|
|
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
| <center>http://i143.photobucket.com/albums/r149/Deadringerforlove/dessert1.jpg</center>
| | #redirect[[User:WarioLoaf]] |
| <br clear="all">
| |
| {| align="center" style="width: 85%; background-color: #f1f1de; border: 2px solid #996; padding: 5px; color:black"
| |
| |'''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 [[Wikipedia:Wikipedia:Consensus|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 [[/Archive|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 using the code <nowiki>{{user|</nowiki>''User name''<nowiki>}}</nowiki>.
| |
| | |
| This page observes the [[MarioWiki:No-Signature Policy|No-Signature Policy]].
| |
| | |
| <h2 style="color:black">How To</h2>
| |
| #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.
| |
| #"<nowiki># </nowiki>" should be added under the last vote of each support/oppose section to show another blank line.
| |
| #All proposals that end up in a tie will be extended for another week.
| |
| #If a proposal has more than ten votes, it can only pass or fail by a margin of '''three''' votes. If a proposal reaches the deadline and the total number of votes for each option differ by two or less votes, the deadline will be extended for another week.
| |
| #Any proposal that has three votes or less at deadline will automatically be listed as "[[Wikipedia:Quorum|NO QUORUM]]." The original proposer then has the option to relist said proposal to generate more discussion.
| |
| #No proposal can overturn the decision of a previous proposal that is less than '''4 weeks''' ('''28 days''') old.
| |
| #Proposals can only be rewritten or deleted by their proposer within the first three days of their creation. However, the proposer can request that their proposal be deleted by a [[MarioWiki:Administrators|Sysop]] at any time, provided they have a valid reason for it.
| |
| #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.
| |
| #There shouldn't be proposals about creating articles on a underrepresented or completely absent subject, unless there is major disagreement about whether the content should be included. To organize efforts about completing articles on missing subjects, try creating a [[MarioWiki:PipeProject|PipeProject]].
| |
| #Proposals can not be made about [[MarioWiki:Administrators|System Operator]] promotions and demotions. Sysops can only be promoted and demoted by the will of [[MarioWiki:Bureaucrats|Bureaucrats]].
| |
| #If the Sysops 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.
| |
| #No joke proposals. Proposals are serious wiki matters, and should be handled professionally. Joke proposals will be deleted on sight.
| |
| | |
| The times are in EDT (UTC -4:00), and are set so that the user is more likely to be online at those times (after work/school, weekend nights). 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 a minute later, the deadline is a day plus 15 hours (Sunday), as opposed to a day minus 4 hours.
| |
| | |
| __TOC__
| |
| | |
| <center><span style="font-size:200%">CURRENTLY: '''{{LOCALTIME}}, {{LOCALDAY}} {{LOCALMONTHNAME}} {{LOCALYEAR}} (EDT)'''</span></center>
| |
| | |
| ==New Features==
| |
| ===Create spoiler boxes===
| |
| Over on a couple wikis, they have boxes that toggle(show/hide) that contain any information that may give away the ending plot. I propose that we do the same thing. That way, people can't say that they just figured out the entire plot of the game without a warning. Now I know that we already have those warning things, but my eyes tend to linger and other people's probably do too. I would need lots of help to create and place these if this proposal goes through. So if it does, help would be appreciated.
| |
| | |
| '''Proposer''': {{User|Electrobomber}}<br>
| |
| '''Deadline''': September 7, 2009, 17:00
| |
| | |
| ====Support====
| |
| #{{User|Electrobomber}} Per above
| |
| #{{User|Arend}} I actually think it's a good idea, and have no idea why people oppose for this. Per Electrobomber.
| |
| | |
| ====Oppose====
| |
| #{{User|Walkazo}} - It's too much hassle. Really, people should ''expect'' spoilers if they read ''anything'' on the Internet; the fact that we even bother warning them puts us ahead of the vast majority of websites out there (not to mention people who troll forums ''just'' to spoil plots). Our job is to deliver all the facts we can, and bending over backwards to accommodate people who ''don't'' want all the facts is counter-productive.
| |
| #{{User|Stooben Rooben}} - Per Walkazo.
| |
| #{{User|Yoshario}}}: Per Walkazo
| |
| #{{User|Marioguy1}} - Wow, Walkazo's making a lot of sense today, first that comment and now this. Per Her.
| |
| #{{User|Time Q}}: Per Walkazo. To be honest, even the spoiler templates we have seem sort of unnecessary to me. I mean, we're an encyclopedia trying to cover all ''Mario''-related stuff, and of course this includes spoilers as well. Putting those templates in articles seems unencyclopedic to me. Just my two cents... anyway, no need for even more spoiler warnings.
| |
| #{{User|Grandy02}}: Per all. I also agree with Time Q, I don't find those spoiler templates useful, either.
| |
| #{{User|Itachi 96}}: Per all.
| |
| #{{User|Pie Shroom}} Per Azzy.
| |
| #{{User|P. Trainer}} Per Walkazo
| |
| #{{User|T.c.w7468}} Per Walkazo. | |
| | |
| ====Comments====
| |
| we already have them :) {{tem|spoiler}} {{user|Tucayo}}
| |
| :<s>So, if the wiki has them... are they in use?</s> Sorry, i checked. They are.- {{user|Edofenrir}}
| |
| ::Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think he's not talking about the {{tem|spoiler}}-thingies, but about something that hides the spoiling contents from the visitors eyes and reveals it when clicked on. - {{User|Edofenrir}}
| |
| :::Yes, you're exactly right, Edofenrir. The spoiler template is "those warning things", as mentioned in the proposal; Electrobomber is suggesting we put the spoiling information in show/hide boxes. - {{User|Walkazo}}
| |
| ::::oh, sorry :embarassed: i didnt understad the proposal ver good :/ {{user|Tucayo}}
| |
| ::::: there, is the proposal a little easier to understand now? {{User|Electrobomber}}
| |
| | |
| ==Removals==
| |
| ''None at the moment.''
| |
| | |
| ==Splits & Merges==
| |
| ''None at the moment.''
| |
| | |
| ==Changes==
| |
| ===Even Out Removal Votes===
| |
| OK, I am very annoyed when I see an inconsistency on a wiki and as I look at the proposals page and the FA page, I notice that there is an inconsistency in the number of votes it takes to remove the invalid votes. On the proposals page, it takes three and on the FA page it takes five, why the two-number difference? If this proposal passes, those numbers will even out so that there is one universal number so that [[User:Marioguy1|someone]] doesn't mess up like that guy :( Anyways, I've created three voting groups just in case someone wants one but not the other.
| |
| | |
| '''Proposer:''' {{User|Marioguy1}}<br>
| |
| '''Deadline:''' Thursday September 10<sup>th</sup>, 2009 (17:00.00)
| |
| | |
| ====Change FA Number====
| |
| #{{User|Marioguy1}} - The FA Number is higher so making it lower would help to squish out those fan-votes because people love someone. On the proposal page I doubt there would be fan-votes. Oh yes and when this proposal ends, if even one of the numbers changes, I want it marked as a success (you know <font color="green">green</font>).
| |
| #{{user|Edofenrir}} - I support this, but only if the removal-votes have to be accompanied by a strong reason to be valid (like it is now). I think three strong reasons are enough.
| |
| #{{user|Tucayo}} - Per, though i am of the idea that we should delete ALL fan votes without going through this....
| |
| #{{User|T.c.w7468}} Per all. <s>But what are we going to change the number to? Four?</s> Oh okay. I'm keeping this vote though. Three sounds more reasonable than five. And Per Time Q, too.
| |
| #{{User|Pie Shroom}} Per MG1.
| |
| #{{User|Timmy Tim}} Sounds fair. FIs need two, but that's too little in my opinion.
| |
| #{{User|Randoman123456789}} - Per Marioguy1.
| |
| #{{User|Time Q}}: There's no reason for having two different numbers, so it's a good idea to even them out. Three seems like a reasonable number: experience has shown that there are hardly ever 5 users that vote for the removal of an FA vote. Oh, and just to clarify: Current rules state that one sysop must be among the voters that vote for the removal of an FA vote. This, of course, should stay the same.
| |
| #{{User|P. Trainer}} Per all.
| |
| #{{user|Yoshario}} – Per all
| |
| | |
| ====Change Proposal Number====
| |
| | |
| ====Don't Change Numbers====
| |
| | |
| ====Comments====
| |
| @T.c.w7468: I think the proposer splitted the support section into two to avoid problems with this question. You just voted for decreasing both numbers of neccessary removal votes to 3. If you had picked the other support category, you would have voted for increasing both numbers of necessary removal votes to five ;3 - {{User|Edofenrir}}
| |
| :Unless I wrote to change the rule it won't be changed. {{User|Marioguy1}}
| |
| ::Timmy Tim: I would of included FIs but do you know how many headers that would take? {{User|Marioguy1}}
| |
| :::You can't vote for the removal of FI votes. {{User|Time Q}}
| |
| ::::I know, I was just saying, it was the same on the vote page too, before we canned it. I reckon that three is a good number for proposals and FAs. {{User|Timmy Tim}}
| |
| | |
| ===Creations & Deletions===
| |
| OK, this proposal is just to test out whether or not this idea is worth proposing. Anyhow, my proposal is to make a section on this page called Creations & Deletions to replace the section Removals. This way there will be more space so that to propose, say a Q&A Page, you won't have to put it under Miscellaneous. This could also help with those old proposals of creating and deleting committees. So that's basically it, vote now!
| |
| | |
| '''Proposer:''' {{User|Marioguy1}}<br>
| |
| '''Deadline:''' Friday September 11<sup>th</sup>, 2009 (20:00.00)
| |
| | |
| ====Create Section====
| |
| #{{User|Marioguy1}} - OK, I think I made my point clear...
| |
| | |
| ====Don't Create Section====
| |
| | |
| ====Comments====
| |
| Couldn't the "New Features" section be used for creating something? –{{User|Yoshario}}
| |
| :And removals for deletes {{user|Tucayo}}
| |
| | |
| ==Miscellaneous==
| |
| ''None at the moment.
| |
| | |
| <!-- Please do not remove, archive or place comments below this message. -->
| |
|
| |
