MarioWiki:Proposals/Archive/25: Difference between revisions

From the Super Mario Wiki, the Mario encyclopedia
Jump to navigationJump to search
mNo edit summary
(Proposal Archiving.)
Line 341: Line 341:
====Delete those entries====
====Delete those entries====
#{{User|Reversinator}} Per proposal.
#{{User|Reversinator}} Per proposal.
#{{User|Luigi is OSAM}} It should only were going to allow an enemy that debuts in a game to be considered referenced every time it appears in a game, then, for example, [[Super Mario Bros.]] could have a reference section listing every game [[Goomba|Goombas]] appear in, and their role in those games, the same for [[Koopa|Koopas]], [[Piranha Plant|Piranha Plants]], etc. It doesn't make any sense, and is not really a reference. If a spin-off series mentions something from a game (eg: a sticker in SSBB), ''then'' it could be considered a reference because that is (at least partially) intended to be a reference.
#{{User|Luigi is OSAM}} It should only have real references.
#{{User|Bop1996}} Per proposal. If we were going to allow an enemy that debuts in a game to be considered referenced every time it appears in a game, then, for example, [[Super Mario Bros.]] could have a reference section listing every game [[Goomba|Goombas]] appear in, and their role in those games, the same for [[Koopa|Koopas]], [[Piranha Plant|Piranha Plants]], etc. It doesn't make any sense, and is not really a reference. If a spin-off series mentions something from a game (eg: a sticker in SSBB), ''then'' it could be considered a reference because that is (at least partially) intended to be a reference.
#{{User|Iggykoopa}} Per all however i do feel that it is a reference when something like a [[Spike]] reappears or if say [[Phanto]] or the [[Goomba's Shoe]] ever came back
#{{User|Iggykoopa}} Per all however i do feel that it is a reference when something like a [[Spike]] reappears or if say [[Phanto]] or the [[Goomba's Shoe]] ever came back
#{{User|Reddragon19k}} Lose it! Per all if you please.
#{{User|Reddragon19k}} Lose it! Per all if you please.
Line 370: Line 371:
References are not that simple; if they were, a concise rule set would be developed already. But as we do not know what Nintendo was thinking, we can't do this. I ''definitely'' don't think that every game with a Goomba in it is a reference to SMB, or that every game with Mario is a reference to the original DK. But sometimes when enemies appear, it is a reference (i.e. Dino Piranha in SMG is referenced by Peewee Piranha in SMG2 (sorry, couldn't think of anything better)). So it's complicated. And ''then'', to make matters more complicated - music. Sometimes music is remixed music from another game, sometimes it's the same, sometimes it's different, but we can't be sure whether music that sounds like it's from SMB3 is actually a reference to SMB3 or they just ran out of sound files so they remixed something. Like I said, the references to other games sections are very complicated. {{User|Marioguy1}}
References are not that simple; if they were, a concise rule set would be developed already. But as we do not know what Nintendo was thinking, we can't do this. I ''definitely'' don't think that every game with a Goomba in it is a reference to SMB, or that every game with Mario is a reference to the original DK. But sometimes when enemies appear, it is a reference (i.e. Dino Piranha in SMG is referenced by Peewee Piranha in SMG2 (sorry, couldn't think of anything better)). So it's complicated. And ''then'', to make matters more complicated - music. Sometimes music is remixed music from another game, sometimes it's the same, sometimes it's different, but we can't be sure whether music that sounds like it's from SMB3 is actually a reference to SMB3 or they just ran out of sound files so they remixed something. Like I said, the references to other games sections are very complicated. {{User|Marioguy1}}
:I agree with Marioguy. Nintendo seems to love including nostalgic references to other games, and then not specifying whether it is a reference or not. Where does that leave us? It seems that this is going to be a case-by-case situation. However, I feel that this discussion is clouding the issue a bit. {{User|Bop1996}}
:I agree with Marioguy. Nintendo seems to love including nostalgic references to other games, and then not specifying whether it is a reference or not. Where does that leave us? It seems that this is going to be a case-by-case situation. However, I feel that this discussion is clouding the issue a bit. {{User|Bop1996}}
}}
===Split <nowiki>Category:Donkey Kong Levels</nowiki> into Separate Categories===
<span style="color:red;font-family:Comic Sans MS;font-size:150%">Don't split 21-24</span>
This is my first proposal. There are many games in the [[Donkey Kong series]]. The category, Donkey Kong Levels, there is too much content. It has about 5 different games in one category. I think we should make categories for each game. For example, '''<nowiki>Category:Donkey Kong Country Levels</nowiki>''', etc. It would be easier to find levels and it wouldn't take up  2 pages! We should make one for every game such as [[Donkey Kong Country 2]], [[Donkey Kong Country 3]], [[DK: King of Swing]], etc. It just seems easier to navigate levels. We should also delete the original one if we make other categories. I will add a section for making new categories and I will add one for keep the original one as is.
'''Proposer''': {{User|DKPetey99}}<br>
'''Voting start''': March 24, 2011 0:00<br>
'''Deadline''': <s>March 32, 2011, 0:00 GMT</s> '''Extended''': <s>April 8th, 2011, 0:00 GMT</s>, April 15th, 2011, 0:00 GMT
{{Scrollbox|content=
====Make a New Category====
#{{User|DKPetey99}} - It is my proposal and I think it would help the wiki ''and'' other users by making it simple to navigate levels by games.
#{{User|M&SG}} - That sounds like a good idea.
#{{User|Kaptain K. Rool}} - Per M&SG.
#{{User|SWFlash}} Per proposer.
#{{User|Reddragon19k}} Love it! Per SW and Kaptain K. Rool!
#{{User|Bowser's luma}} Per all.
#{{User|Akfamilyhome}} That'd make it more simple. Per all.
#{{User|Magikrazy51}} We don't have all the Mario <s>games</s> levels in one category.
#{{User|Yoshidude99}} Per Magikrazy51.
#{{User|Nicke8}} Per Magikrazy51 also.
#{{User|Boowhoplaysgames}} Per All
#{{User|Ilovemarioandtoad}} Per All
#{{User|Lucas777123}} Per All.
#{{User|IGGY7735}} Per all.
#{{User|BoygeyDude}} Why not? Per all
#{{User|Allycat0925}} Per all.
#{{User|Superfiremario}} Per all.
#{{User|YoshiGo99}} Per all.
#{{User|SuperYoshiBros}} Per all.
#{{User|DK and Diddy Kong vs Bowser and Bowser Jr.}} Per DKPetey99.
#{{User|yoshiyoshiyoshi}} Per all
====Keep Original Category====
#{{User|Walkazo}} - Just use the games' navigation templates: they're supposed to have all the levels listed, and generally they'll be arranged by world, which is a much better way to organize the levels than the alphabetical categories. It's better if all games, ''DK'' or otherwise, simply have general categories for all their subjects.
#{{User|Bop1996}} Per Walkazo. I don't see why this is necessary.
#{{User|Paper Yoshi}} - Per Walkazo and Fawfulfury65's comment below (although FF65 hasn't voted yet).
#{{User|Luigi is OSAM}}- Is this really necessary? It's sort of like going to the characters catagory and complaining about how they don't have a catagory for just characters from cirtian games. I mean, if you know your alphabet, it should be pretty easy.
#{{User|Iggykoopa}}- per Walkazo and isnt Donkey Kong  technically it's own franchise
#{{User|Yoshiwaker}} - per all.
#{{User|Reversinator}} Per all.
#{{User|Baby Mario Bloops}} - Per Walkazo above and Fawfulfury65 below.
#{{User|MrConcreteDonkey}} - Per all.
#{{user|Bloc Partier}} - Per Walkazo.
#{{User|Fawfulfury65}} Per my comments and everyone else.
#{{User|Mario4Ever}} Per all.
#{{User|UltraMario3000}} Per all.
#{{User|Edofenrir}} - Per Walkazo and FF65.
#{{User|Gamefreak75}} - Per all.
#{{User|Super Mario Bros.}} &ndash; Per all.
#{{User|Theguywithtwohats}}- per all
#{{User|Marioguy1}} - I believe that we tried to get rid of categories that list things that should be in a navbox. That's my way of saying "per Walkazo".
#{{User|Xzelion}} - Per Walkazo
#{{User|Turboo}} - per all
#{{User|Glowsquid}} - per Walkazo.
#{{User|Smasher 101}} - Per all
#{{User|Lu-igi board}} - Per all
#{{User|LeftyGreenMario}} If a giant list sounds cumbersome, good old CTRL + F will help. Otherwise, I do not find this proposal necessary. The category is general, but it is not so vague that we need to make subcategories out of it. That's what it sounds like to me anyway. This is a ''per all'' war, isn't it?
====Comments====
We shouldn't delete the Donkey Kong levels category because it can be useful in finding many DK levels. Also, if we really want to find information about a Donkey Kong Country 2 level or something, why can't we just look in [[:Category:Donkey Kong Country 2: Diddy's Kong Quest]], or the category for any other game? There's also templates that you can use to easily find levels in one of those games. {{User|Fawfulfury65}}
MS&G: You know your vote is invalid. You can't simply say, "Good idea" if you want to support. {{User|BabyLuigiOnFire}}
BabyLuigionfire why can't you just because you have nothing new to add doesnt mean it isnt valid other wise like 20 votes from other propsals that say per all
{{User|Iggykoopa}}
:''If anyone has an idea about improving the wiki or managing its community, but feels 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 the other users, who will then vote about whether or not they think the idea should be used.'' Simply saying "Good idea!" is NOT a strong argument. And please don't backsass me like that, it's very rude. {{User|BabyLuigiOnFire}}
::@Iggykoopa it doesn't matter that it has its own Franchise, the categories should be made into games {{User|DKPetey99}}
Baby luigi on fire the rules state that Every vote should have a reason accompanying it. Agreeing with or seconding a previously mentioned reason given by another user is accepted.{{User|Iggykoopa}}
:::That is still not a strong reason. I suggest the very least was to "per" the user. And leaving a vote blank in the support section is still an agreement, but we still delete it anyway since the reason is not strong enough. {{User|BabyLuigiOnFire}}
Like I, {{User|Magikrazy51}} said in the opposing section, "WE DONT HAVE ALL THE MARIO <s>GAMES</s> LEVELS IN ONE CATEGORY!".
:@Magikrazy this proposal is to split the enemies catagory of DKC, not the game catagories. {{User|Yoshiwaker}}
::Actually, it's for the levels in the game. Read the proposal, we were both wrong. {{User|Magikrazy51}}
@Babyluigionfire how is saying per all not the same as saying good idea #{{User|Iggykoopa}}
:Because saying "per all" is like repeating what the users said. Saying "good idea" is just as good as saying nothing when you support/oppose. However, I sometimes see "per all" votes with severe skepticism. {{User|BabyLuigiOnFire}}
Babyluigionfire how is saying per all any different than saying good idea when your agreeing with a proposal {{User|Iggykoopa}}
:Per all means, "I would say the same thing as everyone else, but it would take up extra space and time." It takes up less time if you read through the votes and say, "Hmm, I agree with what (insert one to three users here) says, so I'll say per all and reference all those votes at once." However, sometimes per all votes are used lightly, which is what I think BLOF said, mostly in cases where there was no vote that had complete reasoning. {{User|Bop1996}}
im confused are there votes invalid are not? {{User|Iggykoopa}}
:The ones that say "I like this idea" or "This sounds like a good idea" have no substance, so a sysop may decide to remove them. The votes that say "Per all" are perfectly valid, so long as someone out there said something valid. {{User|Bop1996}}
Speaking of that... @Lucas777123: You vote is invalid. Please add a reason on why you think this is a good idea, or I'll remove your vote. {{User|Fawfulfury65}}
:@YoshiGo99: Your vote is equivalent to Lucas777123's vote. Lucas has been warned already, so you should change your vote too. {{User|Bop1996}}
I think to split the category, because to those who oppose, and this is soley my thought, but: It's like saying let's merge all of the Mario series levels into one category, and list all of them '''''in''''' one category. Then, we list all hte levels, under one category. {{User|Boowhoplaysgames}}
:It took me a while to understand ''what'' you were saying. If you are saying what I think you are saying, which is that if we keep the levels from one series merged, we will eventually list all the levels on the wiki in one category, that is the wrong way to argue. It's known as "slippery slope", and it's when you extrapolate a disastrous outcome eventually based off one or two plausible extrapolations. If not, it's probably circular reasoning, which is self-explanatory. {{User|Bop1996}}
[[User talk:YoshiGo99|And you]] [[User talk:BoygeyDude|gotta]] [[User talk:IGGY7735|support me]], [[User talk:Ilovemarioandtoad|too!]] It seems like some people are supporting this just because they were asked to. That's just what it looks like to me. {{User|Yoshiwaker}}
:Asking people to vote is fine, and telling people that their objection to a proposal or FA suggestion has been fixed is fine, but I think I saw a sysop ask someone not to ask people to vote a specific side, and promising to do something in return is a little suspicious... {{User|Bop1996}}
::Which sysyop? {{User|Reversinator}}
:::Not sure, I was looking through a bunch of talk pages this morning, but I ''think'' I saw it discouraged. Anyway, it's probably not a good idea to ask people to vote a certain side unless you direct them to a reason seen on the proposal. If you just say "vote support" or "please oppose" it could discourage people to read the proposal and see the arguments against... Not suggesting anything, but it doesn't seem like the greatest idea... {{User|Bop1996}}
I greatly discourage anyone to tell another user to vote on a certain side. Supporting a proposal because someone told you to is a horrible idea, but I do feel that some users have been doing this, since a lot of the supporters have been asked to support it. I hope that all of the voters have read through the proposal, thought about it, and have read through the opinions of others, because if not, we may not have what's best for the Wiki. Asking them to vote for the proposal is OK, though, as they might not feel forced to vote on the side they were told. {{User|Fawfulfury65}}
:Per FF65. It would really suck if a proposal passed simply because the people supporting it had more friends, and I'd also prefer it if people don't go soliciting support from their buddies, but there's no rule or anything saying that you absolutely cannot do that. If "friend votes" start becoming ''disruptive'', the admins might have to become more aggressive about dissuading this behaviour, but hopefully it won't come to that. We can also hope that the friends at least vote based on how they personally feel about a proposal, even if the only reason they're checking it out is because they were called over by their pal. - {{User|Walkazo}}
I agree with this, and Im all for FF65. I think it isn't a good thing, that you vote on a certain side, because someone told you; DKPetey99 has done a good job not telling other people to vote support: Me and my bro. both got messages saying to vote on his proposal, but didn't say which side. We both simply voted support, because we had a discussion on what we think is best. I greatly discourage any favors, or things a sysop, or anyone, to do so they get the most support/no support. This is a fair Proposal, if the issue with the one sysop wasn't happening with this proposal that is...{{User|Boowhoplaysgames}}
}}
}}

Revision as of 19:23, April 13, 2011


Any proposal decided and past is archived here. Use the scroll box to see votes and comments. This page is protected to maintain the discussion as was. Please add archived proposals to the bottom of the page.

MarioWiki:Proposals/Archive Template


Allow autoconfirmed users edit other users' userpages

DON'T ALLOW 1-34

Recently I have seen red links, redirect links, etc. on other peoples userpages along with deleted images and I was wondering if us autoconfirmed users can edit their userpages for errors, etc. It really doesn't make sense that only sysops get to edit this so I set up this proposal. Also, on Wikia we get to edit others' userpages along with most other wikis.

Proposer: Kaptain K. Rool (talk)
Voting start: March 19, 2011 14:30 GMT
Deadline: March 26, 2011 3:30 GMT

Support

  1. Kaptain K. Rool (talk) - Because I made this proposal.

Oppose

  1. Yoshiwaker (talk) Sysops only edit userpages if they need to. This would let almost anybody put anything on your user page. It's just pointless anyway.
  2. M&SG (talk) - I agree with Yoshiwaker.
  3. Ultrahammer5365 (talk) - Per all. You shouldn't be allowed to mess with other people's userpages.
  4. Zero777 (talk) I am Zero! Per all. Zero signing out.
  5. Tails777 (talk) Per all
  6. Bowser's luma (talk) Yes, let us support vandalism.
  7. Super Mario Bros. (talk) - Ask a sysop to fix it. I believe the "Keep Your Hands to Yourself" extension was added to the wiki by Porple because vandals were messing with user pages. It makes complete sense that only sysops and the user that owns the user space gets to edit it. And nobody cares if you can edit others' user pages on Wikia, as we aren't Wikia.
  8. Phoenix (talk) No way, I'm sorry, but there's really no reason...
  9. Fawfulfury65 (talk) Imagine a vandal coming onto your userpage and replacing all of your personal information with fake, unnecessary and inappropriate information that could be offensive to you. This is why only sysops can edit other peoples' userpages. If there's a problem with a userpage, you are expected to ask a sysop to remove it. It only takes a minute to ask.
  10. MrConcreteDonkey (talk) - Per all. Only Sysops can be trusted with these powers. In my opinion, you've made just another proposal to suit your personal wants.
  11. Bop1996 (talk) Per all. I like how you have control of your userspace and I don't want a vandal messing up my page, even if I can revert it later.
  12. Yoshidude99 (talk) I don't want some random person editing my userpage.
  13. Reversinator (talk) Per all.
  14. Ralphfan (talk) - Per all.
  15. UltraMario3000 (talk) Per all.
  16. Luigi is OSAM (talk) Ummmm editing another person's page? Most users are autoconfirmed, and you never know when someone could VANDILIZE!
  17. Edofenrir (talk) - None of your points is significant enough to outweight the benefits this extention provides.
  18. SWFlash (talk) I've just imagined how my userpage was edited…that's……:(
  19. Pokémon Trainer Mario (talk) I think once a vandal moved a sysops userpage.
  20. Walkazo (talk) - Per all.
  21. Paper Yoshi (talk) - Per all.
  22. DK and Diddy Kong vs Bowser and Bowser Jr. (talk) - Per Bowser's luma and Yoshidude99.
  23. T.c.w7468 (talk) Per all.
  24. BabyLuigiOnFire (talk) Only if we autoconfirmed users can ONLY have the ability to remove fake new message boxes, but this is all or nothing, so I say nothing. Per all.
  25. Baby Mario Bloops (talk) - Where to begin...hmmm...oh yes, no! There is too much vandals around the wiki to even let this happen. Not only that, but some users don't want other users putting crap on their page.
  26. Gamefreak75 (talk) - Per my comment below and the rest above.
  27. Mariomario64 (talk) - Per all. Plus, why give normal "everyday" users (I guess you could say that) access to editing other users' own pages? If you ask me, that makes no sense.
  28. New Super Mario (talk) I like my userpage and don't want anyone editing my page.
  29. Magikrazy51 (talk)Okay, so if your proposal passes, I'll erase everything and put on it "?". You could lose a lot of data that way. Per all.
  30. Geniusguy445 (talk) Aren't talk page messages enough to offer help? "Your link to [Mario]] should really be [[Mario]]. Glad I could help." Or would it be better to have your entire user page destroyed except for that one correct Mario link.
  31. Count Bonsula (talk) - Per all.
  32. Iggykoopa (talk) per all
  33. Akfamilyhome (talk) Definitely opposing. Having people wreck up your own userpage isn't fun. Why don't inform them about the error on their talk page instead?
  34. Superdaisygirl (talk)I hardly have anything on my page but I still don't want someone making changes to it.

Comments

@Yoshiwaker: We can revert vandalism if they do put junk on our userpages and we do need to help the community too. Kaptain K. Rool (talk)

@Kaptain: Is there ever any really good reason to edit someone else's userpage? Yoshiwaker (talk)
Err yes... to replace images and fix red links. Kaptain K. Rool (talk)
I don't think that's a very good reason, but I'll just stop arguing because this would go on forever. Yoshiwaker (talk)
@Kaptain K. Rool - Well, that may be true, but what happens when some vandal whams your userpage? I mean, do you really want to be constantly looking over your shoulder and reverting edits every other day...? Phoenix (talk) 15:52, 18 March 2011 (EDT)

I think we would need to talk to Steve about this even if the proposal did pass... Marioguy1 (talk)

Also, on Wikia we get to edit others' userpages along with most other wikis
How many of these edits are actually good edits? About 1 in 10, I say. Judging from my userpage at Kirby Wikia, those who have edited it besides me have only inserted derogatory remarks or just complete rubbish on it. Gamefreak75 (talk)

Imagine a vandal coming onto your userpage and replacing all of your personal information with fake, unnecessary and inappropriate information that could be offensive to you.

This. What if people go to my user page and say "I hate (insert any Nintendo character here)!"? It offends me a lot when Kirby or Diddy Kong gets insulted. DK and Diddy Kong vs Bowser and Bowser Jr. (talk)

Basically, if a user page has any red links, let the Sysops handle that stuff. That's why the Sysops are here; if you want a user page fixed, just contact me or any other Sysop. M&SG (talk)

@Kaptain K. Rool - Adding on to what I said above: you say we need to "help out the community" by "removing red links, redirect links...along with deleted images," but technically, userpages are not really part of the community in this context. Pretty much the whole point of it being your userpage is that it's, well, your userpage. If other people start editing it left and right, then it's not really just yours anymore is it? That's the one thing that sets userpages apart from every other article on this wiki. In your argument, it seems to me that you're almost saying that the prospect of complete (and possibly recurring) userpage obliteration is better than some of the fairly minor problems you list above. Long story short: the only part of the wiki that we are responsible for improving is the articles. Phoenix (talk) 17:48, 19 March 2011 (EDT)

Look you're just embarrassing yourself with this proposal. It's not going to pass by any means. M&SG (talk)

I can see it possibly working if you could lock off sections of a page. Which would be FANTASTIC! for many articles. E.g. All of the stuff like release dates for past games that aren't going to change could be locked off. But until then...No. Geniusguy445 (talk)

Once upon a time, I used Wikia. And a tale from my past would have to be when I was trolled there. How was I trolled? Well, a user went to my userpage and repeatedly replaced it with insults. Marioguy1 (talk)

Caw? Iggykoopa (talk)

Spam? Reversinator (talk)
Confused? Magikrazy51 (talk)
Without a reason for existence? Bop1996 (talk)
Guys, please don't leave anymore comments about an insubstantial comment. BabyLuigiOnFire (talk)
The third line of text here pretty much makes this entire proposal invalid... Phoenix (talk) 05:25, 27 March 2011 (EDT)

Merge all of King Koopa's alter egos into one article

Merge to King Koopa's alter egos 20-3-0

On The Super Mario Bros. Super Show! King Koopa has many alter egos. These alter egos are just him in a different costume. The costumes don't give him any extra abilities, they are only seen for one episode, and while wearing the costumes, King Koopa is no different from when he's not wearing the costumes. Thus, I propose to merge the alter-egos of King Koopa that currently have an article (Al Koopone, Captain Koopa, Emperor Augustus Septemberus Octoberus Koopa,Kid Koopa, Koopa Khan, Koopa Klaus (alter ego), Moon Man Koopa, and Robo Koopa (alter ego)) into a single article. I'd prefer merging them to King Koopa's alter egos, but I'll also add a section to merge them to Bowser.

Proposer: Reversinator (talk)
Voting start: March 20, 2011, 15:50
Deadline: March 27, 2011, 23:59 GMT

Merge to King Koopa's alter egos

  1. Reversinator (talk) Per my proposal.
  2. Walkazo (talk) - Per Reversinator.
  3. Bloc Partier (talk) - Per above.
  4. Reddragon19k (talk) - Per all!
  5. SWFlash (talk) Per Bloc Partier.
  6. Bop1996 (talk) Per all.
  7. Mariomario64 (talk) If they give no special powers and only appear in one episode, then why have separate articles in the first place?
  8. New Super Mario (talk) Per Reversinator
  9. M&SG (talk) - Alter egos really don't need their own articles.
  10. DK and Diddy Kong vs Bowser and Bowser Jr. (talk) Per Mariomario64.
  11. Luigi is OSAM (talk) PER ALL
  12. Magikrazy51 (talk) MergemergemergemergemergemergeMERGE! Per all (merge).
  13. Paper Yoshi (talk) - Per Reversinator's comment below (the one after mine).
  14. Geniusguy445 (talk) good idea. per all. Because they were a separate article to begin with. We can do this now, and then allow another proposal if people really want the page to be part of Bowser.
  15. Mpeng (talk) D'accordo
  16. Iggykoopa (talk) per all
  17. TheBreakshift (talk) Per all.
  18. Zero777 (talk) I am Zero! what the heck happen to my original vote Per all. Zero signing out.
  19. DKPetey99 (talk) Per all except M&SG
  20. Lu-igi board (talk) per all

Merge to Bowser

  1. Pokémon Trainer Mario (talk) I honestly think this idea is better. Per a- There's no one above me!
  2. DKPetey99 (talk) Bowser is no different than the alter egos, thus, it should merge to Bowser.
  3. Akfamilyhome (talk) Per all? Yeah... but even better you can just add a link that redirects to the alter ego page.

Leave them split

Comments

I agree. Just as how the Super Strikes and Mega Strikes were merged together, these alter egos should be merged together. DK and Diddy Kong vs Bowser and Bowser Jr. (talk)

How are you planning on merging? Are you going to add a new column to the table, or do something altogether different. Bop1996 (talk)

I was planning on adding a new column and giving a short description of the alter-ego's role. Reversinator (talk)

Before merging King Koopa, I suggest that you merge Robo Koopa to Robo Suit, because I feel that information belongs there rather than being deleted. Also, what are we going to do with the Featured Article status on Robo Koopa if this proposal passes? BabyLuigiOnFire (talk)

The powers of the suit should go there, and like I said before, I'll give a brief summary on King Koopa's alter egos. And if it's merged, there's no point in keeping the FA status. Reversinator (talk)

Although I believe the pages have enough information to stand by themselves, I'll stay open to any opinions before voting, as I never watched The Super Mario Bros. Super Show!. Paper Yoshi (talk)

Most of the info is basically the plot of the episode. Reversinator (talk)
Will this proposal unfeature Robo Koopa? I'm not sure the articles that will be merged will be the same quality. LeftyGreenMario (talk)

While this is going on, how about merging all of the pages on the (sort of borrowing my brother's idea here, please don't add a megabyte of protests to my userpage, again) Super Paper Mario people, and other single-appearance things? Mpeng (talk)

@Mpeng What the heck are you even talking about? King Koopa (Or just Bowser) has nothing to do with Super Paper Mario.UltraMario3000 (talk)
@UltraMario3000 - Didn't say he was. I guess this isn't the time or place. Mpeng (talk)

I think Robo Koopa should keep its own article, and FA status - if it's long enough and good enough, what's the point of merging and losing a great article. Instead, we can just use {{main}}. If we merge it, we're bound to lose some information and that's not good for the Wiki. MrConcreteDonkey (talk)

But that would be inconsistent. Besides, all the information can easily be saved. Robo Koopa (episode) already has a complete record of events, so shortening the alter ego's History into a summary isn't an issue. The Trivia about the RoboCop and Terminator reference can also go into the episode page, and the Powers and Abilities chart can go into Robo Suit (along with the other Trivia point about the "destroy you miserable little meddlers" button). So the only thing we'd be losing is an entry in out list of FAs, but that's a small price to pay for a much more efficient and consistent organization of Koopa's 30+ alter egos. - Walkazo (talk)

Merge Minor NPCs with their location

DON'T MERGE 1-16

There are a lot of articles for minor NPCs in RPGs that are too minor to be their own article. I believe we should merge them with the location where they are, so they can be found easily. Also, many of these articles are stubs anyway, so it would also get rid of some stubs.

Template:Scrollbox

Input new rules for name changing

DON'T INPUT 1-19

I used up my 2 chances to change my name, but I find my current name to be too long. I say to increase the number of times we can change our names to three, and place a limit on how many letters, numbers, spaces, etc. to 20. It saves users from making their second (and last) name change, then realizing that the username is too long.

Template:Scrollbox

Make an Article for AR games

Make an Article for AR games 15-0

I think AR games needs a page on here.It has a lot of Mario characters in it

No other wiki has a page for AR games,and it's Mario related,so it should have an article. Template:Scrollbox


Remove certain entries in "References in Other Games" sections

Remove Entries 13-0

On most of the articles about games, there is a "References in Other Games" section that lists games that reference that game. What's the problem? If an enemy is introduced in one game, and then that enemy is used in a future game, it is considered a reference to the former game. May I ask why? If an enemy appears in another game, that means it is a recurring enemy. The first game just introduced it. Template:Scrollbox

Split Category:Donkey Kong Levels into Separate Categories

Don't split 21-24

This is my first proposal. There are many games in the Donkey Kong series. The category, Donkey Kong Levels, there is too much content. It has about 5 different games in one category. I think we should make categories for each game. For example, Category:Donkey Kong Country Levels, etc. It would be easier to find levels and it wouldn't take up 2 pages! We should make one for every game such as Donkey Kong Country 2, Donkey Kong Country 3, DK: King of Swing, etc. It just seems easier to navigate levels. We should also delete the original one if we make other categories. I will add a section for making new categories and I will add one for keep the original one as is.

Proposer: DKPetey99 (talk)
Voting start: March 24, 2011 0:00
Deadline: March 32, 2011, 0:00 GMT Extended: April 8th, 2011, 0:00 GMT, April 15th, 2011, 0:00 GMT

Template:Scrollbox

Retrieved from "https://www.mariowiki.com/index.php?title=MarioWiki:Proposals/Archive/25&oldid=997076"