|
|
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
| <center>[[File:Proposals.png]]</center>
| | {{/Header}} |
| <br clear=all>
| |
| {| align="center" style="width: 85%; background-color: #f1f1de; border: 2px solid #996; padding: 5px; color:black" | |
| |'''Proposals''' can be new features (such as an extension), removals of previously added features that have tired out, or new policies that must be approved via [[Wikipedia:Wikipedia:Consensus|consensus]] before any action is taken.
| |
| *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 [[/Archive|archived]].
| |
| *All proposals must pass by a majority, including proposals with more than two options.
| |
| |}
| |
| 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 <nowiki>{{User|</nowiki>''User name''<nowiki>}}</nowiki>.
| |
|
| |
|
| This page observes the [[MarioWiki:No-Signature Policy|No-Signature Policy]].
| | ==Writing guidelines== |
| | | ''None at the moment.'' |
| <h2 style="color:black">How To</h2>
| |
| <h3 style="color:black">Rules</h3>
| |
| #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 [[MarioWiki:Writing Guideline|Writing Guideline]] proposals ''must'' include a link to the draft page.
| |
| #Anyone can comment on proposals whether logged-in or not, but only registered users can create or vote on proposals.
| |
| #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.
| |
| #Every vote should have a reason accompanying it. Agreeing with or seconding a previously mentioned reason given by another user is accepted.
| |
| #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 [[MarioWiki:Administrators|administrators]].
| |
| #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.
| |
| #No proposal can overturn the decision of a previous proposal that is less than '''4 weeks''' ('''28 days''') old.
| |
| #Any proposal that has three votes or less at deadline will automatically be listed as "[[Wikipedia:Quorum|NO QUORUM]]." The original proposer then has the option to relist said proposal to generate more discussion.
| |
| #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 all votes cast must be for a single option, rather than one option simply having more votes than the other options.
| |
| #If a proposal has more than ten votes, it can only pass or fail by a margin of '''three''' votes. In other words, one option must have 50% + 3 of all votes cast. This means that if a basic two-option proposal reaches the deadline and the total number of votes for each option differ by two or less votes, the deadline will be extended for another week. Proposals with more than two options require more precise counting of votes to determine if an extension is necessary.
| |
| #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.
| |
| #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.
| |
| #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.
| |
| #Proposals can only be rewritten or deleted by their proposer within the first three days of their creation. However, proposers can request that their proposal be deleted by an [[MarioWiki:Administrators|administrator]] at any time, provided they have a valid reason for it. Please note that cancelled proposals must also be archived.
| |
| #There should not be proposals about creating articles on an underrepresented or completely absent subject, unless there is major disagreement about whether the content should be included. To organize efforts about completing articles on missing subjects, try setting up a [[ForumBoard:57|collaboration thread on the forums]].
| |
| #Proposals cannot be made about promotions and demotions. Users can only be promoted and demoted by the will of the [[MarioWiki:Administrators|administration]].
| |
| #No joke proposals. Proposals are serious wiki matters and should be handled professionally. Joke proposals will be deleted on sight.
| |
| | |
| <h3 style="color:black">Basic Proposal and Support/Oppose Format</h3>
| |
| 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 <u>replace the whole variable including the squared brackets</u>, 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.
| |
| -----
| |
| <nowiki>===[insert a title for your proposal here]===</nowiki><br>
| |
| <nowiki>[describe what issue this proposal is about and what changes you think should be made to improve how the wiki handles that issue]</nowiki>
| |
| | |
| <nowiki>'''Proposer''': {{User|[enter your username here]}}<br></nowiki><br>
| |
| <nowiki>'''Deadline''': [insert a deadline here, 7 days after the proposal was created, at 23:59 GMT. (14 days for </nowiki>[[MarioWiki:Writing Guideline|Writing Guidelines]] and [[#Talk Page Proposals|Talk Page Proposals]])
| |
| | |
| <nowiki>====Support====</nowiki><br>
| |
| <nowiki>#{{User|[enter your username here]}} [make a statement indicating that you support your proposal]</nowiki>
| |
| | |
| <nowiki>====Oppose====</nowiki>
| |
| | |
| <nowiki>====Comments====</nowiki>
| |
| -----
| |
| 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 "<nowiki>#{{User|[add your username here]}}</nowiki> 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".
| |
| | |
| __TOC__<!--
| |
| | |
| <center><span style="font-size:200%">CURRENTLY: '''{{#time: H:i, d M Y}} (GMT)'''</span></center>
| |
|
| |
|
| | ==New features== |
| | ===Add parameters for listing related groups to character and species infoboxes=== |
| | Alright, I know the "Affiliation(s)" parameter for these was deprecated many years ago for being [https://www.mariowiki.com/images/2/26/Mario1c.jpg dumb], but hear me out. |
|
| |
|
| | A few years after [[MarioWiki:Proposals/Archive/31#Remove the "Affiliation" parameter from infoboxes|this proposal]] passed, this wiki added a [[Template:Group infobox|group infobox]] for linking to and listing members, member species, and leaders of a group, similar to how the species infobox lists variants, notable members, etc of the species. Thing is, unlike the character and species infoboxes that are designed to link to each other (character's species/species' notable members, species variants/species variants of, and so on), group infoboxes are a one-way street as it currently stands. So, I propose that parameters be added to these infoboxes so they can list the groups they belong to. And to be clear, this parameter would '''only''' be used for groups, so we get none of that "Mario is 'affiliated' with his brother and sometimes Bowser" nonsense. This has a much more specific purpose. Right now this wiki doesn't really have lists of groups that characters and species belong to, you have to look through all the articles for groups to find that out, so I think these lists would be worth having. |
|
| |
|
| <br>
| | I've come up with two options: |
| --> | | *Option 1: [[Template:Character infobox]] and [[Template:Species infobox]] get a "member of" parameter, which would be used to link to groups they are, well, a member of. [[Goomba]] and the like would link to [[Bowser's Minions]], [[Vivian]] would link to [[Three Shadows]], etc. This parameter would be used to list both memberships and leadership roles (the latter could maybe be distinguished by adding "(leader)" next to the link). |
| | *Option 2: these infoboxes would also get a separate "Leader of" parameter. [[Bowser]] would use this to link to [[Bowser's Minions]], [[King K. Rool]] would use this to link to [[Kremling Krew]], [[Captain Syrup]] would use this to link to [[Black Sugar Gang]], characters and species-characters would link to the [[:Category:baseball teams|baseball teams]] they lead, etc. |
|
| |
|
| <h2 style="color:black">Talk Page Proposals</h2>
| | EDIT: In case it wasn't clear, the parameters would be displayed in a two-column list similar to the species infobox parameters, and would only be used for links (e.g. groups that actually have articles, and not just any arbitrary category people come up with). |
| 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 [[:Category:Settled Talk Page Proposals|here]].''
| | '''Proposer''': {{User|Dive Rocket Launcher}}<br> |
| | '''Deadline''': June 14, 2024, 23:59 GMT |
|
| |
|
| <h3 style="color:black">Rules</h3>
| | ====Option 1==== |
| #All active talk page proposals must be listed below in chronological order (new proposals go at the bottom). All pages affected must be mentioned in the ''brief'' description, with the talk page housing the discussion linked to directly via "({{fakelink|Discuss}})". If the proposal involved a page that is not yet made, use {{tem|fakelink}} to communicate its title. The '''Deadline''' must also be included in the entry. Linking to pages not directly involved in the talk page proposal is not recommended, as it clutters the list with unnecessary links. Place {{tem|TPP}} under the section's header, and once the proposal is over, replace the template with {{tem|SettledTPP}}. | | #{{User|Dive Rocket Launcher}} First choice per proposal. |
| #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:
| |
| #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.
| |
| #Talk page proposals may be closed by the proposer at any time if both the support ''and'' the oppose sides each have fewer than five votes.
| |
| #The talk page proposal '''must''' pertain to the article it is posted on.
| |
|
| |
|
| ===List of Talk Page Proposals=== | | ====Option 2==== |
| *Create separate articles for the [[List of Adventure Mode enemies|Adventure Mode]] enemies ([[Talk:List of Adventure Mode enemies#Create separate articles for the Adventure Mode enemies|Discuss]]) '''Deadline:''' May 2, 2013 23:59 GMT
| | #{{User|Dive Rocket Launcher}} Second choice per proposal. |
| *Rename [[Big Red Balloon]] to {{fakelink|Red Balloon}} ([[Talk:Big Red Balloon#Merge to Red Balloon|Discuss]]) '''Deadline:''' May 2, 2013 23:59 GMT
| |
| *Rename [[GAME & WARIO (WarioWare: D.I.Y. Showcase)]] to [[GAME & WARIO]] ([[Talk:GAME & WARIO (WarioWare: D.I.Y. Showcase)#Rename back to GAME & WARIO|Discuss]]) '''Deadline:''' May 8, 2013, 23:59 GMT
| |
| *Split [[Photo Together with Super Mario]] ([[Talk:Nintendo 3DS#Split Photo Together with Super Mario|Discuss]]) '''Deadline:''' May 13, 2013 23:59 GMT
| |
| *Delete the [[List of chronological references]] page ([[Talk:List of chronological references#Get rid of the page|Discuss]]) '''Deadline:''' May 15, 2013 23:59 GMT
| |
| *Delete Count Bleck's Army ([[Category talk:Count Bleck's Army#Delete Count Bleck's Army|Discuss]]) '''Deadline:''' May 15, 2013, 23:59 GMT
| |
|
| |
|
| ==Writing Guidelines== | | ====Do nothing==== |
| ''None at the moment.''
| | #{{User|DrBaskerville}} Whereas a nice idea in theory, I fear we'll see a repeat of everything that led to the previous iteration of this parameter getting deleted in the first place. Unless there will be heavy patrolling of this parameter, which seems unlike given how widespread the [[Template:Character infobox]] is, I don't trust leaving it to chance that it will be used responsibly and we won't end up with weird things like Mario being "member of" some ridiculous things like "Mario Bros.", or, just as worse, a long, long, exhaustive list of every organization Mario has ever participated in, e.g. [[Excess Express]] passengers, [[Mario Kart 8]] racers (etc., etc.), and so on. Mario is obviously a "worse case" example, but the principles apply to virtually any character who has multiple appearances. In the [[Goomba]] example that you provided, for instance, not all Goombas are part of Bowser's Minions. What about the Goombas in [[Goomba Village]] or [[Rogueport]] or any of the other various non-Bowser-aligned Goombas. You'd just have to get really, really into the weeds to make specific rules for parameter usage, and it will be a pain to enforce them. |
| | | #{{User|SolemnStormcloud}} Per DrBaskerville. |
| ==New Features== | |
| ===Merge ''Mario''-related controversies into a single page.===
| |
| After extensively searching both the Wiki and the Forums, I've concluded that the Wiki does not include a page that lists controversies that involve the ''Mario'' series, nor has any proposal been made towards creating one. Being [[Nintendo]]'s flagship franchise, it is apparent that the series has dealt with controversy, with examples such as the [[Mario Party 8#Controversy|Mario Party 8]], [[Tanooki Suit#Controversy|Tanooki Suit]] and [[Ashley's Song#Controversy|Ashley's Song]] controversies coming to mind. Should these issues be detailed in their own article akin to the [[bulbapedia:Pokémon controversy|one on Bulbapedia]], or should they continue to be listed in separate articles as sections? The new article would also allow for expansion on these topics, and the inclusion of additional controversies related to ''Mario'' that are unmentioned on the Wiki (such as PETA's recent KFC campaign).
| |
| | |
| '''Proposer''': {{User|GBAToad}}<br>
| |
| '''Deadline''': May 9, 2013, 23:59 GMT
| |
| | |
| ====Support====
| |
| #{{User|GBAToad}} Personally, I believe that there aren't enough controversies to compose a really long article. However, I also believe that this article could include smaller examples such as the satanic references in [[Super Mario Bros. 3]], [[Birdo]]'s gender, and lawsuits against Nintendo that pertain to its systems, thus giving it more depth and making it a significant contribution to the Wiki. Plus, the Wiki lists the inclusions of ''Mario'' in both positive (main appearances) and neutral (cameos and the like) perspectives, but why doesn't it list the inclusions of ''Mario'' in a publicly negative perspective? I created this proposal because the idea has never been raised before, which is really surprising to me. Anyway, I support the merge of these controversies to form a new article.
| |
| #{{User|Yoshi876}} Seems like a good idea, the page could be laid out like the ''List of Mario references'' in various forms of media.
| |
| #{{User|Tucayo}} - I feel this sort of content can be really attractive for readers, and having them all together in one place would be convenient. However, as a fellow staff member had mentioned in earlier discussions, we have to be really cautious not to be biased. A page like this requires to be absolutely objective, stating only the facts and not going into speculation; it's up to each reader to draw his conclusions on subjects like this.
| |
| #{{User|Mario4Ever}} Per Tucayo.
| |
| #{{User|King Pikante}} Per Tucayo.
| |
| #{{User|Walkazo}} - A "List of controversies in the ''Mario'' series" page is a good idea, for all the reasons proposed (although "merge" is a bit of a misnomer, as the info shouldn't be ''moved'' from the individual articles, just copied). Also, to elaborate on the point Tucayo alluded to, this sort of article will need to have references for every single point (direct quotations from the games works), to ensure that we're keeping our facts straight, our writing unbiased, and our credibility high.
| |
| #{{User|BowserJunior}} Per all. | |
| | |
| ====Oppose====
| |
|
| |
|
| ====Comments==== | | ====Comments==== |
| Line 110: |
Line 35: |
|
| |
|
| ==Changes== | | ==Changes== |
| ===Delete Links to Passed Talk Page Proposals ONLY Until Action Has Been Taken===
| | ''None at the moment.'' |
| Normally, when a talk page proposal passes, we delete the link to the talk page proposal in this page. The problem is that this may leave settled talk page proposals not done because the settled proposal basically is out of sight for many users. I remember one talk page proposal settled a long time ago and no action has been taken until '''years''' later; it may have been forgotten. Just recently, few users have taken action in splitting enemies in the Subspace Army article, and I'm wondering if people don't realize it or if they are too busy doing something else.
| |
| | |
| My proposal is this: if a talk page proposal has passed, '''we should leave the link on the main proposal page until action has been taken according to the talk page proposal.''' And once the action has followed, ''then'' we can remove the link. That way, we know if action has been taken on that proposal or not.
| |
| | |
| This is necessary so we ensure appropriate action has been taken when a talk page proposal has settled.
| |
| | |
| This can also apply to more major proposals, but talk page proposals are the ones that need more awareness.
| |
| | |
| Of course, exceptions can apply.
| |
| | |
| '''Proposer''': {{User|LeftyGreenMario}}<br>
| |
| '''Deadline''': May 2, 2013, 23:59 GMT
| |
| | |
| ====Support====
| |
| #{{User|LeftyGreenMario}} We should keep links to the talk page proposal on this page until action has been taken. ''Then'', we should remove them. That way, users know if the actions a talk page proposal requires have been taken.
| |
| #{{User|BowserJunior}} Per LGM.
| |
| #{{User|Mariotime11}} Per LeftyGreenMario.
| |
| #{{User|Banon}} This is a good idea. I also think we should note when they have passed. For example, if a TPP has passed but has not been applied, we should note that it passed and that the edits have to be done.
| |
| #{{User|King Pikante}} Per all.
| |
| #{{User|Walkazo}} - Funny, I was ''just'' thinking about this the other day. Simply replacing the deadlines with "passed" until the change was made ''was'' how TPPs were originally done; I dunno why we stopped doing it that way, but bringing the practice back makes total sense. However, not archiving full proposals would make this page very cluttered, and given their larger scale, many aren't quick fixes to start with, so I think it'd be better to stick to archiving them straight away.
| |
| #{{User|ParaLemmy1234}} Per all.
| |
| #{{User|ThePremiumYoshi}} - Per all.
| |
| | |
| ====Oppose====
| |
| | |
| ====Comments====
| |
| Isn't this what we normally do, anyways? That was the way it was at least a few months ago. {{User|GreenDisaster}}
| |
| :I brought this up because the link to the proposal [[Talk:Subspace Army#Create separate articles for Subspace Army enemies|splitting the Subspace Emissary enemies was deleted]], and nobody has really taken action to split the sections into articles, so it appears that we have already done that. {{User|LeftyGreenMario}}
| |
| | |
| For the bigger proposals, perhaps we could have a page where the passed proposals are moved to an archive specifically for proposals that haven't been taken into action yet? After whatever the proposal wanted to do has been done, it can be moved to the standard proposal archive. It would bring attention to proposals that haven't been put into effect, and wouldn't cause much cluttering. It's just a thought. {{User|GreenDisaster}}
| |
| :That sounds like a good idea. Usually, though, bigger proposals get more attention, so more users can do something. {{User|LeftyGreenMario}}
| |
| ::A while back, I made a proposal about splitting a bunch of Donkey Kong Country Returns enemies that had 20 support votes and 0 oppose votes. It took nearly two years for all the necessary articles to be created, and that was only after I made a thread over on the forum. Even if the majority of them get attention, there's always one that slips through the cracks. {{User|GreenDisaster}}
| |
| :::That's why I said it was a good idea. I also said, "Usually". We probably do need to make a section for passed proposals that didn't see action yet. {{User|LeftyGreenMario}}
| |
| | |
| ===Accurate titles for files===
| |
| I have noticed files with [http://www.mariowiki.com/File:530.jpg undescriptive names], [http://www.mariowiki.com/File:HappyFatty_9.png inappropriate names], and [http://www.mariowiki.com/File:Babypeachyushee%27seyelandeees.png deliberately misspelled and practically unreadable ones]. Not only does this decrease professionalism and [[MarioWiki:Image Use Policy|violate the image policy]], but it also makes it more difficult to search for files (e.g. a search for filenames containing "toad" would leave out results if an undescriptive title was used). Even if these images are "only used once or twice", a descriptive title is still more useful.
| |
| | |
| I am proposing that we go back and rename files used in mainspace/gallery/etc. ('Shroom and userspace would be exempt from this, basically) articles that are breaking the policy, as well as enforcing a standard based and possibly expanding on what is written in the image policy I linked beforehand. I would not be opposed to going back and helping with the work, assuming this proposal passes.
| |
| | |
| '''Proposer''': {{User|Turboo}}<br>
| |
| '''Deadline''': May 5, 2013, 23:59 GMT
| |
| | |
| ====Support====
| |
| #{{User|Turboo}} - Per proposal.
| |
| #{{User|Hypnotoad}} - Per proposal.
| |
| #{{User|Yoshi876}} - Per proposal.
| |
| #{{User|A Paragoomba and the Koopa Bros.}} - Per proposal, because names should be more clear and appropriate.
| |
| #{{user|Kibago}} - I agree, specifically with the part about searching for files. Having fun is good and nice, but when functionality is compromised, that is when priorities must be set.
| |
| #{{User|Gamefreak75}} - Per all.
| |
| #{{User|King Pikante}} Per all.
| |
| #{{User|Baby Luigi}} Per all. I used to like uploading retarded file names, but now, I don't.
| |
| #{{User|LeftyGreenMario}} While I don't agree with the "professionalism" part (it can be both fun and presentable), we need standard and to-the-point file names instead of creative ones. I stopped making up my own file names a while ago. Also, per Walkazo's comment.
| |
| #{{User|BowserJunior}} Per all.
| |
| #{{User|ParaLemmy1234}} Per all.
| |
| #{{User|Marshal Dan Troop}} Per proposal.
| |
| #{{User|Mario4Ever}} Per proposal.
| |
| #{{User|Super Mario Bros.}} — Per proposal, and Turboo and Kibago specifically.
| |
| #{{User|Superchao}} Per proposal.
| |
| #{{User|Tucayo}} - Per SMB.
| |
| #{{User|ThePremiumYoshi}} - Per all.
| |
| #{{User|Binarystep}} Per all. "Happy Fatty"? That's some serious BJAODN right there!
| |
| | |
| ====Oppose====
| |
| | |
| ====Comments====
| |
| At [http://www.pidgi.net/wiki/Main_Page PidgiWiki], we have a [http://www.pidgi.net/wiki/PidgiWiki:Naming standard] which works well. What we do is put the subject of the image first, followed by a hyphen, and then the game/event is comes from.
| |
| | |
| For example: "Bowser Artwork - Super Mario Bros." If there is an alternative image, we use "Bowser Artwork (alt) - Super Mario Bros.", "Bowser Artwork (alt 2) - Super Mario Bros.", etc. This could be a good way to go.--{{User|YoshiKong}} 05:17, 28 April 2013 (EDT)
| |
| :I don't really like an idea of a naming standard, since that means we have to rename every single file in this wiki to match the standard. I think the best way to go is to at least make sure the image is descriptive, professional, and follows the image use policy. We don't need a single standard for this. {{User|Baby Luigi}}
| |
| ::If this proposal passes, we're going to be renaming all of the files anyways. I wouldn't be opposed to a standard naming convention, as long as it isn't too convoluted. {{User|GreenDisaster}}
| |
| :::I don't think we should rename ''all'' the images, just the ones that seem to be in violation of policy. While YK's suggestion could work as a guideline placed on the image policy page (even then, like Walkazo said, we should focus on keeping names straightforward), I don't think we need to enforce it, especially since a lot of filenames work even if they're simply the name of the character or the location. - [[User:Turboo|Turboo]] ([[User talk:Turboo|talk]]) 18:46, 28 April 2013 (EDT)
| |
| | |
| If we were the impose the standard, we should eliminate the "having fun part" since there is a degree where you may have fun uploading images, and it all depends on the user's personal idea what "fun" is. I know I might sound a wee bit sarcastic here since I did this crap in the past, but if we were to have more functional image files, we need to be as serious as writing articles on this. {{User|Baby Luigi}}
| |
| :Removing the "fun" clause has actually come up in admin discussions before, but we never went back and actually got rid of it, but yeah, I'd agree that it'd be better without such a subjective point. As for the overall standard, I think making a rigid formula we have to follow ''or else'' would be a bad idea: as long as we can tell what the images are of, if there's some variety, it's not the end of the world. We ''could'' add more specific requests to the current "meaningful name" parameter, such as having the name of the game (or an abbreviation), what kind of image it is (profile art, screenshot, boxart, whatever), and what the image is of (name of the character in the profile, name of the level a screenshot it of and maybe some info about the shot, etc.). However, there should also be emphasis on making the names ''straightforward'': I'd argue that "''Bowser art SMB''" and "''Bowser art 2 SMB''" would be preferable to the ones YoshiKong suggested, since they're shorter and don't mess around with punctuation (brackets, dashes) and extra words ("alt"). Similarly, even if a screenshot contains Bowser, Mario and a Podoboo, something like "SMB screenshot end of 1-4" would be easier to use than "''SMB screenshot 1-4 Bowser, Mario and a Podoboo''"; or if a screenshot is of Mario and a Whacka, "''PM screenshot Whacka''" would be fine, since the Whacka's the important part. But again, most image names are fine even if they don't follow this sort of "what/kind/game" standard, and renaming them would be excessive and annoying, so even requesting those three things should be more of a guideline than a hard rule. - {{User|Walkazo}}
| |
|
| |
|
| ==Miscellaneous== | | ==Miscellaneous== |
| ''None at the moment''. | | ''None at the moment.'' |
|
Current time:
Monday, June 10th, 20:48 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
- 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}}.
- Only registered, autoconfirmed users can create, comment in, or vote on proposals and talk page proposals. Users may vote for more than one option, but they may not vote for every option available.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- No proposal can overturn the decision of a previous proposal that is less than 4 weeks (28 days) old.
- 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.
- 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.
- If a proposal with only two voting options has more than ten votes, it can only pass or fail with a margin of at least three votes, otherwise the deadline will be extended for another week as if no majority was reached at all.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- Proposals cannot be made about promotions and demotions. Users can only be promoted and demoted by the will of the administration.
- No joke proposals. Proposals are serious wiki matters and should be handled professionally. Joke proposals will be deleted on sight.
- 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: "June 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
- All active talk page proposals must be listed below in chronological order (new proposals go at the bottom) using {{TPP discuss}}. 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 {{settled TPP}}.
- 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:
- 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.
- The talk page proposal must pertain to the article it is posted on.
- 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
- Move Moo Moo back to cow (discuss) Deadline: June 10, 2024, 23:59 GMT
- Consider Spike Top derived from both Buzzy Beetles and Spinies (discuss) Deadline:
June 4, 2024, 23:59 GMT Extended to June 11, 2024, 23:59 GMT
- Split Samus from List of fighters debuting in Super Smash Bros. (discuss) Deadline: June 11, 2024, 23:59 GMT
- Move attack info from Super Hammer to Spin Hammer and move the latter to Super Hammer (move) (discuss) Deadline: June 13, 2024, 23:59 GMT
- Add Mario Bros. as a related game to the Super Mario series (discuss) Deadline: June 13, 2024, 23:59 GMT
- Move Chain Chompikins from Madame Broode to Big Chain Chomp (discuss) Deadline: June 15, 2024, 23:59 GMT
- Move List of Toad Town News in Paper Mario to simply "Toad Town News" (discuss) Deadline: June 18th, 2024, 23:59 GMT
- Merge Young Link and Toon Link info to Link's article (discuss) Deadline: June 20th, 2024, 23:59 GMT
- Move Baby Donkey Kong to Baby DK (discuss) Deadline: June 21st, 2024, 23:59 GMT
- Consider Grifty to be a Little Mouser (discuss) Deadline: June 22, 2024, 23:59 GMT
Unimplemented proposals
Proposals
- ^Note: Requires action from admins.
Talk page proposals
Writing guidelines
None at the moment.
New features
Add parameters for listing related groups to character and species infoboxes
Alright, I know the "Affiliation(s)" parameter for these was deprecated many years ago for being dumb, but hear me out.
A few years after this proposal passed, this wiki added a group infobox for linking to and listing members, member species, and leaders of a group, similar to how the species infobox lists variants, notable members, etc of the species. Thing is, unlike the character and species infoboxes that are designed to link to each other (character's species/species' notable members, species variants/species variants of, and so on), group infoboxes are a one-way street as it currently stands. So, I propose that parameters be added to these infoboxes so they can list the groups they belong to. And to be clear, this parameter would only be used for groups, so we get none of that "Mario is 'affiliated' with his brother and sometimes Bowser" nonsense. This has a much more specific purpose. Right now this wiki doesn't really have lists of groups that characters and species belong to, you have to look through all the articles for groups to find that out, so I think these lists would be worth having.
I've come up with two options:
EDIT: In case it wasn't clear, the parameters would be displayed in a two-column list similar to the species infobox parameters, and would only be used for links (e.g. groups that actually have articles, and not just any arbitrary category people come up with).
Proposer: Dive Rocket Launcher (talk)
Deadline: June 14, 2024, 23:59 GMT
Option 1
- Dive Rocket Launcher (talk) First choice per proposal.
Option 2
- Dive Rocket Launcher (talk) Second choice per proposal.
Do nothing
- DrBaskerville (talk) Whereas a nice idea in theory, I fear we'll see a repeat of everything that led to the previous iteration of this parameter getting deleted in the first place. Unless there will be heavy patrolling of this parameter, which seems unlike given how widespread the Template:Character infobox is, I don't trust leaving it to chance that it will be used responsibly and we won't end up with weird things like Mario being "member of" some ridiculous things like "Mario Bros.", or, just as worse, a long, long, exhaustive list of every organization Mario has ever participated in, e.g. Excess Express passengers, Mario Kart 8 racers (etc., etc.), and so on. Mario is obviously a "worse case" example, but the principles apply to virtually any character who has multiple appearances. In the Goomba example that you provided, for instance, not all Goombas are part of Bowser's Minions. What about the Goombas in Goomba Village or Rogueport or any of the other various non-Bowser-aligned Goombas. You'd just have to get really, really into the weeds to make specific rules for parameter usage, and it will be a pain to enforce them.
- SolemnStormcloud (talk) Per DrBaskerville.
Removals
None at the moment.
Changes
None at the moment.
Miscellaneous
None at the moment.
