MarioWiki:Proposals: Difference between revisions
m (→Support) |
|||
| Line 62: | Line 62: | ||
#{{User|Luigi 64DD}} Per all. | #{{User|Luigi 64DD}} Per all. | ||
#{{User|MKS1675}} Per All | #{{User|MKS1675}} Per All | ||
#{{User|Ghost Jam}} Per all. | |||
====Oppose==== | ====Oppose==== | ||
Revision as of 02:59, January 23, 2017
|
|
Sunday, May 12th, 13:53 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.
|
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 on proposals with more than two choices.
- 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 by a margin of 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 12, 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
- Split Speed Mario Bros. from Ultimate NES Remix (discuss) Deadline: May 12, 2024, 23:59 GMT
- Merge Arrow Switch with gravity switch (discuss) Deadline: May 13, 2024, 23:59 GMT
- Re-merge Pixels with List of references in film (discuss) Deadline: May 13, 2024, 23:59 GMT
- Rename Moneybags to Moneybag (enemy) (discuss) Deadline: May 13, 2024, 23:59 GMT
- Split "Team Dinosaur" from The Dinosaurs (discuss) Deadline: May 15, 2024, 23:59 GMT
- Merge Hat trampoline (Cascade Kingdom) to Trampoline (discuss) Deadline: May 15th, 2024, 23:59 GMT
- Delete Memory Card (discuss) Deadline: May 23, 2024, 23:59 GMT
Unimplemented proposals
Proposals
| Merge the Wrecking Crew and VS. Wrecking Crew phases into list articles, Axis (ended February 24, 2022) |
| Do not consider usage of classic recurring themes as references to the game of origin, Swallow (ended March 9, 2022) |
| Split Mario Kart Tour character variants into list articles, Tails777 (ended May 4, 2022) |
| Enforce WCAG Level AA standards to mainspace and template content, PanchamBro (ended May 29, 2022) |
| Change how RPG enemy infoboxes classify role, Doc von Schmeltwick (ended September 18, 2022) |
| Trim away detailed special move information for all non-Mario fighters, Koopa con Carne (ended January 30, 2023) |
- ^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.
| Classify the Just Dance series as a guest appearance, Spectrogram (ended April 27, 2023) |
| Establish a standard for long course listings in articles for characters/enemies/items/etc., Koopa con Carne (ended June 8, 2023) |
| Consider filenames as sources and create redirects, Axis (ended August 24, 2023) |
| Add tabbers to race/battle course articles, GuntherBB (ended November 18, 2023) |
| Remove elemental creatures categories from various Super Mario RPG enemies, Swallow (ended January 11, 2024) |
| Standardize the formatting of foreign and explanatory words and phrases in "Names in other languages" tables, Annalisa10 (ended February 7, 2024) |
| Merge Super Mario Bros. (film) subjects with their game counterparts, JanMisali (ended April 18, 2024) |
| Remove profiles and certain other content related to the Super Mario Bros. Encyclopedia from the wiki, Koopa con Carne (ended April 30, 2024) |
| Create The Cutting Room Floor link template, Bro Hammer (ended May 7, 2024) |
Talk page proposals
| Split all the clothing, Doc von Schmeltwick (ended September 12, 2021) |
| Split the various reissues of Mario Bros., Doc von Schmeltwick (ended April 22, 2022) |
| Split machine parts, Robo-Rabbit, and flag from Super Duel Mode, Doc von Schmeltwick (ended September 30, 2022) |
| Expand source priority exception to include regional English differences, LinkTheLefty (ended January 14, 2023) |
| Add product IDs in game infoboxes, Windy (ended March 18, 2023) |
| Remove the list of Super Smash Bros. series objects, Axis (ended May 10, 2023) |
| Merge Start Dash with Rocket Start, Koopa con Carne (ended August 17, 2023) |
| Use italics for the full title of the Mario Kart 8 Deluxe – Booster Course Pass, Hewer (ended September 15, 2023) |
| Split Special Shot into separate articles by game, Technetium (ended September 30, 2023) |
| Convert the lists of episode appearances for television series characters into categories, Camwoodstock (ended November 22, 2023) |
| Decide which series certain Yoshi games are related to, GuntherBB (ended December 14, 2023) |
| Change the Super Mario 64 DS level section to include more specific character requirements, Altendo (ended December 20, 2023) |
| Replace "List of Game Over screens" and "'Game Over' as death" sections with a "History" section, DrippingYellow (ended December 20, 2023) |
| Split the Jungle Buddies from Animal Friends, DrippingYellow (ended December 22, 2023) |
| Make major changes to the MarioWiki:Links page, PnnyCrygr (ended January 10, 2024) |
| Make bestiary list pages for the Minion Quest and Bowser Jr.'s Journey modes, Doc von Schmeltwick (ended January 11, 2024) |
| Merge the ghost Bats and Mice from Luigi's Mansion to their respective organic counterparts from the later games, Doc von Schmeltwick (ended January 20, 2024) |
| Split Strobomb from Robomb, Doc von Schmeltwick (ended January 20, 2024) |
| Split the NES and SNES releases of Wario's Woods, SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA) (ended March 27, 2024) |
| Merge Mii Brawler, Mii Swordfighter, and Mii Gunner to Mii, TheUndescribableGhost (ended March 28, 2024) |
| Merge Masterpieces to the Super Smash Bros. Brawl and Super Smash Bros. for Wii U articles, Camwoodstock (ended March 31, 2024) |
| Split Mario's Time Machine (Nintendo Entertainment System), or the Super Nintendo Entertainment version along with both console versions of Mario is Missing!, LinkTheLefty (ended April 11, 2024) |
| Rename Beanstalk to Vine, DrippingYellow (ended April 11, 2024) |
| Remove non-Super Mario content from Super Smash Bros. series challenges articles, BMfan08 (ended May 3, 2024) |
| Merge Stompybot 3000 with Colonel Pluck, DrippingYellow (ended May 4, 2024) |
| Merge Party Ball (item) with Party Ball, GuntherBayBee (ended May 5, 2024) |
List of talk page proposals
- Split Category:Super Mario 64 into Category:Super Mario 64 and Template:Fakelink (discuss) Deadline: Passed
Writing guidelines
None at the moment.
New features
None at the moment.
Removals
None at the moment.
Changes
Splitting Large Galleries
As I mentioned here, Mario's gallery page is incredibly large; over 87,000 bytes, which makes loading take a significant amount of time. The following proposal wouldn't just effect Mario's gallery, but all gallery pages in general.
Once a gallery page reaches a certain number of bytes, around 50-60K, it starts to lag on loading time. So I'm proposing we split those pages up once they reach that amount into separate pages to help cut down on loading times and lessen the strain on our computers, as well as making navigation easier. The page would be split into the following pages like this:
- Gallery:(name) artwork and scans
This gallery page would contain all the artwork from various games as well as scans of the subject from books, magazines, manga, etc. I'm grouping them together as these two things seem to coincide with each other, and it doesn't seem right to split them.
- Gallery:(name) sprites
This gallery page would contain the many sprites of the subject.
- Gallery: (name) screenshots
This gallery page would contain all the screenshots from games and animation we've captured of the subject.
In the case of the original gallery page, it would become a disambiguation to guide users and readers to the proper location. Additionally, sample images relating to the linked page can be included to give readers an example of what to expect. In Mario's case, the page would look like this:
"Due to the size of this gallery, it has been split to reduce loading times.
- For artworks and scans of Mario, see [[Gallery:Mario artwork and scans|here]].
<gallery><image><image><image></gallery>
- For sprites of Mario, see [[Gallery:Mario sprites|here]].
<gallery><image><image><image></gallery>
- For screenshots of Mario, see [[Gallery:Mario screenshots|here]].
<gallery><image><image><image></gallery>
- For the gallery of images relating to Mario's younger form, Baby Mario, see [[Gallery:Baby Mario|here]].
- For images relating to Mario's powered-up forms, see [[:Category:Forms|here]]."
I don't know if the opening statement really needs to be there, but it'll help users who weren't aware of this proposal to split (should it pass) explain why this gallery page is different from the rest.
Should this proposal pass, the MarioWiki:Galleries page should be updated to reflect this change. The {{galleries}} navbox would also have to be updated to reflect the change, for example: "Mario (Artworks and Scans · Sprites · Screenshots)"
Proposer: Alex95 (talk)
Deadline: Friday, January 27th, 2017, 23:59 GMT
Support
- Alex95 (talk) Per my proposal above.
- Shokora (talk) – Per proposal.
- Tails777 (talk) Sounds like a good idea to me. Especially since Mario gets like 4 or 5 pieces of individual artwork per game.
- TheFlameChomp (talk) – Per all.
- Tucayo (talk) - This is definitely needed, per proposal.
- Mario jc (talk) - Per all.
- Toadette the Achiever (talk) Splitting pages to curb length and loading time strain is relieving and sometimes even necessary considering that browsing through high-traffic pages can be overwhelming both for the browser and the reader. In addition to this, splitting upon length alone is a much easier task with galleries than it is with articles, because they're, well, image repositories. The only things I feel need to be covered are how the {{galleries}} will be edited accordingly to this change and where or whether we should draw the line for gallery sizes, but other than that, everything looks fine, so per Alex95.
- Yoshi the Space Station Manager (talk) Per all. (Note: I am wondering which galleries are above 50GB? It will help the proposal.)
- Jazama (talk) Per all
- Bazooka Mario (talk) Anything to keep loading times more bearable. Sure thing
except finding appropriate Mario images to shitpost in the forums will be more of a challenge tho. Now, what do we do with those Bowser and Mario pages in this wiki... - SK64 (talk) Per all. Hopefully this can happen on most of the larger galleries.
- Luigi 64DD (talk) Per all.
- MKS1675 (talk) Per All
- Ghost Jam (talk) Per all.
Oppose
Comments
Let me get one thing straight, while the Wiki-code for Gallery:Mario is 87KB, the generated HTML (i.e. the code that actually gets loaded) is 997KB (which is compressed to 95KB when sent to your browser).
Including the images, the size (compressed) will be 21MB, which is the actual culprit of the loading time (1+ minute). (On mobile devices this is even 58MB / 2 minutes)
Lakituthequick 18:31, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
- Ah, okay. I, uh... didn't know the technical stuff. I just knew the page was taking too long to load and I wanted to do something to fix it.
13:38, 20 January 2017 (EST)
Could it be worth to have a small sample of each gallery on the main Gallery page instead of it just being a disambiguation page? Or maybe link to all pages from the main article? I'm just trying to save some users a click. --
™ The 'Shroom 18:56, 20 January 2017 (EST)
- Some example images are perfectly fine, yeah, I added that in. And doesn't the disambig example list all the pages already? I just showed the coding so users would know what to include. 19:03, 20 January 2017 (EST)
@Toadette the Achiever (talk), you bring up a point I completely forgot about: the {{galleries}}. I've seen other templates use the following format whenever there is a grouped subject, e.g.: Mario (Artworks and Scans · Sprites · Screenshots). Would that work? 19:39, 20 January 2017 (EST)
- Yes, that probably would. I'm not sure what else to say here other than, yes, it's important to be consistent, especially with navbox templates.
(T|C) 21:09, 20 January 2017 (EST)
- Consistency is important! 21:18, 20 January 2017 (EST)
- Consistency is important!
@YtSSM, the only gallery I've found so far above 50KB is Mario's, but Luigi's is getting close and probably the Mushroom's? Regardless, this will effect a gallery should it end up beyond 50KB. 22:42, 20 January 2017 (EST)
@Alex95 – I think that gallery template format would work fine for the most part. The only problem I can think of is the entry being separated to another line, The alternative would be to link to the "hub" gallery only, which leaves the subject with a single link on Template:Galleries. Because thinking ahead, it would be confusing to see split parenthesis lines throughout the template. – Shokora (talk · edits) 05:37, 21 January 2017 (EST)
- Only linking to the "hub" gallery would make it easier, sure, but makes an extra step in navigating. Should there be an "Additional Galleries" section on the template? I can see the original idea working fine, but... sheesh, I don't know anymore :P I'm open to ideas, but I'm having trouble finding ways to make them all work correctly... 12:35, 21 January 2017 (EST)
Prohibit Converting Between GIF, JPEG, and PNG Formats
- Introduction
Converting between image formats is pointless and unconstructive maintenance. Why? Quality doesn't improve at all. There's also some misunderstandings how each image format works. JPEG to PNG preserves the JPEG artifacting (known as lossy compression). GIF to PNG keeps all the same pixels just to have a smaller file format because PNG compression is better than GIF compression (yes, there is a compression algorithm to GIF), which means improper colors are preserved because GIF is limited to 256 colors.
- What this proposal applies to
PNG is the best format out there for web images but requires care to be wielded properly. It makes things harder to identify what needs replacing if improperly used. JPEG to PNG directly is improper use in general. This is especially true if it just to apply transparency that JPEG isn't capable of doing, which could fall under violation of a proposal prohibiting bad/fan transparency. The image that is in need of transparency should have a version that is officially applied by Nintendo, such as a press kit release. If it doesn't exist, don't convert to PNG (or edit the clean image if it is found to exist but not transparent). The file size will just be bloated at that point without affecting the quality at all.
- What this proposal doesn't apply to
This doesn't apply to sprite rips or custom 3D model renders because the aliasing makes it super easy to apply so there is no potential for bad transparency. If there is a mistake, it can be corrected without affecting the overall image.
This doesn't apply to replacing images if a clean version of that image exists or can exist. I replace screenshots and sprites often, especially if they are in the wrong format or improperly taken. You can see my images to see just how they compare to the image I was targeting to replace at the time.
If the image is found to be released in PSD or a similar format and it doesn't have transparency with all exposed layers, it might be possible to apply the transparency without it violating the bad transparency proposal.
Sometimes images are in the BMP format or some other raw format. That is OK to convert to PNG. No quality loss there.
- Exceptions
However, if the PNG is seen to be too large for upload, even after compression optimization (10MB max at this time for each file), exceptions can be made to allow PNG to JPEG conversion. At that point, the JPEG will be of lower space requirements but the lower space requirements means lossy compression took place.
- Conclusion
In short, keep the original format and don't convert directly. Do things properly. If this proposal passes, MarioWiki:Image use policy needs to be amended to reflect the change. This applies to future uploading only. If it can be spotted that an image already uploaded is in violation of this policy change, deal with it on a case by case basis as things are discovered. No need to massively go through each an every image uploaded all at once.
Proposer: Wildgoosespeeder (talk)
Deadline: January 30, 2017, 23:59 GMT
Support
- Wildgoosespeeder (talk) Per proposal
Oppose
Comments
Anything unclear? --Wildgoosespeeder (talk) (Stats - Contribs) 22:45, 22 January 2017 (EST)
I think {{image-quality}} suffices to tell other editors that the image in question has JPEG artifacts or GIF 256-color limits. There are benefits of keeping things in a single format when the image size is small. When I created the list of Star Pieces in Paper Mario, I first used the screenshots from a 100% Paper Mario run on the Internet, which were similar to JPG, then replaced them with GIFs from the Star Piece guide on RPGClassics and finally retook them myself for successively higher quality. Since things were done in PNG at first, this saved the work of replacing all the images two times, with the additional benefit of preserving all the older versions for historical reference. --A gossip-loving Toad (Talk) 00:42, 23 January 2017 (EST)
- There has been much debate over the use of that tag. I think it's best to just prohibit future uploads from converting the images so that way new debates if the tag should be placed on those images don't get started and existing debates can get resolved ASAP (any affected images that currently occupy Category:Quality requested). --Wildgoosespeeder (talk) (Stats - Contribs) 01:10, 23 January 2017 (EST)
Miscellaneous
None at the moment.
