MarioWiki:Proposals/Archive/51: Difference between revisions

{{MarioWiki:Proposals/Archive Template|current=yes}}

{| class="{{#if: {{{overturned|}}}|mw-collapsible mw-collapsed|notice-template reminder}}" style="background:white;margin:0.15em;border:1px solid black;padding:0.5em 1em;{{radius|1em}}" width="100%"

{| class="{{#if: {{{overturned|}}}|mw-collapsible mw-collapsed|notice-template reminder}}" style="background:white;margin: .15em;border:1px solid black;padding: .5em 1em;{{radius|1em}}" width="100%"

{| class="{{#if: {{{overturned|}}}|mw-collapsible mw-collapsed|notice-template reminder}}" style="background:white;margin: .15em;border:1px solid black;padding: .5em 1em;{{radius|1em}}" width="100%"

The link is really there for the reader (99% of wiki visitors), not the editors. Your scenario imagines a reader who wants to get into editing, but that is a very low percentage case. The vast majority of our traffic only reads. If they want to get into editing, they will be introduced to our help pages and {{tem|Wikipolicy}} at some point and see the categories link. The target audience of [[MarioWiki:Categories]] is the editor and isn't as useful as [[Special:Categories]] if your only goal is exploring the site. A reader can use the search box on [[Special:Categories]] to check out different categories we have, for example. The info on MarioWiki:Categories about our category structure and where to put categories probably isn't the reading that visitors came to the site for (deep ''Mario'' lore). Editors and would-be editors seeking category help will find MarioWiki:Categories through our help pages, where as visitors are not going to know that Special:Categories exists without the link since they're not roaming through [[Special:SpecialPages]]. That Categories link appears across the wiki, on every namespace, and it takes you to a page that let's you explore all the wiki's categories (makes sense). Not sure it should take you to a policy page instead! --{{User:Porplemontage/sig}} 14:33, 25 February 2018 (EST)

The current [[Template:Kingdom|''Super Mario Odyssey'' Kingdom nav-template]] has (mostly red) links for all the named locations within every kingdom in the game. I think each one of these locations getting an article is a bad idea.

#{{user|Wildgoosespeeder}} The proposal is about allowing as many characters in the original title as possible, if the suggested title has technical issues. When such a case occurs, use the <code><nowiki>{{DISPLAYTITLE}}</nowiki></code> [[mediawiki.org:Help:Magic words|MediaWiki Magic Word]] to correct the title. <code>#</code> in URLs are used for linking to headers in a page name, like [[Iggy's Castle#Overview|this example]]. Even forcing URL encoding brings up an error. [https://www.mariowiki.com/%231_Iggy%27s_Castle] I couldn't get MediaWiki to parse this normally, so a forced URL is used to demonstrate.

[[MarioWiki:Proposals/Archive_51#Make_an_exception_for_the_Super_Smash_Bros._series_in_our_coverage_policy|The previous ''Super Smash Bros.'' proposal]] allowed us to justify previous exceptions to ''Smash'' coverage (i.e. the stage hazards and Smash Taunt characters) and paved a path for future exceptions. After [https://www.marioboards.com/index.php?topic=39608.0 the discussion on the forums], this proposal will outline exactly what further exceptions will be made, as in which pages will be merged and which pages will remain intact. With that out of the way, let's dive in!

Note that this proposal isn't completely exhaustive: there are scattered pages like [[List of Mii Outfits]] and [[List of bonuses in Super Smash Bros.]] that also deserve scrutiny, but considering the subtle differences between each of them, it'd be best to tackle those individually and not overburden this proposal. Still, there's plenty that's already being covered here. It's a lot to take in, but these are changes that should be taken for all the same reasons as before. It's disingenuous to treat the ''Super Smash Bros.'' series as if its ''Mario'' content is even close to that of existing crossovers with the franchise like ''[[Fortune Street]]'' and ''[[Mario & Sonic (series)|Mario & Sonic]]''. The wiki should strive to reflect that.

::Why did I forget to sign again? Stupid me. Anyways, I already feel we shouldn't be covering most of Donkey Kong's games since I feel we are robbing [[DKWiki:Main Page|Donkey Kong Wiki]] site traffic, but I don't want to stir up that hive of bees again (*shutters at my talk page*). I've given up that idea and won't push that anymore. Let's try a different game example. --{{User:Wildgoosespeeder/sig}} 18:35, 2 April 2018 (EDT)

:::@Wildgoosespeeder: [[dkwiki:Forum:Merge_with_Super_Mario_Wiki]] - [[User:Reboot|Reboot]] ([[User talk:Reboot|talk]]) 19:09, 2 April 2018 (EDT)

This primarily affects {{tem|species-infobox}}. In the immediate aftermath, this proposal will be achieved by putting all three variables in the "See also" line (with appropriate <nowiki>{{#if:*}}s</nowiki> so that they can be stacked vertically), inside a new <nowiki>{{{see also}}}</nowiki> variable, which will be on the documentation and override the older variables if both the new and old variables are used. In the longer term, it may require use of a bot to make wiki-wide changes, especially if full alphabetisation (as opposed to priority-based sorting) is desired.

Add an <code><nowiki>|</nowiki>enemies=</code> section to <nowiki>{{</nowiki>[[Template:Levelbox|Levelbox]]<nowiki>}}</nowiki> and move "Enemies" sections (like [[World 1-1 (Super Mario Bros.)#Enemies]]) to the infobox. This information doesn't seem like it's worth a whole section since it's already covered in the overview section, and small lists (which is the case in most levels) would fit perfect in an infobox, especially if they were comma separated instead of bulleted.

<br \><s>{{User|The Retro Gamer}} <s>Per my proposal. Edit 1: I'm thinking about how to (and if I will) revise my proposal; I don't think this reformatting will work well on a grand scale for levels with more than 20 enemies.</s> Edit 2: Alex95 suggested that the infobox section could be collapsible, and I like this option very much; it elegantly solves the space concern while putting infobox-appropriate information in the infobox. '''Edit:''' No longer my preferred option; see my vote above.

#{{user|Wildgoosespeeder}} The concern over a long enemy list isn't a big one because MediaWiki CSS styles we use start the list collapsed (<code><nowiki>mw-collapsible mw-collapsed</nowiki></code>). See [[mediawiki.org:Manual:Collapsible elements|here]]. Leaving an enemy list as an article section instead of in an infobox makes the specific vital level information look excluded. A level infobox should include basic level information, such as time limit, world-level, music, etc., which I see enemies as that type of information.

Still thinking over, so I'm not going to vote yet, but keep in mind that a "spoiler box" is a thing as well. Like in [[Template:Species-infobox]]. Perhaps this new section can be coded like that, if space is the main issue. {{User:Alex95/sig}} 00:20, 30 April 2018 (EDT)

However, I don't see why this is actually a template yet. It won't really hurt to add one (and [[MarioWiki:Proposals/Archive 44#Create a template for proposal outcomes|given the]] [[MarioWiki:Proposals/Archive 46#Expand the "Outcome template" rule to appeal outcomes|many prior proposals]] [[MarioWiki:Proposals/Archive 46#Create .7B.7BTPPDiscuss.7D.7D|to templatize certain]] [[MarioWiki:Proposals/Archive 51#Create a template for FA archives|repetitive features of the wiki]]), hence why I am proposing this. There are still many reviewers and aggregators out there, so it may take a while to add them in, but I've added quite a bit in the meantime. The only real problem is figuring out how to configure the URLs (since some links are inconsistent with others on the same site), but it's also something we can fix as we go on.

*'''It may not be entirely inaccurate, but it's not entirely accurate either.''' As {{user|Super Radio}} (the original proposer) pointed out, the term "[[wiktionary:outer space|outer space]]" is specifically used to refer to the open, near-empty space outside the gravitational sphere of any celestial body. As far as I can tell, [[Outer Space]] from ''[[Super Paper Mario]]'', the locations in ''[[Super Mario Galaxy]]'' (including the [[Comet Observatory]] itself), the worlds of ''[[Super Mario Galaxy 2]]'', the last four worlds of ''[[Super Mario 3D World]]'', and [[Rainbow Road (Wii)|two incarnations]] [[Rainbow Road (Wii U)|of Rainbow Road]] are the only unambiguous examples. That's literally all. The majority of locations that are purported to be in outer space are heavily implied to be otherwise. [[Cosmic Adventure]], for example, is "said" to be in outer space despite specifically being defined as just a [[Mini-Land]] attraction; the "outer space" backdrop is just a backdrop, more or less. Some locations are also only temporarily in outer space, too. [[Princess Peach's Castle|Peach's Castle]], for example, is pulled into outer space by [[Bowser]] and his minions in both ''[[Paper Mario]]'' and ''[[Super Mario Galaxy]]''. In the case of the former, [[Bowser's Castle]] is also temporarily in outer space! As {{user|Glowsquid}} once said, ''"Furthermore, why would you use an inaccurate and potentially misleading term when dozens of accurate, non-misleading alternatives exist?"''

A recurring trend on this wiki is to create articles on real-world terms, such as [[Genre]], [[Level]], and [[Pre-release and unused content]]. I know we've said something like this in [[MarioWiki:Proposals/Archive 27#Reality vs. Fiction|the first proposal aimed at reducing ''generic'' subjects]], but allowing these articles as precedents would lead to further unnecessary articles, such as {{fake link|Episode}}, {{fake link|Map}}, {{fake link|Cutscene}}...the list goes on. {{wp|Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not a dictionary|Keep in mind that wikis are not dictionaries}}, and we don't necessarily ''need'' articles on those subjects, same as the generic subjects. Therefore, in a similar vein to the generic subjects proposal I linked to, I propose that we allow articles on real-world terms '''only if they have a function or purpose that makes them unique and discernible from the way the term is applied elsewhere'''.

*[[Unrevisitable locations]] – Same as fourth wall.