MarioWiki:Proposals

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 consensus before any action(s) are done. Any user can support or oppose, but must have a strong reason for doing so, not, e.g., "I like this idea!" "Vote" periods last for one week. Any past proposals are archived. A proposal section works like a discussion page: comments are brought up and replied to using indents (colons, such as : or ::::) and all edits are signed with the signature code ~~~(~). How To Actions that users feel are appropriate to have community approval first can be added by anyone, but they must have a strong argument. Users then vote and discuss on the issue during that week. The "deadline" for the proposal is one week from posting at: Monday to Thursday: 17:00 (5pm) Friday and Saturday: 20:00 (8pm) Sunday: 15:00 (3pm) At any time a vote may be rejected if at least three active users believe the vote truly has strong reasons supporting it. Every vote should have a reason accompanying it. "# " should be added under the last vote of each support/oppose section to show another blank line. At the deadline, the validity of each vote and the discussion is reviewed by the community. A sysop or user calls the result of the proposal and takes action(s) as decided if necessary, and archives the proposal. The times are in EDT, and are set so that the user is more likely to be online at those times (after school, weekend nights). So for example, if a proposal is added on Saturday night at 11:59 PM EDT, the deadline is the next Saturday night at 8:00 PM. If it is indeed a minute later, the deadline is a day plus 15 hours (Sunday), as opposed to a day minus 4 hours. CURRENTLY: 03:25, 23 December 2024 (EDT) New Features Re-Add Banjo and Conker Articles I've been thinking about this for a long time, and this proposal is to gauge how users would react to the re-inclusion of Banjo and Conker info into the wiki. Banjo and Conker first appeared in Diddy Kong Racing, and their series developed out of that game. As such, Donkey Kong, Banjo, and Conker are believed to exist in a greater DK Universe (and an extension of the Marioverse). As we have been redefining our view of remakes, that they are not replacements but supplements to the originals, I feel Banjo and Conker should have a place here. Just because Diddy Kong Racing DS is a remake that removed these two characters does not mean Banjo and Conker don't have their origins in the Donkey Kong series. Ultimately, there are many reasons for their inclusion in this wiki, and many reasons for their exclusion. All are valid. I don't want to start any flame wars, and I do not want make this a big deal. Please keep all discussions about this respectful. I just want to see if a majority of users would like Banjo and Conker content reintegrated at this time, or if they do not. Somehow I feel this info will eventually become a part of the wiki, as they are part of the greater world Nintendo and Rare created out of the Donkey Kong series, but this may not happen for a long time. Here are the details of the proposal that would go into effect: Banjo and Conker related articles can be recreated on the wiki. First we should go through deleted edits to restore as much as we can, then start editing and creating articles like normal. Banjo and Conker series would be added as Tertiary Importance to the Importance Policy. Additionally, this proposal would also move all crossovers (including Super Smash Bros.) to Secondary Importance. This proposal would also prohibit articles about the Star Fox series and Grabbed by the Ghoulies. Tricky from Diddy Kong Racing exists in a separate continuity from Tricky EarthWalker from the Star Fox series, although the latter is a out-of-universe reference to the former. In Grabbed by the Ghoulies, no major characters return in a major role (there are some minor cameos, just as major Jet Force Gemini characters appear as cameos in Banjo-Kazooie, and Jet Force Gemini is not a part of the Banjo-Kazooie continuity). This differs from Diddy Kong Racing, where Banjo and Conker were major characters who spun off into their franchises. Proposer: Son of Suns Deadline: 20:00, 21 September 2007 Recreate Banjo and Conker Articles Son of Suns - I am the proposer and I have included some of my reasons above. My Bloody Valentine Never thought of it that way. Then again, Roy made his debut in Super Smash Bros. Melee. XzelionETC Neither have I (thought of it that way), Sounds good. Plumber Never thought they should have gone in the first place. Glowsquid Per everyone. User: Ultimatetoad (nope tiptup wasnt in pilot, but still....I agree with SOS) Leave Banjo and Conker Articles Out of the Wiki Mr.Vruet info|talk|chat If we do that we would have arcticles on everything in the zelda series the metroid series and you get the idea....as they were all in Super Smash bros which is a crossover. Cobold (talk · contribs) - Conker's Bad Fur Day isn't a game that can be featured on a children's wiki, it has too many adult themes. F g Comments I agree on everything you have said except two things you may want to take into consideration We should Import them from the Rare Wiki at Wikia since they may have been lengthened a little in there time there. We should bump crossovers down to a class lower than Tertiary, instead of Secondary, as Secondary is for series that originated from the Mario series, not crossovers from another series Plumber 02:05, 15 September 2007 (EDT) OMG, I just remembered. The Conker games are very much sick, aren't they? M rated, correct? Wouldn't it be bad for the young children who come here if we make articles on the rude content in the Conker series? My Bloody Valentine A wiki is an encyclopedia. It is not meant to be censored, it is meant to tell information. Also, Vruet, we only make articles about those in the Smash Series., and none of those other series developed from the Mario series. Plumber 02:26, 15 September 2007 (EDT) Yeah but this wiki is full of young people so we should keep it censored aslo those series are gonna make people asking if they can upload zelda arcticles and stuff as they are in a crossover-Mr.Vruet 02:37, 15 September 2007 (EDT) As Plumber said, an encyclopedia is for information. Using the "A kid could see it!" logic, any depiction of genitalia in paper encyclopedia should be censored since a kid can read it. Conker? I am kind of neutral on it. However, I'm all for the re-inclusion of banjo content sincee Titup, a minor character in both Banjo Kazzoie and Tooie (I think he was also in pilot, but not too sure.), reappered in DKRDS. Glowsquid Removals Cool User Lists Many users have a section on their userpage listing other community members they like. Often there is unnecessary conflict and even (pardon) stupid flaming when a user removes someone from this list. I say we get rid of all of these sections – there's no need to hurt anyone's feelings over any one of these. True friends – online or offline – can't be simply added or removed from your life on a list. We have a good group dynamic overall in our community, so let's not wreck it. Another option is to rename & rephrase all these lists so they are neutral, such as "User Neighbors I Know", though removing users could still bring questions and trouble. Proposer: Wa TC@Y Deadline: 17:00, 19 September Delete Them All Wa TC@Y – reasons in description above. XzelionETC saying some people are cool and leaving some out is a recipe for bad blood. Bastila Shan You guys are right, My Bloody Valentine Agreed, I removed my Cool Users list already. Ghost Jam If the wiki had a few hundred active members, then I could see sections like these working. The way it is, no. Walkazo - Per Xzelion and Ghost Jam. ~Uniju(T-C-E) - After reading the above... Per all the other dudes... *Goes to delete his* User:Fixitup - Makes perfect sense to remove them. Plumber Even a neutral one will one day cause a problem somewhere. toadbert Wayo is right. You couldn't believe how long I wiated to be in one,seems right not to make people do that like me. Rephrase for Neutrality Master Crash - per my comments. Zach121- I think that they should change the name to wiki friends King Mario -I'll just descibe if I met/talked to them and how I helped them or how they helped me. Mr. Guy the Guy Talk!E Change name like alll guys above 3D, no need to totally DELETE it. Dude. Keep As Is Max2 (talk) The only people who flame about these things are the people who don't edit. --Luigibros2 21:00, 13 September 2007 (EDT) As long as it ain't flameing or swearing at another user it's fine. Comments Could we do something like, users we've come across? or at least something like that. Master Crash That would be the option "Rephrase for Neutrality". - Cobold (talk · contribs) 16:26, 12 September 2007 (EDT) oh.....Master Crash While I agree that we should nuke the cool user list, I have the impression it would create a flame war as bad as the one over the removal of featured article. Thus, I'm kind of neutral on it. Glowsquid To be honest it doesn't matter if we rename it or not, everyone knows what is it, no-mater what the name, at this point renaming it would be useless. XzelionETC Agreed. For something like this to work and not be a problem, we would need a far larger number of active users than we currently do. -- Chris 17:46, 13 September 2007 (EDT) Changes No current proposals. Merges and Splits Mario Cartoons: Split Multiple Episode Pages Some of The Super Mario Bros. Super Show! cartoon articles are seperated by what cartoon episode they appeared with, such as the article King Mario of Cramalot / Day of the Orphan. This proposal would split these articles into two independent articles. Each episode is independently named, and in re-releases of the series, such as on video and DVD, the episodes are often grouped differently from the original television release, showing that the pairings are rather arbitrary. While it should be noted what episode each one originally appeared with, I feel each cartoon should have its own article. It's strange having an article that is split in two sections that are basically completely unrelated. Proposer: Son of Suns Deadline: 20:00, 21 September Split these Articles Son of Suns - I am the proposer and my reasons are given above. Per Son of Suns; XzelionETC My Bloody Valentine Agreed. They are two entirely differant episodes, with nothing to do with each other. Plumber Per all the ones on my side Keep them Merged For "cartoon-learners", I think the should only spend half the time, and I find it fine. Minimariolover10 Comments Recipes Pages Almost all of the Recipe Articles are short and state: What Game What Effect How to get the item Picture All which would be included in a table. Table shown here, Credit to SpikeKnifeNeedleSword for the design. This would work such as the Badges page. Lets face it they're too minor and too many of them. Proposer: XzelionETC (started by SpikeKnifeNeedleSword (talk)) Deadline: 17:00, 19 September Merge XzelionETC My Reasons are stated above. Bastila Shan Xzelion is right Cobold (talk · contribs) - Though items which can be gotten without cooking, such as the Boo's Sheet, should still have their own article. Glowsquid Keep Separate Son of Suns - As officially named items they should be kept. They have just as much info as any other item in the series. They are exactly the same as regular items: what game, what effect, how to get the item, and a picture. Look at the Strange Leaf article, a normal item used for recipes. It is exactly what is in a recipe article, or any other item article for that matter. Full Metal Moogle - We have articles for other items, dont we? D: ~Uniju(T-C-E) All items should get an article, since a lot of them can be gotten by cooking, AND by finding them somewhere not to mention some other reason... *Talks for hours*. Aipom Per SoS. Plumber Per that Pokemon Comments Son of Sun: Your example would be a little more convincing if you didn't purposely choose a stub. For normal items, you can talk about were they are found, if they are revallant to the plot (Like the Dried Shroom) ,how you can obtain them apart for beating up random enemy, and how they can be used for cooking. For a recipe, you simply say which item can be used for cooking them and their effects, deffinately a table job IMO. Glowsquid I think there's been some confusion between recipes and food items. As far as I know, Recipes are "Item 1 + Item 2 = Item 3", not the food items involved, which is what seems to be the common belief (Food Items are even categorized as Recipies, which makes no sence). I'll use the Dried Shroom article to highlight my point: The text part is about the item Dried Shroom, and the "Recipes" secion is a list of the recipes it's used in. Make a list of the recipes, but keep the articles about the items. - Walkazo List of Mario Kart Sponsor Some day ago, Wayoshi deleted an article about Wario Mall, an organization briefly mentioned on a spot in Mario:Kart DS. The Mario Kart series is FULL of random sponsors. I thought we could create a list of these organization of one page, since they do exist, but aren't major enough to have their own articles. Proposer: Glowsquid Deadline: 17:00, 19 September Create that list Glowsquid XzelionETC Per Glowsquid Bastila Shan What gofer Said Cobold (talk · contribs) - Too minor to warrant articles. Walkazo- Good idea. ~Uniju(T-C-E) - Sounds like a neat idea! Aipom Per Glowsquid. Snack 20:55, 14 September 2007 (EDT) Sounds like a great idea. Like Cobold said, they are way too minor to have their own articles, but one big list of them would be great. Plumber 02:10, 15 September 2007 (EDT) I think I was going to do this a long time ago, but wasn't sure if they should be on a list or not. Now I've made my decision. Nay Comments Miscellaneous No current proposals.