MarioWiki:Proposals: Difference between revisions
(→Comments: fixing sig., adding comment) |
No edit summary |
||
Line 61: | Line 61: | ||
#{{User|Zafum}} - I do agree with that they souldn't be annoying or porely done, but i do not think that they need to be removed from being the main picure. | #{{User|Zafum}} - I do agree with that they souldn't be annoying or porely done, but i do not think that they need to be removed from being the main picure. | ||
#{{User|Mario3v}} - Per Zafum's comment. | #{{User|Mario3v}} - Per Zafum's comment. | ||
#{{User|The Gravitator}} - Per Zafum. | |||
====Comments==== | ====Comments==== |
Revision as of 04:13, January 24, 2009
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
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. New FeaturesNone at the moment. RemovalsNone at the moment. Splits & MergesNone at the moment. ChangesDisallow Animations as Main Pictures in ArticlesOK, so me and good 'ol Son of Suns (talk) had a little talk here on animations in articles. This discussion can be found here. Now, the article in question had an animation as the main image of the article. This proposal is to remove all animations in all articles. Reasoning:
Now, the exception to this proposed rule is when the animation is actually showing something other than how the thing looks in-game. For example, on Blooper, there is animation that shows how a Blooper moves. This is useful because describing the erratic, zigzag movement of a Blooper is quite difficult in words. Usually, "useful" animations can be found low on the page in large articles. So now I turn it over to you: to eradicate, or not to eradicate? Proposer: Bloc Partier (talk) Disallow Animations
Allow Animations
CommentsPlease hold while I make a semi-complete listing of useful animations. It will contain very few articles. Feel free to point me out some useful ones. - Bloc Partier (talk)
What about Amazing Flyin' Hammer Bro.'s image? Also, while this isn't so bad (it does a good job at showing the difference in how they look and move), the first gif on the Paragoomba article is unnecessary. - Walkazo (talk) I think the problem with some of these images is that they aren't "natural" to the game. Like, they are way too quick. Any animated image that actually matches the motion of the game should be fine. (Or slower, to show movement details.) -- Son of Suns (talk) Maybe voting to allow/disallow animations is too extreme. There'll be too many exceptions to the rule. It would be better if we just voted to agree or disagree that there should be less animations, and that making more should be discouraged unless there's a really good reason for it. Then we can delete the existing bad images on a case-by-case basis (which is basically what we're doing now to find the exceptions). - Walkazo (talk) It is possible to remove those funny animated sprites, like characters when idle (i.e: The Paragoomba image) these images are really monotonous and don't say almost anything... Coincollector (talk)
MiscellaneousNone at the moment. |