MarioWiki:Proposals/Archive/60: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
(Archiving passed proposal) |
||
Line 626: | Line 626: | ||
:I agreed your comment. I replace (non-''Smash'' appearance) with (formal), and changed the title. Since King K. Rool made his first physical appearance in 10 years since ''Mario Super Sluggers''. Candy Kong and any other DK characters (excluding Dixie, Cranky and Funky) haven't appeared in 15 years since ''DK: Jungle Climber''. We haven't seen Kremlings in the recent years. [[User:Windy|Windy]] ([[User talk:Windy|talk]]) 14:08, November 19, 2022 (EST) | :I agreed your comment. I replace (non-''Smash'' appearance) with (formal), and changed the title. Since King K. Rool made his first physical appearance in 10 years since ''Mario Super Sluggers''. Candy Kong and any other DK characters (excluding Dixie, Cranky and Funky) haven't appeared in 15 years since ''DK: Jungle Climber''. We haven't seen Kremlings in the recent years. [[User:Windy|Windy]] ([[User talk:Windy|talk]]) 14:08, November 19, 2022 (EST) | ||
It's an abandoned situation, so I think this proposal needs to be extended. [[User:Windy|Windy]] ([[User talk:Windy|talk]]) 21:39, November 24, 2022 (EST) | It's an abandoned situation, so I think this proposal needs to be extended. [[User:Windy|Windy]] ([[User talk:Windy|talk]]) 21:39, November 24, 2022 (EST) | ||
===Rework the ''Mario Kart 8 Deluxe'' category into a subcategory of the ''Mario Kart 8'' category covering only ''Deluxe''-exclusive content=== | |||
{{ProposalOutcome|passed|6-0|rework category}} | |||
Currently, said category - [https://www.mariowiki.com/Category:Mario_Kart_8_Deluxe which I have to link to externally for formatting reasons] - appears to have the scope of "everything that's in ''[[Mario Kart 8 Deluxe]]''". While sensible on paper, this results in a category whose contents are largely identical to the ''Mario Kart 8'' category, especially when it comes to its subcategories. | |||
Now, if this were a "Mario Kart 9" that happened to reuse much of ''8''{{'}}s content, I would not have an issue. It would "come by it honestly", so to speak. However, ''8 Deluxe'' is not a Mario Kart 9, and we do not treat it that way anywhere else on this wiki. They share a navbox. Articles list their subject's ''8 Deluxe'' roles in the same section, if not the same sentence, as their original ''8'' ones. The only benefit to these separate categories is being able to see everything that's in ''8 Deluxe'' as a whole, and there are [[Mario Kart 8 Deluxe#Characters|already]] [[Mario Kart 8 Deluxe#Vehicle parts|sections]] of the article for that. | |||
Why is this a problem worth paying attention to? Well, in addition to two separate categories being more difficult to maintain than one (as evidence, I submit how much content within the ''8 Deluxe'' category's current scope has not been tagged with the category), we also don't have categories for ''8 Deluxe''-exclusive content. These seem like two problems worth solving with each other to me. | |||
Here's how we do it. | |||
These are the articles I think should be within the new scope of the category: | |||
* Mario Kart 8 Deluxe | |||
* Mario Kart 8 Deluxe – Booster Course Pass | |||
* Category:Mario Kart 8 Deluxe – Booster Course Pass race courses | |||
* Category:Mario Kart 8 Deluxe images | |||
* Category:Mario Kart 8 Deluxe media files | |||
** Category:Mario Kart 8 Deluxe characters | |||
** Dry Bones | |||
** Bowser Jr. | |||
** King Boo | |||
** Gold Mario | |||
** Inkling | |||
* Category:Mario Kart 8 Deluxe objects | |||
** Cash | |||
** Arrow field | |||
** Half-pipe | |||
** Water Geyser | |||
** Metal ball | |||
** Bumper (Mario Kart series) | |||
** Flipper (Mario Kart series) | |||
** Penguin | |||
** Mushroom Trampoline | |||
** Mushroom Platform | |||
** Wiggler | |||
* Koopa Clown | |||
* Inkstriker | |||
* Splat Buggy | |||
* Master Cycle Zero | |||
* Ancient Tires | |||
* Paraglider | |||
* Boo | |||
* Feather | |||
* ''(All 8 of MK8DX's battle courses)'' | |||
* ''(All 6, eventually 12, of the Booster Course Pass cup articles)'' | |||
* List of Mario Kart 8 Deluxe staff | |||
* List of official Mario Kart 8 Deluxe tournaments | |||
* List of sponsors debuting in Mario Kart 8 and Mario Kart 8 Deluxe | |||
* Mario Kart 8 Deluxe in-game statistics | |||
* Mario Kart 8 Deluxe Kart Customizer Game | |||
* Which Mario Kart 8 Deluxe racer are you most like? | |||
I would like to call attention to the fact that direct subcategories of the ''Mario Kart 8'' category would no longer be in this one, as well. | |||
In addition, these categories would be deleted for redundancy: | |||
* Mario Kart 8 Deluxe karts | |||
* Mario Kart 8 Deluxe bikes | |||
* Mario Kart 8 Deluxe ATVs | |||
* Mario Kart 8 Deluxe tires | |||
* Mario Kart 8 Deluxe gliders | |||
* Mario Kart 8 Deluxe items | |||
Effectively, the ''8 Deluxe'' category would become a subcategory that, unlike regular subcategories that supersede their parent category, '''is superseded by''' its parent category. | |||
I think this would clean up the ''Mario Kart 8 Deluxe'' category, bring it in line with our [[MarioWiki:Categories|category tree system policy]] by removing instances where categories are subcategories of both it and regular ''8'', and make it much easier to maintain in the future. | |||
'''Proposer''': {{User|Ahemtoday}}<br> | |||
'''Deadline''': December 5, 2022, 23:59 GMT | |||
====Support==== | |||
#{{user|Ahemtoday}} Per proposal. | |||
#{{User|Hewer}} Per proposal, I was quite confused by what the category's scope was meant to be before. | |||
#{{User|Killer Moth}} Per proposal. | |||
#{{User|TheFlameChomp}} Per proposal, I think it makes sense to cut down on the redundant categories here, as well as other reissues in general. I do agree with Mario jc's point in the comments about keeping "Mario Kart 8 Deluxe characters" having enough entries per policy, though. | |||
#{{User|RealStuffMister}} per proposal | |||
#{{User|Waluigi Time}} Per all. | |||
====Oppose==== | |||
====Comments==== | |||
A few minor nitpicks about the list: [[Train (obstacle)|train]] covers the Super Bell Subway trains and they were in original 8 so it should be removed, ninja Shy Guys don't have an article separate from Shy Guys which are in original 8 so they can go too, [[Half-pipe (object)|half-pipe]]s are missing, and Boo is in a bit of a weird spot because it was an obstacle in original 8 and became an item in Deluxe so I'm not sure whether it should be included or not. (Also for future reference, you can link to categories non-externally by putting a colon at the start of the link, e.g. <nowiki>[[:Category:Mario Kart 8 Deluxe]]</nowiki> gets you [[:Category:Mario Kart 8 Deluxe]].) {{User:Hewer/sig}} 04:23, November 28, 2022 (EST) | |||
:Thanks for the advice! I've changed the list to match. In the case of Boo... honestly, considering its drastically different roles in the game, I'd say it can be in both [[:Category:Mario Kart 8 species]] and [[:Category:Mario Kart 8 Deluxe]] in the same way [[Chain Chomp]] is in both the Double Dash [[:Category:Mario Kart: Double Dash!! species|species]] and [[:Category:Mario Kart: Double Dash!! items|item]] categories. [[User:Ahemtoday|Ahemtoday]] ([[User talk:Ahemtoday|talk]]) 12:08, November 28, 2022 (EST) | |||
Honestly I think this rule should be applied to all reissue categories since there's a lot of redundant entries for other reissues as well. Not saying this proposal should be broadened to reflect that, but just something we can consider in the future.<br>I don't think "Mario Kart 8 Deluxe characters" should be deleted; per [[MarioWiki:Categories#Size and scope]], there's enough entries for that subcategory to stay (King Boo, Dry Bones, Bowser Jr., Inkling and Gold Mario). {{User:Mario jc/sig}} 22:40, November 28, 2022 (EST) | |||
:How did I manage to miss Bowser Jr.?<br>Anyway, I could go either way on a characters category, honestly. Five feels a bit few, even if it's over the legal minimum. If we ''do'' keep that category, we ought to make a "Mario Kart 8 Deluxe battle courses" category, since that has even more examples. Which would actually be the ''first'', since no other game has a category for that on this wiki. [[User:Ahemtoday|Ahemtoday]] ([[User talk:Ahemtoday|talk]]) 23:28, November 28, 2022 (EST) | |||
::On second thought... I've come around on this. The category ''does'' already exist, so deleting it when we don't necessarily have to would be a bit of an unnecessary change. [[User:Ahemtoday|Ahemtoday]] ([[User talk:Ahemtoday|talk]]) 15:15, November 30, 2022 (EST) |
Revision as of 18:34, December 6, 2022
Split the WFC information box for Mario Kart coursesTemplate:ProposalOutcome On every page for race courses and battle arenas in the Mario Kart series, there is an info box with some minor information about the course such as what games it has appeared in, what are the staff ghosts, etc. One of those sections is simply referred to as WFC, which stands for and links to the page for Nintendo Wi-Fi Connection, which has the information on whether the track is still playable online or not depending on what game it is, such as saying the online is no longer available for Toad's Factory since WFC shut down so Mario Kart Wii is no longer officially playable online. However, as this may be fine when referring to Mario Kart DS and Mario Kart Wii, Mario Kart 7 and 8 use Nintendo Network and Mario Kart 8 Deluxe uses Nintendo Switch Online which doesn't work well for this section because WFC links directly to the Nintendo Wi-Fi Connection page and not Nintendo Network for Mario Kart 7 and 8 and Nintendo Switch Online for Mario Kart 8 Deluxe. Because of this, I am proposing to split this section to add NN and NSO sections for Mario Kart 7, 8, and 8 Deluxe so it links the user to the correct page and not just the outdated WFC, I am also offering another alternative where is will not be split but renamed to simply 'Online Play' and unlinked from the WFC page and then add Mario Kart Tour's online status since Tour uses a generic service that doesn't use any of the aforementioned services but I feel more people will lean towards renaming the section to 'Online Play'. Proposer: Skipper93653 (talk) Split section into WFC (for Nintendo Wi-Fi Connection on Wii and DS), NN (for Nintendo Network on 3DS and Wii U), and NSO (for Nintendo Switch Online on Switch)
Rename WFC section to simply 'Online Play' and unlink it from the WFC page
Keep as-isCommentsThe "WFC" section (which used to be called "Wi-Fi") was actually intended to only be for MKWii and MKDS courses, as specified on the page for the race course template. I guess people started putting info for MK7, MK8 and MK8D on there and no one thought to remove them. However;
Honestly, I think the best thing to do is to revert it back to "Wi-Fi" and remove the link to WFC, because "Wi-Fi" can refer to all online play, not just WFC. It also makes it not be repetitive, and means we won't have to go through all 127 (yes i counted) courses with it listed, when there is a much easier, more obvious, solution) - YoYo (Talk) 10:52, October 2, 2022 (EDT) It should be noted that Mario Kart Tour also has online multiplayer as of March 8, 2020 (although Gold Pass users were able to betatest it from December 18, 2019, to December 26, 2019, as well as from January 22, 2020, to January 28, 2020). I believe that courses in Tour would also have to be implemented in the Online Play section, though with some specific details that showcases which Tours they're available in as of which date (considering the overall course selection rotates every two weeks). Now, for Coconut Mall, this can be as simple as saying "Available" and then refer to the "Tours" section earlier in the infobox, but it's probably a bit more difficult for courses that have been in the game since launch, before multiplayer was added, such as 3DS Toad Circuit, which would have to refer to the Tours section above as well, but also specify that it's only possible since Trick Tour (2020). And that's not even accounting the courses that were available during the Gold Pass-only betatests, such as N64 Kalimari Desert, which has online play since the Baby Rosalina Tour, but was also available for the first week of the Holiday Tour (2019) and the second week of the Ice Tour. Now we could do it simple and only have to say "Available" concerning Tour, but it might not be entirely accurate due to the bi-weekly rotation and the fact that Tour didn't initially launch with multiplayer (plus the two beta tests before the official multiplayer launch). We cannot split it into its own section either, because Tour doesn't have a special branding for the online service it's using, unlike DS/Wii, 7/8 or 8 Deluxe, so I feel keeping these all merged into an "Online Play" section would still be the better option. rend (talk) (edits) 12:42, October 2, 2022 (EDT) Remove "Koopa" and other name particles from Koopaling article titlesTemplate:ProposalOutcome Starting with Mario Kart 8 on Wii U hitherto the time of this proposal, Mario games have exclusively referred to Koopalings using their first names: Larry, Ludwig, Wendy etc. These games include Paper Mario: Color Splash, Mario & Luigi games, Mario Kart Tour, Dr. Mario World, Super Smash Bros. games, and Mario & Sonic games (Rio 2016; Tokyo 2020). The Koopaling article names on this wiki do not reflect this state of affairs: currently, they use the naming scheme established in old manuals, which is stylised by way of the word "Koopa" attached as a surname or nobiliary title of sorts. Said naming scheme has seen sparse use in more recent years, being specifically reserved to ancillary material such as the New Super Mario Bros. Wii Prima Guide, this video, and most likely more--I invite knowledgeable editors to expand this list for future reference. As dictated by the source priority policy, this material should not override what the games themselves put forward. In addition, the more concise versions of these characters' names would better serve readers and contributors alike. Given my statement above, the object of this proposal is to simply change Koopaling articles, and most pages directly related to the individual characters, to display only their first name. The page List of DIC cartoon episodes featuring Hip Koopa is excluded from the proposal's scope, as its title reflects the character's name used in the SMB3 cartoon. The following is a list of affected pages, with target titles in brackets:
I would also like us to hash out how to phrase the opening paragraphs in their character articles; namely, whether to list the short name or the full name first. For this, I'm splitting the support option into two possible directions:
I suppose some editors may prefer the second direction, given that it's common practice in academic and academically-modeled resources to start out an article's text with the subject's full name, and not necessarily the best known version of the name. Proposer: Koopa con Carne (talk) Support (option 1)
Support (option 2)
Oppose
CommentsI'd like to remind yet again that in Super Smash Bros. Ultimate the full names are all acknowledged - they also were acknowledged in the Wii U version of Mario & Sonic at the Rio 2016 Olympic Games that featured the Theme of Larry Koopa.
I'd actually like to take this a bit further by questioning Peach and Daisy; as of right now their article names are "Princess Peach"/"Princess Daisy", but much like how very few, if any, modern games ever refer to the Koopalings by their full names, very few, if any games references Peach and Daisy by their titles in game. Mario Kart, Mario Party, Mario Golf, Smash Bros, they all just refer to them as Peach and Daisy. And if the fact that it's a title has anything to do with it, why isn't Bowser's article named "King Bowser"? I'd wager we could probably move their articles to just Peach and Daisy for the same reasons. Tails777 Talk to me!
@Opposition: The amount of media that refers to the Koopalings using only their first name (including, as mentioned in the proposal, almost every single game they appeared in during the last decade) far surpasses the number of instances where their full name is used. Participants to the previous proposal brought up isolated, relatively minor instances of the Koopalings' full names being used, particularly in merchandise and print media, and treated them as top-priority sources despite going counter to what the naming policy says. In the spirit of hopefully convincing people that it's misguided to do so, I raise another piece of merch, the Super Mario Trading Card Collection, released in April 2022 (so pretty recent), which respects the naming model used in games. Shouldn't it similarly be taken into consideration, and be measured against a random Larry Koopa toy and a Monopoly set? Because it's clear that merchandise releases are not consistent among themselves in the least, so why not turn to what the games already very clearly establish? -- KOOPA CON CARNE 19:10, September 18, 2022 (EDT)
@Opposition: I'm challenging someone to explain why "the names are occasionally used" (in things like Smash Bros. and merchandise no less, which as I've demonstrated above aren't even consistent with themselves) is being so strongly bandied around as an argument against designating the names that are put front and center in most appearances of these characters to their wiki articles.a So far, zero proper rationale has been given for the former direction in either of the three proposals that have concerned this matter, other than a couple of arguments that can be best defined as mental gymnastics. Nobody is arguing that we should get rid of the names altogether, just that using them in such a representative fashion isn't the proper way to go--and I've already proposed two methods to handle their full names in their lead, because, much like LinkTheLefty has previously stated, these names are significant enough to deserve a mention as such. That doesn't mean Squirps is a contender for a move to "Prince Squirp Korogaline Squirpina" though. -- KOOPA CON CARNE 10:30, September 21, 2022 (EDT)
"How does typing "Koopa" on the end of the name, on the rare occasions you need to, waste any time at all?"
I'm not ready to vote on this yet (even though I supported the previous proposal), but I would just like to say that I think the difference between the two support options is extremely trivial, to the point where I don't understand why the issue even warranted separate voting options for them. Both support options have users voting exclusively for them, which is only going to increase this prop's chances of stalemating, given how polarizing this is. 17:15, October 1, 2022 (EDT)
Create Category:Mario + Rabbids Sparks of Hope SparksTemplate:ProposalOutcomePer rule 15, a proposal isn't necessary to create this category if it already sufficiently meets the standards and there's no controversy. Currently, the articles for Sparks from Mario + Rabbids Sparks of Hope have several categories attributed to them, including Category:Lumas, Category:Rabbids, Category:Allies, and Category:Mario + Rabbids Sparks of Hope characters. However, as far as I am aware, all 30 of the Sparks featured in the game meet these criteria. Therefore, per MarioWiki:Manual of Style#Categories, a more specific category should be created for these Sparks, named Category:Mario + Rabbids Sparks of Hope Sparks. Proposer: ThePowerPlayer (talk) Support
OpposeCommentsUsually, categories that cover a group of species/characters do not include the game title, even when they only appear in one game (for example, Category:Flip-Flop Folk), so I don’t think including the game title in this case is necessary. Additionally, since this category already fits the criteria mentioned by the policy, I feel that it can be carried out whenever enough Sparks pages are created, and I don’t think a proposal is really necessary. --TheFlameChomp (talk) 13:14, October 17, 2022 (EDT)
I don't think this proposal is even needed, you can just make a category. Spectrogram (talk) 13:28, October 17, 2022 (EDT) I also agree it should just be called "Category:Sparks". Nightwicked Bowser 13:47, October 17, 2022 (EDT) Remove or Split trophy/spirit cameo in the Latest appearanceTemplate:ProposalOutcome Non-physical appearance being listed in the Character Infobox. Most of the DK characters had this information. Especially, they haven't appeared in the game in over a decade. Tiny Kong hasn't appeared in a game since 2008. Excluding remakes, Toadsworth hasn't make an appearance in a new game since 2013. We recommended that remove or split any trophy/spirit cameo appearance in infobox that anyone can appeared on. Or we split their physical and overall appearance. An infobox similar to other Nintendo or third party characters.
Proposer: Windy (talk) Support (option 1)Support (option 2)
Oppose
CommentsUpdated as 'Remove' to 'Remove or Split'. Split their physical appearance similar to other Nintendo characters. If the character doesn't have a physical appearance in the recent games since Smash's spirit, the infobox must be include (YEAR, physical). Windy (talk) 16:37, October 14, 2022 (EDT)
If you want to move options after updated, do so. Windy (talk) 15:11, October 17, 2022 (EDT) Decide what Paper Airplane Chase isTemplate:ProposalOutcome Paper Airplane Chase is a DSiWare game that was made based on the minigame Paper Plane (minigame came first). If this game wasn't made based on the WarioWare minigame, the answer to how MarioWiki should cover it would be obvious: a cameo appearance. The characters just appear on the background and serve no gameplay functionality. So the question is, how should Paper Airplane Chase be covered on this wiki?
Proposer: Spectrogram (talk) Mario game
Guest appearanceCameo appearanceCommentsStandardize citations for archived pagesTemplate:ProposalOutcomeAs requested by proposer. Many web pages that are used as citations on the Mario Wiki are no longer available at their original links. Consequently, the citations use links from web page archival sites such as archive.today or the Wayback Machine. This can be seen on articles that reference the English translation of the Mario Portal, such as Banzai Bill, as well as other articles, such as Nintendo GameCube. Including archived citations is especially important for web pages that are volatile by design, such as online store listings for merchandise. However, nowhere does MarioWiki:Citations feature a template for how to properly cite archived web pages; therefore, an example of a citation for an archived page should be created under the heading What to put as references. EDIT: Per Koopa con Carne's comments, I've revised my recommendations for a standardized template below. The current basic template for citations of non-archived pages looks like this:
In order to make citations of archived pages as simple as possible, they should only link to the archived page, followed by the date and timestamp (if available) of the archived page, along with the name of the archival website:
This is what an actual citation would look like under this standard, using one of the references on the Nintendo GameCube article as an example:
Here's another example, using the citation of the Mario Portal on the Banzai Bill article (because this specific page does not have an author nor a release date attributed to it, these details are omitted from the citation):
As a clarification, this proposal does not mean to mandate that every citation of a web page should include an archived link; that should be left to editor consideration. However, in cases where archived links are necessary, such as volatile links or links that are already dead, a standard method of citation would be useful to implement. Proposer: ThePowerPlayer (talk) Support
Oppose
CommentsCan you articulate some specifics for this standard? Namely, would it suffice to include the link to a snapshot, or would editors be requested to also add the time, date, and name of the archivation website of that particular snapshot? You are putting forward the Banzai Bill citation as a template and, though I agree on encouraging comprehensive fact-checking and easy readability/access (as the user who basically pushed for this whole format across the wiki over the past years), I reckon some editors may not like being forced by policy to tick so many boxes when structuring their links. -- KOOPA CON CARNE 00:50, October 10, 2022 (EDT)
So, is the proposal now championing the prohibition of first-hand links in favour of archived links, or just a guideline recommendation for using the latter? The last statement of the proposal is in direct contradiction with the rest: "As a clarification, this proposal does not mean to mandate that every citation of a web page should include an archived link; that should be left to editor consideration." -- KOOPA CON CARNE 18:04, October 11, 2022 (EDT)
My sincere apologies for writing this so late, but I'd like to request that this proposal be cancelled. Koopa con Carne has made several valid points of opposition; on top of this, the proposal has only received three support votes other than mine (with one doubting its effectiveness). I still agree that standardized guidelines are generally better than a lack of guidelines, but I'd rather not have a policy change go into effect unless it's agreed upon unanimously or nearly unanimously (i.e. more support votes and less valid criticisms of what the proposal entails). ThePowerPlayer 20:42, October 23, 2022 (EDT) Include non-Smash appearance in an infoboxTemplate:ProposalOutcome The last proposal was failed due to considering only for deletion. Split was added but failed. However, there is a second chance, and Smash Wiki also including their non-Smash appearance. See "Most recent non-Smash appearance". Also the other-Nintendo or third party characters have included their first appearance and Mario-related media appearance together in MarioWiki. To make easily check the last physical appearance in the non-Smash games. Example for Kritter Before: After: Proposer: Windy (talk) SupportOpposeCommentsI'm pretty sure this proposal shouldn't be allowed per proposal rule 7, as it hasn't been long enough since the failure of the last one to re-propose it. Hewer (talk · contributions · edit count) 06:00, October 28, 2022 (EDT) Merge all non-Mario universe Super Smash Bros. Stages into a collective articleTemplate:ProposalOutcome Throughout the past few months the wiki has been trimming down on Super Smash Bros. content. Mutliple propsoals have now been passed supporting the trimming of Smash content including propsoals merging items, deleting general technqiues and most recently the merging of bosses. Up until I recently beleived that Smash should receive full coverage on this wiki becuause of the high level of represention Mario and its sub-franchies recive in these games. However the recent trimming of content combined with the existence of Smash Wiki I have changed my mind on this. The next step that should be taken in trimming smash content is would be to merge the stages into one collective artcile. This is probably the most radical proposal in the trimming of Smash content so far giving the stages are a big part of the Super Smash Bros. franchise. However if we are no longer going to have seperate artciles for Items and Bosses then I think it now has to be questioned to wherever or not non-Mario stages should be also still have seperate pages given this the Mario Wiki that they based on locations that have nothing or very little to do with the Mario franchise and that seperste artciles of these stages exist on Smash Wiki. Given that this the Mario Wiki that all stages based locations from the Mario and the sub-franchises should keep their artciles. By keeping them split it will emphasis that this the Mario Wiki by given increased focus on elements from Smash that are based on Mario. Therefore should this propsoal pass stages from these franchises which are covered by this wiki remain split:
One series where I think there is question mark to wherever they should be split or merged are Smash oringal stages, ie Battlefield and Final Destination. I would be also keep these with their own articles as these stages have the most hertiage of all Smash stages in the series and that they are not specfially based on a non-Mario franchise. I will therefore provide two options for merging one that sees the Smash oringnal stages remain split and the one that sees them merged. As for all the other franchises inclduing not listed above they would all be merged into an idvidual artcile with the page names being replaced by redirects and include external links to Smash Wiki. I'm very much aware that if this proposal passes it would be a very signifcant change for the wiki. But I beleive now given the trimming of smash content that has been taking place it is one that I beleive should hapoen. (Amendments made to proposal in comments below) Proposer: NSY (talk) Merge all non-Mario universe stages excluding stages orignal to SmashMerge all non-Mario universe stages including stages orignal to Smash
Merge only non-Mario adventure mode and subspace emissary stages
Keep all Smash stages split
CommentsI'm very conflicted about this. I think non-Mario Subspace Emissary stages such as Battleship Halberd Bridge or The Path to the Ruins need to be merged, but regular stages that shape Smash Bros. into what it is are fine. Not to mention, Battlefield according to the last Smash proposal will be merged with Fighting Polygons and other teams, so that would mean merging a stage that was already just merged. Keeping it unsplit alone would also be seen as weird. Your proposal also does not make an exception for Wrecking Crew (stage). Please add an option to only merge non-Mario Subspace Emissary levels Spectrogram (talk) 13:07, October 1, 2022 (EDT)
Thanks for all the feedback given on this proposal, I created this proposal because I feel like it should either be all or nothing when consdiering Smash content, either it should be all merged or all split and I felt based off the pervious proposals held that the consenus of smash content leaned towards it being merged. By having items and bosses merged but stages split i feel it is middle of the road but i do understand the points made of stages being more important. It seems very likely that this proposal is not going to pass but i'll going make amendments based of the things said to see if changes any minds. Firstly as per comments from Spectrogram and 7feetunder I've added the extra option to merge non-Mario adventure mode subpace emissary stages. Secondly in regards to infobox removals and trimming of content, i've decided to strike that off from the proposal given ideas clearly sound unpopular. Thirdly in regards to Wrecking Crewe I completly forgot that stage existed and if this proposal were to pass then that would also stay split. Lastly if this proposal passes then maybe rather than one aritcle it be mutliple articles perhaps one per game to avoid it being messey. That being said even despite these ameadments the consenus clearly belevies the stages should remain split and fully see where all of you are coming from the points made but I curious to see what you all think of these amendments. NSY (talk) @KoolKoopa, no, it doesn't. Smash series is an exception in the coverage policy, which allows such proposals to be made. It wouldn't imply removing content from other crossovers. Spectrogram (talk) 13:58, October 18, 2022 (EDT) @KoolKoopa "By that logic..." Erm, no? Mario Kart is a pure, distinctly Mario game spin-off with non-Mario stuff in it, and said non-Mario stuff gets covered as a result. Smash is not a pure, distinctly Mario game. It's a 50-ish way crossover with its own unique stuff in it on top of that. Those two situations are Apples to Fruit Punch levels of different. Merge most of what's listed in DiamondTemplate:ProposalOutcome All of the disambiguated objects on that page that bear the appearance of a diamond and are named "Diamond" (e.g. Diamond (Wario's Woods), Diamond (Wario Land 4), and Diamond (Dr. Mario World)) are the same generic subject, just with different functions--and that principle isn't used to break apart Frog, Heart, Mushroom, and other similar pages. (In fact, a proposal to split the latter ended in a failure.) This proposal aims to bring together all the aforementioned objects into one page. Regarding the diamonds that appear in a collection of functionally-identical objects, such as the diamond treasure in Wario World and the gem category in Luigi's Mansion 2, I should probably clarify that I don't intend to have them split from their parent page with this proposal, just give them a quick mention alongside the more individual diamond items on the repurposed Diamond article. Proposer: Koopa con Carne (talk) Support
OpposeCommentsWhat's the deal with Captain Toad's Super Gem? The current Diamond page says it's sometimes called a "diamond", but I don't recall that being the case in the game's English version. It will be kept a separate article whether this proposal passes or not, since it's a distinctly-named fictional object, but if Super Gems indeed have this secondary descriptor, they should be linked through an "about" tag at the top of the Diamond article. IMO. -- KOOPA CON CARNE 15:55, October 22, 2022 (EDT) Visual EditorTemplate:ProposalOutcome Editing articles using the current editing format (aka, Source Editor) is difficult. There needs to be another editing option to making editing easier. This is something Fandom has and works wonders. Proposer: Johnjohn2001 (talk) Support
Oppose
CommentsThis is not something that can be done via proposal but something that is up to our site owner (Porplemontage (talk)). Besides, while the source editor does have a difficulty curve compared to using the visual editor in fandom for beginners, I wouldn't say it is all that difficult to learn. Ray Trace(T|C) 17:01, October 25, 2022 (EDT) Personally, I'm not even sure a Visual Editor like the one FANDOM uses can be implemented. FANDOM, even back when it used to be called Wikia, tends to implement a lot of features that no other wiki farm has, such as their default skin, user blogs, message walls, comments and the Discussions feature (this also extends to discontinued skins and features). I don't think any of these FANDOM-exclusive features are compatible with other wikis outside of FANDOM.
Remove the list and table exception from MarioWiki:Article sizeTemplate:ProposalOutcome Okay, I tried starting a discussion on this first, but the lack of debate on this is ridiculous. So basically, our article size policy has this weird exception stating that "This policy does not apply to list or table pages such as Places and Trophy Descriptions (Super Smash Bros. Brawl), just actual articles." I tried asking why this clause was made and the reasoning behind it (especially considering that lists are like, 700% easier to split than normal pages) but got nothing more than a single vague answer from Doomhiker. ("Happened because of a forum discussion." - What forum discussion, when the forum discussion took place, and the actual rationale behind it are still a mystery to me.) But what I find the most alarming is that so far, this exception has been violated twice in recent months; namely, for List of tours in Mario Kart Tour and List of favored and favorite courses in Mario Kart Tour. Spirit (Super Smash Bros. Ultimate) was also split, but that had a proposal specifically for it, so I will let it slide. Rather than argue for re-merging those two list pages, I'm instead going to be arguing for the removal of this exception clause. From what I can tell, the policy was made back in the blissful perfect days of the early 2010s, back when the biggest article was Bowser and not several list pages on Mario Kart Tour-related subjects. And the list pages we have now are massive; the latter example that I gave that breached the list and table exception was over a million bytes long before it was split. When has something like that ever happened before on any wiki using any wiki-style across the internet including Wikipedia itself??? And even with the lists we have merged now, our current largest page (List of trophies in Super Smash Bros. for Wii U) is also a list and is twice as large as Bowser's article is now. This, this is ridiculous. Not only do these super long pages take full minutes to load completely and are impossible to edit concisely, but our policy explicitly states that we're not supposed to split them if they're lists, which several of our largest pages are. Considering the negatives of having massive several-hundred-thousand-byte-long list pages and the fact that lists are extremely easy to split into separate articles, and the fact that several of these articles (namely, the lists for Mario Kart Tour related stuff) show no signs of slowing down their growth, what reason is there to say that list pages shouldn't be split up a bit? Please note that if this proposal fails, the two exception-breaching list splits I mentioned before (List of tours in Mario Kart Tour and List of favored and favorite courses in Mario Kart Tour) will be re-merged into their main list pages again. We can't have our cake and eat it too. Proposer: Somethingone (talk) Support
OpposeCommentsFor clarification, the question that Spectro asked on Discord was what I interpreted to be a question as to why the favored and favorite page was split regardless of policy. They asked why lists couldn't be split after asking why that page was still split, I responded to the latter. The forum discussion in question can be seen here. Doomhiker (talk) 15:34, October 29, 2022 (EDT) Decide when to substitute the meaning/explanation of a foreign name with a hyphenTemplate:ProposalOutcome This is part one of a motion to enforce consistency regarding the use of hyphens (-) in "Meaning" sections of "Naming in other languages" tables. A minor technicality, but it's always better to adhere to a firm convention rather than being spotty about it. I've always taken the hyphen to indicate that it's redundant to explicitly note the meaning of a subject's name in a given language, either because it's an untranslatable name, the same as that subject's English name, or composed entirely of common English words. However, to my knowledge, no policy dictates using it as such, which leads to potentially confusing variances in the way information is formatted and conveyed; as an example, a recent edit to the "Foreign names" template assigns a different purpose to the hyphen, automatically rendering it where a "Meaning" argument doesn't exist in the template itself. We can't have it more than one way, so let's put our foot down on this.
If the first course of action ends up with the most votes in this proposal, it will be stated as a rule on the aforementioned "Foreign names" template's page. If the second course of action does instead, the template's own use of the hyphen will be explicitly noted on said page. Proposer: Koopa con Carne (talk) Option 1
Option 2
Option 3CommentsThe recent edit doesn't change the meaning of the hyphen, it simply provides a streamlined way to display it which saves on wikitext (omitting the M parameter rather than manually setting it equal to "-"). --Steve (talk) 20:10, November 13, 2022 (EST)
Remove external links to Zelda Dungeon Wiki and/or Triforce WikiTemplate:ProposalOutcome Early this year, a proposal was passed to add external links to Zelda Dungeon Wiki and Triforce Wiki by 10-0; the intent was to add two links to two independently hosted wikis as Zelda Wiki at the time was hosted on Fandom. Fortunately for us, this is no longer the case. Zeldapedia is now independently hosted and doing well. I think while Zelda Dungeon Wiki and Triforce Wiki have served their purpose and are great resources for Zelda content, it would be embarassing (as a NIWA wiki) to continue using these wikis when it was originally intended to supplement a Fandom wiki that has since forked its content to become independently hosted once again. Edit: After giving some thoughts, I've decided to allow users to either remove ZD Wiki or Triforce Wiki or remove them both. Proposer: PanchamBro (talk) Remove both
Remove only Triforce WikiRemove only Zelda Dungeon WikiDo nothing
CommentsHere's the thing, I'm more in favor of just removing Triforce Wiki. Zelda Dungeon Wiki, I feel, should still be kept for the reasons Doc has said. However, I'm more in favor of removing Triforce Wiki because the owner has had disturbing history on many NIWA wikis. Wikiboy10 (talk) 09:53, October 20, 2022 (EDT)
Disregarding the problematic history with Triforce Wiki (and thank god he's no longer involved), I have some issues with your argument @LinkTheLefty.
I'm not sure if this is a great argument. We already have issues with Smash coverage here, and at the moment they aren't linking to any other Smash wiki than SmashWiki. I might be getting into slippery slope territory by saying this, but I don't want an instance where we decide that if we provide enough coverage to a franchise, we should link to every wiki that covers that franchise. Relatively speaking, I don't want this wiki to start linking to https://animalcrossing.fandom.com (which is unlikely, but still). I don't think Zeldapedia minds about linking to other Zelda wikis, but I don't want this to set a precedent that quite frankly should be avoided. -- PanchamBro (talk • contributions) 11:08, October 20, 2022 (EDT)
I think I'm going to wait a bit before weighing in with a vote. For now, I think it's best if we at least replace all links to the ZeldaWiki hosted by FANDOM with links to the new independent Zeldapedia, if that hasn't been done already.
@Scrooge200 If one wiki doesn't have enough info compared to the other, there's nothing to stop anyone from fixing this. But if all wikis update themselves so that they share the same info, what's the point in linking to anything other than the associate wiki if there's no difference? That would be redundant. SmokedChili (talk) 11:35, November 13, 2022 (EST)
Okay, I think I should finally give some thoughts with how many people have addressed this problem and after hearing what others have to say. I think there are indeed some merits to keeping some wikis around as external links even if another wiki (Zelda Wiki) exists in the interwiki link. I think what really stemmed this proposal was in fact my discomfort in regards to association, even if they've been removed permanently. I'm sorry if I meant harm for Doc and the others. If we consider if "the relevant content is mature enough" to qualify a wiki being on the external links section, then the two other Zelda wikis we link up to (Zelda Dungeon Wiki and Triforce Wiki) are considered mature to have their place. The lack of engagement until very recently probably is also a clear sign that there are better priorities necessary than addressing these links. At the very least, we should establish a guideline for future external link-related proposals so that they're not...contentious with how they are being dealt. In other words, my proposal is going to be cancelled. I do hope that the MarioWiki community continues to support independent wikis and NIWA in general and try not to cater too much on Fandom. The Zelda Wiki fork definitely helped momentum in that regard. -- PanchamBro (talk • contributions) 22:05, November 14, 2022 (EST)
Partially unban citing the English version of the Super Mario Bros. Encyclopedia as official names for subjectsTemplate:ProposalOutcome I know what you're probably thinking, but hear me out. The original proposal had three options - the first option was unanimously decided against, but I think it may be time the second option had another look. Things have changed a bit since the proposal in 2018, and it's become evident that, while this probably hasn't happened to the extent that it did in Super Mario Bros. Encyclopedia (and hopefully won't again), fan-name borrowing has happened on smaller scales. Piranha Pod (from the book) and Nipper Dandelion (not from the book) became in-game names in Super Smash Bros. Ultimate. Some of the names from the book have been immediately discarded, such as Micro Piranha Plant, but tellingly, the English version of the Mario Portal website more recently used a hefty combination of names from the Super Mario Bros. Encyclopedia as well as new localizations, and there is little question that the names there are accepted. And on a Nintendo-related note, renowned Pokémon localizer Nob Ogasawara has said that he would not have minded using fan-names if he felt the name was good. So, after some thought, I believe the wiki could adapt from these developments and unban English citations of the Super Mario Bros. Encyclopedia in a strictly limited capacity, discouraging it but at the same time accepting that it does and will sometimes happen beyond our control. Here is my vision for it: Super Mario Bros. Encyclopedia would now be taking a special sixth spot as an acceptable English source here, making it the very last resort before taking foreign and conjectural names; citing the name from Super Mario Bros. Encyclopedia would only be allowed on the express condition that there is no other suitable higher source. This means that the vast majority of the book would remain uncitable; however, this rule should reduce our list of foreign article names quite a bit, as well as open up the possibility of new and more accessible articles. Again, if there is literally any other viable English source available, the Super Mario Bros. Encyclopedia reference would get removed from the article and any alternate name it had would only be used as a redirect, just as the case is now. The current conjecture and another language templates may need to get rephrased, but there will be a new encyclopedia template to denote encyclopedia-named articles as a special case. Under these unique rules, citogenesis and mistakes will be kept to a minimum. At least the following will be renamed:
*Not renamed so much as probably removed from the another language category. Suggested edge cases consist of the following:
If this proposal passes, there might be the idea to lift certain other English-language restrictions such as profile and description incorporation at a later date, but for now, these restrictions seem functional. Proposer: LinkTheLefty (talk) Support
Oppose
CommentsI think there should be an option which is a support with two additional conditions:
Overall, the fear of ultimately citing ourselves is not unjustified, so I think that before accepting the names of the English encyclopedia we should be sure that we aren't the source of said names. What do you think?--Mister Wu (talk) 18:42, November 19, 2022 (EST)
@FanOfYoshi, @LinkTheLefty, @Mister Wu, Why haven't you mentioned your previous approval of banning the book as a source? Here are few quotes respectively: "They give the names from the wiki, and i realize it isn't Nintendo of America who translated this.", "The initially known issues don't even begin to scratch the surface. There are countless mistakes that add up to give the impression that the English translation simply ceased over a year ago after steadfast overreliance on the wiki, providing a particular time capsule of factually incorrect and outdated information throughout the book. The wiki itself is a constant work-in-progress, and to say that an officially licensed product looking up to it is unprofessional would be an understatement. While there are outliers, any potential benefit the book might have had is seriously outweighed by the actual damage, and so it doesn't feel right to use it as a source unless a revised edition ever comes to fruition that fixes all of these problems.", "I feared the book might not have been completely reliable, but I didn't expect that it would have quite frequently used wikis to get names, even when said names were conjectural or didn't follow the policies of the wikis themselves. At this point, it's better to just tell the editors not to use this book as a reliable source of information regarding names, since it isn't." Wikiboy10 (talk) 18:07, November 25, 2022 (EST)
Include physical appearance in an infoboxTemplate:ProposalOutcome The last proposal was failed due to considering only for deletion. Split was added but failed. However, there is a second chance, and Smash Wiki also including their non-Smash appearance. See "Most recent non-Smash appearance". Also the other-Nintendo or third party characters have included their first appearance and Mario-related media appearance together in MarioWiki. To make easily check the last physical appearance in the non-Smash games. Example for Kritter Before: After: Proposer: Windy (talk) SupportOppose
CommentsHaven't decided what to vote for yet, but I should point out that bringing up how other wikis handle certain situations is not a good argument as they often work vastly different from how we do. Nightwicked Bowser 14:12, November 18, 2022 (EST) Something I want to point out is that we do seem to have this in practice for first appearances; for example, check out Roy (Fire Emblem), Bubbles (Clu Clu Land), or Cream the Rabbit. LinkTheLefty (talk) 21:32, November 18, 2022 (EST)
I think that, instead of including most recent non-Smash appearance, we should be including most recent physical appearance instead. That means that, if the character's most recent appearance is nothing more than a pictured cameo, then we can add the most recent appearance in which the character actually physically appears. The infobox on Monty Mole would be a good example of what I'm getting at, as it includes both its most recent appearance in Tetris 99 (which is nothing more than a pictured cameo appearance), as well as in Mario Party Superstars (in which it actually appears in physical form. In Kritter's case, its most recent appearance would include Super Smash Bros. Ultimate (the latest (non-physical) appearance) and Super Smash Bros. for Nintendo 3DS (the latest actual, physical appearance).
It's an abandoned situation, so I think this proposal needs to be extended. Windy (talk) 21:39, November 24, 2022 (EST) Rework the Mario Kart 8 Deluxe category into a subcategory of the Mario Kart 8 category covering only Deluxe-exclusive contentTemplate:ProposalOutcome Currently, said category - which I have to link to externally for formatting reasons - appears to have the scope of "everything that's in Mario Kart 8 Deluxe". While sensible on paper, this results in a category whose contents are largely identical to the Mario Kart 8 category, especially when it comes to its subcategories. Now, if this were a "Mario Kart 9" that happened to reuse much of 8's content, I would not have an issue. It would "come by it honestly", so to speak. However, 8 Deluxe is not a Mario Kart 9, and we do not treat it that way anywhere else on this wiki. They share a navbox. Articles list their subject's 8 Deluxe roles in the same section, if not the same sentence, as their original 8 ones. The only benefit to these separate categories is being able to see everything that's in 8 Deluxe as a whole, and there are already sections of the article for that. Why is this a problem worth paying attention to? Well, in addition to two separate categories being more difficult to maintain than one (as evidence, I submit how much content within the 8 Deluxe category's current scope has not been tagged with the category), we also don't have categories for 8 Deluxe-exclusive content. These seem like two problems worth solving with each other to me. Here's how we do it. These are the articles I think should be within the new scope of the category:
I would like to call attention to the fact that direct subcategories of the Mario Kart 8 category would no longer be in this one, as well. In addition, these categories would be deleted for redundancy:
Effectively, the 8 Deluxe category would become a subcategory that, unlike regular subcategories that supersede their parent category, is superseded by its parent category. I think this would clean up the Mario Kart 8 Deluxe category, bring it in line with our category tree system policy by removing instances where categories are subcategories of both it and regular 8, and make it much easier to maintain in the future. Proposer: Ahemtoday (talk) Support
OpposeCommentsA few minor nitpicks about the list: train covers the Super Bell Subway trains and they were in original 8 so it should be removed, ninja Shy Guys don't have an article separate from Shy Guys which are in original 8 so they can go too, half-pipes are missing, and Boo is in a bit of a weird spot because it was an obstacle in original 8 and became an item in Deluxe so I'm not sure whether it should be included or not. (Also for future reference, you can link to categories non-externally by putting a colon at the start of the link, e.g. [[:Category:Mario Kart 8 Deluxe]] gets you Category:Mario Kart 8 Deluxe.) Hewer (talk · contributions · edit count) 04:23, November 28, 2022 (EST)
Honestly I think this rule should be applied to all reissue categories since there's a lot of redundant entries for other reissues as well. Not saying this proposal should be broadened to reflect that, but just something we can consider in the future.
|