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}}. Signing with the signature code ~~~(~) is not allowed due to technical issues.
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.
- 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.
- 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 are two topics that cannot be decided on through a proposal: the first is sysop promotions and demotions, which are decided by Bureaucrats. Secondly, no proposals calling for the creation of Banjo, Conker or Sonic series articles are allowed (several proposals supporting them have failed in recent history).
The times are in EDT, 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.
CURRENTLY: 12:14, 27 May 2024 (EST)
New Features
None at the moment.
Removals
The 'Shroom
This wouldn't be a full "removal" per say, that is – we wouldn't delete all of the pages, but maybe put a cascading protection on all of them, so it would end up being a joyful anachronism...
But let's be honest. Only 1/9 articles besides Director-related stuff was put in on time yesterday. Ever since I quit Directors don't do what they're supposed to do – recruit new writers, as the current director would say, AGGRESSIVELY, and not firing the ones that can't meet a deadline. All of this has led to declined activity the past two months, making it a shame to the sidebar. It's time to make it a thing of the past.
Proposer: Wayoshi (talk)
Deadline: 14 December, 15:00
Bai-Bai Nao
- Wayoshi (talk) – All in all...there is little need, demand or even care for the entire project now.
- InfectedShroom (talk) - Besides all the insults to Directors in general, per Wayo. Besides, no one ever reads it anymore...
Me No Wantz It 2 Go
- Blitzwing (talk) - I wasn't the greatest or more authoritative director YESH YESH YESH, but that's no excuse to penalize possible competent directors or the users who posted their sections in timely manner. Beside, considering comments you left some times ago, I am fairly sure you're only doing this to troll me.
- Super-Yoshi (talk) - Per Blitz.
- Princess Grapes Butterfly (talk) Per all. Long live The 'Shroom!!! They're still users that read and also work on The 'Shroom.
- Stumpers (talk) - If it isn't hurting anyone, why should the 'Shroom end? Besides, life and other Wiki needs should come before the Shroom, so I think you can excuse the majority of my fellow writers who, like me, have finals coming up or in process. I know that's why my Travel Guide isn't in (not to mention the Mama Mario article)
- Stooben Rooben (talk) - Per my comment below.
So, this proposal is just about firing the people who cannot meet the deadline, and protecting all the 'Shroom pages? Nvm, Wayo told me that we will stop creating issues and protect the old ones. So the 'Shroom will go down. I need some time to think my vote over :/ - Super-Yoshi (talk)
- Right – I simply mentioned that the failure to fire incompetent writers led to this proposal. Wayoshi (talk) 12:49, 7 December 2008 (EST)
- Wut!! Firing all the people who cannot meet the deadline but what if they're just an few hours late or a day late. Wut!!!! Closing down Teh 'Shroom but... Princess Grapes Butterfly (talk)
I'd like to point out that most sections weren't late yesterday: It was my own failure to update the page in a timely manner, which I apologize for.
Also, I must that making this proposal during the elector direction is the best/worst fraking lack of timing I ever saw. --Blitzwing 12:57, 7 December 2008 (EST)
A) I've been thinking about this for awhile, so this isn't a personal attack or any c-rap like that. B) There's no point to give a new director a chance, because the pieces are now all too disjointed. Wayoshi (talk) 13:09, 7 December 2008 (EST)
- ...I don't really see the point in doing this. The 'Shroom was made as a community activity for any willing users to participate in. If users don't send in their sections, they get fired – unless, of course, they have a good reason for not sending it in. So maybe all of the sections aren't getting sent in on time, or even at all. That's not entirely the Director's fault; a large part of the blame should go to that section's writer, (unless, like I said, they have a good reason for NOT sending in their section(s).) I for one, have always sent in my sections on time, except for when I was on hiatus. Why is this? Because I think that The 'Shroom is a vital part in bringing the community together. I make my sections unique to make the readers feel more welcomed to other parts of the paper. If we have users that don't send in their sections without a good reason, then they need to be replaced by more responsible users. Sometimes, life gets in the way of things: You have to remember, almost all members of The 'Shroom are kids, so they have to worry about school, homework, chores, they could be grounded, they have friends, whatever. Life gets in the way, and that's understandable. If it's something as simple as "I didn't feel up to doing it this month", then they aren't an extremely responsible party. Getting rid of The 'Shroom will likely make a huge dent in the community of this site. While encyclopedic efforts are our number-one priority on this site, (no doubt), we wouldn't have an encyclopedia if it weren't for our members. And if our members didn't communicate between each other, or see what one another is capable of, then our encyclopedic intake would drop dramatically. The effort one puts in his or her section can also be looked at for what they could do as a Sysop. If their sections are neatly-written, are sent in on time (or a little late with good reason), and they show a good amount of responsibility, that can be looked at as a sort of key to what they could do as a Sysop – of course, they would have to follow the other guidelines. Nonetheless, The 'Shroom is a great part of this site, and it makes it really unique from all other wikis out there...especially all other Mario Wikis. Let a new director have a chance; maybe things will clear up a little more. IMO, The 'Shroom could be in a lot worse place than it is now. -- Stooben Rooben (talk) 15:43, 7 December 2008 (EST)
- St00by made a lot of good points, but I see your point too Wayoshi. Sure, the Shroom's popularity and amount of coverage has been declining, but rather than shut it down completely I just think that a few major changes have to be made. First of all, every writer that has been tardy with their articles repeatedly, which nowadays is just about everyone, should be replaced. And we're also having a new director election at present, and a new director could obviously help with the release enforcement problems you mentioned. So I think a new director, new writers, and a redesigned community newspaper can effectively restore the 'Shrooms popularity. After all, Mariowiki is doing nothing but grow, so if we can restore the newspaper to its former glory it will be twice as popular as it ever was. Definitely worth keeping it around for a while.
 Glitchman (talk · contribs) 23:37, 7 December 2008 (EST)
Splits & Merges
Splitting the Capsule article
There's something strange around here: The capsule from SSB and the capsule from Mario Party series are merged INTO ONE ARTICLE, but, THEY'RE COMPLETELY DIFFERENT! I think we shoud split in into two articles: Orb, because it IS the Mario Party Capsule; and Capsule (SSB). Now you see, Orb is the redirect page, but this mustn't be a redirect; instead, the remaining article after the split will be an disambiguation of course. Still thinking to remain it so? There are reasons to split it:
- They look different (SSB capsules are looking like those medicine capsules (look at the Megavitamin), MP capsules and orbs are just... round capsules. You can even see what in a MP capsule/orb contains, never in a capsule).
- They ALSO work different, even because the game style differs (Orbs and MP capsules are placed on spaces, SSB capsules can be thrown anywhere).
- Effects are different TOO (SSB capsule: 1 o' the 8 chance it explodes, other seven will contain items, MP capsules and orbs will change the selected space in a Character Space, which effect will start when been stopped on).
- Color variations (The SSB capsule will always stay White/Red, the MP capsule/orb has a transperent part and a part which differs what for sort effect it has).
Have I proven truth now? Do you think so as I? Give your own opinion.
Proposer: Arend (talk)
Deadline: December 11, 2008, 17:00
Support
- Arend (talk) - Per myself, of course
- Blitzwing (talk) - Per Arend.
- Stumpers (talk) - The merging of two subjects who share a name but are different characters is something we should be combating per the results of the Star Rod proposal awhile back.
- Canama (talk) - Per all
- Walkazo (talk) - Per all.
- Princess Grapes Butterfly (talk) Per all.
- Super-Yoshi (talk) - Per Stumpers and Arend.
- Tucayo (talk) - Per Arend, but they should be split in 3 pages, (Orb, Capsule (MP5) and Capsule (SSB))
- Stooben Rooben (talk) - Per all.
- Randoman123456789 (talk) - Per all. Why are two comeletely different things merged into on article?
- Dom (talk) - Per all, especially our good old friend Logic.
Oppose
To Tucayo: An Orb is just a different name for a Capsule, just as Toadstool is a different name for Peach, and we don't have an article for "Toadstool" and an article for "Peach." -- Son of Suns (talk)
We currently have an article entitled Super Mario Amada Series that encompasses three works: Super Mario Momotaro, Super Mario Issunboshi, and Super Mario Snow White. Each was released in separate tapes and were not part of one grander three part serial, but were rather separate stories. Each was just shy of 20 minutes long, rivaling each full episode of The Super Mario Bros. Super Show! in length. Now, take into account that each of those episodes currently has two articles: one for the live-action segment and one for the cartoon. Thus, the three subjects are certainly notable enough for their own articles. I should note, only Issunboshi is long enough as it stands not to be considered a stub, but each video's article could easily be made as long. Thus, I propose we split the article into: Super Mario Momotaro, Super Mario Issunboshi, and Super Mario Snow White.
Proposer: Stumpers (talk)
Deadline: December 12, 2008, 20:00
Support
- Stumpers (talk) - See my reasoning above.
- Son of Suns (talk) - They are part of a series of three individual cartoons, just as the Paper Mario series is made up of three individual games.
- Princess Grapes Butterfly (talk) Per all. These cartoons are all based on different fairly tale stories and they are individual not the same, so these article should be spilt.
- Walkazo (talk) - Per all. Not many people have watched the movies, but there's still enough information out there to make decent articles if we're willing to work at it.
- Stooben Rooben (talk) - Per all.
- Grandy02 (talk) - Per all, every episode tells a different story.
- Super-Yoshi (talk) - Per Stumpers.
Oppose
As an aside, the name of the article is fan-made as far as I know: Amada is the name of the company that produced them and "Super Mario Amada" was a term used by TheMushroomKingdom.net. The intro to Momotaro calls itself, "Super Mario Momotaro." If this proposal does not pass, we still need to change the title of the article. Stumpers (talk)
This proposal would give individual enemies listed in each of theses their own pages, reversing this previous decision. I am proposing this for several reasons. First, according to MarioWiki: Canonicity, there is no official canon, so we should not discriminate between different types of enemies in the greater Mario franchise. Additionally, the MarioWiki: Importance Policy says there are no restrictions on the number of articles that can be made for each sub-series or cross-over series. Fifty detailed articles (including descriptions, attacks, behaviors, locations, etc.) is better than a sub-par list that limits our knowledge of what some users may see as vital subjects. We should not be prejudiced against different series connected to the main Mario series; they are all equal in the wiki, and some users may find such information valuable. Why should their way of consuming the greater Mario franchise be denied by the wiki? A few articles about fifty or so Smash Bros. enemies is not going to overwhelm the wiki with Smash Bros. content, seeing that there is probably over a thousand Mario enemy articles, enemies that might have less information than the Smash Bros. enemies could potentially have. Plus we still have articles on all the Smash Bros. stages and items, so why not enemies? In the end all these enemies will be separated into their Smash Bros. related categories, so such information will still be separated from the main group of Mario enemies.
Proposer: Son of Suns (talk)
Deadline: December 13, 2008, 20:00
Support
- Son of Suns (talk) - Because I believe in a Mario Wiki that is open to various ways of appreciating the greater Mario franchise.
- Super-Yoshi (talk) - Per SoS.
Oppose
Haven't there already been heaps of discussions about this very topic? Dom (talk)
- Yes, there were. There was a proposal for merging the enemies, which passed. Grandy02 (talk)
- This proposal would reverse that decision. -- Son of Suns (talk)
Changes
Template:Spoiler
Change Count Bleck to Blumiere and Tippi to Lady Timpani
I say they should be changed, because blumiere and timpani are they real names, while the other one are fake, so they shuold be moved so they are each one with their correct name
Proposer: Tucayo (talk)
Deadline: Tuesday, December 9th, 5:00pm
Support
- Tucayo (talk) - Per me
Oppose
- Son of Suns (talk) - Both names should appear in the intro, but we should use the most common name as the article's title. This is what they are known by throughout the game. They are not "false" names and indeed may be more "real" than the other name, as this is the name they are called by most if not all other characters. Also, Geno's real name is ♥♪!? but we shouldn't change the article title to that, as everyone just calls him Geno.
- Stooben Rooben (talk) - Per Son of Suns.
- Stumpers (talk) - Per Son of Suns. Arg... I have this intense need to say something more.
- Princess Grapes Butterfly (talk) Per Son of Suns. There like nicknames.
- White Knight (talk) Per all, particularly Son of Sons.
- Canama (talk) - Per all.
- Walkazo (talk) - Per Son of Suns.
- Super-Yoshi (talk) - Per SoS. We also have redirects, so it works out aswell.
- Dom (talk) - If that happened, I would leave this Wiki in disgust! Just say a random person typed into the search bar "Tippi" shortly after purchasing the game, as they wanted some non-spoiler about her. And then it redirects to Timpani and shows her true identity, and a major part of the plot is ruined for that person. Same with Count Bleck. People are easily upset by spoilers.
- Wayoshi (talk) – per Dom especially.
I'd like to note that Count Bleck's real full name is Lord Blumiere, not just Blumiere. Stooben Rooben (talk)
Template:Endspoiler
Miscellaneous
None at the moment.
|
