|
|
| Line 11: |
Line 11: |
|
| |
|
| ==Changes== | | ==Changes== |
| ===Determine coverage status of ''Tetris'' (NES) and ''F-1 Race'' (Game Boy)===
| | ''None at the moment.'' |
| This is primarily based on our current coverage of ''[[Alleyway]]'', ''[[Baseball]]'', and ''[[Pinball (game)|Pinball]]'', which have decidedly low actual ''Mario''-centric content but are given a (relatively) large amount of coverage regardless. In both [https://youtu.be/-FAzHyXZPm0 the (official) NES version of ''Tetris''] and [https://youtu.be/puPPNaw0PKo the Game Boy version of ''F-1 Race''] (the origin of which has [[Famicom Grand Prix: F1 Race|a ''Super Mario'' sequel]]), a troupe of Nintendo characters - mostly ''Super Mario'' ones - appear on congratulatory screens, being part of a gradually expanding band in the former and individually appearing waving among the grid girls between races (and then all in a row at the end) in the latter. They are made up of Mario, Luigi, Toad, Princess, Donkey Kong, and Bowser, intermixed with Link, Samus, and Pit. What I want to determine here is whether we follow the above examples and give these articles despite the small nature of the appearances, and if so what level of coverage is considered.
| |
| | |
| '''Proposer:''' {{user|Doc von Schmeltwick}}<br>
| |
| '''Deadline:''' July 28, 2023, 23:59 GMT
| |
| | |
| ====Full appearance (articles get full coverage)====
| |
| | |
| | |
| ====Guest appearance (articles get limited coverage)====
| |
| <s>#{{User|Pseudo}} These most definitely seem to have the Mario characters in them, though only in a minor appearance. I'm in support.</s>
| |
| | |
| ====Cameo (no articles; unchanged)====
| |
| #{{User|CoolNintendo}}: Opposing because the reason why those few things got full coverage is because mario is physically playable in them to some capacity. these two are only passerby cameos and a perfect example of what would go onto a List of mario References article
| |
| #{{User|Axis}} ''Alleyway'': you play as Mario for the whole game, ''Baseball'': US manual description: ''Has a strong cleanup and ace, MARIO. One offensive team!'', and ''Pinball'': you also play as Mario, at least on Screen C, but it's very Mario-themed, so it gave it a boost. These two games on the other hand, only have Mario characters appearing among other non-Mario characters at the end screen, they serve no gameplay purpose and can be easily cut out, I don't see how this is any different than ''Punch-Out!!'' for NES.
| |
| #{{User|Camwoodstock}} If we had still existed in the world where Qix on Game Boy had its article, we'd be inclined to agree. Unfortunately, that was merged awhile ago, and much for the same reasons that splitting this article is being opposed. Unfortunately, it'd take an overt change to how we handle first-party cameos for a split like this to make any sense; that is a debate for another day, though, and if you ''really'' must do it now... Do it up on the [[List of references in Nintendo video games]] article, not an already in-progress proposal. ;P
| |
| #{{User|Hewer}} Per all.
| |
| #{{User|MegaBowser64}} Per.
| |
| #{{User|Pseudo}} Upon seeing these other examples given that contain cameos on par with this, I'm inclined to think these don't need their own articles. They should definitely be added to the List of references page though, per Camwoodstock.
| |
| #{{User|Waluigi Time}} Per all.
| |
| #{{User|TheFlameChomp}} Per all.
| |
| #{{User|ThePowerPlayer}} Per all.
| |
| #{{User|TheUndescribableGhost}} While the appearances are indeed pretty obvious, there are just there for a simple gag and doesn't really impact the games very well in terms of gameplay or plot.
| |
| | |
| ====Comments====
| |
| | |
| ===Decide how to name level articles for ''Mario vs. Donkey Kong 2: March of the Minis'' and ''Mario vs. Donkey Kong: Minis March Again!''===
| |
| | |
| Yesterday, a [[:Template:Move|move template]] was added to the [[Spooky Attic]] level articles for ''[[Mario vs. Donkey Kong 2: March of the Minis]]'' by [[User:LinkTheLefty|LinkTheLefty]], but no active discussion or proposal was established, which is a case of [[MarioWiki:Proposals/Archive/61#Discourage_drive-by_templating_part_2|drive-by templating]]. This proposal aims to remedy that situation.
| |
| | |
| In ''Mario vs. Donkey Kong 2: March of the Minis'', the level name is displayed on the [[:File:MvsDK2 Mushroom Mayhem.png|floor selection screen]], in the format "Room X-Y" where X is the floor number and Y is the room number; this format is also displayed on the [[Nintendo DS]] system's top screen during a level. However, as the level fades in, the level name is displayed in a different format, "Floor X Room Y", alongside the message "Ready To Go!". Thus, two different in-game names are being used for the same level, for each standard level in the game. Notably, this usage of two different names happens in an identical manner in ''[[Mario vs. Donkey Kong: Minis March Again!]]''.
| |
| | |
| Deciding which of these formats to use for naming levels is a difficult case, since they would both take the highest possible priority under [[MarioWiki:Naming|naming guidelines]], and it doesn't seem like either game gives one of the formats more notability than the other. LinkTheLefty's argument in adding the move templates was that the format "Floor X Room Y" is the full name of the subject. However, the wiki's naming guidelines state that "the name of an article should correspond to the '''most commonly used English name''' of the subject". The format "Room X-Y" is used twice per level in ''March of the Minis'' and three times per level in ''Minis March Again!'': on the level selection screen ''and'' during a level in both games, as well as on the level results screen in ''Minis March Again!'' only. This is as opposed to the format "Floor X Room Y", which is only used once per level as it fades into view. That difference leads me to treat naming these articles like [[Professor E. Gadd]], where we no longer name the article {{fake link|Professor Elvin Gadd}} because his full name is much less commonly used than the shortened version. Additionally, the format "X-Y" maintains consistency with not only the vast majority of side-scrolling ''[[Super Mario (franchise)|Super Mario]]'' levels, but other levels in the ''[[Mario vs. Donkey Kong (series)|Mario vs. Donkey Kong]]'' series as well, such as [[Area 1-1]]. Therefore, I would support keeping the naming format for these levels as is, although I can see a convincing argument being made for changing the names instead.
| |
| | |
| I've given this proposal four options, since this may not be an all-or-nothing decision, especially if new evidence arises that I hadn't considered. Because both formats are official level names, whichever format is not used in the article titles will become a redirect to each level. I'd also like to note that this proposal only covers the [[:Template:MVDKMOTM levels|levels in ''March of the Minis'']] and the [[:Template:MVDKMMA levels|levels in ''Minis March Again!'']] which currently use the format "Room X-Y" in their article names. The boss levels in each game have different unique names that may or may not warrant their own proposal, and the [[Shy Guy Smash!]] levels in ''March of the Minis'' do not have unique names at all, so the boss and minigame levels do not apply to this proposal.
| |
| | |
| '''Proposer:''' {{user|ThePowerPlayer}}<br>
| |
| '''Deadline:''' July 31, 2023, 23:59 GMT
| |
| | |
| ====Continue using "Room X-Y" for both ''March of the Minis'' and ''Minis March Again!''====
| |
| #{{User|ThePowerPlayer}} Per proposal.
| |
| #{{User|Koopa con Carne}} per proposal.
| |
| #{{User|Waluigi Time}} Per all.
| |
| #{{User|MegaBowser64}} Per Waluigi Time.
| |
| | |
| ====Use "Floor X Room Y" for both ''March of the Minis'' and ''Minis March Again!''====
| |
| | |
| ====Use "Room X-Y" for ''March of the Minis'', and "Floor X Room Y" for ''Minis March Again!''====
| |
| | |
| ====Use "Floor X Room Y" for ''March of the Minis'', and "Room X-Y" for ''Minis March Again!''====
| |
| | |
| ====Comments====
| |
| When it comes to boss levels in ''Minis March Again'', [https://youtu.be/H3_zOV-I9p4?t=433 it's a bit more complicated] <small>(youtube.com)</small>. They are simply labelled "DONKEY KONG" on the level selection screen, "FLOOR X DONKEY KONG GAME" as the level fades in, and "FLOOR X DONKEY KONG" on the level results screen, with none of these being given any form of priority in-game; in this same respect, the analogues for regular levels are "ROOM X-Y", "FLOOR X ROOM Y", and "ROOM X-Y" again. Also, unlike with regular levels, boss levels don't have their name displayed on the top screen during gameplay. {{User:Koopa con Carne/Sig}} 14:46, July 24, 2023 (EDT)
| |
| :Apologies for not bringing that up; I was aware of this, but I thought it to be irrelevant to the specific topic of the proposal, which focuses on level names that are currently titled "Room X-Y". It's worth noting that ''March of the Minis'' [https://youtu.be/1yQ97YZyY9w?t=686 also uses different names] <small>(youtube.com)</small> for its boss levels: they are labeled generically as "BOSS - DK" on the level selection screen, and uniquely as "BOSS GAME X" as the level fades in, but no level title is displayed on the results screen for any level in that game. I've modified the proposal to reflect this additional information. {{User:ThePowerPlayer/sig}} 16:53, July 24, 2023 (EDT)
| |
| | |
| This is good info compiled in one place, and I honestly forgot that ''Minis March Again!'' used mostly the same level format anyway. My other issue is that each name set comes from different spots, and the longer titles of the regular levels would be more internally consistent with where the ''March of the Minis'' boss levels come from (which are right now, for all intents and purposes, invoking [[MarioWiki talk:Naming|source priority exception]] against identical common-use - with the exception of the two "Hidden Boss" levels that are both covered within the "DK's Hideout" article). Any abbreviations tend to go to the level code section in the [[template:level infobox|level infobox]]. I know this proposal isn't addressing the boss levels, but I'd prefer it taken care of all at once, especially since the second game's boss levels look like they currently take their titles from yet another game screen. It seems like it became somewhat random. (And about that other thing: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M9kRewzz_pM Yeah I get it.)] [[User:LinkTheLefty|LinkTheLefty]] ([[User talk:LinkTheLefty|talk]]) 19:04, July 24, 2023 (EDT)
| |
| :My reasoning for why I didn't include the boss level articles is not only because it would force the proposal to include more voting options and make it unnecessarily complicated, but because the boss levels are a separate case, where the ideal title to use for each level is generally more clear.<br>For the names of the first eight boss levels in ''March of the Minis'' (Boss Game 1 through Boss Game 8), I'm not sure how they invoke any source priority exception, because all of the names discussed above are exclusively found in the games, which is always the highest priority source. For what it's worth, the [https://www.nintendo.com/consumer/gameslist/manuals/DS_Mario_vs_Donkey_Kong_March_of_the_Minis.pdf North American] and [https://fs-prod-cdn.nintendo-europe.com/media/downloads/games_8/emanuals/nintendo_ds_21/Manual_NintendoDS_MarioVsDonkeyKong2MarchOfTheMinis_EN.pdf European] instruction manuals refer to all of the boss levels generically as "DK stages" on page 18 and "DK levels" on page 16, respectively. Those are the only sources that would share a tier of priority with the in-game names, meaning that for the levels currently titled "Boss Game X", the ''only'' unique names for those levels are in the "Boss Game X" format: [[User talk:ThePowerPlayer#DK boss stage names|I was corrected when I claimed otherwise]]. The regular levels in either game are a different case, because they have ''two'' formats that designate each level with unique numbers, which are "Room X-Y" and "Floor X Room Y".<br>For the "Hidden Boss" levels in [[DK's Hideout]], not only do they have clear in-game level names of B1 and B2, but they can both be covered at once on the DK's Hideout article anyway. The more interesting case is the level called "Final Boss" on the [[Roof (Mario vs. Donkey Kong 2: March of the Minis)|roof]], which is indeed the name of the floor according to both instruction booklets. "Final Boss" is the only level on that floor, so the article covering both the floor and level should remain "Roof". Aside from that clear-cut evidence, naming the article "Final Boss" would be silly and/or confusing, because that term could apply to any final boss. Finally, for the boss levels in ''Minis March Again!'', although those levels do have two unique names for each level ("FLOOR X DONKEY KONG GAME" as the level fades in and "FLOOR X DONKEY KONG" on the level results screen), the name currently used for those levels is "Floor X Donkey Kong". This is in fact consistent with the "Room X-Y" format for standard levels, which is also used on the level results screen: compare the [https://youtu.be/H3_zOV-I9p4?t=109 Room 1-1 results screen] with the [https://youtu.be/H3_zOV-I9p4?t=514 Floor 1 Donkey Kong results screen] <small>(youtube.com)</small>. Once again, the only reason the ''March of the Minis'' boss level articles are named "Boss Game X" is because there is no other unique name for them whatsoever, and they certainly shouldn't all be named "BOSS - DK" with the floor name as an identifier when the "BOSS GAME X" text is present with the same source priority. If this is still an issue of contention, I'll happily make a second proposal one week from when this proposal was created, but as I mentioned, I want to keep this proposal's voting options as simple as possible. {{User:ThePowerPlayer/sig}} 16:58, July 25, 2023 (EDT)
| |
| ::Extra emphasis should be placed on the word "unique" here, so yes, from my understanding, the bosses do edge away from the "most commonly used" labels, hence, an exception is made. I feel like I should make a little table here to show what I mean by picking and choosing from different name sets. All I'm pointing out is that the full titles would be more consistent with where we take the names for the boss levels in ''March of the Minis'' (''Minis March Again!'' can come later). But if you'd rather focus on the regular levels: honestly, I've been wondering a bit recently if "most common in-game name" would necessarily be the optimal approach in every single case, as seen in my hesitation [[MarioWiki:Proposals/Archive/62#Comments 8|here]]. If we were to go beyond this in the strictest sense, we might have to re-evaluate things like the ''Super Mario Bros. 3'' and ''Mario & Wario'' worlds, and consider giving them the series-standard world-number-and-identifiers. After all, that would align with the uniform approach of the shorter names used in this very proposal, right? That these are up to proposals means we have room to bend the rules a bit, you understand. [[User:LinkTheLefty|LinkTheLefty]] ([[User talk:LinkTheLefty|talk]]) 17:50, July 25, 2023 (EDT)
| |
| :::Doesn't the "most commonly used name" thing just refer to American English over British English? That's definitely the impression I get from how the policy is worded. {{User:Hewer/sig}} 18:29, July 25, 2023 (EDT)
| |
| :::I've thought about this some more, and I've also made a [[User:ThePowerPlayer/Sandbox#Mario vs. Donkey Kong series level names table|reference table]] to use for any further discussion. I will concede that the "most commonly used name" rule on MarioWiki:Naming most likely was not meant to apply to discrepancies within the North American version of a single game, and that the outcomes of many proposals inherently bend the rules on a case-by-case basis; however, I still stand by every other point I make in the proposal and comments above, including the point about how "Room X-Y" maintains consistency with other games. I do recognize that according to the reference table I made, for ''March of the Minis'' specifically, the current format that article titles use for normal and boss levels respectively are not consistent with each other; however, there are only two options that would make them consistent. The first is using the generic title "BOSS - DK" for all of the first eight boss levels, which is an absurd approach that would necessitate separate identifiers for all eight articles. The second is using "Floor X Room Y" for the regular levels and "Boss Game X" for the boss levels, and I do see this as a valid option. However, regardless of whether or not the "most commonly used name" rule applies here, I can't ignore the consistency with the names of levels in other games, even in the same series, that the "Room X-Y" format provides. I have some contention with your point about the ''Super Mario Bros. 3'' and ''Mario & Wario'' worlds, because the article names we currently use are clearly unique names that have some thought put into them, which is why we default to using them. Case in point: the articles for [[Mushroom Mayhem]] and [[Mini Mayhem]] are not named "Floor 1", despite that name being more prominently featured on the level selection screen, and the unique names being subtitles on each floor. In contrast, "Floor X Room Y" feels less unique and more like a needlessly complex way to describe the same floor-and-room number formatting as "Room X-Y", just like "Floor X Donkey Kong Game" in ''Minis March Again!'' is more needlessly complex than "Floor X Donkey Kong". On that topic, for ''Minis March Again!'', the normal and boss level article titles ''are'' consistent with each other, and I see no good reason to change either of them. I'm probably going to make a separate proposal for the boss level articles anyway, just to establish a set guideline, but let me know your current thoughts on this. {{User:ThePowerPlayer/sig}} 23:07, July 29, 2023 (EDT)
| |
|
| |
|
| ==Miscellaneous== | | ==Miscellaneous== |
| ''None at the moment.'' | | ''None at the moment.'' |
|
Current time:
Wednesday, May 29th, 11:20 GMT
|
|
Proposals can be new features (such as an extension), the removal of previously-added features that have tired out, or new policies that must be approved via consensus before any action is taken.
- "Vote" periods last for one week.
- Any user can support or oppose, but must have a strong reason for doing so (not, e.g., "I like this idea!").
- All proposals must be approved by a majority of voters, including proposals with more than two options.
- For past proposals, see the proposal archive and the talk page proposal archive.
|
A proposal section works like a discussion page: comments are brought up and replied to using indents (colons, such as : or ::::) and all edits are signed using the code {{User|User name}}.
How to
Rules
- If users have an idea about improving the wiki or managing its community, but feel that they need community approval before acting upon that idea, they may make a proposal about it. They must have a strong argument supporting their idea and be willing to discuss it in detail with the other users, who will then vote about whether or not they think the idea should be used. Proposals should include links to all relevant pages and writing guidelines. Proposals must include a link to the draft page. Any pages that would be largely affected by the proposal should be marked with {{proposal notice}}.
- Only registered, autoconfirmed users can create, comment in, or vote on proposals and talk page proposals. Users may vote for more than one option, but they may not vote for every option available.
- Proposals end at the end of the day (23:59) one week after voting starts, except for writing guidelines and talk page proposals, which run for two weeks (all times GMT).
- For example, if a proposal is added at any time on Monday, August 1, 2011, the voting starts immediately and the deadline is one week later on Monday, August 8, at 23:59 GMT.
- Every vote should have a strong, sensible reason accompanying it. Agreeing with a previously mentioned reason given by another user is accepted (including "per" votes), but tangential comments, heavy sarcasm, and other misleading or irrelevant quips are just as invalid as providing no reason at all.
- Users who feel that certain votes were cast in bad faith or which truly have no merit can address the votes in the comments section. Users can ask a voter to clarify their position, point out mistakes or flaws in their arguments, or call for the outright removal of the vote if it lacks sufficient reasoning. Users may not remove or alter the content of anyone else's votes. Voters can remove or rewrite their own vote at any time, but the final decision to remove another user's vote lies solely with the administrators.
- Users can also use the comments section to bring up any concerns or mistakes in regards to the proposal itself. In such cases, it's important the proposer addresses any concerns raised as soon as possible. Even if the supporting side might be winning by a wide margin, that should be no reason for such questions to be left unanswered. They may point out any missing details that might have been overlooked by the proposer, so it's a good idea as the proposer to check them frequently to achieve the most accurate outcome possible.
- If a user makes a vote and is subsequently blocked for any amount of time, their vote is removed. However, if the block ends before the proposal ends, then the user in question holds the right to re-cast their vote. If a proposer is blocked, their vote is removed and "(banned)" is added next to their name in the "Proposer:" line of the proposal, which runs until its deadline as normal. If the proposal passes, it falls to the supporters of the idea to enact any changes in a timely manner.
- No proposal can overturn the decision of a previous proposal that is less than 4 weeks (28 days) old.
- Any proposal where none of the options have at least four votes will be extended for another week. If after three extensions, no options have at least four votes, the proposal will be listed as "NO QUORUM." The original proposer then has the option to relist said proposal to generate more discussion.
- All proposals that end up in a tie will be extended for another week. Proposals with more than two options must also be extended another week if any single option does not have a majority support: i.e. more than half of the total number of voters must appear in a single voting option, rather than one option simply having more votes than the other options.
- If a proposal with only two voting options has more than ten votes, it can only pass or fail with a margin of at least three votes, otherwise the deadline will be extended for another week as if no majority was reached at all.
- Proposals can only be extended up to three times. If a consensus has not been reached by the fourth deadline, the proposal fails and can only be re-proposed after four weeks, at the earliest.
- All proposals are archived. The original proposer must take action accordingly if the outcome of the proposal dictates it. If it requires the help of an administrator, the proposer can ask for that help.
- If the administrators deem a proposal unnecessary or potentially detrimental to the upkeep of the Super Mario Wiki, they have the right to remove it at any time.
- Proposals can only be rewritten or deleted by their proposer within the first three days of their creation (six days for talk page proposals). However, proposers can request that their proposal be deleted by an administrator at any time, provided they have a valid reason for it. Please note that canceled proposals must also be archived.
- Unless there is major disagreement about whether certain content should be included, there should not be proposals about creating, expanding, rewriting or otherwise fixing up pages. To organize efforts about improving articles on neglected or completely missing subjects, try setting up a collaboration thread on the forums.
- Proposals cannot be made about promotions and demotions. Users can only be promoted and demoted by the will of the administration.
- No joke proposals. Proposals are serious wiki matters and should be handled professionally. Joke proposals will be deleted on sight.
- Proposals must have a status quo option (e.g. Oppose, Do nothing) unless the status quo itself violates policy.
Basic proposal and support/oppose format
This is an example of what your proposal must look like, if you want it to be acknowledged. If you are inexperienced or unsure how to set up this format, simply copy the following and paste it into the fitting section. Then replace the [subject] - variables with information to customize your proposal, so it says what you wish. If you insert the information, be sure to replace the whole variable including the squared brackets, so "[insert info here]" becomes "This is the inserted information", not "[This is the inserted information]". Proposals presenting multiple alternative courses of action can have more than two voting options, but what each voting section is supporting must be clearly defined. Such options should also be kept to a minimum, and if something comes up in the comments, the proposal can be amended as necessary.
===[insert a title for your proposal here]===
[describe what issue this proposal is about and what changes you think should be made to improve how the wiki handles that issue]
'''Proposer''': {{User|[enter your username here]}}<br>
'''Deadline''': [insert a deadline here, 7 days after the proposal was created (14 for writing guidelines and talk page proposals), at 23:59 GMT, in the format: "May 29, 2024, 23:59 GMT"]
====Support====
#{{User|[enter your username here]}} [make a statement indicating that you support your proposal]
====Oppose====
====Comments====
Users will now be able to vote on your proposal, until the set deadline is reached. Remember, you are a user as well, so you can vote on your own proposal just like the others.
To support, or oppose, just insert "#{{User|[add your username here]}}" at the bottom of the section of your choice. Just don't forget to add a valid reason for your vote behind that tag if you are voting on another user's proposal. If you are voting on your own proposal, you can just say "Per my proposal".
Talk page proposals
All proposals dealing with a single article or a specific group of articles are held on the talk page of one of the articles in question. Proposals dealing with massive amounts of splits, merges or deletions across the wiki should still be held on this page.
- For a list of all settled talk page proposals, see MarioWiki:Proposals/TPP archive and Category:Settled talk page proposals.
Rules
- All active talk page proposals must be listed below in chronological order (new proposals go at the bottom) using {{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}}.
- All rules for talk page proposals are the same as mainspace proposals (see the "How to" section above), with the exceptions made by Rules 3 and 4 as follows:
- Voting in talk page proposals will be open for two weeks, not one (all times GMT).
- For example, if a proposal is added at any time on Monday, August 1, 2011, it ends two weeks later on Monday, August 15, 2011, at 23:59 GMT.
- The talk page proposal must pertain to the article it is posted on.
- When a talk page proposal passes, it should be removed from this list and included in the list under the "Unimplemented proposals" section until the proposed changes have been enacted.
List of ongoing talk page proposals
- In Template:Species infobox, expand "Relatives" guidelines to include variant-type relationships with significant differences between species (discuss) Deadline:
May 12, 2024, 23:59 GMT Extended to May 19, 2024, 23:59 GMT Extended to May 26, 2024, 23:59 GMT
- Add a Composers Subsection to Template:Themes (discuss) Deadline: May 28, 2024, 23:59 GMT
- Split the contents of the blimp page (discuss) Deadline: May 28, 2024, 23:59 GMT
- Create a Rewrite-remove template (discuss) Deadline: May 30, 2024, 23:59 GMT
- Decide whether to redesign the Main Page (discuss) Deadline: June 1, 2024, 23:59 GMT
- Include Rainbow Coaster & Rainbow Downhill back in the Rainbow Road article (discuss) Deadline:
May 28, 2024, 23:59 GMT Extended to June 4, 2024, 23:59 GMT
- Consider Spike Top derived from both Buzzy Beetles and Spinies (discuss) Deadline: June 4, 2024, 23:59 GMT
- Merge Iron Cleft with The Iron Adonis Twins (discuss) Deadline: June 6, 2024, 23:59 GMT
- Merge Meat (object) with Meat (discuss) Deadline: June 6, 2024, 23:59 GMT
- Re-merge Frog (Yoshi's Story) with Frog (discuss) Deadline: June 7, 2024, 23:59 GMT
- Move the chef-based recipe lists (such as List of Tayce T. recipes) to game-based ones (discuss) Deadline: June 9, 2024, 23:59 GMT
- Merge the corresponding chef-named recipes (discuss) Deadline: June 9, 2024, 23:59 GMT
- Merge Silver Credit and Gold Credit to Silver Card and Golden Card, respectively (discuss) Deadline: June 9, 2024, 23:59 GMT
- Move Moo Moo back to cow (discuss) Deadline: June 10, 2024, 23:59 GMT
- Split Samus from List of fighters debuting in Super Smash Bros. (discuss) Deadline: June 11, 2024, 23:59 GMT
Unimplemented proposals
Proposals
- ^Note: This has yet to be done with with several non–Super Mario fighters who still have their own page; namely, Banjo, Fox, Inkling, Isabelle, Kirby, Link, Mega Man, Pac-Man, R.O.B., Sonic, and Villager.
Talk page proposals
Writing guidelines
None at the moment.
New features
None at the moment.
Removals
None at the moment.
Changes
None at the moment.
Miscellaneous
None at the moment.
