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: 23:44, 21 November 2024 (EDT) New Features None at the moment. Removals Trouble Center Too sporadically used: basically on average once a month Most of the uses are incorrect – user or syntax related instead of articles The troubles are rarely solved Users usually ask directly on user talk and get a faster solution that way, because watchlist notification < user talk notification Proposer: Wayoshi (talk) Deadline: October 11, 2008, 20:00 Put it to Rest Wayoshi (talk) – hope the bulleted list helps convince others Stooben Rooben (talk) - I've been thinking about this for a long time. I hardly see anyone ever use it, and when they do, their trouble(s) are never answered. Most people ask a Sysop or experienced member on his/her talk page more commonly, as Wayoshi said. People are more apt to get a fast response that way, than with a dead trouble center. I for one never used it; I always asked someone else for help, as many others have done with me. Iggykoopa (talk) Per all Super-Yoshi (talk) - Per St00by. Holy crap I also agree with Wayoshi :O (for the first time :O) Princess Grapes Butterfly (talk) Per all. It hasn't been used in months. Time Q (talk): Per Wayo. We've had this before, and decided to try a comeback. There was no comeback, so I think it's finally time to bury it. Palkia47 (talk) - Its useless. As already stated, its hardly used anymore; and when any user puts a question up; it's hardly answered. Phailure (talk) Per all, it definetly is easier to use user talk. Mateus 23 (talk) Per all. Booster - I sometimes forget that it even exists. Anyways, it's been pretty useless for over a year. InfectedShroom (talk) - Ay. Let's be rid of it. The Gravitator (talk) - I barely knew it existed until this proposal. 0_o 1337Yoshi (talk) - Per all. In the year I've been here, I've never seen it used. Of course, once we do delete it, someone's gonna think of a use for it, but... :P Stumpers (talk) - Let's delete it, but we should make it clear to new users that they can ask for help on the Main Page talk if they don't know any users to ask. Luigi001 (talk) Per all. It's nothing but a waste of space. No one uses it, so it's time to let it go. RAP (talk) Per all who shall tear it down! (not really though, XD) Walkazo (talk) - Per all. If people need help but don't know who to ask specifically, the Main Page talk and/or MarioWiki_talk:FAQ should be enough to take care of them. Dom (talk) - Per all. I looked at it once ages ago and noticed its lack of action and accuracy, so yeah. Tucayo (talk) - Per Stooben Rooben tanokki (talk) -I used It once , the last time I bothered looking almost all from when I first joined were still there,and finally no ones used It.We gave it a chance worked for a while and crashed.Per all. Yoshikart (talk)Per 1337. It's never been ******* used. White Knight (talk) Per all. There are plenty of other ways to get information. Keep it Running Magitroopa (talk) - Really bad idea. It's like you don't care about newbies. Shrikeswind (talk) - This isn't so much because I like the Trouble Center or not (I myself can rarely if ever find it,) but more because I find there are several things about the Trouble Center that need some improvement. Look, I can barely even find the thing, and some folks might not know it even exists or, if they do, what it's for. I feel that we should run an experiment with the Trouble Center by giving it more publicity, and if that fails, then we determine what to do with it, because the way things stand, the Trouble Center's NEVER get any customers. Comments Storm Warrior: Even though all of the above is true, It's still pretty useful. Like I said in my post, new users should post concerns on this page or alert one of the sysops - that's what we're here for. Stumpers (talk) Or if you need help with something else, you can always contact one of us. Stooben Rooben (talk) We even mention that on the welcome template, so we actually do care about new users. Stumpers (talk) Yeah. Like everyone said, people rarely respond to to the trouble center. We're HELPING newbies. 1337Yoshi (talk) Dudes, hypothetically speaking. I first posted a comment in the Proposals after coming from the Main Page's "Latest Proposal" box. Otherwise, I wouldn't have known it had existed. Why not try something like that for the Trouble Center? I mean, folks like me just go to the front page, see what's up, and if the answer's "Nothing," go on and do what they were doing. Folks like me would be more apt to go to the Trouble Center in the case that we made news of it. Shrikeswind (talk) Your idea is good. However, it would most likely be too much effort for something that wouldn't work. I'm glad to see you want the Trouble Center to stay, but I don't think lack of publicity is really the problem. It has a link on the sidebar, and that's really all it needs. Even The 'Shroom, Wiki Maintenance, Featured Articles, Forum, and Chatroom have just a link on the sidebar, yet they all get heavy traffic. I think the concept of the Trouble Center pretty much died out quite some time ago. I've been here almost a year, and I think 3 times I've seen it used. Stooben Rooben (talk) Splits & Merges Merge Goomba with bellhop goomba I feel we should merge bellhop goombas with regular goombas Because they are just goombas in bellhop suits also They are the same thing just differnt looks. Proposer: Iggykoopa (talk) Deadline: October 11, 2008, 20:00 Merge Iggykoopa (talk) Per what i said. Phailure (talk) Per Iggy. There's not really any basic proof they're any different, so merge it is. EDIT:See below proposal. :P Cumoriasiome (talk) they sould merge, as the bellhop goomba page even says there is no difference besides looks. Keep Separate Super-Yoshi (talk) No, they are considered a sub-species of Goomba's. Stooben Rooben (talk) - Per S-Y. Plus, they are officially named. Princess Grapes Butterfly (talk) Per S-Y! No just no. There not Goomba there a sub-species like S-Y said. Palkia47 (talk) - Per S-Y. They're different from regular Goombas and are a different species (but, rather called "sub-species"; as said by PGB above). While they act like a Goomba; and attack like a Goomba; they are not the regular Goomba. Walkazo (talk) - Per all. Plus, this would requie merging Rhinestone Goombas, and perhaps other obscure Hotel Mario sub-species that have slipped my mind... Stumpers (talk) - I'm not sure why they should be merged and not Pirate Goombas, so it makes me worried that this is either about limiting Hotel Mario content or will lead to limiting content rather than merging alternately dressed Goombas. Booster - Per all. Bellhop Goomba is a Bellhop Goomba. Grandy02 (talk) - They are officially named and look different from the ordinary Goombas. They might act like the normal Goombas, but a lot of enemies have similar patterns. InfectedShroom (talk) - Per All. 1337Yoshi (talk) - Per all. Mateus 23 (talk) - Per all. Dom (talk) WTFudge!? per all. Ameboid (talk) - Keep itself at his place. Otherwise we would have a Goomba page longer than Mario. Also many Koopa or whatever sub-species are kept seperate. So let's do it here, too. Comments Think about it guys we merged Pumpkin Heads with goombas and there way differnt so we should merge bellhop goombas because they are not any differnt from regular goombas. - Iggykoopa (talk) Pumpkin heads weren't officially-named though. Stooben Rooben (talk) Per St00by. If it isn't official, then they don't have an article about it. And just a tip, try to outline your proposal with more details instead of just two simple sentences. For Example, St00by's proposal has many details and whatnot in it. The preceding unsigned comment was added by Super-Yoshi (talk). As far as I know, you can't remove the "Protection" of the Bellhop Goombas, unlike the Pumpkin head. Just throwing that out. Blitzwing (talk) Oh well that was kinda embarrasing, not signing my comment just like that :o. And Per Blitz Super-Yoshi (talk) Hey Grapes, whos this Y-S guy? he sounds pretty neat. I wanna meet him :D Super-Yoshi (talk) ROFL... Stooben Rooben (talk) Oh crud I didn't notice that till nao. (ROFL...LOL) XD Sry 'bout that I'll fix it. Princess Grapes Butterfly (talk) lol np Super-Yoshi (talk) Okay I fixed it. :p Princess Grapes Butterfly (talk) Iggykoopa Wait so your tellling me bellhop goombas are a sub species when they act the same and are just goombas in hotel outfits. But the pumpkin heads are not a sub species well there are no simularets beetween goombas and pupkin heads also one hit for bellhop goombas and goombas while it takes two for pumpkin heads Um exscuse me, but umm pumpkin heads are Goombas. If you star spin them, the pumkin breaks revealing a regular Goomba. (See Talk:Pumpkin Head) Princess Grapes Butterfly (talk) Iggykoopa, instead of putting your name before your message, please put this at the end of your message: {{User|Iggykoopa}}. Also please post new comments at the bottom. Thanks! Time Q (talk) Iggy, just to clarify, "sub-species" is just a fan word used to describe an enemy or species that is obviously a modification of another species. For example, Paragoombas are obviously the developers referencing back to Goombas and Paratroopas. Honestly, we use it way too much, and as I can tell from your confusion, it really is misleading. "Associated Enemies" would be a better, albeit vaguer, term. Stumpers (talk) Wait so your telling me the bellhop goombas are sub sprcies when on the page you say there is no difference but the pumpkin head goombas are not just becayuse they were never named Iggykoopa (talk) Um please sigh your comments. Thanks! Princess Grapes Butterfly (talk) Ok just to set the record straghit i do not want to merge rhinestone goombas with regular goombas and the reason being they are much faster then regular goombas also they act differnt. Iggykoopa (talk) To your point Princess Grapes Butterfly think of this if you hit a winged goomba does it become a regular goomba yes but does that mean they should be merged no so by that logic we should un merge pumpkin head goombas and regualr goombas.Iggykoopa (talk) Please try to use more full stops in your comments so they are easier to read, Iggykoopa. Thanks. Stooben Rooben (talk) Uh they are merge. Princess Grapes Butterfly (talk) What? Stooben Rooben (talk) The Pumpkins Heads. Princess Grapes Butterfly (talk) Ah. I thought you were referring to Bellhop Goombas. Stooben Rooben (talk) No. :D Princess Grapes Butterfly (talk) Spliting goombas and pumpkin Head goombas. I feel we sould unmerge goombas and pumpkin head goombas because they are differnt from regular goombas For two reasons first they look differnt and they are stronger and second on the whole if you star spin them they become regular goombas that is true but think of this if you hit a winged goomba it becomes a regular goomba but do we merge it with regular goombas no. Proposer: Iggykoopa (talk) Deadline: October 12, 2008, 15:00 Unmerge Iggykoopa (talk) Per what i said. Stay merged Stumpers (talk) - We merged them because Nintendo themselves never separated Pumpkin Heads from Goombas - that was our own speculative decision. However, the other Goombas have specifically been given official names, and we feel that we should respect Nintendo's decision by giving separate articles to subjects with different names except when two subjects are way too similar (ie two enemies that always work together, for example) Stooben Rooben (talk) - Per Stumpers. They were never officially named, thus they were merged. Pumpkin Goomba is not a Pumpkin Goomba – it is just a Goomba. Super-Yoshi (talk) - Look, they were named officially, if you didn't read the page, or our comments on your other proposal. Also Per Stumpers. Princess Grapes Butterfly (talk) Per all! They're just Goombas with head armor! It doesn't change there species. Dom (talk) - Per Stumpers. (he always makes good points) 1337Yoshi (talk) - Per Stumpers. I mean, we don't have an article for SMG's helmeted Goombas, now, do we? Mateus 23 (talk) - Per Stumpers and Princess Grapes. Comments Like i said if you jump on a winged goomba they become regular goombas but do we merge them no so with that logic we should not merge regular goombas and pumpkin head goombas. Iggykoopa But think of this those fish things you Call ???? Have there own page when one is just a blurp with a sharkfin also there are some you merged even with the fact that they have names like pat-the-bats. Iggykoopa Ok but on that point they never called them goombas so they should just be called pumpkin head goombas Iggykoopa Heres just a tip Iggy, get some facts about what your going to write a proposal about, create it in a proffesionally looking way (eg: using full stops, adding puncuation, grammer, etc.) so we can get more detail on what your implying too. You should get to know what your going to propose about before writing a proposal. Nothing personal, just a tip. Lol I just noticed, everyone whos opposing starts with an "S". And Btw Iggykoopa, Time Q (talk) asked for you to follow the proposal rules, and use {{User|Iggykoopa}} instead of signing it with just Iggykoopa. So I ask nicely to sign it with the proper format, please. Thanks. Super-Yoshi (talk) Ok first of all super-Yoshi Dont tell me what i should and should not do i made this proposal and to say i do not know what im talking about well screw you. Also Think of this your whole thing on nintendo never named them is funny because why should that matter i mean because think about it bellhop goombas were never in a nintendo game There for there not nintendo charecters. Iggykoopa (talk) Bellhop Goombas were in Hotel Mario, a NINTENDO game. And your banned now. Come say "Screw you" to my face next time, k? Ill deal with it. Super-Yoshi (talk) Aww man, I was about to chastize him (have I ever mentioned how I hate Edit Conflicts?)... Anyway, Nintendo didn't actually make Hotel Mario, but it's still a Mario game and everything in it is as official as Mario himself. And in response to Iggy's other arguments: we have an article for ???? because that's what the Blurp with a sharkfin on it's back is called in Mario & Luigi: Superstar Saga, whereas "Pumpkin Goomba" was pure conjecture. And as for Pat the Bats, it doesn't matter how silly the name is, it's still their name; they're still valid enemies. - Walkazo (talk) The Pumpkin heads can have their protections removed and be turned into normal Goombas, you might say the same about the Para-Goombas, but they appeared in a dozen of games, and they have an actual name. --Blitzwing 06:47, 6 October 2008 (EDT) Now wait just a minute. If you remove a Bellhop Goomba's uniform, it turns into a noral Goomba. So why are we voting to NOT merge Goomba and Bellhop Goomba? Phailure (talk) The Bellhop Goombas uniform can't be removed ingame (Man that sound perverted), duuuurrrrrrrr. --Blitzwing 07:46, 8 October 2008 (EDT) Touche. But still, why merge Pumpkin Heads and not Bellhop Goombas? Phailure (talk) See Knife quote in Talk:Pumpkin Heads Princess Grapes Butterfly (talk) 1337, do you mean These helmeted goombas ? Bob-omb buddy (talk) Goombas I say we should split the Goomba article into two articles: Goomba and Goomba (SMW). The SMW Goombas appeared in more than one game (Seriously, I've seen round ones in Super Mario Galaxy), they have differend Japanese names and they look different, unlike the Bellhop Goomba proposal (see below) and I hope this is not like Arend's disaster Rosalina proposal. Proposer: Yoshikart (talk) Deadline: October 15, 2008, 17:00 Split Yoshikart (talk) This is my proposal. Stumpers (talk) - I'm not sure that they were in Super Mario Galaxy not having played the whole game, but yes, Super Mario World did feature "Round Goombas" rather than "Goombas" in the Japanese version. Just as we separate Kamek from Magikoopa (he is known only as Magikoopa in Japan), maybe it's time that we also pay attention to how Nintendo of Japan names separate subjects. Walkazo (talk) - Per all. Stooben Rooben (talk) - Per all. Since they are officially named, I have no objections. InfectedShroom (talk) - Per all. I wondered why I couldn't find info on those guys... :P Blitzwing (talk) - Per All. btw, There's indeed a different species of Goomba in Galaxy, but they're not round, just smaller and with a duller skin. Ameboid (talk) - Per all. The thing about the Goombas in SMG is indeed correct. Keep Together Comments Ain't and round Goomba basicly a Goomba or a sub species. (I'm sorta confused.) Princess Grapes Butterfly (talk) To the supporters: Do these have an official name? Stooben Rooben (talk) They do in Japan (as both Yoshikart and Stumpers mentioned): "Kuribon", which should be enough to allow the split. While we're on the subject, another enemy I know that clearly is not the same species as its name-sake is Mario & Luigi: Superstar Saga Boomerang Bros.; but as far as I know, the Japanese names are the same as well, so it's more problematic. - Walkazo (talk) Thanks. Stooben Rooben (talk) Say, if this proposal pass, would the page be called Kuribon or Goomba (SMW)? Blitzwing (talk) File:RoundGoomba.png <- Is this what your talking 'bout. Anyway doesn't Kuribon means Little Chestnut people. Princess Grapes Butterfly (talk) I would call it "Goomba (SMW)" because of the fact many people don't know the Japanese name (Kuribon), so they compare their look. And, what do they look like? They look like little Goombas. Of course, there are some experts knowing the Japanese name but we simply redirect to 'Goomba (SMW)'. My opinion. - Ameboid (talk) Or you could just make "Goomba (SMW)" a redirect to "Kuribon" – that seems like the more logical way to tackle the issue, since that is their official name. Stooben Rooben (talk) Yeah, that would be the best way. Stumpers (talk) 18:44, 9 October 2008 (EDT) .................... Yoshikart (talk) And the point of that comment was...? Stooben Rooben (talk) Changes Userbox Page Recently, I stopped by the userbox page and found it to be absolutly unacceptable. Users add new userboxes at will, and often don't care for things such as, I dunno, GRAMMAR? So, I'm prposing that we lock up the Userbox page or at least trim it down. If you want to make a new userbox so badly, don't place it on the main page. Proposer: Phailure (talk) Deadline: October 15, 2008, 17:00 Lock the page Don't lock Stumpers (talk) - Right now I'm busy enough operating the rest of the Wiki, but maybe the other sysops aren't. Regardless, I have to say, userboxes themselves are useless, so I don't see why a useless userbox would be a problem. Plus, what are your criteria for determining whether a userbox is useless or useful? Since other sysops are cool with trimming the page down, I no longer object. However, I'm keeping this vote here for everyone who "per'd" me. Princess Grapes Butterfly (talk) Per myself. Anyways why lock just because if some userboxes seem useless. There just for user whom want them. You don't have to use the new ones that just pop up. The userboxes page is for every user to post a userbox (as long as there aproperate.) Palkia47 (talk) - Per Stumpers' original vote. Userboxes are epic, and someone may want to create their own. Super-Yoshi (talk) - Per Stumpers' original vote and Grapes. M&SG (talk) - As long as the userbox is appropriate, I don't see the problem. Besides, even if that article is locked, we'll still be able to make our own personal userboxes for our user page. Moonshine (talk) - I really see userboxes as an eyesore, nor would I ever use them. However, I do see where they may be appealing to others. Quite simply, the fact that they're constantly being used entirely makes up for the fact that they're cheesy and an eyesore. Walkazo (talk) - More will get done if dedicated Users of all ranks can hack away at the garbage (as opposed to just the Sysops, who have more important things to do than this inconsequential community fluff). Timn (talk) - As long as the grammer improves. Anyway, I make tons of userboxes. Trim down Phailure (talk) Per what I said. tanokki (talk) -Both sides have a good point we should have criteria for userboxes {ie:This user likes luigi. OK. This user is friends with [insert username here]. NO} It shouldn't be that hard delete some keep others and we really need to trim down the userbox section other [I had to remove my own cose the page had trouble loading]. Stooben Rooben (talk) - That page has been chaotic for quite a few months now. Many of the userboxes on there aren't needed, as they are simply edited from other similar userboxes. Also, the "This user is friends with __" have absolutely no reason to be on there; these userboxes, if created, should be created only for users to give to their friends. (Just like I used to do.) The page takes ridiculously long to load due to the mass amounts of images and coding on it as well. It's a MarioWiki page, not a User page. It's a fine page for referring to how to make basic userboxes, (ex: This user is an advanced gamer), etcetera. These userboxes that say, "this user's favorite character is Mametchi/Luigi/Francis/whatever" are entirely unnecessary – there only needs to be one userbox for that "genre" of userboxes – This user's favorite character is ___. The userbox can be edited from there to the user's liking. Take my userbox tower for example: Most of the userboxes on there were created/edited by me, but I don't recall ever putting them in the userbox page. Phoenix Rider (talk) - This is definitely something that needs to be done. As Stooben said, one genre of userboxes that can be customized to the user's liking. Specific, one person/object/etc. userboxes should not be put of there. Blitzwing (talk) - Per Stooben. Took the words right out of my mouth. Stumpers (talk) - I'm switching sides to back Rooben... that's the second time this week. Per Stoob. Comments Okay, I take that back. But if you had stopped by before I cleaned it up, you'd see how atrocious it's become. Phailure (talk) Rather than locking the page, what about just eliminating all of the excess userboxes? Take this, this, and this for examples: they could easily be trimmed down to basic userboxes that could be edited to a user's liking. Also, if there was a "Trim Down" option on this proposal, I'd vote for it. Stooben Rooben (talk) Same here. The Sysops have enough things to do without having to worry about something as frivolous as Userboxes. Simply let the Users who care about Userboxes keep them tidy, and be done with it. - Walkazo (talk) But that's the whole point. The page isn't kept tidy. It overloads the bandwidth with all the pictures and code, and most are used by maybe one or two people: the people that made them and decided to stick them on there. I have plenty of userboxes that I created myself without needing to put it on the Userbox page. Phoenix Rider (talk) Walkazo: You've conivinced my to change my mind. Now that I think about it, sysops DO have better things to do :l Phoenix Rider: Ditto. Palkia47:True, but they still don't need to clog up the page.Phailure (talk) Since Stumpers switched his vote, I have a question about those who said "Per Stumpers". Since Grapes and Palkia have additional reasoning to their votes aside from "Per Stumpers", would their votes still be valid? With that being said, would Super-Yoshi's vote be the only invalid one? Stooben Rooben (talk) Good question. I assume that we can now take "Per Stumpers" to be "Per what Stumpers' original vote said." Stumpers (talk) Sounds good. Stooben Rooben (talk) Done. Phailure (talk) When I feel like making a new Userbox, I just 'steal' one from another User page, or make a new one. I never use that Userbox page, it seems kinda pointless. Like a blunt arrow. Dom (talk) Miscellaneous None at the moment.