MarioWiki:Proposals: Difference between revisions

From the Super Mario Wiki, the Mario encyclopedia
Jump to navigationJump to search
mNo edit summary
(→‎Splits & Merges: archiving)
Line 41: Line 41:


==Splits & Merges==
==Splits & Merges==
===Merge Mario's clothing===
''None at the moment.
So I've been looking around the wiki, and I recently noticed that there are articles of each piece of Mario's clothing (excluding his overalls). I find this a bit odd. They aren't very notable in any way. So I think we should merge each piece into one article. It would be named something like "Mario's clothing" or "List of Mario's clothing" or something to that effect. Opinions?
 
'''Proposer''':[[User:huntercrunch|huntercrunch]]
 
'''Deadline''': July 3, 2008, 17:00
 
====Support====
#{{User|huntercrunch}} - I am the proposer and I give my reasons above.
 
====Oppose====
#{{user|Time Q}}: Per Stumpers in the comments. [[Mario's Hat]] should have its own article. His gloves and shoes also seem to play a more or less important role, according to the respective articles.
#[[User:Ninjayoshi|Ninjayoshi]] - Per Stumpers and Time Q.  Also, the hat has been in every single Mario game.  Ex. his overalls were changed around in the beginning
#{{user|InfectedShroom}} - Per Time. The gloves and shoes are rather important in Luigi's Mansion.
#{{User|Glitchman}} - Mario's Hat, Shoes, and Glove all have an important role in [[Luigi's Mansion]], plus the hat also has an important role in Super Mario 64.  Keep them how they are.
#{{User|1337Yoshi}} Mario's hat is the only one that really plays a significant role in multiple games (Super Mario 64, Super Mario Sunshine, Luigi's Mansion, etc.), so at least that deserves an article. The others seem to be more or less secondary, and could be merged into one article.
#{{User|Walkazo}} - Per Stumpers (below) and everyone else who agreed with him, including 1337.
#{{User|Mumbles}} Per everyone.
 
====Comments====
Just so that people can judge better, the articles are: [[Mario's Hat]], [[Mario's Glove]], [[Mario's Shoe]], [[Mario's Shirt]], [[Mario's Overalls]], and, if you consider it, [[Mario's Star]].  I would agree with you on the glove, shoes, shirt, and overalls.  We did the same with [[Pauline's Items]].  However, the hat is what's getting to me.  That has played an important role in the series and is apparently the secret to Mario's power (see Super Mario 64). {{User|Stumpers}}
 
I think his shoes and gloves should be merged. -[[User:Ninjayoshi|Ninjayoshi]]
:I agree with Stumpers. After this proposal dies we should have another one to merge everything but Mario's Hat (since it's too late to alter this one). - {{User|Walkazo}}
::Will do. {{User|Stumpers}}
 
{{User|Dom}} Insignificant items like his gloves and er, shoes, should be merged, but stuff like his hat and main clothes are quite deserving of their own articles. There are articles about MUCH less significant things on this Wiki...
 
 
 


==Changes==
==Changes==

Revision as of 17:56, July 3, 2008

f_propcopym_9045f2d.png


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

  1. Actions that users feel are appropriate to have community approval first can be added by anyone, but they must have a strong argument.
  2. Users then vote and discuss on the issue during that week. The "deadline" for the proposal is one week from posting at:
    1. Monday to Thursday: 17:00 (5pm)
    2. Friday and Saturday: 20:00 (8pm)
    3. Sunday: 15:00 (3pm)
  3. Every vote should have a reason accompanying it.
  4. 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.
  5. "# " should be added under the last vote of each support/oppose section to show another blank line.
  6. 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.
  7. 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: 14:51, 7 August 2024 (EDT)

New Features

None at the moment.

Removals

None at the moment.

Splits & Merges

None at the moment.

Changes

Fire and Ice Templates

As I said on the Fire talk page, too many things use fire (or ice) for these templates to be practical. Instead, I propose we alter these templates so that they only include things made of, or irrefutably linked to fire/ice. This is a better design because readers could then research creatures of fire or ice with as much ease as if they were using the Bird or Fish Templates to research those kinds of beings, instead of getting bogged down with species that only use fire or ice. For example, if someone wants to research Birds, anything else in the Bird Template that flies but isn't a bird would slow them down; however a misfile like this would be obvious as a bird is a clearly defined animal, while what can be considered appropriately placed under "Fire" and "Ice" is much more subjective. As such, I'm open to suggestions on what should or shouldn't be removed, though my first attempt (complete with justifications for my choices) can be seen alongside the original templates here.

Proposer:Walkazo

Deadline: July 9, 2008, 17:00

Support

  1. Walkazo (talk) - My reasons above.
  2. Pikax (talk) - I have seen what Walkazo plans to separate from the templates and why he wants to separate those things, and I have no objections to his plan.
  3. Dryest bowser (talk)-per all
  4. The Writing Guy (talk) - Per Walkazo.

Oppose

Comments

Miscellaneous

None at the moment.