MarioWiki:Proposals

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. All 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) Every vote should have a reason accompanying it. At any time a vote may be rejected if at least three active users believe the vote truly has no merit or was cast in bad faith. However, there must be strong reasons supporting the invalidation. "# " 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. Any proposal that has three votes or less at deadline will automatically be listed as "NO QUORUM" 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 a sysop, the proposer can ask for that help. 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: 23:19, 30 May 2024 (EDT) New Features None at the moment. Removals Spriting Refrence On the wiki, many people add in articles refrencing about spriting and models. I know what these mean, but not all guests or users who don't care about the community side may not know what exactly sprites are, and the differences with models. So should we allow this kind of talk? Or shall we make this only for people who know about this stuff? Examples of these articles would be Beta Elements and sorry to say but parts of Super Smash Bros. Brawl. Proposer: Crypt Raider Deadline: 20:00, 1 Febuary 2008 (EDT) Let's not add spriting refrences GrodenE T C ElMy reasons above. Keep spriting refrences   Tykyle - spriting references are essential to explaining the beta elements some games Stumpers! Anybody who used it should have made sure it was in the glossary, but that page needs work! Cobold (talk · contribs) - I don't see the point. There are sprites shown on the Beta Elements page and they should be labelled as such. If people don't understand that, they can go to the Glossary. Paper Jorge ( Talk·Contributions)· Per Cobold. The Glossary page is supposed to explain those "terms" that people might not understand. Explosive Pants Modifier TEH PER ALL-NESS. Storm Yoshi Sprites are very important to show what the character looked like in the actual game. Also per Cobold. Walkazo - Per all. Comments I still haven't quite understood what you are talking about? Could you say where in the Brawl article exactly there is a reference? The Beta Elements would be a different story, it's vital to the article and could perhaps be explained for that. - Cobold (talk · contribs) 18:03, 25 January 2008 (EST) I don't really understand this proposal... Spriting is a legetimate videogame term, refering to 2D models of characters and items, it's not just a community thing. Same things for Model. What's the point of removing mentions of something perfectly legetimate? Blitzwing (talk · gnome work) Splits & Merges Split Luma into Hungry Luma Currently, we do not have an article on Hungry Lumas. Although Hungry Lumas are simply Lumas that are hungry, I believe they should get a separate article because they appear so consistently in the game and their name is official, with a capitalized Hungry in front of Luma. They also affect the gameplay a lot by forming new planets, new galaxies, or even Mushrooms. Of course, they are still the same species as Lumas (not subspecies), but should that be reason that they have to stay on the same article? Proposer: Knife (talk) Deadline: January 29, 2008, 17:00 Support BLOC PARTIER. Yeah, I agree. They are big in finding more stars, and the fact that they can transform into galaxies is very big, especially when the galaxies have seperate pages. GrodenE T C El Per InfectedShroom. Master Crash Well, we do have that Koopa article. Tykyle - The Hungry Lumas are much more important to the gameplay than normal lumas. Now, would this article include the shop and comet lumas? NMRodo It has an official name, and affects quite a few Stars in the game. Knife (talk) 20:50, 26 January 2008 (EST) Per InfectedShroom Stumpers! I'm gonna have to go with you guys on this, but I would also support providing links to the other luma articles from the main one. MarioBros777 It's Back to Editing!!! Per all above. Due to the fact that Hungry Lumas are useful. Like new galaxies. (Would it include that Luma who knows about Prankster Comets?) Oppose Glitchman (talk · contribs) True, but they're basically regular Lumas and do not have any separate abilities, so it would be best to just create a large section on the Luma page dedicated to Hungry Lumas, to show what they do and where they appear in the game. HyperToad They are just lumas, not any different except they eat. Do we make articles for Koopa without a shell? HyperToad Explosive Pants Modifier TEH PER ALL-NESS. Mr. Guy the GuyNormle Lumas transform into varouis objects without feeding them Star Bits, and Hungry Lumas transform into planets by feeding them star bitsE King Mario Comments Hypertoad:Yes. --Blitzwing 11:43, 23 January 2008 (EST) Hey, Knife, you gonna support your own proposal? BLOC PARTIER. Bliz:OMG, this wiki has PROMBLEMS! HyperToad The page is perfectly okay, those are enemies from Super Mario World which start out with having no shell. - Cobold (talk · contribs) 12:18, 26 January 2008 (EST) Tykyle: Yes.Knife (talk) 20:52, 26 January 2008 (EST) Would the Luma Shop need a separate article... Nah...But i just wanted to check... MarioBros777 It's Back to Editing!!! Oh yeah... I say split!!! Get your fist and break the article into 2! :P Minor Things Recently I've seen articles such as Pauline's Items, Beach Koopa, Pirate Goomba, Mario mini and MANY others, that are kept because they "affect gameplay" but then others like Snufit Ball deleted. When are we going to actually set a standerd? These must be deleted. Proposer HyperToad Deadline: February 1, 2008, 20:00 Delete - This wiki doesn't need an article on everything, even if it effects gameplay HyperToad Reasons above Keep Blitzwing - See my comment below. Cobold (talk · contribs) - This is very article specific, thus NOT what Proposals are about. You can't decide this overall. Time Questions Per Cobold. Stumpers! We need another justification: "affects gameplay" means that we should include an article about video games that have inspired the Mario games, so... I think it's a weak argument for anything. BLOC PARTIER. Per everyone. This reach of this proposal is much too wide. Glitchman (talk · contribs) Per Blitzwing. Walkazo - Per All. MarioGalaxy2433g5 - Per All plus my comments below. Comments What is "too minor" and what is not is mostly opinion. Maybe Mario mini isn't as important as Mario himself, however, the character play a proeminent part (A minigame in Super Mario 64 is centered around it) and have an official name, showing Nintendo kinda cares about that... thing. However, I agree we should merge Beach koopa (C'mon, it's just a Koopa without it's shell, it doesn't make it a new species). For this kind of problem, we should work with a case-by-case basis , not everything need to be run throught the proposals, if you think the article is about a too minor subject, say it on the Talkpage and see if other agree/disagree, making an individual proposal to merge Pirate Goomba is OK, however, making a proposal to get rid of everything that doesn't seem too major just doesn't work. Blitzwing (talk · gnome work) Saying it on talkpages DOESN'T WORK! I've tried with Pauline's Items, but Xluidi came in and acted like he's so smart by saying "It affects gameplay, like CHEESE". Everthing that effects gameplay doesn't get an article! So maybe this proposal can't work, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't have a standerd for what gets an article and what doesn't. What about Blue Bird Green Bird, and so forth! And YOU were the one trying to destroy cheese! HyperToad HT, I can relate to your problem (not with Xluidi... I mean the talk page discussions being shot down by one comment), but what you'll want to do is go after each separate page individually on the proposal page. Asking people to vote for a generality makes them worry about other pages. You split voters into saying "no" if you talk about more than one subject. Hope that helps you with your future proposals! Stumpers! 17:49, 26 January 2008 (EST) The Marioverse is filled with minor things, and if we cut them all out our Wiki will be full of holes. Some things, like the Isle Delfino Birds should be merged (a proposal just passed to merge the birds but hasn't been enacted), but others like Beach Koopas should stay. Yes, they're just Koopas without shells, but they've been given offical names, have appeared over and over in the Marioverse, and have affected gameplay and plot; if that's not significant than what is? So they're not seperate species, neither are KP Koopas or Pirate Goombas. The point is, we can't be this picky about these little details, nomatter what we say makes one thing or another article-worthy, someone else will say it doesn't. As many others have said, do this case-by-case; and don't blow your cool if you don't like what stays. Who knows, someone out there might want to know about Pauline's Items... - Walkazo BTW: This proposal is under the wrong section. (Way to go HyperToad). MarioGalaxy2433g5 16:02, 27 January 2008 (EST) See Walazo, there this secret thing called REDIRECTS! Redirect can help give info on Pauline's Items without using pointless articles. HyperToad Redirect to... what? --Blitzwing 11:38, 28 January 2008 (EST) My guess is he'll say Donkey Kong (arcade game) for Pauline's Items. But, see HyperToad, the secret thing here is that some things like Mario mini can't be put into one major game's article: in this case, Mario mini is in Super Mario 64 and SM64DS, with homages to it appearing in Paper Mario, Mario Teaches Typing 2 and New Super Mario Bros., to name a few. Plus, there's nothing more infuriating than a re-direct if you want to read about one thing and get shuttled off to another where the first thing's only a little footnote at the bottom of the page or not in it at all. And also, who the heck is Walazo? If you're gonna patronize someone, at least get their name right. - Walkazo This is way too broad of a proposal. MarioGalaxy2433g5 17:55, 28 January 2008 (EST) Thank MarioGalaxy, we know that. Also, not everything has to redirect, just some. Also, please go to the main page's talk. HyperToad Changes Correct Operator System I know everyone is tired of talking about the chat on this wiki, but please, hear me out. Steve currently has "200" powers – founder of #mariowiki, complete control over all settings. When I had my bureaucrat term, I was privileged with "190" – everything the same as 200 except to unregister #mariowiki (i.e. remove ChanServ and all ops). All sysops on the wiki got "100", which allowed them to be auto-oped upon entry in the room to ban & kick when appropriate. The chat was very ho-hum and orderly at that time. But now? Ever since I stepped down, no one has returned to 190 (Xze should have), and though 100s are valid, "back-up" non-sysops are now receiving 100s also, because, as the Big P declares "the chat is separate from the wiki." To that I give a polite "no." I'm sorry, Steve, but the chat has been on this wiki for almost a year now. <10% are forum-only users. And now, there are three non-sysops with auto-op powers, one of which I am extremely questionable about, with no consensus from us. As the only person >100 now, Steve, not RAP (who's in chat quite often) or Cobold, is making all the decisions, and as such the chat has been quite a mess for at least a month now, if not more. I understand with more people the chat is harder to control – now 15 people on a weekday is not uncommon. But we had 10 people on spring nights, probably 15 on summer nights too, and everything couldn't have been better. Now, it really couldn't be much worse. Thus I propose the following: All sysops get 100s, all bureaucrats get 190s. It is not a requirement to chat, but it is strongly encouraged to help keep it in line and child-safe (i.e. no sexual content, etc.) Enough sysops/crats are active in chat for now, so that is not a concern. All non-sysops stay at 0, including patrollers. A patroller and sysop are two completely different things. Patrollers don't have enough privileged rights to earn a 100, though this is debatable. Demotion of op powers also means loss of sysop powers. The chat is CONNECTED TO the wiki. Sysops are Ops, No One Else Wa TC@Y – per my long-winded text above. Alphaclaw11Per Wayo. Also i do think thiere are ways for people to lose power but being a syop or crat means you are trusted so you should be in trusted in chat, but that doesnt mean being DE-OPed means being DE-Sysops but like i said before, being a sysop means you are trusted.One more thing THis doesnt mean being a sysop means you ahve to go on chat. I do thing that good OP who arent Sysops should stay OPed since they help. GrodenE T C El Per all. Keep Separated Power Groups ~Uniju(T-C-E) - As I've stated many many many other times, the chat and forum always seem to be falling apart because their ops/mods are only sysops, so the mods/ops need to both be sysops, and active on that sub-site. However, recently the chat has got these "back-up ops", which are the only thing keeping the chat from being a spam pit around, like... Through almost all of the late morning, through sometime in the after noon, the ops tend to be lacking. While more trusted users who become back-up ops tend to still come on during this time. The Back-up ops are really the only thing keeping this together, you just dislike them because you don't get any time to break rules on chat anymore. Chaos NEEDS MOAR NINJI - Look, I may be biased because I'm a back-up, but I'm on half the time regular ops aren't. During the course of the day that I am on, operators of the chat usually come around 6:00 PM EST. That's pretty late, considering many Users get on around 2:00 PM EST - 3:00 PM EST. Many times, it is just the other back-up operators and I keeping control. If there are trustworthy Users, why not let them be Operators? It makes no sense, considering the chat is pretty seperate to the Wiki. Look, I don't care if I'm demoted. I just feel that Back-up Ops should be around. I also agree with DP's idea of limiting the amount of them. Comments Before I get any complaints / flames, this is NOT a cheap way for me to return to an operator rank. Note that by the proposal if I go awry in chat again, I will also lose something I covet very much: maintaining & improving this wiki with my powers here. This could very well fall flat, but I feel it necessary to finally get a consensus; it's high time we put all disputes of chat to rest. Wa TC@Y 20:25, 28 January 2008 (EST) I must disagree with the back-up Op removal. However, I am not opposed to limiting them. I believe we should ONLY have two trustworthy back-up Ops. After all, Steve has recently given Uniju and Shroobario 100 level Op powers on chat, but Uni recently cursed like crazy, as well as flame others. Not that I'm flaming Uni or anything, I just don't trust Uni as a back-up Op, neither do I trust Shrooby. We just need more trustworthy Users, like Purple Yoshi or ChaosNinji. My Bloody Valentine Let it be noted that you already made this, Wayoshi. It failed, remember? Chaos NEEDS MOAR NINJI I feel that there should be another answerAlphaclaw11read my comment where i voted What if the active Sysops were to take a vote before the creation of any back-up operator? That seems fair, considering you said that the back-ups were created without consensus. Chaos NEEDS MOAR NINJI Miscellaneous Character Stats and Descriptions I find it rather odd that semi-minor characters such as Daisy and Waluigi have extremely detailed stats and character descriptions from recent spinoff games such as Mario Party DS and Mario Superstar Baseball while main characters such as Mario and Wario have very vague stats and no descriptions for games such as Mario Party DS. It seems like a minor complaint, but for the Super Mario Wiki, it seems kind of unfair and silly not to include thorough stats for everyone, especially main characters such as those mentioned. For those who can not find out for themselves (such as myself), the Mario Wiki should definitely include the information to live up to its reputation as a thorough database. All who support should be for attempting to locate these stats or finding one who is able to. Proposer: Have A Rotten Day! Deadline: January 28, 2008, 17:00 Support Have A Rotten Day - Per myself Glitchman (talk · contribs) Per Have a Rotten Day! Oppose Comments The main reason for that, is 'cos Daisy and Waluigi's articles are hit by incredibly over-zealous fanboys, who put all their time to that one article. That's awesome for us, cos' we need all the info we can get, but other articles are ignored in this way. I'm only commenting to give the reason why this has happened, sorry. My Bloody Valentine So, anyway, what exactly are we Supporting and Opposing here? I don't think this is even proposal-worthy, yes it's odd, but like Pokemon Dp said, some off our users here are *ahem*, more dedicated to certain characters. --Blitzwing 18:02, 22 January 2008 (EST) Couldn't Have a Rotten Day just do it himself? Even if this passes the only thing that will change is that he will HAVE to do it himself. Not just could. Stumpers! 18:12, 22 January 2008 (EST) Good point, Stumpers. He says in his proposal that he does not own all of the Mario sports title and cannot find all of the info by himself, but if the proposal passes he's going to have to do it anyway. Glitchman (talk · contribs) 18:54, 22 January 2008 (PT) No, I totally agree with you guys. I'm not horrendously concerned over this, I just think that when it comes to stats that people have obviously gotten hold of, that they should include all of the characters over time. I really have been trying to locate the info myself and trying to locate people I know who may have the information but I haven't really met anyone who has the info. I am more than willing to include the info myself, I just don't own the games or know anyone who does. If I get the info, I'd be happy to personally apply it to the proper pages. I just really feel that when it comes to information like that, that all characters need to be included, regardless of popularity, in order to fufill the Mario Wiki's reputation as a thorough database. Have A Rotten Day! The proposal page is for things that can alter the working of the MarioWiki (New rules, deleting/merging an article), if you think some articles lack informations, there's the Trouble Center --Blitzwing 06:42, 25 January 2008 (EST) Ugh, are you serious? Just because CERTAIN PEOPLE [ugh-huh, ME!] were willing to do it for characters they liked doesn't mean other characters are by your opinion MORE deserving of the same information. I don't have to add info to certain pages if I don't feel like it. I can indeed do this with ease, it's just that no one seems to care as much about MArio and Luigi's spin-off information as they do for characters like (i.e Waluigi et Daisy). I have no problem with doing this, it's just frustrating the way you put it. Fixitup Okay.. then do it please. Have A Rotten Day! I'm in the middle of it. :P Nyeh! Fixitup Yoshi and Wario entries Fellow Kids Next Door operatives I mean MarioWiki users, :P; I just found out an issue that lasts just about when the wiki has started to this very day... Do you notice something missing in the lists such as Characters, Places, Items, Species, Allies and Enemies? If not, it would be the Yoshi and Wario entries. Just look, those entries are long forgotten and unlisted, (excluding DK entries). You can barely see some of the entries in those lists, and besides, they are linked through articles instead of lists sadly, :(. Come on, this is the Super Mario Wiki! In the last note, if neither of those two choices are effected, then Wayoshi would make a DPL code to list Yoshi and Wario entries in the Wiki Maintenance in such case. Proposer: RAP... My very first proposal! Deadline: February 3, 2008, 15:00 Include the Yoshi and Wario entries in those primary lists RAP... I think it would be better if those entries belong in the same list instead of seperately, IMO. GreenKoopa-Don't jump on mee! How on earth could anyone miss that?! Walkazo - Seeing as these main lists are simply called Places etc. instead of Mario Places than it would make sence that all the places were listed there. If the crossover things are already in these lists, we should just stick everything else in there too and make it a done deal. An obscenely large list will be a tad onerous to navigate, but it will be no worse than the lack of lists we have now (Donkey Kong Places but no Yoshi Places or Wario Places?). Alphaclaw11It would be easier and yoshi and wario games first were mario games so they are related game wise.And if they are included in the wiki overall then they should be in the overall lists. Red.TideI've always said that the Wario and Yoshi series, particularly the Yoshi series, aren't really distinct series from the Mario series. Make a list for Yoshi and Wario entries seperately Comments Talking about Donkey Kong Characters etc.? Considering that Crossover (a.k.a. Smash Bros.) characters are already included in the "mainstream" lists, it's a bit inconvenient. But it is here. - Cobold (talk · contribs) 05:35, 27 January 2008 (EST) Maybe it's because I'm reading this at 3am, but I'm not seeing the problem. If they are missing from lists, add them. Don't need a proposal for that. -- Chris 06:07, 27 January 2008 (EST) Sadly some people don't tend to add the other types of entries into those lists just because they belong to the Yoshi series or even the Wario series. RAP... And besides, I think SoS perviously suggested spliting up into other lists, and sofourth with my conversion... Source - Talk: Places