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 using the code {{User|User name}}.

This page observes the No-Signature Policy.

How To

1. Actions that users feel are appropriate to have community approval first can be added by anyone, but they must have a strong argument.
2. Users then start to discuss on the issue. 24 hours after posting the proposal (rounding up or down to the next or previous full hour, respectively, is allowed), the voting period begins. (The proposer is allowed to support their proposal right after posting.) Each proposal ends at the end of the day one week after voting start. (All times GMT).
3. Every vote should have a reason accompanying it. Agreeing or seconding a previously mentioned reason given by another user is accepted.
4. 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. The voter 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.
5. All proposals that end up in a tie will be extended for another week.
6. 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.
7. Any proposal that has three votes or less at deadline will automatically be listed as "NO QUORUM." The original proposer then has the option to relist said proposal to generate more discussion.
8. No proposal can overturn the decision of a previous proposal that is less than 4 weeks (28 days) old.
9. 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 Sysop at any time, provided they have a valid reason for it.
10. 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.
11. There shouldn't be proposals about creating articles on an 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 PipeProject.
12. Proposals cannot be made about Sysop promotions and demotions. Sysops can only be promoted and demoted by the will of Bureaucrats.
13. 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.
14. No joke proposals. Proposals are serious wiki matters, and should be handled professionally. Joke proposals will be deleted on sight.

The times are in GMT, 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 Monday night at 23:59 GMT, the deadline is the night of the Tuesday of the next week at 23:59 PM. If it is posted a minute later, the deadline is 23:59 PM of the Wednesday of the next week, since midnight is considered to be part of the next day, as 00:00 AM.

Basic Proposal and Support/Oppose Format

This is an example of what your proposal should 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]".

---

===[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>
'''Voting start''': [insert a voting start time here, f.e. "January 1, 2010, 14:00". Voting start times are 24 hours after the time at which the proposal was posted, as described in Rule 2 above.]<br>
'''Deadline''': [insert a deadline here, 7 days after the voting start, at 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.

How To

1. All active talk page proposals must be listed below in chronological order (new proposals go at the bottom). All pages affected must be mentioned in the brief description, with the talk page housing the discussion linked to directly via "(Template:Fakelink)". If the proposal involved a page that is not yet made, use {{fakelink}} to communicate its title. The Deadline must also be included in the entry. 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 heading.
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. There is no 24 hour delay between the posting of a talk page proposal and the commencement of voting.
4. Talk page proposals may be closed by the proposer if both the support and the oppose sides each have fewer than five votes.
5. The talk page proposal must pertain to the article it is posted on.

List of Talk Page Proposals

• Split Ridley into Ridley and Meta Ridley (Discuss) Deadline: March 3, 2011, 23:59 GMT Extended: March 10, 2011, 23:59 GMT, March 17, 2011, 23:59 GMT, March 24, 2011, 23:59 GMT
• Merge Whispy Woods to Green Greens and Dream Land (Discuss) Deadline: March 29, 2011, 23:59 GMT
• Split the SSBB section of Mario Circuit into its own article as Template:Fakelink (Discuss) Deadline: March 29, 2011, 23:59 GMT
• Merge Squarp Hole to Squirps (Discuss) Deadline: March 31, 2011, 23:59 GMT

New Features

None at the moment.

Removals

Remove Spoiler Templates

These templates ({{spoiler}} and {{endspoiler}}) are pointless and ugly, and they should have been scrapped years ago. A database about the Mario series is obviously going to have Mario spoilers: people shouldn't need us to tell them that, and common sense can easily replace the way we're using the templates now. If you don't want ending details, stop reading once you get past the parts you already know in the story section of the game/movie/etc. page, and don't read the pages of characters (or whatever) from the game/etc. that you haven't encountered yet on your own. As for the Histories of recurring characters, almost every section is a spoiler (or has the potential to be one), but we can't possibly put templates everywhere - that'll look silly, which is probably why it hasn't been done (i.e. Bowser's page has a grand total of two sentences roped off). On these template-less articles, common sense is the only thing keeping readers from spoiling all the other games/etc. whenever they go there, and it seems to work just fine: the same principle can easily be applied to the entire database. The only times readers can be ambushed by spoilers is in sections dealing with multiple sources at one time (namely Trivia sections, but also things like "Powers and Abilities", "Personality" and even introductions), and for the most part, spoilers aren't even put on these parts! Fat lot of good that does the readers, but trying to change that would look just as bad as putting dozens of spoilers throughout History sections: the templates break up the flow of our articles badly enough as is. Putting spoilers right at the tops of pages looks bad too.

Simply put, everything is a spoiler to some extent, so we'd be wiser to wash out hands of the entire template nonsense and simply make a blanket statement on MarioWiki:About warning people that they're reading at their own risk. There's no need to put it on the Main Page: everyone should realize that the Super Mario Wiki, "with 11,389 articles on the complete Mario series", will have Mario spoilers - our coverage wouldn't be complete if that wasn't the case. It's our job to present our readers with all the info we can: how they actually go about reading it (or not) is their responsibility, not ours.

Proposer: Walkazo (talk)
Voting start: March 19, 2011 2:00 GMT
Deadline: March 26, 2011 26:59 GMT

Support

1. Walkazo (talk) - Per my proposal. I've wanted those templates removed since 2009.
2. Kaptain K. Rool (talk) - Per proposal.
3. Yoshiwaker (talk) - I agree that most things are spoilers. I've seen many spoilers that don't have the spoiler template.
4. Ultrahammer5365 (talk) - Per proposal, except I think that a spoiler statement should be put on the main page.
5. Zero777 (talk) I am Zero! At first I thought it will be a bad idea since some people may overread, but your argument is a good, complete reason, per proposal. Zero signing out.

Oppose

1. Bowser's luma (talk) No offense Walkazo, but when I read this proposal I thought it was a joke at first because I thought that it was so obvious that spoiler warnings are necessary. First off, yes, we will have spoilers, but when going through articles, people don't want to see what is going to happen at the end of a game. Putting something in the MarioWiki:About page is a good idea, but removing the spoiler templates is unnecessary. To be honest, what guest here reads MarioWiki:About before getting information from one article on what they need to know? The spoilers keep people, and remember there are younger kids here as well, from finding out what happens in the end/climax of whatever will be spoiled. Removing those templates would also mean that we have to go to every article around with them and remove them, which is very tedious. This isn't necessary enough to pass and require people to do that much work, and I believe it is a common courtesy to anyone who reads the articles here to have a small warning before reading anything that may spoil the end/climax of a game for them that they do not want to find out. Also, the fact that everything does contain spoilers doesn't warrant that we remove the templates because some are much bigger than others, and I know we are all smart enough to deem what is currently worthy of said templates and what is not. If it bothers you that much that we have two gray boxes about a centimeter big in some places on certain articles so that people don't complain that we ruined it for them, I don't know what to tell you.

Comments

So basically, you are proposing to remove "spoiler" tags because we're a complete Mario encyclopedia and people should know that since we are complete, they already know that they are warned? I'm with you. I think the title text on the main page: Welcome to the Super Mario Wiki! with (insert number here) articles on the complete Mario series should be enough to warrant a spoiler warning to anyone. BabyLuigiOnFire (talk)

Yep, that's exactly what I'm saying. - Walkazo (talk)

Would something similar to what Zelda Wiki does, such as at the top, a notice saying "this wiki contains spoilers, read at your own risk" be a good idea? I get what your saying, just trying to clear up any ambiguity. Bop1996 (talk)

Changes

Allow autoconfirmed users edit other users' userpages

Recently I have seen red links, redirect links, etc. on other peoples userpages along with deleted images and I was wondering if us autoconfirmed users can edit their userpages for errors, etc. It really doesn't make sense that only sysops get to edit this so I set up this proposal. Also, on Wikia we get to edit others' userpages along with most other wikis.

• Proposer: Kaptain K. Rool (talk)
  
• Voting start: March 18, 2011 3:30 GMT
• Deadline: March 25, 2011 3:30 GMT

Support

1. Kaptain K. Rool (talk) - Because I made this proposal.

Oppose

1. Yoshiwaker (talk) Sysops only edit userpages if they need to. This would let almost anybody put anything on your user page. It's just pointless anyway.
2. M&SG (talk) - I agree with Yoshiwaker.
3. Ultrahammer5365 (talk) - Per all. You shouldn't be allowed to mess with other people's userpages.
4. Zero777 (talk) I am Zero! Per all. Zero signing out.
5. Tails777 (talk) Per all

Comments

@Yoshiwaker: We can revert vandalism if they do put junk on our userpages and we do need to help the community too. Kaptain K. Rool (talk)

@Kaptain: Is there ever any really good reason to edit someone else's userpage? Yoshiwaker (talk)

Err yes... to replace images and fix red links. Kaptain K. Rool (talk)

I don't think that's a very good reason, but I'll just stop arguing because this would go on forever. Yoshiwaker (talk)

Miscellaneous

Captain info and Stats in Mario Strikers Charged

I'm noticing that people want the info of a captain to look like this on the captain's page (below assumes it is Diddy Kong):

• Unlocked By: Clearing the Crystal Cup
• Character Type: Playmaker
• Decription: Diddy Kong is agile and fast and can protect the ball while making incredible passes at will! But watch out, he can remove a player from the game when he get the chance!
• Mega Strike: Diddy jumps high into the air, and as the background turns orange he holds his hands together, crosses his legs and closes his eyes, as if he is chanting. He then touches it with the tip of his tail, and the ball goes flying.
• Super Ability: Red Card!
• Deke: Diddy backflips over opponents.
• Uniform: Yellow and red
• Alt. Uniform: Purple
• Team Emblem: Star logo.
• Team Number: 5
• Away Entrance: Diddy holds a banana in a threatening way while making angry sounds and hitting it against his hand.
• Home Entrance: Diddy dives down with an angry look on his face and pounds the ground quickly.
• Theme: Hindustani Classical

I think we need to shorten it to this on the page of each captain (so keep the above in this page) and on say Diddy Kong's page, change it to this.

• Character Type: Playmaker
• Super Ability: Red Card!
• Deke: Diddy backflips over opponents.

Stats

• Moving 10
• Shooting 3
• Passing 10
• Defense 3

Proposer: DK and Diddy Kong vs Bowser and Bowser Jr. (talk)
Voting start: March 13, 2011 8:00 GMT
Deadline: March 20, 2011 8:00 GMT

Support

1. DK and Diddy Kong vs Bowser and Bowser Jr. (talk) We don't need extra stuff like team colors and stuff. Just use the gameplay abilities of the characters (so for Donkey Kong, don't say his alternate color is purple, since that doesn't affect the gameplay. Just put his stats, Super Ability, Deke and his Character Type, which is Power)
2. Cmario17 (talk) This could be a good idea for shortening pages, as some pages like Mario and Bowser are exceedingly long and difficult to read in one sitting. We could expand this idea to shortening data for more games, as the info is still on the page of the game. But shortening the description for only one game causes the other game descriptions to appear too long.

Oppose

1. SWFlash (talk) It's very important. The stuff like description, how unlocked, the mega strike, emblem, etc. should stay.
2. RobloxKid007 (talk) Per SWFlash.
3. Reversinator (talk) Per all.
4. Zero777 (talk) I am Zero! Per my comment. Zero signing out.
5. BabyLuigiOnFire (talk) I don't see a substantial reason to remove the information. This information is not required, but it is simply interesting to read. I think of the extra information makes our information go "above and beyond", going beyond the required amount. I think removing the information would leave the article a former shell of itself.
6. Walkazo (talk) - Per all. Character pages should be like one-stop shopping when it comes to stats, bios and nitty-gritty details: readers shouldn't have to go to the individual game pages just so we can cut down on a few lines of text here and there. Plus, how a character is unlocked, their Mega Strike and their official description are pretty significant pieces of info and shouldn't be on the chopping block anyway.
7. Luigi is OSAM (talk) Per all. People might go on the Wiki thinking "Hmm, how is this unlocked?" or somthing and get sorta angry when its MISSING INFO! Have a nice day.
8. Mario4Ever (talk) Per Zero's comment.
9. SuperYoshiBros (talk) Per all.
10. Bop1996 (talk) Per Zero and Walkazo. If I were looking to find out more about a character in a game like this, this is exactly what I would want to see and where I would look. If it ain't broke, don't fix it.
11. Reddragon19k (talk) Per all please!
12. Bowser's luma (talk) Per those who per all. :)
13. M&SG (talk) - The extra information is pretty vital, even if it seems redundant to have.
14. MrConcreteDonkey (talk) - Per all.
15. Nicke8 (talk) - Per all.
16. MarioManiac (talk) Per all.
17. Tails777 (talk) Per all, especially Luigi is OSAM
18. Arend (talk) - Per all, but I'd like the stats of each character added, as it wasn't included on Mario Strikers Charged Football.
19. Young Master Luma (talk) - Per all. Especially since a wiki is suposed to be a place where you can find all sorts of information! If we were to make every article shorter just for easier reading, we wouldn't have as much info (obviously).
20. Yoshidude99 (talk) - Per all.
21. Mariomario64 (talk) - I know absolutely nothing about the Mario Strikers series, but as a wiki, we should inculde as much info as we can. Per all.
22. Ultrahammer5365 (talk)- Per all.

Comments

Is there any problem with having the content on the page? Marioguy1 (talk)

The info like team colors and stuff are only atheistic, so they don't affect the gameplay. Info like Super Abilities are important as they state what the character is capable of. Atheistic info makes the page longer, and are useless. DK and Diddy Kong vs Bowser and Bowser Jr. (talk)

Hm? I'm thinking of the "unlocked by" part, if I were searching for how to unlock Diddy Kong, I would go to the Diddy Kong article. Marioguy1 (talk)

Does it matter is it's atheistic or not? It's still something that's relevant, thus we mention it. If we didn't put that info there, it would go somewhere else anyways, so might as well leave it there. Reversinator (talk)

I think the term you guys want is aesthetic. The term 'atheistic' means something entirely different. Mario4Ever (talk)

I am Zero! Here's my thought, in previous Mario sports games, Nintendo made the sport too goofy and too simplified for it to have real life, sufficient info, but in this game I think Nintendo made it a bit more serious. What I'm basically saying is, for example, football, they give useless info to viewers that has nothing to do with the game like colors home/away, current manager, etc. And what's the problem of having that info there, I find it very useful. Zero signing out. Zero777 (talk)

Sorry, but I don't understand what you are trying to say. Reversinator (talk)

Shouldn't this be a TPP? Fawfulfury65 (talk)

I'm confused. Why do you think it's to much info? I mean, if you need to find out how to unlock it, you'd be pretty dissapointed. Also, I like reading the bios! Luigi is OSAM (talk)

@FF65: No, it concerns too many articles for a TPP (all the MSC captains). - Walkazo (talk)

@Walkazo: Well, you could of course put this proposal on the Mario Strikers Charged Football page, since it concerns only about the captains of that one game. If it was about many different characters of many different games, then it could be put here. Arend (talk)

I forgot to put this in, and the Wiki had problems that forced to log me out two days ago, but I wanted the way to unlock the captains in MSC to stay. So on Bowser Jr.'s page, it shoild still say that you need to beat the Fire Cup. DK and Diddy Kong vs Bowser and Bowser Jr. (talk)

@Arend: It could go on the game's page, but it's perfectly fine here too: it affects enough pages, even if it is about what they do regarding one game's stats. - Walkazo (talk)