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. There are two topics that cannot be decided on through a proposal: the first is sysop promotions and demotions, which are decided by Bureaucrats. Secondly, no proposals calling for the creation of Banjo, Conker or Sonic series articles are allowed (several proposals supporting them have failed in recent history). The times are in EDT, 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: 03:53, 27 December 2024 (EDT) New Features None at the Moment Removals None at the moment. Splits & Merges Smash Bros. Moves In light of recent applications of our importance policy, many users would like to see minor Super Smash Bros. subjects merged. One such suggestion has been to merge the special moves with the characters’ pages. For example, Hand Grenade, Remote Controlled Missile, Cypher, C4, and Grenade Launcher would be merged with Solid Snake. This merge would decrease the emphasis placed Smash Bros. while still retaining all Super Smash Bros. content. If this proposal passes, the following assurances are granted (1) ALL content from a special move page must be transferred to its respective character page BEFORE the special move page is blanked. This includes pictures. (2) ALL special move pages affected will become redirects to their appropriate section in their characters' articles. In other words, you will still be able to easily look up each special move. It will simply no longer have its own page. (3) The Super Smash Bros. Special Moves page will still be in place. If you would like an example of how this would look, please see here. Please note how the image templates and stub templates carried over. Trophy information when applicable has now been moved down to the larger trophy information section. The only real change is that images have been made smaller. For the purpose of example, I have including the SSB Moves template at the bottom of the section. Unless people really want it to be there, when/if I merge the moves, I will not be including the template. Let me know. Proposer: Stumpers (talk) Deadline: 17:00, October 2, 2008 Support Stumpers (talk) - Per myself above. This merge will retain all information about the Smash Bros. series, but it will present it in a way that will not give unequal attention to the Smash Bros. series over other cross-overs. We need to either follow the importance policy by measures such as the one described in the proposal or we need to modify the importance policy. Uniju :D (talk) - I completely agree with Stumpers. R.O.B 128 (talk) - You have my full support on this incentive. It's about time this happened. Booster - I'm all for this. From what I gather, moves pertaining to Mario characters will be merged as well, yes? Stooben Rooben (talk) - This is a great idea. The wiki needs a little less focus on the SSB series, and some more on the Mario series; I don't want anything to drastic to be changed, so this seems like just the right way to do things. Super-Yoshi (talk) - Per all. Cobold (talk) - I suggested this ages ago. I didn't want to create a proposal after the debate didn't work out. This step should be all right to put some weight onto the Importance Policy, it was only a theory before. tanokki (talk) -I didn't like this initially but when I looked a stumpers test page It made sense.Per all. White Knight (talk) - A brilliant idea if you ask me. Oppose Phailure (talk)- NO WAI. Next thing you know, Kirby, King Dedede, and Meta Knight will all be merged into "Kirby series". Comment Just a question to those responsible for the random quote generator: many Final Smash articles include quotes from Masahiro Sakurai. Will we need to remove these in the event that the character page has a quote at the top? Alternatively, we could merge quotes into the actual text, like so: In his Super Smash Bros. Dojo! entry for Peach Blossom, Masahiro comments, "[insert quote here]." Stumpers (talk) Booster: It does also apply to Mario characters. Stumpers (talk) 23:19, 25 September 2008 (EDT) About your first comment, you could just use {{LLquote}} Stooben Rooben (talk) 23:41, 25 September 2008 (EDT) Well, this what I've actually wanted (and some others) and this will definately prevent vandalism. Srsly, we would have to patrol 195 articles if there isn't a merge. Plus, I think somebody went a little too far when they put that Diddy Kong can perform "Diddycide". That's a technique that is only meant to be on Smash Wiki. Are you going to merge the moves for the Mario series characters too, Stumpers? R.O.B 128 (talk) I was considering only merging non-Mario characters, but then Blitzwing and Stooben suggested to me that we merge all the moves. So, yes - that is the current plan: Fireball, Cape, Mario Tornado, and Jump Punch will all be merged with Mario. If anyone would rather this not be the case, please speak up. Stumpers (talk) Say wut? Fireball is in more than just Smash Bros., you know. Screw the importance policy.Phailure (talk) Please try to remain civil. Stooben Rooben (talk) Just as Mario's cape form from Super Mario World will not be merged with Mario, neither will the article Fireball. We will be merging the SSB section from the article into Mario, but in its place we will be lightly mentioning that fireball became an attack, with a link to the Fireball section in the Mario article. As much as its worth, I can tell you that it is not my intention that this proposal lead to all major Smash Bros. elements being merged. I'd like to refer you to Yangus, White Mage, and Knuckles. They have articles, and so I see no reason why we should merge characters from Smash Bros.. Stumpers (talk) New Super Mario Bros. Level Articles Looking through the site, I noticed we have some articles on each level of New Super Mario Bros.. I'm not exactly sure why. The levels of Super Mario Bros, Super Mario Bros. 3, The Lost Levels, etcetera, are all merged with their respective world article. (Ex: World 1-1 (SMB) is non-existent because it is already in World 1 (SMB)). So here's my proposal: merge the NSMB level articles with their respective world articles, just as we have done with the aforementioned articles. Proposer: Stooben Rooben (talk) Deadline: 17:00, October 2, 2008 Merge Stooben Rooben (talk) - Per my statement above. Super-Yoshi (talk) - Per St00by. The Dark Doggy 2 (talk) - There's no back story or info or even a name for NSMB levels except that what their theme is (eg forest or snow), and who will go to Mario Wiki to find that out? Blue koopa (talk) - There is very little info that can be put into those articles and all the levels in a world are prety much the same. Keep Separate Time Q (talk): What makes a level article-worthy? Super Mario World levels all get articles (which I think is good), so why not do the same for NSMB, SMB, etc.? The only difference here is that they don't have proper names, but most SMW level names only consist of the world name and a number as well. Levels definitely have enough content to write about in separate articles, so IMO we should allow level articles for any game. Bob-omb buddy (talk)-Per Time Q,and I have found that merging levels loses info. Garlic Man (talk) - Per Time Q; in fact, if the proposal is declined, we could start a PipeProject to complete all of these levels. The Writing Guy (talk) - Per TimeQ. Stumpers (talk) - There is a lot more content for each of the levels in NSMB than there is for each level of Super Mario Bros.: alternate exits, special coins to collect, switches to flip, etc. Grandy02 (talk) - Per all. Palkia47 (talk) - Per all. We are a Mario Wiki, and we have and need the most Mario info we can get, and just having like two sentences on the World article isn't info; a description of the level in an article is info :D Comments Time Q: I do see your point, and I actually expected someone to point this out. The reason why I didn't propose that SMW levels get merged, is because they do consist of more that solely numbers. Ex: SMB, SMB2, SMB3, TLL, YI, YIDS, NSMB, SPP, and probably a few others each have levels titled "World 1-1", or "World 2-1", etcetera. SMW does actually name their levels, albeit some of the names are less "wordy" than others. But, SMW has levels with titles like "Awesome", "Gnarly", and even "Yoshi's Island 2". While the all games have official level names (even if they are just a sequence of numbers), SMW is the only one to give their levels more original names. If we were to separate every "World 1-1", "World 1-2", "World 1-3", and so on into their own articles, we would have at least 32 disambiguation pages with the aforementioned titles. So, in this aspect, I find merging the NSMB level articles to their respective world articles makes navigation all-the-more easier. Stooben Rooben (talk) 02:29, 26 September 2008 (EDT) You've got a point here, but I don't think navigation would be that much of a problem. How would having disambiguation pages make navigation more difficult? I'm still all for putting brief level summaries into their respective world articles (and linking to the actual level articles). The only thing that separates the "article-worthiness" of NSMB levels from the "article-worthiness" of SMW levels is that the former do not get names. But we have a lot of articles about things that don't have (official) names. Time Q (talk) How is there a disambig,And dosent every one of the pages list the levels at the end of the page?Bob-omb buddy (talk) World 1 (SMB) isn't even complete yet! Before we consider whether to carry this action out or not, shouldn't someone complete all of the incomplete world/level articles first? Pikax (talk) Time Q: The excess amount of navigation templates and disambig pages seem rather unnecessary. (I do admit I have created a lot of navigation templates. :P) We would have at least 32 disambiguation pages if we are to separate all levels from their respective world articles. Take SMB3's world articles for example: Grass Land is a nice, long article that gives a descriptive entry for each level in that world; not to mention SMB3's levels have practically the same level names. In my opinion, it would be better to have eight long, descriptive articles on worlds and their levels, rather than around 40-60 stubs. Expansion is possible on the level articles, but if we were to do that, we might as well separate any and all levels from their respective world article. Bob-omb Buddy: 1) Merging articles does not always mean loss of information. It depends on who's doing the merging and how it's being done. Take for example when I merged controller articles to their respective console article: I left the lengthy description of each controller exactly as it was and merely implemented it into the respective console article. Pikax: I can finish World 1 (SMB). Stooben Rooben (talk) 17:12, 26 September 2008 (EDT) Changes Wiki Appearance: Light Red Alright folks, I guess I did get a little too bold in giving you too many options on changing on something that has stayed constant for our 3+ years - our skin. Well, I took all things into consideration, including the Encyclopedia feedback section, and I think I came up with a winner. Hopefully. :P Screenshot 1, Screenshot 2 Proposer: Wayoshi (talk) Deadline: 20:00, September 26 2008 Switch to This Skin Wayoshi (talk) Shadow Boshi (talk) Freaking awesome.And SM64 Mario looks better than SMW Mario. GO WAYOSHI! Phailure (talk) Don't listen to those n00bs, this is epic win. Arend (talk) Not sure about the logo, but the back is good. It just FITS a Mariosite! why? It has 8-Bit Mario's and is red, the color Mario wears. tanokki (talk) It looks a lot better especially the logo.Template:Fakelink Now, the color is a bit messy but that can be changed in seconds so overall It's good. Pseudo-dino (talk) Awesome! But maybe tone down the background red a bit. shyguy27 (talk) Per all. kingbowser99 (talk) Good, but how and why do you propose to change it? Blue koopa (talk) It's good, but could be better with a different logo, like the mariowik2 one below. R.O.B 128 (talk) Despite your comment on my talk page, I vote your idea. The current skin is too bland and boring as well as somewhat ugly. Tucayo (talk) Looks Better. Yoshikart (talk) Current one looks bland. I support Wayo, despite him trying to close userpedia which is the reason for my retirement. Use mario mini. user:Yoshitheawesome Good idea. Let's shake things up a bit! Mr. Br Mario (talk) Hey, very nice skin. Much better than the old one. And I support the idea of changing the logo too. SM64 is much better than SMAS's Super Mario Bros. ALL HAIL WAYOSHI!!! Keep with the White Super-Yoshi (talk) Your first proposal had many users state that we should oppose/propose. The logo needs a major change, but IMO that one wouldn't suite it. Besides, why can't you just create a monobook.css? The white background looks fine to me. It sorta gives that "Wikipedia" style look, which makes it look proffesional. However, these are just my opinions related to the wiki. I deny this proposal. Storm Yoshi (talk) The new one looks friggin weird. TOO MUCH RED o_0 . And the Mario logo thing is just far too weird for my liking. RedFire Mario (talk) I like the way it is. The new look is rly weird and it looks horrible. Keep the old and awesome one Walkazo (talk) - The background's not bad, but not good enough to be worthwhile. It'd be a novelty for a little; but our focus should be on information, not background colour (building on what Super-Yoshi said). The logo isn't that great either: it's too faded-out, and lacks "umph". DarkHero Sonic the Darkness (talk) The background doesn't really look good enough for the wiki. I think we should have the same skin the wiki has right now and I agree with Storm Yoshi. Jdrowlands (talk) - Per Super Yoshi. bob-omb buddy (talk) - the background would get boring quickly an as for the logos,the Mario mini one is creepy,and the other one isn't colourful enough. Dark Lakitu 789 (talk) Per Walkazo. Also the logo's letters should of have a out line. Princess Grapes Butterfly (talk) Per all! So far I still think the white background is better. And the old logo looks better than the one shown above. (It kinda of creepy any other logo ideas?) Stumpers (talk) Mario's always been a very colorful series, but the new skin is very pink rather than colorful. I know you were looking to make it look like different varients of Mario's color red, but it ends up looking either, in the best case, faded, or in the worst case, efeminent (no offense intended wish that comment - I'm just saying that an efeminent color scheme does not fit the series: Super Princess Peach is currently the only efeminent game in the series). The logo is also lacking, I'm really sorry to say. I'm not sure how to improve it, really... but the previous opposer was right about the words at the very least needing outlines. Thing is: you're trying to replicate Super Mario 64's style but it just isn't working because the letters you're using aren't stylized as they were in the SM64 logo. Besides, don't you think the logo should reflect on the entire series, or at least on certain pivital points (ie SMB, SM64, and Galaxy)? Coincollector (talk) According to Stumpers. The background offers pink tones rather than red tones, and the edit zone, why in that color as well? Talking about the logo, not bad, but compared with the SM64 style of the title, is poor. I would rather the old logo's font style that reachs a bit of such style (although it may be inspired from the Super Mario World style)... Magitroopa (talk) OMG! It looks ugly! No offense, Wayoshi. Count Caterpie (talk) It looks like a picnic blanket, plus i like the logo we have. Luigi001 (talk) Per all. Personally I like the wiki's skin the way it is. But that's me. And that logo is kinda creepy! Canama (talk) Per all. No. Just no. Fantastic Mr. L (talk)I like the background, but the head is disturbing somehow. Might as well stay with the white. InfectedShroom (talk) - Per all. Not that I care, considering I just made a .css... Ah well. I like the monotonous white skin. The Great Gonzales (talk) - I prefer the original, myself. I like our current, more professional-looking logo better (Nothing on you, Wayoshi, of course). Plus, I think the red background is a bit obtrusive and could become distracting to readers' eyes. Frostyfireyoshi (talk) - Per all. I said: PER ALL !!!!!!!! Dom (talk) - Here goes my rant. OK, this opposal is slightly biased as I hate the colour red, but that's jsut one reason. I think white looks more proffesional and is easier on the eyes. And as for the logo - that's...that's just really scary. I'm about the 500th person to say this, but it looks kinda dinky with the text over his eyes, and his face is kind of... dumb-looking. However, I do think our current logo should be changed somehow. So, I appreciate your excellent effort at redesigning the Wiki's style, Wayoshi... but, maybe you could try a different one that more people like. KP Blue (talk) - I prefer the current skin. It gives the site sort of a library-ish look. Which I like, because I'm editing from a library. Besides, we don't want to annoy the obsessive compulsive users. Besides, the pink look makes the place look gay, no offense. Mario Gamer (talk) - Wikis are always white, the basic layout and colors are fine. I've honestly never cared for the logo since it's not very...professional looking but this new one is not any better. I think a logo contest for the site would be cool. Girrrtacos (talk) I prefer the original. Phoenix Rider (talk) - I can't imagine ever switching over to something else. This style has worked for us and makes everything appear smooth and crisp. Not to overuse the word, but it does look professional this way. The red is a bit harsh on the eyes and it looks too busy back there. In addition to that it makes the site seem kiddy. Is this really what we want our readers to see? Keep in mind how many people use Wikipedia and are accustomed to the layout there. I've always viewed our layout as Wikipedia-esque with a Mario spin. The new design just throws that all out the window and that should not be. Good job on the redesign aspect and all, Wayoshi, but the way it is now seems perfect to me. Comments I'm aware Mario's eyes are covered by the A & R. I could put all the text at the top and Mario at the bottom, if everyone else prefers such, but I like the hidden effect. Wayoshi (talk) 22:40, 19 September 2008 (EDT) I admire that you are putting much effort to produce a good wiki Wayo, and I congratulate you for that. It must have taken a long time to do both, but still, per my response up above. Super-Yoshi (talk) That screenshot looks exactly the same as our skin but with a different logo. :| I personally don't like that logo either, Mario should be semi-transparent not black and white. Uniju :D (talk) Ok, technically, I don't like this text and the logo at all (the one seen above in the Proposal), but, while looking through, I thought of a logo... yet, I doubt it'd work. Palkia47 (talk) File:LOGOMARWIK2.png My brother made an other logo. It has 9 Mario games on the background. 3 Mario 2D games, 3 Mario 3D games and 3 Mario Spin-offs. What do you think. Arend (talk) That look better than the logo that Wayo made. (No offence.) It pwnz!! Princess Grapes Butterfly (talk) I think I will soon see that Mario mini logo IN MY NIGHTMARES. Arend's logo is pretty decent, although Mario looks kinda funky. --Blitzwing 11:10, 20 September 2008 (EDT) Arend's brother's logo is very close to what I was thinking of when I wrote my comment about your logo, Wayo. I think it's very unfair to ask you to keep coming up with ideas and to keep having them get shot down, so maybe we should make a main page talk and/or forum thread about this subject and get lots of different ideas from various users and then we can put the best ones together? Stumpers (talk) 14:11, 20 September 2008 (EDT) Only if everyone agrees in wanting to change the skin, and too many want no change at all. Wayoshi (talk) 16:14, 20 September 2008 (EDT) Pretty much everyone wants to see a new logo, though. Perhaps we should have a contest? Stumpers (talk) 16:31, 20 September 2008 (EDT) I have to agree that arend's brother's logo is far better than the one we have, and I still think a slight change in the skin colors could help. And if that doesn't work, things like (very) faded background images for the content and such would be cool. Uniju :D (talk) How about a background with the clouds from Super Mario All-Stars or something? I dunno... something like that where we used the games' backgrounds as our background images would be pretty sweet IMO. Stumpers (talk) Stumpers: I want the current logo to stay, though... D: Garlic Man (talk) I secretly like it, too, but I wouldn't mind it being updated. ;) I'm a sucker for the old school titles, but there's been so much more content since then. Stumpers (talk) I think a contest would be a fantastic idea. Stooben Rooben (talk) Per Stooby. That Icon thing of Arend's bro pwns! King Mario (talk) Lol, that was my idea! :) I think we'd need to have a proposal as to whether the logo needs updating... something like "Either keep the old logo or have a contest to decide a new one." Stumpers (talk) Agreed. And if we do have a contest, I already have an idea for a logo. Stooben Rooben (talk) Crazy! A contest sounds ftw :D Super-Yoshi (talk) I like Arend's brother's logo, though I think it would look better if the red faded to yellow (instead of pink) for the lettering - Walkazo (talk) That actually gives me an idea for the contest: if we limit ourselves to "rough drafts" of sorts (ie those versions of logos for which we haven't yet received input from the community) we're going to be limiting the quality of our eventual logo. In other words, why don't we first have a general, open-forum style logo page, where people post their logos and get ideas for improvement. Then, the next week, we open up a new page where people would post their final versions of their logos. We could then vote off logos as follows: after three days, top 50% make it to the second round, then the top three make it to the final round, and then only one makes it to be our logo of course. What do you think? Stumpers (talk) 00:54, 21 September 2008 (EDT) I was worried about "works in progress" being used (hense I commented now, instead of waiting for the actual logo-voting), and I think your solution is a brilliant way to avoid that. - Walkazo (talk) Sounds brilliant. - Stooben Rooben (talk) 01:27, 21 September 2008 (EDT) Thanks very much! So we should start a proposal about whether or not we should replace the old logo, and if so that we should use that system? Stumpers (talk) 12:18, 21 September 2008 (EDT) Well, I suppose we should have a proposal on whether or not the logo should be changed. The options could be: Change the logo, or have a contest. Stooben Rooben (talk) CoooOOOOOOOOooooooonteEeEeeeeeeeeeeeest! Sorry, White Stripes reference. Anyhow, good Idea. InfectedShroom (talk) Wouldn't the options be "Keep the old Logo" and "Get a New Logo", with the contest expalined in the proposal? Also, I think the old Logo should be included in the contest (hypothetically, if 6 people votes to keep the old one, but 10 voted for a contest, and then their votes were split so that the highest new logo had 4 votes, the actual best bet would have been the old one). - Walkazo (talk) Yes, sorry. I was in a hurry. Didn't mean to write, "Heads I win, tails you lose." You have to keep in mind that you'd also be splitting the votes of all the people who think the logo should change if we went with your second idea. However, I could see making the old logo an option in the contest just in case all the new logos are garbage. What do you think? Stumpers (talk) 22:46, 21 September 2008 (EDT) That's what I was sorta getting at. If more people want to keep the old logo than any one of the new designs, leaving that option out of the final decision would yield results that don't accurately reflect the will of the huddled masses. And since we want to please the most people, that would be bad. - Walkazo (talk) Maybe if there were a possibility of using either of the two skins, I might have supported this proposal. Pikax (talk) This is absolutely bias. There is seriously no point of letting users decide. Anyway, if it was agreed with people with the power to do this like Sysops, wouldn't they change it back if they had complaints. Personally, I perfer the red, but w/e.Purple Yoshi (talk) Wait... what? Why shouldn't we let the users decide? The whole point of proposals is so that our Wiki is more democratic than the rest out there. How do we have a bias going anyway? Against red? Nope. Against Wayo? Definately not - that guy's amazing. Against mario mini? Well, maybe. Stumpers (talk) 14:48, 24 September 2008 (EDT) It's easier for the Sysops to get feedback now than deal with angry Users later. - Walkazo (talk) Hey Wayo if you like that colour background so much use it on your page! Princess Grapes Butterfly (talk) That would only be pleasing you. Wayoshi can do whatevr he wants on his own page. R.O.B 128 (talk) I'm starting to think this is becoming too much work for too little of an outcome. Why can't users just make their own monobook.css if they aren't happy with the sites current appearance? It seems simple enough. Stooben Rooben (talk) 18:04, 24 September 2008 (EDT) I guess because not everyone is able to do the coding, and because visitors too might want to see a different skin. Time Q (talk) Yeah. I made that point on the previous proposal I think, and those who want the proposed design can receive the code from Wayoshi, put it as their Custom Css, and it would be fine. Garlic Man (talk) I like both of you guys' ideas, but seeing all of the opposing votes, we might as well start asking Wayo to give us the code. R.O.B 128 (talk) We still might want to consider a logo contest, though... Stumpers (talk) But if you think about it, everybody could just make their own logo(or use another users'), and be happy with it; it seems compromisal(for the lack of a better word). Garlic Man (talk) I don't have the requirements necessary to accomplish your task, but the contest would be an awesome choice. Y'know, they don't have this kinda stuff on Bulbapedia; this wiki is much better. R.O.B 128 (talk) Time Q: If a user has trouble making a monobook, couldn't he or she ask another Sysop/User with a monobook for help? And if they were embarrassed, they could just copy someone else's monobook coding and customize it as they see fit. Stumpers and R.O.B 128: I tend to agree with Garlic Man on this issue. After thinking things through a little more, users could add their own logo to their monobook. The contest is a good idea, but alas, not everyone would be happy with the outcome; the same goes with the skin. Stooben Rooben (talk) 20:18, 24 September 2008 (EDT) I agree with Stooben's idea since I'm being neutral in this arguement. It would help ease the tention and make everyone (sorta) happy. And the wiki itself would not be affected (plus you also have to see if the back round would cause certain fonts to be illedgible) so it should also be tested. MC Hammer Bro. (talk) Following up on what I said earlier, as well as Stooben's comment, I think the overall white, neutral skin is appropriate for the default wiki; people may say it is boring, but it will not cause complaints about uneasiness on the eyes. Time Q: Also, for new users, the welcome template has a link to the CSS info page, and they can refer to that. Garlic Man (talk) Regarding logos, anyone think that a Mushroom would fit nicely? I'm no graphics artist, so I wouldn't be able to actually desgin one though. Many wikis often use a roundish logo to compliment Wikipedia, and a Mushroom only seems fitting. -- Booster That could be an adequate logo if it had "Super Mario Wiki" on it, yes. Stooben Rooben (talk) I think we're missing the point of a new logo or skin here: we want to be presentable to the users who aren't going to be hardcore and making their own skin for a minor specialty Wiki like ours (which is going to be a good 98%). I think the consensus is that our current skin is a good way to do that, but there's a lot more discord surrounding the logo, as you know. Our logo becomes a Wiki's "face" (at least according to the fan Wiki buffs over at Wikia). Therefore, it's very important that we agree on that. For example, we all think of one box art image when I say "Super Mario Galaxy." Even if a gamer was to make his own box art and insert it into the box on his personal shelf, that would not change the fact that the world thinks of the official SMG box art when they think SMG. The current logo has been in place for years - perhaps it is time to see if it can't hold up to the work of some of the new image buffs we've gained since it was first made. Stumpers (talk) Yeah, per Stumpers, that's exactly what I meant. You can't just have a random logo and tell users to make their own. I'm referring to guests who don't want to register, just visit the wiki, yet they should have a proper logo. I'm not saying that anything is wrong with our current logo, though, only that telling users to make their own skins and not caring about a standard one is the wrong approach. Time Q (talk) A similar discussion came up the other day between the sysops on a completely different issue: we can think of very creative yet complex ways to ensure than a particular user will be able to customize his/her Wiki experience to his/her liking, but we as experienced, involved editors need to keep the casual visitors in mind. Passing users assume things about a Wiki as we all know from being passing users. One such thing is that our presentation is the best we can do, and we want everyone to see it. Asking users to each make their own logo and skin is backwards: rather than ask the majority of users to create their own logos, we should choose the logo that the majority agrees on, and let the dissatisfied minority make special skins for their personal use. I think that we have determined that the majority likes our current monobook skin, but we really have varied opinions in terms of the logo. Stumpers (talk) This might have been covered already (haven't sifted through all the comments yet, sorry), but, Wayoshi, is it possible to just add these layouts as default skin options, premade monobooks I guess? -- Ghost Jam (talk) That's a good Idea. If we can't do that, we'll need the code from Wayoshi so that we may enter it into our personal Monobook. R.O.B 128 (talk) That a good idea R.O.B so the users who like Wayo design should get the code. That will maybe keep them happy hopely BTW So are we going to have a contest or not? Please don't! Classic logos seem better but Arend's logo seems cool too. Princess Grapes Butterfly (talk) The striking is not funny. This page has no room for jokes; this is a serious issue. R.O.B 128 (talk) Getting back to the point – I do like Ghost Jam's idea. Is it possible that you could make something like, Template:Fakelink, Template:Fakelink, etcetera; then you could add them to a MediaWiki page that could create a dropbox in each user's personal preferences? Ex: Skin Default (Light Blue) Red Green Yellow Etc. Logo Default (Current Logo) Logo 1 Logo 2 Logo 3 Etc. Maybe that would work; and if users still weren't happy with those skins and/or logos, he or she could create her own monobook. As for guests that are just visiting the site, I believe that the current logo and skin is fine for a first glance. Then, if said user were to join, he could set his own skin/logo preferences. Stooben Rooben (talk) How easy would it be for other people to create their own monobooks and could this site handle it if there were over 50 or over 5000 different monobooks? Pikax (talk) GhostJam and Rooben: That's a brilliant idea. I don't know why myself and other Wikia & Wikipedia editors didn't think of it: multiple official skins! Of course, we'd still need a standard, but it severely takes the pressure off of picking just one. Stumpers (talk) Miscellaneous None at the moment.