MarioWiki:Proposals/Archive/14

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. Re-Split Orange Yoshi SPLIT 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) Deadline: 9 May, 2009, 20:00 Re-Split Arend (talk) Per myself Super Mario Bros. (talk) I would have to agree with Arend. Even though they replaced Brown Yoshi with Orange Yoshi, they are still different Yoshi types. Zafum (talk) - Per Arend. Fly Guy 2 (talk) - per Arend Walkazo (talk) - Per all. Randoman123456789 (talk) - They are two slightly different species of Yoshi, and therefore must be split into two articles. Per all. Per all -Canama Keep Merge Comments Revive MarioWiki:Pipe Plaza REVIVE 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) Deadline: Wednesday, May 13th, 17:00 Bring it back from the world of dead Tucayo (talk) - Per me Castle Toad (talk) - Per you (i can be from the loyal-active ones!) yes! Dark boo (talk)- Makes since, and I'll gladdley help with the page Nerdy Guy (talk) - Yeah, we just have to change the edit permission to Patrollers and others and it'll be updated alot! Super Mario Bros. (talk) Per all and Tucayo, his idea does make a lot of sense, I think that it would be great if the PipePlaza was brought back from the dead. JerseyMarioFreak (talk)Per all MC Hammer Bro. (talk)-That is a great idea. It will be great for orginizing information and allow easier access to helping other user with technical issues. I'd love to help in its resurection. Stooben Rooben (talk) - Per Tucayo. I'll help out whenever I can, too. Let it rest in peace for the eternity Comments @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) We could either a) Allow only Sysops to edit it, or b) block all users who haven't been here for a month. Stooben Rooben (talk) Mario Award Voting on Main Page VOTING 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: Replace the Weekly Poll from June 14 (Monday) to July 14 (Tuesday). This kinda would split a poll in half starting on Friday, but maybe on June 11 we could draw the usual poll-voting crowd in with a promise for a lot of polls (40: 30 traditional + 10 anti, hopefully) on Friday and kinda just starve it off from 7/14-17. Make it explicit in the Poll Selection page that no future question may copy a Mario Award. To distinguish, we aim to be as general as we can, while many of the questions on polls are hypothetical for the future or specific by game. We can keep the Mario Awards special annually. I would be willing to compromise if this is too harsh, by keeping away from Mario Award type poll questions only when it's coming up, and letting it be allowed in the winter months. Please comment on this and I'll definitely respond. Userpedia Awards aren't exactly something that visitors will recognize. But if the iFrame extension is installed, I will gladly come on and help put on those awards on their Main Page as well, which may produce more voters than the 56 last year. 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) Deadline: 17:00, 14 May Let's Get Thousands of Voters Wayoshi (talk) – This will make the awards all the more special with more widespread opinion. Gotta take advantage of our gigantic traffic. Stooben Rooben (talk) - Per Wayoshi. This sounds like an absolutely wonderful way to make the Awards thrive. I'll talk to Neurario about getting the iFrame extension installed. Xpike (talk) – Even though I didn't understood a thing, I prefer this than nagging. Zafum (talk) - Per Wayoshi. This would really help the Mario Awards. Tucayo (talk) - Per Wayo, nice idea. The same as XP said Super Mario Bros. (talk) Per Wayoshi and XP. Neurario (talk) Per all, a great idea to utilize traffic from both our sites. Stoob, I'll get in touch. Yoshario (talk) Per Wayo and XP Ralphfan (talk) - Best...idea...ever! Keep it to MarioWiki:Anniversary Comments Wayo: what will we do with the "other" votes. they cant be forgotten Tucayo (talk) No Sigs on Featured Images Page DO 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) Deadline: May 14, 2009, 17:00 No Sigs Castle Toad (talk) - i find Sigs a bit unformal to be used in there. Tucayo (talk) i wasnt planning to support it, but as SMB made an opposing proposal, i did. Zafum, you forgot to support it Walkazo (talk) - Per all; plus sigs make voting pages impossible to load for old computers. They should be banned from all three Feature-nomination pages: that way the rules for FI (Images), FA (Articles) and FL (Lists) will all be consistant. Zafum (talk) - Oops, forgot to support my own proposal. Keep Sigs Comments You dont have to make a proposal about this Tucayo (talk) See my proposal below. Super Mario Bros. (talk) Change "No Signature" Policies NO 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: Signatures that do not ruin vote counts can be used. No images can be used in the signatures. If a signature does ruin vote counts, the signature will be changed to the {{User|Username Here}} format. 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) Deadline: Sunday, 17 May 2009, 15:00 Support Super Mario Bros. (talk) Per me. Oppose Tucayo (talk) - NO, Users wont respect if their sig ruins vote counts or not, neither they will know if it ruins it, so i say NO. Walkazo (talk) - It's too complicated; it's better to just be straightforward: all or nothing. (Personally, I'd like to see all main community pages sig-less, but I'm a kill-joy on an eleven-year-old computer, so don't mind me...) Luigifreak (talk) It will be hard to tell if a sig ruins it unless they post, and by the time we realize it, it will be hard to clean up. also per walkazo, its too complicated. Zafum (talk)- I have answers to all your ideas:1.Signatures, wether they change vote counts or not are just informal.2.So many different people use pics on their sigs, that removing pics on them would be crazy. Anyway, my sig is completely based on images.3.why should you delete a user's vote because his sig differs from other user's sigs?Per All Stooben Rooben (talk) - Per Walkazo. Leirin (talk) - Per all. Luigifan123 (talk) - Per all. Lu-igi board per all Comments I changed the elimination of votes part, which the replacement being written in bold. Super Mario Bros. (talk) Movie Section NO "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) Deadline: May 23, 2009, 20:00 Support Hyper Guy (talk) (creator) Oppose StarYoshi1 (talk) - No. Just no. Super Mario Wiki is a place for factual things about the Mario series, not fan-art/fictions/movies. This is why Userpedia was created. Userpedia is the place to put these things, not at SMW. Super Mario Bros. (talk) I would have to agree with StarYoshi1, this is a wiki for information. Also, see my comment below. Yoshario (talk) Per StarYoshi1. This is going to distract people from editing the wiki. per staryoshi Lu-igi board Walkazo (talk) - Per StarYoshi1. JerseyMarioFreak (talk) - NO WAY. Per StarYoshi. 4DJONG-No, first they already have one, plus this is not the Unmario wiki this is the SMW so, basically per StarYoshi. Alan Warp Zone (talk) No that´s a bad idea and it will give the Wiki a bad or different maning of what it is. Girrrtacos (talk) Per StarYoshi1 and Super Mario Bros. Try the 'Shroom or Userpedia[1]. Stooben Rooben (talk) - Per StarYoshi1. Comments Hyper Guy, here is a suggestion, try asking this guy if you could have this on the 'Shroom. Super Mario Bros. (talk) You can sign up in the Fun Stuff page if you like Tucayo (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) Everyone should sign with {{User|Username}}, but we won't remove [[User:Username|Username]], as that doesn't mess with people's computers, like some personalized sigs do. However, seeing as 4DJONG's signature included a timestamp, that implies he signed with ~~~~, which we ask people to not do. Again, it's mainly to prevent sigs containing images and backgrounds from clogging-up the page, but it would look better if everyone simply signed the same way. - Walkazo (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 Material DON'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. If you have any suggestions for this proposal, please put them in the comments section. Proposer: Super Mario Bros. (talk) Deadline: 17:00, Monday, 25 May 2009 Create New Rule Super Mario Bros. (talk) Per my reasons above. Leave As Is Ghost Jam (talk) - I don't think we really need a rule for this as it's more of a matter of common sense. In general, Sysops will delete obviously offensive material. Girrrtacos (talk) Per Ghost Jam- leave it to the Sysops. Time Q (talk): Per Ghpost Jam. Why make a rule for everything? The list of rules on the proposal page is way too long already, anyway. Stooben Rooben (talk) Per that ghosty thing up there. Some people could also take offense to certain things, while other don't. (Take the Mario Hentai debate a few months back for example. Many hardcore MarioWikians wanted to add information on it as long as it was official; others didn't want it because it would 'taint' the community.) Per Stooben Rooben. Hehehe. Hentai. Perfect example. Hyper Guy (talk) Walkazo (talk) - Per all. Yoshario (talk) - Per GJ & Stooby Tucayo (talk) - Per everybody, that sounded weird, Per all. Alan Warp Zone (talk) - Yes the patroller r for that, but why not we have a Warn button on some places like forums it works... Comments Split Proposals Page and Rules NO 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) Deadline: Tuesday, 26 May 2009, 17:00 Support Super Mario Bros. (talk) Per reasons above Alan Warp Zone (talk) Also, the rules r different and it may be on a Navigation page. Oppose Walkazo (talk) - No one will read the rules if they're on a separate page. There are too many policy pages scattered about the Wiki as it is, and the last thing we want to do is make more of them. Stooben Rooben (talk) - Per Walkazo. If we really want people to follow the rules, we want them to stick out on the Proposals page. Time Q (talk): Per Walkazo and Stooben. Tucayo (talk) - Per all, its easier to have em in just one page Mr.C (talk) - Per Walkazo, and also, keeping them here would save space. Comments If 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 Signatures ALLOW 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) Deadline: Tuesday, 26 May 2009, 17:00 Support Super Mario Bros. (talk) Per reasons above. Alan Warp Zone (talk) I have a good computer, but I think so, cause old computers take time to load. Blitzwing (talk) Signatures look silly on public pages, and they can cause coding problem (Infact, I remember when a signature made it completely impossible to access a page.) Oppose KPH2293 (talk)—I understand banning them from organized voting pages, but this is too extreme. Why don't we just ban signatures that cause technical issues? Not all of them are disruptive. Tucayo (talk) - Oppose, oppose, OPPOSE. Blitz:You can just revert that edit. TimeQ: Theyre banned from voting pages, and that only really leaves us talks pages. Stooby: Not all sigs cause problems, so i dont see why the sigs of users who are fine must be deleted from other pages. SMB: If you have an old computer, just mark on your browser something to not show the images Nerdy Guy (talk) - Per KPH and Tucayo, plus the following: 1) Having all signtures look the same makes it hard to keep track of who's talking. 2) If the things listed in the perposal happen, we would look boring and dull to anyperson looking at talk pages to see what we think. 3) We can just give a reminder and/or a note to anyone whose sig is causing problems. Besides those reasons, there are other reasons why I think this proposal shouldn't pass; the perposal is a little too extreme, no offense. Stooben Rooben (talk) - KPH convinced me. Having no sigs on this page is understandable; but let's not go for overkill. Leirin (talk) - Per all. Comments I 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) KPH: That's a good idea. However, certain sigs cause certain problems on different computers. One of my older sigs that had a blue background messed up talk pages for some users, (Pokemon DP, Walkazo, Stumpers, and a few others), while it cause no problems for others. It'd be kind of difficult to narrow down what does and what doesn't cause technical problems, unfortunately. - Stooben Rooben (talk) Tucayo: You misunderstood me. I know that not all sigs cause problems, but some do for certain computers. (Example: Super-Yoshi's signature causes the background of a talk page to turn lightgray on my computer, while on others, I'm sure it's fine. So it's hard to target which sigs are "problem-causers", for lack of a better term. - Stooben Rooben (talk) By "not all of them are disruptive", I was mainly referring to signatures that are no more problematic than {{user}}, like "KPH2293 (T/C)". Most technical issues are caused by colors/images, and a signature like this uses neither of those. —KPH2293 (talk) Then we can just edit sigs taht affect Tucayo (talk) Why edit those sigs? I don't even think it is possible, users are not allowed to edit other people's user space. If they were, i 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) Check the proposal. Is it ok? Super Mario Bros. (talk) Honestly, I wouldn't mind this proposal as much if it didn't ban anything besides {{user}}. Look at the example I posted in my previous comment - how is that anymore disruptive than the template? Furthermore, why ban them from only MarioWiki/help pages? How would they would be any more problematic there than they would be on a mainspace talk page? —KPH2293 (talk) Well, are you suggesting that we delete them from the mainspace? Also, Tucayo, why edit those sigs? I don't even think it is possible, users are not allowed to edit other people's user space. If they were, I don't think that would be right. Super Mario Bros. (talk) Sorry, I should have been more specific. What I mean is, I believe it should be all or nothing. There is little difference between mainspace and MarioWiki talk. Why ban them from one and not the other? Leaving user talk alone makes sense, since what's disruptive on those pages is really up to whoever owns the userspace. Also, you are correct; users do not have the technical power to edit others' pages. Only sysops have that function. —KPH2293 (talk) Mainspace talk pages rarely gather enough comments to be problematic (and the ones that do are generally for the big pages like Bowser, which old computers can't handle anyway), whereas things like MarioWiki talk:FAQ can become monstrous. Users with old computers can always avoid the big pages (I do), but viewing something like the Community Portal is essential if you wanna stay in the loop. Another reason to not ban custom sigs on mainspace talk pages is the fact that it'll be an obscene amount of work to go around to every single talk page and switch the sigs for {{user}}s, which we'd have to do to be consistent and to insure users won't get confused about how they're supposed to sign new comments from now on. There are far less Help/MarioWiki talk pages that would need this treatment, so while it is still not a savory task, it is doable. Also, timestamps are really handy on mainspace talks pages (old queries may have been answered over time on the page, but just not on the talk) and most people won't think to add ~~~~~ after {{User|name}}, whereas automatically signing with ~~~~ is much more straightforward. Losing timestamps from Help/MarioWiki talk pages is disadvantageous too, and when you take into account the fact that most of the Help/MarioWiki talk pages are short (like the mainspace talks) and don't pose problems, this proposal starts to look like overkill again. Perhaps more specific proposals could be made in the future (assuming this one fails) to target specific problem pages, like the aforementioned FAQ and Main Talk pages. However, in the end, something needs to be done. I don't mind waiting five minutes to see the Main talk page (when it hasn't been archived in a while), but it just doesn't seem fair that those of us with old technology get penalized by something as frivolous as signatures. - Walkazo (talk) The length that a talk page reaches depends on the significance of the subject, not the namespace. Not every MarioWiki page will become horrendously large, and not every mainspace page will stay at a couple of sections. Besides, not all signatures cause technical problems; we could always just fix/ban the ones that do. —KPH2293 (talk) That's why I haven't voted: I don't like signatures clogging up my computer, but I also think this proposal is a little excessive, and that sig usage should be banned on a case-by-case basis instead (like for this page and the poll pages). - Walkazo (talk)