkey Kong Country}}'' episode
|-
| colspan="2" style="font-size:125%;background:#DEA600;text-align:center" | "Watch the Skies"
|-
| colspan="2" style="text-align:center" | [[File:WatchTheSkiesTitle.PNG|250px]]
|-
| '''Episode'''
| 8
|-
|'''Writer'''
| Dale Schott
|- style="background:#DEA600;"
!colspan=2 | Episode chronology
|- style="text-align:center"
| style="width: 50%;" | '''← Previous'''<br>"[[Bug a Boogie]]"
|'''Next →'''<br>"[[Baby Kong Blues]]"
|-
|colspan=2 style="text-align: center;" | [[Donkey Kong Country (television series)#Episodes|List of episodes]]
|}
|
{| class="infobox" style="width:220px;background:#f7f8ff;border-color:#88a;--darkborder:#7a8596;--darkbannerbg:#525864;--darksubbannerbg:#3d424b;--darkrowbg:none;--darkfooterbg:#292C32;--darkbg:#141619"
! colspan="2" style="font-size:120%;background:#bbccea" | Level
|-
| colspan="2" style="font-size:125%;background:#ccddfa;text-align:center" | The Desert Mystery
|-
| colspan="2" style="text-align:center" | [[File:TheDesertMystery Wonder.jpg|250px]]
|-
| '''World'''
| [[Sunbaked Desert]]
|-
|'''Difficulty'''
| ★★
|- style="background:#bcf;"
!colspan=2 | Level sequence
|-
|colspan=2 | '''← Previous'''<br>[[Sunbaked Desert House]]
|-
|colspan=2 | '''Next →'''<br>[[Color-Switch Dungeon]]<br>[[Secrets of Shova Mansion]]<br>[[Sunbaked Desert Palace]]<br>[[Badge Challenge Crouching High Jump II]]<br>[[KO Arena Sunbaked Skirmish]]
|-
|colspan=2 style="text-align: center;" | [[Super Mario Bros. Wonder#Locations|List of levels]]
|}
|}


====Oppose====
'''Proposer''': {{User|Bro Hammer}}<br>
#[[User:Lu-igi board|Lu-igi board]] nope terrible idea. per Marioguys comment.
'''Deadline''': April 25, 2025, 23:59 GMT
#{{User|Mr bones}} Per Marioguy's comment bellow.
#{{User|MrConcreteDonkey}} Per all.
#{{User|Baby Mario Bloops}} Got to admit, It wasn't that bad of an idea, but Marioguy is right. Articles for stuff like that is much more better than one huge list.
#{{User|Emperor Yoshi}} Well, the current system works fine, and there is too much information in those articles to work well in a list.
#{{User|Blue Toad}} Per Emperor Yoshi, Baby Mario Bloops, and Marioguy's comment below.
#{{user|Tucayo}} - How about no? Per all
#{{User|M&SG}} - Not a good idea.  Better to keep those kinds of articles separate.
#{{User|LeftyGreenMario}} The list you said would probably be too long and it's going to give my netbook a fit. Per all, I guess.
#{{User|New Super Mario}} It's fine the way it is
#{{User|T.c.w7468}} Per all, and Marioguy's comment below.
#{{User|Fuzzipede27}} Per marioguy1's comment.
#{{User|MATEOELBACAN}} - Per all.
#{{User|Commander Code-8}} This is probably one of the worst ideas I've heard of. I could barely stay one the wiki if this passed.
#{{User|Marioguy1}} - Per Marioguy1's comment.
#{{User|Frostyfireyoshi}} No, just NO. Per. All.
#{{User|Walkazo}} - Per MG1, BMB and Emperor Yoshi.
#{{User|Cat91x}} The wiki is already fine. There is no need for this.


====Comments====
====Support: change how previous and next entries are presented in infoboxes====
You mean you want to create more articles like [[Conker (series)]] or [[Banjo (series)]]? Because I really don't think we need one of those for other series like Zelda or Super Smash Bros. {{User|Fawfulfury65}}
#{{User|Bro Hammer}} Per proposal.
:I think the current coverage policy is good. Long lists of content is not as good as seperate pages for it because in a long list, you have to scroll all the way down to the part you want to read meanwhile in an article, it's all nicely grouped together under an easily-recognized title. {{User|Marioguy1}}
#{{User|PopitTart}} Good god, yes '''PLEASE'''. I was ''flabbergasted'' the first time I tried navigating levels in SMW and was redirected to a category of just. Every Single Level in Every Single Game the Wiki Covers. What use does that possibly have??
#{{User|Ahemtoday}} You make a lot of good points about the current problems, and this is a natural solution to 'em. I'm not sure about "episode chronology" or especially "level sequence" as a header for the section, though — those terms describe something that these sections are just a small slice of. Maybe, say, "surrounding levels" or "surrounding episodes"? (Side note, but there's something magical to me about proposals being able to overturn longstanding bits of wiki policy. These infobox sections have been formatted that way for at least fifteen years...)
#[[User:AmossGuy|AmossGuy]] ([[User talk:AmossGuy|talk]]) This simply shows the information more clearly, I think. And I like Ahemtoday's suggestion of "surrounding levels" for the terminology.
#{{User|Sparks}} '''YES!!'''
#{{User|Camwoodstock}} This is ''way'' overdue, especially after more non-linear games like ''[[Super Mario Bros. Wonder]]'' but even thanks to games as old as ''[[Super Mario World]]''. Even for far more linear affairs, like your ''[[Super Mario Bros.]]es'' or your ''[[Donkey Kong 3: Dai Gyakushū]]s'', we quite prefer the aesthetics of actually listing the page names over what we currently have; though we do feel it important to ask, in the case of games where levels are named stuff like just, "World 7-1" and "World 7-2" with nothing distinguishing them, would we just visually display them as "World 7-1" and "World 7-2", or would we include the parenthetical, and it'd display as "World 7-1 (Super Mario Bros. Special)" and "World 7-2 (Super Mario Bros. Special)"? While not a dealbreaker, it would be annoying, and we'd suggest... Not. ;P
#{{User|EvieMaybe}} per all! huge fan of this
#{{User|Hewer}} Good idea.
#{{User|Jdtendo}} {{hover|<<|Per proposal}} {{hover|>>|Per all}}
#{{User|Pseudo}} This would be a huge improvement on the current infoboxes in a number of ways. Also, I would agree with Camwoodstock's suggestion to ''not'' include the parentheticals in level name links.
#{{User|ThePowerPlayer}} Per all.
#{{User|Salmancer}} Yeah, current system could use a tune-up.
#{{User|Scrooge200}} Yes! This makes so much more sense. I'm surprised this hasn't been proposed earlier.
#{{User|Yoshi18}} Per all! I encourage this very much!
#{{User|BMfan08}} Thank you thank you '''THANK YOU'''! Arrows were a seamless option back when all games went from one level to the next but with multiple "next" or "previous" levels being a possibility now this produces a lot more headaches. Absolutely agree.


How come there isn't a single support vote? {{User|Booderdash}}
====Oppose: keep previous and next entries presentation as is====
:Because no one supports it? {{User|Fawfulfury65}}


Th...The proposer doesn't support his/her own proposal???{{User|Mr bones}}
====Comments (Change previous and next entries presentation in infoboxes)====
:Maybe they forgot to vote. They're not opposing or supporting. {{User|Fawfulfury65}}
i'm concerned the "List of levels" link could cause issues in games that have more than one version with differing amounts of levels (such as ''[[Mario vs. Donkey Kong]]''). what could we do about that? {{User:EvieMaybe/sig}} 00:24, April 11, 2025 (EDT)
::Or he has given the choice not to vote in his proposal. He doesn't have to vote if he doesn't want to. {{User|BabyLuigiOnFire}}
:Probably have two links, one each for each version of the game? This would be my first idea. {{User:Pseudo/sig}} 12:27, April 11, 2025 (EDT)
::maybe it could link to the "[game] levels" category? also as a sidenote, the tall version used for Wonder should align the Next levels to the right. {{User:EvieMaybe/sig}} 00:13, April 12, 2025 (EDT)


This idea is terrible. {{unsigned|Arcer7}}
Can this proposal apply to [[Template:Mission infobox]]? At least everything in Category:Levels is the same kind of thing. That's untrue of the Missions category, which has achievements, levels, minigames, and those non-level scenario things all together because they're all called "missions". [[User:Salmancer|Salmancer]] ([[User talk:Salmancer|talk]]) 13:45, April 11, 2025 (EDT)
:And let's not forget [[Template:Tour infobox]] too. {{User:Hewer/sig}} 19:41, April 11, 2025 (EDT)
:Yeah, this may apply to any infobox with that feature. {{User:Bro Hammer/sig}} 13:11, April 12, 2025 (EDT)


==Miscellaneous==
For those concerned about the "sequence/chronology" header, I based that on how Wikipedia does it (where they have a "X chronology" in their infoboxes, like [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Infobox_television_episode this]). In my opinion, it makes more sense. ('''Subjective babble warning''') The "previous and next" section is not a regular field, but a fixed "footer" to the infobox. It serves as a navigation aid to the ''topic of the infobox'' (e.g. "''Super Mario Bros.'' levels" as a whole series of articles), '''not''' as data on the current subject alone. The fact the current format doesn't even list the names, but instead just tells us "go to the previous/next entry" with << and >> evidences that function. If we named it something like "surrounding levels", it would imply that these are to be taken as ''attributes of the entry'' isolatedly, like "timer" and "difficulty", when that is not the case. It doesn't seem to matter that much, but there is much implied from just a header title. {{User:Bro Hammer/sig}} 13:11, April 12, 2025 (EDT)
''None at the moment''

Latest revision as of 10:40, April 17, 2025

Image used as a banner for the Proposals page
Current time:
Friday, April 18th, 10:13 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.
  • Voting periods last for two weeks, but can close early or be extended (see below).
  • Any autoconfirmed user can support or oppose, but must have a strong reason for doing so.
  • 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.

If you would like to get feedback on an idea before formally proposing it here, you may do so on the proposals talk. For talk page proposals, you can discuss the changes on the talk page itself before creating the TPP there.

How to

If someone has 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 other users, who will then vote on whether or not they think the idea should be implemented. 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}}.

Rules

  1. Only autoconfirmed users may create or vote on proposals. Proposals can be created by one user or co-authored by two users.
  2. A given user may author/co-author up to five ongoing proposals. Any additional proposals will be immediately canceled.
  3. Anyone is free to comment on proposals (provided that the page's protection level allows them to edit).
  4. Proposals conclude at the end of the day (23:59) two weeks after voting starts (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 two weeks later on Monday, August 15, at 23:59 GMT.
  5. Users may vote for more than one option, but they may not vote for every option available. Keep in mind that we use approval voting, so all of your votes count equally regardless of preferred order.
  6. Every vote should have a strong, sensible reason accompanying it. Agreeing with a previously mentioned reason given by another user is acceptable (including "per" votes), but tangential comments, heavy sarcasm, and other misleading or irrelevant quips are just as invalid as providing no reason at all.
  7. 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 wiki staff.
    • 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.
  8. 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 "(blocked)" 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.
  9. Proposals cannot contradict an already ongoing proposal or overturn the decision of a previous proposal that concluded less than four weeks (28 days) ago.
  10. If one week before a proposal's initial deadline, the first place option is ahead of the second place option by eight or more votes and the first place option has at least 80% approval, then the proposal concludes early. Wiki staff may tag a proposal with "Do not close early" at any time to prevent an early close, if needed.
    • Tag the proposal with {{early notice}} if it is on track for an early close. Use {{proposal check|early=yes}} to perform the check.
  11. 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.
  12. If a proposal reaches its deadline and there is a tie for first place, then the proposal is extended for another week.
  13. 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% approval to win. If the margin is only one or two votes, then the first place option must have at least 60% approval to win. If the required approval threshold is not met, then the proposal is extended for another week.
    • Use {{proposal check}} to automate this calculation; see the template page for usage instructions and examples.
  14. Proposals can be extended a maximum of three times. If a consensus has not been reached by the fourth deadline, then the proposal fails and cannot be re-proposed until at least four weeks after the last deadline.
  15. 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.
  16. After a proposal passes, it is added to the appropriate list of "unimplemented proposals" below and is removed once it has been sufficiently implemented.
  17. If the wiki staff deem a proposal unnecessary or potentially detrimental to the upkeep of the Super Mario Wiki, they have the right to cancel it at any time.
  18. Proposals can only be rewritten or canceled by their proposer within the first four days of their creation. However, proposers can request that their proposal be canceled by a staff member at any time, provided they have a valid reason for it. Please note that canceled proposals must also be archived.
  19. 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.
  20. Proposals cannot be made about promotions and demotions. Staff changes are discussed internally and handled by the bureaucrats.
  21. No joke proposals. Proposals are serious wiki matters and should be handled professionally. Joke proposals will be deleted on sight.
  22. Proposals must have a status quo option (e.g. Oppose, Do nothing) unless the status quo itself violates policy.

Basic proposal formatting

Copy and paste the formatting below to get started; your username and the proposal deadline will automatically be substituted when you save the page. Update the bracketed variables with actual information, and be sure to replace the whole variable including the square brackets, so "[insert info here]" becomes "This is the inserted information" and not "[This is the inserted information]". Proposals presenting multiple alternative courses of action can have more than two voting options, but the objective(s) of each voting option 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|{{subst:REVISIONUSER}}}}<br>
'''Deadline''': {{subst:#time:F j, Y|+2 weeks}}, 23:59 GMT

====[option title (e.g. Support, Option 1)]: [brief summary of option]====
#{{User|{{subst:REVISIONUSER}}}} Per proposal.

====[option title (e.g. Oppose, Option 2)]: [brief summary of option]====

====Comments ([brief proposal title])====

Autoconfirmed users will now be able to vote on your proposal. Remember that you can vote on your own proposal just like the others.

To vote for an option, just insert #{{User|[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 simply say "Per proposal."

Poll proposal formatting

As an alternative to the basic proposal format, users may choose to create a poll proposal when one larger issue can be broken down into multiple subissues that can be resolved independently of each other. In a poll proposal, each option is essentially its own mini-proposal with a deadline and suboption headings. The rules above apply to each option as if it were its own proposal: users may vote on any number of options they wish, and individual options may close early or be extended separately from the rest. If an option fails to achieve quorum or reach a consensus after three extensions, then the status quo wins for that option by default. If all options fail, then nothing will be done.

To create a poll proposal, copy and paste the formatting below to get started; your username and the option deadlines will automatically be substituted when you save the page. Update the bracketed variables with actual information, and be sure to replace the whole variable including the square brackets, so "[insert info here]" becomes "This is the inserted information" and not "[This is the inserted information]". 

===[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|{{subst:REVISIONUSER}}}}

====[option title (e.g. Option 1)]: [brief summary of option]====
'''Deadline''': {{subst:#time:F j, Y|+2 weeks}}, 23:59 GMT

;Support
#{{User|{{subst:REVISIONUSER}}}} Per proposal.

;Oppose

====[option title (e.g. Option 2)]: [brief summary of option]====
'''Deadline''': {{subst:#time:F j, Y|+2 weeks}}, 23:59 GMT

;Support
#{{User|{{subst:REVISIONUSER}}}} Per proposal.

;Oppose

====[option title (e.g. Option 3)]: [brief summary of option]====
'''Deadline''': {{subst:#time:F j, Y|+2 weeks}}, 23:59 GMT

;Support
#{{User|{{subst:REVISIONUSER}}}} Per proposal.

;Oppose

====Comments ([brief proposal title])====

For the purposes of the ongoing proposals list, a poll proposal's deadline is the latest deadline of any ongoing option(s). A poll proposal is archived after all of its options have settled, and it is listed as one single proposal in the archive. It is considered to have "passed" if one or more options were approved by voters (resulting in a change from the status quo), and it is considered to have "failed" if all options were rejected by voters and no change in the status quo was made.

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. All of the above proposal rules also apply to talk page proposals. Place {{TPP}} under the section's heading, and once the proposal is over, replace the template with {{settled TPP}}. Proposals dealing with a large amount of splits, merges, or deletions across the wiki should still be held on this page.

All active talk page proposals must be listed below in chronological order (new proposals go at the bottom) using {{ongoing TPP}}. 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.

List of ongoing talk page proposals

Unimplemented proposals

Proposals

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 Super Mario Maker titles and Super Mario Run.
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)
Use the classic and classic link templates when discussing classic courses in Mario Kart Tour, YoYo (ended October 2, 2024)
Split off the Mario Kart Tour template(s), MightyMario (ended November 24, 2024)
Split major RPG appearances of recurring locations, EvieMaybe (ended December 16, 2024)
Split Mario & Luigi badges and remaining accessories, Camwoodstock (ended February 1, 2025)
Merge Chef Torte and Apprentice (Torte), Camwoodstock (ended February 3, 2025)
Merge intro/outro sections, rename Gameplay section to "Overview" for Mario Party minigame articles, ToxBoxity64 (ended March 1, 2025)
Allow English Super Mario Bros. Encyclopedia names to be mentioned on articles where they are not the title, Hewer (ended March 27, 2025)
Create pages for the Captain N episodes where Donkey Kong is a central character, Glowsquid (ended April 1, 2025)
Make a page for the Nintendo Switch 2 Welcome Tour, Koopa con Carne (ended April 11, 2025)
Split Mario & Sonic game categories by version, Technetium (ended April 16, 2025)

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)
Create articles for specified special buildings in Super Mario Run, Salmancer (ended November 15, 2024)
Merge False Character and Fighting Polygon/Wireframe/Alloy/Mii Teams into List of Super Smash Bros. series bosses, Doc von Schmeltwick (ended December 2, 2024)
Merge Wiggler Family to Dimble Wood, Camwoodstock (ended January 11, 2025)
Create a catch-all Poltergust article, Blinker (ended January 21, 2025)
Give the Cluck-A-Pop Prizes articles, Camwoodstock (ended January 31, 2025)
Reverse the proposal to trim White Shy Guy, Waluigi Time (ended February 8, 2025)
Split Animal Crossing (game), Kaptain Skurvy (ended February 12, 2025)
Split the modes in the Battles page, Mario (ended February 15, 2025)
Count ongoing serialized comics for latest appearances, Rykitu (ended March 2, 2025)
Split Super Mario Maker helmets from Buzzy Shell and Spiny Shell (red), PopitTart (ended March 12, 2025)
Restructure Yoshi's Island (series) into Yoshi (series), PopitTart (ended March 19, 2025)
Merge Mario Party 4 hosts with their species, Kirby the Formling (ended March 23, 2025)
Split the enemy/obstacle ice block of Yoshi's Woolly World from Ice Block, Sorbetti (ended March 29, 2025)
Split Super Luigi subjects into a dedicated list article, EvieMaybe (ended April 3, 2025)
Refocus Papa Mario as "Mario's dad", Superstarxalien169 (ended April 4, 2025)
Merge the list of references to Super Mario Bros. with Super Mario Bros., Waluigi Time (ended April 6, 2025)
Split Hammer (move) from Hammer, Blinker (ended April 10, 2025)
Give Nathaniel's Fun Factory full coverage, Nelsonic (ended April 12, 2025)

Writing guidelines

None at the moment.

New features

Noting the Switch 2 Editions

I have seen that it's kind of a mystery how we should note the Switch 2 Edition of a game. This question caused some controversy when I asked it in Talk:Super Mario Party Jamboree, so I have decided to involve the whole community in this to see what everyone thinks and so we all know what we should do in the future, when more Switch 2 Editions will follow.

Proposer: Yoshi18 (talk)
Deadline: April 20, 2025, 23:59 GMT

We give Switch 2 Editions their own articles

  1. memoryman3 (talk) Switch 2 Editions are unique game builds that Nintendo gives you the option to upgrade to, and as such should be treated as unique games. Determining whether a game deserves a separate article should be treated on a case-by-case basis, similar to other reissues. This would be no different from distinguishing a game like Luigi's Mansion 2 HD or Donkey Kong Country Returns HD as unique titles, unless the changes are so minimal that the games are classified as ports.

We give Switch 2 Editions their own section in their base games' article

  1. CarlosYoshiBoi (talk) I’m in for this one.

We make a Switch 2 Edition page where the Switch 2 Editions have their own respective sections

Propose in the games' talk page based on what the Switch 2 Edition adds

Re-propose this when we're closer to release of the Switch 2

  1. LinkTheLefty (talk) Ideally, we should wait until after launch since there's still much we don't know. From what I understand, they don't even have their own physical versions when seemingly everything else does (literally just the original Switch copy with a one-time download-code, or for all intents and purposes, DLC). If these "upgrade packs" act just like DLC does on previous consoles, then I think we should treat them as such, but that's to be determined at a later time.
  2. Camwoodstock (talk) Yeah, no, we should definitely wait on this until the Switch 2 releases. Otherwise, we might end up pre-emptively codifying a ton of articles with nothing substantial to them beyond "It's exactly the same as Switch 1, the gameplay functions, visuals, text, audio, and everything are all the same, but it just runs smoother." We'd like to refer to the PC-88 and Sharp X1 versions of Super Mario Bros. Special, not just because it's fresh on our mind, but it is genuinely relevant to the subject; that is a game that very expressly has a performance-related different release on another platform, but outside of the very obvious audiovisual elements, there just isn't enough to warrant splitting on the gameplay side. We could very easily see the Switch 2 Editions being similar to this, where the gameplay is entirely intact with no unique mechanics or mild substitutions due to hardware improvements, but the vast majority of the differences are just "uh, it looks different and runs smoother", which is not particularly substantial.
  3. Tails777 (talk) Per all. Too early at this point.
  4. EvieMaybe (talk) per all, and per my comment below
  5. Yoshi18 (talk) Per proposal and all.
  6. TheFlameChomp (talk) Per all.
  7. Nintendo101 (talk) per everyone. No need to jump the shark.

Comments

We know so little about what a Switch 2 Edition will mean that I don't think a decision can be made right now. Salmancer (talk) 12:05, April 6, 2025 (EDT)

Seconding this--wouldn't it be better to just wait for the Switch 2 to actually release to see how the Switch 2 editions actually work? We're highly skeptical they would actually feature exclusive content in the first place, mind you, but without a Switch 2 edition having actually released, we're kind of voting in the dark here. Camwoodstock-sigicon.png~Camwoodstock ( talk • contribs ) Camwoodstock-sigicon2.png 12:07, April 6, 2025 (EDT)
i want to point out the "Switch 2 Edition" moniker is specifically reserved for versions which have actual content changes (ie, not what Odyssey is getting, which is just a free compatibility update). however, i still think we should wait more before deciding what to do, and that it might be better to case-by-case it — Super Leaf stamp from Super Mario 3D World + Bowser's Fury.eviemaybe (talk / contributions) 14:12, April 6, 2025 (EDT)

Case-by-case where we only split ones with significant new content might be the way to go. This reminds me of how New Play Control! Donkey Kong Jungle Beat is split while New Play Control! Mario Power Tennis isn't. As for determining which ones have enough new content, it seems like the titles can help with that - so far, ones that are mainly just graphical improvements are just called "Game – Nintendo Switch 2 Edition", while ones that have more content added have another bit on the end of the title after a "＋" (like Super Mario Party Jamboree – Nintendo Switch 2 Edition ＋ Jamboree TV). I guess the option closest to this is the fourth one, except I'd rather not strictly require a proposal to determine it in cases where it's obvious (though of course we'd be allowed to have one if it's not). Hewer A Hamburger in Super Smash Bros. Brawl. (talk · contributions · edit count) 16:50, April 6, 2025 (EDT)

I understand everyone's argument about this but I feel like we already know enough about the Switch 2 Edition of Jamboree to make this proposal. Blue Yoshi from Mario Kart Tour Yoshi18 (talk/contribs) 15:27, April 7, 2025 (EDT)

It is weird personally to have a "table this proposal" voting option when this wiki doesn't have a policy preventing it from being proposed again. A proposal being put up again after some time has passed is fairly normal. Well, there is the four week rule but surely no one would enforce that if the Switch 2 Edition games released within that window. Salmancer (talk) 13:45, April 11, 2025 (EDT)

I guess it's meant to be the equivalent of a "do nothing" option. Hewer A Hamburger in Super Smash Bros. Brawl. (talk · contributions · edit count) 02:59, April 12, 2025 (EDT)
Maybe it should have been "re-discuss" instead of "re-propose" so it doesn't have to have another proposal. Oh well. LinkTheLefty (talk) 08:20, April 12, 2025 (EDT)

Hey guys, I have a question. When this proposal ends, which color do I have to give it in the proposal archive page? Because it doesn’t seem like any of those fit. Should I color it Grey/Gray? Blue Yoshi from Mario Kart Tour Yoshi18 (talk/contribs) 07:14, April 15, 2025 (EDT)

I'd say red, assuming the last option passes. Hewer A Hamburger in Super Smash Bros. Brawl. (talk · contributions · edit count) 10:05, April 15, 2025 (EDT)

But this'll get re-proposed when the Switch 2 (or the first Switch 2 Edition releases) so doesn’t that technically mean it passed, because the option that passed is that we'll discuss it later. Because if it didn't pass, no change would've been made, ever. But this time there will be a change made. Just not now, but like, it'll still happen this year. Blue Yoshi from Mario Kart Tour Yoshi18 (talk/contribs) 11:25, April 15, 2025 (EDT)

It'd be red because the option that passed was to not take action yet. If a later proposal decides on a change then the change is attributed to that proposal and this one could switch to the blue colour. Hewer A Hamburger in Super Smash Bros. Brawl. (talk · contributions · edit count) 11:38, April 15, 2025 (EDT)

That's actually not a bad idea! Blue Yoshi from Mario Kart Tour Yoshi18 (talk/contribs) 18:13, April 15, 2025 (EDT)

Removals

None at the moment.

Changes

None at the moment.

Miscellaneous

What is a game?

Per @Camwoodstock's comments on the ongoing electronic water-related proposal on the list of games. The way that a game is considered a game is currently arbitrary, with board games being split to one list, card games being relegated elsewhere, Play Nintendo getting its own list, and Nintendo Today! quizzes all being merged into the app's article. This proposal aims to decide what gets on the list of games article, since there isn't anything on that page that explicitly states that the games listed have to be video games (minus the text "organized by video game system", but this can be changed). To note, this proposal is not suggesting that anything should be removed from the list, the goal of this proposal is to figure out whether or not anything should be added to the list of games.

Proposer: Nelsonic (talk)

Do board games move to the list?

Deadline: April 19, 2025, 23:59 GMT

Yes
  1. Nelsonic (talk) Per proposal.
  2. Camwoodstock (talk) Per ourselves in the original comments; this feels like kind of a no-brainer, and we're surprised these have been excluded from the Games list for as long as they have been. Board games are like, a known concept, they've been around for millennia, and heck, games like Mario Party-e exist as a hybrid board game/video game. Excluding board games feels very arbitrary, just because they aren't "video" games, but we've included the Game & Watch titles for forever, with basically no contention whatsoever, despite those not technically meeting the definition of being a "video" game.
  3. Rykitu (talk) Per Camwoodstock.
  4. Kaptain Skurvy (talk) The article is titled the "list of games," not the "list of VIDEO games." It'd be nice if this page just covered every game of every type, especially seeing how I consider board games (or anything of the sort) to be closer to games than merchandise. Besides, they are called board GAMES, so why shouldn't they be included on the "list of GAMES"?
  5. JanMisali (talk) Per all. Board games are pretty unambiguously "games".
  6. Pseudo (talk) Per Camwoodstock. While I understand Nintendo101's point about board games often being promotional tie-in products, they are still Mario franchise media in their own right, and a kind of game at that.
  7. Yoshi18 (talk) Per all. As a big Mario Party fan. I feel like board games fit to the category of games
No
  1. Nintendo101 (talk) This is not to disparage board games or other types of media of this nature, but I think it would be healthier for our site to have distinction between a "video game" and "promotional tie-in media and products." I do not think being interactive is enough for it count as a "game" within the context of a video game-oriented franchise, in the same way I would not include instruction booklets in a list of books because they have readable text. This kind of stuff should be supported on the site, but not here.
  2. Koopa con Carne (talk) per Nintendo101. There are a lot of different mediums for games in this world, but it's indisputable that the Mario franchise manifests itself most often in video games, and I believe this specific list is better off focusing on those, with an appropriate move to "List of video games". I can see the appeal and use of a page for Mario games that are not video games, though, and I support creating that. The wiki currently considers these games to be "merchandise", which I consider apt for some (like the shampoo bottles) but something of a stretch for others (board games).
  3. Hewer (talk) Per Koopa con Carne. I'm not denying that board games are games, but they're not video games, and I think "List of video games" would be a more useful page for this wiki about a primarily video game franchise than "List of games".
  4. SGoW (talk) Per all. I would rather the wiki not mix the core media of the Mario franchise (video games) with miscellaneous pieces of merchandise such as board games.
  5. Ahemtoday (talk) Per all.

Do card games move to the list?

Deadline: April 19, 2025, 23:59 GMT

Yes
  1. Nelsonic (talk) Per proposal.
  2. Camwoodstock (talk) Per ourselves in the original comments, and the same rationale behind board games. Sure, it's not a "video" game, but this is List of Games, not List of Video Games.
  3. Rykitu (talk) Per Camwoodstock again.
  4. Kaptain Skurvy (talk) Per my board game vote.
  5. JanMisali (talk) Per proposal.
  6. Pseudo (talk) Per Camwoodstock and my above vote for board games.
No
  1. Nintendo101 (talk) per my board game vote.
  2. Koopa con Carne (talk) Per Nintendo 101 and my board game vote.
  3. Hewer (talk) Same as the board game vote.
  4. SGoW (talk) Per all.
  5. Ahemtoday (talk) Per all.

Do party games (i.e. Jenga) move to the list?

Deadline: April 19, 2025, 23:59 GMT

Yes
  1. Nelsonic (talk) Per proposal.
  2. Camwoodstock (talk) Per ourselves in the original comments, and the rationale behind board games. This is gonna be appearing a few more times...
  3. Rykitu (talk) Per Camwoodstock yet again.
  4. Kaptain Skurvy (talk) Also per my board game vote.
  5. JanMisali (talk) Per proposal.
  6. Pseudo (talk) Also a mere semantic distinction between party games like this and board games, in my view.
  7. Yoshi18 (talk) Things like Jenga are such family games, like Mario Party. I have the feeling they should've already been classified as games long ago.
No
  1. Nintendo101 (talk) per my board game vote. (You also do not italicize Jenga.)
  2. Koopa con Carne (talk) Per Nintendo 101 and my board game vote.
  3. Hewer (talk) Same as the card game vote.
  4. SGoW (talk) Per all.
  5. Ahemtoday (talk) Per all.

Do physical games (i.e. Barrel of Monkeys-style things with physical characters and pieces) move to the list?

Deadline: April 19, 2025, 23:59 GMT

Yes
  1. Nelsonic (talk) Per proposal.
  2. Camwoodstock (talk) Per ourselves in the original comments, and the rationale behind board games. You get it, right?
  3. Rykitu (talk) Per Camwoodstock once more.
  4. Kaptain Skurvy (talk) Yet again per my board game vote.
  5. JanMisali (talk) Per proposal.
  6. Pseudo (talk) Per my other "yes" votes.
No
  1. Nintendo101 (talk) per my board game vote.
  2. Koopa con Carne (talk) Per Nintendo 101 and my board game vote.
  3. Hewer (talk) Same as the party game vote.
  4. SGoW (talk) Per all.
  5. Ahemtoday (talk) Per all.

Does Super Mario Ride move to the list?

Deadline: April 19, 2025, 23:59 GMT

Yes
  1. Nelsonic (talk) Per proposal. It is currently listed under "Other Super Mario-themed games" on the list of merchandise.
  2. JanMisali (talk) Per proposal. I'm a maximal inclusivist when it comes to these things, so I think anything anyone could plausibly conceptualize as "a game" ought to be classified as a game for navigational purposes.
No
  1. Camwoodstock (talk) From the looks of it, those are toy cars; those are toys, not games. Them being listed as "other Super Mario-themed games" feels like a bit of a misnomer.
  2. Nintendo101 (talk) per my board game vote above.
  3. Rykitu (talk) Rides are not games.
  4. Pseudo (talk) If it's a toy and not a game, it probably shouldn't count. This is a slightly different category of item.
  5. Yoshi18 (talk) Per all.
  6. Koopa con Carne (talk) Per Nintendo 101 and my board game vote.
  7. SGoW (talk) Per all.
  8. Ahemtoday (talk) Per all.

Do Play Nintendo games move to the list?

Deadline: April 19, 2025, 23:59 GMT

Yes
  1. Nelsonic (talk) Per proposal. There's a dedicated HTML section now.
  2. Camwoodstock (talk) With an HTML section in tow, we feel it's only fair.
  3. Rykitu (talk) Sure.
  4. Kaptain Skurvy (talk) We have other browser games on the list, why not these?
  5. JanMisali (talk) Per proposal. Even if the term we were using was "video game" instead of just "game" I would think these should count.
  6. Pseudo (talk) These seems like games as much as a typical Flash game of old, which we already include in the list of games, so this seems more clear cut than any of the others.
  7. Yoshi18 (talk) Per Nelsonic and Camwoodstock.
No

Does Nintendo Today! move to the list?

Deadline: April 19, 2025, 23:59 GMT

Yes
  1. Nelsonic (talk) Per proposal. It has many interactive elements, such as quizzes.
  2. JanMisali (talk) Per proposal. I understand everyone else's hesitation, but Nelsonic has a point!
No
  1. 1468z (talk) The only thing that comes the closest to the definition of game and is related to Mario is the silhouette quizzes, which despite their name are actually just articles with a profile of a character without any interactive elements. It's not that different from something you would find on Nintendo's website.
  2. Camwoodstock (talk) To be honest, we're a bit on the fence, but we're leaning on this for now. Maybe if there were more active game elements to them, but as it stands, these are just articles at the moment with no real interactive elements aside from. Clicking it and reading it.
  3. Nintendo101 (talk) per my board game vote.
  4. Hewer (talk) Per Shinya Takahashi ("[Nintendo Today] is something a little different that's not a game").
  5. Rykitu (talk) Per all. If you really think about it, if we count Nintendo Today as a game, that would mean the Super Mario Wiki would be considered a game.
  6. Pseudo (talk) This seems like not so much of a game to me as a platform for games (in addition to other media); at most, I'd support adding this app's individual included games to the list.
  7. Yoshi18 (talk) Per all. Nintendo Today! is basically just a daily newspaper (similar to The 'Shroom).
  8. SGoW (talk) Per all.
  9. Ahemtoday (talk) Per all.

Does Super Mario World: Mario to Yoshi no Bōken Land move to the list?

Deadline: April 19, 2025, 23:59 GMT

Yes
  1. Nelsonic (talk) Per proposal. It was an interactive VHS tape that required the user to press buttons at certain points.
  2. Camwoodstock (talk) By our own definition of it being an "interactive game", yes, even if it's just a VHS analogue to those Play Nintendo quizzes, you can get a question wrong and stuff will still happen.
  3. Rykitu (talk) Per all.
  4. Kaptain Skurvy (talk) Per all.
  5. JanMisali (talk) Per all. Somewhat surprised it wasn't already being considered a game.
  6. Pseudo (talk) Eh, more or less? It's sort of an edge case but it's still primarily intended as interactive, just in an unusual format. It is definitely a "game" that relies on "video" for displaying its contents.
  7. Koopa con Carne (talk) Checks both the "video" and the "game" parts of "video game". As long as Dragon's Lair is considered a video game, this should too.
No
  1. Nintendo101 (talk) per my board game vote.
  2. Yoshi18 (talk) I have mixed feelings about this one, but I'm turning more to the "No" side. I just don't feel like interactive cartoons can be considered games.

Do rides move to the list?

Deadline: April 19, 2025, 23:59 GMT

Yes
  1. Nelsonic (talk) Per proposal. They were made by Banpresto, usable in arcades, and required money to play.
  2. JanMisali (talk) Per proposal, and per my Super Mario Ride vote.
No
  1. Camwoodstock (talk) You don't really interact with it aside from sitting on it; if there was a more game-ified aspect to it, kinda like Waku Waku Sonic Patrol Car, maybe? But as it stands, this is a little too non-interactive.
  2. Nintendo101 (talk) per my board game vote.
  3. Rykitu (talk) Once again, rides are not games. Except Būbū Mario. That is a game.
  4. Pseudo (talk) Seems like not so much a game as an automated experience; games require interactivity of some kind, I'd think.
  5. Yoshi18 (talk) Once again per Camwoodstock and Rykitu.
  6. SGoW (talk) Per all.
  7. Ahemtoday (talk) Per all.

Do the remaining water games on the list of merchandise move to the list?

Deadline: April 19, 2025, 23:59 GMT

Yes
  1. Nelsonic (talk) Per proposal.
  2. Camwoodstock (talk) Per ourselves in the original proposal's comments; they are interactive games with a blatant physical, mechanical element to them. The lack of "video" isn't a hurdle so long as the Game & Watch games exist.
  3. Rykitu (talk) Per Camwoodstock twice more.
  4. Kaptain Skurvy (talk) Per all.
  5. JanMisali (talk) Per all.
  6. Pseudo (talk) Yeah, it's pretty much a type of game. Per Camwoodstock's comparison to Game & Watch.
  7. Yoshi18 (talk) Per all.
No
  1. Nintendo101 (talk) per my board game vote. This is not comparable to Game & Watch.
  2. Koopa con Carne (talk) Per Nintendo 101 and my board game vote.
  3. SGoW (talk) Per all.
  4. Ahemtoday (talk) Per all.

The Comment Games

@Nintendo101, unless us and everyone we know has been using it very wrong, we don't really see how the board game vote applies to Nintendo Today!... ;P not that it matters, as we agree that Nintendo Today! would be overkill to include either way unless they were more interactive, but y'know, Camwoodstock-sigicon.png~Camwoodstock ( talk • contribs ) Camwoodstock-sigicon2.png 20:23, April 5, 2025 (EDT)

Also, Wikipedia does italicise Jenga. Hewer A Hamburger in Super Smash Bros. Brawl. (talk · contributions · edit count) 20:30, April 5, 2025 (EDT)

If we decide to keep the non-video games off the list of games, I feel like a name change to "List of video games" might be a good idea (though the link on the main page can keep it shortened to "Games" for simplicity if need be). Hewer A Hamburger in Super Smash Bros. Brawl. (talk · contributions · edit count) 20:43, April 5, 2025 (EDT)

@Hewer I have an idea. Could we add a new header on the list of games (underneath the iOS stuff and the LEGO Super Mario Roku/Sky Italia games) for "physical games" or "non-electronic games", thus keeping the base list intact up to said section? Nelsonic (talk) 13:21, April 8, 2025 (EDT)
I suppose that'd work too. Hewer A Hamburger in Super Smash Bros. Brawl. (talk · contributions · edit count) 13:25, April 9, 2025 (EDT)

If Play Nintendo is added to the list, would we include every game in the "Play" category or will we also include the quizzes, polls, puzzles, matching and painting games? If that is the case, I am warning you that there are hundreds of those and would probably take like 75% of the whole page. Sprite of Lakitu from Super Mario Bros.RykituSprite of Lakitu from Super Mario Bros.

@Rykitu I was thinking that for the duplicates, we could link to a handful of the most relevant ones and then stick something along the lines of "For a complete list of Play Nintendo quizzes, see list of Play Nintendo skill quizzes" underneath the segment. Nelsonic (talk) 13:11, April 9, 2025 (EDT)
Ok, that works! Sprite of Lakitu from Super Mario Bros.RykituSprite of Lakitu from Super Mario Bros.

@JanMisali: I think Nelsonic was mistaken about the amount of interactivity in Nintendo Today. The misleadingly named "quizzes" are just pages that describe a character, with no more interactivity than the websites that the descriptions come from. At that point, what piece of software wouldn't you consider a game? Is Nintendo Music a game? Hewer A Hamburger in Super Smash Bros. Brawl. (talk · contributions · edit count) 10:17, April 15, 2025 (EDT)

I fully sincerely believe anything with any amount of interactivity at all can be considered a game. Websites, apps, web browsers, activity books, DVD menus, and pretty much all software. I think it's better to cast a wide net and include things that 99% of people would say aren't games than it is to be too narrow and exclude things 1% of people would say are games. jan Misali (talk · contributions) 10:27, April 15, 2025 (EDT)
That's how you make a definition so broad that it's useless. Hewer A Hamburger in Super Smash Bros. Brawl. (talk · contributions · edit count) 11:11, April 15, 2025 (EDT)

Uniformly indicate subjects' work of origin in infobox headers

For some infoboxes like RPG enemy infoboxes or show episode infoboxes, the work is displayed in a header (like "Paper Mario enemy" or "Super Mario World episode"). Others, like the generic level infobox (which has only "Level" in a header) and the minigame infobox, indicate the game in a regular field.

I propose all subject infoboxes with a "Game" field or similar (exceptions and specific details below) adopt the work-in-header-cell format (like "Super Mario World level"), and the "Game" or "Appears in" field be changed to "Reappearances" (present only in cases where the subject reappears, like retro Mario Kart courses or returning WarioWare microgames).

Why do that? In order to maintain consistency in the presentation of this type of info, and also because it makes more sense than having the work be indicated in a regular field, as the work is not an internal attribute of the subject (like a level's time or code, or an enemy's stats), but part of its context. Also, making work identification more clear is useful when the same infoboxes are widely used for subjects belonging to different games and series.

That would affect every infobox that has a "Game" field currently, the course infobox, and infoboxes for specific games.

In the end, the infoboxes affected by this change would be:

(As for spaces, karts and kart parts, Paper Mario item and power shots, which have an "Appears in" field, I suggest we indicate the series in the header instead (Mario Party, Mario Kart, Paper Mario and Mario Tennis), since they are not really "tied" to the game they debuted in, but are series-wide elements.)

Proposer: Bro Hammer (talk)
Deadline: April 21, 2025, 23:59 GMT

Support: replace regular "Game" fields and similar in infoboxes with a header cell

  1. Bro Hammer (talk) Per proposal.
  2. Ahemtoday (talk) I like uniformity.
  3. Salmancer (talk) I see the appeal.

Oppose: do not change any infoboxes

Comments (Uniformly indicate subjects' work of origin in infobox headers)

My understanding is that Power Shots are exclusive to exactly two Mario Tennis games, Mario Power Tennis and Mario Tennis: Power Tour. And of them, only twelve appear in both games. At that point, you might as well just have those twelve them say "Mario Power Tennis Power Shot" and say they reappear in Mario Tennis: Power Tour. Salmancer (talk) 13:45, April 11, 2025 (EDT)

Change previous and next entries cell in infoboxes to include actual entry names and change directory link

Based on the vote so far, this proposal may be eligible to close one week early. Please use {{proposal check|early=yes}} on April 18, 2025 at 23:59 GMT and close the proposal if applicable.

Currently, the previous and next cell in infoboxes for TV show episodes, levels and worlds have a few issues:

  • The previous and next entries are displayed as "<<" and ">>", which make it more cumbersome to simply figure out what they are, since one may have to hover the cursor over it, and it is even worse on mobile, where you may have to open the link to learn what it is);
  • It gets always more confusing and messy when more than one entry is displayed, especially for levels that link to secret levels, displayed as "**", as it is not immediately understandable what that means;
  • Levels and worlds have a "directory of levels/worlds" link which just links to the Level category or World article. It is kind of pointless.

I propose we change that section to another format that:

  • Includes a header labeling the section;
  • Uses "previous" and "next" labels;
  • Lists the names for the entries, and, for secret levels, attach a "(secret)" note to it.
  • Links to the relevant section listing the entries in the specific article for the work;

Since some articles may have longer lists of entries (such as some levels in Super Mario Bros. Wonder, we can have an alternate format that stacks the previous and next cells instead, since it appears laid out more nicely. It may make that section take a lot more space, but cases like these are very few compared to most which have just one or two entries each side.

See examples
Level
Donut Ghost House
Donut Ghost House from Super Mario World
World Donut Plains
Time limit 300 seconds
Level sequence
← Previous
Donut Plains 2
Donut Secret 1 		Next →
Donut Plains 3
Top Secret Area (secret)
List of levels
Donkey Kong Country episode
"Watch the Skies"
The title card for the episode Watch the Skies from the Donkey Kong Country television series
Episode 8
Writer Dale Schott
Episode chronology
← Previous
"Bug a Boogie" 		Next →
"Baby Kong Blues"
List of episodes
Level
The Desert Mystery
The Desert Mystery's Wonder Effect
World Sunbaked Desert
Difficulty ★★
Level sequence
← Previous
Sunbaked Desert House
Next →
Color-Switch Dungeon
Secrets of Shova Mansion
Sunbaked Desert Palace
Badge Challenge Crouching High Jump II
KO Arena Sunbaked Skirmish
List of levels

Proposer: Bro Hammer (talk)
Deadline: April 25, 2025, 23:59 GMT

Support: change how previous and next entries are presented in infoboxes

  1. Bro Hammer (talk) Per proposal.
  2. PopitTart (talk) Good god, yes PLEASE. I was flabbergasted the first time I tried navigating levels in SMW and was redirected to a category of just. Every Single Level in Every Single Game the Wiki Covers. What use does that possibly have??
  3. Ahemtoday (talk) You make a lot of good points about the current problems, and this is a natural solution to 'em. I'm not sure about "episode chronology" or especially "level sequence" as a header for the section, though — those terms describe something that these sections are just a small slice of. Maybe, say, "surrounding levels" or "surrounding episodes"? (Side note, but there's something magical to me about proposals being able to overturn longstanding bits of wiki policy. These infobox sections have been formatted that way for at least fifteen years...)
  4. AmossGuy (talk) This simply shows the information more clearly, I think. And I like Ahemtoday's suggestion of "surrounding levels" for the terminology.
  5. Sparks (talk) YES!!
  6. Camwoodstock (talk) This is way overdue, especially after more non-linear games like Super Mario Bros. Wonder but even thanks to games as old as Super Mario World. Even for far more linear affairs, like your Super Mario Bros.es or your Donkey Kong 3: Dai Gyakushūs, we quite prefer the aesthetics of actually listing the page names over what we currently have; though we do feel it important to ask, in the case of games where levels are named stuff like just, "World 7-1" and "World 7-2" with nothing distinguishing them, would we just visually display them as "World 7-1" and "World 7-2", or would we include the parenthetical, and it'd display as "World 7-1 (Super Mario Bros. Special)" and "World 7-2 (Super Mario Bros. Special)"? While not a dealbreaker, it would be annoying, and we'd suggest... Not. ;P
  7. EvieMaybe (talk) per all! huge fan of this
  8. Hewer (talk) Good idea.
  9. Jdtendo (talk) << >>
  10. Pseudo (talk) This would be a huge improvement on the current infoboxes in a number of ways. Also, I would agree with Camwoodstock's suggestion to not include the parentheticals in level name links.
  11. ThePowerPlayer (talk) Per all.
  12. Salmancer (talk) Yeah, current system could use a tune-up.
  13. Scrooge200 (talk) Yes! This makes so much more sense. I'm surprised this hasn't been proposed earlier.
  14. Yoshi18 (talk) Per all! I encourage this very much!
  15. BMfan08 (talk) Thank you thank you THANK YOU! Arrows were a seamless option back when all games went from one level to the next but with multiple "next" or "previous" levels being a possibility now this produces a lot more headaches. Absolutely agree.

Oppose: keep previous and next entries presentation as is

Comments (Change previous and next entries presentation in infoboxes)

i'm concerned the "List of levels" link could cause issues in games that have more than one version with differing amounts of levels (such as Mario vs. Donkey Kong). what could we do about that? — Super Leaf stamp from Super Mario 3D World + Bowser's Fury.eviemaybe (talk / contributions) 00:24, April 11, 2025 (EDT)

Probably have two links, one each for each version of the game? This would be my first idea. -- Pseudo (talk, contributions) User:Pseudo 12:27, April 11, 2025 (EDT)
maybe it could link to the "[game] levels" category? also as a sidenote, the tall version used for Wonder should align the Next levels to the right. — Super Leaf stamp from Super Mario 3D World + Bowser's Fury.eviemaybe (talk / contributions) 00:13, April 12, 2025 (EDT)

Can this proposal apply to Template:Mission infobox? At least everything in Category:Levels is the same kind of thing. That's untrue of the Missions category, which has achievements, levels, minigames, and those non-level scenario things all together because they're all called "missions". Salmancer (talk) 13:45, April 11, 2025 (EDT)

And let's not forget Template:Tour infobox too. Hewer A Hamburger in Super Smash Bros. Brawl. (talk · contributions · edit count) 19:41, April 11, 2025 (EDT)
Yeah, this may apply to any infobox with that feature. Bro Hammer (Talk • Cont) 13:11, April 12, 2025 (EDT)

For those concerned about the "sequence/chronology" header, I based that on how Wikipedia does it (where they have a "X chronology" in their infoboxes, like this). In my opinion, it makes more sense. (Subjective babble warning) The "previous and next" section is not a regular field, but a fixed "footer" to the infobox. It serves as a navigation aid to the topic of the infobox (e.g. "Super Mario Bros. levels" as a whole series of articles), not as data on the current subject alone. The fact the current format doesn't even list the names, but instead just tells us "go to the previous/next entry" with << and >> evidences that function. If we named it something like "surrounding levels", it would imply that these are to be taken as attributes of the entry isolatedly, like "timer" and "difficulty", when that is not the case. It doesn't seem to matter that much, but there is much implied from just a header title. Bro Hammer (Talk • Cont) 13:11, April 12, 2025 (EDT)

Retrieved from "https://www.mariowiki.com/index.php?title=MarioWiki:Proposals&oldid=4845688"