MarioWiki:Proposals

From the Super Mario Wiki, the Mario encyclopedia
Jump to navigationJump to search
f_propcopym_9045f2d.png


Proposals can be new features (such as an extension), removal of a previously added feature that has tired out, or new policies that must be approved via consensus before any action(s) are done.
  • Any user can support or oppose, but must have a strong reason for doing so, not, e.g., "I like this idea!"
  • "Vote" periods last for one week.
  • All past proposals are archived.

A proposal section works like a discussion page: comments are brought up and replied to using indents (colons, such as : or ::::) and all edits are signed with the signature code ~~~(~).

How To

  1. Actions that users feel are appropriate to have community approval first can be added by anyone, but they must have a strong argument.
  2. Users then vote and discuss on the issue during that week. The "deadline" for the proposal is one week from posting at:
    1. Monday to Thursday: 17:00 (5pm)
    2. Friday and Saturday: 20:00 (8pm)
    3. Sunday: 15:00 (3pm)
  3. Every vote should have a reason accompanying it.
  4. At any time a vote may be rejected if at least three active users believe the vote truly has no merit or was cast in bad faith. However, there must be strong reasons supporting the invalidation.
  5. "# " should be added under the last vote of each support/oppose section to show another blank line.
  6. At the deadline, the validity of each vote and the discussion is reviewed by the community.
  7. Any proposal that has three votes or less at deadline will automatically be listed as "NO QUORUM"
  8. All proposals are archived. The original proposer must take action accordingly if the outcome of the proposal dictates it. If it requires the help of a sysop, the proposer can ask for that help.

The times are in EDT, and are set so that the user is more likely to be online at those times (after school, weekend nights).

So for example, if a proposal is added on Saturday night at 11:59 PM EDT, the deadline is the next Saturday night at 8:00 PM. If it is indeed a minute later, the deadline is a day plus 15 hours (Sunday), as opposed to a day minus 4 hours.

CURRENTLY: 02:03, 28 May 2024 (EDT)


New Features

None at the moment.

Removals

Repeated Images

Me and Stumpers discussed about Repeating Images on articles. On the article R.O.B., at one point, there were two Brawl artworks on the same page. That was soon changed by a sysop. However, in picture galleries at the end of the article, as Stumpers said, "is really great for seeing how the character has evolved". I agree with that statement. Since there are yet no official rules about repeating images on a single article, this proposal will hopefully make it clear. However, this means two pictures on one article. Three or more is redundant, and makes the article quality go down.

Proposer: Marcelagus (T • C • E)
Deadline: April 3, 2008, 17:00

Repeated Images on Articles

  1. Marcelagus (T • C • E) Per what I said above. Sometimes you just need the same pic in two places.
  2. Time Questions: I don't see a problem with it, and indeed, seeing how the character has evolved is good. And the same picture twice in one article doesn't even take twice the time to load, right?
  3. Stumpers! Per myself and Garlic Man. That's my understanding, too, Time Q. If this doesn't pass, though, we can alleviate this problem by replacing official art in the biography section with screenshots, moving the artwork to the bottom. That would be more applicable IMO anyway, since the section is on the character's actions rather than his/her appearance.
  4. Princess Grapes Butterfly Per all I agree!
  5. — Stooben Rooben Yup. Per all.
  6. Walkazo - I don't see a problem with reusing images as long as they're in large articles that have enough other images to offset the repetition (otherwise it might look a bit lazy on our part).
  7. Sprite of the Ruby Star in Paper Mario: The Thousand-Year Door CrystalYoshi Yoshi Egg Sprite.png No reason not to. It doesn't waste that much space, only a little bit. Plus some images in the gallery also have a place on the page.
  8. BLOC PARTIER. Per all, and see my comments.

No Repeated Images

  1. Glitchmansig.PNG Glitchman (talk · contribs) Glitchmansig.PNG - Meh, I see your point, but there are probably already too many images on the major pages as it is.
  2. Fixitup - It's a waste of space, and a waste of perfectly good and usable images otherwise.
  3. As long as I've been here, we've always gone by an image is in an article once and thats it. I also agree with Fixitup said, so per him (or her). SJ derp :P

Comments

Wait wait wait... I don't seem to understand the proposal. Do you mean the same pic on, say, the top and then again on the bottom? Or something else...? BLOC PARTIER. Sorry, I may just be an idiot. :P

Well, anywhere. Including the gallery, the main image, and images throughout the article. Marcelagus (T • C • E)
Hmm... Then I must disagree. See my reasons above. BLOC PARTIER.
I don't think we'd ever have an image up three times, though. Stumpers! 23:03, 27 March 2008 (EDT)
You say it'd be fine if an image was repeated twice at the most. By opposing, however, you say that an image must not appear more than once in an article. It seems to be a contradiction. If you support, you don't support the idea that an image may appear three times in one article, but only that it may be repeated. To make it clearer, perhaps Garlic Man can modify the proposal's description, in the way that even if the supporters' side wins, an image may only appear twice. 'cause three times would definitely be too much imho. Time Questions 07:43, 28 March 2008 (EDT)
You have a point. I'll remove my vote for now, because there is no place for me to vote. If there ever is, I'll move it there. ;) BLOC PARTIER.
Sorry, Infected Shroom. You're right, my proposal was not very clear. Twice is the max, and only twice. Three times is over the limit. I have changed the proposal slightly as well. I hope this helped. Marcelagus (T • C • E)
Alright. Thank you. ;) BLOC PARTIER.

Fixitup: please explain your vote. What do you mean "a waste of perfectly good and usable images otherwise"? It's not like an image has a limited number of uses allowed. And Toadette: what's so great about one of the image per page, even it's been that way since you came. Sprite of the Ruby Star in Paper Mario: The Thousand-Year Door CrystalYoshi Yoshi Egg Sprite.png 20:44, 30 March 2008 (EDT)

Well, if we add images twice, the bandwith is slowly depleted away, and that is what keeps the site up. SJ derp :P
Toadette, "As long as I've been here, we've always gone by an image is in an article once and thats it." is not a valid oppose; if it has been, that's what the proposal is trying to change. Also, it's not a waste of space. It's useful as a visual aid. It's not like we're putting a bunch of images on the page just to make it bigger. Marcelagus (T • C • E)
I also put "Per Fixitup". =) SJ derp :P

Are we talking about screenshots or artwork? My Bloody Valentine

Splits & Merges

Banjo and Conker: Back in the Fold

i aint good at proposing Wiki-changing but i must to ge tthis out. About a year ago i made almost 85% of the Banjo Articles. As their articles are unseen by the general public on the RareWiki and the Conker articles on line with obscure gems i propose we bring Banjo and conker back. i mean there are some great articles on rarewiki nobody reads cause its an unsuccessful spin-off. Even though the yare owned by Microsoft now cant contradict they are part of DK's universe first.I mea nthe series in Super smash bros. dont need a spinned off article franchise here but banjo and Conker mad their first appearances in a DK game. That makes their universe as DK related as King K. Rool.

Proposer: WarioLoaf (talk) Deadline:

YAYo!

NAYo!

Comments

Changes

Damsels

After making a template on the "damsels" in the Mario series, Coincollector brought up an interesting point to me. Why did I put males in the damsels template. I had always thought that damsel meant "someone in need of rescue", when in fact (I looked it up) it generally means a "female in need of rescue". I had then thought of the Damsel Category, and how a lot of male characters are listed in it. So, here's my proposal:

Because of vocabulary mix-up with the category, I believe that the category's name should be retitled Category:Characters in Need of Rescue. It isn't a huge change, but it is a confusing thing. Like Coincollector said: "Why do you put masculine characters in the 'damsels' template? Are they 'ladies'?".

Proposer: — Stooben Rooben
Deadline: April 6, 2008, 15:00

Name Change

  1. — Stooben Rooben Reasons given above. Per me, and CC for pointing it out.
  2. Stumpers! 02:09, 30 March 2008 (EDT) Booster has been removing that category and replacing it with a template of "hostages." I think a category for that would be good, too.
  3. Ghost JamShyghost.PNG per Stooben Rooben.
  4. Sprite of the Ruby Star in Paper Mario: The Thousand-Year Door CrystalYoshi Yoshi Egg Sprite.png See comment below.
  5. Walkazo - A hostage is a person "held by another as a pledge for certain conditions to be fullfilled", criteria that does not apply to most of the characters currently in this category/listed in this template. "Characters in Need of Rescue" may be wordy, but at least it's accurate.
  6. BLOC PARTIER. Damsels... AWKWARD! But anyway, per all.
  7. Princess Grapes Butterfly Per all (Doesn't hostage mean captive?)

Leave it Alone

Comments

Uh, not sure whether I understand this proposal. Correct me if I'm wrong: There is no Damsels category anymore, only a Hostages category. Do you still want to rename it to "Characters in Need of Rescue"? Time Questions 06:58, 30 March 2008 (EDT)

According to my dictionary, "damsel" just means a youg, unmarried woman. "Damsel in distress" means a woman in need of rescue. And plus some of the characters are male, which is against the definition. So the name should be changed, I'll vote. Sprite of the Ruby Star in Paper Mario: The Thousand-Year Door CrystalYoshi Yoshi Egg Sprite.png 08:44, 30 March 2008 (EDT)

But... the category isn't called "Damsels" anymore. Or am I wrong here? Time Questions 08:50, 30 March 2008 (EDT)
Somebody already renamed it. :P MarioGalaxy2433g5 {Talk/Contribs} 09:15, 30 March 2008 (EDT)
Yeah, both the template and the category. So as Time Q said, by default this proposal is about changing the name "Hostages" to "Characters in Need of Rescue" (hopefully for both template and category, for consistancy's sake). - Walkazo
What's wrong with "hostages"? - Cobold (talk · contribs) 10:53, 30 March 2008 (EDT)
Hostages doesn't really sound right. Hostages is more like by professional kidnappers or something. But it's fine. It's "damsels" that I voted against. Sprite of the Ruby Star in Paper Mario: The Thousand-Year Door CrystalYoshi Yoshi Egg Sprite.png

15:15, 30 March 2008 (EDT)

I agree, "hostages" doesn't sound right to me either (though perhaps only a native speaker of English can judge that). The term "hostage" implies that there are conditions to fulfill so that the captive will be released. Which isn't the case with every single "hostage" on that list, I think. Time Questions 14:16, 30 March 2008 (EDT)
Yes, per Time Q. That's what I meant. Sprite of the Ruby Star in Paper Mario: The Thousand-Year Door CrystalYoshi Yoshi Egg Sprite.png

15:15, 30 March 2008 (EDT)

Miscellaneous

None at the moment.

Retrieved from "https://www.mariowiki.com/index.php?title=MarioWiki:Proposals&oldid=351455"