MarioWiki:Proposals/Archive/41: Difference between revisions
m (Text replacement - "Unknown Shy Guy.PNG" to "M&LBIS Sergeant Guy.png") |
m (Text replacement - "\[\[(:)?Image:" to "[[$1File:") |
||
Line 70: | Line 70: | ||
:If we aren't going to do much of it, then I don't see a point in a major change at all if it isn't going to be actively used. - {{User:Ninelevendo/sig}} 18:08, 19 August 2014 (EDT) | :If we aren't going to do much of it, then I don't see a point in a major change at all if it isn't going to be actively used. - {{User:Ninelevendo/sig}} 18:08, 19 August 2014 (EDT) | ||
::I understand. Maybe upload a few voice clips from alot of games should be better?{{User:Ashley anEoTselkie/sig}} | ::I understand. Maybe upload a few voice clips from alot of games should be better?{{User:Ashley anEoTselkie/sig}} | ||
:::Given the similarity and sometimes out right sharing of sound resources within a given console generation, it'd suggest considering making one long clip per either system or voice actor that includes many/all samples we have. That is, "Mario's Voice, N64" would be the track name with every voice sample from the start of the N64 era to the end, or "Charles Martinet, 1995 - 2000" with same. -- [[ | :::Given the similarity and sometimes out right sharing of sound resources within a given console generation, it'd suggest considering making one long clip per either system or voice actor that includes many/all samples we have. That is, "Mario's Voice, N64" would be the track name with every voice sample from the start of the N64 era to the end, or "Charles Martinet, 1995 - 2000" with same. -- [[File:Shyghost.PNG]][[User:Ghost Jam|Ghost Jam]][[File:Shyghost.PNG]] 18:46, 19 August 2014 (EDT) | ||
::::Uh that's not a good idea. Mario Kart Wii uses about 100 unique voice clips per character, we're not going to document all of them. Just document one per game, that's the best suited for the character. Ninelevendo, ripping voices is easy depending on the system. For Wii, all you need is BrawlBox and a clean .brsar from an .iso, and you can extract voices from sorts of games (Super Sluggers, Mario Party 8, Mario Kart Wii, Super Smash Bros. Brawl). {{User:Baby Luigi/sig}} 22:32, 20 August 2014 (EDT) | ::::Uh that's not a good idea. Mario Kart Wii uses about 100 unique voice clips per character, we're not going to document all of them. Just document one per game, that's the best suited for the character. Ninelevendo, ripping voices is easy depending on the system. For Wii, all you need is BrawlBox and a clean .brsar from an .iso, and you can extract voices from sorts of games (Super Sluggers, Mario Party 8, Mario Kart Wii, Super Smash Bros. Brawl). {{User:Baby Luigi/sig}} 22:32, 20 August 2014 (EDT) | ||
:::::Too be honest, I was going to further suggest that the entire project be moved to the Mario Wiki Youtube account to save on storage space and to prevent us from having crazy long resource articles. But whatever gets the job done. -- [[ | :::::Too be honest, I was going to further suggest that the entire project be moved to the Mario Wiki Youtube account to save on storage space and to prevent us from having crazy long resource articles. But whatever gets the job done. -- [[File:Shyghost.PNG]][[User:Ghost Jam|Ghost Jam]][[File:Shyghost.PNG]] 04:48, 22 August 2014 (EDT) | ||
Just so you now, there's already a class of subpages for sound clips: "List of X media" pages ([[List of Mario Tennis Open media|like this]]). Right now, it's only for games and whatnot, but I suppose if enough sound clips of a character are amassed, a subpage could be used for that. However I doubt that would ever be necessary, and it's not very ideal either. Uploading sound clips of voicework in of itself isn't a bad idea, tho: just be choosy about what's worth including. - {{User|Walkazo}} | Just so you now, there's already a class of subpages for sound clips: "List of X media" pages ([[List of Mario Tennis Open media|like this]]). Right now, it's only for games and whatnot, but I suppose if enough sound clips of a character are amassed, a subpage could be used for that. However I doubt that would ever be necessary, and it's not very ideal either. Uploading sound clips of voicework in of itself isn't a bad idea, tho: just be choosy about what's worth including. - {{User|Walkazo}} | ||
Line 128: | Line 128: | ||
:Okey dokey. Thanks a bunch for the clarement :) Since our policy is different, I then don't see the point of following their. Maybe, if ever Smash Bros. will become complex over years, I will support this. {{User:Tsunami/sig}} | :Okey dokey. Thanks a bunch for the clarement :) Since our policy is different, I then don't see the point of following their. Maybe, if ever Smash Bros. will become complex over years, I will support this. {{User:Tsunami/sig}} | ||
@Randombob-omb4761: I take your point, but our inclusion policy has traditionally been interpreted as "more articles are better than less articles, if we can pull it off." -- [[ | @Randombob-omb4761: I take your point, but our inclusion policy has traditionally been interpreted as "more articles are better than less articles, if we can pull it off." -- [[File:Shyghost.PNG]][[User:Ghost Jam|Ghost Jam]][[File:Shyghost.PNG]] 22:05, 18 September 2014 (EDT) | ||
About the special moves, couldn't we just go back to having separate articles for them? A lot of the reason behind the merge was to [[MarioWiki:Proposals/Archive_10#Smash_Bros._Moves|minimize Smash Bros. coverage]], and there was also talk of [[MarioWiki:Proposals/Archive_20#Split_all_Super_Smash_Bros._moves_into_separate_articles|stubs]] being created (which used to be a very scary word). The stub argument is tosh for a bunch of reasons, but the coverage of "minor" Smash Bros aspects is an interesting point that I've always wanted to discuss. We have several characters like stage-specific ones ([[Ultimate Chimera]], [[Bulborb]], [[Turtle (Super Smash Bros.)|the Great Bay turtle]]) merged, which is because of their small appearances. At the same time, we have SSB enemies like [[Mite]]s and [[Like Like]]s that also have relatively small appearances but are still given articles because they act as full-fledged enemies. By that same token, the special moves are constantly used and being seen, and the wiki's certainly no stranger to giving articles to [[List of special moves|special moves]]. After all, giving them articles would clear up some of the section's clutter. | About the special moves, couldn't we just go back to having separate articles for them? A lot of the reason behind the merge was to [[MarioWiki:Proposals/Archive_10#Smash_Bros._Moves|minimize Smash Bros. coverage]], and there was also talk of [[MarioWiki:Proposals/Archive_20#Split_all_Super_Smash_Bros._moves_into_separate_articles|stubs]] being created (which used to be a very scary word). The stub argument is tosh for a bunch of reasons, but the coverage of "minor" Smash Bros aspects is an interesting point that I've always wanted to discuss. We have several characters like stage-specific ones ([[Ultimate Chimera]], [[Bulborb]], [[Turtle (Super Smash Bros.)|the Great Bay turtle]]) merged, which is because of their small appearances. At the same time, we have SSB enemies like [[Mite]]s and [[Like Like]]s that also have relatively small appearances but are still given articles because they act as full-fledged enemies. By that same token, the special moves are constantly used and being seen, and the wiki's certainly no stranger to giving articles to [[List of special moves|special moves]]. After all, giving them articles would clear up some of the section's clutter. | ||
Line 168: | Line 168: | ||
====Comments==== | ====Comments==== | ||
Truth be told, we tried this more than twice and in various forms. First was an informal [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Barnstars barnstar-type] system where any users could award something of their choosing to another user they felt was deserving of a more robust thank you (some talk page archives for the oldest users still have a few of these left around, despite our deciding to mass delete them). This ended up creating arguments about who gave who what for what reason and then rivals handing out bad rewards ("You got the Garlic reward cause YOU STINK!" and other crap like that). This tried to evolve into a formal awards system that fell flat on it's face (partly due to left over hostility from the informal system, partly due to apprehension on part of most of the administrative team), which then became version one of the long removed Trouble Center (this one still bugs me, it had so much potential). Other methods have been discussed over the years, on all fronts. One might ask why these attempts keep falling through when larger wikis, such as and pretty much exclusively Wikipedia, don't seem to have this problem, or at least the problem is minor at best. I think it's because of the size of the communities in question. Wikipedia is pretty much a community of communities and, much like what happens in Vegas staying in Vegas, minor award based issues that pop up in various sub-communities are handled by those communities and maybe an ops if it's Friday and Jimbo has had a few. MarioWiki is a much smaller community and intensely more intimate when it comes to it's users. When Martha May Whovier next door gets a shinny new trinket fro her lawn, Betty Lou Who wants one too. But time has proven that we can't play nice about it, so let's just stick with what Walkazo and everyone else said above. -- [[ | Truth be told, we tried this more than twice and in various forms. First was an informal [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Barnstars barnstar-type] system where any users could award something of their choosing to another user they felt was deserving of a more robust thank you (some talk page archives for the oldest users still have a few of these left around, despite our deciding to mass delete them). This ended up creating arguments about who gave who what for what reason and then rivals handing out bad rewards ("You got the Garlic reward cause YOU STINK!" and other crap like that). This tried to evolve into a formal awards system that fell flat on it's face (partly due to left over hostility from the informal system, partly due to apprehension on part of most of the administrative team), which then became version one of the long removed Trouble Center (this one still bugs me, it had so much potential). Other methods have been discussed over the years, on all fronts. One might ask why these attempts keep falling through when larger wikis, such as and pretty much exclusively Wikipedia, don't seem to have this problem, or at least the problem is minor at best. I think it's because of the size of the communities in question. Wikipedia is pretty much a community of communities and, much like what happens in Vegas staying in Vegas, minor award based issues that pop up in various sub-communities are handled by those communities and maybe an ops if it's Friday and Jimbo has had a few. MarioWiki is a much smaller community and intensely more intimate when it comes to it's users. When Martha May Whovier next door gets a shinny new trinket fro her lawn, Betty Lou Who wants one too. But time has proven that we can't play nice about it, so let's just stick with what Walkazo and everyone else said above. -- [[File:Shyghost.PNG]][[User:Ghost Jam|Ghost Jam]][[File:Shyghost.PNG]] 14:46, 22 September 2014 (EDT) | ||
:Even when wikis like this become much bigger that its current state, I'd still be against a rewards system of any kind. You still shouldn't expect to edit wikis to get a reward other than just being a help. People who donate or people who volunteer don't do it for a reward, they do it because it's the morally right thing to do and the reward you get isn't material, it's an intrinsic happiness when you did help out. Feeling that the wiki needs you is certainly a rewarding feeling, and I don't want any sort of rewards. It WOULD be nice, I would admit, to have a virtual image of my star in my user page but I can most certainly live without one just as well. Reputation and this good feeling you get when you help out is more of a better reward than a material one. {{User:Baby Luigi/sig}} 23:46, 22 September 2014 (EDT) | :Even when wikis like this become much bigger that its current state, I'd still be against a rewards system of any kind. You still shouldn't expect to edit wikis to get a reward other than just being a help. People who donate or people who volunteer don't do it for a reward, they do it because it's the morally right thing to do and the reward you get isn't material, it's an intrinsic happiness when you did help out. Feeling that the wiki needs you is certainly a rewarding feeling, and I don't want any sort of rewards. It WOULD be nice, I would admit, to have a virtual image of my star in my user page but I can most certainly live without one just as well. Reputation and this good feeling you get when you help out is more of a better reward than a material one. {{User:Baby Luigi/sig}} 23:46, 22 September 2014 (EDT) | ||
::If we could get people over the hump, so to speak, this all might have worked out better. There is a certain allure to having a system in place so we can send lighthearted gifts and heartfelt thankyous to different users for different reasons. It shouldn't be the only reason editors edit, but it's ok for a certain level of adulation to be ''a'' reason for doing something, so long as it doesn't become ''the'' reason and that's where our community issues started (or it all went ignored, such as with Trouble Center version 2). I'll be honest, if I could ACTUALLY give ever one of our major editors a piece of pie or a T-shirt, I'd do it. But all I can really give is my thanks and support. -- [[ | ::If we could get people over the hump, so to speak, this all might have worked out better. There is a certain allure to having a system in place so we can send lighthearted gifts and heartfelt thankyous to different users for different reasons. It shouldn't be the only reason editors edit, but it's ok for a certain level of adulation to be ''a'' reason for doing something, so long as it doesn't become ''the'' reason and that's where our community issues started (or it all went ignored, such as with Trouble Center version 2). I'll be honest, if I could ACTUALLY give ever one of our major editors a piece of pie or a T-shirt, I'd do it. But all I can really give is my thanks and support. -- [[File:Shyghost.PNG]][[User:Ghost Jam|Ghost Jam]][[File:Shyghost.PNG]] 01:05, 23 September 2014 (EDT) | ||
:::Same here. I am doing a quite difficult and long thing because 1) It is important enough to be noted and 2) Since none did it, and I have some free time, '''why not?''' I also do thing for helping out and being rewarded by the nice look of the result, NOT for being recompensed <s>(though Mario T-Shirts are always appreciated ;)</s>. Why did I work to feature Lakitu? 1) It's my fav character, and I promised I would not let the nomination fail 2) Helping out to not make the nomination fail, since the article was in good shape. Aaaand... everything what I could say was already said by Baby Luigi. Speking of rewards, you can customize every template by copypasting and modifing the code. Points (just like reputation in some forums) could be an idea (and is the one that makes most sense), but this way the system would be too difficult to handle (still simpler of Pie for Everyone, how could one get pie if not American?). So, this is why the compliments are '''the best''' way to credit someone for their work, to feel like it's their own day (Baby Luigi's words). My day was Lakitu's Featuration. {{User:Tsunami/sig}} | :::Same here. I am doing a quite difficult and long thing because 1) It is important enough to be noted and 2) Since none did it, and I have some free time, '''why not?''' I also do thing for helping out and being rewarded by the nice look of the result, NOT for being recompensed <s>(though Mario T-Shirts are always appreciated ;)</s>. Why did I work to feature Lakitu? 1) It's my fav character, and I promised I would not let the nomination fail 2) Helping out to not make the nomination fail, since the article was in good shape. Aaaand... everything what I could say was already said by Baby Luigi. Speking of rewards, you can customize every template by copypasting and modifing the code. Points (just like reputation in some forums) could be an idea (and is the one that makes most sense), but this way the system would be too difficult to handle (still simpler of Pie for Everyone, how could one get pie if not American?). So, this is why the compliments are '''the best''' way to credit someone for their work, to feel like it's their own day (Baby Luigi's words). My day was Lakitu's Featuration. {{User:Tsunami/sig}} | ||
@TripleK: You HAVE to add a reason there or else it will be removed {{User:Baby Luigi/sig}} 14:32, 26 September 2014 (EDT) | @TripleK: You HAVE to add a reason there or else it will be removed {{User:Baby Luigi/sig}} 14:32, 26 September 2014 (EDT) | ||
Line 203: | Line 203: | ||
Well, the Super Mario 3D series and the Super Mario Galaxy series are (currently!) just duos, but I'm curious about this; We don't have a page for this, and yet its amount of games are up to par with [[Super Mario Advance (series)|Super Mario Advance]] if New Super Luigi U isn't counted, and with the current number of [[Mario vs. Donkey Kong (series)|Mario vs. Donkey Kong]] if it is. Is there areason for that? Especially because the SMA games are remakes with Mario Bros. stuck on. So basically, I can't vote yet. {{User:BabyLuigi64/sig}} | Well, the Super Mario 3D series and the Super Mario Galaxy series are (currently!) just duos, but I'm curious about this; We don't have a page for this, and yet its amount of games are up to par with [[Super Mario Advance (series)|Super Mario Advance]] if New Super Luigi U isn't counted, and with the current number of [[Mario vs. Donkey Kong (series)|Mario vs. Donkey Kong]] if it is. Is there areason for that? Especially because the SMA games are remakes with Mario Bros. stuck on. So basically, I can't vote yet. {{User:BabyLuigi64/sig}} | ||
Aside: Sorry for the premature deletion, everyone. Seemed like an open and shut violation to me and it probably would have been if a discussion hadn't broken out between us about this very subject at the same time. -- [[ | Aside: Sorry for the premature deletion, everyone. Seemed like an open and shut violation to me and it probably would have been if a discussion hadn't broken out between us about this very subject at the same time. -- [[File:Shyghost.PNG]][[User:Ghost Jam|Ghost Jam]][[File:Shyghost.PNG]] 06:32, 24 September 2014 (EDT) | ||
@Mario @GhostJam Erm... you two really have fear of changing some basics? I'm not blaming you at all, but I find it, like, a bit strange. Changing rules is a thing that sometimes in a project (MarioWiki, in this case) happens. By the by, I want to remember proposals can easily change from a win to a lose... {{User:Tsunami/sig}} | @Mario @GhostJam Erm... you two really have fear of changing some basics? I'm not blaming you at all, but I find it, like, a bit strange. Changing rules is a thing that sometimes in a project (MarioWiki, in this case) happens. By the by, I want to remember proposals can easily change from a win to a lose... {{User:Tsunami/sig}} | ||
Line 222: | Line 222: | ||
Just a reminder that new comments always go on the bottom, lest this becomes a total mess. Anyway, as long as a set of games has three or more entries, it can get a series, that's not the problem here: the real question isn't "how much", it's "what". I.e. should a sub-sub-series of the ''Super Mario'' sub-series (of the overall ''Mario'' series) get a series article like its parent sub-series and other sub-series (like ''Mario Kart'' and whatnot), or is that going to cause organizational issues and inconsistencies between articles and series pages, duplication of information, and/or a snowball effect of sub-sub-series pages for increasingly blurry game groupings? I.e. should the original ''SMB'' games get a page too? Should ''SM64'', ''SMS'' and the ''Galaxy'' games be grouped together as the more open-world platformers? Should the ''3D'' games go with them because it's also 3D even if it's a bit more sidescrollery? If they make a third ''Galaxy'' game, will it get a separate series page? If they make a third ''3D Land/World/etc.'' game, will it get a page? If they make a ''3D Galaxy'' game then what do we do? And going outside the ''Super Mario'' games, should the three ''Mario Kart Arcade GP'' games get a page? Or the ''Super Mario Fushigi'' arcade party games? Do we really want to start prying open these cans of worms when the series pages we ''can'' agree on are already in rough shape? Anyway, the points about there already being a [[Super Mario Advance (series)]] are fair, and part of me feels like it'd be easier to just delete that page, but it's a bit different in that it's also got the ''Yoshi's Island'' remake in there, so it's not purely a subset of ''Super Mario''-only games. It might be best to have a separate discussion/proposal about that series page... - {{User:Walkazo/sig}} 16:27, 24 September 2014 (EDT) | Just a reminder that new comments always go on the bottom, lest this becomes a total mess. Anyway, as long as a set of games has three or more entries, it can get a series, that's not the problem here: the real question isn't "how much", it's "what". I.e. should a sub-sub-series of the ''Super Mario'' sub-series (of the overall ''Mario'' series) get a series article like its parent sub-series and other sub-series (like ''Mario Kart'' and whatnot), or is that going to cause organizational issues and inconsistencies between articles and series pages, duplication of information, and/or a snowball effect of sub-sub-series pages for increasingly blurry game groupings? I.e. should the original ''SMB'' games get a page too? Should ''SM64'', ''SMS'' and the ''Galaxy'' games be grouped together as the more open-world platformers? Should the ''3D'' games go with them because it's also 3D even if it's a bit more sidescrollery? If they make a third ''Galaxy'' game, will it get a separate series page? If they make a third ''3D Land/World/etc.'' game, will it get a page? If they make a ''3D Galaxy'' game then what do we do? And going outside the ''Super Mario'' games, should the three ''Mario Kart Arcade GP'' games get a page? Or the ''Super Mario Fushigi'' arcade party games? Do we really want to start prying open these cans of worms when the series pages we ''can'' agree on are already in rough shape? Anyway, the points about there already being a [[Super Mario Advance (series)]] are fair, and part of me feels like it'd be easier to just delete that page, but it's a bit different in that it's also got the ''Yoshi's Island'' remake in there, so it's not purely a subset of ''Super Mario''-only games. It might be best to have a separate discussion/proposal about that series page... - {{User:Walkazo/sig}} 16:27, 24 September 2014 (EDT) | ||
@TsunamiIt has less to do with fear of change and more to do with apprehension over overhauling an already incomplete system. The fact that we only have one main-sub-series page is endemic of the problem and most of us just aren't comfortable letting it spread without having a discussion about the long reaching effects of such a change. Also, I disagree with this comment at the bottom thing. I can't speak for anyone else, but I find this @[PERSON] crap harder to follow than just having a standard reply indent. -- [[ | @TsunamiIt has less to do with fear of change and more to do with apprehension over overhauling an already incomplete system. The fact that we only have one main-sub-series page is endemic of the problem and most of us just aren't comfortable letting it spread without having a discussion about the long reaching effects of such a change. Also, I disagree with this comment at the bottom thing. I can't speak for anyone else, but I find this @[PERSON] crap harder to follow than just having a standard reply indent. -- [[File:Shyghost.PNG]][[User:Ghost Jam|Ghost Jam]][[File:Shyghost.PNG]] 20:27, 24 September 2014 (EDT) | ||
@Mario @GhostJam Erm... you two really have fear of changing some basics? I'm not blaming you at all, but I find it, like, a bit strange. Changing rules is a thing that sometimes in a project (MarioWiki, in this case) happens. By the by, I want to remember proposals can easily change from a win to a lose... {{User:Tsunami/sig}} | @Mario @GhostJam Erm... you two really have fear of changing some basics? I'm not blaming you at all, but I find it, like, a bit strange. Changing rules is a thing that sometimes in a project (MarioWiki, in this case) happens. By the by, I want to remember proposals can easily change from a win to a lose... {{User:Tsunami/sig}} | ||
Line 237: | Line 237: | ||
::The thing you don't understand is that the word '''"New"''' doesn't mean that it's a different series, it is still part of the '''Super Mario [Bros.] (series)'''. - {{User:Ninelevendo/sig}} 17:33, 27 September 2014 (EDT) | ::The thing you don't understand is that the word '''"New"''' doesn't mean that it's a different series, it is still part of the '''Super Mario [Bros.] (series)'''. - {{User:Ninelevendo/sig}} 17:33, 27 September 2014 (EDT) | ||
:::We're talking about how we would handle it with other sub-subseries games; we can't make a proposal for one without it affecting similar things. {{User:BabyLuigi64/sig}} | :::We're talking about how we would handle it with other sub-subseries games; we can't make a proposal for one without it affecting similar things. {{User:BabyLuigi64/sig}} | ||
::::Which is why I suggested moving this to the forums where an organized discussion can take place. Bring the results of that discussion back to here and we'll vote on it again. -- [[ | ::::Which is why I suggested moving this to the forums where an organized discussion can take place. Bring the results of that discussion back to here and we'll vote on it again. -- [[File:Shyghost.PNG]][[User:Ghost Jam|Ghost Jam]][[File:Shyghost.PNG]] 19:27, 27 September 2014 (EDT) | ||
@Ninelevendo | @Ninelevendo | ||
Look there is many differences also note that Super Mario Advance is made into a Series article '''But Wait!''', it is just remakes. Also is it in 2D, do you see it's power ups in the old school version? | Look there is many differences also note that Super Mario Advance is made into a Series article '''But Wait!''', it is just remakes. Also is it in 2D, do you see it's power ups in the old school version? | ||
Line 258: | Line 258: | ||
:1. This has the potential to turn into something bigger than can be contained in a single proposal. It needs to either be split up into a wider discussion or several more proposals. I'd go with the discussion first. | :1. This has the potential to turn into something bigger than can be contained in a single proposal. It needs to either be split up into a wider discussion or several more proposals. I'd go with the discussion first. | ||
:2. You're fighting the proposal process itself, whether you realize it or not, so you pretty much lost this on day one. This relates to the last point pretty heavily. | :2. You're fighting the proposal process itself, whether you realize it or not, so you pretty much lost this on day one. This relates to the last point pretty heavily. | ||
:If you think this change is best for the wiki, address the concerns we've stated and work for an amicable solution. -- [[ | :If you think this change is best for the wiki, address the concerns we've stated and work for an amicable solution. -- [[File:Shyghost.PNG]][[User:Ghost Jam|Ghost Jam]][[File:Shyghost.PNG]] 01:33, 1 October 2014 (EDT) | ||
::I lost it after a while too. I '''HAVE''' to discuss about this with someone... {{User:Tsunami/sig}} | ::I lost it after a while too. I '''HAVE''' to discuss about this with someone... {{User:Tsunami/sig}} | ||
Line 566: | Line 566: | ||
I feel that we need to have a formal discussion about how we apply our inclusion policy before this gets out of hand, but that's a debate for another time and a different venue. | I feel that we need to have a formal discussion about how we apply our inclusion policy before this gets out of hand, but that's a debate for another time and a different venue. | ||
-- [[ | -- [[File:Shyghost.PNG]][[User:Ghost Jam|Ghost Jam]][[File:Shyghost.PNG]] 20:53, 27 December 2014 (EST) | ||
:If we were talking about overlapping articles about the same (or at least similar) subject ''type'', I'd say not to bother with the extra ones, but something doesn't sit right about substituting boss articles for boss-fight level articles. It breaks the flow and navigation (like, you get to [[Rope Bridge Rumble]], and then the page tells you it's the last level, and the infobox bounces you straight to Oil Drum Alley, and not once does it mention there's a boss fight in between: you have to go down to the nav templates and count to figure out which boss you're at (and hope it's never switched to alphabetical order); then if you ''do'' go to the boss page, you're dead-ended because there's no level template there), and it seems like an easily fixed gap. - {{User|Walkazo}} | :If we were talking about overlapping articles about the same (or at least similar) subject ''type'', I'd say not to bother with the extra ones, but something doesn't sit right about substituting boss articles for boss-fight level articles. It breaks the flow and navigation (like, you get to [[Rope Bridge Rumble]], and then the page tells you it's the last level, and the infobox bounces you straight to Oil Drum Alley, and not once does it mention there's a boss fight in between: you have to go down to the nav templates and count to figure out which boss you're at (and hope it's never switched to alphabetical order); then if you ''do'' go to the boss page, you're dead-ended because there's no level template there), and it seems like an easily fixed gap. - {{User|Walkazo}} | ||
Line 601: | Line 601: | ||
::Ok, that is Toadally Toadiffic. I'm going to stoad making Toad-puns Toaday. How you feel is definetly relaTOADable. But really, you must really, I mean, REALLY like BIS. [[File:Toad-brigade model CTTT.png|35px|]][[User:toadbrigade5|<font color=red><big>'''Toad'''</big></font>]][[User talk:toadbrigade5| <small>and his</small><font color=grey> '''brigade!'''</font>]][[File:Toadette model CTTT.png|35px]] 19:58, 30 December 2014 (EST) | ::Ok, that is Toadally Toadiffic. I'm going to stoad making Toad-puns Toaday. How you feel is definetly relaTOADable. But really, you must really, I mean, REALLY like BIS. [[File:Toad-brigade model CTTT.png|35px|]][[User:toadbrigade5|<font color=red><big>'''Toad'''</big></font>]][[User talk:toadbrigade5| <small>and his</small><font color=grey> '''brigade!'''</font>]][[File:Toadette model CTTT.png|35px]] 19:58, 30 December 2014 (EST) | ||
Didn't we formally decide to move Easter Eggs and trivia sections into the body of articles where able? I seem to recall that. Then again, maybe we were all operating on the assumption that it was a formal decision. -- [[ | Didn't we formally decide to move Easter Eggs and trivia sections into the body of articles where able? I seem to recall that. Then again, maybe we were all operating on the assumption that it was a formal decision. -- [[File:Shyghost.PNG]][[User:Ghost Jam|Ghost Jam]][[File:Shyghost.PNG]] 00:31, 1 January 2015 (EST) | ||
:Not formally (at least not that I saw), but we had similar conversion when someone wanted to make a list for them. Yeah, Easter Egg page is terrible, so I support this proposal along with getting rid of that page.--{{User:Dashbot/sig}} 13:54, 2 January 2015 (EST) | :Not formally (at least not that I saw), but we had similar conversion when someone wanted to make a list for them. Yeah, Easter Egg page is terrible, so I support this proposal along with getting rid of that page.--{{User:Dashbot/sig}} 13:54, 2 January 2015 (EST) | ||
::Wait, we have an Easter Egg page? I just looked at it, and it's terrible for Super Mario Wiki. It's not Le Miiverse Wiki or Haunted Hathoways Wiki terrible, but for a Mario Wiki, ugh. It's like the Sticker Star of Mario Wiki. [[User:Madz the Penguin|Madz the Penguin]] ([[User talk:Madz the Penguin|talk]]) 14:35, 2 January 2015 (EST) | ::Wait, we have an Easter Egg page? I just looked at it, and it's terrible for Super Mario Wiki. It's not Le Miiverse Wiki or Haunted Hathoways Wiki terrible, but for a Mario Wiki, ugh. It's like the Sticker Star of Mario Wiki. [[User:Madz the Penguin|Madz the Penguin]] ([[User talk:Madz the Penguin|talk]]) 14:35, 2 January 2015 (EST) | ||
Line 737: | Line 737: | ||
Dunno if it's outlined in any public places, but Porplemontage once suggested (to the admins) that we aim for '''15 seconds maximum''' of tracks longer than a minute (and 25% max of tracks shorter than a minute), rather than full songs, for the same reason that we don't upload entire comics or make full game scripts anymore. Documenting and providing samples of music, art, etc. is one thing, but we don't want to risk legal crap by reproducing full versions of any sort of content - nor is it our place to be a one-stop shop for ''Mario'' music: that's not what encyclopedias are about. - {{User|Walkazo}} | Dunno if it's outlined in any public places, but Porplemontage once suggested (to the admins) that we aim for '''15 seconds maximum''' of tracks longer than a minute (and 25% max of tracks shorter than a minute), rather than full songs, for the same reason that we don't upload entire comics or make full game scripts anymore. Documenting and providing samples of music, art, etc. is one thing, but we don't want to risk legal crap by reproducing full versions of any sort of content - nor is it our place to be a one-stop shop for ''Mario'' music: that's not what encyclopedias are about. - {{User|Walkazo}} | ||
:If Steve said that, then this discussion is pretty much over and we need to add shortening sound files to the "to do" list. The idea that someone may "like it" and that's why it's here is irrelevant, we're an encyclopedia, not last.fm. If someone wants to access a full version, it shouldn't be here. Perhaps Youtube or something. -- [[ | :If Steve said that, then this discussion is pretty much over and we need to add shortening sound files to the "to do" list. The idea that someone may "like it" and that's why it's here is irrelevant, we're an encyclopedia, not last.fm. If someone wants to access a full version, it shouldn't be here. Perhaps Youtube or something. -- [[File:Shyghost.PNG]][[User:Ghost Jam|Ghost Jam]][[File:Shyghost.PNG]] 05:26, 9 February 2015 (EST) | ||
If the Mario Wiki is still sticking to the motto of covering "all things Mario," then personally I think the whole piece should exist. But if Porplemontage suggested it, it's sort of hard to argue. However, the idea doesn't seem very favorable, and (I might be looking too deep into this) Porplemontage after all only meant it as a ''suggestion'', not an order. [[User:Andymii|Andymii]] ([[User talk:Andymii|talk]]) 19:31, 9 February 2015 (EST) | If the Mario Wiki is still sticking to the motto of covering "all things Mario," then personally I think the whole piece should exist. But if Porplemontage suggested it, it's sort of hard to argue. However, the idea doesn't seem very favorable, and (I might be looking too deep into this) Porplemontage after all only meant it as a ''suggestion'', not an order. [[User:Andymii|Andymii]] ([[User talk:Andymii|talk]]) 19:31, 9 February 2015 (EST) |
Revision as of 12:02, February 10, 2021
Block on wiki = block on forumTemplate:ProposalOutcome
(not sure if this belongs in Changes or Miscellaneous; please move if necessary) Proposer: Lord Bowser (talk) Ban on both only when permabanned on wikiBan on both in all instances for same amount of time
Ban only on wiki (do nothing)
CommentsYou forgot a "Do Nothing" section, which would probably be best as there are instances of people being blocked on forum and not on wiki. If the user gets themselves blocked on the wiki, but still acts in a gracious manner on the forums then I don't see why they should be banned there. Yoshi876 (talk)
Allow the upload of voice clipsTemplate:ProposalOutcome So, I am a bit busy, but I will spend more time in the wiki, as how it was...OK, so, I was thinking about uploading some (NOT A LOT!) of voice clips, I mean, voice clips for people hear and see the difference between voice actors. Example: Upload a Peach voice clip from SM64 and one from SMG. My idea is have a small number of voice clips.
useful places to get voices: the sounds resource, the kittycorps meowmix forums, MFGG, youtube.com, ripping (use BrawlBox, SZS modifier, etc) anx trought glitches (MK8) and SSB3DS will have a voice tool like MP games. Proposer: Ashley and Red (talk) Support
OpposeComments@Nineelevndo, I understand your oppose...or the major part it. If ripping is hard, it isn't mybproblem: who want to rip, rip. Who doesn't...doesn't rip. Also, most of them can be downloaded anywhere, you just need to credit the ripper. Also, I said a dmall amount because of PC lags. Got it? ;) User:Ashley anEoTselkie/sig
Just so you now, there's already a class of subpages for sound clips: "List of X media" pages (like this). Right now, it's only for games and whatnot, but I suppose if enough sound clips of a character are amassed, a subpage could be used for that. However I doubt that would ever be necessary, and it's not very ideal either. Uploading sound clips of voicework in of itself isn't a bad idea, tho: just be choosy about what's worth including. - Walkazo (talk) It may be nice to have voice clips, thing is, for all the Mario games that will come, the maximum of 7 is too low. I don't know anything on converting and stuff, but it could be nice to have them as .ogg files, just as musics. This way we could have, just like for the games page, a "List of Mario GFXs" and/or "List of GFXs from Super Mario 64". By the way, another reason for not supporting in Ninelevendo's. Why putting so effort for a such difficult thing to do when not so much people will hear it? But yes, I know that GFXs put a variety at the game and are nice to hear with music. P.S. I found a video glitch of MK8 where the music goes off and all the characters voices can be hearded, the ones when you select it. The link is www.youtube.com/watch?v=aUJH3oTDwbE. Hope I helped you if the proposal pass :) TSUNAMI The majority of the users on this Wiki are on either Windows XP, Vista and 7 or Mac OS X. I'd see a lag if they were on something older let's say like Windows 2000 or Windows Me, 98 and 95 but that's very unlikely since barely anyone uses Windows 2000 or Windows 9X.I'd see that some people would receive a lag but that is if they were using an old piece of shit Windows 2000,9X or NT 4.0 PC.If someone were using Windows 2000 then this site would look all garbled up and shit like that though the chance is very unlikely for someone to use such older outdated and abandoned OSes. - Pwwnd123(talk|contributions)
I like this idea...but having entire pages for this? I don't agree. What I DO agree with is using a selected voice clip to color personality sections with characters, so you know what they sound like. I think one voice clip per character on average would be great detailing personality. Ray Trace(T|C) 20:54, 20 August 2014 (EDT)
Create Separate Articles for Smash FightersTemplate:ProposalOutcome This is an idea I had, and it's to cut back on the more lengthy articles like Mario. The Smash section for him is cluttered with his moves, Solid Snake convo and Subscape Emissary role, and I feel like it's a little too much. The Smash Wiki has an article for Mario in each different Smash Bros., so I kind of had the idea we could create a Mario (SSB) article where we can go more in depth about just his Smash Bros. roles; moves, trophy, stickers etc. This would apply to other Marioverse characters in Smash, and doing this would cut back on the length of these already massive articles. It also allows us to redirect the Smash Bros. section for the Koopalings to Main Article: Bowser Jr. (SSB) without having to go into depth about Ludwig's moveset on his own article. I figure this would only apply to Marioverse characters, as it's not like Link's or Pikachu's article needs to be reduced in size. Proposer: Paper Jorge (talk) Support
Oppose
Comments@Tsunami We don't really cover the technical things as, for one, it would make the section really long, but most of the terms (such as "Edge-guarding") could be considered "fan-made names". Plus, we don't really cover things like Hitboxes largely because, well, we aren't Smashwiki, our policy is different to theirs. - 01:26, 18 September 2014 (EDT)
@Randombob-omb4761: I take your point, but our inclusion policy has traditionally been interpreted as "more articles are better than less articles, if we can pull it off." -- Ghost Jam 22:05, 18 September 2014 (EDT) About the special moves, couldn't we just go back to having separate articles for them? A lot of the reason behind the merge was to minimize Smash Bros. coverage, and there was also talk of stubs being created (which used to be a very scary word). The stub argument is tosh for a bunch of reasons, but the coverage of "minor" Smash Bros aspects is an interesting point that I've always wanted to discuss. We have several characters like stage-specific ones (Ultimate Chimera, Bulborb, the Great Bay turtle) merged, which is because of their small appearances. At the same time, we have SSB enemies like Mites and Like Likes that also have relatively small appearances but are still given articles because they act as full-fledged enemies. By that same token, the special moves are constantly used and being seen, and the wiki's certainly no stranger to giving articles to special moves. After all, giving them articles would clear up some of the section's clutter. I've prattled on about a subject that I want to discuss with no real point other than that I want to discuss it. What exactly is and isn't "minor" to the point of not covering it is something that I always wanted to discuss. Anyone else wanna make sense of what I wrote and chime in with their own thoughts? Hello, I'm Time Turner.
Active rewardsTemplate:ProposalOutcome Well I was looking around the Pie for everyone joke proposal, and one of the comments said that a reward would be nice,just not pie.So it hit me why not have a rewards program. In witch active users get rewarded for being active, or editing the most or other things. The prizes witch would be given away buy the breuacrats and could be coustom userbok towers,a signiture makeover,and other little goodies.Some stuff would be easy while others chalanging tempting users to go above and beond. Proposer: Green 6017 King Of The Slowpoke (talk) (banned) SupportOppose
CommentsTruth be told, we tried this more than twice and in various forms. First was an informal barnstar-type system where any users could award something of their choosing to another user they felt was deserving of a more robust thank you (some talk page archives for the oldest users still have a few of these left around, despite our deciding to mass delete them). This ended up creating arguments about who gave who what for what reason and then rivals handing out bad rewards ("You got the Garlic reward cause YOU STINK!" and other crap like that). This tried to evolve into a formal awards system that fell flat on it's face (partly due to left over hostility from the informal system, partly due to apprehension on part of most of the administrative team), which then became version one of the long removed Trouble Center (this one still bugs me, it had so much potential). Other methods have been discussed over the years, on all fronts. One might ask why these attempts keep falling through when larger wikis, such as and pretty much exclusively Wikipedia, don't seem to have this problem, or at least the problem is minor at best. I think it's because of the size of the communities in question. Wikipedia is pretty much a community of communities and, much like what happens in Vegas staying in Vegas, minor award based issues that pop up in various sub-communities are handled by those communities and maybe an ops if it's Friday and Jimbo has had a few. MarioWiki is a much smaller community and intensely more intimate when it comes to it's users. When Martha May Whovier next door gets a shinny new trinket fro her lawn, Betty Lou Who wants one too. But time has proven that we can't play nice about it, so let's just stick with what Walkazo and everyone else said above. -- Ghost Jam 14:46, 22 September 2014 (EDT)
@TripleK: You HAVE to add a reason there or else it will be removed Ray Trace(T|C) 14:32, 26 September 2014 (EDT) New ArticleTemplate:ProposalOutcome I was reading New Super Mario Bros. Wii when it hit me. We should make an Article called New Super Mario Bros. (Series). I mean really, look how muuch installments we have in the series and new ones coming soon. Also, we have Mario & Luigi (series) article, a Mario Kart (series) article and a Mario Party (series) article. So why not we make one for the New Super Mario Bros. Series while it is a popular series. Also, it can provide editorial oppurtunities because millions play it. Proposer: Iggy Koopa777 (talk) Support
Oppose
CommentsHaven't we been through this? - 22:22, 22 September 2014 (EDT)
Well, the Super Mario 3D series and the Super Mario Galaxy series are (currently!) just duos, but I'm curious about this; We don't have a page for this, and yet its amount of games are up to par with Super Mario Advance if New Super Luigi U isn't counted, and with the current number of Mario vs. Donkey Kong if it is. Is there areason for that? Especially because the SMA games are remakes with Mario Bros. stuck on. So basically, I can't vote yet. BabyLuigi64 Aside: Sorry for the premature deletion, everyone. Seemed like an open and shut violation to me and it probably would have been if a discussion hadn't broken out between us about this very subject at the same time. -- Ghost Jam 06:32, 24 September 2014 (EDT) @Mario @GhostJam Erm... you two really have fear of changing some basics? I'm not blaming you at all, but I find it, like, a bit strange. Changing rules is a thing that sometimes in a project (MarioWiki, in this case) happens. By the by, I want to remember proposals can easily change from a win to a lose... TSUNAMI
Look we made Subseries into pages such as Mario Kart, Mario Party, etc. and there is enough installments (5) so why oppose?
@Iggy Koopa777 I should also add, Mario Kart and Mario Party are MUCH larger than NSMB, both have hit more than ten titles. The Mario Kart games reach a total of 11 games including arcade titles, meanwhile, Mario Party reaches 16, again including arcade games but discounting MP10. Therefore, the articles can be and are much more expansive.
Just a reminder that new comments always go on the bottom, lest this becomes a total mess. Anyway, as long as a set of games has three or more entries, it can get a series, that's not the problem here: the real question isn't "how much", it's "what". I.e. should a sub-sub-series of the Super Mario sub-series (of the overall Mario series) get a series article like its parent sub-series and other sub-series (like Mario Kart and whatnot), or is that going to cause organizational issues and inconsistencies between articles and series pages, duplication of information, and/or a snowball effect of sub-sub-series pages for increasingly blurry game groupings? I.e. should the original SMB games get a page too? Should SM64, SMS and the Galaxy games be grouped together as the more open-world platformers? Should the 3D games go with them because it's also 3D even if it's a bit more sidescrollery? If they make a third Galaxy game, will it get a separate series page? If they make a third 3D Land/World/etc. game, will it get a page? If they make a 3D Galaxy game then what do we do? And going outside the Super Mario games, should the three Mario Kart Arcade GP games get a page? Or the Super Mario Fushigi arcade party games? Do we really want to start prying open these cans of worms when the series pages we can agree on are already in rough shape? Anyway, the points about there already being a Super Mario Advance (series) are fair, and part of me feels like it'd be easier to just delete that page, but it's a bit different in that it's also got the Yoshi's Island remake in there, so it's not purely a subset of Super Mario-only games. It might be best to have a separate discussion/proposal about that series page... - Walkazo 16:27, 24 September 2014 (EDT) @TsunamiIt has less to do with fear of change and more to do with apprehension over overhauling an already incomplete system. The fact that we only have one main-sub-series page is endemic of the problem and most of us just aren't comfortable letting it spread without having a discussion about the long reaching effects of such a change. Also, I disagree with this comment at the bottom thing. I can't speak for anyone else, but I find this @[PERSON] crap harder to follow than just having a standard reply indent. -- Ghost Jam 20:27, 24 September 2014 (EDT) @Mario @GhostJam Erm... you two really have fear of changing some basics? I'm not blaming you at all, but I find it, like, a bit strange. Changing rules is a thing that sometimes in a project (MarioWiki, in this case) happens. By the by, I want to remember proposals can easily change from a win to a lose... TSUNAMI
Ok. Let's clear up this confusion. I am NOT talking about old school games like SMB or SML. I mean NSMBU, NSMB, NSMBWii, NSMB2 and and NSLU. And Can't anyone notice the title is called New Super Mario Bros. (Series) notice that "New" part there?, yeah, that is what i am talking about. It says it right there New Super Mario Bros. (Series). NOT Super Mario Bros. (Series). Paper Iggy Koopa
@Ninelevendo Look there is many differences also note that Super Mario Advance is made into a Series article But Wait!, it is just remakes. Also is it in 2D, do you see it's power ups in the old school version? Paper Iggy Koopa
@Superfiremario: Size doesn't get factored in as much when it comes to separate series. Mario & Luigi, Mario Strikers, and Mario Baseball have less games than the collective New Super Mario Bros. subseries. Just letting you know. It's me, Mario! (Talk / Stalk) 22:43, 28 September 2014 (EDT) Ok, lets explain something. First, We made Paper Mario into a series page and it has only 4 installments and there is huge differences in this so called "Series". plus the 3DS adaptation is called New Super Mario Bros. 2. Wait wait wait?!, New Super Mario Bros. 2 notice the 2 part there?, it sounds a lot like a series. Paper Iggy Koopa
I doubt this proposal will pass, oh well, at least i tried. Dreams do not come true every day. Paper Iggy Koopa
Create articles for the assist trophy charactersTemplate:ProposalOutcome With the influx of SSB4 articles coming in, it needs to be decided now more than ever what to do with the Assist Trophy article. There are a lot of new assist trophies in the newest installment, and that's resulting in more names being added to the ever-growing list. It's gotten to the point where having a list covering all of them simply isn't enough. There are so many avenues of information that could be covered: relevant information on their original seires, their trophy and sticker descriptions, more detailed explanations of their abilities and interactions in fights (especially when some of the new ones basically act as CPU fighters)... These are all things that could easily be done if they were given separate articles. Besides that, there's one thing I'd like to mention. To put it succinctly, we're giving articles to nearly every other character in the Smash series: the Adventure Mode enemies like Topis and Like Likes, the Subspace Emissary enemies like Mizzos and Floows, the Smash Run enemies like Cuccos and Darknuts, and pretty much every boss that isn't "this character +1 height" (Duon, Giga Bowser, Yellow Devil, etc). They range from being mindless with a single attack to requiring strategies to dodge around their attacks. The assist trophies, on the other hand, encompass all of that and have the added bonus of being items. If we're going by wiki standard, that's two reasons in one why they should have articles. Judging by the archive of proposals, there's always been a... worry, for lack of a decent word, about covering Smash Bros. articles. There have been proposals to merge and remove and split and delete, all with varying results and decisions, but all arriving to the generally same conclusion: we should cover the Smash series, but within reason. With that said, our standards for what is "within reason" change. There are two proposals up there for not having articles for the Adventure Mode and Subspace Emissary enemies (that have passed, mind you), and yet, there have been recent proposals overriding them. What we can accept for articles has changed, and having articles for the assist trophies is definitely something that we could accept. Proposer: Time Turner (talk) Create the articles
Do not create the articlesCommentsThen what about Pokémon? They should be treated the same way as the Assist Trophy characters. Aokage (talk) 14:38, 11 October 2014 (EDT)
How about special moves? How are we going to deal with the currently spotty coverage of it? It's me, Mario! (Talk / Stalk) 15:17, 11 October 2014 (EDT)
This is something I can't decide on. I won't vote (for now) but I'm curious to see how this ends. BabyLuigi64
What would be the point of this? Are we giving any other real information other than who they are and what they do in the game? - 01:26, 13 October 2014 (EDT)
Merge all warioware microgames with their respective List of microgames in ___Template:ProposalOutcome Er... Well... I suck at these. But er... User:Tsunami convinced me to do this. I think that it would be a good idea to get rid of microgame articles because number one: There tiny. Stubs. Honestly, we look for so many stubs, but no one mentions the microgames. And most of them are so minor, all you must do is tap something. It's minor, and minor warrents an article, but there are so many of them they clog the random and take up waaaaay too much space. I'm pretty sure Warioware has more articles than the Mario party and kart series have combined. And I don't think anyone who looked up Paratroopa ment the microgame. So my idea is that we put them all in one article in an organized manor, like the List of implied Characters. We don't need to cut information, we can just copy paste it. Nothing new has to be written. I understand that this will be a MASSIVE merge, something I don't even want to know how to do. But I think it's worth it. Just please, hear me out. And er... don't criticize me for a horrible proposal. Proposer: Toadbrigade5 (talk) Support
Oppose
Comments@Timeturner Niice Paragraph, but number 1: The massive numbers prove my point. The abundance of nearly identical numbers is clogging the random, and I think having a few giant articles would be easier. It wouldn't be too cluttered, I mean, is the list of implied characters considered cluttered?
@Walkazo: Wow. Can't believe I messed up on the definition of a stub. Thanks for clearing a few things up though. @Toadbrigade5 If you understanded and want to close the proposal since there is no way it can pass/you want to oppose too/other reasons, you can ask to do so, as long it is before November 29 00:00 GMT (if I got it right), to an admin, such as Walkazo. Just saying, since by your comments I realize you realized. TSUNAMI
Captain Toad vs Toad vs Blue Toad Part Deux: The ToadeningTemplate:ProposalOutcome (Before you go "not this shit again", please make sure to read this thing in full. Yes, this has been discussed a lot. No, thought-terminating clichés are not a substitute for actual discourse.) The previous proposal outcomes regarding if the playable Toad in 3D World is Blue Toad or teh Toad are wrong and I want to reverse them. Since determining the identity of an anthropomorphic fungi in a children's video game series warrants only the highest level of intellectual scrutiny, here's a list of the for and againsts: (Note that in both cases, Captain Toad would still warrant a separate page since he's a separate, distinct persona 'n' shit) The Blue Toad in 3D World is Toad; Captain Toad is a totally new character
Captain Toad is teh Toad; 3D World Toad is Blue Toad
Toad toad toad toad toad toad. Toad. Based on these last two points, it seems fairly obvious to me what the facts are. Deciding what teh truth is by a vote seems dangerously close to the contemptible concept of wikiality to me, but the time-honored Mariowiki tradition is "throw a vote at it"at anything vaguely contentious. So whatever. (*In the interest of transparency, I have to thank Wario Forums user Warelander for bringing these points to my attention.) (P.S: May you burn in hell, Toad.) Proposer: Glowsquid (talk) Captain Toad is the Toad (move 3D World info to Blue Toad (character)
Captain Toad is a Toad (status-quo)
Comments". According to games, there are several Toads that look alike. Have you ever heard of Bowser's Inside Story? That has several blorbed Toads that look and act exactly like "the Toad"." I've posted several sources that hint captain toad = toad. Your tagent does nothing to disprove anything I've written in the main body. "Also, Nintendo didn't say if Captain Toad was Toad" that's exactly what the last point of the 2nd section adress, jesus. --Glowsquid (talk) 20:08, 5 December 2014 (EST)
I gotta say, I consider the Japanese Mario fans lucky. At least they are not bothered by "character the character" debates. And it shouldn't be a secret that I'm against "character the character" articles. In my eyes, characters that appear as species are all generic unless given specific traits; see Toadette, Toadsworth and most boss enemies, like Kamella. If "the character" articles were merged with their respective "character species" articles, I'm sure we wouldn't have these thousand-times-done deliberations, because then we don't have to complicate things any further than we already have. "In the ending of 3D World, Captain Toad and the Toad Brigade appears, minus the blue Toad. Because their Blue Toad is the one adventuring with Mario. Durrrrrrr." Okay, no. Spoilers for Treasure Tracker, but Blue Brigader Toad can't be 3D World Toad because they appear in separate places with different appearances. He couldn't be in two places at the same time. Also, Blue Brigader Toad makes a reference to having a poor eyesight without his glasses in Super Mario Galaxy 2. -SmokedChili (Talk) (Thoughts) 05:27, 6 December 2014 (EST)
Split all Smash Bros. special moves into separate articlesTemplate:ProposalOutcome The first article that really brought this to my attention was Falco Lombardi's section, because jesus, but with five individual games to grab information and images from, the special moves for the Smash characters are starting to become a bit bloated. Not to Falco's extent, mind you, but nearly all of them have the potential to be as disorganized. The newest installment introduced two variant special moves for every special move as well, which just further stockpiles more words and images to the sections. It's gotten to the point where having individual articles for them is simply better for tidiness, but individual pages will also allow more fleshed-out explanations of the moves, including images from all the games, more detailed explanations of the moves' intricacies (without seeping too much into SSBWiki's level of detail), better explanations of differences between installments... Besides the fact that we're giving articles to every other Smash Bros. element under the sun, and the fact that we are certainly no stranger to special moves (case in point, we've given articles to everyone's individual basketball dunks), and as mentioned in the coverage policy, "everything appearing in the games gets articles"... This is basically the next step. I'm aware of the previous proposal to merge them all, but as evidenced by recent proposals, our standards for importance have changed. Proposer: Time Turner (talk) Support
OpposeCommentsSplit the Badges of Paper Mario and The Thousand-Year Door into separate articlesTemplate:ProposalOutcome Note: This proposal is not advocating to split the lists from the Badge article into separate articles. It is advocating for every single badge in those lists to have their own, respective articles. This is to prevent any confusion. I'm well aware that I'm going on a bit of a splitting spree with these proposals, but stick with me for a second. Yes, we already have lists on the main Badge page that seemingly sets up all of the badges' info in a tidy manner, but there are quite a few elements that could be added. Names in other languages, in-game descriptions (both on pick-up and in the journal), synergies/conflicts with other badges, better explanations of where they can be found besides "this whole area"... Besides, is there any real reason why they shouldn't have articles besides consistency? I mean, they're basically regular items that have permanent effects instead of one-off effects (there are quite a few that also act as special moves), and we have plenty of articles on items that are basically masquerading as keys to the next level, or even literal keys. I feel like there's certainly enough information to substantiate each and every one of these badges. For this proposal, the badges from Paper Mario and Paper Mario: The Thousand-Year Door will be the only ones covered (though discussion could lead to changes), since there are notable differences between the PM badges and the M&L badges and I'd like to take baby steps before diving in. Proposer: Time Turner (talk) Articles For All
Articles For NoneComments@Baby Luigi: I think you've misread what this proposal wants to do... Hello, I'm Time Turner. Split the ghosts of ScareScraper into separate articlesTemplate:ProposalOutcome In recent months the policy of the wiki has changed. We have created a separate articles for all the assistants and the Pokemon Super Smash Bros.. The proposal to create a separate articles for each badge is going well, even Alph also received their own page in spite of Super Smash Bros. is a simple alternate costume. So I think every single ghost deserves its own page. Proposer: Sonic98 (talk) Articles For All
Articles For None
CommentsCorrect me if I'm wrong, but looking at the Scarescraper page, it looks like each type of Ghost already has its own page. Magikrazy (talk) I also don't understand how Alph has his own page either. It's me, Mario! (Talk / Stalk) 20:16, 10 December 2014 (EST)
Are people going to use this "the more the merrier" shit to justify making separate pages for all the Koopa Troopa shell colours next? --Glowsquid (talk) 21:21, 10 December 2014 (EST)
Create separate articles for DKC series and DKL series boss levelsTemplate:ProposalOutcome Alright, this has bothered me for quite some time, so I'd like to try and change it. Currently, the Donkey Kong series's boss levels are merged with their respective boss articles. Apparently this is due to the fact that the levels are pretty much just a boss fight, and thus don't "deserve" sepate articles. I disagree. Here's some reasons as to why I think they should be split: 1. It's wiki policy that all individual levels get separate articles. I'd also like to mention that there's one boss level that actually does feature another section before the actual fight: Tiki Tong Terror. This information is nowhere to be seen, however, because there's no article for the actual level, only Tiki Tong. Proposer: Aokage (talk) Create
Don't createCommentsthis "more the merrier" shit is going too far: 1): The quote-unquote boss levels can be barely called that. They either dump the player directly in the boss fight or (in DKC Returns) consist of a short stretch of land with a DK barrel. Any content they describe would be redundant with the individual boss pages. Standalone pages would be especially problematic for the first DKC's "boss levels", which are flat and (save for the last one) uses the same background graphic. 2): The existence of pages for similarly low-content Mario levels is not a strong precedent. An old proposal established DKC's featureless boss levels shouldn't have a page. Ergo, if the precedent was followed properly, the cited pages should not have been created. 3): The arrow situation sucks, but it's an argument to have the arrow lead to the next "proper" level (something the DKC 3 level pages already do), not create a bunch of useless pages when a simpler solution exist. --Glowsquid (talk) 18:08, 27 December 2014 (EST)
I'm not going to log a formal vote on this, as I'm stuck between what I want to say and the policies I'm sworn to uphold. On the one hand, policy is firmly in favor of this, it falls right into our inclusion policy and standard editing practices. To bring up Glowsquid's points:
On the other hand, Glowsquid has a point. We are stretching the inclusion policy as far is it can go to squeeze out every article we can and I debate the supposed quality or non-stub status some of the results have left us with. Generally speaking, lots of articles are great for a museum, but less helpful for an encyclopedia and/or archive and we qualify more as the later than the former. I feel that we need to have a formal discussion about how we apply our inclusion policy before this gets out of hand, but that's a debate for another time and a different venue. -- Ghost Jam 20:53, 27 December 2014 (EST)
Add an Easter Egg section to game articlesTemplate:ProposalOutcome A while back, there was a proposal for creating sub pages for game easter eggs. A lot of votes mentioned that A. there aren't really enough easter eggs in a game to earn an full on article for them and B. they'd work better as a section in the game article. Well that's where this comes in. May as well start a proposal for adding an Easter Egg section. Not sure if it really needs a proposal but may as well throw it out there. An easter egg section can also cut down on the amount of Trivia a game article has (such as Luigi's Mansion: Dark Moon for example) Proposer: Tails777 (talk) Support
OpposeCommentsUgh, @MadzthePenguin, I get that you like M@L:BIS but, why does everything you say need a reference? lol,jk Toad and his brigade! 15:09, 30 December 2014 (EST)
Didn't we formally decide to move Easter Eggs and trivia sections into the body of articles where able? I seem to recall that. Then again, maybe we were all operating on the assumption that it was a formal decision. -- Ghost Jam 00:31, 1 January 2015 (EST)
Crteate an arcade pageTemplate:ProposalOutcome (UPDATE) Ok, what 1337star said dawned on me as an even better idea. Again as I said in the comments I wrote this at 3 Am and I was so tired I wrote my first idea down without any 2nd thoughts. I don’t know if it’s too late to change but I still am going to change the proposal below to the creation of separate articles on the various different arcade machines that Mario games have been on.
Proposer: Green6017 Guy (talk) Support
Oppose
CommentsThe proposal is kind of vague when it comes to arcade. Are you talking arcade as a whole or make pages for separate arcade consoles? If the former, then there's the question of consistency: why doesn't handheld get its own page either? If the latter, we might get several articles on arcade consoles, but I'm not sure if that's a good way to do things. For instance, Mario Kart Arcade GP 2 uses the Triforce arcade console. P.S. It's also really difficult to read your proposal; do you need help with grammar and spelling? It's me, Mario! (Talk / Stalk) 01:42, 21 January 2015 (EST) Sorry I wrote it while I was half asleep at 3 Am in the morning. I was planing on writing it earlier but stuff happend. sorry again and if I have the time Ill rewrite it. Green6017 Guy Just a note here on some of the different arcade boards that already have/could have articles:
These are just the ones I could find from a quick search on Wikipedia (plus other sources when Wikipedia was vague. If you're serious about improving our arcade coverage, doing further research on these five and finding others would be a good start. -- 1337star (Mailbox SP) 15:35, 23 January 2015 (EST) This proposal is somewhat of a mixed idea in my opinion. We should have another option for giving each individual Arcade platform its own article and that is the option I would support and I'd imagine many other people who are currently opposing this proposal would switch their votes to that option too. Individual users are not allowed to edit other users proposals so we'd need Green6017 Guy to rewrite it to continue. 3D Player 2010 17:25, 23 January 2015 (EST) Make a new "Out of date" templateTemplate:ProposalOutcome I think we should make a new "this page is out of date" template. To avoid confusion, here is why summed up in three reasons:
Below are two versions. Personally, I like images on templates because they show creativity, but I understand some people disagree on me about images, so I've included a template without an image as well. Version 1 Version 2 So, what do you guys think? Proposer: Andymii (talk) Support (Version 1)Support (Version 2)Oppose
CommentsCan you direct me to a page that is out of date? And how do you mean "out of date? If it's missing info, then someone should be expected to put that information in, even if it's just one sentence. And if it's using a name that isn't widely used anymore then a simple edit is all that's required rather than some poxy template. Yoshi876 (talk) Take Club Nintendo (rewards program) for instance. The rewards are, well, out of date. Since no one is editing or updating it, this template would fit in perfectly. Andymii (talk) 13:55, 8 February 2015 (EST) What's all this fuss about "instant recognizably", anyways? Is it really that difficult to just read the template? --Vommack (talk) 16:30, 8 February 2015 (EST) You know, I've changed my mind. I agree with the people in the "oppose" section. I've cancelled this proposal; sorry. Andymii (talk) 17:54, 8 February 2015 (EST) Establish a duration rule for music filesTemplate:ProposalOutcome Is this the right place to have unnecessarily long (even 2:00+ long) music samples such as this one? The wiki does not focus on game music. They are just samples, so people usually check them out to get an idea of the song, not to listen to them from the start to the end. Besides, shorter samples make the article seem lighter and do not divert attention from the page for much time. I suggest we make all music files between 0:15 and 0:20 long. Proposer: Mr. Ice Bro. (talk) Support
Oppose
CommentsThe ONLY problem we have with our current policy is that we upload like, complete CD rips of game soundtracks when they are clearly copyrighted by Nintendo and are crossing the illegal line. Unlike content here on MarioWiki, on which we use for a clear fair use basic, music is something slightly different; they have soundtracks of it and they WILL mark you for copyright if you upload the complete track on YouTube. Now I'm using YouTube's ----ty copyright claim system but then again, these pieces of music were composed by artists and are copyrighted by Nintendo. Furthermore, our own fair use policy even states that we have only a sample of the soundtrack, like a shorter or a reduced quality version of it. I admit there's a gray line when it comes to soundtracks of games not officially released but something doesn't sit well with me when we upload clean, nice uploads of complete BGMs when a soundtrack CD of the said game DOES exist. And yes, you can use the typical illegal measures of obtaining CD ripped soundtracks on say, you know those sites. It's almost like we just pick apart the original rip from a CD and reupload it on this wiki. I entirely disagree with the proposal, regardless. Many people love certain video game bgms and would probably like to listen to the full version of it, which is what this wiki provides, but I'm still a bit skeptical whether we should still provide the full bgm of a song. Ray Trace(T|C) 15:19, 8 February 2015 (EST)
"say, WarioWare: Twisted, which hasn't received anything officially in regards to its soundtrack and is a decade old now, I'd go for it" No. Fair use doesn't work that way. --Glowsquid (talk) 16:47, 8 February 2015 (EST) Dunno if it's outlined in any public places, but Porplemontage once suggested (to the admins) that we aim for 15 seconds maximum of tracks longer than a minute (and 25% max of tracks shorter than a minute), rather than full songs, for the same reason that we don't upload entire comics or make full game scripts anymore. Documenting and providing samples of music, art, etc. is one thing, but we don't want to risk legal crap by reproducing full versions of any sort of content - nor is it our place to be a one-stop shop for Mario music: that's not what encyclopedias are about. - Walkazo (talk)
If the Mario Wiki is still sticking to the motto of covering "all things Mario," then personally I think the whole piece should exist. But if Porplemontage suggested it, it's sort of hard to argue. However, the idea doesn't seem very favorable, and (I might be looking too deep into this) Porplemontage after all only meant it as a suggestion, not an order. Andymii (talk) 19:31, 9 February 2015 (EST)
This is another topic, but concerning fair use, if we're really going to shorten the music tracks, fine, but we can't leave artworks untouched either due to this line in our fair-use template: "It is believed that the use of low-resolution images of character artwork for commentary on the character in question qualifies as fair use under United States copyright law." It's me, Mario! (Talk / Stalk) 15:06, 10 February 2015 (EST)
I'd also like to bring up sprites, but those are more acceptable than HD artworks. I recall an admin from Spriters Resource has stated that Nintendo actually acknowledges the site's existence. Prior to Pokemon Black and White's release, Nintendo has realized that people already ripped the sprites of the Pokemon and all, but actually went in and asked them to refrain from uploading the sprites until or after the game has been released. That's another discussion, ultimately, but it's just an FYI that the existence of sprites doesn't fall into legal concerns compared to the HD artwork or songs. It's me, Mario! (Talk / Stalk) 18:31, 12 February 2015 (EST) Protect all user talk pages so that only auto-confirmed users can edit themTemplate:ProposalOutcome I honestly think that this is something that we need to do. Many forms of abuse of this website are in the form of people harassing other users. There are two major independant reasons why we should be doing this in my opinion.
Proposer: Kart Player 2011 (talk) Support
Oppose
CommentsA lot of stuff Time Turner pointed out I didn't think about. How do I close proposals? 3D Player 2010 17:41, 8 March 2015 (EDT) So I'm going to start thinking about some ways I can remake this proposal while adding things in it to mitigate some of the problems that Time Turner pointed out in this. I'd like this proposal closed. I might remake this proposal sometime later if I can think of possibilities on additions/changes to this proposal idea to mitigate the flaws Time Turner pointed out. Though I might not be able to figure any way out however in which case this will never be remade. 3D Player 2010 18:09, 8 March 2015 (EDT) Remove extraneous Super Smash Bros. conversations from articles' main bodyTemplate:ProposalOutcome The title's unwieldy, but this proposal is specifically covering the Snake's codec conversations and Palutena's Guidance conversations. These conversations are charming bits of dialog between Snake/Pit and their advisers, providing tidbits and small background information on whichever character they're talking about. However, these conversations really don't provide anything groundbreaking, usually saying things that aren't relevant or would have already been mentioned, and yet, all articles have the Snake conversations and the Palutena ones are steadily being added as well. There's really nothing substantial that they're adding; right now, all they're doing is contributing to the mass of headers within the Smash sections. At best, they should be relegated to the articles' "Profile and statistics" headers or they should be removed entirely and kept to the lists I linked to above. Proposer: Time Turner (talk) Move convos. to profiles and statistics
Remove convos.Keep convos.Comments@Baby Luigi: I'm not saying that they don't have a place on the wiki, I'm just saying that their place isn't necessarily in the articles' main body. Hello, I'm Time Turner. @Stonehill: I think what you are describing is this and this. Yoshi876 (talk) Make a Rule Against Using Too Many ContractionsTemplate:ProposalOutcome This proposal is complicated, so please read this carefully so you know exactly what I am proposing. Ever since I joined this wiki, one thing I always keep an eye out for is contractions (won't, can't, he'll, doesn't, etc.). We are an encyclopedia, so we should be relatively formal; contractions are generally looked upon as colloquial and informal. So what should we do? Well, first of all, contractions are completely fine in talk and discussion pages, so any rule against contractions should not apply in those pages. And since contractions have become such an important part of English, a person using a few once in a while by accident should not be penalized. However, when people start using them excessively, sentences start to sound like "Mario'll then grab the item. It'll then transform him into Mini Mario, which'll allow him to run up walls he can't run up otherwise." See how informal it sounds? As one of the premier NIWA wikis, this would be unacceptable here on MarioWiki. The unfortunate truth is that this website is loaded with sentences like these. So, I propose that contractions in main space pages be generally avoided and using them to excess be worth a gentle Reminder. It will make things admittedly more difficult, but at the end, it is for the good of the wiki. Contractions are already technically against our standard style, but it has to be raised a notch due to sheer amount of infractions. Pushing it off to the side will not work. Proposer: Andymii (talk) SupportOppose
CommentsI've noticed that you've added a point to your proposal after you voted. Yes, contractions are technically against standardized writing as I had stated (it's not our rules, it's a general rule in formal English writing that every English major should know). It doesn't necessarily need to be raised a notch any more than the forbidden second person/imperative writing nor as a raised awareness of certain styles and dictions used in a very informal manner in this wiki. I agree that more awareness should be raised about lessening the use of contractions in this wiki but it does not necessarily need to be its own rule since it's already a rule in standard, formal writing. Ray Trace(T|C) 23:04, 5 March 2015 (EST) Make notice for animated imagesTemplate:ProposalOutcome Seeing how Bulbapedia does things, I came up with a cool idea. Maybe we should create a template that should state whether this image is animated. It's purpose? To explain that some browsers are limited to viewing only the first frame of animated images and kindly remind users (especially new users that use old and worn-out browsers) not to change the image, even if it's not moving at all (unless there's really a problem, in which someone good at animated images can help). A sample of said template can be viewed here. Proposer: Stonehill (talk) Support
Oppose
CommentsThe idea makes sense, but the template must be consistent in design with other image notices, such as {{map-image}}, {{Award-image}}, {{BJAODN-image}}, etc. Having the whole "if the Goombas aren't moving" explanation also seems unnecessary: just say something like "This image is animated; please do not reupload it as a static image." and maybe an additional note that some brows might erroneously display it as already being a static image, but either way, be succinct. - Walkazo (talk)
15:19, 4 March 2015 (EST)
15:35, 4 March 2015 (EST)
18:13, 4 March 2015 (EST)
18:17, 4 March 2015 (EST) "To explain that some browsers are limited to viewing only the first frame of animated images and kindly remind users (especially new users that use old and worn-out browsers) not to change the image" Which browsers don't support animated images? I think most popular browsers (FireFox and Internet Explorer and maybe Safari) supports the basic animated .gif image. Finally, for the notice template, it would be better if the image included has transparency instead of a white background, but it's just my opinion. It's me, Mario! (Talk / Stalk) 18:30, 4 March 2015 (EST)
Does this count personal images too? ~~ Boo4761
This matter itches me because there is a point that is missed here. Animated GIFs are supported in any browser since the millenium bug (bar early wearables). However, this template is meant for animated PNGs, which is not supported in all browsers yet, let alone image editors. Bulbapedia uses these APNGs in a manner not crucial to the information, just as eye-candy for those with awesome browsers.
14:37, 13 March 2015 (EDT)
19:01, 15 March 2015 (EDT) Um... why was this proposal extended? At the time of extension, the vote was 5-10, and proposals should only be extended if the vote is within 3 or less in difference. If no one says anything, I will mark this proposal as failed. Andymii (talk) 21:40, 17 March 2015 (EDT)
|