Proposals can be new features (such as an extension), removal of a previously added feature that has tired out, or new policies that must be approved via consensus before any action(s) are done.
- Any user can support or oppose, but must have a strong reason for doing so, not, e.g., "I like this idea!"
- "Vote" periods last for one week.
- Any past proposals are archived.
|
A proposal section works like a discussion page: comments are brought up and replied to using indents (colons, such as : or ::::) and all edits are signed with the signature code ~~~(~).
How To
- Actions that users feel are appropriate to have community approval first can be added by anyone, but they must have a strong argument.
- Users then vote and discuss on the issue during that week. The "deadline" for the proposal is one week from posting at:
- Monday to Thursday: 17:00 (5pm)
- Friday and Saturday: 20:00 (8pm)
- Sunday: 15:00 (3pm)
- At any time a vote may be rejected if at least three active users believe the vote truly has strong reasons supporting it. Every vote should have a reason accompanying it.
- "# " should be added under the last vote of each support/oppose section to show another blank line.
- At the deadline, the validity of each vote and the discussion is reviewed by the community.
- A user calls the result of the proposal and takes action(s) as decided if necessary, and archives the proposal.
The times are in EDT, and are set so that the user is more likely to be online at those times (after school, weekend nights).
So for example, if a proposal is added on Saturday night at 11:59 PM EDT, the deadline is the next Saturday night at 8:00 PM. If it is indeed a minute later, the deadline is a day plus 15 hours (Sunday), as opposed to a day minus 4 hours.
CURRENTLY: 18:30, 4 June 2024 (EDT)
New Features
Question of the Day
I find the "Quote of the Moment" boring. I see something different every time, and yet see repeats just as much. How about having a "Question of the Day" on the main page instead? That might make viewers more interested. I've got quite a bit of questions for asking to start you guys up:
- "Why does Peach's castle look different every game?"
- "Why are there always new places in the Mushroom Kingdom replacing the old areas in each game?"
- "Why does Bowser always kidnap Peach?"
- "Why does Mario live in a small cottage instead of his castle?"
- "What makes Wario so greedy?"
- "What is the point to having Waluigi around?"
- "When will Daisy be part in another adventure game?"
- "What makes Bowser King of the Koopas?"
- "Just because places are named after characters, does that mean that those particular characters own them? (examples: does Mario own Mario Circut, or does Luigi own Luigi's Engine Room?)
- "Why are there so many mushrooms in places where they are not famous for mushrooms?" (examples: Flipside, Rougeport, Beanbean, etc;)
- "Why was Donkey Kong taken out of the Mario Party sereis as a playable character?"
- "Why do enemies have different names in some games?"
- "How are Goombas able to hold things when they have no arms?"
- "Why is Peach the "chosen one" for the game's plot (and therefore is kiddnapped)?"
- "Why do Dry Bones that stand up wear gloves when their living counterparts do not?"
- "When characters get flattened, why do they get TOTALLY flattened (as paper)? They are not made of putty!"
- "What makes objects like platforms and blocks float in the air?"
- "Why are there so many blocks?"
- "Why are there items in one game have the same effect as other items in another game? (examples: Fright Jar-Fright Mask, Repel Jel-Boo's Sheet)"
- "Do those spiked shells on Bowser, the Koopalings, or Koopa Kid mean ANYTHING?"
- "Why does Luigi not live in his mansion?"
- "Why did Prof. E. Gadd invent the Hydrogush to help Mario and Luigi when he could have just use F.L.U.D.D.?"
- "Where are all the humans?"
- "What would life have been like if Kamek succeeded in disposing the Mario Bros.?"
- "If characters in the video game world are playing video games of past plots, would they be considered true stories?"
- "What becomes of enemies that have been turned into eggs by Yoshi, then used?"
These are just a few that I was able to think up, but others may participate as well with their own questions. These are not questions of how much people know about the Marioverse games, just food for thought (so the title could be called "Questionable Question") One question a day, and these questions (from above) alone will last the feature 26 days. Each one can be put into the archives after the day is done, if wanted. So, what do you think? (please do not put the questions up on the main page if this proposal is to be put on the latest proposal section of the main page. It'll spoil everything.)
Mr.Benio
19:52, 12 October 2007 (EDT)
Yay
-
Luigibros2 I think it's a good idea and would be kind of fun.
- --[[User:Nasakid|Zach121]] 22:25, 13 October 2007 (EDT) Agreed with LB And YAYZ
Nah
- That kind of thing belongs in The 'Shroom.
Plumber
22:30, 13 October 2007 (EDT)
- ~PY
-Quote of the Moment is more fun. If not we can do quote of the day.
- Cobold (talk · contribs) - Per Plumber.
- User:Ultimatetoad - meh..... i like quote of the day better, most of those questions have no real answers...
- Stumpers! 00:08, 15 October 2007 (EDT) I've never said per before, but per Plumber... brrr... I don't like how that sounds. Those are really clever questions. I'd like to see them discussed, particularly the mansion/castle question about the Mario Bros. Did they sell those? What I'm trying to say is it just doesn't seem like something that would work on the main page, but it will work SOMEwhere. I'd go for the 'Shroom. Maybe there could be user-submitted explanations to spark discussion?
Paper Jorge! I give paper cuts so stand back! Nah. Why? Well, because I have the answer to everything: It's videogames and they don't actually need answers. They have to be fun thats all.- Mr. Guy the Guy
Talk!E You ccan just look up this stuff
- I think we should also have a random trivia fact that picks a random fact instead of the did you know box thats already on the front page. --[[User:Nasakid|Zach121]] 12:38, 14 October 2007 (EDT)
- Now, THAT is a good idea!
Glowsquid
- Oooh, ho, ho, ho! Me gusta mucho. (I like it, for those of you who just know English) You feel like creating a proposal? Stumpers! 00:09, 15 October 2007 (EDT)
- Why not both?
rend (talk) (edits)
Removals
No current proposals.
Changes
Mario Info
It seems we have a rule that we cannot have Non-Mario info on pages for characters/places/items from other series', like Super Sonic or Zelda. However, we should be able to give at least a short back story of what happened in other games, doing so would make a lot of the articles make a lot more sense to viewers who are not fans of that series. I propose that we should be able to do this, AND include some images from previous Non-Mario games where the Place/Item/Character appeared(This may include some articles for things that would not get an article because they are from another series, even if they are shown/implied in a Mario game).
- Proposer: Uniju :D
- Deadline: 20:00, Nov. 1
Support
- ~Uniju(T-C-E)I am the proposer, and my reasons are given above.
Oppose
- Mr. Guy the Guy Talk!E Were not allowed at first, so I agree with the old rule
- My Bloody Valentine We already provide a brief backstory on the character. VERY brief summaries are allowed, and have already been used. Also, we should only provide Images from Mario-based games (The Cameos articles excluded).
XzelionETC Per DP- Son of Suns - We should only provide info that appears in Mario games. We don't want this becoming a general Nintendo/video game wiki. Links should be provided to Wikipedia and other video game wikis so users can find more info about a non-Mario subject.
- Ghost Jam
Non-Mario related character articles should only list information that is relevant to said character being included in the Mario Wiki. Other information, such as a brief rundown of Zelda's history, would be out of place. Please see further comments below.
- Cobold (talk · contribs) - For Smash Bros. characters, the trophies of them and trophies of other elements of their series should provide enough story to put together.
Mr. Guy, you don't agree because an existing rule says otherwise? Thats the reason this is a proposal, and I don't think thats a valid reason. -_-' ~Uniju(T-C-E)
- And DP: Like I said in the proposal, most people who are NOT fans of that series will need to haunt down info from other places to understand any of it. So we should be able to show more info than we do, and theres nothing about Sonic Adventure on the Sonic article, or Ocarina of Time on the Zelda article, its against the rules to add that info. ~Uniju(T-C-E)
I see Sonic as an exception to the rule. Sonic and Mario have a non-game rivalry that started way back in 1992. That might be something to place an article about. -- Chris 04:10, 13 October 2007 (EDT)
In theory this proposal sounds like a good idea. But as everyonme else has said, this is Super Mario Wiki. We don't need to know what happened in Ocarina of Time to understand Zelda and Links' role in the Marioverse. And as Cobald said, for Super Smash. Bros. characters the trophies are enough to understand some stuff about thier personalities and some aspects of their personal history (Link is brave, Link saves Zelda a lot, etc.). If people want to find out more, the Internet's a big place, and it's not our job to tell people about Zelda or Earthbound or whatever, just Mario. - Walkazo
- A line could be added at the end of a non-Mario characters article linking to Wikipedia or whatever series specific wiki is available. -- Chris 13:38, 13 October 2007 (EDT)
- I see where you're coming from, Uniju. We should provide information to an extent. Making a page as dedicated as Mario for example would be going overboard, obviously. I think we're pretty good as it is now. :3 We should link to other Wikis, though. How about one link to Wikipedia and one link to a specialty Wiki using the same format as Uncyclopedia? Here's a couple of good Wikis:
Stumpers! 00:21, 15 October 2007 (EDT)
- Might I add, there is also a Nintendo Wiki. My Bloody Valentine
Merges and Splits
Fire Guy & Barbecue Guy
Split
Luigibros2 They are two seperate enemies and thus desrve seperate articles.
Keep the same
- Dimenzio They are the same so let's merge the informations. But which name shall we take and which name shall we redirect?
- My Bloody Valentine They are the same, yes. Only one problem, which name to choose!?
Whoever proposed this really needs to include some information and proper formatting. There wasn't even a "Comment" section for crying out loud! - Walkazo
To late Dimenzio cause I heard that Barecue Guy is more profesional and less conjectural Mr. Guy the Guy Talk!E Also this proposal doesn't make much sense...
LugiBros2: Uhhh... Actually, both article are about the same subject, but with a different name. The problem is we dunno which name we should use.
Glowsquid
Okay, so you say who Barbecue guy is, but what's the difference between him and Fire Guy? Who is Fire Guy even? Stumpers! 19:15, 11 October 2007 (EDT)
Ashley 'n' Red
The page Ashley and Red deal about these two WarioWare character, however I think the page should be split. Unlike say, Macho Grubba who is simply Grubba with a new alias and powers, Ashley and Red are two completly different characters. I say that the page should be split in two, one for Ashley, and one for Red (Demon).
Proposer Glowsquid
Deadline Oct 19 21:00 EDT
Split
- Glowsquid - I am the proposer and my reasosn are given above.
- Son of Suns - Surely you can guess. Anything officially named deserves an article in my book.
- Walkazo - Yep. Seperate characters, seperate articles. And while we're at it, Dribble and Spitz and Kat and Ana should be split up too.
- My Bloody Valentine I don't play WarioWare, so I don't know much about those two, but still, I say we should split them into their own articles. Also, Dribble and Spitz and Kat and Ana should be split as well, as Walkazo said.
- Stumpers! 00:47, 15 October 2007 (EDT) I was just thinking this. Kat and Ana have separate articles, too. Oh, and these two are so much more different than any of the "character pairs" from the Mario & Luigi series. They have distinct personalities and have more than cameo appearances.
Oppose
- These kinds of minor characters who are rarely seen without the other look better together. Gramma Red and Gramma Green, and the Millennium Star are examples of such. Plumber 22:29, 13 October 2007 (EDT)
Plumber, looking at your examples, I noticed that they've only appeared in one game. I think they've been left combined because of their significance to the series. Take the Grandmas Bros. for example. Their personalities are nearly identical and they've only appeared in one game. Because of how little you can write about them separately (ie they have different voices), you can justify the combination. The thing with Ashley and Red is that they have completly separate personalities and actions during the multiple games they have appeared in. Still, if they had similar personalities I would say that, by all means, we could combine them. Good point. Stumpers! 01:05, 15 October 2007 (EDT)
Miscellaneous
Add Fan Flash Series
I've seen on Wikipedia an Super Mario Bros. Z article. Now it's deleted, but on another language (French for example), that article is still there. I think popular fan flash series, such as Super Mario Bros. Z shall be added. But what do YOU think? Shall we add them or not?
Proposer: rend (talk) (edits)
Deadline: Sunday, October 21, 15:00 (EDT)
ADD THEM!!!!
- Yes it's a popular cartoon and It has to do with Mario, so I don't see why not. User:Gowser
- Yes add them! I remember in one of the episodes credits it said that they got permission by Nintendo and Sega.-Mcoolister
- It would be nice to add an article based on a popular web show. But sadly, as I can tell from the amount of posts below, I can say, no. Sorry SMBZ lovers. =( Superjustin 18:48, 15 October 2007 (EDT)
Don't add them...
- My Bloody Valentine Give it a little while longer, and that article will be deleted on the French site as well. We are an encyclopedia based on REAL Mario content, not Mario content that fans of the series have made.
- Supertroopa As Pokemon DP just mentioned this is supposed to be a site full of the content of the real Mario series of games created by Nintendo and it wouldn't work out with the articles full of the real content and the content by fans.
-
MarioBros777 It's Back to Editing!!! There's going to be a Wiki for it. Join that even though it is not out yet it will be soon. :P
- Son of Suns - It's unofficial information, and not needed. Plus, I think the 'Shroom has a section devoted to unofficial Mario flash media.
- Cobold (talk · contribs) - Per all.
- XzelionETC Per All
- Paper Jorge! I give paper cuts so stand back! This wiki is about Mario games, comics, movies and official stuff. Unofficial stuff is a no.
- Snack 12:33, 15 October 2007 (EDT) No way. Just because it is popular and relativly well known, doesn't mean it belongs here. Put it on Fantendo or something.
- Walkazo and PP - Per all. Besides, there have been articles on fan movies in the past (i.e. Rise of the Mushroom Kingdom) and they all got deleted. Also, some stuff in the Flash movies might be a bit mature for the Wiki (RotMK had blood and gore, for example).
- huntercrunch Per SoS. This was proposed i assume only because you are a fan yourself. If it isn't official information, then it has no place here on the wiki.
- Full Metal Moogle
they are not official.
Arend, you should vote yourself. My Bloody Valentine
- Mcoolister: I think they were joking. I mean, did we get permission from Nintendo to make this site...and did we really need permission? Paper Jorge! I give paper cuts so stand back!
- Nintendo and Sega own the copyrights to those characters and ideas. The fan videos were providing attribution to prevent copyright infringement. They are not official sources. We do the same thing here with our general disclaimer. -- Son of Suns
- Oh thanks SoS for clearing that up. Paper Jorge! I give paper cuts so stand back!
Huntercrusher, I'm sure you know that people usually write about one topic over another because of personal preference. Just because a certain idea started as a result of preference should not be grounds for bashing it. I'm kind of on the fence about this... I'm not sure my vote would matter either way, though. Stumpers! 19:07, 15 October 2007 (EDT)
