MarioWiki:Proposals/Archive/59
Decide how to cover Mario Kart Tour bonus challenges on course articlesTemplate:ProposalOutcome The layout of each bonus challenge in Mario Kart Tour (e.g. Ring Race) depends on the course in which it is set. It tracks, therefore, that these challenges should be covered in detail on their relevant course articles in addition to their parent article. If you wish to see how a course article would look with coverage of its bonus challenges, scroll down to the "Mario Kart Tour" section in the "History" section here. However, bonus challenges have been observed to appear multiple times across the game's tours, sometimes with changed objectives, which prompts wiki users to regularly update their list entries. Simply copying and pasting these entries onto another article would make it more difficult for users to be aware of which needs to be updated where. On the other hand, adding a way to transclude entire entries (allow information entered on a page to be automatically transferred to another) would spaghettify the original code and potentially deter users from updating it with new information. For instance, this is how the code for an average bonus challenge entry currently looks: |- |[[File:MKT Tour1 YoshiCupChallenge.png|200px]] |[[New York Minute]] |[[File:MKT Icon Yoshi.png|50px]]<br>[[Yoshi]] |[[File:MKT Icon PipeFrameLimeGreen.png|50px]]<br>[[Pipe Frame]] |[[File:MKT Icon SuperGliderLimeGreen.png|50px]]<br>[[Super Glider]] | *5 *8 *12 |[[New York Tour]] (source: Do Jump Boosts article) and this is how it would look with a transclusion mechanism in place: <onlyinclude>{{#ifeq:{{{transcludesection|Do Jump Boosts New York Minute}}}|Do Jump Boosts New York Minute| {{!}}- {{!}}[[File:MKT Tour1 YoshiCupChallenge.png|200px]] {{!}} {{#ifeq:{{PAGENAME}}|Do Jump Boosts|[[New York Minute]]|Regular}} {{!}}[[File:MKT Icon Yoshi.png|50px]]<br>[[Yoshi]] {{!}}[[File:MKT Icon PipeFrameLimeGreen.png|50px]]<br>[[Pipe Frame]] {{!}}[[File:MKT Icon SuperGliderLimeGreen.png|50px]]<br>[[Super Glider]] {{!}} *5 *8 *12 {{!}}[[New York Tour]]}}</onlyinclude> A bit ugly, innit? On average, this would only save a small number of bytes on the target article--less than 100, really. Picture, now, an entire table with the same code plastered repeatedly. I believe the wiki should account for editor friendliness too, especially when the returns of optimisation are disappointing. I am not sure how to proceed here. I am unwilling to go ahead with either option unless I have a clear-cut vision of each one's net advantages. I will thus be resorting to the community's choice. Proposer: Koopa con Carne (talk) Copy-paste table sectionsTransclude sections
Leave as is (bonus challenges will continue to be listed in image galleries)
CommentsMario Kart Tour's tables tend to be pretty sloppy overall (no offense but this ranked cup table is rather monstrous though other tables don't fare much better) though I'm not really understanding this proposal. Probably repetitive content? Maybe the table format just isn't suitable for this sort of thing? It's me, Mario! (Talk / Stalk) 10:55, June 9, 2022 (EDT)
Do not use Mario + Rabbids "introductory taglines" as top quotes in articlesTemplate:ProposalOutcome The main reason I am proposing this is because in every one of these pages, not only is the tagline used as the page's top quote, but that same tagline also appears in two other areas of the same article: the splash screen image and statboxes, the former of which is often towards the top as well. To me, it makes it look like we're forcing these onto readers by having it as a quote as well, especially on the Rabbid Kong article which uses that and another quote. If Mario + Rabbids Sparks of Hope does this as well, then this proposal will also apply with that game's subjects. Proposer: Swallow (talk) Support
OpposeCommentsNot really sure this needs to be a proposal to be honest, I think we can just use discretion to remove them if they're already displayed elsewhere. -- Too Bad! Waluigi Time! 13:27, July 17, 2022 (EDT)
Stop considering reissues to be a reference to the original game and vice versaTemplate:ProposalOutcome This issue is something that is somewhat bothering me. On the Super Mario Wiki, a reference is when something unique in a previous game returns in a later one. For example, the Super Mario Bros. 2 ground theme in later Mario games references that game. We know that because, unlike the ground theme from SMB1, it isn't part of a character's theme song or anything. What isn't considered a reference is when something in a previous game appears quite often. For example, Yoshi appearing in a game isn't a reference to Super Mario World because he has become a significant part of the franchise. The same applies to sequels and follow-ups, such as Super Mario Galaxy 2 not being a reference to Super Mario Galaxy. Reissues, on the other hand, don't get this exception. On both of the pages that talk about Super Mario 64 and its remake, both articles list the remake and original game, respectively. The same also applies to Diddy Kong Racing and its remake. Referring to the same game in the article, oddly, does not apply to Super Mario 3D World and its rerelease nor NSMBU with its reissue. The thing is, it's pretty evident that a reissue is going to take elements from the game it is copying. We don't need to mention it in the references sections of the articles. What this proposal suggests doing is to stop considering reissues as references, just as much as we don't consider sequels, prequels, or any follow-ups as references because that's what most of these follow-ups do. It's like if we consider the Star Wars Special Edition to be a reference to A New Hope. Also, we should put this in the guidelines for for the page regarding references.
Support
OpposeCommentsI do want to say that DKC2 GBA lampshading how Kerozene wasn't in the original should stay. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 20:59, July 16, 2022 (EDT)
I mostly agree with the proposal, but I would argue this about Yoshi in Super Mario 64 DS. His appearance is recontextualized such that having him on the castle's roof in the opening sequence (rather than the very end) is a reference to the original game in a new subplot, not content rereleased verbatim. Still, I'm conflicted on whether it's sensible to list such details in references sections. What do you all think? AgentMuffin (talk) 20:27, July 17, 2022 (EDT)
Fix how we handle infobox relations on generic speciesTemplate:ProposalOutcome No, not "change" or "decide", fix.
So with this in mind, we should ideally be using "variants" for the specific species that are based on a real-world species, but that is not what we do; we instead list the specific species as merely "comparable" to the broader generic species, despite the specific species being a type of said generic species.
1. List the specific species as variants on the R.W.S. page. This is the most accurate way of depicting the relation between R.W.S. and the specific species based on it, because...I just said why a lot of times, didn't I? 2. List the specific species as relatives on the R.W.S. page. You could say that using "variant" between R.W.S. and specific species is confusing compared to how we use it for specific species to other specific species, since Nintendo probably wasn't thinking of the R.W.S. as a specific parent and instead as just an R.W.S. to base the enemies on. This method will account for that while still stating the relationships correctly. 3. Use an about on the top of the R.W.S. page. Let's be honest, these parameters were designed with unique species in mind. Mixing R.W.S. up with unique enemy species is what caused this confusing happenstance to happen, and with this method, we'd be making things a whole lot simpler. Take the Clown page for instance; instead of listing every clown in the greater Mario franchise as "comparable" to the Wario World enemy, we have an about on the top saying to check Category:Clowns for clowns across the Mario franchises. This method will do that for all the R.W.S., simplifying things and also helping us clean up whatever happened with Dragon (which is a specific Yoshi's Story species and not exactly meant to be representative of all dragons, but the comparable conundrum is also there somehow.). EDIT: Doc suggested to repurpose the subject_origin parameter to link to the R.W.S. On the individual species pages, and since options 1 & 2 would counter this I'm adding it to option 3. EDIT 2: Also adding another option just for the subject_origin itself. 4. Do nothing. We all collectively agree that it is fine as it is now and leave the infobox saying that all the specific species are "similar to x-real-world-species but aren't actually an x-R.-W.-S." except for that one YS Bumblebee which has a special status for...no reason at all. So, with that all said and done, let's answer this question; How do we list specific species on the infoboxes of R.W.S. pages? Proposer: Somethingone (talk) List specific species as variants of R.W.S.List specific species as relatives of R.W.S.Repurpose subject_origin for the specific species pages, use an about template for the R.W.S. Pages
Just repurpose the subject_origin for the species pages
List specific species as comparable to R.W.S. (Do Nothing)CommentsThere is actually a "subject_origin" parameter last I checked that is the remnants of the old "species_origin" parameter, and as it is now, it is barely used. Course, it may be removed now, but seems like a good compromise. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 14:12, July 17, 2022 (EDT)
Decide on the article titles for the golf courses from Mario Golf (GBC) and Mario Golf: Advance TourTemplate:ProposalOutcome Currently, our articles on the main tournament courses in these games (excluding the Mushroom Kingdom ones, which are different for each game) title them as simply "Marion", "Palms", "Dunes", and "Links". There's more to it than that though. The Game Boy Color game is rather consistent about it. The courses are all called "[X] Club" - "Marion Club", "Palm Club" (note singular), "Dune Club" (again note singular), and "Links Club". Mario Golf: Advance Tour is way more flip-floppy about it. The in-game menus use "[X] Course" - "Marion Course", "Palms Course", "Dunes Course", and "Links Course". The "Course" part is capitalized in the menus, but not in dialogue, because screw consistency. The clubs that house the courses in story mode are still called "[X] Club", albeit with Palms and Dunes now pluralized. There is also at least one instance of an NPC calling the Marion Club the "Marion Golf Club", because again, screw consistency. The one-word variants are sometimes used by NPCs, but that seems more like shorthand than anything. So which of these names do we use for the articles? My vote goes to the "Course" names; that would make them consistent with the Mushroom Course, which does not have a "Club" name associated with it (its "club" is Peach's Castle). I plan to expand these articles in the future, so I want to solve this conundrum beforehand. Proposer: 7feetunder (talk) Use "Course" names
Use "Club" names
Use single-word names (leave as is)Comments |