MarioWiki:Proposals: Difference between revisions

From the Super Mario Wiki, the Mario encyclopedia
Jump to navigationJump to search
Line 26: Line 26:
#{{User|Tails777}} They aren't sprites so a separate template for models seems like a good idea to me. Per proposal.
#{{User|Tails777}} They aren't sprites so a separate template for models seems like a good idea to me. Per proposal.
#{{User|Yoshi876}} If they're different, have different templates. Per proposal.
#{{User|Yoshi876}} If they're different, have different templates. Per proposal.
#{{User|Madikoopa}} Per all.


====Oppose====
====Oppose====

Revision as of 15:27, August 11, 2013

Image used as a banner for the Proposals page
Current time:
Friday, January 3rd, 18:45 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. Anyone is free to comment on proposals (provided that the page's protection level allows them to edit).
  2. 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.
  3. Users may vote for more than one option, but they may not vote for every option available.
  4. 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.
  5. Users who feel that certain votes were cast in bad faith or which truly have no merit can address the votes in the comments section. Users can ask a voter to clarify their position, point out mistakes or flaws in their arguments, or call for the outright removal of the vote if it lacks sufficient reasoning. Users may not remove or alter the content of anyone else's votes. Voters can remove or rewrite their own vote(s) at any time, but the final decision to remove another user's vote lies solely with the 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.
  6. If a user makes a vote and is subsequently blocked for any amount of time, their vote is removed. However, if the block ends before the proposal ends, then the user in question holds the right to re-cast their vote. If a proposer is blocked, their vote is removed and "(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.
  7. Proposals cannot contradict an already ongoing proposal or overturn the decision of a previous proposal that concluded less than four weeks (28 days) ago.
  8. 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.
  9. 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.
  10. If a proposal reaches its deadline and there is a tie for first place, then the proposal is extended for another week.
  11. 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.
  12. 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.
  13. 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.
  14. After a proposal passes, it is added to the appropriate list of "unimplemented proposals" below and is removed once it has been sufficiently implemented.
  15. 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.
  16. 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.
  17. 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.
  18. Proposals cannot be made about promotions and demotions. Staff changes are discussed internally and handled by the bureaucrats.
  19. No joke proposals. Proposals are serious wiki matters and should be handled professionally. Joke proposals will be deleted on sight.
  20. Proposals must have a status quo option (e.g. Oppose, Do nothing) unless the status quo itself violates policy.

Basic proposal formatting

Below is an example of what your proposal must look like. If you are unsure how to set up this format, simply copy the following and paste it into the fitting section. When updating the bracketed variables with actual information, 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}}}} [make a statement indicating that you support your 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".

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 header, 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 {{TPP discuss}}. Include a brief description of the proposal while also mentioning any pages affected by it, a link to the talk page housing the discussion, and the deadline. If the proposal involves a page that is not yet made, use {{fake link}} to communicate its title in the description. Linking to pages not directly involved in the talk page proposal is not recommended, as it clutters the list with unnecessary links.

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, Super Mario Run, and Super Mario Bros. Wonder.
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)
Add film and television ratings to Template:Ratings, TheUndescribableGhost (ended October 1, 2024)
Use the classic and classic link templates when discussing classic courses in Mario Kart Tour, YoYo (ended October 2, 2024)
Clarify coverage of the Super Smash Bros. series, Doc von Schmeltwick (ended October 17, 2024)
Remove all subpage and redirect links from all navigational templates, JanMisali (ended October 31, 2024)
Prioritize MESEN/NEStopia palette for NES sprites and screenshots, Doc von Schmeltwick (ended November 3, 2024)
Stop considering reused voice clips as references (usually), Waluigi Time (ended November 8, 2024)
Allow English names from closed captions, Koopa con Carne (ended November 12, 2024)
^ NOTE: A number of names coming from closed captions are listed here.
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)
Stop integrating templates under the names of planets and areas in the Super Mario Galaxy games, Nintendo101 (ended December 25, 2024)

Talk page proposals

Split all the clothing, Doc von Schmeltwick (ended September 12, 2021)
Split machine parts, Robo-Rabbit, and flag from Super Duel Mode, Doc von Schmeltwick (ended September 30, 2022)
Make bestiary list pages for the Minion Quest and Bowser Jr.'s Journey modes, Doc von Schmeltwick (ended January 11, 2024)
Allow separate articles for Diddy Kong Pilot (2003)'s subjects, Doc von Schmeltwick (ended August 3, 2024)
Create articles for specified special buildings in Super Mario Run, Salmancer (ended November 15, 2024)
Expand and rename List of characters by game to List of characters by first appearance, Hewer (ended November 20, 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)
Make changes to List of Smash Taunt characters, Hewer (ended December 27, 2024)
Merge Candy Block with Hard Block, Nintendo101 (ended December 31, 2024)
Merge ON/OFF Conveyor Belt with Conveyor Belt, PopitTart (ended January 1, 2025)

List of Talk Page Proposals

Writing Guidelines

None at the moment.

New features

Make Template:Fakelink template

Since there is really many 3D games.. and there is too much models on this wiki that is classed as a sprite. So I porpose we create a template for them. I'm not so good with copyrights, but here is an almost a copy from {{game-sprite}}

Copyrighted game screenshot This is a model originally from a copyrighted computer or video game, and the copyright for it is most likely held by the company that developed the game. It is believed that the use of a limited number of web-resolution models for identification and critical commentary on the computer or video game in question or the copyrighted character(s) depicted on the screenshot in question qualifies as fair use under United States copyright law, as such display does not significantly impede the right of the copyright holder to sell the copyrighted material, is not being used to turn a profit in this context, and presents ideas that cannot be exhibited otherwise. See Copyrights and fair use rationale.

Proposer: Megadardery (talk)
Deadline: August 18, 2013, 23:59 GMT

Support

  1. Megadardery (talk) Per proposal
  2. Tails777 (talk) They aren't sprites so a separate template for models seems like a good idea to me. Per proposal.
  3. Yoshi876 (talk) If they're different, have different templates. Per proposal.
  4. Madikoopa (talk) Per all.

Oppose

Comments

Removals

Remove Select Level Image Maps

See walkazo's comment:

I also question the need for platformer image maps at all. They've always struck me as a bit superfluous, especially for linear games - like Template:YISMA3_Map - what's the point? The level numbers are right there already, so it's not like an amorphous RPG map or whatever...

I read her comment and I totally agree with her, And yeah, Navigation Templates will do the trick for them, and If we must keep something, I'd like to keep the Icons, But remove the templates. By removing I mean the following templates: {{NSMB2map}}, {{NSMBmap}}, {{SMW2YI Map}}, {{YISMA3 Map}} and {{YIDS Map}}.

Proposer: Megadardery (talk) (Walkazo's Idea)
Deadline: August 14, 2013, 23:59 GMT

Support

  1. Megadardery (talk) Per above.
  2. Gonzales Kart Inc. (talk) I got an idea to make them images. Per proposal.
  3. SuperYoshiBros (talk) In my opinion, it's pointless. Per all.
  4. Walkazo (talk) - Per me. Straightforward and simple set-ups are better than needless flash.
  5. Baby Luigi (talk) I don't really support any image maps in general. They always strike me of more of what the capability of the wiki can boast. However, this is just plain redundant. Images mean a thousand words and all, but if this image level maps' purpose are as the same as a simple nav template, then the point of an image becomes pointless and taking up space.
  6. Time Turner (talk) Per all.
  7. Mario4Ever (talk) Per Walkazo.
  8. Jazama (talk) Per all
  9. Ace Shadow (talk) Per all.

Oppose

  1. Tails777 (talk) I don't see anything wrong with them. They seem helpful to me.
  2. MegaKoopa (talk) Per Tails777.
  3. Tucayo (talk) - These templates don't clutter the pages they are in, they help with navigation, and they embellish the articles they are in. All the CSS the wiki has is by no means necessary, but it makes it look attractive, and attractive is good.
  4. Yoshi876 (talk) Per all.
  5. A Paragoomba and the Koopa Bros. (talk) Per all, they are easier to navigate with.
  6. Mario7 (talk) Per all.
  7. ParaLemmy1234 (talk) They can help see the layout of the map (e.g. location of Toad houses, the castle, any ghost houses, etc.). Per all.
  8. Aokage (talk) Per all.
  9. YoshiKong (talk) – Strongly disagree, per all.
  10. Iggy Koopa Jr (talk)Per all.

Comments

Is it really necessary to get rid of them? They look really nice and don't make too much of a clutter. --Tucayo (talk) 15:03, 6 August 2013 (EDT)

What's the point of keeping the icons? Yoshi876 (talk)

The icons being the images themselves? It'd make sense to have them on the world pages, but not the level pages. Also, thanks for crediting me with the idea, but for the record, I'm a girl, so if the pronouns could be fixed, that'd be great... - Walkazo (talk)
I dunno what your problem is but that sounds a bit rude... PPLToast (talk) 15:47, 6 August 2013 (EDT)
I already know, just a typo. @Tucayo, If a thing is unneeded, then we don't need it. they may be nice, but not fantastic, I'd prefer them, if they are em, locations. not just 'worlds' Megadardery (talk)

Stuff like {{Beamap}}, {{PitMKmap}}, {{BisMKmap}}, and {{Bowsermap}}, also feel a bit pointless for me other than showing off. In the sections of the articles they appear in, it feels redundant, but preferably, I'd like the links of the locations in the article get removed, not the picture. LeftyGreenMario (talk)

Lists are good if you don't want to have to waver your mouse all over an image, or if you're just looking for a list of names at a glance, and whatnot. Things like {{Bowsermap}} are handy when you don't know the name, or when you'd simply like an annotated map to help match names with locations. They're good for game articles and pages like Bowser's body or Mushroom Kingdom, although I'm honestly not too crazy about them also being used as navigation templates on the individual location pages; it's not as bad as linear games getting the image map treatment, but it still seems a bit unnecessary. - Walkazo (talk)
First, keeping the picture without the links is bit confusing. Especially for games like PiT. How can i know where this location is on the map? The propose of any Image Map, is to make navigation easier. Plus knowing what is the name of every part of the map. Keeping templates like {{NSMBmap}} does not add any help in navigation stuff. However, Templates like {{Bowsermap}} is good, because people may know the location but not the name. And searching wouldn't help at all. Visual maps are the really type of Image Maps that should be kept. Megadardery (talk)
If I use the Yoshi's Island here as an example, some people may remember the icon of the level, but not the level name, so keeping that template and others like it are necessary for easy navigation. Yoshi876 (talk)
If we have to, we could add those to the navigation template. Megadardery (talk)

@ParaLemmy1234: What you mean with that? I'm talking about linear games maps (just icons) not other maps (real location).Megadardery (talk)

Changes

Moving pages like "Cat Mario" to "Cat Form" and so

Well this is my first proposal so I am going to attempt. I was linked here. I think that pages for Mario's forms (Raccoon, Cat etc.) should be renamed to like "Raccoon Form", putting the word "Form" at the end of Mario's form articles. Because some characters (like in SMB2 or NSMW) can also achieve the form, not just Mario. It would make more sense to just put for example "Cat Form" instead of "Cat Mario", since all the chars in NSMW can go Cat form. (that is an example, I mean for all of Mario's forms, even if it is only Mario that ever achieves them).

Proposer: Kuzey457
Deadline: August 16, 2013 23:59 GMT

Support

  1. Yoshi876 (talk) Per proposal.
  2. Tucayo (talk) - Makes more sense than having to clarify on every article any character can transform into it.
  3. SuperYoshiBros (talk) I was actually thinking about this recently. Per all.

Oppose

Comments

If this passes, will {{diff}} have to be deleted? driftmaster130 (talk)

It'd be unneeded, so I'd say yes. Yoshi876 (talk)
No, it is necessary for other uses. like this - Megadardery (talk)

Stupid question, but is the name "Tanooki form" and "Fire form" ever used? LeftyGreenMario (talk)

I won't vote now, but isn't "Fire form" a conjecture name? - Megadardery (talk)

I was asking that... LeftyGreenMario (talk)
Sorry, I didn't understand you. better contact an admin before this proposal pass - Megadardery (talk)

Miscellaneous

None at the moment.

Retrieved from "https://www.mariowiki.com/index.php?title=MarioWiki:Proposals&oldid=1531778"