MarioWiki:Proposals/Archive/14: Difference between revisions
mNo edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
Line 388: | Line 388: | ||
::But wouldn't that only work if Nintendo releases their work under the Creative Commons ShareAlike license? {{User|Yoshario}} | ::But wouldn't that only work if Nintendo releases their work under the Creative Commons ShareAlike license? {{User|Yoshario}} | ||
:::Or...you could just make the licensing templates that we're missing. I think I've made one or two. {{User|Stooben Rooben}} | :::Or...you could just make the licensing templates that we're missing. I think I've made one or two. {{User|Stooben Rooben}} | ||
}} | |||
===Babies=== | |||
<span style="color:red;font-family:Comic Sans MS;font-size:150%">NO SPLIT 10-5</span> | |||
Okay, so I was going through the Wiki, and I noticed that it said Baby Mario and Baby Luigi first appeared in The Adventures of Super Mario Bros. 3. That’s false! They first appeared in Yoshi’s Island! A similar situation goes for babies Peach, Daisy and Bowser! I say we split the pages into Baby Mario and Baby Mario (SMB3 Cartoon), Baby Luigi and Baby Luigi (SMB3 Cartoon), Baby Peach and Baby Peach (SMBSS), Baby Daisy and Baby Daisy (movie), and Baby Bowser and Baby Bowser (cartoons). I hope that will clear things up. | |||
{{scroll box|content= | |||
'''Proposer:''' {{User|Rabidchomp}} <br> | |||
'''Deadline:''' June 7, 2009, 15:00 | |||
====Support==== | |||
#{{User|Rabidchomp}} Per above. | |||
#{{User|FourPaperHeroes}} Per above. | |||
#[[User:Lu-igi board|Lu-igi board]] per above | |||
#{{User|Chamchir9482}} because the baby mario in toddler terrors of time travel isn't really a baby mario but one reduced in size and many features reduced. He's still the same plumber. | |||
#{{User|RymanX}} The babies in the cartoons/movies are completely different characters than those in the games, and thus deserve their own articles to avoid confusion. | |||
====Oppose==== | |||
#{{user|Coincollector}} I think is not necessary. According to the Mariowiki guidelines, we make the history (biography) of the character starting in his or her very first appeareance (in this case, SMB3 cartoon was in 1990, where the baby characters appeared first, and Yoshi's Island was in 1995, where they appeared later). | |||
#{{user|Luigifreak}} Per coincollecter. We wouldn't split up Mario into two articles, so these characters aren't really different. | |||
#{{user|Yoshario}} Per Coincollector. | |||
#[[User:Super Mario Bros.|Mario & Luigi]] Per Coincollector and my reasons below. | |||
#{{User|Walkazo}} - Per Coincollector. | |||
#{{User|Mr.C}} - Per CoinCollector. | |||
#{{User|Cobold}} - I don't see this clearing anything up. It just creates additional pages where I see no need for them. What's the difference between a baby appearing in a cartoon and a baby appearing in a game? It's just overcomplicating things. | |||
#{{User|Time Q}}: Per Coincollector. Rabidchomp, you don't even state ''why'' you think that the babies' first appearance was in ''YI'' rather than in the ''SMB3'' cartoon. How can we support your idea then? | |||
#{{User|Stooben Rooben}} - Per Coincollector. | |||
#{{User|GreenKoopa}} - If we made seperate articles for SMB3 Baby Mario and Luigi, we'd have to do the same for all the other characters that are substantially different in the cartoons. So, this puts us with not only Baby Mario/Luigi (SMB3 cartoon) but many, many other articles, including Mario/Luigi (SMB cartoons) and Live Action Mario/Luigi (SMB cartoons). And that's just focusing on the bros! Theres also Yoshi(who spoke in a broken sort of english in the cartoon, but speaks in syllables from his name in the games) and the Koopalings (all have different names and some have certain traits changed)! Also, I agree with Coincollector besides. | |||
====Comments==== | |||
Erm... i'm 99% sure that the adventures of super maio bros 3 (which was a cartoon) was released long before Yoshis island, and therefore the babies were seen in the cartoon first. That being said, I don't quite understand this proposal. What is your reasoning behind splitting the pages? If it's just that you think that they were seen in Yoshis island first, than thats not a valid reason. The babies in smb3 are really the same as their yoshis island counterparts. {{User|Luigifreak}} | |||
No, they're not! They are two totally different media (i.e. video games, cartoons, etc.), so I consider them different characters. {{User|Rabidchomp}} | |||
:It does not matter whether they are different media, this is the '''Super Mario Wiki''', not the '''Super Mario Wiki of Video Games and Not Other Media'''. In example, if regular Mario (not the baby characters that were referred to in the above proposal) appears in the video game and the cartoon, does that justify splitting that article because they are in different media? I personally don't think so. And it is true that Baby Mario first appeared in the Adventures of SMB3 and then Yoshi's Island. It doesn't matter whther their appearances were completely different, they still have the same concept of a character: a baby version of Mario (and this applies to all other baby characters). [[User:Super Mario Bros.|Mario & Luigi]] | |||
:Oops, I didn't see that luigifreak had already used the Mario example... Well, it is still a good example to make, anyway. [[User:Super Mario Bros.|Mario & Luigi]] [[User talk:Super Mario Bros.|(talk)]] | |||
Regardless of what the wiki is, these are different people, and thus deserve different articles. If Baby Mario (games) and baby Mario (cartoon)get the same article, then I don't see why [[Poochy]] and [[Poochie]] deserve sepetate articles, the differences are the same. {{User|RymanX}} | |||
If RabidChomp was Steve, I'd see this happening. Mr.C | |||
:Who's Steve? -Rabidchomp | |||
::[[User:Porplemontage|Porplemontage]], the site owner. —{{user|KPH2293}} | |||
Couldn't we possibly edit the template to have both "First game appearance" and "First television appearance"? - [[User:Pokemega32|Pokemega32]] 06:52, 7 June 2009 (EDT) | |||
:Well, we could, but I don't really see a reason why we should. {{User:Time Q/sig}} 07:19, 7 June 2009 (EDT) | |||
::In addition to what Time Q said, I think it would be pretty unorganized to do that for a template. Perhaps we could have 2 separate templates, one for first game appearance and another for first television appearance? I personally think it is more organized than having one template with both those things. {{User|Super Mario Bros.}} | |||
:::But on second thought, which template are we talking about? If you are talking about the template at the beginning of each page, then exclude my idea. If we are talking about a template that goes on the bottom of the page, then consider my idea. {{User|Super Mario Bros.}} | |||
I Mario Freak say... WHAT ABOUT BABY YOSHI! | |||
}} | }} |
Revision as of 16:53, June 7, 2009
MarioWiki:Proposals/Archive Template Re-Split Orange YoshiSPLIT 7-0 I think it wasn't a good idea to merge Brown Yoshi to Orange Yoshi. It only was merged because of that Brown Yoshi was replaced by Orange Yoshi. Worst is, there first stand, after the merge, that Brown WAS Orange. But even thought it is in the same color group, yellow, it can still be seen that the two colors are different to each other. Orange is a mix of yellow and red, brown is much darker and a bit more yellow (meaning you can't consider brown as orange, only because it looks like each other!). If you think to keep merge, because of too less text, then add more info! That's why I think we must re-split Orange Yoshi to Orange Yoshi and Brown Yoshi. Proposer: Arend (talk) Re-Split
Keep MergeCommentsRevive MarioWiki:Pipe PlazaREVIVE 8-0 I know many of you will say "What for? We have the Talk:Main Page" but i'll tell you what, that talk is that, a simple talk page, all unorganized. On the other hand, the Pipe Plaza provides good info, is neat and organized. If this proposal succeeds, we would post Mario related things in the Pipe Plaza talk and Technical issues in Talk:Main Page. Also, we would need a team of loyal, active and trustworthy users to keep the page nice, current and organized. Proposer: Tucayo (talk) Bring it back from the world of dead
Let it rest in peace for the eternityComments@NG - You can't change the editing permission for one specific locked page for patrollers, its impossible with MediaWiki software. You can however, install an extension that would lock it to all users who don't have the password. But I think an extra extension for one page would take to much time and work. If we were to do this, I think we should just lock it to registered users. --Yoshario (talk) We need to tell sysops about this,either to unprotect it,or to take care of it by thmselves, or just to allow patrollers to edit itTucayo (talk)
Mario Award Voting on Main PageVOTING ON MAIN PAGE 9-0 I've already cleared this mostly with Steve, but I want to make sure there is a majority agreement on this – Remember when we only had 62 voters for Mario Awards I? 2007, yeah. N00bsday...then that turned to 93 in 2008, nice improvement. But my goodness, 2000 votes a week on the poll...and 140 this year if the 50% increase trend continues....no way I'm settling for that, man! :P Overall provisions of this proposal:
I will take care of any and all costs necessary to get polls that will suit the needs for the Mario Awards (hiding results, allowing write-ins, deleting duplicate votes / all by an IP). Google Forms is an excellent free service that is my backup choice right now, but two polls have suffered from duplicate voting (Funky Kong as Favorite Kong comes to mind) and that is an absolute no here...but again, I'll take care of all that, please let it not factor into your votes. While I could put all the new polls on MarioWiki:Anniversary and link it in the announcement line...the polls being right there for everyone on the most hit page of the wiki by far will be very noticeable and should be a significant increase in voters. Proposer: (who else) Wayoshi (talk) Let's Get Thousands of Voters
Keep it to MarioWiki:AnniversaryCommentsWayo: what will we do with the "other" votes. they cant be forgotten Tucayo (talk) No Sigs on Featured Images PageDO NOT ALLOW SIGS ON FEATURED IMAGES PAGE 4-0 Though this may seem minor now, I have seen one or two sigs that have altered vote counts on that page, and if we allow sigs on this page, eventually as the amount of images on the page grows, more and more sigs will mess up vote counts. Proposer: Zafum (talk) No Sigs
Keep SigsCommentsYou dont have to make a proposal about this Tucayo (talk) See my proposal below. Super Mario Bros. (talk) Change "No Signature" PoliciesNO CHANGES 1-8 Before you vote against this rule, listen to this for one second. I think that we should reverse, well, partially reverse, the rule that eliminates signatures on voting pages. I think that the rule should be changed to "no signatures that ruin vote counts". For example, if you have seen my signature or Walkazo's signature, you will see that it would probably not ruin vote counts. Here are some ideas for my proposed rule:
Users can make a second signature page that they could use specifically for proposals and other voting pages if their signature does not meet these requirements, use their regular signature if it does meet the requirements, or use the {{User|Username Here}} format. Proposer: Super Mario Bros. (talk) Support
Oppose
CommentsI changed the elimination of votes part, which the replacement being written in bold. Super Mario Bros. (talk) Movie SectionNO "MOVIES" SECTION 1-10 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) SupportOppose
CommentsHyper Guy, here is a suggestion, try asking this guy if you could have this on the 'Shroom. Super Mario Bros. (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)
Yes, he is, he just can't use {{user:4DJONG/sig}}, or ~~~ if he has a custom sig. Yoshario (talk) MrV: You dont know what were talking about, right? Tucayo (talk) No Offensive MaterialDON'T CREATE OFFENSIVE MATERIAL RULE 1-9 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.
Proposer: Super Mario Bros. (talk) Create New Rule
Leave As Is
CommentsSplit Proposals Page and RulesNO SPLIT 2-5 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) Support
Oppose
CommentsIf 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) Eliminate Mainstream SignaturesALLOW SIGNATURES 3-5 I was listening to what one of the fellow wiki members have said, and I actually think my proposal about allowing 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. If this proposal passes, signatures will be banned from MarioWiki and Help talk pages as well as other pages that say that they are, but will be allowed on article talk pages, user pages, and user talk 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) Support
Oppose
CommentsI 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)
Limiting sigs to User space does seem a tad extreme. Maybe they should just be banned from MarioWiki and Help talk pages, but allowed on article talk pages. - Walkazo (talk)
Add pronunciationsI think that it would help the wiki if we added pronunciations. This would allow users to know how to say hard names to say. The pronunciation would not have to be in the title it could be the first time the name is said in the article. If a article started like this, Mario is, we would change it to, Mario (Mar-e-o) is, or we could change it to Mario pronouced Mar-e-o is. I still don't know how to pronouce Cackaletta. This would also help make the wiki look more offical, after all the Mariowiki baseicley is a dictionary for all things Mario. Proposer: Dark boo (talk) Support
Oppose
CommentsIt sounds good in theory, but I don't think it'd actually work. For one thing, we can't be sure of some pronunciations; see Talk:Dimentio for one example: we're pretty sure it's "Dime-en-tee-o", but there is some doubt. Another example is the X-Nauts: it's supposedly pronounced "cross-not", but then you have statements like "an X-Yux" implying it's been read as "ex-yux", not "cross-yux" on at least one in-game occasion. Other names aren't offered pronunciations at all, like Cackletta - I'd guess it's "Cak-let-ah", but that's an assumption, not a fact; and seeing a speculation's not allowed on mainspace, I couldn't write that down in good faith. The pronunciation of X-Nauts and their affiliates is significant and is already noted on their articles, but otherwise, adding pronunciations to some articles but leaving unverifiable ones would just look inconsistent. - Walkazo (talk) We could put possible pronunciation on unsure ones, and for the actually pronunciation for those we could just put the most common one or the most likley one, or we could always put more then one pronunciation Dark boo (talk) 2257: Yeah, the IPA is a good way of putting pronunciations (and "informal" spellings such as "Mar-e-o" could be put additionally). I could also help with that. But I don't think we need a proposal for it. Where the pronunciation appears to be interesting, we can put it. (Only problem about IPA is, that some of the symbols don't seem to be displayed correctly - see this article and its talk). Time Q (talk) I think that even if this proposal fails, we should be allowed to add pronunciations to articles about subjects whose pronunciations are officially confirmed and not self-explaining. This could be helpful for non-English names as well. I am not voting because I don't think I agree with either option. Time Q (talk) Allow grammar edits of other users on talk pagesDON'T ALLOW GRAMMAR EDITS OF OTHER PEOPLE'S COMMENTS 1-13 I recently learned of a rule that says that users are not allowed to edit other users' comments on talk pages. That includes their own talk page. I prefer to use proper grammar, spelling, and punctuation and think that it is a great idea to allow users to edit other users' comments for grammar, spelling, and punctuation purposes. Proposer: Ralphfan (talk) AllowDon't Allow
CommentsThe content isn't changed; it will look more professional.
I really would like to support this, but there's a big, big problem... This is THE INTERNET. The bane of all grammar and spelling >_>. Dom (talk) Make Rule for Deletion of Unlicensed ImagesNO SUCH RULE 1-6 Since the is no rule set in stone for the deletion of Unlicensed images, I am proposing that we delete all week-old unlicensed images. This policy will enforce the licensing of images, therefore there will be no copyright issues. Proposer: Yoshario (talk) SupportOppose
Comments@Walkazo There isn't a license for everything. Like derivative works of copyrighted Mario images like user comics and sprite recolors. And there can't be a license for those images because its not covered under fair use. Yoshario (talk) As i told Yoshario in chat, maybe (if its possible),to make choosing a license obligatory to upload an image, and maybe adding an "Other" option Tucayo (talk)
It doesn't matter, it still wouldn't be covered under fair use. Yoshario (talk)
BabiesNO SPLIT 10-5 Okay, so I was going through the Wiki, and I noticed that it said Baby Mario and Baby Luigi first appeared in The Adventures of Super Mario Bros. 3. That’s false! They first appeared in Yoshi’s Island! A similar situation goes for babies Peach, Daisy and Bowser! I say we split the pages into Baby Mario and Baby Mario (SMB3 Cartoon), Baby Luigi and Baby Luigi (SMB3 Cartoon), Baby Peach and Baby Peach (SMBSS), Baby Daisy and Baby Daisy (movie), and Baby Bowser and Baby Bowser (cartoons). I hope that will clear things up. Proposer: Rabidchomp (talk) Support
Oppose
CommentsErm... i'm 99% sure that the adventures of super maio bros 3 (which was a cartoon) was released long before Yoshis island, and therefore the babies were seen in the cartoon first. That being said, I don't quite understand this proposal. What is your reasoning behind splitting the pages? If it's just that you think that they were seen in Yoshis island first, than thats not a valid reason. The babies in smb3 are really the same as their yoshis island counterparts. Luigifreak (talk) No, they're not! They are two totally different media (i.e. video games, cartoons, etc.), so I consider them different characters. Rabidchomp (talk)
Regardless of what the wiki is, these are different people, and thus deserve different articles. If Baby Mario (games) and baby Mario (cartoon)get the same article, then I don't see why Poochy and Poochie deserve sepetate articles, the differences are the same. RymanX (talk) If RabidChomp was Steve, I'd see this happening. Mr.C
Couldn't we possibly edit the template to have both "First game appearance" and "First television appearance"? - Pokemega32 06:52, 7 June 2009 (EDT)
|