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}}.

This page observes the No-Signature Policy.

How To

1. Actions that users feel are appropriate to have community approval first can be added by anyone, but they must have a strong argument.
2. 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)
3. Every vote should have a reason accompanying it.
4. 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.
5. "# " should be added under the last vote of each support/oppose section to show another blank line.
6. All proposals that end up in a tie will be extended for another week.
7. If a proposal has more than ten votes, it can only pass or fail by a margin of three votes. If a proposal reaches the deadline and the total number of votes for each option differ by two or less votes, the deadline will be extended for another week.
8. 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.
9. No proposal can overturn the decision of a previous proposal that is less than 4 weeks (28 days) old.
10. Proposals can only be rewritten or deleted by their proposer within the first three days of their creation. However, the proposer can request that their proposal be deleted by a Sysop at any time, provided they have a valid reason for it.
11. 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.
12. There shouldn't be proposals about creating articles on a underrepresented or completely absent subject, unless there is major disagreement about whether the content should be included. To organize efforts about completing articles on missing subjects, try creating a PipeProject.
13. Proposals can not be made about System Operator promotions and demotions. Sysops can only be promoted and demoted by the will of Bureaucrats.
14. If the Sysops deem a proposal unnecessary or potentially detrimental to the upkeep of the Super Mario Wiki, they have the right to remove it at any time.
15. No joke proposals. Proposals are serious wiki matters, and should be handled professionally. Joke proposals will be deleted on sight.

The times are in EDT (UTC -4:00), 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: 18:00, 27 December 2024 (EDT)

New Features

None at the moment.

Removals

None at the moment.

Splits & Merges

Split Beta Elements into Sub-Articles

We all know that the Beta Elements page is incredibly long...the second-longest page on the wiki — It's chock full of images and good information on a ton of different games, (which isn't a bad thing), but I feel the article would be better off describing what a beta element is, and then having a list at the bottom of the page that lists all of the games we have beta info on. Which leads me to the second part of my proposal. Most of the beta element sections in that page are more than long enough to constitute their own page. This would make it easier to find a specific beta element in a specific game, and it would also make it much easier to load said page(s). For example, the beta elements for Super Mario World could be found at Template:Fakelink. This page could easily be found because there would be a link on Beta Elements to that page, as well as a link to it on the Super Mario World article.

• An example of what the 'new' Beta Elements page would look like can be found here.
• An example of what the Super Mario World beta elements sub-page would look like can be found here.

Proposer: Stooben Rooben (talk)
Deadline: October 6, 2009, 17:00

Support

1. Stooben Rooben (talk) — Per my reasoning above.
2. Tucayo (talk) - Per Stooby
3. Super Paper Mario Bros. (talk) Per Dr. Rooben.
4. YellowYoshi127 (talk) Yoshi! Stoobys right, it is way to long.
5. Monteyaga (talk) Per All.
6. Edofenrir (talk) - It's not like me to simply per without adding my opinion, but Stooben Rooben summed it up perfectly.
7. Twentytwofiftyseven (talk) - Per All. This page takes like 5 minutes to be rendered after each edit.
8. Walkazo (talk) - Per Stooben. It'll be nice to be able to read about beta elements without my computer crashing halfway through loading the page. Smaller articles are also easier to organize, maintain and patrol.
9. Zero777 (talk) I am Zero! I like this idea very much, it is big hassle to load up the entire beta element page, the whole article is packed, and soon enough there will be to many games in that article which can make it hard to load. Zero signing out.
10. Yoshario (talk) – Per Stooben Rooben.
11. Grandy02 (talk) – Per Stooben.
12. FunkyK38 (talk) Definitely a good idea. Per Stooben.
13. MC Hammer Bro. (talk) Per above.
14. Coincollector (talk) - Buena idea Stoob.
15. lewa159 (talk) - Per all, and who whould oppose?
16. Marioguy1 (talk) - The new article looks great! So do the sub-articles, if it doesn't do something bad it must do something good! Per um...that guy!
17. T.c.w7468 (talk) Per all, the article is too big, and splitting them up would be easier to navigate as well. I can't believe no one thought of this earlier.
18. Baby Mario Bloops (talk) It's a win-win no matter what happens. It will help shorten that long list, and keep it more organized. Also, if it doens't work, we could change it back (which I don't think will ever happen). I'm supporting this big time!
19. Timmy Tim (talk) Per all, but what's the longest page?
20. Ben Kitsune (talk) Per all, wholeheartedly!

Comments

I think it would be better to have a catagory with a link to the sub-pages. Betaman (talk)

It's still necessary for us to describe what exactly a beta element is, though; so the article should stay. That said, we could add a Template:Fakelink to those sub-pages. -- Stooben Rooben (talk)

Could something similar be done for the Glitches article? Of course it's only half as big as the Beta elements article, but... that's still big. - Edofenrir (talk)

Good point. They're pretty similar in nature, so if we want to be consistent, we should probably split both pages. - Walkazo (talk)

I completely forgot about the Glitches page. :O Yeah, it'd be a good idea to split that page too. Thanks for pointing that out! -- Stooben Rooben (talk)

I totally agree with this proposal but (just throwing this out there)couldn't we just merge the beta elements with the game page (since many glitches and beta elements are strewn about the trivia sections of the games anyways). Just an idea... MC Hammer Bro. (talk)

Theoretically, while that could work, it has been mentioned that for some games, having a section devoted entirely to Beta Elements are several pages long in and of itself. It would simply just be easier to create a separate section completely devoted it per each game if the section of the game was too long. HOWEVER, if the article in question was a stub, then, yeah, I could see the reasoning behind that. Ben Kitsune (talk)

Mario Baseball Special swings/pitches

The Mario Super Star Baseball special pitches and swings are in the same article (Peach's Heart Swing and Heart Pitch are under Heart Ball while on the Slugger's page, the character bios list them separately. The Slugger's special pages are being made right now and I'm wondering of the pitches and swings should also be merged into one page like the MSSB ones or if the MSSB's should be split.

Propeser: MC Hammer Bro. (talk)
Deadline: October 7th, 2009 17:00PM

Split

1. MC Hammer Bro. (talk) I think they should be split because one is an offensive special and one is defensive.

Continue like the other pages

1. Super Paper Mario Bros. (talk) – Although this sounds ideal, they are moves in the same game that are related to the character. If we split everything based on offensive and defensive, this article would be a good candidate for splitting, and it is rather small as of now. We would end up with little stublets if we split these articles.
2. Baby Mario Bloops (talk) S.P.M.B. has a good point. Lately, even I, would likes to have articles split, been merging them. We already have enough stubs right now, and we definitely don't need stublets.

Changes

None at the moment.

Miscellaneous

None at the moment.