Decide what to move Super Mario Galaxy 2 worlds to
don't rename 1-0-1-8
The worlds in Super Mario Galaxy 2 have names, but each article for the six main worlds is named "World <#> (Super Mario Galaxy 2)" while the article for the special world is called "World S". The good news is I was wondering if there's a possibility to decide what to rename the worlds. There are four options to choose from:
Option 1
Create the {{suffixed title}}, {{SMG2 world}}, {{SMG2 world-link}}, and {{SMG2 world title}} templates (the {{suffixed title}} template works like {{prefixed title}}, with the small text being placed after the first parameter, while the {{SMG2 world}}, {{SMG2 world-link}}, and {{SMG2 world title}} work like {{classic}}, {{classic-link}}, and {{classic title}} respectively, with the skeleton being "World <#>: <small><name></small> and the example being World 1: The Great Space Journey Begins) and move the following pages to the world number and name:
Nightwicked Bowser (talk) These names are only displayed on the save file and are not shown while playing the game itself. Even if you go to a different world and save the game, the name on the save file doesn't change and is still the name of the world you should be on. Then there's the fact that when doing the green stars, the save file name is "the green star challenge is on" and when the game is completed 100% the name is "master of galaxies".
YoYo (talk) the names you've assigned to each world are actually the names for the "chapters" in the game's progression, not the names for the worlds themselves. it would be like naming each kingdom from Super Mario Odyssey's page after their first moon.
Nintendo101 (talk) These are not the names of the worlds. They are subtitles provided to the player for narrative context.
Camwoodstock (talk) Per all, especially Nightwicked Bowser and Yoyo. These don't seem to be the worlds' actual names, just a status on the save menu. There's definitely a better way to convey this information about the save menu descriptions than to clumsily bake them into the world pages' names!
Comments
Create a {{visible anchor}} template
canceled by proposer
I've come up with an idea for a sub-template for the {{anchor}} template. A {{visible anchor}} retains its behavior like {{anchor}}, with the only difference being that the first parameter will be visible text on the page. You can go here to read the documentation on Wikipedia. Do you have any thoughts that there's a possibility create the {{visible anchor}} template?
Proposer: GuntherBB (talk) Deadline: March 23, 2024, 23:59 GMT Date withdrawn: March 17, 2024, 01:45 GMT
PnnyCrygr (talk) Redundant and unnecessary for a fan wiki which tries not to be like Wikipedia. If that so-called visible anchored is templated onto any link, that should create any visual mess. Enough said...
Camwoodstock (talk) This is redundant for our purposes. Per PennyCrygr. This is redundant for our purposes.
Hewer (talk) Per all, the proposal makes absolutely no argument as to why we should have this feature and how it would help us beyond "Wikipedia has it".
Comments
Stop referring to Bowser as "King Koopa" in Japanese media
Refer to as Bowser in Japanese media 8-0
In articles about Japanese Mario media, we typically refer to Bowser as "King Koopa" for some reason.
I think that this naming convention is pointless and we should call Bowser by his actual English name.
One may argue that "King Koopa" is Bowser's Japanese name and therefore he should be named as such.
Actually, Bowser's Japanese name is Kuppa (officially romanized as "Koopa") or Daimaō Kuppa (literally "Great Demon King Koopa"), but he is seldom called "King Koopa" verbatim in Japanese media.
Most importantly, when referring to characters or species in articles about Japanese-only media, we typically use the usual English name instead of the Japanese name: "Goomba" instead of Kuribō, "Koopa Troopa" instead of Nokonoko, "Toad" instead of Kinopio, and so on.
There is no reason why Bowser should be an exception.
One may also argue that the names "Koopa" and "King Koopa" have been used in some English-language Mario media (notably the DIC series).
However, the name "Bowser" is overwhelmingly more widespread and was already attested in the original Super Mario Bros. instruction booklet.
I hope we can agree that The Super Mario Bros. Super Show is not the highest-priority naming source.
Lastly, this "King Koopa" naming convention is not even consistent on the Wiki because many articles about Japanese-only mangas refer to Bowser as "Bowser" rather than "King Koopa".
If this proposal passes, mentions of Bowser as "King Koopa" or simply "Koopa" will be replaced with "Bowser" in articles about Japanese media, including:
OmegaRuby (talk) Consistency is a priority. Per all.
Scrooge200 (talk) Always found this a bit confusing because it just perpetuates an old name nobody uses anymore. Per all.
Oppose
Comments
What about referring to Princess Peach by that name in early Japanese media? If this passes, it would seem more consistent to change those to "Princess Toadstool" since that was her English name at the time. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 09:43, March 20, 2024 (EDT)
We could still refer to Princess Peach by that name considering that it is her usual name in English nowadays. I don't think it is that relevant to be faithful to the English names that were used at the time in the USA considering those names do not appear in the actual Japanese media; and if that is actually relevant, that could always be the subject of a later proposal. Jdtendo(T|C) 10:42, March 20, 2024 (EDT)
Broaden the scope of the {{unreferenced}} template
canceled by proposer
Like everyone in the Super Mario Wiki said, "We are not Wikipedia." I humbly ask if there's a possibility to broaden the scope of the {{unreferenced}} template.
The template currently reads as follows:
<div class="notice-template maintenance" style="background:#FC5;border:1px solid #f22">
This {{#if:{{{section|}}}|section|article}} '''does not [[MarioWiki:Citations|cite any sources]]'''. Please help {{plain link|1=[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} improve this {{#if:{{{section|}}}|section|article}}]}} by [[MarioWiki:Citations#How to add references|adding citations from reliable sources]]. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed.
</div>
However, once the proposal passes, the template will read as follows:
<div class="notice-template maintenance" style="background:#FC5;border:1px solid #f22">
It has been requested that at least one '''[[MarioWiki:Citations#How to add references|citation from a reliable source]]''' be added to this {{#if:{{{section|}}}|section|article}}.<br><small>This {{#if:{{{section|}}}|section|article}} should not cite any unsourced material. See the [[MarioWiki:Citations|citation policy]] for more information.</small>
</div>
It has been requested that at least one citation from a reliable source be added to this article. This article should not cite any unsourced material. See the citation policy for more information.
That way, the {{unreferenced}} template will read differently from Wikipedia's {{unreferenced}} template.
Proposer: GuntherBB (talk) Deadline: April 5, 2024, 23:59 GMT Date withdrawn: March 31, 2024, 03:49 GMT
Camwoodstock (talk) Per KCC--we probably don't need a template that's simultaneously more and less specific when we can simply use ref needed to clearly and concisely convey exactly what needs a citation.
Nintendo101 (talk) I appreciate that you reached out to me specifically, but unless I am missing something, I do not really see why this would be an improvement.
Comments
this might just be one of the most difficult to read proposals i have seen on this site, its a real struggle to look at. is there a chance of tidying it up dramatically - YoYo (Talk) 13:54, March 29, 2024 (EDT)
I cleaned it up, just so you know. Once the proposal passes, I'd recommend removing the <!-- and --> tags. GuntherBayBeee 19:53, March 29, 2024 (EDT)
Never mind. I had to clean the proposal up again by adding the <pre> tags. You should take a look at what the template will look like from above. The preceding unsigned comment was added by GuntherBB (talk). 20:06, March 29, 2024
This is not related to the proposal itself but I see that you sent the same talk page message to so many users at once, including myself about this proposal. I'm not super skilled with template codes and such, so I won't vote in it. I just thought I'd mention the message. Sparks (talk) 21:52, March 30, 2024 (EDT)
A bit of clarification on our vote: Just because we are not Wikipedia doesn't mean we have to do things differently from how Wikipedia does them. While we have our petty, personal beef with Wikipedia (mostly about their comically dated "notability" guidelines), they aren't always wrong, and this is one such case where we feel they nailed the Wiki design on the head; for all intents and purposes, {{ref needed}} is better than any of these templates to us. It's more precise, it's more concise, and most importantly, it's what people--both on this wiki and from other wikis--know best. (This is also why we're not updating our vote, though we do appreciate the proposal being made easier to read.) ~Camwoodstock(talk) 23:28, March 30, 2024 (EDT)
