MarioWiki:Proposals

From the Super Mario Wiki, the Mario encyclopedia
Revision as of 18:10, December 11, 2023 by Seandwalsh (talk | contribs) (→‎Oppose)
Jump to navigationJump to search
Image used as a banner for the Proposals page
Current time:
Friday, May 10th, 17:38 GMT
Proposals can be new features (such as an extension), the removal of previously-added features that have tired out, or new policies that must be approved via consensus before any action is taken.
  • "Vote" periods last for one week.
  • Any user can support or oppose, but must have a strong reason for doing so (not, e.g., "I like this idea!").
  • All proposals must be approved by a majority of voters, including proposals with more than two options.
  • For past proposals, see the proposal archive and the talk page proposal archive.

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 using the code {{User|User name}}.

How to

Rules

  1. If users have an idea about improving the wiki or managing its community, but feel that they need community approval before acting upon that idea, they may make a proposal about it. They must have a strong argument supporting their idea and be willing to discuss it in detail with the other users, who will then vote about whether or not they think the idea should be used. Proposals should include links to all relevant pages and writing guidelines. Proposals must include a link to the draft page. Any pages that would be largely affected by the proposal should be marked with {{proposal notice}}.
  2. Only registered, autoconfirmed users can create, comment in, or vote on proposals and talk page proposals. Users may vote for more than one option on proposals with more than two choices.
  3. Proposals end at the end of the day (23:59) one week after voting starts, except for writing guidelines and talk page proposals, which run for two weeks (all times GMT).
    • For example, if a proposal is added at any time on Monday, August 1, 2011, the voting starts immediately and the deadline is one week later on Monday, August 8, at 23:59 GMT.
  4. Every vote should have a strong, sensible reason accompanying it. Agreeing with a previously mentioned reason given by another user is accepted (including "per" votes), but tangential comments, heavy sarcasm, and other misleading or irrelevant quips are just as invalid as providing no reason at all.
  5. Users who feel that certain votes were cast in bad faith or which truly have no merit can address the votes in the comments section. Users can ask a voter to clarify their position, point out mistakes or flaws in their arguments, or call for the outright removal of the vote if it lacks sufficient reasoning. Users may not remove or alter the content of anyone else's votes. Voters can remove or rewrite their own vote at any time, but the final decision to remove another user's vote lies solely with the administrators.
    • Users can also use the comments section to bring up any concerns or mistakes in regards to the proposal itself. In such cases, it's important the proposer addresses any concerns raised as soon as possible. Even if the supporting side might be winning by a wide margin, that should be no reason for such questions to be left unanswered. They may point out any missing details that might have been overlooked by the proposer, so it's a good idea as the proposer to check them frequently to achieve the most accurate outcome possible.
  6. If a user makes a vote and is subsequently blocked for any amount of time, their vote is removed. However, if the block ends before the proposal ends, then the user in question holds the right to re-cast their vote. If a proposer is blocked, their vote is removed and "(banned)" is added next to their name in the "Proposer:" line of the proposal, which runs until its deadline as normal. If the proposal passes, it falls to the supporters of the idea to enact any changes in a timely manner.
  7. No proposal can overturn the decision of a previous proposal that is less than 4 weeks (28 days) old.
  8. Any proposal where none of the options have at least four votes will be extended for another week. If after three extensions, no options have at least four votes, the proposal will be listed as "NO QUORUM." The original proposer then has the option to relist said proposal to generate more discussion.
  9. All proposals that end up in a tie will be extended for another week. Proposals with more than two options must also be extended another week if any single option does not have a majority support: i.e. more than half of the total number of voters must appear in a single voting option, rather than one option simply having more votes than the other options.
  10. If a proposal with only two voting options has more than ten votes, it can only pass or fail by a margin of three votes, otherwise the deadline will be extended for another week as if no majority was reached at all.
  11. Proposals can only be extended up to three times. If a consensus has not been reached by the fourth deadline, the proposal fails and can only be re-proposed after four weeks, at the earliest.
  12. 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 an administrator, the proposer can ask for that help.
  13. If the administrators deem a proposal unnecessary or potentially detrimental to the upkeep of the Super Mario Wiki, they have the right to remove it at any time.
  14. Proposals can only be rewritten or deleted by their proposer within the first three days of their creation (six days for talk page proposals). However, proposers can request that their proposal be deleted by an administrator at any time, provided they have a valid reason for it. Please note that canceled proposals must also be archived.
  15. Unless there is major disagreement about whether certain content should be included, there should not be proposals about creating, expanding, rewriting or otherwise fixing up pages. To organize efforts about improving articles on neglected or completely missing subjects, try setting up a collaboration thread on the forums.
  16. Proposals cannot be made about promotions and demotions. Users can only be promoted and demoted by the will of the administration.
  17. No joke proposals. Proposals are serious wiki matters and should be handled professionally. Joke proposals will be deleted on sight.
  18. Proposals must have a status quo option (e.g. Oppose, Do nothing) unless the status quo itself violates policy.

Basic proposal and support/oppose format

This is an example of what your proposal must look like, if you want it to be acknowledged. If you are inexperienced or unsure how to set up this format, simply copy the following and paste it into the fitting section. Then replace the [subject] - variables with information to customize your proposal, so it says what you wish. If you insert the information, be sure to replace the whole variable including the squared brackets, so "[insert info here]" becomes "This is the inserted information", not "[This is the inserted information]". Proposals presenting multiple alternative courses of action can have more than two voting options, but what each voting section is supporting must be clearly defined. Such options should also be kept to a minimum, and if something comes up in the comments, the proposal can be amended as necessary.

===[insert a title for your proposal here]===
[describe what issue this proposal is about and what changes you think should be made to improve how the wiki handles that issue]

'''Proposer''': {{User|[enter your username here]}}<br>
'''Deadline''': [insert a deadline here, 7 days after the proposal was created (14 for writing guidelines and talk page proposals), at 23:59 GMT, in the format: "May 10, 2024, 23:59 GMT"]

====Support====
#{{User|[enter your username here]}} [make a statement indicating that you support your proposal]

====Oppose====

====Comments====

Users will now be able to vote on your proposal, until the set deadline is reached. Remember, you are a user as well, so you can vote on your own proposal just like the others.

To support, or oppose, just insert "#{{User|[add your username here]}}" at the bottom of the section of your choice. Just don't forget to add a valid reason for your vote behind that tag if you are voting on another user's proposal. If you are voting on your own proposal, you can just say "Per my proposal".

Talk page proposals

All proposals dealing with a single article or a specific group of articles are held on the talk page of one of the articles in question. Proposals dealing with massive amounts of splits, merges or deletions across the wiki should still be held on this page.

For a list of all settled talk page proposals, see MarioWiki:Proposals/TPP archive and Category:Settled talk page proposals.

Rules

  1. All active talk page proposals must be listed below in chronological order (new proposals go at the bottom) using {{TPPDiscuss}}. Include a brief description of the proposal while also mentioning any pages affected by it, a link to the talk page housing the discussion, and the deadline. If the proposal involves a page that is not yet made, use {{fake link}} to communicate its title in the description. Linking to pages not directly involved in the talk page proposal is not recommended, as it clutters the list with unnecessary links. Place {{TPP}} under the section's header, and once the proposal is over, replace the template with {{SettledTPP}}.
  2. All rules for talk page proposals are the same as mainspace proposals (see the "How to" section above), with the exceptions made by Rules 3 and 4 as follows:
  3. Voting in talk page proposals will be open for two weeks, not one (all times GMT).
    • For example, if a proposal is added at any time on Monday, August 1, 2011, it ends two weeks later on Monday, August 15, 2011, at 23:59 GMT.
  4. The talk page proposal must pertain to the article it is posted on.
  5. When a talk page proposal passes, it should be removed from this list and included in the list under the "Unimplemented proposals" section until the proposed changes have been enacted.

List of ongoing talk page proposals

Unimplemented proposals

Proposals

Merge the Wrecking Crew and VS. Wrecking Crew phases into list articles, Axis (ended February 24, 2022)
Do not consider usage of classic recurring themes as references to the game of origin, Swallow (ended March 9, 2022)
Split Mario Kart Tour character variants into list articles, Tails777 (ended May 4, 2022)
Enforce WCAG Level AA standards to mainspace and template content, PanchamBro (ended May 29, 2022)
Change how RPG enemy infoboxes classify role, Doc von Schmeltwick (ended September 18, 2022)
Trim away detailed special move information for all non-Mario fighters, Koopa con Carne (ended January 30, 2023)
Classify the Just Dance series as a guest appearance, Spectrogram (ended April 27, 2023)
Establish a standard for long course listings in articles for characters/enemies/items/etc., Koopa con Carne (ended June 8, 2023)
Consider filenames as sources and create redirects, Axis (ended August 24, 2023)
Add tabbers to race/battle course articles, GuntherBB (ended November 18, 2023)
Remove elemental creatures categories from various Super Mario RPG enemies, Swallow (ended January 11, 2024)
Standardize the formatting of foreign and explanatory words and phrases in "Names in other languages" tables, Annalisa10 (ended February 7, 2024)
Merge Super Mario Bros. (film) subjects with their game counterparts, JanMisali (ended April 18, 2024)
Remove profiles and certain other content related to the Super Mario Bros. Encyclopedia from the wiki, Koopa con Carne (ended April 30, 2024)
Create The Cutting Room Floor link template, Bro Hammer (ended May 7, 2024)

Talk page proposals

Split all the clothing, Doc von Schmeltwick (ended September 12, 2021)
Split the various reissues of Mario Bros., Doc von Schmeltwick (ended April 22, 2022)
Split machine parts, Robo-Rabbit, and flag from Super Duel Mode, Doc von Schmeltwick (ended September 30, 2022)
Expand source priority exception to include regional English differences, LinkTheLefty (ended January 14, 2023)
Add product IDs in game infoboxes, Windy (ended March 18, 2023)
Remove the list of Super Smash Bros. series objects, Axis (ended May 10, 2023)
Merge Start Dash with Rocket Start, Koopa con Carne (ended August 17, 2023)
Use italics for the full title of the Mario Kart 8 Deluxe – Booster Course Pass, Hewer (ended September 15, 2023)
Split Special Shot into separate articles by game, Technetium (ended September 30, 2023)
Convert the lists of episode appearances for television series characters into categories, Camwoodstock (ended November 22, 2023)
Decide which series certain Yoshi games are related to, GuntherBB (ended December 14, 2023)
Change the Super Mario 64 DS level section to include more specific character requirements, Altendo (ended December 20, 2023)
Replace "List of Game Over screens" and "'Game Over' as death" sections with a "History" section, DrippingYellow (ended December 20, 2023)
Split the Jungle Buddies from Animal Friends, DrippingYellow (ended December 22, 2023)
Make major changes to the MarioWiki:Links page, PnnyCrygr (ended January 10, 2024)
Make bestiary list pages for the Minion Quest and Bowser Jr.'s Journey modes, Doc von Schmeltwick (ended January 11, 2024)
Merge the "Johnson" running gag into one page, Doc von Schmeltwick (ended January 11, 2024)
Merge the ghost Bats and Mice from Luigi's Mansion to their respective organic counterparts from the later games, Doc von Schmeltwick (ended January 20, 2024)
Split Strobomb from Robomb, Doc von Schmeltwick (ended January 20, 2024)
Split the NES and SNES releases of Wario's Woods, SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA) (ended March 27, 2024)
Merge Mii Brawler, Mii Swordfighter, and Mii Gunner to Mii, TheUndescribableGhost (ended March 28, 2024)
Merge Masterpieces to the Super Smash Bros. Brawl and Super Smash Bros. for Wii U articles, Camwoodstock (ended March 31, 2024)
Split Mario's Time Machine (Nintendo Entertainment System), or the Super Nintendo Entertainment version along with both console versions of Mario is Missing!, LinkTheLefty (ended April 11, 2024)
Rename Beanstalk to Vine, DrippingYellow (ended April 11, 2024)
Remove non-Super Mario content from Super Smash Bros. series challenges articles, BMfan08 (ended May 3, 2024)
Merge Stompybot 3000 with Colonel Pluck, DrippingYellow (ended May 4, 2024)
Merge Party Ball (item) with Party Ball, GuntherBayBee (ended May 5, 2024)
Split "Big Boo (character)" from Big Boo, Doc von Schmeltwick (ended May 8, 2024)

Writing guidelines

None at the moment.

New features

Add unique final lap music to the infoboxes of certain Mario Kart 7 and Mario Kart 8 (Deluxe) courses

In Mario Kart 7, Mario Kart 8, and Mario Kart 8 Deluxe, certain courses have their final lap music altered beyond increased tempo and pitch. Some have a different, shorter intro, one has added instrumentation, and three even start at the end of the song rather than the beginning. I was thinking about adding these unique final lap songs to their respective courses' infoboxes. They are technically different songs from their normal versions, after all.

I know what you'll probably be asking: Would this improve the wiki in any way, though? Yes, actually. Right now, we're having to tediously list out each course whose final lap song has a unique intro, and while it isn't too bad right now, I could see this becoming terribly clunky if future Mario Kart games include more unique final lap songs. By including these songs in their courses' infoboxes instead, we shouldn't need to point this out every time this occurs in the Mario Kart series.

Note that this proposal only affects courses from Mario Kart 7, Mario Kart 8, and Mario Kart 8 Deluxe — while games like Mario Kart Arcade GP and Mario Kart Wii also have final lap songs that skip parts of their normal versions (and it may be worth doing a proposal for them later), most to all of their courses have this trait and it wouldn't be as notable for them.

Articles affected by this proposal: Rock Rock Mountain (Mario Kart 7 only), 3DS DK Jungle, 3DS Rainbow Road, Toad Harbor, Dolphin Shoals, N64 Rainbow Road, Mute City, GCN Baby Park, GBA Ribbon Road, and SNES Bowser Castle 3.

EDIT: Following concerns that most of these aren't different enough from their normal versions, I've added an option for just adding 3DS Rainbow Road, N64 Rainbow Road, and GCN Baby Park's final lap songs, as theirs start from the ending of the normal version's music and are therefore the most unique.

Proposer: SolemnStormcloud (talk)
Deadline: December 13, 2023, 23:59 GMT

Add unique final lap music for all listed courses

  1. SolemnStormcloud (talk) Per proposal.

Add unique final lap music for 3DS Rainbow Road, N64 Rainbow Road, and GCN Baby Park only

  1. SolemnStormcloud (talk) Secondary choice.

Do nothing

  1. PnnyCrygr (talk) Would not it just pad the page's file size up? The page would have to load a bit slower to accommodate these new final lap media files. They are basically the same music, but sped up.
  2. Ahemtoday (talk) I'm not particularly moved to add something into the infobox to make a trivia bullet point shorter. If the list of courses this applies to gets so long that it's untenably unwieldy, I think at that point it'd be so common that it wouldn't be worth listing at all.
  3. Arend (talk) From what I can gather, the only differences most of these listed final lap versions have is that they have just the shorter intro, and the way these are different are... kinda minor? Certainly only slightly more notable than all the intro-less Mario Kart Wii courses, but not really notable enough to require inclusion on the course pages either. I certainly never noticed that MK7's version of Rock Rock Mountain had a different final lap intro. 3DS Rainbow Road and N64 Rainbow Road I feel are the only Final Laps notable enough to be included, and it's only because they skip a huge portion of the original music track and begin near the end instead. Dolphin Shoals's final lap will just play the entire Dry Land version throughout the whole course instead of at the end...which also isn't justifiable to include since the regular Dry Land version is already on the page; I think a Trivia item can simply cover that already. I'm pretty sure only a handful of Mario Kart Arcade GP DX Final Lap versions are more notable because some have a different, shorter loop that goes gradually faster per loop (then again, I think I only noticed that with Bon Dance Street and Pac-Man Stadium, and I'm honestly unsure about those two).
  4. ExoRosalina (talk) It would waste the time if we add the final lap versions, because like in Mario Kart Wii, it skips the first part but with exceptions are Toad's Factory and Ghost Valley 2. In similar reasons with Ahemtoday, it will be very unnecessary if we add the info box for final lap versions.

Comments

@PnnyCrygr — Agh, didn't take that into consideration... Still, it's better to not have to point out every course with a unique final lap intro every time another one appears in the series. I've added another option for just adding the final lap music of 3DS Rainbow Road, N64 Rainbow Road, and GCN Baby Park. SolemnStormcloud (talk) 19:42, December 7, 2023 (EST)

@Arend — Not that it will change your opinion, but Dolphin Shoals' final lap music also has added whistles. SolemnStormcloud (talk) 19:42, December 7, 2023 (EST)

@Ahemtoday — If the list does end up getting that long, I think we should still give some coverage to these unique final lap songs. SolemnStormcloud (talk) 09:00, December 8, 2023 (EST)

@ExoRosalina — The Mario Kart Wii courses have their intro skipped entirely, while the Mario Kart 7 and 8 courses in question use a different, shorter intro. SolemnStormcloud (talk) 09:00, December 8, 2023 (EST)

Ultimately, I won't mind if this proposal fails — this was a throwaway proposal made as a form of catharsis while I was stressed. All of us have our ideas that we think would improve this wiki, but of course, not everyone will agree with every idea. SolemnStormcloud (talk) 09:00, December 8, 2023 (EST)

Removals

None at the moment.

Changes

Stop separating alternate -VISUAL- media artwork in image galleries

Something that's been bothering me for a while is that singular character/species/item artwork for non-game -VISUAL- media (for instance, The Super Mario Bros. Super Show and The Super Mario Bros. Movie) are separated from game artwork and usually awkwardly crammed into a "miscellaneous" section for stock images (another issue for later) and random things like concept art, icons, and official memes. I see no reason why these pieces of artwork created for a defined piece of -VISUAL- media should be shunted below the others just because of the medium used; after all, computer applications like Super Mario Bros. Print World do get to be included among the games.

Clarification:
NO MERGE: Screenshots, sprites/models/cels, full scans - including game cards reusing pre-existing stock art, generic-nonspecific-promotional artwork, box art, photographs
DO MERGE: Promotional artwork for characters and objects specifically made for and associated with a particular show/book/movie/non-video-based game

Proposer: Doc von Schmeltwick (talk)
Deadline: December 11, 2023, 23:59 GMT

Support

  1. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) - Per.
  2. DesaMatt (talk) - Per proposal.
  3. Super Game Gear (talk) Great points made. Per proposer.
  4. Camwoodstock (talk) While you could argue there are some edge cases where a case-by-case basis is warranted, in general there isn't really a case where these things exceed enough appearances for their own subset of the gallery except for like... Maybe Mario and Bowser, who already have parts of their galleries (namely the screenshots) split off into entire media categories because of stuff like Bowser's copious amount of alternative costumes in the cartoons or Mario being the titular character of a multimedia franchise; in the case of galleries where this ratio is a lot slimmer, however--like, say, Bowser's character art in specific only having one image for DiC King Koopa instead of a notable percentile of the page, melding the non-game media in with their overall game appearances rather than into their stock art sections would make more sense to us. And, as we mentioned, in any sort of edge-case, we can pretty easily handle that in the future; especially since said "edge cases" most likely pertain to the largest galleries on the site, which are generally impacted the least by already having the multimedia split for different reasons.
  5. Hewer (talk) Per all.

Oppose

  1. LadySophie17 (talk) Cramming them into the often much larger game installments section isn't much better either. They are not games, so I think they are fine where they are. If anything, an option to separate them from both games and miscellaneous would fare better.
  2. Okapii (talk) Per LadieSophie. I wouldn’t be opposed to creating a separate gallery section for more prominent non-game media, but shoving them in alongside models and renders from the games would be messy.
  3. Mario (talk) Concerns here. Are we going to organize Fake Mario Show by episode or by when the show launches? Are there instances where game installments have been released in between episode windows? Should we try to fill every episode for the show? Is it a good idea to apply this proposal to all character galleries or only particular ones (like Mario's gallery vs Paragoomba's gallery); this has been brought up in a support vote by Camwoodstock which should be a provision in a proposal first. How is "alternate media" or "nongame media" defined? Are we going to also merge scans and merchandise images? Is promotional art in general gonna be merged? Will the group art in Mario's gallery be merged? There's definitely something pictured in the proposer's head like cartoon screenshots, Mario Supershow individual art, and comic book scans, but it's not defined in the proposal. As I said with "Have stricter policies for one-off generic species characters", this proposal has an issue that I think brings up valid points, but the solution outlined is too vague. Enforcing this can end up creating unforeseen problems. It doesn't help that this proposal's title is "Stop separating alternate media artwork in image galleries" which suggests that all alternate media artwork should be merged (such as group art taken from a photograph of an airport; File:MarionFriends NintendoCheckin.png; good luck trying to arrange that chronologically with the rest of the page) but seems to concern with "singular character/species/item artwork" rather than all sorts of media, which can be easily misread in archives.

    I emphasize that getting wiki discussion first is important before creating a committing to a proposal like this and then suddenly people are deciding on something and agree to a proposal (and sway the vote that can happen literally overnight; everyone has different schedules; they're not going to know when an proposal has cropped up and then like 7 people already support it) that has a lot of unanswered questions that need to be addressed within a week time span. That being said, and to be fair for the authors of proposals I've been criticizing, MarioWiki seems to not have a lot of places to do this. Proposals generate discussions more easily than talk page comments but can be daunting to subject your suggestions to a vote. I've tried to bring up a general discussion in Talk: Main Page regarding our editing field, and maybe that's the place to go for this sort of thing (it seems like the most logical place). It's just, again, a matter of who will respond to your discussion? I don't know if it's a prevalent issue of not having discussion until the proposal comes, but eh.
  4. FanOfYoshi (talk) Per all.
  5. Sdman213 (talk) Per all.
  6. PnnyCrygr (talk) Per.
  7. Seandwalsh (talk) Per all.

Comments

@Opposition I had thought of that, but a majority of subjects with non-game art have maybe one or two instances of it, which is too little to have a designated section of a large gallery. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 18:40, December 4, 2023 (EST)

For the record: my vote has been made after this comment. Icon showing how many lives Mario has left. From Super Mario 64 DS. It's me, Mario! (Talk / Stalk) 21:13, December 4, 2023 (EST)
King Koopa from The Super Mario Bros. Super Show!
When I bring up the cartoon, I mean stock artwork created for it

@LGM Considering we've been putting new/retouched Mario Portal artwork with the game it represents despite coming years after, presumably when the show first aired. I've been thinking through this for a while. As for the scope of "alternative media," things like TV, books, film. Scans of random merchandise and wall art would not count. I'm using "medium" by the definition of "able to tell a story." I would not count things like - say - full trivia cards, food wrappers, or action figures as "media" by any stretch, and I'm honestly not sure how we got there. Anyways, I'll amend the proposal by specifying that it is -VISUAL- media, which is generally understood to be animation/books/film/games; also, please note, this proposal is only for artwork, not for screenshots or standard scans. While I suppose animation cels could be counted as sprites, that is out of the scope of this proposal. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 21:11, December 4, 2023 (EST)

Can this be clarified in the proposal? Will this proposal merge only art from TV, film, and comic books? You can expand the scope later as needed. Also, on a tangent that wouldn't directly apply to this proposal; it's just a thought experiment: why should merchandise not be merged? I'm just curious. I don't think it should be merged either since it isn't immediately from a particular installment, but arguably there's a release date associated with these things, a particular portrayal of these characters, and there's perhaps even narrative to some of these. And it's not like game applications like Mario no Photopi or little basic digital games like Luigi's Hammer Toss have narratives tied to them, but let's say a hypothetical Mario DnD game comes around. It has a specific launch date, has a narrative, Mario plays a role, and Mario gets art of it. It has all the markings of a game like Fortune Street except it's a physical board game. This art would go on the merchandise aspect probably. But why not put it with the rest of the games? And if this one, why not Super Mario Level Up! or Super Mario Blow Up! Shaky Tower Balancing Game? Icon showing how many lives Mario has left. From Super Mario 64 DS. It's me, Mario! (Talk / Stalk) 21:25, December 4, 2023 (EST)
OK, clarifying above. Presumably art for toys would go with box art if we were merging all of that. Now, if'n a TTRPG were to come out and have artwork created specifically for it, I'd absolutely be fine with merging it, but most board/card games we do have on the site don't have isolated art unique from pre-existing video game art; any that do, sure, I see no problem with it (and on the Triforce wiki I include art from a Milton-Bradley board game in the standard image galleries). Now, for generic unspecified art used on a variety of products (and Mario Party: Star Rush), like, say, "promotional render of pink-colored Yoshi sitting down (not associated with any game)," I also want those merged at some point in the long run, but it's more difficult in figuring out when it was first utilized. I suppose the main reason I want the alt-media art merged is because it's ultimately irrelevant what the source media was; unlike a screenshot, a piece of artwork created for it makes no difference what the source media was. It's still just artwork created as supplement to something else. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 21:34, December 4, 2023 (EST)

Merge the identically-named Donkey Kong Country 2: Diddy's Kong Quest and Donkey Kong Land 2 levels

This proposal aims to merge the identically named Donkey Kong Country 2: Diddy's Kong Quest and Donkey Kong Land 2 levels together (e.g. Pirate Panic (Donkey Kong Country 2: Diddy's Kong Quest) and Pirate Panic (Donkey Kong Land 2) to Pirate Panic). While it is true that the layouts are entirely different in all respects, they are still just as much the same subject as the worlds containing them are (e.g., Gloomy Gulch is obviously the same world in both games, and the map itself was reused from Donkey Kong Country 2). Just because the layout is different doesn't mean that it's a different subject. The level Stronghold Showdown even shares an article between the two games, simply because its layout is the same. The only reason they were split is because of the vastly different layouts, which may have been because it would look too crammed if it were all together in like tables.

However, I've been creating a solution to that. For one, I've redoing several of the Donkey Kong level articles to get rid of the crammed tables and present things in a simpler fashion (which I began doing after discussing it with an administrator) and completed all levels in the original three Donkey Kong Country games. Before getting to the Donkey Kong Land 2 pages I'd like to reintegrate them their Donkey Kong Country 2: Diddy's Kong Quest level. An example of how such a page would look can be found on my sandbox page, though if this proposal passes, we can adjust the consistent format if needed.

Proposer: Super Game Gear (talk)
Deadline: December 12, 2023, 23:59 GMT

Support

  1. Super Game Gear (talk) As proposer.

#SolemnStormcloud (talk) Might as well split off GBA Ribbon Road's remake in Mario Kart 8 if layout differences really matter that much. It's more convenient to have just one article with no identifier, anyways.

Oppose

  1. Koopa con Carne (talk) They're different levels regardless of their name being identical, and it's a good excuse to keep the size of their articles in check. The GBA Ribbon Road analogy doesn't hold because the course, while adapted to look good in HD and to make use of MK8's mechanics, maintained its general layout. No, I'd say this case is more similar to Jungle Hijinxs (DKC) vs. Jungle Hijinxs (DKCR), or Bramble Scramble (DKC2) vs. Bramble Scramble (DKCTF), and the proposal is basically supporting their merge on the basis of name alone.
  2. Hewer (talk) The proposal fails to present any reason why splitting levels for having entirely different layouts is a bad thing. In the case of level articles specifically, where the layout is really the subject's most important aspect, having an entirely different layout between games is a good way to determine different levels, and merging levels just because they share a name and a theme is a bad idea. Mario Kart courses are a different situation, as not only is the basic layout unchanged, Ribbon Road's "GBA" prefix proves beyond doubt that it is the same course. A more comparable situation would be the two completely different Sherbet Lands.
  3. DrippingYellow (talk) Having two levels in a single article is unprecedented, and also results in some awkwardness, like two different enemy and object lists, two different layout sections, trivia that applies to one level but not its Donkey Kong Land II equivalent...
  4. SolemnStormcloud (talk) As much as I think Ribbon Road's remake isn't as similar to the original as most would say, at least it's not completely different like these levels are.
  5. Swallow (talk) Per all
  6. Mario (talk) The merge doesn't seem to be worth the hassle.
  7. TheFlameChomp (talk) Per all.
  8. YoYo (talk) They're different levels. The Ribbon Road analogy is also very backwards... as they are still both Ribbon Road.

Comments

@Koopa Con Carne: No, there are other reasons why I made this proposal, such as the worlds sharing a page or even one "boss" level, Stronghold Showdown, having the same article between games. It's not just based on the name alone. It's making the point that the layout is the only reason why the articles are split, which is why Stronghold Showdown or the worlds are not split as well as why they share information between Donkey Kong Country 2 and Donkey Kong Land 2. Putting the level pages together would establish a consistency rather than have the information flying all over the place. The levels are not just based on name, but also feature, such as Bramble Blast having barrel-blasting between brambles or Target Terror involving riding a roller coaster. If the two pages are together, it will help list the consistent similarities between the two levels' main features, or when it doesn't, like Glimmer's Galleon (ironically) not having Glimmer in Donkey Kong Land 2. Super Game Gear (talk) 14:37, December 5, 2023 (EST)

They're different levels. Full stop.
1. "The levels are not just based on name, but also feature, such as Bramble Blast having barrel-blasting between brambles or Target Terror involving riding a roller coaster." Once again I bring up Bramble Scramble (Donkey Kong Country 2: Diddy's Kong Quest) and Bramble Scramble (Donkey Kong Country: Tropical Freeze). Same title, same bramble-based concept. Fits snugly in your reasoning.
2. Splitting Stronghold Showdown would have been nonsense considering it's less of a level and more of a glorified cutscene, whose "layout" is essentially just one long platform where you briefly encounter DK; you can't argue for consistency by pivoting around a minor set-piece that is inherently distinct from all the other levels.
3. The worlds share pages because they're the same exact overarching areas on Crocodile Isle, down to having the same level map. If one were to treat them as inherently different just because the levels within them are, at what point up the hierarchy of "greater locations" would the line be drawn? Splitting them between their SNES and Game Boy appearances would have made as much sense as splitting Crocodile Isle on the same grounds.
-- KOOPA CON CARNE 15:28, December 5, 2023 (EST)
The Tropical Freeze example is a digression, and it's obvious that Bramble Scramble from that game is not the same, especially because it does not take place on Crocodile Isle, nor does it have the same pinpoint location on the world map like just about every Donkey Kong Land 2 level has with their Country 2 counterpart, which the DKL2 levels aimed to replicate. I would never have proposed to merge the Tropical Freeze level into the Country 2 / Land 2 level As contradictory as this sounds, DKC2/DKL2 levels are both the same levels yet they are not solely from a gameplay point of view, which is because of the layout. There's still the boss levels like Kleever's Kiln and Kleaver's Kiln, which have a nearly identical layout, and Kreepy Krow's boss level also involves climbing up ropes to the next area. The areas range from very different (like Pirate Panic in DKL2 vs. DKC2), to very similar (Kleever's Kiln in both games) to practically identical (like Stronghold Showdown). Super Game Gear (talk) 16:20, December 5, 2023 (EST)
The layouts being different across the two games entails that important objects such as DK Coins and Bonus Barrels are positioned differently--and I'd argue people mostly read these articles for the items and secrets. The circumstances are there to neatly distribute this content between articles instead of lumping it together in one page and, consequently, making the content less accessible. Stronghold Showdown again is a "level" only in the sense that you can individually select it from the world map in much the same way as Funky's Flights II and Kong Kollege. "The Tropical Freeze example is a digression, and it's obvious that Bramble Scramble from that game is not the same, especially because it does not take place on Crocodile Isle" Alright then, take Jungle Hijinxs (Donkey Kong Country) and Jungle Hijinxs (Donkey Kong Country Returns). Same location, same level placement, same concept, with the added quality that they're both in the same series of games. Merge them, then? -- KOOPA CON CARNE 17:01, December 5, 2023 (EST)
Yeah, Jungle Hijinxs is a closer example, though I haven't thought about whether to merge those (it might end up looking like the Mario Kart course pages). The similarities between DKC and DKC Returns are significantly less than with DKC2 and DKL2, which even share the exact same storyline & the latter also aims to almost directly carry most things over from Country 2, just on a Game Boy system. There are still more variables of similarities between the Country 2 and Land 2 levels. Most of the returning supporting locations, worlds, enemies, all the same as in Donkey Kong Land 2. The entire set of levels in DKL2 (save for a few) have the exact same name as their DKC2 counterpart, as well as same placement on world map, which I've brought up. They directly carried things over from Country 2, including the world map, but made different level iterations for the game, changing little else (other than what they did not carry over, like Kudgel's Kontest). I don't want to digress too much into the retro Studios games, as that doesn't fully concern the scope of this proposal. However, the Jungle world where DKCR's Jungle Hijinxs takes place is not an exact replica of the Kongo Jungle world from Donkey Kong Country, whilst the world maps in DKC2 and DKL2 are the exact same. There's no Ropey Rampage or Coral Capers in DKC Returns, and all the enemies and collectibles are different. Meanwhile, there's a different iteration of Pirate Panic, Mainbrace Mayhem, Gangplank Galley, so forth so forth in DKC2 and DKL2, both also featuring DK Coin and Kremkoins as the key items. Super Game Gear (talk) 17:21, December 5, 2023 (EST)
Just saw the World 1-1 case brought up. I said earlier in comments (regarding Bramble Scramble) that merging based on name alone shouldn't be the deciding factor, but Country 2 and Land 2, despite being different games, have exceptional variables of similarities to one another. Super Game Gear (talk) 17:31, December 5, 2023 (EST)
So why not merge the Lost Levels with their SMB1 counterparts? And what about New Super Mario Bros. U and New Super Luigi U, which also share the exact same world map and level themes (and The Final Battle and The Final Battle even share the same name), but with completely different layouts? Hewer (talk · contributions · edit count) 17:54, December 5, 2023 (EST)
Looks like New Super Mario Bros. U and New Super Luigi U are the most comparable to Country 2 and Land 2. Maybe someday their level pages being merged could be the subject of a different proposal, in which case the New Super Mario Bros. U name takes precedent, due to the Switch version having both games but retaining the part of its New Super Mario Bros. U, whilst Luigi U is an expansion. I'm going off-topic, however, but just wanted to quickly share my thoughts that I may be up for merging those. Super Game Gear (talk) 18:02, December 5, 2023 (EST)

@KCC Just letting you know, you linked Bramble Scramble (Donkey Kong Country 2: Diddy's Kong Quest) twice. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 16:05, December 5, 2023 (EST)

Thanks. -- KOOPA CON CARNE 16:06, December 5, 2023 (EST)

@DrippingYellow — Even though I've officially changed my stance on this proposal, I still can play devil's advocate and say those footnotes could be replaced with subheaders. SolemnStormcloud (talk) 19:29, December 6, 2023 (EST) @YoYo — Admittedly, Ribbon Road's layout differences don't bug me as much after Mario Kart Tour continued to alter the layouts of certain GBA courses, but I made that remark on impulse and no longer stand by my initial vote. Please don't bring any more attention to it. SolemnStormcloud (talk) 13:45, December 11, 2023 (EST)

Remove icons from Lists of Course appearances in Mario Kart Tour

The time has finally come. With Mario Kart Tour ending all new content, it is the perfect time to start addressing some of the.... issues it has caused. Namely bloated article sizes with atrocious loading times. A quick look at Special:LongPages will show you that Mario Kart Tour absolutely dominates the category. In the top 50 longest pages, Mario Kart Tour accounts for 36 of them! And of those 36, 30 are "List of [Course] Appearances in Mario Kart Tour" pages. Worse than just being long pages, these pages are absolutely filled to the brim with images. Looking at the largest offender, the number of images in the article is over 9000! (Literally. There are 9212 icons in the page.) Outdated meme aside, this drastically increases the loading times for the page, especially in slower machines. If you need to find any specific character in this, it also becomes a giant game of Where's Waldo?. (There are only two regular Rosalinas in this page, can you find them?) This proposal aims to address those problems.

Don't get me wrong, I like the icons. They make the page look nice and organized. But when dealing with articles this large, efficiency should be a priority. I have made here an example of what a page would look like following this proposal. I'll be the first to admit it doesn't look pretty. It might not be the easiest to read either, but at least its contents are easily searchable with Ctrl+F, something the original lacks. Most importantly, it is less than half the size of the original, and should load much faster. This should help curb some of the unstoppable growth of Mario Kart Tour, or at least encourage some more discussion on how to stop it.

This proposal applies only to "List of [Course] appearances in Mario Kart Tour". Other Mario Kart Tour pages have different formatting and need to be tackled separately.

Proposer: LadySophie17 (talk)
Deadline: December 13, 2023, 23:59 GMT

Support

  1. LadySophie17 (talk) I know this is a lot to change but I intend to take responsibility.
  2. Koopa con Carne (talk) Per proposal.
  3. BMfan08 (talk) I think it's bizarre just how many MKT pages have been in LongPages, especially given how we're looking at trimming other pages right now. Per all.
  4. Mushroom Head (talk) I seriously have an eyesore when scrolling through these pages, since they are so ridiculously long and image-full. Also I tried to preview the largest offender, and it said "An error occurred while attempting to preview your changes. The server did not respond within the expected time."
  5. Camwoodstock (talk) Per proposal. In addition to taking forever to load, the images end up making everything ironically blend together and it actually makes it harder to find information you're looking for, rather than just, say, Ctrl+F finding it in the text version. We can accept something looking a little garish if it's much more practical!
  6. SolemnStormcloud (talk) Per all.
  7. Waluigi Time (talk) Between the long load times and the lack of page text making it a lot harder to actually find information, I'm in full support.
  8. PnnyCrygr (talk) Seriously considered opposing this, since I thought itd make the table harder to comprehend, but now I support because of the compaints that the table icons are an "eyesore". Also, per all, because adding many icons slows down loading.
  9. Archivist Toadette (talk) While the recent page trimmings in general concern me a little (since some articles in question would already be very long by nature and are likely to only become longer and longer over time), I do agree that this will reduce the clutter on each table and give our readers a better navigational experience. Per all.
  10. Sdman213 (talk) Per all.
  11. Mario (talk) I hate these articles.
  12. TheFlameChomp (talk) Per all.
  13. Shadow2 (talk) Holy crap, it took THIRTY-THREE seconds to load on my otherwise high-speed internet.
  14. ExoRosalina (talk) Per all, and yeah it will destroy my loading time even on better internet if so many icon images have included like around 4GB or higher.
  15. Yoshi360 (talk) Per all.

Oppose

Comments

Honestly, I'd kind of prefer a half-way point. The actual icons are fine, but then you have things like 512x512px kart artwork that's been shrunk down to tiny size. I think images that are small by default should be kept while ones that are large and just shrunk past the point of recognition should be nixed. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 10:48, December 6, 2023 (EST)

I definitely agree with Doc. BOWSER... (talk) 20:36, December 6, 2023 (EST)
Now HOLD ON. Looking at the example page, I noticed that the boxes where the icons normally are end up being very cramped. That could potentially be a problem. The crampedness currently seems to be just for karts and gliders, but only because the boxes for characters are big. I think we could fix this NOT by removing every single icon, as that COULD, not likely but it's possible, create a precedent for icon removal, but by changing the box sizes so that there's as little cramping as possible. SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA) (talk) 11:41, December 8, 2023 (CST)
I can see the character boxes being cramped due to the large amount of characters, but I believe the solution for that is to make the character boxes larger than the other boxes. I still fully intend to remove all of the icons for this page, as letting only character icons stay makes the table inconsistent, and makes characters not searchable, which defeats one of the purposes for this proposal. — Lady Sophie Wiggler Sophie.png (T|C) 14:58, December 8, 2023 (EST)
No, I said change the sizes of the boxes, not remove all icons but the character icons. SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA) (talk) 14:08, December 8, 2023 (CST)
I think she was talking to me... Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 17:04, December 10, 2023 (EST)

Merge Chain Chomp (Elder Princess Shroob), Digi-Koopa, and Digital Boo with their respective boss articles

These articles have been around for far too long. Let's look at what we have here:

  • Exhibit A: Chain Chomp (Elder Princess Shroob). It's effectively just a purple Chain Chomp with Shroob-like eyes, and it only appears during a specific attack used by Elder Princess Shroob during her first phase. It is not targetable nor does it have a distinct official name. There is an inquiry about a possible Japanese name, but nobody has responded to it.
  • Exhibits B & C: Digi-Koopa and Digital Boo. Just like Exhibit A, these only appears as parts of an attack during a specific boss fight, namely Bowser Memory ML. In particular, the Koopa's only role is to shrink Bowser Memory M after he uses his Super Mushroom attack, and it doesn't even appear in the remake. They also have no official name, with their articles currently using one-off generic terms from a Prima guide as their titles.

I see no reason for these to be separate articles. The content on Chain Chomp (Elder Princess Shroob) can simply be covered on the Chain Chomp and Elder Princess Shroob articles, and the Koopa and Boo have no reason to be split from Bowser Memory ML, especially since the bosses themselves are merged. I could maybe see a case for keeping the Chomp if that Japanese name is confirmed to be official, but the others have got to go.

Proposer: 7feetunder (talk)
Deadline: December 17, 2023, 23:59 GMT

Merge both

  1. 7feetunder (talk) Per proposal.
  2. SolemnStormcloud (talk) Primary choice, though this is subject to change if a source is found for the aforementioned Japanese name. Per all.
  3. LadySophie17 (talk) Honestly, even if the Japanese name for the Chain Chomp is real, it should probably stay merged, with a redirect page.
  4. Ahemtoday (talk) I don't think the presence of a Japanese changes the fact that these are... basically just articles on specific enemy attacks, which we don't otherwise do for the Mario & Luigi series.
  5. Swallow (talk) Per all

Only merge Digi-Koopa and Digital Boo

  1. 7feetunder (talk) Second choice.
  2. Camwoodstock (talk) Unless we can verify the Shroob Chain Chomp has or doesn't have a proper name in Japan, we're not keen to merge that one juuust yet. These guys, though... We mean, Digi-Koopa was so forgettable they forgot him in the remake. And without the precedent of Shroob-ified versions of Mario enemies being a thing (we'd like to single out Shroob-omb here, who while they're Technically™ unique enemies that you can target on their own, they literally only exist alongside the Support Shroobs... who in of themselves, only exist alongside the Commander Shroobs. While not exactly comparable per say seeing as you can't target the Shroob Chain Chomp, we feel like there's something to be said about how much more remote the Shroob-omb is yet it has its own article.), these digital guys having their own article feels a whole lot more superfluous.

#SolemnStormcloud (talk) Secondary choice.

Only merge Chain Chomp (Elder Princess Shroob)

Do nothing

Comments

Might also be worth pointing out that the Koopa is not in the BIS remake at all. Bowser Nightwicked Bowser Bowser emblem from Mario Kart 8 15:34, December 10, 2023 (EST)

Added. Dark BonesSig.png 15:35, December 10, 2023 (EST)

Miscellaneous

None at the moment.

Retrieved from "https://www.mariowiki.com/index.php?title=MarioWiki:Proposals&oldid=4080500"