MarioWiki:Proposals: Difference between revisions

From the Super Mario Wiki, the Mario encyclopedia
Jump to navigationJump to search
 
Line 1: Line 1:
{{MarioWiki:Proposals/Header}}
{{/Header}}
 
===List of talk page proposals===
{{TPPDiscuss|Reclassify [[Rocky Wrench]] as the parent species to [[Monty Mole]]|Talk:Rocky Wrench#Reworking Relations|May 4, 2018, 23:59 GMT}}
{{TPPDiscuss|Merge [[Goop Generator]] with [[Polluted Piranha]]|Talk:Goop_Generator#Merge_with_Polluted_Piranha|May 6, 2018, 23:59 GMT}}
{{TPPDiscuss|Change [[Giant Bowser]]'s name and coverage or delete|Talk:Giant Bowser#Change this article's name and coverage or delete|May 8, 2018, 23:59 GMT}}
{{TPPDiscuss|Clean up [[Horse]]|Talk:Horse#Clean up this page|May 9, 2018, 23:59 GMT}}
 
==Unimplemented proposals==
{| class=sortable align=center width=100% cellspacing=0 border=1 cellpadding=3 style="text-align:center; border-collapse:collapse; font-family:Arial;"
|-
!width="3%"|#
!width="65%"|Proposal
!width="18%"|User
!width="14%"|Date
|-
|1
|align=left|[[MarioWiki:Proposals/Archive 41#Create separate articles for DKC series and DKL series boss levels|Create boss level articles for ''Donkey Kong Country'' and ''Donkey Kong Land'' series]]
|{{User|Aokage}}
|January 3, 2015
|-
|2
|align=left|[[MarioWiki:Proposals/Archive 45#Create a template for the TTYD badge drop rates|Create a template for the ''Paper Mario: The Thousand-Year Door'' badge drop rates]]
|{{User|Lord Bowser}}
|August 17, 2016
|-
|3
|align=left|[[MarioWiki:Proposals/Archive 46#Split all remaining courts/boards based on recurring places from their parent articles|Split all remaining courts and boards from their parent articles]]
|{{User|NSY}}
|September 25, 2016
|-
|4
|align=left|[[MarioWiki:Proposals/Archive 47#Do_Something_With_Game-Specific_Species_Categories|Clean up species categories to only include non-hostile species]]
|{{User|Niiue}}
|August 8, 2017
|-
|5
|align=left|[[Category talk:Artifacts#Do something with this category|Clean up Category:Artifacts]]
|{{User|Niiue}}
|August 22, 2017
|-
|6
|align=left|[[Category talk:Ice Creatures#Do something about this category|Trim down Category:Fire Creatures and Category:Ice Creatures]]
|{{User|Doc von Schmeltwick}}
|September 7, 2017
|-
|7
|align=left|[[Talk:Behemoth#Merge_Behemoth_King_to_Behemoth_or_expand_Behemoth_King_article|Expand the Behemoth King article]]
|{{User|Owencrazyboy9}}
|December 23, 2017
|-
|8
|align=left|[[MarioWiki:Proposals/Archive 50#The Secret Courses of Remix 10 in Super Mario Run|Create articles on the Remix 10 secret courses in Super Mario Run]]
|{{User|Time Turner}}
|December 26, 2017
|-
|9
|align=left|[[MarioWiki:Proposals/Archive 50#Add anchor links to Power Moon lists|Add anchor links to Power Moon lists]] ([[Talk:Lists of Power Moons|view progress]])
|{{User|Super Radio}}
|December 31, 2017
|-
|10
|align=left|[[MarioWiki:Proposals/Archive 50#Give the Wario: Master of Disguise episodes their own pages|Create articles for the ''Wario: Master of Disguise'' episodes]]
|{{User|DKPetey99}}
|January 23, 2018
|-
|11
|align=left|[[MarioWiki:Proposals/Archive 50#Removing bolded text from image captions|Remove bolded text from image captions]]
|{{User|Time Turner}}
|February 11, 2018
|-
|12
|align=left|[[MarioWiki:Proposals/Archive 50#Create articles for the Mario Party 4 hosts: Revisited|Create articles for the ''Mario Party 4'' hosts]]
|{{User|Tails777}}
|February 11, 2018
|-
|13
|align=left|[[MarioWiki:Proposals/Archive 51#Create a template for FA archives|Create a template for FA archives]]
|{{User|Toadette the Achiever}}
|February 18, 2018
|-
|14
|align=left|[[MarioWiki:Proposals/Archive 51#Smash Bros. Articles: What Stays and What Goes.3F|Merge the specified ''Super Smash Bros.'' subjects]]
|{{User|Time Turner}}
|April 9, 2018
|}


==Writing guidelines==
==Writing guidelines==
Line 96: Line 11:


==Changes==
==Changes==
===Replace enemy sections with an infobox entry===
===Move ''Super Smash Bros.'' information for crossover characters into the list articles and delete their ''Super Smash Bros.'' profiles===
This proposal concerns ''Super Smash Bros.'' information of certain characters listed in [[Template:Crossover characters|Crossover characters]]. It makes it harder to see the actual ''Super Mario'' content on said articles, like how the [[Isabelle]] page largely concerns her appearances in ''Super Smash Bros.'' while the actual ''Super Mario'' appearances in ''Mario Kart 8'' and ''Super Mario Maker'' are all the way below. In the case of [[Villager]], it starts off by showing the ''WarioWare'' appearances but then has this huge chunk of ''Super Smash Bros.'' information in between that and the appearances in ''Mario Kart 8'' and ''Super Mario Maker''.
 
Besides, the List of ''Super Smash Bros.'' fighters pages feel kind of awkward that certain crossover characters do not have their information listed there with other non-''Super Mario'' characters, so this proposal aims to rectify that.
 
The fighters on the list pages do not have their profiles, and I don't see why the crossover characters should have them but not the fighters already in the list pages, so if this proposal passes, all of that will be deleted too. This '''includes''' the Profiles section on '''other crossover pages''' like [[Knuckles]], [[Deku Baba]], [[Zangief]], and so forth, since it would be illogical for them to keep their profiles but not the protagonists of the ''Super Smash Bros.'' series, an inconsistency that's already present. But the status of the ''SSB'' content in the History section of crossover content OTHER THAN fighters in the ''Super Smash Bros.'' series can be for a future proposal.


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


While it's true that having some level articles with enemies sections and some with enemies in the levelbox would be inconsistent, I think this has to be considered with the usefulness of having sections with small lists of enemies.
*[[Link]] → [[List of fighters debuting in Super Smash Bros.]]
*[[Isabelle]] → [[List of fighters debuting in Super Smash Bros. Ultimate]]
*[[Villager]] → [[List of fighters debuting in Super Smash Bros. for Nintendo 3DS / Wii U]]
*[[Kirby]] → [[List of fighters debuting in Super Smash Bros.]]
*[[Sonic]] → [[List of fighters debuting in Super Smash Bros. Brawl]]
*[[Mii]] → [[List of fighters debuting in Super Smash Bros. for Nintendo 3DS / Wii U]]
*[[R.O.B.]] → [[List of fighters debuting in Super Smash Bros. Brawl]]
*[[Kirby]] → [[List of fighters debuting in Super Smash Bros.]]
*[[Banjo]] → [[List of fighters debuting in Super Smash Bros. Ultimate]]
*[[Kazooie]] → [[List of fighters debuting in Super Smash Bros. Ultimate]]
*[[Mega Man]] → [[List of fighters debuting in Super Smash Bros. for Nintendo 3DS / Wii U]]
*[[Pac-Man]] → [[List of fighters debuting in Super Smash Bros. for Nintendo 3DS / Wii U]]


'''EDIT:''' Alex95 suggested the enemies levelbox section could be collapsible, solving my main concern with adding enemies sections to the levelbox. I've made an example of how this could look [[User:The Retro Gamer/Levelbox|here]] (any suggestions for changes are welcome).
There's also Samus, and there's a proposal to currently split the article, so if that passes, her ''Super Smash Bros.'' information will stay on the [[List of fighters debuting in Super Smash Bros.]] page.


'''EDIT 2:''' I think there's another important point that needs to be addressed: what ''should'' be included in the enemies sections? As this may directly affect this proposal's outcome, I've opted to add it in, as I'm still within the editing window for the proposal.
Note: A short summary of the character's role, or any connections to ''Super Mario'', will remain intact, similarly to how [[Mario#History]] has a short summary on Mario throughout his appearance while the main history page on Mario is located at [[History of Mario]].


'''Proposer''': {{User|The Retro Gamer}}<br>
There are three options: Option 1 will enact all of the changes above, Option 2 will remove only the ''Super Smash Bros.'' profiles from pages on non-''Super Mario'' content, and Option 3 opposes everything in this proposal.
'''Deadline''': May 7, 2018, 23:59 GMT


====Part 1: What should be included in enemies lists====
'''Proposer''': {{User|Super Mario RPG}}<br>
=====Include enemy link ''and'' enemy counts=====
'''Deadline''': June 4, 2024, 23:59 GMT
#{{User|The Retro Gamer}} I think enemy lists should include counts, because that helps define the level: a level with one throwaway enemy is quite different from a level heavily populated by a certain enemy. As a corollary to this point, I have removed my vote from my original main option, since enemy counts as a defining factor in the level means they probably deserve their own section. Obviously, implementing this would be a long-term process, but I think if we're already listing the enemies, it's not too hard to gradually add the counts (and situational specifications, like counts in different versions) as well.
=====Only include enemy link=====
====Part 2: Should enemy lists be moved/added to the infobox====
=====Move all enemies sections to the levelbox, with the enemies section being collapsible.=====
<s>{{User|Alex95}} - I suppose I'll agree with myself.</s>
<br \><s>{{User|The Retro Gamer}} <s>Per my proposal. Edit 1: I'm thinking about how to (and if I will) revise my proposal; I don't think this reformatting will work well on a grand scale for levels with more than 20 enemies.</s> Edit 2: Alex95 suggested that the infobox section could be collapsible, and I like this option very much; it elegantly solves the space concern while putting infobox-appropriate information in the infobox. '''Edit:''' No longer my preferred option; see my vote above.
#{{User|Supermariofan67}} Per Alex95
#{{User|Reboot}} Per
#{{user|Wildgoosespeeder}} The concern over a long enemy list isn't a big one because MediaWiki CSS styles we use start the list collapsed (<code><nowiki>mw-collapsible mw-collapsed</nowiki></code>). See [[mediawiki.org:Manual:Collapsible elements|here]]. Leaving an enemy list as an article section instead of in an infobox makes the specific vital level information look excluded. A level infobox should include basic level information, such as time limit, world-level, music, etc., which I see enemies as that type of information.


=====Add enemies to the levelbox, but keep the enemy sections=====
====Option 1: Full support====
#{{User|The Retro Gamer}}: <s>I would prefer the other option, but I'll still vote here as a fallback. While the enemies sections do fill space, I honestly think most of the content regarding the level's enemies should be covered in the level's description (usually in the section titled "Layout"). The list of enemies is side information that might be good in certain circumstances, but I don't think it's useful to the general reader.</s> However, I still support this option because I don't think it's bad to have some infobox/article redundancy, since an infobox allows for a concentrated organization of information. '''Regarding Yoshi the SSM's vote, see my comment below; implementing this change would not be that much work with a bot process.'''
#{{User|Super Mario RPG}} As proposer.
#{{User|Toadette the Achiever}} While I still think less is more, especially with infoboxes, I can envision this solution working as an alternative. This is my first choice.


=====Don't add enemies to the levelbox=====
====Option 2: Trim profiles only====
#{{User|Doc von Schmeltwick}} -Some levels have MASSIVE amounts of enemy variation, which would cause a cluster if in the infobox.
#{{User|Super Mario RPG}} Secondary
#{{User|Toadette the Achiever}} Second choice: less is more, especially with infoboxes. Per Doc.
 
#{{User|Yoshi the SSM}} Per Doc's comments. Also, this would require a lot of work (hundreds of pages) with very little difference. This slight difference doesn't warrant that massive work for it to be done. Whether it is just the proposer or multiple users.
====Option 3: Oppose====
#{{User|YoshiEgg1990}} Per YoshiTheSSM.
#{{User|Axis}} I believe it's unnecessary.
#{{User|BBQ Turtle}} Per all, this would just be overfilling the infobox.
#{{User|Nintendo101}} It makes intuitive sense to just list the ''Super Smash Bros.'' info on the pages of the character when available. (As a side note, the ''Super Smash Bros.'' series has a pretty intimate relationship with the ''Super Mario'' franchise, and I do not think we should be omitting coverage here just because SmashWiki exists. We don't address topics the same way.)
#{{User|Tails777}} If the characters have an article, I see no reason why Smash stuff should be singled out and removed just because it's not Mario related.
#{{user|Doc von Schmeltwick}} - Per all, especially Nintendo101
#{{User|Hewer}} It's standard practice (and also pretty logical) to list any time a subject happens to appear alongside Mario stuff. [[Captain N: The Game Master]] is a good example - it's considered a guest appearance, so it doesn't get full coverage, but we still mention things' appearances there if they happen to be covered on the wiki for some other reason, e.g. [[Slime (Dragon Quest)]]. So why should Smash (where Mario stuff perhaps has a greater role than in Captain N) be the one exception? The proposal tries to argue about organisation and finding information, but I'd say unnecessarily splitting a character's information across multiple pages is the real bad organisation here. If people really can't bear to scroll through some Smash stuff in order to find what they're looking for (which, mind, might be the Smash stuff anyway), they can use the contents links at the top of the article to jump to particular sections no problem. And also, to be frank, I don't really understand what the proposal is talking about regarding "profiles".
#{{User|FanOfRosalina2007}} Per all, especially Hewer's reasoning.
#{{user|MegaBowser64}} Per all of yall. Personally I don't think it's a big deal to leave Smash info on character pages. There isn't much harm done.
#{{User|Sdman213}} Per all.


====Comments====
====Comments====
@Doc von Schmeltwick: Can you provide an example of a level article with a large amount of enemy variation? I'm not trying to doubt you, I just want some context so I can understand better. [[User:The Retro Gamer|<span style="color:red;">--The</span>]] [[User talk:The Retro Gamer|<span style="color:green;">Retro</span>]] [[Special:Contributions/The Retro Gamer|<span style="color:blue;">Gamer</span>]] 20:49, 29 April 2018 (EDT)
<s>[[MarioWiki:Proposals/Archive/61#Trim_the_Smash_Bros_trophies_page|This passed proposal]] already establishes that non-Mario trophies should be removed from dedicated character articles. Check out the bolded sentence and the rationale after it:<blockquote>It's simple. I propose to simply trim those trophies list pages to only the Mario/DK/Wario etc. character and cut the rest. '''This includes crossover characters that have pages on the wiki''' - while we may have a Link page because he's in Mario Kart 8, his Smash Bros trophy is about Link the protagonist of his own independent intellectual property and not Link the funny Mario Kart 8 man, and it leads to the bizarre situation of having a listing of Link but not the character his series is named after. Best keep things simple. </blockquote> I believe if option 3 were to win in this proposal, that decision would be overturned.</s> {{User:Koopa con Carne/Sig}} 15:06, May 28, 2024 (EDT), edited 15:14, May 28, 2024 (EDT)
:Actually, I see what you mean, I really underestimated the amount of enemy variation in some levels, how annoying: [[The Great Maze]] takes the cake, with a whopping ''71'' enemies! I'll think about how to revise (or whether to remove) my proposal. [[User:The Retro Gamer|<span style="color:red;">--The</span>]] [[User talk:The Retro Gamer|<span style="color:green;">Retro</span>]] [[Special:Contributions/The Retro Gamer|<span style="color:blue;">Gamer</span>]] 21:17, 29 April 2018 (EDT)
:Okay, I'll remove that from the scope of the proposal then. [[User:Super Mario RPG|Super Mario RPG]] ([[User talk:Super Mario RPG|talk]]) 15:09, May 28, 2024 (EDT)
::Although on the other hand, "The Great Maze" is kind of an exception, with the next-most enemy populated level being [[Super Star Dash]], with 42. It's still a lot, though. [[User:The Retro Gamer|<span style="color:red;">--The</span>]] [[User talk:The Retro Gamer|<span style="color:green;">Retro</span>]] [[Special:Contributions/The Retro Gamer|<span style="color:blue;">Gamer</span>]] 21:25, 29 April 2018 (EDT)
::Wait, hold on, I may be stupid. That simply specifies that the subjects who have pages on the wiki, but do not pertain to the Mario franchise, would be among the trophies trimmed from the trophy pages, but it does not specify that they'd be trimmed from their own pages as well. I confused myself and hopefully I can clear it up following my above comment. {{User:Koopa con Carne/Sig}} 15:13, May 28, 2024 (EDT)
Ok, for reference, here's a list of the top 11 most-enemy populated levels:
:::I was about to ask about the example of me trimming the profiles from the [[Sonic]] page applies, but now I'm not sure what's going on myself. [[User:Super Mario RPG|Super Mario RPG]] ([[User talk:Super Mario RPG|talk]]) 15:25, May 28, 2024 (EDT)
<span class="mw-collapsible mw-collapsed">
::::That was about the lists of all trophies per game, not profile sections for individual subjects. Doesn't look like there's any overlap between these proposals. --{{User:Waluigi Time/sig}} 16:14, May 28, 2024 (EDT)
#[[The Great Maze]]: 71 enemies
#[[Super Star Dash]]: 42 enemies
#[[Nisekoi: Tsugumi & Marika]]: 39 enemies
#[[NWC 2015-2]]: 32 enemies
#[[World 16-2 (Super Mario Maker for Nintendo 3DS)]]: 30 enemies
#[[Wavy Beach 5-5]]: 23 enemies
#[[World 12-2 (Super Mario Maker for Nintendo 3DS)]]: 22 enemies
#[[Bowser's Chambers of Doom]]: 21 enemies
#[[Ship Love]]: 21 enemies
#[[NWC 2015-3]]: 20 enemies
#[[Wavy Beach 5-4]]: 20 enemies</span>


[[User:The Retro Gamer|<span style="color:red;">--The</span>]] [[User talk:The Retro Gamer|<span style="color:green;">Retro</span>]] [[Special:Contributions/The Retro Gamer|<span style="color:blue;">Gamer</span>]] 21:44, 29 April 2018 (EDT)
I was going to address the opposition by stating that, should this pass, a short summary of each character's ''SSB'' role will remain on the page (See [[Mario#History]] for a similar type of example), but the main information will be on the list of fighters pages. [[User:Super Mario RPG|Super Mario RPG]] ([[User talk:Super Mario RPG|talk]]) 16:42, May 28, 2024 (EDT)
:To me, any list of more than like 5 things is too much for an infobox, as it invariably either stretches it down or looks cluttered if there's any more than that. [[User:Doc von Schmeltwick|Doc von Schmeltwick]] ([[User talk:Doc von Schmeltwick|talk]]) 21:55, 29 April 2018 (EDT)
::That's the thing... ''most'' levels are not even in the 20's range. I would imagine 10 is the average, but I'm doing counts right now. [[User:The Retro Gamer|<span style="color:red;">--The</span>]] [[User talk:The Retro Gamer|<span style="color:green;">Retro</span>]] [[Special:Contributions/The Retro Gamer|<span style="color:blue;">Gamer</span>]] 22:07, 29 April 2018 (EDT)
:::Here are the counts I've got. They're slightly overcounted because they include some worlds, but the bias shouldn't affect the general trend. For those interested, these numbers were calculated from an iterative regular expression search (using regex of the form <code><nowiki>== ?Enemies ?==(?>\n\*[^\n]*){</nowiki>''#''<nowiki>}(?!\n\*)</nowiki></code>) of a export generated from a recursive subcategory and page search of [[:Category:Levels]]; if anyone else does a count and gets different results, please tell me.
*19 enemies: 4 pages
*18 enemies: 1 page
*17 enemies: 7 pages
*16 enemies: 8 pages
*15 enemies: 8 pages
*14 enemies: 11 pages
*13 enemies: 19 pages
*12 enemies: 12 pages
*11 enemies: 38 pages
*10 enemies: 41 pages
*9 enemies: 56 pages
*8 enemies: 72 pages
*7 enemies: 82 pages
*6 enemies: 148 pages
*5 enemies: 216 pages
*4 enemies: 281 pages
*3 enemies: 332 pages
*2 enemies: 307 pages
*1 enemy: 208 pages
::This proposal could also have a boundary, where only levels with under a certain amount of enemies would have the enemies relegated to the infobox. My concern is that the renovation of the ''DKC'' levels will add a lot of small lists of enemies, when these could just be in the infobox. [[User:The Retro Gamer|<span style="color:red;">--The</span>]] [[User talk:The Retro Gamer|<span style="color:green;">Retro</span>]] [[Special:Contributions/The Retro Gamer|<span style="color:blue;">Gamer</span>]] 22:43, 29 April 2018 (EDT)
:::We really do not need ''every'' statistic in the infobox, especially regarding variance.... (also geeze how did you get all those so fast?) [[User:Doc von Schmeltwick|Doc von Schmeltwick]] ([[User talk:Doc von Schmeltwick|talk]]) 23:00, 29 April 2018 (EDT)
::::It's directly relevant to this proposal, since you brought up the question of enemy lists being too long for the infobox. The point there is, ''most'' enemy lists are shorter than 6 enemies. I could make the votes more nuanced by having one section voting for specific limits. And I'm also aware of the next question: inconsistency. I don't think it's unreasonable to have certain pages to have enemies in the infobox, while others have it in the article body; one could consider that levels over a certain number of enemies are notable in their number of enemies, rather than considering the general case requiring a section. [[User:The Retro Gamer|<span style="color:red;">--The</span>]] [[User talk:The Retro Gamer|<span style="color:green;">Retro</span>]] [[Special:Contributions/The Retro Gamer|<span style="color:blue;">Gamer</span>]] 23:24, 29 April 2018 (EDT)
:::::I think this should be an all-or-nothing deal so as to not have arbitrary exceptions happen, and I'm going with "nothing." [[User:Doc von Schmeltwick|Doc von Schmeltwick]] ([[User talk:Doc von Schmeltwick|talk]]) 23:25, 29 April 2018 (EDT)
::::::But the exceptions wouldn't really be arbitrary, since they could be based off the statistics above. You're welcome to vote how you please, but I think lists under a certain amount of enemies shouldn't be kept in the article body just for the sake of consistency. [[User:The Retro Gamer|<span style="color:red;">--The</span>]] [[User talk:The Retro Gamer|<span style="color:green;">Retro</span>]] [[Special:Contributions/The Retro Gamer|<span style="color:blue;">Gamer</span>]] 23:35, 29 April 2018 (EDT)


Still thinking over, so I'm not going to vote yet, but keep in mind that a "spoiler box" is a thing as well. Like in [[Template:Species-infobox]]. Perhaps this new section can be coded like that, if space is the main issue. {{User:Alex95/sig}} 00:20, 30 April 2018 (EDT)
Looks like the truncation of the moves helps a lot with accessibility, like on the Villager page listed above. Pages like [[Fox]] still have excessive profiles, and it seems weird to have those there but not on like the corresponding List of trophies pages. [[User:Super Mario RPG|Super Mario RPG]] ([[User talk:Super Mario RPG|talk]]) 17:30, May 29, 2024 (EDT)
:I was not aware of that option. I think that option would be the optimal outcome, solving the space issue completely. I'll add that to the list of options and add my vote to that. [[User:The Retro Gamer|<span style="color:red;">--The</span>]] [[User talk:The Retro Gamer|<span style="color:green;">Retro</span>]] [[Special:Contributions/The Retro Gamer|<span style="color:blue;">Gamer</span>]] 00:36, 30 April 2018 (EDT)
:Eh, I'd say it makes sense. The list of trophies pages are only meant to be lists of Mario trophies, but we happen to also have pages describing fighters in Smash, so why not list the trophies there where they're relevant? Again I raise you Captain N - the article about it is only about the show and its relevance to Mario, so we don't mention the appearance of Dragon Quest Slimes on that article since it has nothing to do with Mario in that context, but because we happen to have an article about Slimes for another reason, we mention the appearance there. Also, I find the "accessibility" arguments you keep going for a bit strange - there are people who might want to look at Smash information on this wiki, it's not just some burden that we have to avert people from as best as we can. {{User:Hewer/sig}} 07:54, May 30, 2024 (EDT)
::The collapsability changes nothing for me, as I still find it looks bad, and is a detrimental change in general. Enemy lists are too ''important'' to be relegated to the small text, particularly that is hidden. [[User:Doc von Schmeltwick|Doc von Schmeltwick]] ([[User talk:Doc von Schmeltwick|talk]]) 14:17, 30 April 2018 (EDT)
:::Oh, I thought we were still keeping the information in the article anyway. Misread the proposal. Yeah, the list of enemies in the level is rather important to have confined to an easily missable section in the infobox, so either both should be there or nothing should change imo. {{User:Alex95/sig}} 14:23, 30 April 2018 (EDT)
::::...I don't understand: both of what? '''''Just''''' relegating the sections to the infoboxes (rather than also keeping the current sections) seems to look rather unprofessional and make all of the articles look more short than they need to be IMHO. {{User:Toadette the Achiever/sig}} 15:16, 30 April 2018 (EDT)
:::::How about the new option "Add enemies to the levelbox, but keep the enemy sections": it seems like most people don't have a problem with the enemies being in the levelbox, but some (most?) would also prefer to keep the enemies sections. Another thought: the levelboxes could just be a pure list, while the enemies section in the article could include counts. [[User:The Retro Gamer|<span style="color:red;">--The</span>]] [[User talk:The Retro Gamer|<span style="color:green;">Retro</span>]] [[Special:Contributions/The Retro Gamer|<span style="color:blue;">Gamer</span>]] 15:39, 30 April 2018 (EDT)
::::::I still think this should not be added to the infobox at all. Mariowiki's policy is "only once," and having it in the infobox is less preferable than having a list on the article itself. Ergo, it should not be on the infobox at all, as that would be either redundant or pushed out of the way unnecessarily. [[User:Doc von Schmeltwick|Doc von Schmeltwick]] ([[User talk:Doc von Schmeltwick|talk]]) 17:31, 30 April 2018 (EDT)
:::::::I just read over [[MarioWiki:Once and only once]]. That policy is sort of vague and appears to have been written to address multiple pages about the same thing, no infobox redundancy. In particular, I ''don't'' think it should apply to infobox redundancy, because infoboxes ''are'' basically mostly redundant information reorganized; the article's lead section usually covers much of the same information. But it is true that some of the same points ("One of the versions will soon be out of date") could possibly apply to this kind of redundancy.
:::::::I think this proposal hinges on the importance this wiki's community places on enemy lists to an article; I do not find them particularly important because they are (or should be) covered in the level layout section, but others (like yourself) are free to disagree. [[User:The Retro Gamer|<span style="color:red;">--The</span>]] [[User talk:The Retro Gamer|<span style="color:green;">Retro</span>]] [[Special:Contributions/The Retro Gamer|<span style="color:blue;">Gamer</span>]] 18:13, 30 April 2018 (EDT)
::::::::I just don't think they should be in the infobox. Furthermore, that starts a slippery slope: Should we mention how many coins/bananas appear, and which are situational? Should we list how many containers of various types, such as boxes, crates and barrels? How many areas of weak ground with secrets under them there are? How many springs? How many background elements? How many points are feasible? The point is, this could go on recursively until eventually we're at how many a-presses it takes, and we don't need to go there. [[User:Doc von Schmeltwick|Doc von Schmeltwick]] ([[User talk:Doc von Schmeltwick|talk]]) 18:28, 30 April 2018 (EDT)
:::::::::I just think lists without descriptions look a bit ugly in the middle of articles which otherwise have sections filled with descriptions. I can see your slippery slope argument, and I do think we have to be careful about adding things to the infobox. In your ''Should we list how many...'' sentences, I'm a bit unclear if you think non-noteworthy things will get shoehorned into the infobox to avoid the scrutiny of an article section, or if you're worried about nuanced things being simplified in the infobox. [[User:The Retro Gamer|<span style="color:red;">--The</span>]] [[User talk:The Retro Gamer|<span style="color:green;">Retro</span>]] [[Special:Contributions/The Retro Gamer|<span style="color:blue;">Gamer</span>]] 18:49, 30 April 2018 (EDT)
::::::::::My point is, we don't want the infobox to cover absolutely everything; that's what the article itself is for. And large lists look ''far'' uglier in the infobox than they do on the page itself, because infoboxes are intended to be shorter than the article, regardless of collapsability. [[User:Doc von Schmeltwick|Doc von Schmeltwick]] ([[User talk:Doc von Schmeltwick|talk]]) 18:52, 30 April 2018 (EDT)
:::::::::::The reason why it looks ugly in the article to me is all the whitespace to the right when browsing articles on desktop. I think infoboxes are meant to provide quick access to basic information about an article, and enemies are basic information about a level that also usually isn't ambiguous (like coin counting) or trivial (like the number of background elements). [[User:The Retro Gamer|<span style="color:red;">--The</span>]] [[User talk:The Retro Gamer|<span style="color:green;">Retro</span>]] [[Special:Contributions/The Retro Gamer|<span style="color:blue;">Gamer</span>]] 19:04, 30 April 2018 (EDT)
::::::::::::I prefer whitespace to bloated infoboxes, myself. If need really be, we could always feature a gallery of sprites/model renders/screenshots, which would take up empty space and not be brushed out of the way. [[User:Doc von Schmeltwick|Doc von Schmeltwick]] ([[User talk:Doc von Schmeltwick|talk]]) 19:21, 30 April 2018 (EDT)
::::::::I want to point out that they are covered in the level layouts if they are really relevant to the layout. Just, not in a list form. The enemy section helps us to know which enemies appear without searching for them in the layout. {{User:Yoshi the Space Station Manager/sig}} 18:36, 30 April 2018 (EDT)
:::::::::Which is why we have them listed in reasonably-sized text under a header that ''isn't'' in the infobox, where the text is small, and easily-missable if it's collapsed. [[User:Doc von Schmeltwick|Doc von Schmeltwick]] ([[User talk:Doc von Schmeltwick|talk]]) 18:49, 30 April 2018 (EDT)
@Yoshi the SSM: Regarding the amount of work, keep in mind the changes could be implemented smoothly using a bot process with a bit of care (I used the same strategy to count the number of enemies in enemy sections above). [[User:The Retro Gamer|<span style="color:red;">--The</span>]] [[User talk:The Retro Gamer|<span style="color:green;">Retro</span>]] [[Special:Contributions/The Retro Gamer|<span style="color:blue;">Gamer</span>]] 19:34, 30 April 2018 (EDT)
:Oh. Ok. I'll change it soon. But won't entire remove due to Doc's comments. Also, Part 1 doesn't need to be part of the proposal. That needs to be an entirely new proposal. Otherwise that would make two different outcomes the same proposal. And if one pass and the other didn't, we don't have anything for it. Also, if one ended in a tie and the other didn't... yeah. {{User:Yoshi the Space Station Manager/sig}} 10:49, 1 May 2018 (EDT)
::The outcomes are directly related, I think, because the viability of moving enemies sections to the levelbox is directly related to whether the enemies sections (in the loosest sense of the term: both levelbox sections and article sections) include enemy counts. It was intended to be a matrix of options, where one can choose what degree the enemy lists should specifically cover, while. We already have multi-option proposals, so I don't see how this would confuse the system. But I don't have a deep understanding of closure specifications in multi-option proposals; Pass/fail is a bit oversimplified for them, since different pass outcomes may be radically different. If something was a tie, then status quo would be kept for that part of the proposal.


::If others express concern though, I will split it out into its own proposal. [[User:The Retro Gamer|<span style="color:red;">--The</span>]] [[User talk:The Retro Gamer|<span style="color:green;">Retro</span>]] [[Special:Contributions/The Retro Gamer|<span style="color:blue;">Gamer</span>]] 13:24, 1 May 2018 (EDT)
===Merge the name of Mario family wiki===
Mariowiki contains content from ''Donkey Kong'' and ''Wario'' series despite Mario did not appears. [[Pauline]] is an intersection between ''Mario'' and ''Donkey Kong'' series, so she can be included in either. As independent games of the Mario family including ''Luigi'' and ''Princess Peach'' released, the name of ''Mariowiki'' will no longer be effective. luigiwiki.com and peachwiki.com also redirected to Mariowiki.
 
Since Mario is from the ''Mushroom Kingdom'', the important thing is that they are the ''Mario family'', so I'd suggest giving them a new name.
 
'''Proposer''': {{User|Windy}}<br>
'''Deadline''': June 8, 2024, 23:59 GMT
 
====Option 1: Rename to Mushroomwiki====
====Option 2: Rename to Kinopedia====
#{{User|Windy}} As proposer.
 
====Status quo====
#{{User|Arend}} Current wiki name is fine. It's straight to the point: it's about the ''Super Mario'' franchise, and in marketing for this franchise, characters with their own series such as Wario, Yoshi and DK are often included anyway. Something like "Mushroom Wiki" is not clear at all, and are probably even ''less'' relevant to the Yoshi, DK or Wario series, since none of their series have anything to do with mushrooms. "Kino" is also German for "cinema", so "Kinopedia" works even ''less'' (unless you're trying to say it's a pun on [[Toad|Kinopio]] rather than [[Mushroom|Kinoko]], in which case that's still worse).
#{{User|Pseudo}} The current wiki name is simple, concise, and great for searchability. Changing it would completely torpedo that for very little gain. While separate, the Donkey Kong, Yoshi, and Wario games are closely related to the Mario franchise, and make sense to be covered on the Mario wiki.
#{{User|Hewer}} The name of the whole franchise is Super Mario, a game doesn't necessarily need to feature Mario to be in the franchise. I don't think anyone is confused to see New Super Luigi U on the Super Mario Wiki. Meanwhile, they most certainly would be confused as to what the hell Mushroom Wiki or Kinopedia is even about, those names are significantly more generic and less recognisable and would create immense amounts of confusion, not solve it. This is a disastrous "solution" to a non-existent issue. (also I'm not entirely sure what you meant when you said Pauline "can be included in either" but the idea that Pauline is the main crossover between the Mario and Donkey Kong franchise rather than their shared origins and DK's continued appearances in Mario games is laughable)
#{{User|Super Mario RPG}} Absolutely not. Per all.
#{{User|Nightwicked Bowser}} Per all, this would be confusing as f**k.
#{{User|Zootalo}} Nah. Per all.
#{{User|Sparks}} Per all.
#{{user|Doc von Schmeltwick}} - ...why would that be better? It just makes it harder to find. Obtuse names like "JiggyWikki" and "Triforce Wiki" were chosen just because the more obvious "Banjo Wiki" and "Zelda Wiki" were already taken.
#{{User|Camwoodstock}} Per all. "Mushroomwiki" makes us think of a wiki for mushroom foragers, and no offense, but "Kinopedia" make us think of a knockoff of Urban Dictionary--all things considered, we lucked out ''hard'' by having the name "Super Mario Wiki" at "mariowiki.com" ripe for the picking; we really, really shouldn't just throw that all away for something obtuse. We are not Elon Musk.
#{{User|Sdman213}} No. Definitely per all.
 
====Comments====
The point is the merging of Mario character names. The domain; Luigiwiki, Peachwiki, DKwiki (or donkeykongwiki.com), Wariowiki, Yoshiwiki and Bowserwiki have all been redirected to Mariowiki. [[User:Windy|Windy]] ([[User talk:Windy|talk]]) 10:26, June 1, 2024 (EDT)
:Why would that need done? Especially Peach, who has two major games plus an LCD thing under her... petticoat...? (she doesn't have a belt) And Bowser, who has zilch. [[User:Doc von Schmeltwick|Doc von Schmeltwick]] ([[User talk:Doc von Schmeltwick|talk]]) 10:38, June 1, 2024 (EDT)
:So...where's the issue? What does this have to do with renaming the wiki? {{User:Hewer/sig}} 10:39, June 1, 2024 (EDT)


@Wildgoosespeeder What I worry about is how it will look '''un-'''collapsed, when the "show" button is clicked. Not to mention that it still starts a slippery slope of what "basic level information" is. Every type of item? Every type of object? Every type of NPC species? Every type of obstacle? Amount of signs? Amount of trees? Amount of ''butterflies''? Note how those got progressively more and more absurd. This is another thing I'm worried about. [[User:Doc von Schmeltwick|Doc von Schmeltwick]] ([[User talk:Doc von Schmeltwick|talk]]) 13:21, 1 May 2018 (EDT)
Let me ask you a question: what is the name of [[Super Mario (franchise)|the ''whole'' franchise this wiki is about, and covers franchises like Yoshi, Donkey Kong and Wario alike]]? It's not some weird merger of names, not something like "Mushroom" or "Kinoko" or even the "Mario family" (which admittedly is a better to name a wiki after than "Mushroom"/"Kinoko"). No, it's ''Super Mario''. "Super Mario Wiki" is still a perfectly fine name for the subjects this wiki is talking about. While this wiki does contain content from the ''Donkey Kong'' and ''Wario'' series despite Mario "did not appears", there's really no need to rename this wiki since Yoshi, DK and Wario are still characters in the franchise that Mario ''is the center of''. And so are Luigi, Peach and Toad: ''all six of these'' are always to be recognized as ''Super Mario'' characters, so even if Mario doesn't appear in some games that these others star in, the current name of our wiki is still effective and relevant. {{User:Arend/sig}} 10:47, June 1, 2024 (EDT)


==Miscellaneous==
==Miscellaneous==
''None at the moment.''
''None at the moment.''

Latest revision as of 11:26, June 1, 2024

Image used as a banner for the Proposals page
Current time:
Saturday, June 1st, 15:26 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, but they may not vote for every option available.
  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 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.
  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: "June 1, 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 {{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}}.
  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

Split Mario Kart Tour character variants into list articles, Tails777 (ended May 4, 2022)
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)
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)
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)
Break alphabetical order in enemy lists to list enemy variants below their base form, EvieMaybe (ended May 21, 2024)
Consider "humorous" and other related terms as frequently misused in MarioWiki:Good writing, DrippingYellow (ended May 28, 2024)

Talk page proposals

Split all the clothing, Doc von Schmeltwick (ended September 12, 2021)
Split machine parts, Robo-Rabbit, and flag from Super Duel Mode, Doc von Schmeltwick (ended September 30, 2022)
Add product IDs in game infoboxes, Windy (ended March 18, 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)
Split the Jungle Buddies from Animal Friends, DrippingYellow (ended December 22, 2023)
Make bestiary list pages for the Minion Quest and Bowser Jr.'s Journey modes, Doc von Schmeltwick (ended January 11, 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)
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)
Remove non-Super Mario content from Super Smash Bros. series challenges articles, BMfan08 (ended May 3, 2024)
Split Cheep Blimp (Paper Mario: The Thousand-Year Door) and Zeeppelin from the blimp page, Doc von Schmeltwick (ended May 28, 2024)

Writing guidelines

None at the moment.

New features

None at the moment.

Removals

None at the moment.

Changes

Move Super Smash Bros. information for crossover characters into the list articles and delete their Super Smash Bros. profiles

This proposal concerns Super Smash Bros. information of certain characters listed in Crossover characters. It makes it harder to see the actual Super Mario content on said articles, like how the Isabelle page largely concerns her appearances in Super Smash Bros. while the actual Super Mario appearances in Mario Kart 8 and Super Mario Maker are all the way below. In the case of Villager, it starts off by showing the WarioWare appearances but then has this huge chunk of Super Smash Bros. information in between that and the appearances in Mario Kart 8 and Super Mario Maker.

Besides, the List of Super Smash Bros. fighters pages feel kind of awkward that certain crossover characters do not have their information listed there with other non-Super Mario characters, so this proposal aims to rectify that.

The fighters on the list pages do not have their profiles, and I don't see why the crossover characters should have them but not the fighters already in the list pages, so if this proposal passes, all of that will be deleted too. This includes the Profiles section on other crossover pages like Knuckles, Deku Baba, Zangief, and so forth, since it would be illogical for them to keep their profiles but not the protagonists of the Super Smash Bros. series, an inconsistency that's already present. But the status of the SSB content in the History section of crossover content OTHER THAN fighters in the Super Smash Bros. series can be for a future proposal.

This will affect the following pages, and their Super Smash Bros. information (excluding profiles) will go into the following articles:

There's also Samus, and there's a proposal to currently split the article, so if that passes, her Super Smash Bros. information will stay on the List of fighters debuting in Super Smash Bros. page.

Note: A short summary of the character's role, or any connections to Super Mario, will remain intact, similarly to how Mario#History has a short summary on Mario throughout his appearance while the main history page on Mario is located at History of Mario.

There are three options: Option 1 will enact all of the changes above, Option 2 will remove only the Super Smash Bros. profiles from pages on non-Super Mario content, and Option 3 opposes everything in this proposal.

Proposer: Super Mario RPG (talk)
Deadline: June 4, 2024, 23:59 GMT

Option 1: Full support

  1. Super Mario RPG (talk) As proposer.

Option 2: Trim profiles only

  1. Super Mario RPG (talk) Secondary

Option 3: Oppose

  1. Axis (talk) I believe it's unnecessary.
  2. Nintendo101 (talk) It makes intuitive sense to just list the Super Smash Bros. info on the pages of the character when available. (As a side note, the Super Smash Bros. series has a pretty intimate relationship with the Super Mario franchise, and I do not think we should be omitting coverage here just because SmashWiki exists. We don't address topics the same way.)
  3. Tails777 (talk) If the characters have an article, I see no reason why Smash stuff should be singled out and removed just because it's not Mario related.
  4. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) - Per all, especially Nintendo101
  5. Hewer (talk) It's standard practice (and also pretty logical) to list any time a subject happens to appear alongside Mario stuff. Captain N: The Game Master is a good example - it's considered a guest appearance, so it doesn't get full coverage, but we still mention things' appearances there if they happen to be covered on the wiki for some other reason, e.g. Slime (Dragon Quest). So why should Smash (where Mario stuff perhaps has a greater role than in Captain N) be the one exception? The proposal tries to argue about organisation and finding information, but I'd say unnecessarily splitting a character's information across multiple pages is the real bad organisation here. If people really can't bear to scroll through some Smash stuff in order to find what they're looking for (which, mind, might be the Smash stuff anyway), they can use the contents links at the top of the article to jump to particular sections no problem. And also, to be frank, I don't really understand what the proposal is talking about regarding "profiles".
  6. FanOfRosalina2007 (talk) Per all, especially Hewer's reasoning.
  7. MegaBowser64 (talk) Per all of yall. Personally I don't think it's a big deal to leave Smash info on character pages. There isn't much harm done.
  8. Sdman213 (talk) Per all.

Comments

This passed proposal already establishes that non-Mario trophies should be removed from dedicated character articles. Check out the bolded sentence and the rationale after it:

It's simple. I propose to simply trim those trophies list pages to only the Mario/DK/Wario etc. character and cut the rest. This includes crossover characters that have pages on the wiki - while we may have a Link page because he's in Mario Kart 8, his Smash Bros trophy is about Link the protagonist of his own independent intellectual property and not Link the funny Mario Kart 8 man, and it leads to the bizarre situation of having a listing of Link but not the character his series is named after. Best keep things simple.

I believe if option 3 were to win in this proposal, that decision would be overturned. -- KOOPA CON CARNE 15:06, May 28, 2024 (EDT), edited 15:14, May 28, 2024 (EDT)

Okay, I'll remove that from the scope of the proposal then. Super Mario RPG (talk) 15:09, May 28, 2024 (EDT)
Wait, hold on, I may be stupid. That simply specifies that the subjects who have pages on the wiki, but do not pertain to the Mario franchise, would be among the trophies trimmed from the trophy pages, but it does not specify that they'd be trimmed from their own pages as well. I confused myself and hopefully I can clear it up following my above comment. -- KOOPA CON CARNE 15:13, May 28, 2024 (EDT)
I was about to ask about the example of me trimming the profiles from the Sonic page applies, but now I'm not sure what's going on myself. Super Mario RPG (talk) 15:25, May 28, 2024 (EDT)
That was about the lists of all trophies per game, not profile sections for individual subjects. Doesn't look like there's any overlap between these proposals. --Waluigi's head icon in Mario Kart 8 Deluxe. Too Bad! Waluigi Time! 16:14, May 28, 2024 (EDT)

I was going to address the opposition by stating that, should this pass, a short summary of each character's SSB role will remain on the page (See Mario#History for a similar type of example), but the main information will be on the list of fighters pages. Super Mario RPG (talk) 16:42, May 28, 2024 (EDT)

Looks like the truncation of the moves helps a lot with accessibility, like on the Villager page listed above. Pages like Fox still have excessive profiles, and it seems weird to have those there but not on like the corresponding List of trophies pages. Super Mario RPG (talk) 17:30, May 29, 2024 (EDT)

Eh, I'd say it makes sense. The list of trophies pages are only meant to be lists of Mario trophies, but we happen to also have pages describing fighters in Smash, so why not list the trophies there where they're relevant? Again I raise you Captain N - the article about it is only about the show and its relevance to Mario, so we don't mention the appearance of Dragon Quest Slimes on that article since it has nothing to do with Mario in that context, but because we happen to have an article about Slimes for another reason, we mention the appearance there. Also, I find the "accessibility" arguments you keep going for a bit strange - there are people who might want to look at Smash information on this wiki, it's not just some burden that we have to avert people from as best as we can. Hewer (talk · contributions · edit count) 07:54, May 30, 2024 (EDT)

Merge the name of Mario family wiki

Mariowiki contains content from Donkey Kong and Wario series despite Mario did not appears. Pauline is an intersection between Mario and Donkey Kong series, so she can be included in either. As independent games of the Mario family including Luigi and Princess Peach released, the name of Mariowiki will no longer be effective. luigiwiki.com and peachwiki.com also redirected to Mariowiki.

Since Mario is from the Mushroom Kingdom, the important thing is that they are the Mario family, so I'd suggest giving them a new name.

Proposer: Windy (talk)
Deadline: June 8, 2024, 23:59 GMT

Option 1: Rename to Mushroomwiki

Option 2: Rename to Kinopedia

  1. Windy (talk) As proposer.

Status quo

  1. Arend (talk) Current wiki name is fine. It's straight to the point: it's about the Super Mario franchise, and in marketing for this franchise, characters with their own series such as Wario, Yoshi and DK are often included anyway. Something like "Mushroom Wiki" is not clear at all, and are probably even less relevant to the Yoshi, DK or Wario series, since none of their series have anything to do with mushrooms. "Kino" is also German for "cinema", so "Kinopedia" works even less (unless you're trying to say it's a pun on Kinopio rather than Kinoko, in which case that's still worse).
  2. Pseudo (talk) The current wiki name is simple, concise, and great for searchability. Changing it would completely torpedo that for very little gain. While separate, the Donkey Kong, Yoshi, and Wario games are closely related to the Mario franchise, and make sense to be covered on the Mario wiki.
  3. Hewer (talk) The name of the whole franchise is Super Mario, a game doesn't necessarily need to feature Mario to be in the franchise. I don't think anyone is confused to see New Super Luigi U on the Super Mario Wiki. Meanwhile, they most certainly would be confused as to what the hell Mushroom Wiki or Kinopedia is even about, those names are significantly more generic and less recognisable and would create immense amounts of confusion, not solve it. This is a disastrous "solution" to a non-existent issue. (also I'm not entirely sure what you meant when you said Pauline "can be included in either" but the idea that Pauline is the main crossover between the Mario and Donkey Kong franchise rather than their shared origins and DK's continued appearances in Mario games is laughable)
  4. Super Mario RPG (talk) Absolutely not. Per all.
  5. Nightwicked Bowser (talk) Per all, this would be confusing as f**k.
  6. Zootalo (talk) Nah. Per all.
  7. Sparks (talk) Per all.
  8. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) - ...why would that be better? It just makes it harder to find. Obtuse names like "JiggyWikki" and "Triforce Wiki" were chosen just because the more obvious "Banjo Wiki" and "Zelda Wiki" were already taken.
  9. Camwoodstock (talk) Per all. "Mushroomwiki" makes us think of a wiki for mushroom foragers, and no offense, but "Kinopedia" make us think of a knockoff of Urban Dictionary--all things considered, we lucked out hard by having the name "Super Mario Wiki" at "mariowiki.com" ripe for the picking; we really, really shouldn't just throw that all away for something obtuse. We are not Elon Musk.
  10. Sdman213 (talk) No. Definitely per all.

Comments

The point is the merging of Mario character names. The domain; Luigiwiki, Peachwiki, DKwiki (or donkeykongwiki.com), Wariowiki, Yoshiwiki and Bowserwiki have all been redirected to Mariowiki. Windy (talk) 10:26, June 1, 2024 (EDT)

Why would that need done? Especially Peach, who has two major games plus an LCD thing under her... petticoat...? (she doesn't have a belt) And Bowser, who has zilch. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 10:38, June 1, 2024 (EDT)
So...where's the issue? What does this have to do with renaming the wiki? Hewer (talk · contributions · edit count) 10:39, June 1, 2024 (EDT)

Let me ask you a question: what is the name of the whole franchise this wiki is about, and covers franchises like Yoshi, Donkey Kong and Wario alike? It's not some weird merger of names, not something like "Mushroom" or "Kinoko" or even the "Mario family" (which admittedly is a better to name a wiki after than "Mushroom"/"Kinoko"). No, it's Super Mario. "Super Mario Wiki" is still a perfectly fine name for the subjects this wiki is talking about. While this wiki does contain content from the Donkey Kong and Wario series despite Mario "did not appears", there's really no need to rename this wiki since Yoshi, DK and Wario are still characters in the franchise that Mario is the center of. And so are Luigi, Peach and Toad: all six of these are always to be recognized as Super Mario characters, so even if Mario doesn't appear in some games that these others star in, the current name of our wiki is still effective and relevant. ArendLogoTransparent.pngrend (talk) (edits) 10:47, June 1, 2024 (EDT)

Miscellaneous

None at the moment.

Retrieved from "https://www.mariowiki.com/index.php?title=MarioWiki:Proposals&oldid=4238853"