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. All 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 using the code {{user|User name}}. Signing with the signature code ~~~(~) is not allowed due to technical issues. 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) Every vote should have a reason accompanying it. At any time a vote may be rejected if at least three active users believe the vote truly has no merit or was cast in bad faith. However, there must be strong reasons supporting the invalidation. "# " should be added under the last vote of each support/oppose section to show another blank line. Any proposal that has three votes or less at deadline will automatically be listed as "NO QUORUM." The original proposer then has the option to relist said proposal to generate more discussion. All proposals are archived. The original proposer must take action accordingly if the outcome of the proposal dictates it. If it requires the help of a sysop, the proposer can ask for that help. The times are in EDT, and are set so that the user is more likely to be online at those times (after school, weekend nights). 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. Also, NO PROPOSALS ABOUT HAVING BANJO AND CONKER ARTICLES -The Management. CURRENTLY: 06:40, 20 November 2024 (EDT) New Features No proposal at the moment. Removals None at the moment. Splits & Merges Gale Boomerang and Fire Bow Currently, there are articles for Gale Boomerang and Fire Bow, special attacks in the Smash Bros series. However, these attacks are both VERY similar to their respective counterparts (Boomerang and Bow). So I propose that both of those moves will be merged with the latter. Below are some of my specific merging reasons: 1. They both serve the same purpose and have similar mechanics 2. Well.. it's just a boomerang with a whirlwind around it, so it is also the same item (technically) 3.The bows (with the exception of Y. Link), Bombs, Spin attacks and Boomerangs all share an article (except the Gale Boomerang, obviously). 4. The Fire Bow is just a bow that shoots fire arrows. Big difference. 5. Articles such as Blaster, reflector, Thunder, Skull Bash, Thunder jolt, Super Jump Punch and Counter share an article, among others. So there are all my reasons. Also, if this proposal passes, I think we should make Gale Boomerang redirect to Boomerang and Fire Bow to Bow. Proposer: User:huntercrunch Deadline: July 31, 2008, 17:00 Merge User:huntercrunch - I am the proposer and my reasons are given above. Keep seperate Pikax (talk) - if the weapons are considerably different, such as the Fire Bow shooting fiery arrows and the Gale Boomerang having that whirlwind, then they should be recognised as different by having their own articles. Cobold (talk) - per Pikax. 1.they do have different mechanics 2.their different attacks doing different damage 3. wikis which specialize in SSB keep em sperate --Hemu (talk) Glitchman (talk) - Per all. Comments Not to be a purist, but the two bows are different: fire arrows set the opponent on fire and do more damage. According to the Zelda storyline, the boomerangs are two distinctly different items. The Gale Boomerang holds a wind spirit within it while the boomerang is a generic child's toy. Stumpers (talk) For the record, point 5 in the proposal is incorrect. Pikax (talk) You know, I could see a proposal calling for each character's Super Smash Bros. movies to be put on one page, so it would be something like, "Fox's Smash Bros. Special Moves" and "Mario's Smash Bros. Special Moves" the reason I wouldn't do just "Mario's Special Moves" is because there are so many moves he has outside of Smash Bros. that are also considered special moves. What do you think? Stumpers (talk) I'd support that proposal. But remember to use {{User|___}} on this page. - Walkazo (talk) Changes Miscellaneous Legendary Dogs Alright, when I was doing some infoboxes on some articles, one was the Entei article. When I tryed typing Suicune down, the article wasn't created. I tried Raikou, also, and there was no page. I don't see why we have an Entei article when there's not a Suicune and/or Raikou article. I'm proposing that we either: delete the Entei article; create the Suicune and Raikou article; or keep the Entei article and don't create the Suicune and Raikou article. For those who don't know who these three are and why Suicune and Raikou should have articles: is because that they are the three legendaries from the Pokemon games (ie. Zapdos, Moltres, and Articuno), so having one legendary dog without the other two is pointless. So, which option? Proposer: MegaMario9910 (talk) Deadline: July 28, 2008 15:00 Create Raikou and Suicune Article MegaMario9910 (talk) - Its best to create the article, since they've appeared in the same games that Entei has. per Megamario9910 a.k.a weird guy. Mrsdaisyluigi (talk) Delete Entei Article Sonic64 (talk)-All non-playable Pokemon should be in the Pokemon article. Thet's what it's for. Glitchman (talk) Per Sonic64. DaWeegeeMan (talk) Per Sonic64 Blitzwing (talk) Per Sonic64. Keep as it is Stumpers (talk) None of the Pokemon are given articles unless they played a large role in Smash Bros, such as being a trophy stage. Walkazo (talk) - Per Stumpers (and Grandy02 below). Pikax (talk) - Per Walkazo. Cobold (talk) - It has been pointed out at several occasions that Entei only has an article because he is a stage. Pokemon DP (talk) - ...Um, why would you even want to create an article on Raikou and Suicune? To be honest, this Proposal seemed to lack logic. But enough of me insulting MegaMario, Entei has an article because it's an Event Match stage in Melee. Hence, it deserves an article. Luigi3000 (talk) Per Stumpers mi little freind. Dom (talk) - Per most of the people in this section - Suicune and Raikou don't have important enough roles to deserve their own page, they can be on the Pokemon page with Goldeen and other crap Pokemans. Sorry, MM9910 (or Palkia47?)! Jdrowlands (talk) - Per all, especially Stumpers. Stooben Rooben (talk) - Per the geniuses above me. 14:10, 25 July 2008 (EDT) Comments As far as I know, there's an article for Entei because the Entei trophy is a stage in an event in Melee. That's the only reason, if there were no Entei stage, it would just be merged with the Poké Ball article like Raikou and Suicune. --Grandy02 (talk) But isn't that a bit minor? Its just an event, and the stage is a trophy, and a trophy is a trophy. I know its not the exact same trophy (no description, you battle on it), but its still a trophy, and which a trophy is a trophy. MegaMario9910 (talk)...I know that made no sense. I'm not making the guide lines. Majora's Mask has an article for the same reason. Grandy02 (talk) Pikax (talk) - In terms of gameplay, the Entei stage is not a trophy.