MarioWiki:Proposals: Difference between revisions

From the Super Mario Wiki, the Mario encyclopedia
Jump to navigationJump to search
(→‎Support: yeah, agreed (really, why does it cast Water Blast?))
 
Line 1: Line 1:
{{MarioWiki:Proposals/Header}}
{{/Header}}


==Writing guidelines==
==Writing guidelines==
''None at the moment.''
===Consider "humorous" and other related terms as frequently misused in [[MarioWiki:Good writing]]===
 
A writing quirk that seems to pop up everywhere (particularly in the Mario RPG pages/sections) that always drives me ''nuts'' is referring to a situation or action as "comical" or "humorous". Generally, these words are used to describe something that is percieved to be amusing, which is obviously subjective and should not be present in encyclopediac writing. However, usage of these words on here seems to follow an improper, "objective" pattern of referring to features intended by the developers as gags or jokes. Examples of blatant misuse:
 
From the [[Minion Quest: The Search for Bowser]] article:
<blockquote>The group runs into [[Prince Peasley]], and after a battle ensues with a few [[Piranha Bean]]s, Captain Goomba ''humorously'' sends out one of them to attack Prince Peasley.</blockquote>
Who says Captain Goomba is trying to make a joke out of sending monsters out to fight an ego-centric prince? In Captain Goomba's eyes, he's practically fighting for his life trying not to be eaten. The only one who could find this humorous is the viewer, and since this is a story synopsis in an encyclopedia, there shouldn't be any viewer.
 
From [[Goomba Mask]]:
<blockquote>In ''[[Paper Mario: The Origami King]]'', a different Goomba Mask resembling a [[Paper Macho Goomba]] appears in the [[Shogun Studios]] storage area. If Mario wears it, he spins around and causes the mask's eyes to roll, with the humorous appearance making [[Olivia]] laugh.</blockquote>
Even though there is actually an in-game audience this time, the wording still implies that the ''writer'' thinks it is humorous. In order to emphasize that it's Olivia who thinks it is funny, I changed the last sentence to:
<blockquote>If Mario wears it, he spins around and causes the mask's eyes to roll, which Olivia finds amusing to the point of laughter.</blockquote>
 
The article for [[Kruller]] has quite possibly the most egregious usage of "humorously" I've ever seen:
<blockquote>When Luigi enters the office afterward, Kruller briefly faints from shock at Luigi entering, before entering the next room to find a suitable weapon to defend himself (''humorously'' getting stuck on his back mid-roll) [...] Gooigi then retrieves the Mezzanine's elevator button, with it being ''humorously'' revealed that Luigi slept through the entire battle [...] After defeating Kruller in two-player mode, Luigi, who was watching the battle from outside, takes all the credit saying that he did it, after which Gooigi ''humorously'' copies Luigi as he had actually defeated Kruller [...] </blockquote>
 
''All'' of these are jokes meant for the audience. And once again, because this is a synopsis in an encyclopedia, there shouldn't ''be'' an audience.


==New features==
And there's way more that I haven't mentioned (just look up the word "humorous" on here and you'll see what I mean). To summarize how I feel this term has been frequently misused, in a form easily copyable for the rules:
===Create a article for List of television networks===
Hi, i was wondering if a article can be made listing all the television networks that the Mario and Donkey Kong TV Shows and Movies aired on.


The reason we need this article on the wiki is i want to document the networks that aired the shows in every region in a list so that it can be well-documented here on the wiki and also preserved for the future for anybody that wants to know what networks aired the shows on in other regions such as Jetix for example.
;'''Humorous/Comical/etc.''': "Humorous", along with other similar words, is used from an observational perspective to describe something one finds amusing or funny, which is, of course, subjective on the part of the writer and should be avoided in an encyclopedia. However, it is commonly misused to refer to anything that is specifically written to be a joke or a gag by the authors of a piece of media. These kinds of words should generally be used only when a character or person relevant to the article ''finds'' something amusing. Not to be confused with "comedic", a word that simply means something relates to comedy in general, and is fine to use if a joke is deliberate on the part of a character (or, in case of references to the media's development, a developer).


'''Proposer''': {{User|MarioKartFan4863927}}<br>
'''Proposer''': {{User|DrippingYellow}}<br>
'''Deadline''': January 11, 2024, 23:59 GMT
'''Deadline''': May 26, 2024, 23:59 GMT


====Support====
====Support====
#{{User|MarioKartFan4863927}} Per
#{{User|DrippingYellow}} This whole situation is, dare I say it... "humorous". Per proposal.
#{{User|Camwoodstock}} Per proposal. Flowery writing is no laughing matter!
#{{User|Hewer}} I'd add that "comedic" should be used instead to get across that something is meant to be funny while using more objective language, but otherwise, sure, I'll humour this idea.
#{{User|Ray Trace}} We should just get rid of that subjective adjective altogether, let readers decide from the context of the quote if it's humorous or not, we don't need to write an editorial about it (ie sentences such as "Patrick gets caught by Sandy's lasso and dragged back, resulting in a nuclear explosion" already conveys to the reader that it's comedic)
#{{User|TheFlameChomp}} Per all.
#{{User|Jazama}} Per all


====Oppose====
====Oppose====
#{{User|Swallow}} I think a better idea would be just to list those in the relevant articles rather than creating a whole new page for it.
#{{User|Super Game Gear}} Per Swallow.
#{{User|PnnyCrygr}} "''Oh no, not again!''" to quote [[Ashley]]. Also per all.
#{{User|Sparks}} I understand your idea for the networks, but there may not be that many to warrant a category for them. Per all.
#{{User|Camwoodstock}} Per Swallow--while this isn't ''useless'' information, it almost definitely doesn't need to have a whole article to itself <small>(we're ignoring the idea of making YouTube it's own disambiguation page in this proposal because it is way out-of-scope for "just the DiC Mario cartoons")</small>. Just expand the "Distributor(s)" section of the infobox, within reason of course (so like, don't put just straight-up "YouTube" in it.), and we don't think anyone would particularly bat an eye.
#{{User|Killer Moth}} Per all.
#{{User|Mushroom Head}} Per all.
#{{User|Mario}} Reminds me of your failed proposals in [[Talk:WildBrain]], [[Talk:Netflix]], [[Talk:YouTube]], [[Talk:Hulu (streaming service)]], [[Talk:Amazon Prime Video]], [[Talk:NCircle TV]], [[Talk:Jaroo]], and [[Talk:WildBrainTV]]. The information you want is too oddly specific and ultimately tangential to MarioWiki. If you want to keep a personal list, then probably do it on your userpage.
#{{User|Sdman213}} Per all.
#{{User|Biggestman}} "Here we go! Again? Again?" Again? Again? Again? Again? Again? You have already tried and failed very similar things through 8 DISTINCT TPPs, just give up. Per all.
#{{User|Arend}} While this isn't entirely useless (to be honest, it ''is'' a better idea than the eight different proposals about adding pages for the streaming services that could've easily been made into a single proposal (could be a BJAODN contender?)), I'm also not sure if it's entirely necessary for this wiki, either. I'd take up to Camwoodstock and Mario's suggestions if I were you.


====Comments====
====Comments====
@Mario: I don't necessarily think we need this article but I disagree with the notion that this information is too irrelevant to cover on the wiki. Couldn't it be seen as the equivalent of what consoles a game can be played on? {{User:Hewer/sig}} 16:06, January 6, 2024 (EST)
"Comical" and "comedic" should be fine, as those simply mean relating to comedy. [[User:Doc von Schmeltwick|Doc von Schmeltwick]] ([[User talk:Doc von Schmeltwick|talk]]) 19:31, May 12, 2024 (EDT)
:"Comedic" is definitely fine, but in multiple dictionary sources I've come across, the definition of "comical" meaning "relating to comedy" is either listed as obsolete and deprecated, or absent altogether. [[User:DrippingYellow|DrippingYellow]] ([[User talk:DrippingYellow|talk]]) 19:43, May 12, 2024 (EDT)
 
{{@|Ray Trace}} That was a really good example of obvious comedy. SpongeBob itself is comedy, so that was a good idea to use that as an example! [[User:SONIC123CDMANIA+&#38;K(B&#38;ATSA)|SONIC123CDMANIA+&#38;K(B&#38;ATSA)]] ([[User talk:SONIC123CDMANIA+&#38;K(B&#38;ATSA)|talk]]) 08:12, May 15, 2024 (EDT)
 
{{@|Hewer}} I updated the rules blurb, is it good now? [[User:DrippingYellow|DrippingYellow]] ([[User talk:DrippingYellow|talk]]) 11:34, May 15, 2024 (EDT)
:Yeah, that works. {{User:Hewer/sig}} 11:43, May 15, 2024 (EDT)
 
===Standardize "History in the Super Mario franchise" headings under certain conditions===
Inspired by [[User:Nintendo101|Nintendo101]]'s [[User talk:Nintendo101/flowerpot|flowerpot]] subpage (from an [https://www.mariowiki.com/index.php?title=User:Nintendo101/flowerpot&oldid=4209600 earlier revision], before it had been removed), this proposal aims to standardize the use of '''<nowiki>==History in the Super Mario franchise==</nowiki>''' over '''<nowiki>==History==</nowiki>'''. This will help make it clear to readers what is ''Super Mario'' and what is not while reading articles, and prevent potential disputes once a standard has been set. Please note that this proposal is '''NOT''' about the ''DK'', ''Yoshi'', or ''Wario'' subfranchises.
 
For an article to apply for the '''<nowiki>==History in the Super Mario franchise==</nowiki>''' heading, the article should meet one of the following criteria:
 
#It is a generic subject (e.g. [[Grape]]s) or something from real life, like a person, with a fictional portrayal in ''Super Mario'' media, such as [[Thomas Jefferson]]. An example of this [https://www.mariowiki.com/index.php?title=Dinosaur&oldid=4213618 was on the Dinosaur article before being reverted].
#It is from the [[Super Mario (franchise)|''Super Mario'' franchise]] '''BUT''' has also appeared in non-''Super Mario'' media, popular examples being the [[Super Smash Bros. (series)|''Super Smash Bros.'' series]] and the ''[[Minecraft]]'' textures. Everything that isn't ''Super Mario'' would be subheadings of '''<nowiki>==History in other games==</nowiki>''', or '''<nowiki>==History in other media==</nowiki>''' if the subject also (or instead) appeared in publications, television shows, etc. not in ''Super Mario'' franchise. An example of this can be seen on the [[History of Luigi]] article.
#Crossover content, including Nintendo products, as they appear in ''Super Mario'' media. Examples can be seen on the [[Game Boy]], [[Link]], and [[Egg Pawn]] pages.
 
For the first bullet point, this would help establish that real and generic subjects are not from ''Super Mario'' and makes the History heading less ambiguous. On the [[Dinosaur]] article, for example, are we reading about history of dinosaurs as they exist in real life, up to the point of extinction, or from the ''Super Mario'' franchise? It's the latter. For [[George Washington]], are we reading history about him from the 18th century or as he exists in the ''Super Mario'' franchise? It's also the latter, clearly.
 
For the second bullet point, this would help eliminate the popular misconception that ''Super Smash Bros.'' is part of the ''Super Mario'' franchise and help better contextualize ''Super Mario'' as it exists in other media, like sometimes ''Zelda'' or ''Minecraft'', rather than being integral to the same degree as their main appearances in ''Super Mario'' media itself.


@Arend: NGL, we already have a drafted proposal for a YouTube disambiguation page locked-and-loaded on our Notepad++. We're just waiting for the 28 day cooldown between proposals on the same topic to expire before actually, y'know, putting it to a vote. ;P {{User:Camwoodstock/sig}} 12:43, January 10, 2024 (EST)
For the third bullet point, this would eliminate confusion that the history is talking about Nintendo products in general, like when they were produced, the amount of sales generated, etc. and rather mention its appearances within the ''Super Mario'' franchise itself. History on Nintendo products themselves can be found on [[nwiki:|NintendoWiki]]. Similarly, for articles like [[Link]], it helps when the History section specifies it is of Link as he appears in the ''Super Mario'' franchise. Then connections to ''Super Mario'' go under the "History in other media" heading.


===Create a navigation template for non-''Mario'' characters===
To make it short, if this proposal passes, and <nowiki>==History==</nowiki> is changed to <nowiki>==History in the ''Super Mario'' franchise==</nowiki> (and split into a separate <nowiki>==History in other media==</nowiki> in the case of criteria #2) on an article that can be categorized by any of the three numbered bullet points above, '''users will not be allowed to revert it back to the initial <nowiki>==History==</nowiki> heading''', like in the [https://www.mariowiki.com/index.php?title=Dinosaur&diff=next&oldid=4213618 aforementioned case involving the Dinosaur article].
There are several characters documented on the Super Mario Wiki whom did not originate from the ''Mario'' universe, but rather an external series/franchise. These crossover characters range from [[Sonic|Sonic the Hedgehog]] (and others from the titular series), [[Link]], [[Kirby]], [[Mega Man]] and [[:Category:Third-party characters|more]]. Instead of having to scroll through a multi-paged category or searching and hoping they're here just to find one article, wouldn't it be more convenient for readers and editors to be able to access all of these characters via a neatly-organised navigation box?


The navbox could be sorted by either series of origin, their roles in their crossover appearances, or both. I think this would be a good idea because, as I said before, the only alternatives right now are to scroll through a giant category page or search the character's name in the search bar and hope for the best. If this proposal is approved, leave it to me to create the template; it would be my responsibility due to the idea originating from me.
'''Proposer''': {{User|Super Mario RPG}}<br>
'''Deadline''': May 31, 2024, 23:59 GMT


'''Proposer''': {{User|RetroNintendo2008}}<br>
====Support for all three options====
'''Deadline''': January 11, 2024, 23:59 GMT
#{{User|Super Mario RPG}} I'm for this option.
#{{User|SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)}} Yes. Also, for the flowerpot thing, I have that saved (with a few tweaks) [[User:SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)/Nintendo101's flowerpot old revision saved plus tweaks|here]].


====Support====
====Apply to only crossover content and real products====
#{{User|RetroNintendo2008}} Per proposal.
#{{User|Super Game Gear}} Sounds like a good idea.
#{{User|SolemnStormcloud}} Per proposal. There's no harm in voting now — redefining [[:Category:Third-party characters]] can happen in a later proposal.
#{{User|Mushroom Head}} Per all.
#{{User|Camwoodstock}} While the prototype sandbox version is a little rugged, actually improving the aesthetics and giving its character roster another skim is something that can be done in due time. Off the immediate top of our head, no thoughts just going, a lot of the comics characters could easily qualify, but things like that are better suited for ''after'' the template is voted into existence. What we've got so far, we think looks nice and is, above all else, easy to navigate--which, y'know, is a big thing for a navbox to do right.
#{{User|Ahemtoday}} Just realized I hadn't supported this yet.
#{{User|Arend}} Per all, btw


====Oppose====
====Oppose====
#{{User|Hewer}} Similar to your [[MarioWiki:Proposals/Archive/65#Standardize a "Cameo appearances" section|previous]] [[MarioWiki:Proposals/Archive/65#Standardize the "Other appearances" scope to include anything that's not a Super Mario game|proposals]] about reorganising history sections, I don't really see what we'd gain from this. For the first and third bullet points, the edit summary that removed it from the [[Dinosaur]] page sums up my thoughts: "This is obvious and unnecessary". Of course we're only going to be covering the subject's history that's within our scope, I don't think anyone's visiting the Dinosaur page seeking a complete history of the Mesozoic Era only to be disappointed when they don't find it. For the second bullet point, I ask the same question as your last attempt to split up non-Mario appearances: why does it not being a Mario game make it worth splitting up? The assertion that they're not "integral to the same degree as their main appearances in Super Mario media itself" feels wrong, games like Smash are major appearances of the Mario characters and are important to their histories, sometimes moreso than appearances in actual Mario games (Smash Melee introducing Yoshi's [[Egg Roll (move)|Egg Roll]], Smash Ultimate being K. Rool's first physical appearance in a decade, etc.). I also again question whether "the popular misconception that Super Smash Bros. is part of the Super Mario franchise" exists or is worth "fixing" in such an indirect way (we already don't consider them Mario games to my knowledge anyway). The [[Game Boy]] example is the only one given where I see some merit in doing this, since we do give some coverage to the actual histories of Nintendo hardware and it could be worth distinguishing the history of their in-universe appearances from that.
#{{User|Nintendo101}} Because this is the <u>Super Mario</u> Wiki, the inherent assumption is that any subject with an article appears in the franchise (including [[Link]] and [[Sonic]]), and that the "History" section would only cover its appearance in the ''Super Mario'' franchise. What else would it be about? If a "history in the Super Mario franchise" was to be implemented anywhere, I feel like it only makes sense for recurring subjects that debuted in the ''Super Mario'' franchise, but make recurring appearances elsewhere (like Chain Chomps, which make some a few appearances in ''Zelda''). But even in that context, I don't know if it would be appropriate. (I also don't agree with the premise that any in-game subject is "generic", regardless of its name or design. The [[grape]]s in ''Yoshi's Story'' are just as derived from the {{wp|grape|real article}} as the [[Sour Bunch]].)
#{{User|Nightwicked Bowser}} Per my edit summary Hewer quoted.
#{{User|FanOfRosalina2007}} Per Nintendo101.
#{{User|Jazama}} Per all
#{{User|Dine2017}} Under criterion #2, common ''Mario'' subjects such as [[Goomba]] would have a long ==History in the Super Mario franchise== and a short ==History in other games/media==, making the two unbalanced. Also per all. (In the case of [[Game Boy]], I think ==Appearances in the Super Mario franchise== is more accurate, cf. [[Nintendo Entertainment System]] and [[Nintendo 64]].)


====Comments====
====Comments====
Tangentially related, but we just took a look at the category linked in "more", and it's a ''doozy''. In addition to characters that are from external series altogether, such as say, [[Plok]], characters that are from games that happen to have been co-developed by non-Nintendo companies are also clumped in here. We'd guesstimate roughly half of this category is just stuff from either Smash or ''Super Mario RPG'', and while you can argue the former makes some sense to include, the latter absolutely shouldn't be here; especially seeing as we sure don't clump together every last ''Mario Party'' original character despite those being primarily by Hudson. If they really had to be included, the ''[[Wario Blast]]'' bosses are only included via their category being a subcategory--sure, we don't have a blanket "Super Mario RPG characters" category, but we feel like you could easily make one even if just for this. Why the hey is this not already the case for either partially or fully third-party games?
For clarity, when I say "standardize," (not to be confused with "allow," since I don't think there's anything in the rules that explicitly forbids formatting in the aforementioned three cases), it means if a page is formatted that way, others aren't allowed to revert it, since it's the standard for how said articles should look. Also, {{@|SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)}}, glad to see that flowerpot page. [[User:Super Mario RPG|Super Mario RPG]] ([[User talk:Super Mario RPG|talk]]) 14:32, May 17, 2024 (EDT)
:"For clarity, when I say "standardize," (not to be confused with "allow," since I don't think there's anything in the rules that explicitly forbids formatting in the aforementioned three cases), it means if a page is formatted that way, others aren't allowed to revert it, since it's the standard for how said articles should look." Thanks for the clarification! My support will still be there. "Also, {{@|SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)}}, glad to see that flowerpot page." Thanks! I wanted to keep/expand on it as a subpage of my userpage, b/c I didn't want any edit conflicts. You and {{@|Nintendo101}} are free to edit it if you want. [[User:SONIC123CDMANIA+&#38;K(B&#38;ATSA)|SONIC123CDMANIA+&#38;K(B&#38;ATSA)]] ([[User talk:SONIC123CDMANIA+&#38;K(B&#38;ATSA)|talk]]) 14:43, May 17, 2024 (EDT)
 
Wasn't there a proposal about roughly the same thing not too long ago? You're meant to wait 28 days between proposals on the same thing, so if that's the case, we don't exactly wanna wait for a substantial amount of votes before calling attention to it. {{User:Camwoodstock/sig}} 15:12, May 17, 2024 (EDT)
:No, I think this is different. That one had to do with removing franchise headers, which this one doesn't. [[User:SONIC123CDMANIA+&#38;K(B&#38;ATSA)|SONIC123CDMANIA+&#38;K(B&#38;ATSA)]] ([[User talk:SONIC123CDMANIA+&#38;K(B&#38;ATSA)|talk]]) 15:23, May 17, 2024 (EDT)
::Yeah, this one is not about removing headings. It's about modifying "History" to "History in the ''Super Mario'' franchise" in one of three case, and in one case (if there's appearances outside of ''Super Mario''), splitting "History in other games/media"  into its own history heading. See what I did on [[Don Bongo]] as an example. [[User:Super Mario RPG|Super Mario RPG]] ([[User talk:Super Mario RPG|talk]]) 15:39, May 17, 2024 (EDT)


More directly related, however, with the category in its current state, we're almost hesitant to vote on this... At all. Would we just have a section that's "Here's every original character to ''Super Mario RPG'' because Square Enix isn't Nintendo! This is a helpful navbox when you're looking for [[Dr. Wily]]." Yes? Then we don't want to even think about that navbox. Are we going to hopefully repair the category and use that as a basis for the navbox? Yes? Then we might be on-board. But until then, we literally don't feel like we can vote either way in good conscience because hopefully, now that we've brought it up, this category can get all its gunk fixed. <s>also sorry if we sound dismissive, we're not trying to be! we just want to make it clear this category is in a BAD state rn.</s> {{User:Camwoodstock/sig}} 15:01, January 4, 2024 (EST)
Where would appearances in things like Smash and Captain N go in this case? {{User:Koopa con Carne/Sig}} 15:40, May 17, 2024 (EDT)
:[[Talk:Super Mario RPG: Legend of the Seven Stars#Original characters third-party categorization|I recently had a discussion]] with fellow user Juju1995 on how to handle the original characters of ''Super Mario RPG'' and ''Diddy Kong Racing'' for [[:Category:Third-party characters]]. We didn't come to any conclusion, however. Other than the idea to add subcategories I gave there, another possible solution to fixing Category:Third-party characters would be to tighten the definition to characters that are both not owned by Nintendo or its subsidiaries ''and'' come from a series also not owned by Nintendo or its subsidiaries. [[User:SolemnStormcloud|SolemnStormcloud]] ([[User talk:SolemnStormcloud|talk]]) 15:24, January 4, 2024 (EST)
:"History in other media" (see [[Link]] article). [[User:Super Mario RPG|Super Mario RPG]] ([[User talk:Super Mario RPG|talk]]) 15:41, May 17, 2024 (EDT)
::We feel like the requirements kinda need to be tightened, because in the current state the category is just ''flooded'' with Smash and ''SMRPG'' characters... And redirects to Mega Man's article as various forms he's taken on in the different spinoff series, just because of his Final Smash. (...Do any articles at all actually use these redirects? We might need to make a proposal on that.) ;P {{User:Camwoodstock/sig}} 22:15, January 4, 2024 (EST)
::Makes sense. [[User:SONIC123CDMANIA+&#38;K(B&#38;ATSA)|SONIC123CDMANIA+&#38;K(B&#38;ATSA)]] ([[User talk:SONIC123CDMANIA+&#38;K(B&#38;ATSA)|talk]]) 15:48, May 17, 2024 (EDT)
:::You'd also have to apply the definition change to [[:Category:Third-party species]] and [[:Category:Third-party locations]], even though neither category is in quite as bad a state as the one for characters. The fact we even have more than one "third-party" category makes my idea about adding subcategories no longer viable. [[User:SolemnStormcloud|SolemnStormcloud]] ([[User talk:SolemnStormcloud|talk]]) 23:49, January 4, 2024 (EST)
:I understand that the category is currently in a higher priority as of now in terms of fixing, reorganization and whatnot. Therefore, wouldn't a navbox ''also'' be convient in that scenario too? It's obviously gonna take a while to fix the category, so users and readers currently have to just wait for the issue to be resolved for an easier method of finding this type of characters. As I said before, the navbox would be far more organized than how the category currently is. So, it wouldn't really make sense to not do it in many regards. {{User:NintendoFan08/sig}} 07:07, January 5, 2024 (EST)
::We suppose that makes sense, we just wanna make it abundantly clear that copy-pasting the category 1:1 for the navbox is a ''Terrible, Awful, No Good Idea™'', since... well, you've heard us gob about the state of the category for a bit now, we hopefully don't need to repeat ourselves. {{User:Camwoodstock/sig}} 09:22, January 5, 2024 (EST)
:::You are correct, but the navbox obviously wouldn't include ''every'' article from the category. Firstly, any redirects wouldn't be included. Secondly, there are a few characters that wouldn't count as necessary (e.g. the ''Super Mario RPG'' characters arguably don't exactly count as third-party since they only appear in a ''Mario'' game). {{User:RetroNintendo2008/sig}} 10:00, January 5, 2024 (EST)
::::Touche, not including redirects is kind of a given, and odds are the ''SMRPG'' characters are not long for the category. We're still a little too concerned to vote one way or the other, seeing as we'd like to see a draft of what the template ''could'' look like before making any solid decisions, but this has our provisional approval now, now that that's been made clear. {{User:Camwoodstock/sig}} 10:32, January 5, 2024 (EST)
:::::''"...we'd like to see a draft of what the template could look like before making any solid decisions..."'' If you do want me to do this, I'd happily make a proof-of-concept in my user sandbox page. {{User:RetroNintendo2008/sig}} 11:14, January 5, 2024 (EST)
::::::That'd work for us! {{User:Camwoodstock/sig}} 11:22, January 5, 2024 (EST)
:::::::I've finished making the navbox, and it can be viewed in my [[User:RetroNintendo2008/sandbox|sandbox]]! {{User:RetroNintendo2008/sig}} 13:13, January 5, 2024 (EST)
::::::::We like what we're seeing here! While there's a few characters that got missed in the absolute chaos that is the article in its current state--mostly characters that are only in various comics (pouring one out for my boy [[Plok]] right now and obligatory mention of the true Classics of Article that is [[Chuckie]])--there's ample time to remedy that and manually cross-check everything; hopefully once the category's pruned of all the ''SMRPG'' stuff and is easier to review, we can get to adding what was missed, but we definitely like the list we're seeing. We think it's a good sign that we're thinking of what else we can ''include'' for the sake of thoroughness, rather than asking what we need to ''remove'' for the sake of pruning extraneous characters that shouldn't have been added in the first place. {{User:Camwoodstock/sig}} 15:03, January 5, 2024 (EST)
:::::::::Thank you for your feedback! I know the proof-of-concept isn't exactly the highest quality, and I am aware there are many characters I missed (keeping track of them all is harder than you think), but I'm glad it at least strengthened this proposal's chances of being approved! {{User:RetroNintendo2008/sig}} 06:01, January 6, 2024 (EST)
A silly question; we'd like to potentially release a proposal that ''would'' impact the Third-party characters category, albeit only in regards to articles that are present to it via redirects--specifically about the presence of many copious redirects to [[Mega Man]] just because of his Final Smash. Could we start that now, or should we wait for this proposal to conclude first? {{User:Camwoodstock/sig}} 10:32, January 5, 2024 (EST)
:I see no problem with doing so. Go ahead! [[User:SolemnStormcloud|SolemnStormcloud]] ([[User talk:SolemnStormcloud|talk]]) 11:49, January 5, 2024 (EST)


There seems to be a lot of talk about the third-party characters in this proposal for a non-Mario characters navigational template. However, I'd like to remind everyone that characters such as [[Link]], [[Bubbles (Clu Clu Land)|Bubbles]], [[Inkling]] and [[Villager]] are ''also'' non-Mario characters, being from ''The Legend of Zelda'', ''Clu Clu Land'', ''Splatoon'' and ''Animal Crossing'' respectively. Since only third-party characters are being discussed here, I thus have to ask if [[:Category:Characters from other Nintendo games]] will also be included on the navigation template, since they aren't Mario characters either. I have to assume as such because Nintendo characters like Link and Kirby ''are'' mentioned by the proposer, but ''no one else'' seems to talk about it!<br>I can imagine that the template would get subcategories like "Nintendo characters" and "Third-party characters" and then go from there, and then have an "Other" subcategory for the ''Smash Bros.'' character lists since these lists contain both Nintendo and third-party characters from ''Brawl'' onwards. {{User:Arend/sig}} 17:02, January 6, 2024 (EST)
{{@|Hewer|Nintendo101|Nightwicked Bowser}} I thought [[MarioWiki:Proposals/Archive/65#Oppose_13|"This is a Super Mario Wiki" as a argument was getting old]], but that's what you 3 are using! What happened in between? Is it not a old argument anymore? [[User:SONIC123CDMANIA+&#38;K(B&#38;ATSA)|SONIC123CDMANIA+&#38;K(B&#38;ATSA)]] ([[User talk:SONIC123CDMANIA+&#38;K(B&#38;ATSA)|talk]]) 09:04, May 20, 2024 (EDT)
:Oh my goodness, you're right! My apologies, I was completely unaware of this category until now. I also have to admit I completely forgot about characters such as Bubbles and more, so while I did account for characters such as Link, Kirby and Villager, it's even more obvious how many characters I overlooked. The prototype I made is merely a proof-of-concept and doesn't entirely reflect how the navbox will look if this proposal is approved. Therefore, I wasn't too worried about including ''every'' character in case it took too long or I made some inaccuracies. However, I may make a second revision to accompany for these additions just for the sake of convenience. {{User:RetroNintendo2008/sig}} 07:58, January 7, 2024 (EST)
:I don't think anything in the comment you reference contradicts any of the sentiments made here. No one is arguing subjects that originated outside of the ''Super Mario'' franchise (like Link, Sonic, [[Mad Scienstein]], [[Wart]], etc.) should not receive coverage, nor that appearances made by subjects that ''did'' emerged within the franchise should not be noted (like ''Link's Awakening'', ''Smash Bros.'', ''Tetris'', ''Qix'', etc.). Rather, because of the inherent scope of the wiki, it is assumed that a "History" section on this site encompasses the subject of the article's appearances in the ''Super Mario'' franchise and it is unclear to me why that needs further clarification. - [[User:Nintendo101|Nintendo101]] ([[User talk:Nintendo101|talk]]) 09:35, May 20, 2024 (EDT)
::But you said yourself in your oppose vote "Because this is the Super Mario Wiki", which, again, I thought was getting old as an argument. Hewer himself in the linked proposal said it! I'm just confused about what changed in between that and now. [[User:SONIC123CDMANIA+&#38;K(B&#38;ATSA)|SONIC123CDMANIA+&#38;K(B&#38;ATSA)]] ([[User talk:SONIC123CDMANIA+&#38;K(B&#38;ATSA)|talk]]) 09:38, May 20, 2024 (EDT)
:::First off, why are you getting on Nintendo101's case for an argument that I made in a proposal they didn't even take part in? Second, my point when I made that comment was that "This is a Super Mario wiki" is getting old as an argument on its own to trim, reorganise, or otherwise alter crossover content like Smash, as Super Mario RPG keeps trying to do, whereas Nintendo101's argument is that, because this is a Super Mario wiki, we don't need to specify that our content is about Super Mario. The same words may have been used, but the context of the arguments is different. {{User:Hewer/sig}} 11:54, May 20, 2024 (EDT)
::::First off, I'm not. Second, I didn't know that the CONTEXT was different, I only paid attention to the words, not the context. Third, a "History" section only covering the ''Super Mario'' franchise kinda neglects the references and cameos. [[User:SONIC123CDMANIA+&#38;K(B&#38;ATSA)|SONIC123CDMANIA+&#38;K(B&#38;ATSA)]] ([[User talk:SONIC123CDMANIA+&#38;K(B&#38;ATSA)|talk]]) 12:01, May 20, 2024 (EDT)
:::::Isn't the point of this proposal (which you're supporting) to have history sections that only cover the Super Mario franchise? {{User:Hewer/sig}} 12:05, May 20, 2024 (EDT)
::::::I would like to redirect you to point 2 of the proposal. [[User:SONIC123CDMANIA+&#38;K(B&#38;ATSA)|SONIC123CDMANIA+&#38;K(B&#38;ATSA)]] ([[User talk:SONIC123CDMANIA+&#38;K(B&#38;ATSA)|talk]]) 12:31, May 20, 2024 (EDT)
:::::::Does that not just prove my point? {{User:Hewer/sig}} 12:34, May 20, 2024 (EDT)
::::::::The history section is going to be split. That's the point of this proposal. YOUR point is just around 1/2 of the point of this proposal. [[User:SONIC123CDMANIA+&#38;K(B&#38;ATSA)|SONIC123CDMANIA+&#38;K(B&#38;ATSA)]] ([[User talk:SONIC123CDMANIA+&#38;K(B&#38;ATSA)|talk]]) 12:45, May 20, 2024 (EDT)


I definitely see the reasoning behind sorting characters in the navbox by what ''Mario'' media they appear in, but the issue with that is that they can easily appear in multiple things. I see you have them listed in multiple places on the navbox, but I just feel like we're bound to end up with a bunch of duplicate entries. Do you think it would make more sense to categorize them by their source series, instead? [[User:Ahemtoday|Ahemtoday]] ([[User talk:Ahemtoday|talk]]) 13:32, January 7, 2024 (EST)
==New features==
:I can see how that makes sense. I did say above that I will make a second revision, so I will keep that in mind. {{User:RetroNintendo2008/sig}} 14:42, January 7, 2024 (EST)
''None at the moment.''


==Removals==
==Removals==
===Remove elemental creatures categories from various Super Mario RPG enemies===
''None at the moment''
A bit of an extension of [[MarioWiki:Proposals/Archive/63#Trim requirements for elemental creatures categories|this proposal]], but this time focusing solely on ''Super Mario RPG'' enemies and bosses. Lots of enemies in this game can use exact same spells such as [[Flame Wall]] and [[Water Blast]], which then leads to [[:Category:Fire creatures]] and [[:Category:Water creatures]] being added to every single article of enemies that use those attacks (this even leads to [[Czar Dragon]] being in Water creatures, and look at the amount of categories [[Valentina]] falls under). I still think this is taking these categories a bit too far and because these spells are shared between lot of different enemies I don't think they fit too well.
 
==Changes==
===Decide whether to merge the {{tem|more images}}, {{tem|more media}}, and/or {{tem|more refs needed}}===
I may have created the <code>{{tem|more refs needed}}</code> template, but I later saw a discussion for merging it with <code>{{tem|unreferenced}}</code>. That inspired me to plan on merging <code>{{tem|more images}}</code> and <code>{{tem|more media}}</code> with <code>{{tem|image}}</code> and <code>{{tem|media missing}}</code> respectively, so I decided to make a proposal containing three options:
 
;Option 1: Merge <code><nowiki>{{more images}}</nowiki></code>, <code><nowiki>{{more media}}</nowiki></code>, and <code><nowiki>{{more refs needed}}</nowiki></code> with <code><nowiki>{{image}}</nowiki></code>, <code><nowiki>{{media missing}}</nowiki></code>, and <code><nowiki>{{unreferenced}}</nowiki></code> respectively AND create the categories {{fake link|Articles with sections that need more images|Category:Articles with sections that need more images}}, {{fake link|Articles with sections that need more images|Category:Articles with sections that need more media}}.
;Option 2: ONLY merge <code><nowiki>{{more refs needed}}</nowiki></code> with <code><nowiki>{{unreferenced}}</nowiki></code>.
;Option 3: Keep as they are.
 
Here are some examples:
 
<span style="font-size: 150%">Template:Image</span>
----
<pre>
<div class="notice-template maintenance" style="background:#FF6;border:1px solid #630">
It has been requested that {{#if:{{{more|}}}|'''more images'''|at least one '''image'''}} be [[Special:Upload|uploaded]] for this {{#if:{{{section|}}}|section|article}}. Remove this notice only after the {{#if:{{{more|}}}|additional images|image(s)}} have been added. {{#if:{{{reason|{{{1|}}}}}}|'''Specific(s):''' {{{reason|{{{1}}}}}}}}
</div><includeonly>{{#switch:{{NAMESPACE}}||Gallery=[[Category:Articles {{#if:{{{section|}}}|with sections}} that need {{#if:{{{more|}}}|more images|an image}}]]}}</includeonly>
</pre>
 
<code><nowiki>{{image|more=yes|section=yes|Sprites}}</nowiki></code>


'''Proposer''': {{User|Swallow}}<br>
=
'''Deadline''': January 11, 2024, 23:59 GMT


====Support====
<div class="notice-template maintenance" style="background:#FF6;border:1px solid #630">
#{{User|Swallow}} Per proposal
It has been requested that '''more images''' be [[Special:Upload|uploaded]] for this section. Remove this notice only after the additional images have been added. '''Specific(s):''' Sprites
#{{User|Sparks}} Per Swallow. There are too many enemies that can do lots of elemental attacks, such as [[Czar Dragon]], a fire enemy that can do [[Water Blast]].
</div>
#{{User|SolemnStormcloud}} Heh, the [[Earth Crystal|''Earth'' Crystal]] is an air and water creature... Per all.
#{{User|Camwoodstock}} Now that you've pointed it out, we can't unsee it. How is [[Zombone]], the undead version of the fiery Czar Dragon, ''only'' an Air creature? This ought to have been done awhile back, frankly--per proposal.
#{{User|LinkTheLefty}} If Pokémon has taught us anything, it's that move attributes aren't necessarily indicative of monster types.
#{{User|Mario}} Just imagine if Mario and Pokemon had a crossover.
#{{User|PnnyCrygr}} Way too many elemental abilities per enemy, so going with Spark's vote. Imagine if those categorized enemies were airbenders, waterbenders, firebenders, et cetera, or even Avatars.
#{{User|Mister Wu}} Well, yeah, definitely the spells that they can cast don’t necessarily define what they are. I’m still not sure why they thought that the Czar Dragon should be able to cast Water Blast, though…


====Oppose====
<span style="font-size: 150%">Template:Media missing</span>
----
<pre>
{| class="notice-template maintenance" style="background:#C88AFF;border:1px solid #630"
|style="padding-right:10px"|[[File:Soundx.png|25px|class=invert-dark]]
|style="padding-top:3px"| It has been requested that {{#if:{{{more|}}}|'''more audio and/or video files'''|at least one '''audio and/or video file'''}} related to this {{#if:{{{section|}}}|section|article}} be uploaded. {{#if:{{{reason|{{{1|}}}}}}|'''Specific(s):''' {{{reason|{{{1}}}}}}|<includeonly>{{#switch:{{NAMESPACE}}||Gallery=[[Category:Articles with incomplete maintenance tags]]}}<br><small>Please upload all related music, sound effects, voice clips, or any videos for this {{#if:{{{section|}}}|section|article}}. See the [[Help:Media|help]] page for information on how to get started.</small>
|}<includeonly>{{#switch:{{NAMESPACE}}||Gallery=[[Category:Articles {{#if:{{{section|}}}|with sections}} that need {{#if:{{{more|}}}|more media|media}}]]}}</includeonly>
</pre>


====Comments====
<code><nowiki>{{media missing|more=yes|section=yes|Voice clips}}</nowiki></code>
You think Valentina's bad? [[Exor]] falls under ''almost all'' of the elemental creature categories, only missing Category:Air creatures. Category:Water creatures isn't listed, but Exor's <s>Neosquid</s> Mouth can use [[Water Blast]]. Yeah, that's excessive. [[User:SolemnStormcloud|SolemnStormcloud]] ([[User talk:SolemnStormcloud|talk]]) 16:09, January 6, 2024 (EST)


===Cull categories from or delete the various Mega Legends & Mega Man moveset redirects===
=
[[File:SSBU Mega Legends.jpg|thumb|right|200px|Pictured: Mega Man, and 6 redirects to him.]]
Full disclosure, we made this with the approval of the person currently running a proposal about the Third-party characters category. If this is an overstep for whatever reason, we can cancel this and launch it later on.


This concerns the following redirects:
{| class="notice-template maintenance" style="background:#C88AFF;border:1px solid #630"
* [[Proto Man]]
|style="padding-right:10px"|[[File:Soundx.png|25px|class=invert-dark]]
* [[Bass]]
|style="padding-top:3px"| It has been requested that '''more audio and/or video files''' related to this section be uploaded. '''Specific(s):''' Voice clips<br><small>Please upload all related music, sound effects, voice clips, or any videos for this section. See the [[Help:Media|help]] page for information on how to get started.</small>
* [[Mega Man X]]
|}
* [[MegaMan.EXE]]
* [[MegaMan Volnutt]]
* [[Star Force Mega Man]]
* [[Rush]]
* [[Beat (Mega Man)]]


And concerns the following categories:
<code><nowiki>{{media missing|more=yes|Videos}}</nowiki></code>
* [[:Category:Third-party characters]]
* [[:Category:Robots]]
* [[:Category:Mega Man series]]
* [[:Category:Super Smash Bros. for Wii U trophies]]
* [[:Category:Super Smash Bros. for Nintendo 3DS trophies]]
* [[:Category:Super Smash Bros. Ultimate spirits]]


All of these redirects exist to lead back to one spot--[[Mega Man]]'s final smash. MegaMan.EXE, Volnutt, and Star Force Mega Man are all entirely identical category wise; Mega Man series, Third-party characters, Smash 4 3DS and Smash 4 Wii U trophies, and Smash Ultimate spirits. And then Mega Man X is in all of those, and ''also'' in Robots. Protoman and Bass lack the 3DS trophy category, but have the Robots category. Rush and Beat are also part of the custom special moves categories, and robots, and the rest.
=


We'd get these redirects being in these categories if any of these guys had appeared in a comic or cartoon relevant to Mario like Mega Man himself did, but as far as we can tell, none of them do; they're exclusive to either Mega Man's final smash, or his Up+B move--and poor Proto Man and Bass only get to be there for Ultimate, while Beat, bless his robot bird heart, he's only here for a ''custom'' move in Smash 4! The result is that a few of these aforementioned categories just kind of get clogged with needless Mega Man's final smash or Up+B redirects--in a few cases, some of these are literally right next to one another alphabetically!
{| class="notice-template maintenance" style="background:#C88AFF;border:1px solid #630"
|style="padding-right:10px"|[[File:Soundx.png|25px|class=invert-dark]]
|style="padding-top:3px"| It has been requested that '''more audio and/or video files''' related to this article be uploaded. '''Specific(s):''' Videos<br><small>Please upload all related music, sound effects, voice clips, or any videos for this article. See the [[Help:Media|help]] page for information on how to get started.</small>
|}


Now, we do acknowledge a counterpoint that we have categories for Smash 4 custom special moves, as well as Smash 4 trophies and Smash Ultimate spirits. This is way out of the scope of this proposal, but while we feel as though the trophies categories are largely redundant nowadays since we've been gradually scaling back Smash coverage to things that aren't related to the Mario series, we understand those categories ''do'' still currently exist, and they have trophies and spirits; those inclusions do make sense. In addition, in Rush and Beat's case, we understand their presence in [[:Category:Super Smash Bros. for Nintendo 3DS / Wii U special moves]] entirely--they exist entirely to be the focal point of the move, and the move with Beat is literally named after him. But um... Look, we're going to be real here; outside of them being in those categories, which seem to be outdated as-is as our [[List of trophies in Super Smash Bros. for Wii U|trophy li]][[List of trophies in Super Smash Bros. for Nintendo 3DS|st articles]] have culled any non-Mario trophies, we can't think of any other compelling category to put these guys in. Though, since they ''are'' reasonable to put them in, we have an option to retain those categories for the time being.
<span style="font-size: 150%">Template:Unreferenced</span>
----
<pre>
<div class="notice-template maintenance" style="background:#FC5;border:1px solid #f22">
This {{#if:{{{section|}}}|section|article}} '''{{#if:{{{more|}}}|needs additional citations for [[MarioWiki:Citations|verification]]|does not [[MarioWiki:Citations|cite any sources]]}}'''. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. {{#if:{{{reason|{{{1|}}}}}}|'''Specific(s):''' {{{reason|{{{1}}}}}}|<includeonly>{{#switch:{{NAMESPACE}}||Gallery=[[Category:Articles with incomplete maintenance tags]]}}</includeonly>}}<br><small>Please help {{plain link|1=[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} improve this {{#if:{{{section|}}}|section|article}}]}} by [[MarioWiki:Citations#How to add references|adding citations from reliable sources]].</small>
</div><includeonly>{{#switch:{{NAMESPACE}}||Gallery=[[Category:Articles {{#if:{{{more|}}}|{{#if:{{{section|}}}|with sections}} that need more citations|with {{#if:{{{section|}}}|unsourced sections|no sources}}}}]]}}</includeonly>
</pre>


Now, while putting these things in categories is ''beyond'' us, we can understand keeping the redirects themselves for the sake of the Wiki search function--there's likely someone out there who's been getting to Mega Man's final smash by simply searching one of Mega Man's variants (or Proto Man and Bass), and Rush and Beat are valid names for Mega Man's Up-B in Smash. But having these all fully categorized feels... a ''little'' overkill, right?
<code><nowiki>{{unreferenced|more=yes|section=yes|Spanish and German names}}</nowiki></code>


And even worse, and our ultimate point here; having all these redirects in these categories where they don't really fit in causes certain categories to decay heavily in usability. Yeah, this is mostly about [[:Category:Third-party characters]], but also the [[:Category:Robots]] category get rather gunked up because of this. Which is pretty silly when Mega Man himself is in both of those categories! So, there's a few options we can understand taking:
<div class="notice-template maintenance" style="background:#FC5;border:1px solid #f22">
* '''Remove all categories period, keep the redirects:''' This would effectively leave the redirects solely to catch searches. We feel this may be extreme in the case of Rush and Beat's cases, but we understand. We didn't bring it up, but the [[:Category:Mega Man series]] category is related to his Smash appearances, so those would ''also'' vanish. We refuse to comment further on the state of that category, this proposal is long enough, but uh... It's a thing, alright.
This section '''needs additional citations for [[MarioWiki:Citations|verification]]'''. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. '''Specific(s):''' Spanish and German names<br><small>Please help {{plain link|1=[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} improve this section]}} by [[MarioWiki:Citations#How to add references|adding citations from reliable sources]].</small>
* '''Remove the Third-party characters and Robots categories, keep the trophy/spirit/custom move/Mega Man series categories and keep the redirects:''' Like the above, but we leave an exception for the explicitly Smash-related categories.
</div>
* '''Remove all categories ''and'' remove the redirects:''' The full-on nuclear option. DELETE EVERYTHING!!! This feels a little extreme, especially in Rush and Beat's case, but we figure it's worth acknowledging it.
* '''Do nothing:''' We'll just... Keep every category as they are. We don't really like this, considering Mega Man is currently linked to ''9 times'' in the Third-party characters and Robots categories (once for his actual article and 8 redirects), but hey, we are required to have this as an option, so we're not going to decline it just because we dislike it.


'''Proposer''': {{User|Camwoodstock}}<br>
Once the proposal ends with Option 1, we'll be able to merge these templates and then replace the <code><nowiki>{{more images</nowiki></code>, <code><nowiki>{{more media</nowiki></code>, and <code><nowiki>{{more refs needed</nowiki></code> syntax with the <code><nowiki>{{image|more=yes</nowiki></code>, <code><nowiki>{{media missing|more=yes</nowiki></code>, and <code><nowiki>{{unreferenced|more=yes</nowiki></code> syntax respectively. However, once the proposal ends with Option 2, we'll only be able to merge the {{tem|more refs needed}} template and then replace the <code><nowiki>{{more refs needed</nowiki></code> syntax with the <code><nowiki>{{unreferenced|more=yes</nowiki></code> syntax. Once the proposal ends with Option 3, we'll keep the <code><nowiki>{{more refs needed</nowiki></code> template and protect it.
'''Deadline''': January 12, 2024, 23:59 GMT


====Remove all categories, retain the redirects====
'''Proposer''': {{User|GuntherBayBeee}}<br>
#{{User|Camwoodstock}} Our secondary choice, but this definitely feels like a rather nuclear option (somehow even moreso than the "delete the redirects" one!).
'''Deadline''': May 28, 2024, 23:59 GMT
#{{User|SolemnStormcloud}} <s>Per proposal.</s> Secondary choice.


====Remove the Third-party characters and Robots categories, retain the redirects and Smash categories====
====Option 1====
#{{User|Camwoodstock}} This is our primary choice, if we haven't made it clear. We do see the value in retaining those categories while they still exist in their current states, and removing them would only make sense if we began pruning Smash-related categories--not exactly unlikely, but definitely not right now, and way out of the scope of this proposal. But the Third-party characters and Robots categories should've been pruned long ago if you ask us; There's literally 8 redirects to Mega Man in these categories at the moment. Besides, even if it is ''true'' that Beat is a robot, that's not exactly ''helpful'' information when his only Mario presence is as a custom special move.
#{{User|GuntherBayBeee}} Per proposal
#{{User|Hewer}} Per proposal, seeing as Mega Man already being in the categories makes the bunch of redirects a little redundant.
#{{User|Super Mario RPG}} I like the idea of integrating the functionality of the aforementioned templates.
#{{User|SolemnStormcloud}} Primary choice.


====Delete redirects wholesale====
====Option 2====


====Do nothing====
====Option 3====


====Comments====
====Comments====
I'd move to pruning the Smash Bros redirects in categories such as [[:Category:Pokémon series]]. It'll probably happen sooner or later but worth thinking about. {{User:Mario/sig}} 12:31, January 5, 2024 (EST)
:I agree, we need to get rid of all non-''Super Mario'' content in ''Super Smash Bros.'' [[User:Super Game Gear|Super Game Gear]] ([[User talk:Super Game Gear|talk]]) 12:34, January 5, 2024 (EST)
::Don't get carried away. [[User:Doc von Schmeltwick|Doc von Schmeltwick]] ([[User talk:Doc von Schmeltwick|talk]]) 12:45, January 5, 2024 (EST)
:::''sharpens axe'' 🪓 I'm still looking at those bloated list pages with red in my eyes. {{User:Mario/sig}} 12:53, January 5, 2024 (EST)
::::Not to derail the discussion, but I still think we should merge those list pages on a per-game basis rather than covering the entire series, like I have partially done with the page for the original ''[[Super Smash Bros.]]''. That way, it covers their existence and basics without needing to go into detail. [[User:Doc von Schmeltwick|Doc von Schmeltwick]] ([[User talk:Doc von Schmeltwick|talk]]) 15:03, January 5, 2024 (EST)
:::::Yeah, your idea seems okay. {{User:Mario/sig}} 15:16, January 5, 2024 (EST)
:We saw that, and it's a '''''nightmare'''''. We explicitly want to save that for a future proposal, since it's way out of the scope for this proposal (which, believe us, we just made originally for Third-party characters before a category-themed rabbit hole dropped us inside it and we had to climb out of it), but in the meantime, let's play a game; how many times does [[:Category:Mega Man series]] redirect you to [[Mega Man]] after several distinct article merges? {{User:Camwoodstock/sig}} 14:38, January 5, 2024 (EST)
::I counted 28. '''''Twenty-eight.''''' <small>(29 if you count the [[Charge Shot]] disambiguation page.)</small> That's as many pages as most Robot Masters have hit points. Also, why do we even have redirects for Elec Man's Thunder Beam and Zero's techniques? Elec Man and Zero are not playable characters but Assist Trophies, which don't even have individual pages anymore. We also don't have redirects for moves used by non-playable Pokémon like Eevee's Take Down (nor do we ''need'' them), and I highly doubt anyone would be looking for these moves on this wiki. [[User:SolemnStormcloud|SolemnStormcloud]] ([[User talk:SolemnStormcloud|talk]]) 14:57, January 5, 2024 (EST)
:::We initially counted ''29'' (not even including Charge Shot!), which we think is terrifying that we somehow came out with different answers (the culprit was Thunder Beam, we forgot Elec Man was an assist trophy, probably because he isn't even in this category. Poor guy.). We think the only reason redirects like the special weapons even exist is just because of legacy--awhile back (and we mean ''awhile'' back, like, pre-Smash Ultimate), Smash moves were split into their own articles. They've somehow never been questioned until right now. {{User:Camwoodstock/sig}} 15:27, January 5, 2024 (EST)
::::That's true for the Special Weapons Mega Man uses, yes, but the redirects for Thunder Beam and Zero's techniques were created pretty recently — September 24, 2023, to be exact. We had long since merged the Assist Trophy summons to the Assist Trophy page. '''EDIT:''' I discovered redirects for many other named Assist Trophy moves, also created on September 24, 2023. I don't know why we should have redirects for them but not the non-playable Pokémon's moves — or better yet, why we need them at all. [[User:SolemnStormcloud|SolemnStormcloud]] ([[User talk:SolemnStormcloud|talk]]) 15:47, January 5, 2024 (EST)
I noticed you put [[:Category:Super Smash Bros. for Wii U trophies]] a second time instead of [[:Category:Super Smash Bros. Ultimate spirits]]. [[User:SolemnStormcloud|SolemnStormcloud]] ([[User talk:SolemnStormcloud|talk]]) 12:44, January 5, 2024 (EST)
:Oops! Our bad. That's been fixed now. {{User:Camwoodstock/sig}} 14:38, January 5, 2024 (EST)
==Changes==
===Rename the "List of <cartoon> episodes with <character>" articles to "History of <character> in <cartoon>" (and also, don't category-ify them)===
The following proposal covers the following articles:
*[[List of DIC cartoon episodes featuring Hip Koopa]]
*[[List of The Adventures of Super Mario Bros. 3 episodes featuring Mario]]
*[[List of Super Mario World episodes featuring Mario]]
*[[List of Donkey Kong Country episodes featuring Donkey Kong]]
*[[List of Donkey Kong Country episodes featuring Candy Kong]]


Since categories have apparently become talk of the town, we thought we'd revisit a proposal we made ourselves. It's been over a month since [[Talk:List of DIC cartoon episodes featuring Hip Koopa|a proposal we created]] to convert the [[List of DIC cartoon episodes featuring Hip Koopa]] article (and later, a few others) to categories, and while the changes from the proposal haven't been implemented, but in the time since then, we've had second thoughts about that proposal in the first place. So, we thought we'd put it into a new proposal, seeing as we can't exactly withdraw a proposal that's technically already passed.
===Create a category for teenagers===
One thing that feels strange to me on this wiki is the current age categories. We have [[:Category:Children|children]] and [[:Category:Babies|babies]]. However, when it comes to teenagers, it either goes to the children category or doesn't go there at all. Granted, both are underage, but it does not help the average user who wants to find all the teenage characters on this wiki. I mean, if we are okay with creating the categories for the previous underaged characters, a third one one wouldn't hurt. For this to count, I looked for every character that was considered to be a teenager in the ''Super Mario'' franchise at one point. We have enough categories for them to be put in, having about ten ''Super Mario'' characters to count. I'm probably missing a couple and if so, please let me know in the comments. The exact criteria are thirteen to seventeen years old or confirmed to be one. Characters like Tiny Kong wouldn't make it in this category as she was never confirmed to be a teenager in her [[Diddy Kong Racing DS|recent design]].


Originally, the plan was to convert this article, as well as the aforementioned articles, into categories. But having looked at them now, we feel like we understand what they're trying to do better. In Hip Koopa's case, this was information already present elsewhere, but in the other articles' cases, this is actually split off from their History articles, and in Candy Kong's case, it's just split off from her article outright. We don't think a category cuts it for coverage anymore; especially since a merge to the pre-existing History articles, or in Candy Kong's case, to her article, would actually be ''more'' cumbersome than what we're doing. These were split off for a reason, mostly for the sake of size. People can get a general overview of, say, Mario in the DiC Cartoons in the [[History of Mario]] page, and then go to the subpages to learn about his role in every episode individually, since it'd otherwise take up too much space in the article. In the extreme case with poor Candy Kong, her article length would literally be doubled by a merge!
Below is a list of Super Mario characters who are or were teenagers.
*[[Ashley]]<ref group="a" name="Ashley">[http://ms.nintendo-europe.com/wariowaretouched/enGB/index.html ''WarioWare: Touched!'' European website] She is "fifteen going on 500".</ref>
*[[Axem Rangers]]<ref group="a" name="Axem Rangers">Pelland, Scott, and Kent Miller. Super Mario RPG: Legend of the Seven Stars Player's Guide. Page 4.</ref>
**[[Axem Red]]
**[[Axem Black]]
**[[Axem Green]]
**[[Axem Pink]]
**[[Axem Yellow]]
*[[Mona]]
*[[Muffy]]
*[[Tommy Treehugger]]


There's just three options this time, and hopefully, they're easier to understand too:
And here is a list of non-''Super Mario'' characters who would be affected by this proposal. '''This only applies if they were portrayed as teenagers within said game. For example, [[Vector|Vector the Crocodile]] was labeled as one in his earlier appearances but is considered an adult in later games, including all ''Mario & Sonic'' games.'''
* '''Keep the articles, and rename to "History of <character> in <cartoon>":''' The change is simple enough--just rename the articles! These are already functionally history articles, which are only really "list" articles in the sense that they divide things up by episode; the only change would be to the name! And, you know, not saying that we're going to turn these into categories later.
*[[Inkling]]
* '''Keep the articles, but keep the "List of" name:''' Alternatively, we could simply overturn the proposal to turn these into categories, but retain the current names they have. We don't see why you'd do that but then not rename, but to each their own, we suppose.
*[[Pac-Man]]<ref group="a" name="pacster">''[[Mario Kart Arcade GP DX]]'' uses the ''Ghostly Adventures'' design of Pacster, who is a teenager in that show.</ref>
* '''Do nothing:''' The prior proposal will still need to be done in this case, seeing as this is to overturn a proposal that, while it passed, hasn't been enacted yet.
*[[Blaze|Blaze the Cat]]
*[[Espio|Espio the Chameleon]]
*[[Jet (Sonic the Hedgehog)|Jet the Hawk]]
*[[Knuckles|Knuckles the Echidna]]
*[[Silver|Silver the Hedgehog]]
*[[Sonic|Sonic the Hedgehog]]
*[[List of fighters debuting in Super Smash Bros.#Ness|Ness]]<ref group="a" name="earthbound"> His age is listed as twelve to thirteen years old.</ref>
*[[List of fighters debuting in Super Smash Bros. Melee#Roy|Roy]] from ''Fire Emblem''
*[[List of fighters debuting in Super Smash Bros. for Nintendo 3DS / Wii U#Little Mac|Little Mac]]
*[[List of fighters debuting in Super Smash Bros. Ultimate#Sora|Sora]]
*[[List of Assist Trophy characters#Issac|Isaac]]
*[[List of Assist Trophy characters#Jeff|Jeff]]<ref group="a" name="earthbound"></ref>
*[[List of Assist Trophy characters#Lyn|Lyn]]<ref group="a" name="lyn"> Depending on the languages of her games, she is either of teenage age or adult age.</ref>


'''Proposer''': {{User|Camwoodstock}}<br>
I don't know any potential counterarguments in disfavor of this, because this would be much more helpful and less broad than having any underage character be sent to the children category, especially when that's rare, as some of the above-mentioned characters are not put in that category. Plus, it would be weird to call Little Mac or Mona a child. Yes, I know people sometimes describe teens as kids, but it's a lot more misleading if put in those categories.
'''Deadline''': January 13, 2024, 23:59 GMT


====Keep the articles, and rename to "History of <character> in <cartoon>"====
'''Proposer''': {{User|TheUndescribableGhost}}<br>
#{{User|Camwoodstock}} We think we've made it clear this is our choice by now. These articles do have merit in existing as split articles, something we failed to see back then and have been kicking ourselves for (that's an exaggeration, but it's irked us!). However, we wish to address that naming misnomer, and hopefully clear up these articles' intent in the future; both to prevent stuff like this from happening again, but also to make it easier to find these articles for people who need them. It's a little silly how, as far as we've been able to find thus far, these are the ''only'' articles that go over a character's history, yet are named "List of".
'''Deadline''': May 28, 2024, 23:59 GMT
#{{User|Hewer}} I still don't think it's really necessary to keep these split from the history sections/articles but I do see the argument for it and this is a better naming choice if that's what we're going with (and we should probably also make more of these articles for other characters if this passes).


====Keep the articles, but keep the "List of" name====
====Support====
#{{User|Camwoodstock}} If all else fails, while we dislike the "List of" name and feel it's a misnomer, we dislike the idea of these becoming categories and being merged even more now that we've had time to reflect. Especially now that we've seen other such problem categories; this has the potential to get out of hand, fast, and we'd like to nip it in the bud before it becomes a problem for some poor user in 2033.
#{{User|TheUndescribableGhost}} Per proposal


====Do nothing (Proceed with categorization per previous TPP)====
====Oppose====
#{{user|Ahemtoday}} I'm not really convinced by articles being longer — in my mind, if there are more things to cover in an article, then... yeah, it ''should'' get longer. This goes double for the History articles, which basically exist '''because''' they're huge — if they weren't, then they wouldn't be necessary; they'd just be part of the main article. And it seems silly to me to have the [[Mario]] article, which then splits off into [[History of Mario]], and then '''that''' splits off into {{fake link|History of Mario in ''The Adventures of Super Mario Bros. 3''}} and {{fake link|History of Mario in ''The Super Mario Bros. Super Show''}}. You'd need a dedicated proposal encompassing a lot more than just the cartoons to convince me we should do something like that.
#[[User:Doc von Schmeltwick|Doc von Schmeltwick]] ([[User talk:Doc von Schmeltwick|talk]]) - The main reason we have the "babies" category is the ''Yoshi's Island'' games having the baby counterparts. There's no teen-focused variation of the ''Mario'' cast (knock on wood, there)
#{{User|Hewer}} Can't decide whether this is my first or second option but per Ahemtoday (and if ''this'' option passes then we ought to expand the history sections/articles of other characters to also cover their roles in every episode).
#{{User|SolemnStormcloud}} As someone who feels [[:Category:Children]] doesn't have much of a reason to exist, a category for teenagers would have even less of a reason to.
#{{user|Okapii}} Per Ahemtoday.
#{{User|Nintendo101}} Per SolemnStormcloud.
#{{User|Tails777}} I just don't think this is entirely necessary. At least the Mario series makes the whole babies thing really simple; they are characters designed to be babies and stay that way. The third party examples going by "which design is based on a teenage appearance" just feels unnecessary. I think, in the end, it's just not a necessary category.
#{{User|Camwoodstock}} We really don't need this, especially since a lot of characters that are actually concretely teenagers are just kinda like that, and it's not like... a tenet of who they are. When the Child category is already under scrutiny for how it's moreso trivia than actually relevant information, this has even less of a leg to stand on. The closest thing we could think of is basically reworking the Child category to a "Minors" category, but ''even then'', that would succumb to the same issues the current Child category does... And that's not even getting in to the total elephant room that is [[Ashley]], who is '''allegedly''' "15, going on 500", and whether they're on the "teenager" side of this equation or the "adult" side of this equation seems to depend on how funny Nintendo feels like being that day--and more often than not, they do answer "teenager", if not even younger than that.
#{{User|Arend}} Per all. Also, to expand on the Ashley thing, in Japan, her age is left ambiguous, but in those Japanese versions for ''Touched'' and ''Gold'' onwards, Ashley sounds remarkably ''younger'' than in Western versions of those games. That makes it seem that Ashley was originally intended to be a preteen child, but the west aged her up to fifteen since she looks older than the kid characters we've had at the time (e.g. [[9-Volt]], who is a 4th-grader). Then again, Ashley looks about as old as Penny Crygor, who is a middle schooler... needless to say, Ashley's true age is a can of worms in itself.
#{{User|TheFlameChomp}} Per all.
#{{User|Jazama}} Per all
#{{User|MegaBowser64}} Teenagers suck, per all


====Comments====
====Comments====
Why not make categories anyway while still keeping the split articles? {{User:Hewer/sig}} 13:35, January 6, 2024 (EST)
Not sure if I did the references right for this. [[User:TheUndescribableGhost|TheUndescribableGhost]] ([[User talk:TheUndescribableGhost|talk]]) 22:54, May 21, 2024 (EDT)
:If there's enough demand, we could add that as an option; though personally we're worried about over-complicating this proposal as-is, when the original was already probably needlessly over-complicated in retrospect. ;P {{User:Camwoodstock/sig}} 14:27, January 6, 2024 (EST)
::I feel like it might even be doable without a proposal, I just wanted to make clear that I don't think making categories and keeping the pages are mutually exclusive. {{User:Hewer/sig}} 15:57, January 6, 2024 (EST)
 
I think in the end we should just have a list of episodes they appear, plus perhaps a sentence or two of their roles in in a collapsible, similar to [[Koopa Paratroopa]] having these lists of levels they appear in. There's no need to provide exact summaries of their particular roles in these episodes. It works well enough for Yoshi, see [[History_of_Yoshi#Super_Mario_World_television_series]] which I think the list is presentable enough. Now, for characters like Mario, it's probably better to list what episodes he ''doesn't'' appear in or doesn't play a big role anyway, buuuuut I still don't think the split episode pages are useful even for Mario in the end. {{User:Mario/sig}} 17:03, January 6, 2024 (EST)


WTF, why do any of these pages exist? How many AOSMB3 episodes DON'T have Mario in them, or DKC episodes without DK? I don't think you need to do any restructuring or renaming of any of these, just '''delete''' them all. [[User:Shadow2|Shadow2]] ([[User talk:Shadow2|talk]]) 00:13, January 9, 2024 (EST)
====References====
:[[Talk:List of DIC cartoon episodes featuring Hip Koopa#Expand the scope of or nix the Hip Koopa filmography|See the previous proposal on them]]. Despite their names, the purpose of these articles isn't just to list episodes that the characters are in, it's to be like a history section explaining their roles in each episode. Hence why the aim of this proposal is to fix the misleading names. {{User:Hewer/sig}} 02:55, January 9, 2024 (EST)
<references group="a"/>


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

Latest revision as of 15:05, May 26, 2024

Image used as a banner for the Proposals page
Current time:
Monday, May 27th, 01:01 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: "May 27, 2024, 23:59 GMT"]

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

====Oppose====

====Comments====

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

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

Talk page proposals

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

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

Rules

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

List of ongoing talk page proposals

Unimplemented proposals

Proposals

Merge the Wrecking Crew and VS. Wrecking Crew phases into list articles, Axis (ended February 24, 2022)
Do not consider usage of classic recurring themes as references to the game of origin, Swallow (ended March 9, 2022)
Split Mario Kart Tour character variants into list articles, Tails777 (ended May 4, 2022)
Enforce WCAG Level AA standards to mainspace and template content, PanchamBro (ended May 29, 2022)
Change how RPG enemy infoboxes classify role, Doc von Schmeltwick (ended September 18, 2022)
Trim away detailed special move information for all non-Mario fighters, Koopa con Carne (ended January 30, 2023)
Classify the Just Dance series as a guest appearance, Spectrogram (ended April 27, 2023)
Establish a standard for long course listings in articles for characters/enemies/items/etc., Koopa con Carne (ended June 8, 2023)
Consider filenames as sources and create redirects, Axis (ended August 24, 2023)
Add tabbers to race/battle course articles, GuntherBB (ended November 18, 2023)
Remove elemental creatures categories from various Super Mario RPG enemies, Swallow (ended January 11, 2024)
Standardize the formatting of foreign and explanatory words and phrases in "Names in other languages" tables, Annalisa10 (ended February 7, 2024)
Merge Super Mario Bros. (film) subjects with their game counterparts, JanMisali (ended April 18, 2024)
Remove profiles and certain other content related to the Super Mario Bros. Encyclopedia from the wiki, Koopa con Carne (ended April 30, 2024)
Break alphabetical order in enemy lists to list enemy variants below their base form, EvieMaybe (ended May 21, 2024)

Talk page proposals

Split all the clothing, Doc von Schmeltwick (ended September 12, 2021)
Split the various reissues of Mario Bros., Doc von Schmeltwick (ended April 22, 2022)
Split machine parts, Robo-Rabbit, and flag from Super Duel Mode, Doc von Schmeltwick (ended September 30, 2022)
Expand source priority exception to include regional English differences, LinkTheLefty (ended January 14, 2023)
Add product IDs in game infoboxes, Windy (ended March 18, 2023)
Remove the list of Super Smash Bros. series objects, Axis (ended May 10, 2023)
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)
Change the Super Mario 64 DS level section to include more specific character requirements, Altendo (ended December 20, 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)
Merge the ghost Bats and Mice from Luigi's Mansion to their respective organic counterparts from the later games, Doc von Schmeltwick (ended January 20, 2024)
Split Strobomb from Robomb, Doc von Schmeltwick (ended January 20, 2024)
Split the NES and SNES releases of Wario's Woods, SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA) (ended March 27, 2024)
Merge Mii Brawler, Mii Swordfighter, and Mii Gunner to Mii, TheUndescribableGhost (ended March 28, 2024)
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)
Merge Stompybot 3000 with Colonel Pluck, DrippingYellow (ended May 4, 2024)
Split "Team Dinosaur" from The Dinosaurs, Blinker (ended May 15, 2024)
Rename Moneybags to Moneybag (enemy), Hewer (ended May 20, 2024)
Delete Memory Card, Nightwicked Bowser (ended May 23, 2024)

Writing guidelines

Consider "humorous" and other related terms as frequently misused in MarioWiki:Good writing

A writing quirk that seems to pop up everywhere (particularly in the Mario RPG pages/sections) that always drives me nuts is referring to a situation or action as "comical" or "humorous". Generally, these words are used to describe something that is percieved to be amusing, which is obviously subjective and should not be present in encyclopediac writing. However, usage of these words on here seems to follow an improper, "objective" pattern of referring to features intended by the developers as gags or jokes. Examples of blatant misuse:

From the Minion Quest: The Search for Bowser article:

The group runs into Prince Peasley, and after a battle ensues with a few Piranha Beans, Captain Goomba humorously sends out one of them to attack Prince Peasley.

Who says Captain Goomba is trying to make a joke out of sending monsters out to fight an ego-centric prince? In Captain Goomba's eyes, he's practically fighting for his life trying not to be eaten. The only one who could find this humorous is the viewer, and since this is a story synopsis in an encyclopedia, there shouldn't be any viewer.

From Goomba Mask:

In Paper Mario: The Origami King, a different Goomba Mask resembling a Paper Macho Goomba appears in the Shogun Studios storage area. If Mario wears it, he spins around and causes the mask's eyes to roll, with the humorous appearance making Olivia laugh.

Even though there is actually an in-game audience this time, the wording still implies that the writer thinks it is humorous. In order to emphasize that it's Olivia who thinks it is funny, I changed the last sentence to:

If Mario wears it, he spins around and causes the mask's eyes to roll, which Olivia finds amusing to the point of laughter.

The article for Kruller has quite possibly the most egregious usage of "humorously" I've ever seen:

When Luigi enters the office afterward, Kruller briefly faints from shock at Luigi entering, before entering the next room to find a suitable weapon to defend himself (humorously getting stuck on his back mid-roll) [...] Gooigi then retrieves the Mezzanine's elevator button, with it being humorously revealed that Luigi slept through the entire battle [...] After defeating Kruller in two-player mode, Luigi, who was watching the battle from outside, takes all the credit saying that he did it, after which Gooigi humorously copies Luigi as he had actually defeated Kruller [...]

All of these are jokes meant for the audience. And once again, because this is a synopsis in an encyclopedia, there shouldn't be an audience.

And there's way more that I haven't mentioned (just look up the word "humorous" on here and you'll see what I mean). To summarize how I feel this term has been frequently misused, in a form easily copyable for the rules:

Humorous/Comical/etc.
"Humorous", along with other similar words, is used from an observational perspective to describe something one finds amusing or funny, which is, of course, subjective on the part of the writer and should be avoided in an encyclopedia. However, it is commonly misused to refer to anything that is specifically written to be a joke or a gag by the authors of a piece of media. These kinds of words should generally be used only when a character or person relevant to the article finds something amusing. Not to be confused with "comedic", a word that simply means something relates to comedy in general, and is fine to use if a joke is deliberate on the part of a character (or, in case of references to the media's development, a developer).

Proposer: DrippingYellow (talk)
Deadline: May 26, 2024, 23:59 GMT

Support

  1. DrippingYellow (talk) This whole situation is, dare I say it... "humorous". Per proposal.
  2. Camwoodstock (talk) Per proposal. Flowery writing is no laughing matter!
  3. Hewer (talk) I'd add that "comedic" should be used instead to get across that something is meant to be funny while using more objective language, but otherwise, sure, I'll humour this idea.
  4. Ray Trace (talk) We should just get rid of that subjective adjective altogether, let readers decide from the context of the quote if it's humorous or not, we don't need to write an editorial about it (ie sentences such as "Patrick gets caught by Sandy's lasso and dragged back, resulting in a nuclear explosion" already conveys to the reader that it's comedic)
  5. TheFlameChomp (talk) Per all.
  6. Jazama (talk) Per all

Oppose

Comments

"Comical" and "comedic" should be fine, as those simply mean relating to comedy. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 19:31, May 12, 2024 (EDT)

"Comedic" is definitely fine, but in multiple dictionary sources I've come across, the definition of "comical" meaning "relating to comedy" is either listed as obsolete and deprecated, or absent altogether. DrippingYellow (talk) 19:43, May 12, 2024 (EDT)

@Ray Trace That was a really good example of obvious comedy. SpongeBob itself is comedy, so that was a good idea to use that as an example! SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA) (talk) 08:12, May 15, 2024 (EDT)

@Hewer I updated the rules blurb, is it good now? DrippingYellow (talk) 11:34, May 15, 2024 (EDT)

Yeah, that works. Hewer (talk · contributions · edit count) 11:43, May 15, 2024 (EDT)

Standardize "History in the Super Mario franchise" headings under certain conditions

Inspired by Nintendo101's flowerpot subpage (from an earlier revision, before it had been removed), this proposal aims to standardize the use of ==History in the Super Mario franchise== over ==History==. This will help make it clear to readers what is Super Mario and what is not while reading articles, and prevent potential disputes once a standard has been set. Please note that this proposal is NOT about the DK, Yoshi, or Wario subfranchises.

For an article to apply for the ==History in the Super Mario franchise== heading, the article should meet one of the following criteria:

  1. It is a generic subject (e.g. Grapes) or something from real life, like a person, with a fictional portrayal in Super Mario media, such as Thomas Jefferson. An example of this was on the Dinosaur article before being reverted.
  2. It is from the Super Mario franchise BUT has also appeared in non-Super Mario media, popular examples being the Super Smash Bros. series and the Minecraft textures. Everything that isn't Super Mario would be subheadings of ==History in other games==, or ==History in other media== if the subject also (or instead) appeared in publications, television shows, etc. not in Super Mario franchise. An example of this can be seen on the History of Luigi article.
  3. Crossover content, including Nintendo products, as they appear in Super Mario media. Examples can be seen on the Game Boy, Link, and Egg Pawn pages.

For the first bullet point, this would help establish that real and generic subjects are not from Super Mario and makes the History heading less ambiguous. On the Dinosaur article, for example, are we reading about history of dinosaurs as they exist in real life, up to the point of extinction, or from the Super Mario franchise? It's the latter. For George Washington, are we reading history about him from the 18th century or as he exists in the Super Mario franchise? It's also the latter, clearly.

For the second bullet point, this would help eliminate the popular misconception that Super Smash Bros. is part of the Super Mario franchise and help better contextualize Super Mario as it exists in other media, like sometimes Zelda or Minecraft, rather than being integral to the same degree as their main appearances in Super Mario media itself.

For the third bullet point, this would eliminate confusion that the history is talking about Nintendo products in general, like when they were produced, the amount of sales generated, etc. and rather mention its appearances within the Super Mario franchise itself. History on Nintendo products themselves can be found on NintendoWiki. Similarly, for articles like Link, it helps when the History section specifies it is of Link as he appears in the Super Mario franchise. Then connections to Super Mario go under the "History in other media" heading.

To make it short, if this proposal passes, and ==History== is changed to ==History in the ''Super Mario'' franchise== (and split into a separate ==History in other media== in the case of criteria #2) on an article that can be categorized by any of the three numbered bullet points above, users will not be allowed to revert it back to the initial ==History== heading, like in the aforementioned case involving the Dinosaur article.

Proposer: Super Mario RPG (talk)
Deadline: May 31, 2024, 23:59 GMT

Support for all three options

  1. Super Mario RPG (talk) I'm for this option.
  2. SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA) (talk) Yes. Also, for the flowerpot thing, I have that saved (with a few tweaks) here.

Apply to only crossover content and real products

Oppose

  1. Hewer (talk) Similar to your previous proposals about reorganising history sections, I don't really see what we'd gain from this. For the first and third bullet points, the edit summary that removed it from the Dinosaur page sums up my thoughts: "This is obvious and unnecessary". Of course we're only going to be covering the subject's history that's within our scope, I don't think anyone's visiting the Dinosaur page seeking a complete history of the Mesozoic Era only to be disappointed when they don't find it. For the second bullet point, I ask the same question as your last attempt to split up non-Mario appearances: why does it not being a Mario game make it worth splitting up? The assertion that they're not "integral to the same degree as their main appearances in Super Mario media itself" feels wrong, games like Smash are major appearances of the Mario characters and are important to their histories, sometimes moreso than appearances in actual Mario games (Smash Melee introducing Yoshi's Egg Roll, Smash Ultimate being K. Rool's first physical appearance in a decade, etc.). I also again question whether "the popular misconception that Super Smash Bros. is part of the Super Mario franchise" exists or is worth "fixing" in such an indirect way (we already don't consider them Mario games to my knowledge anyway). The Game Boy example is the only one given where I see some merit in doing this, since we do give some coverage to the actual histories of Nintendo hardware and it could be worth distinguishing the history of their in-universe appearances from that.
  2. Nintendo101 (talk) Because this is the Super Mario Wiki, the inherent assumption is that any subject with an article appears in the franchise (including Link and Sonic), and that the "History" section would only cover its appearance in the Super Mario franchise. What else would it be about? If a "history in the Super Mario franchise" was to be implemented anywhere, I feel like it only makes sense for recurring subjects that debuted in the Super Mario franchise, but make recurring appearances elsewhere (like Chain Chomps, which make some a few appearances in Zelda). But even in that context, I don't know if it would be appropriate. (I also don't agree with the premise that any in-game subject is "generic", regardless of its name or design. The grapes in Yoshi's Story are just as derived from the real article as the Sour Bunch.)
  3. Nightwicked Bowser (talk) Per my edit summary Hewer quoted.
  4. FanOfRosalina2007 (talk) Per Nintendo101.
  5. Jazama (talk) Per all
  6. Dine2017 (talk) Under criterion #2, common Mario subjects such as Goomba would have a long ==History in the Super Mario franchise== and a short ==History in other games/media==, making the two unbalanced. Also per all. (In the case of Game Boy, I think ==Appearances in the Super Mario franchise== is more accurate, cf. Nintendo Entertainment System and Nintendo 64.)

Comments

For clarity, when I say "standardize," (not to be confused with "allow," since I don't think there's anything in the rules that explicitly forbids formatting in the aforementioned three cases), it means if a page is formatted that way, others aren't allowed to revert it, since it's the standard for how said articles should look. Also, @SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA), glad to see that flowerpot page. Super Mario RPG (talk) 14:32, May 17, 2024 (EDT)

"For clarity, when I say "standardize," (not to be confused with "allow," since I don't think there's anything in the rules that explicitly forbids formatting in the aforementioned three cases), it means if a page is formatted that way, others aren't allowed to revert it, since it's the standard for how said articles should look." Thanks for the clarification! My support will still be there. "Also, @SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA), glad to see that flowerpot page." Thanks! I wanted to keep/expand on it as a subpage of my userpage, b/c I didn't want any edit conflicts. You and @Nintendo101 are free to edit it if you want. SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA) (talk) 14:43, May 17, 2024 (EDT)

Wasn't there a proposal about roughly the same thing not too long ago? You're meant to wait 28 days between proposals on the same thing, so if that's the case, we don't exactly wanna wait for a substantial amount of votes before calling attention to it. ~Camwoodstock (talk) 15:12, May 17, 2024 (EDT)

No, I think this is different. That one had to do with removing franchise headers, which this one doesn't. SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA) (talk) 15:23, May 17, 2024 (EDT)
Yeah, this one is not about removing headings. It's about modifying "History" to "History in the Super Mario franchise" in one of three case, and in one case (if there's appearances outside of Super Mario), splitting "History in other games/media" into its own history heading. See what I did on Don Bongo as an example. Super Mario RPG (talk) 15:39, May 17, 2024 (EDT)

Where would appearances in things like Smash and Captain N go in this case? -- KOOPA CON CARNE 15:40, May 17, 2024 (EDT)

"History in other media" (see Link article). Super Mario RPG (talk) 15:41, May 17, 2024 (EDT)
Makes sense. SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA) (talk) 15:48, May 17, 2024 (EDT)

@Hewer @Nintendo101 @Nightwicked Bowser I thought "This is a Super Mario Wiki" as a argument was getting old, but that's what you 3 are using! What happened in between? Is it not a old argument anymore? SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA) (talk) 09:04, May 20, 2024 (EDT)

I don't think anything in the comment you reference contradicts any of the sentiments made here. No one is arguing subjects that originated outside of the Super Mario franchise (like Link, Sonic, Mad Scienstein, Wart, etc.) should not receive coverage, nor that appearances made by subjects that did emerged within the franchise should not be noted (like Link's Awakening, Smash Bros., Tetris, Qix, etc.). Rather, because of the inherent scope of the wiki, it is assumed that a "History" section on this site encompasses the subject of the article's appearances in the Super Mario franchise and it is unclear to me why that needs further clarification. - Nintendo101 (talk) 09:35, May 20, 2024 (EDT)
But you said yourself in your oppose vote "Because this is the Super Mario Wiki", which, again, I thought was getting old as an argument. Hewer himself in the linked proposal said it! I'm just confused about what changed in between that and now. SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA) (talk) 09:38, May 20, 2024 (EDT)
First off, why are you getting on Nintendo101's case for an argument that I made in a proposal they didn't even take part in? Second, my point when I made that comment was that "This is a Super Mario wiki" is getting old as an argument on its own to trim, reorganise, or otherwise alter crossover content like Smash, as Super Mario RPG keeps trying to do, whereas Nintendo101's argument is that, because this is a Super Mario wiki, we don't need to specify that our content is about Super Mario. The same words may have been used, but the context of the arguments is different. Hewer (talk · contributions · edit count) 11:54, May 20, 2024 (EDT)
First off, I'm not. Second, I didn't know that the CONTEXT was different, I only paid attention to the words, not the context. Third, a "History" section only covering the Super Mario franchise kinda neglects the references and cameos. SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA) (talk) 12:01, May 20, 2024 (EDT)
Isn't the point of this proposal (which you're supporting) to have history sections that only cover the Super Mario franchise? Hewer (talk · contributions · edit count) 12:05, May 20, 2024 (EDT)
I would like to redirect you to point 2 of the proposal. SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA) (talk) 12:31, May 20, 2024 (EDT)
Does that not just prove my point? Hewer (talk · contributions · edit count) 12:34, May 20, 2024 (EDT)
The history section is going to be split. That's the point of this proposal. YOUR point is just around 1/2 of the point of this proposal. SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA) (talk) 12:45, May 20, 2024 (EDT)

New features

None at the moment.

Removals

None at the moment

Changes

Decide whether to merge the {{more images}}, {{more media}}, and/or {{more refs needed}}

I may have created the {{more refs needed}} template, but I later saw a discussion for merging it with {{unreferenced}}. That inspired me to plan on merging {{more images}} and {{more media}} with {{image}} and {{media missing}} respectively, so I decided to make a proposal containing three options:

Option 1
Merge {{more images}}, {{more media}}, and {{more refs needed}} with {{image}}, {{media missing}}, and {{unreferenced}} respectively AND create the categories Articles with sections that need more images, Articles with sections that need more images.
Option 2
ONLY merge {{more refs needed}} with {{unreferenced}}.
Option 3
Keep as they are.

Here are some examples:

Template:Image 

<div class="notice-template maintenance" style="background:#FF6;border:1px solid #630">
It has been requested that {{#if:{{{more|}}}|'''more images'''|at least one '''image'''}} be [[Special:Upload|uploaded]] for this {{#if:{{{section|}}}|section|article}}. Remove this notice only after the {{#if:{{{more|}}}|additional images|image(s)}} have been added. {{#if:{{{reason|{{{1|}}}}}}|'''Specific(s):''' {{{reason|{{{1}}}}}}}}
</div><includeonly>{{#switch:{{NAMESPACE}}||Gallery=[[Category:Articles {{#if:{{{section|}}}|with sections}} that need {{#if:{{{more|}}}|more images|an image}}]]}}</includeonly>

{{image|more=yes|section=yes|Sprites}}

=

It has been requested that more images be uploaded for this section. Remove this notice only after the additional images have been added. Specific(s): Sprites

Template:Media missing 

{| class="notice-template maintenance" style="background:#C88AFF;border:1px solid #630"
|style="padding-right:10px"|[[File:Soundx.png|25px|class=invert-dark]]
|style="padding-top:3px"| It has been requested that {{#if:{{{more|}}}|'''more audio and/or video files'''|at least one '''audio and/or video file'''}} related to this {{#if:{{{section|}}}|section|article}} be uploaded. {{#if:{{{reason|{{{1|}}}}}}|'''Specific(s):''' {{{reason|{{{1}}}}}}|<includeonly>{{#switch:{{NAMESPACE}}||Gallery=[[Category:Articles with incomplete maintenance tags]]}}<br><small>Please upload all related music, sound effects, voice clips, or any videos for this {{#if:{{{section|}}}|section|article}}. See the [[Help:Media|help]] page for information on how to get started.</small>
|}<includeonly>{{#switch:{{NAMESPACE}}||Gallery=[[Category:Articles {{#if:{{{section|}}}|with sections}} that need {{#if:{{{more|}}}|more media|media}}]]}}</includeonly>

{{media missing|more=yes|section=yes|Voice clips}}

=

Soundx.png It has been requested that more audio and/or video files related to this section be uploaded. Specific(s): Voice clips
Please upload all related music, sound effects, voice clips, or any videos for this section. See the help page for information on how to get started.

{{media missing|more=yes|Videos}}

=

Soundx.png It has been requested that more audio and/or video files related to this article be uploaded. Specific(s): Videos
Please upload all related music, sound effects, voice clips, or any videos for this article. See the help page for information on how to get started.

Template:Unreferenced 

<div class="notice-template maintenance" style="background:#FC5;border:1px solid #f22">
This {{#if:{{{section|}}}|section|article}} '''{{#if:{{{more|}}}|needs additional citations for [[MarioWiki:Citations|verification]]|does not [[MarioWiki:Citations|cite any sources]]}}'''. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. {{#if:{{{reason|{{{1|}}}}}}|'''Specific(s):''' {{{reason|{{{1}}}}}}|<includeonly>{{#switch:{{NAMESPACE}}||Gallery=[[Category:Articles with incomplete maintenance tags]]}}</includeonly>}}<br><small>Please help {{plain link|1=[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} improve this {{#if:{{{section|}}}|section|article}}]}} by [[MarioWiki:Citations#How to add references|adding citations from reliable sources]].</small>
</div><includeonly>{{#switch:{{NAMESPACE}}||Gallery=[[Category:Articles {{#if:{{{more|}}}|{{#if:{{{section|}}}|with sections}} that need more citations|with {{#if:{{{section|}}}|unsourced sections|no sources}}}}]]}}</includeonly>

{{unreferenced|more=yes|section=yes|Spanish and German names}}

This section needs additional citations for verification. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. Specific(s): Spanish and German names
Please help improve this section by adding citations from reliable sources.

Once the proposal ends with Option 1, we'll be able to merge these templates and then replace the {{more images, {{more media, and {{more refs needed syntax with the {{image|more=yes, {{media missing|more=yes, and {{unreferenced|more=yes syntax respectively. However, once the proposal ends with Option 2, we'll only be able to merge the {{more refs needed}} template and then replace the {{more refs needed syntax with the {{unreferenced|more=yes syntax. Once the proposal ends with Option 3, we'll keep the {{more refs needed template and protect it.

Proposer: GuntherBayBeee (talk)
Deadline: May 28, 2024, 23:59 GMT

Option 1

  1. GuntherBayBeee (talk) Per proposal
  2. Super Mario RPG (talk) I like the idea of integrating the functionality of the aforementioned templates.

Option 2

Option 3

Comments

Create a category for teenagers

One thing that feels strange to me on this wiki is the current age categories. We have children and babies. However, when it comes to teenagers, it either goes to the children category or doesn't go there at all. Granted, both are underage, but it does not help the average user who wants to find all the teenage characters on this wiki. I mean, if we are okay with creating the categories for the previous underaged characters, a third one one wouldn't hurt. For this to count, I looked for every character that was considered to be a teenager in the Super Mario franchise at one point. We have enough categories for them to be put in, having about ten Super Mario characters to count. I'm probably missing a couple and if so, please let me know in the comments. The exact criteria are thirteen to seventeen years old or confirmed to be one. Characters like Tiny Kong wouldn't make it in this category as she was never confirmed to be a teenager in her recent design.

Below is a list of Super Mario characters who are or were teenagers.

And here is a list of non-Super Mario characters who would be affected by this proposal. This only applies if they were portrayed as teenagers within said game. For example, Vector the Crocodile was labeled as one in his earlier appearances but is considered an adult in later games, including all Mario & Sonic games.

I don't know any potential counterarguments in disfavor of this, because this would be much more helpful and less broad than having any underage character be sent to the children category, especially when that's rare, as some of the above-mentioned characters are not put in that category. Plus, it would be weird to call Little Mac or Mona a child. Yes, I know people sometimes describe teens as kids, but it's a lot more misleading if put in those categories.

Proposer: TheUndescribableGhost (talk)
Deadline: May 28, 2024, 23:59 GMT

Support

  1. TheUndescribableGhost (talk) Per proposal

Oppose

  1. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) - The main reason we have the "babies" category is the Yoshi's Island games having the baby counterparts. There's no teen-focused variation of the Mario cast (knock on wood, there)
  2. SolemnStormcloud (talk) As someone who feels Category:Children doesn't have much of a reason to exist, a category for teenagers would have even less of a reason to.
  3. Nintendo101 (talk) Per SolemnStormcloud.
  4. Tails777 (talk) I just don't think this is entirely necessary. At least the Mario series makes the whole babies thing really simple; they are characters designed to be babies and stay that way. The third party examples going by "which design is based on a teenage appearance" just feels unnecessary. I think, in the end, it's just not a necessary category.
  5. Camwoodstock (talk) We really don't need this, especially since a lot of characters that are actually concretely teenagers are just kinda like that, and it's not like... a tenet of who they are. When the Child category is already under scrutiny for how it's moreso trivia than actually relevant information, this has even less of a leg to stand on. The closest thing we could think of is basically reworking the Child category to a "Minors" category, but even then, that would succumb to the same issues the current Child category does... And that's not even getting in to the total elephant room that is Ashley, who is allegedly "15, going on 500", and whether they're on the "teenager" side of this equation or the "adult" side of this equation seems to depend on how funny Nintendo feels like being that day--and more often than not, they do answer "teenager", if not even younger than that.
  6. Arend (talk) Per all. Also, to expand on the Ashley thing, in Japan, her age is left ambiguous, but in those Japanese versions for Touched and Gold onwards, Ashley sounds remarkably younger than in Western versions of those games. That makes it seem that Ashley was originally intended to be a preteen child, but the west aged her up to fifteen since she looks older than the kid characters we've had at the time (e.g. 9-Volt, who is a 4th-grader). Then again, Ashley looks about as old as Penny Crygor, who is a middle schooler... needless to say, Ashley's true age is a can of worms in itself.
  7. TheFlameChomp (talk) Per all.
  8. Jazama (talk) Per all
  9. MegaBowser64 (talk) Teenagers suck, per all

Comments

Not sure if I did the references right for this. TheUndescribableGhost (talk) 22:54, May 21, 2024 (EDT)

References

  1. ^ WarioWare: Touched! European website She is "fifteen going on 500".
  2. ^ Pelland, Scott, and Kent Miller. Super Mario RPG: Legend of the Seven Stars Player's Guide. Page 4.
  3. ^ Mario Kart Arcade GP DX uses the Ghostly Adventures design of Pacster, who is a teenager in that show.
  4. ^ a b His age is listed as twelve to thirteen years old.
  5. ^ Depending on the languages of her games, she is either of teenage age or adult age.

Miscellaneous

None at the moment.

Retrieved from "https://www.mariowiki.com/index.php?title=MarioWiki:Proposals&oldid=4227737"