| 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.
|
| All past proposals are archived here. This page is protected to maintain the discussion as was.
|
User Highlights
DO NOT ADD FEATURE 1-8
I know Mario Wiki isn't Userpedia, but I feel guilty when I find out somebody's prrromotion to a higher user rank just happened and I didn't congratulate them is an annoyance. The same with birthdays. Yes, I am a Userpedia user, but I'm thinking more about people limited to only Mario Wiki.
It could just be a small box showing something, (sorry about putting myself in this, but oh well: "Hyper Guy's Birthday is coming up on___" or "User___ has reached Sysop rank) just a small box with a bit of information about the users, who could be recognized for their efforts on Mario Wiki, might make our community look much, much better by giving users credit, no matter how small the alert is. (NOTE: I'm not talking about edits! Just marking important moments for our brilliant users) THANKS FOR READING THIS!
Proposer: Hyper Guy (talk)
Deadline: August 28, 2009, 20:00
Support
- Hyper Guy (talk)
Oppose
- Super Mario Bros. (talk) If you mean a box on the Main Page, it isn't necessary. For the promotion issue you stated, the promotion is usually listed in the Pipe Plaza, usually as, "*Insert User Name Here* has been promoted to *insert rank here*! Congratulations!" And the problem with the birthdays can be solved with the 'Shroom (we have the calendar, one of the sections is for birthdays). If anybody is not content with what we have, then that is too bad for them.
- Cobold (talk) The wiki isn't a forum, so we will not have a database for something like birthdays - creating an automatic system or handling it manual sounds like too much work for me. If you want to congratulate certain users, write down those users' birthdays on your own list. SysOp promotions are noted on the Pipe Plaza.
- Yoshario (talk) – Per Cobold
- Time Q (talk): Per all.
- Walkazo (talk) - Per all.
- T.c.w7468 (talk) Per all.
- MechaWave (talk) - It's simple, not a forum, there's already one that exists for the site. Per Cobold.
- Luigi 128 (talk)Per all the Main page is for the wiki not the users
|
Allowing YouTube Videos Outside Userpages
NO YOUTUBE VIDEOS IN ARTICLES 7-17
Before you all think, "It's been like that for a good while, why should it be changed?!", think about how better articles could look. Sometimes when I make edits, like I've been editing the Pyoro pages recently, I don't want to keep on writing things I know don't make much sense, but I can't show a viewer of the page an example of how the game would be played, and so that users can check if I'm right or not. It could also encourage people who don't want to read long articles. Instead of sitting on a chair for hours on end, they can scroll down the page until they find a YouTube video explaining it for them.
I'm not saying we should stop writing and just spam YouTube videos on the pages, but this idea came to me when a friend asked me the other day, while I was showing him an article so he could see what you can do when you join, he asked "Y'know, I'm not actually reading all this c**p, can you just add a YouTube video on here or something?". After that, I started thinking about other people's opinions on this, and I personally think adding YouTube Videos to pages outside user pages would be like adding pictures to a book!
Proposer: Hyper Guy (talk)
Deadline: August 30, 2009, 15:00
Support
- Hyper Guy (talk) - Per above.
- Clyde1998 (talk) - Why Not, per Hyper Guy!
- Booman (talk) Per all.
- Zero777 (talk) I am Zero! It depends on what video, it's quality, is proffesionally done, and how small is the article, because, if the article is big then it will take a longer time to load. Zero signing out.
- YellowYoshi127 (talk) Yoshi! I think they should extend it to Shroom pages.
- RKOSpriteYoshi (talk)Per HG
- Electrobomber (talk) Hmmmm... yes, this proposal makes sense. I mean, if the youtube video is properly sized (and agreeing with zero) and professionally done, this proposal is a reasonable one. Also, on the Zelda Wiki they have youtube videos on their pages and honestly, their pages don't take that long to load.
Oppose
- Itachi 96 (talk) Some pages, like Mario's, and really big, and, for some computers, are long to load. With Youtube videos, these pages will be extremely long to load.
- Yoshario (talk) – Per Itachi 96. We can always external link to YouTube videos.
- Cobold (talk) see comment section
- Dark Lakitu 789 (talk) Per all
- Tucayo (talk) - Per Steve comments
- Walkazo (talk) - Per all.
- T.c.w7468 (talk) - Per all.
- Paper Yoshi (talk) - Per Itachi 96 and Steve's comment below.
- MechaWave (talk) - Itachi 96, your reason is invalid to me. Per my reasons below.
- Alan Warp Zone (talk) Per Itachi... (about the comment about "per all"...) Yes It´s true some old computers and the memory fulled this would be a nightmare.
- Ralphfan (talk) - Per all!
- Edofenrir (talk) - The way the proposal puts it, I oppose. Youtube-Clips should not be added to replace text ("Just put a youtube video on here")! This is an online-dictionary and dictionaries are things to be read, so people saying they "won't read through all this c**p" are no valid reason to change something. At least that's my oppinion!
- Coincollector (talk) - Using youtube videos on articles would make them less professional besides stealing words from text.
- Marioguy1 (talk) - Couldn't we use references for that? That is what is currently happening is it not? Why change tradition if it is not necessary? These are all rhetorical questions by the way. Per Yoshario.
- Time Q (talk): Per Itachi, Cobold, Edofenrir, and Coincollector.
- Pie Shroom (talk) This is why not. Yeah, this link.
- MC Hammer Bro. (talk) Per Itachi, Cobold and see comment
An external link would work fine in your example. Right now we host all our content when it comes to articles--the text and images. Embedding videos and making them part of the actual article means we are outsourcing content which relies on YouTube and their servers, as well as the user who uploaded the video. Having embedded Flash in the articles looks sloppy. Most everything can be described in words and if videos are an option we could rely on them too much; "This video shows how the gameplay works." Blah Blah Porplemontage (talk)
- I agree. YouTube videos would also take away content from the article, as people might say they don't need to describe what is shown in the video. - Cobold (talk)
- Seconded! And think about all the stubs that would be created by just having articles with one single video and the comment "Watch the video" below it. Edofenrir (talk)
It's a wiki, it's supposed to have content in usually a text form, a reference to an external link TO a YouTube video is better. The video would extend loading time, like on Peach's page mainly, and content and formatting may be harder to replicate. Also, just a little off-topic note, I hate it when someone says "Per all." MechaWave (talk)
I'd say it might be useful in some points but it should be handeled VERY careful so that this feature is not overused or the Wiki will be overrun by Youtube-Videos, rendering the articles useless.
Edofenrir (talk)
I think we need seperate pages for youtube videoes for example: Luigi's Mansion cutscenes would be nothing but youtube videos of cutscenes for the said game. Or Glitch videos would be a good page! Lu-igi board 05:05, 29 August 2009 (EDT)
If we bring Youtube information into this site we'd be relying on so much another web site. Take wikipedia. We only make few reverences to its articles and place links onto articles with necessary articles rather than copying and pasting everything.
MC Hammer Bro. (talk)
|
No name, no vote, no creator's username, delete, Version 2
DO NOT REMOVE UNSIGNED VOTES 2-10
Alright a few months back we had a proposal known as "No name, no vote, no creator's username, deleted poll" which is a small rule for the poll selection page which organized voteing , the proposal pass, but when it pass the poll selection page was no longer used (which sucks because it just happen with no warning and a lot of users like it because it was a lot of fun. I still think the Poll selection page should still be running), so I came up with the idea to apply this rule to the FI and proposal page (I'm not sure if the FA has the support or oppose system, but if it does then it will be apply to that page also.). For all the new users who don't know what I'm talking about it's just basically if you don't put your username under support or oppose then your vote is deleted. note: This doesn't apply to the "comments" section but if a user forgot to put his/her name then just let them, you, or someone else put there username in.
Proposer: Zero777 (talk)
Deadline: September 5, 2009, 20:00
Support
- Zero777 (talk) I am Zero! (creator) The last one pass very successfully, because think about it why make a section if you are not going to support it yourself? There's no reason to oppose since if it pass then it will make a turn for the better for everybody. This proposal will make the pages I just said more organized. Zero signing out.
- YellowYoshi127 (talk) Yoshi! I don't like it when a niminator doesn't support it himself but I see no real reason to have to add creator after your user name as above it usually says nominated by.
Oppose
- Tucayo (talk) - So... If i dont say who i am when i vote, my vote gets deleted..... Stupid.
- Luigifreak (talk) - Per all. We dont need to delete those right off the bat, it's often just a misunderstanding and once the user is told, he/she will almost always change it.
- Yoshario (talk) - If this doesn't apply to the comments section, and a user could fill their username in there, then why not in the Support/Oppose section? There seems to be no need to remove a user's vote because they didn't sign it, someone else could for them.
- Itachi 96 (talk) Per all except Time Q.
- Marioguy1 (talk) - Just add {{unsigned}}, yeash. No need to make someone worry about not having their vote there like someone did to me.
- Randoman123456789 (talk) - Per all.
- Super Paper Mario Bros. (talk) No. Just no. I don't vote on some of my proposals (such as the recent amendment to the No-Signature policy that requires coding). Sometimes the proposer might understand the reasoning of both sides, and can't make up their mind. So, as I said, I oppose this.
- Time Q (talk): Per Yoshario. This is a rule that probably wouldn't do much harm, but it wouldn't make sense either.
- Baby Mario Bloops (talk) Per all.
- T.c.w7468 (talk) Per all
I am Zero! Oh ya, I forgot that part, I was thinking of the poll selection page. Zero signing out. Zero777 (talk)
- we already use that... Tucayo (talk)
I agree with the no name no vote part but I dont think the no username of creator is pointless. Don't most creators vote after they already have published it? Betaman (talk)
- The no name rule already exists with the no-sig policy. I don't think we have to rewrite it. Marioguy1 (talk)
- Time Q: Have you noticed that the top six votes all per you in a way? Marioguy1 (talk)
- Yeah, hehe. I guess that either that means my reasons are really good, or they're all just lazy. :P Time Q (talk)
What happened to the other votes? Itachi 96 (talk)
- The proposer unwarrantedly deleted them. Time Q (talk)
- I'm kinda confused too oO - Edofenrir (talk)
I am Zero! I altered the proposal so much I have to delete the votes and start all over, because some people aren't getting the picture. Zero signing out. Zero777 (talk)
I struck my vote and those that are "per-ing" me for now. Anyone of the users concerned feel free to replace your striked votes with a valid one. Time Q (talk)
I am Zero! Well if you put it that way, well ya it's stupid, but overall is good. Zero signing out. Zero777 (talk)
I have to say that I don't really get the point (what keeps me from voting). So an unsigned vote will be deleted, but another one can fill in your username and then it's fine? Wouldn't it be easier to just tell the person that he/she forgot to sign the vote? I don't understand it. To me it seems like the bold text and the rest contridict each other. Someone please enlighten me. Edofenrir (talk)
Marioguy1 (talk) - Sorry Time Q but you crossed out your vote and your vote has no logic. Plus, your vote is messing up the number system, it looks like there are seven people yet there are only four.
- I know it has no logic (anymore), that's why I crossed it out >.< But there are still some people per-ing me, so I left it there for now. I'll remove it soon, but I wanted to give the other users the chance to update their votes. By the way, you're vote has no reason and thus is invalid. Time Q (talk)
- The "per all" votes still count, since they support other voters' opinions, not just your defunct vote. - Walkazo (talk)
I am Zero! *sigh* It was a success last time, so I wonder what did I add or remove to make this one a failure? Zero signing out. Zero777 (talk)
|
Create spoiler boxes
DO NOT CREATE SPOILER BOXES 2-12
Over on a couple wikis, they have boxes that toggle(show/hide) that contain any information that may give away the ending plot. I propose that we do the same thing. That way, people can't say that they just figured out the entire plot of the game without a warning. Now I know that we already have those warning things, but my eyes tend to linger and other people's probably do too. I would need lots of help to create and place these if this proposal goes through. So if it does, help would be appreciated.
Proposer: Electrobomber (talk)
Deadline: September 7, 2009, 17:00
Support
- Electrobomber (talk) Per above
- Arend (talk) I actually think it's a good idea, and have no idea why people oppose for this. Per Electrobomber.
Oppose
- Walkazo (talk) - It's too much hassle. Really, people should expect spoilers if they read anything on the Internet; the fact that we even bother warning them puts us ahead of the vast majority of websites out there (not to mention people who troll forums just to spoil plots). Our job is to deliver all the facts we can, and bending over backwards to accommodate people who don't want all the facts is counter-productive.
- Stooben Rooben (talk) - Per Walkazo.
- Yoshario (talk)}: Per Walkazo
- Marioguy1 (talk) - Wow, Walkazo's making a lot of sense today, first that comment and now this. Per Her.
- Time Q (talk): Per Walkazo. To be honest, even the spoiler templates we have seem sort of unnecessary to me. I mean, we're an encyclopedia trying to cover all Mario-related stuff, and of course this includes spoilers as well. Putting those templates in articles seems unencyclopedic to me. Just my two cents... anyway, no need for even more spoiler warnings.
- Grandy02 (talk): Per all. I also agree with Time Q, I don't find those spoiler templates useful, either.
- Itachi 96 (talk): Per all.
- Pie Shroom (talk) Per Azzy.
- P. Trainer (talk) Per Walkazo
- T.c.w7468 (talk) Per Walkazo.
- Betaman (talk) Per Walkazo.
- FunkyK38 (talk) Sorry, Electrobomber, but we already have a spoiler template, and what you're suggesting sounds like a lot of work to do.
we already have them :) {{spoiler}} Tucayo (talk)
So, if the wiki has them... are they in use? Sorry, i checked. They are.- Edofenrir (talk)
- Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think he's not talking about the {{spoiler}}-thingies, but about something that hides the spoiling contents from the visitors eyes and reveals it when clicked on. - Edofenrir (talk)
- Yes, you're exactly right, Edofenrir. The spoiler template is "those warning things", as mentioned in the proposal; Electrobomber is suggesting we put the spoiling information in show/hide boxes. - Walkazo (talk)
- oh, sorry :embarassed: i didnt understad the proposal ver good :/ Tucayo (talk)
- there, is the proposal a little easier to understand now? Electrobomber (talk)
|
Even Out Removal Votes
REDUCE NUMBER OF VOTERS REQUIRED TO REMOVE FA VOTE TO THREE 11-0-0
OK, I am very annoyed when I see an inconsistency on a wiki and as I look at the proposals page and the FA page, I notice that there is an inconsistency in the number of votes it takes to remove the invalid votes. On the proposals page, it takes three and on the FA page it takes five, why the two-number difference? If this proposal passes, those numbers will even out so that there is one universal number so that someone doesn't mess up like that guy :( Anyways, I've created three voting groups just in case someone wants one but not the other.
Proposer: Marioguy1 (talk)
Deadline: Thursday September 10th, 2009 (17:00.00)
Change FA Number
- Marioguy1 (talk) - The FA Number is higher so making it lower would help to squish out those fan-votes because people love someone. On the proposal page I doubt there would be fan-votes. Oh yes and when this proposal ends, if even one of the numbers changes, I want it marked as a success (you know green).
- Edofenrir (talk) - I support this, but only if the removal-votes have to be accompanied by a strong reason to be valid (like it is now). I think three strong reasons are enough.
- Tucayo (talk) - Per, though i am of the idea that we should delete ALL fan votes without going through this....
- T.c.w7468 (talk) Per all.
But what are we going to change the number to? Four? Oh okay. I'm keeping this vote though. Three sounds more reasonable than five. And Per Time Q, too.
- Pie Shroom (talk) Per MG1.
- Timmy Tim (talk) Sounds fair. FIs need two, but that's too little in my opinion.
- Randoman123456789 (talk) - Per Marioguy1.
- Time Q (talk): There's no reason for having two different numbers, so it's a good idea to even them out. Three seems like a reasonable number: experience has shown that there are hardly ever 5 users that vote for the removal of an FA vote. Oh, and just to clarify: Current rules state that one sysop must be among the voters that vote for the removal of an FA vote. This, of course, should stay the same.
- P. Trainer (talk) Per all.
- Yoshario (talk) – Per all
- Dark Bowser (talk) Per All.
Change Proposal Number
Don't Change Numbers
@T.c.w7468: I think the proposer splitted the support section into two to avoid problems with this question. You just voted for decreasing both numbers of neccessary removal votes to 3. If you had picked the other support category, you would have voted for increasing both numbers of necessary removal votes to five ;3 - Edofenrir (talk)
- Unless I wrote to change the rule it won't be changed. Marioguy1 (talk)
- Timmy Tim: I would of included FIs but do you know how many headers that would take? Marioguy1 (talk)
- You can't vote for the removal of FI votes. Time Q (talk)
- I know, I was just saying, it was the same on the vote page too, before we canned it. I reckon that three is a good number for proposals and FAs. Timmy Tim (talk)
|
|
|
