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. Proposals can not be made about System Operator promotions and demotions. Sysops can only be promoted and demoted by the will of Bureaucrats. 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 PipeProject. No proposal can overturn the decision of a previous proposal that is less than 4 weeks (28 days) old. 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. All proposals that end up in a tie will be extended for another week. No joke proposals. Proposals are serious wiki matters, and should be handled professionally. Joke proposals will be deleted on sight. The times are in EDT (UTC -4:00), 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 Saturday night at 11:59 PM EDT, the deadline is the next Saturday night at 8:00 PM. If it is a minute later, the deadline is a day plus 15 hours (Sunday), as opposed to a day minus 4 hours. CURRENTLY: 12:12, 25 February 2025 (EDT) New Features Movie Section As you may already know, over at Userpedia, they have some sections where you can create your own stories and such. But there's one thing they don't have- A movies section. Here at Super Mario Wiki, we could have a "Movies" section, where users can freely get others to sign up with their sprites and partake in a comic-like movie, that would then be put on YouTube, in Parts, if wanted. I've put an example over on my UserPage, and if anybody wants to take part in that movie, it will be put up as an option if we do get a "Movies" section. I believe this to be a great way for Users to communicate and share ideas! Proposer: Hyper Guy (talk) Deadline: May 23, 2009, 20:00 Support Hyper Guy (talk) (creator) Oppose StarYoshi1 (talk) - No. Just no. Super Mario Wiki is a place for factual things about the Mario series, not fan-art/fictions/movies. This is why Userpedia was created. Userpedia is the place to put these things, not at SMW. Super Mario Bros. (talk) I would have to agree with StarYoshi1, this is a wiki for information. Also, see my comment below. Yoshario (talk) Per StarYoshi1. This is going to distract people from editing the wiki. per staryoshi Lu-igi board Walkazo (talk) - Per StarYoshi1. JerseyMarioFreak (talk) - NO WAY. Per StarYoshi. 4DJONG-No, first they already have one, plus this is not the Unmario wiki this is the SMW so, basically per StarYoshi. Alan Warp Zone (talk) No that´s a bad idea and it will give the Wiki a bad or different maning of what it is. Girrrtacos (talk) Per StarYoshi1 and Super Mario Bros. Try the 'Shroom or Userpedia[1]. Stooben Rooben (talk) - Per StarYoshi1. Comments Hyper Guy, here is a suggestion, try asking this guy if you could have this on the 'Shroom. Super Mario Bros. (talk) You can sign up in the Fun Stuff page if you like Tucayo (talk) Add it on The 'Shroom, but not any where else. K?4DJONG Are you allowed to put the [[User:4DJONG|4DJONG]] code in your comment, 4DJONG? Super Mario Bros. (talk) Everyone should sign with {{User|Username}}, but we won't remove [[User:Username|Username]], as that doesn't mess with people's computers, like some personalized sigs do. However, seeing as 4DJONG's signature included a timestamp, that implies he signed with ~~~~, which we ask people to not do. Again, it's mainly to prevent sigs containing images and backgrounds from clogging-up the page, but it would look better if everyone simply signed the same way. - Walkazo (talk) Yes, he is, he just can't use {{user:4DJONG/sig}}, or ~~~ if he has a custom sig. Yoshario (talk) Removals None at the moment. Splits & Merges Split Proposals Page and Rules I was looking at one of the comments on one of my proposals, and I got to thinking. Why do we have rules in the How To section? I think we should make a new article (well, I will make an article) that contains some of the rules for the proposals page. It would take a lot out of the How To section and would be easier to add rules without it making the main proposals page too long. Proposer: Super Mario Bros. (talk) Deadline: Tuesday, 26 May 2009, 17:00 Support Super Mario Bros. (talk) Per reasons above Alan Warp Zone (talk) Also, the rules r different and it may be on a Navigation page. Oppose Walkazo (talk) - No one will read the rules if they're on a separate page. There are too many policy pages scattered about the Wiki as it is, and the last thing we want to do is make more of them. Stooben Rooben (talk) - Per Walkazo. If we really want people to follow the rules, we want them to stick out on the Proposals page. Time Q (talk): Per Walkazo and Stooben. Tucayo (talk) - Per all, its easier to have em in just one page Comments If we should not split the pages, then could we at least separate it from the How To section and make it into its own section? If we could do that, then I will delete this proposal. Super Mario Bros. (talk) Changes Eliminate Mainstream Signatures I was listening to what one of the fellow wiki members have said, and I actually think my proposal about all0owing certain signatures was dumb. I myself own an eleven year old computer as well. So, I am going to say what this proposal is about now. No more signatures on any pages except user talk or user pages. I think that it slows down older computers and it looks more professional with the {{User|Username Here}} format on the mainstream wiki. Proposer: Super Mario Bros. (talk), with ideas from Walkazo (talk) Deadline: Tuesday, 26 May 2009, 17:00 Support Super Mario Bros. (talk) Per reasons above. Alan Warp Zone (talk) I have a good computer, but I think so, cause old computers take time to load. Blitzwing (talk) Signatures look silly on public pages, and they can cause coding problem (Infact, I remember when a signature made it completely impossible to access a page.) Stooben Rooben (talk) - Even though I think this is slightly extreme, I feel that it's necessary. Signatures full of animated images, various-colored backgrounds, and the like look very unprofessional on MarioWiki namespace pages. Additionally, because it's hard to narrow down which signatures cause coding problems, and which ones don't, this is probably best. So, per all. Oppose KPH2293 (talk)—I understand banning them from organized voting pages, but this is too extreme. Why don't we just ban signatures that cause technical issues? Not all of them are disruptive. Tucayo (talk) - Oppose, oppose, OPPOSE. Blitz:You can just revert that edit. TimeQ: Theyre banned from voting pages, and that only really leaves us talks pages. Stooby: Not all sigs cause problems, so i dont see why the sigs of users who are fine must be deleted from other pages. SMB: If you have an old computer, just mark on your browser something to not show the images Comments I don't really care either way, but let's assume this passes. In that case, that template should really be moved to {{sig}} to avoid accidental userpage transclusions. e.g. "{{user:twentytwofiftyseven}}", instead of "{{user|twentytwofiftyseven}}" Twentytwofiftyseven (talk) KPH: That's a good idea. However, certain sigs cause certain problems on different computers. One of my older sigs that had a blue background messed up talk pages for some users, (Pokemon DP, Walkazo, Stumpers, and a few others), while it cause no problems for others. It'd be kind of difficult to narrow down what does and what doesn't cause technical problems, unfortunately. - Stooben Rooben (talk) Tucayo: You misunderstood me. I know that not all sigs cause problems, but some do for certain computers. (Example: Super-Yoshi's signature causes the background of a talk page to turn lightgray on my computer, while on others, I'm sure it's fine. So it's hard to target which sigs are "problem-causers", for lack of a better term. - Stooben Rooben (talk) By "not all of them are disruptive", I was mainly referring to signatures that are no more problematic than {{user}}, like "KPH2293 (T/C)". Most technical issues are caused by colors/images, and a signature like this uses neither of those. —KPH2293 (talk) Then we can just edit sigs taht affect Tucayo (talk) Miscellaneous No Offensive Material As a wiki user, I have rarely seen it, and I do not know if there is an already exising rule for this, but I think we should make a new rule for Offensive Material. If a proposal has material deemed offensive by at least three active users, the part that includes the offensive material must be deleted. If it is added again by the proposer, the proposal itself will be deleted. If you have any suggestions for this proposal, please put them in the comments section. Proposer: Super Mario Bros. (talk) Deadline: 17:00, Monday, 25 May 2009 Create New Rule Super Mario Bros. (talk) Per my reasons above. Leave As Is Ghost Jam (talk) - I don't think we really need a rule for this as it's more of a matter of common sense. In general, Sysops will delete obviously offensive material. Girrrtacos (talk) Per Ghost Jam- leave it to the Sysops. Time Q (talk): Per Ghost Jam. Why make a rule for everything? The list of rules on the proposal page is way too long already, anyway. Stooben Rooben (talk) Per that ghosty thing up there. Some people could also take offense to certain things, while other don't. (Take the Mario Hentai debate a few months back for example. Many hardcore MarioWikians wanted to add information on it as long as it was official; others didn't want it because it would 'taint' the community.) Per Stooben Rooben. Hehehe. Hentai. Perfect example. Hyper Guy (talk) Walkazo (talk) - Per all. Yoshario (talk) - Per GJ & Stooby Tucayo (talk) - Per everybody, that sounded weird, Per all. Alan Warp Zone (talk) - Yes the patroller r for that, but why not we have a Warn button on some places like forums it works... Comments