General Discussion

[LeftyGreenMario]

No, I mean the current pages being served as disambiguation pages. I'm talking about one article that serves both games.

 

[GBA]

oooo the manual for mario maker is accessible here, and it's got some good artwork of characters like undodog, coursebot, mashiko, etc.

also its got an image of costume mario which could go in the infobox on the article instead of the mario costume its currently using

Spoiler

edit: also would we consider creating an article for that pigeon character as unless i'm mistaken, this image's url likely has his name in it

Spoiler

http://supermariomaker.nintendo.com/manual/img/img_yamamuraL.gif

 

[RandomYoshi]

Is it worth mentioning that in Super Mario 64's Dire, Dire Docks, the game inexplicably lags when Bowser's Sub is loaded? Or, should this information be relegated to the article about the sub itself?

 

[Ray Trace]

Inexplicably lags? It doesn't look like an inexplicable lag when it loads an object that's only there in the first level; if it lags only if Bower's Sub is loaded, it's probably because Bowser's Sub is the thing causing the lag.

 

[LeftyGreenMario]

oooo the manual for mario maker is accessible here, and it's got some good artwork of characters like undodog, coursebot, mashiko, etc.

also its got an image of costume mario which could go in the infobox on the article instead of the mario costume its currently using

Spoiler

edit: also would we consider creating an article for that pigeon character as unless i'm mistaken, this image's url likely has his name in it

Spoiler

http://supermariomaker.nintendo.com/manual/img/img_yamamuraL.gif

There's also this thing (.pdf) to consider, as RandomYoshi noted earlier; I had to dig that one up.

 

[RandomYoshi]

Inexplicably lags? It doesn't look like an inexplicable lag when it loads an object that's only there in the first level; if it lags only if Bower's Sub is loaded, it's probably because Bowser's Sub is the thing causing the lag.

Yes but we don't know why Bowser's Sub lags the game, hence why I said it "inexplicably lags the game".

 

[LeftyGreenMario]

It probably lags because it has to load an extra object in the scene. Probably optimization issues otherwise.

 

[GBA]

There's also this thing (.pdf) to consider, as RandomYoshi noted earlier; I had to dig that one up.

afaik we don't want to upload the entire artbook because reasons but the only useful thing to come from it is the name of the Weird Mushroom and Weird Mario, there's really not much else to consider as the rest of it is just nice artwork

i mean unless someone wants to create an article listing the codes and descriptions for each example level in the book then go ahead

small official images for characters in the game taken from the manual should be fine rite, so i think the image for costume mario should be swapped

 

[Walkazo]

Plus, uploading the entire artbook (or manual) would be too extensive - same reason we don't upload whole manuals and whatnot: we sample and report, not replicate.

But yeah, taking specific images (from both sources) would be fine, and using the ?-mark Costume Mario for the infobox would be a good idea.

It probably lags because it has to load an extra object in the scene. Probably optimization issues otherwise.

Yeah, seems most likely. Dunno if we really talk about that sorta thing; I mean, there's chunks of SMW that lag due to too many enemies, etc. - it's just something that happens.

No, I mean the current pages being served as disambiguation pages. I'm talking about one article that serves both games.

I think it'd be a good idea, for consistency with SSB and internal navigation (as you said), as well as both internal and external searches (since only having disambig pages makes people less likely to want to click us, and potentially factors into why we're further down the list of links Google spits out for "mario & sonic at the olympic games").

List of cartoon voice actors

I'm surprised this article exists. We don't have a list of game voice actors, do we?

The article seems to mostly exist as a compromise between giving articles to all of the actors and not covering them at all, in a manner akin to Banjo and Conker. To that end, I don't think it's worth it; some of the people here could reasonably benefit from full articles, but when all that you have is "this guy voiced that guy on this show" for a dozen sections, it really doesn't look good.

I asked if related information is better off in the credits section in the respective articles. But in the end, I really don't like that article.

Yeah, it should be scrapped: ideally we want pages for everyone, even if they're small, not just one sucky list page.

 

[LeftyGreenMario]

There's also this thing (.pdf) to consider, as RandomYoshi noted earlier; I had to dig that one up.

afaik we don't want to upload the entire artbook because reasons but the only useful thing to come from it is the name of the Weird Mushroom and Weird Mario, there's really not much else to consider as the rest of it is just nice artwork

i mean unless someone wants to create an article listing the codes and descriptions for each example level in the book then go ahead

small official images for characters in the game taken from the manual should be fine rite, so i think the image for costume mario should be swapped

Ah, I didn't mean to upload the entire thing. Just... *drools* concept art... on the last few pages and some of them scattered throughout the manual. I really think it would be a good idea to extract those lovely images.

I think it'd be a good idea, for consistency with SSB and internal navigation (as you said), as well as both internal and external searches (since only having disambig pages makes people less likely to want to click us, and potentially factors into why we're further down the list of links Google spits out for "mario & sonic at the olympic games").

List of cartoon voice actors

I'm surprised this article exists. We don't have a list of game voice actors, do we?

The article seems to mostly exist as a compromise between giving articles to all of the actors and not covering them at all, in a manner akin to Banjo and Conker. To that end, I don't think it's worth it; some of the people here could reasonably benefit from full articles, but when all that you have is "this guy voiced that guy on this show" for a dozen sections, it really doesn't look good.

I asked if related information is better off in the credits section in the respective articles. But in the end, I really don't like that article.

Yeah, it should be scrapped: ideally we want pages for everyone, even if they're small, not just one sucky list page.

Agreed. Do we need TPPs for either of the two? Because part of me says, "No, it's not going to be potentially controversial", maybe except for the latter subject matter.

One more question: in character galleries, should we include their forms? Because I'm tempted to remove all instances of Fire Mario, Dr. Mario, Tanooki Mario, etc. and confine them to their form pages, although readers might be thinking where the hell those form images are. And I don't know why Mario's gallery links to Baby Mario in the beginning sentence, but not other Mario aliases/powerup forms. But I'm still tempted to remove those forms because Mario's gallery is huge as it is.

 

[Walkazo]

Ah, yeah, that sorta thing is fine.

I'd say just refer any dissenters to the SSB4 TTP (Talk:Super_Smash_Bros._for_Nintendo_3DS_/_Wii_U#Split_Super_Smash_Bros._for_Nintendo_3DS_.2F_Wii_U_into_Super_Smash_Bros._for_Nintendo_3DS_and_Super_Smash_Bros._for_Wii_U_attempt_3) as the thing that set a "different versions of a game (not just ports) = different pages" standard - it's just taken a while to catch the M&S pages up.

As for the galleries stuff, yeah, I'd say remove the forms for the same reason that we remove subspecies from the more basic species galleries: keeping coverage creep, repetition and size down. It'd probably be a good idea to make a note to see the galleries of the various forms for those images in the opener of the gallery alongside the Baby Mario thing, with a piped link to Category:Forms (or maybe to Template:Mario's Transformations) on "forms", but no specific links to any of the form galleries (that'd be too much clutter, and the nav template at the bottom links to the ones with dedicated subpages anyway).

 

[LeftyGreenMario]

Wait, so would it be good practice to set up a Talk Page Proposal or just go ahead? I suppose it's a major change, though, but it doesn't seem like it'll be super controversial because we have a very good precedent to cite, although it might be confusing for those who don't follow Talk Page Proposals closely.

Of course. I'll get around to it. That's what I was planning on doing in the first place, but it's always nice to get an okay.

 

[Walkazo]

Seeing as the SSB4 TPP passed unanimously, this should be fine - it's just being consistent with the earlier SSB decision (technically, it's actually being consistent with the fact that we had pages for the two (Mario Golf (Game Boy Color)) Mario Golf games (Mario Golf (Nintendo 64)) all along - and so was the SSB4 decision, really, we all just forgot about MG in those discussions). If people are confused, just give them the link to the SSB4 TPP and this discussion here.

 

[LeftyGreenMario]

Say, how about the list of cartoon voice actors page? Is it okay if we delete that one?

 

[Time Turner]

Speaking of coverage creep in galleries, should we be putting every single screenshot and/or sprite from a game into that game's article? There are a few games (Paper Mario (Gallery:Paper Mario) is the only one I can remember atm) whose galleries are packed with every conceivable element, and it looks really off. It was only a couple of users who added the images, but nobody's reverted it yet, so the majority seems to be okay with it or indifferent to it. It just seems like way too much padding.

 

[GBA]

ok i've taken some of the images from the manual that i found useful and gathered them here if someone wants to do something with them. they're mostly gifs is all, i don't know the wiki's policy on large animated images

i'm assuming the pigeon's name is Yamamura as it appears in one of its files, but someone can correct me if i'm wrong

not all of these need to be uploaded so if someone wants to further pick and choose and upload then feel free to do so

Spoiler: Mashiko, Yamamura, Undodog group art, etc.

Spoiler: Yamamura art

Spoiler: Undodog art

Spoiler: Mashiko Art

the rest of the art is really minor so i didn't include it, but here's some icons for the games modes and such which could belong in the article

Spoiler: other art

There are a few games (Paper Mario is the only one I can remember atm) whose galleries are packed with every conceivable element, and it looks really off.

that is likely due to the trainwreck that is MarioWiki:Galleries. it was wishful thinking on my part to include the statement 'all images must be included on a gallery's page' a few years ago but it does look off and it should be changed with a proposal or something

 

[LeftyGreenMario]

MarioWiki:Galleries isn't that bad, to be honest, although I still question the thought process behind "For game galleries, all artwork pertaining to the game must be included (and sorted under appropriate subsections), unless the artwork has been recycled from a previous game. All sprites and models should be included in a game gallery, as well as all screenshots and scans from game manuals and guides." I also question why people adhere to this literally, since trying to follow this is nigh impossible anyway. Besides, we have image categories if you want every single image or something.

P.S. Rock Pigeon is now one of my favorite Mario characters. I don't know about you guys, but I love pigeons.

 

[GBA]

MarioWiki:Galleries isn't that bad, to be honest, although I still question the thought process behind "For game galleries, all artwork pertaining to the game must be included (and sorted under appropriate subsections), unless the artwork has been recycled from a previous game. All sprites and models should be included in a game gallery, as well as all screenshots and scans from game manuals and guides." I also question why people adhere to this literally, since trying to follow this is nigh impossible anyway. Besides, we have image categories if you want every single image or something.

then like i said it needs to be changed because i understand how impossible that actually is now

P.S. Rock Pigeon is now one of my favorite Mario characters. I don't know about you guys, but I love pigeons.

well i mean the artwork and name is there and it does need an article. according to this quote

[quote author=Mashiko, page 3]But I'm sure you're almost as skilled as my feathered friend! I bet you'll have no problem mastering the controls for every type of Mario.[/quote]
the bird is a master (or at least a very good) mario maker course designer. he also hosts a section not included in the online manual which has 10 tips on how to design great courses

i mean lol

 

[LeftyGreenMario]

I never played the game, though, so is this all what the rock pigeon does? But lol, I wonder if I said that a pigeon could design courses better than 90% of the content in Super Mario Maker.

Yeah, that needs to be change, but I think that's from a call for being reasonable rather than something that would end up in a contentious debate. I don't think that requires a proposal, but it is a policy change.

 

[GBA]

I never played the game, though, so is this all what the rock pigeon does?

pretty much

 

[Walkazo]

For galleries, asking for all the artwork seems doable (and maybe all playable character / enemy sprites/models, depending on the game), but yeah, I feel like screenshots should be limited to images that actually show specific things - like, this is what gameplay looks like, this is a boss fight, here's examples of every basic background design in this platformer, here's the first level, here's the last level, etc. Plus things like credits slideshows and whatnot, where it makes sense to have the whole set of images, but otherwise, having all the random screenshots just looks sloppy and excessive. And people can already get all the images of a game with the category, so the gallery can afford to be more choosey.

A "Changes"-type proposal could work, since the whole policy page doesn't need rewriting and drafting, so no Writing Guideline proposal would be needed. But on the other hand, it IS common sense to scale back the scope to reasonable levels, so as long as we can come to an agreement here, I feel like any proposal at all would be unnecessary.

 

[Ray Trace]

I'm slightly against "include everything except the kitchen sink" type galleries, but I do like how elements are all neatly organized into this one spot, and I dunno, I wouldn't be totally opposed to keeping galleries like this either. But this is the same person who likes to upload huge animated character gifs into Mario Kart Wii galleries so idk.

 

[Ray Trace]

I'm sick and tired of people not using common sense and using the Sandbox as a place to make completely nonconstructive edits. The most discouragement I've seen is that it's not a place to chat, on the template at the beginning of the page, but since, I don't know, it doesn't say you can't make stupid shit edits on it erhm *cough cough* (MarioWiki:Don't Shoot Your Foot Off), well, BOMBS AWAY.

It's one thing that you're new and you want to use the Sandbox to experiment with wiki syntax, like what I'd have done when I very first joined the wiki. It's another thing to repeatedly use it as an excuse to spew your stupid nonsense on it because of how flexible and lenient it is, to lean new users in. It's about on par with excessive userspace editing, except worse, because the Sandbox was created purposely for newer users to learn how the wiki works, and I've seen some people abuse it to hell, and there's too many instances of people getting away with it because of how lenient we are with it, for a good reason too.

There, rant over. tl;dr some people are stupid.

 

[Time Turner]

You can't really expect new users to be planning out grand plans to revamp the wiki, right? Letting them experiment with tables, galleries, templates, and general wiki code, even if they're doing inane things with it, allows them to learn how things work so that they can (hopefully) use that knowledge to better use in the future. I'm worried that trying to police it in any strict way is going to dissuade users who are simply trying to learn. If someone abuses the sandbox and does nothing but post stupid content while also not trying out any new code, call them out on it, but otherwise, don't worry about it so much.

 

[Ray Trace]

I have absolutely no problem with users trying to learn how the wiki works, in the slightest, hence, why I didn't add any of those examples I put on my list of bad things to do. Some people do use the sandbox for its intended purpose. In fact, many do.

However, there is a difference between people who genuinely use the sandbox for its intended purpose, and people who think they can get away with making *bleep*ty edits because of the fact that we are far more lenient on the sandbox than any other pages on the wiki. Those type of people tend type not only nonsense on the page, that they think is funny, but also do it on a very consistent basis. Those people should, in my opinion, get reprimanded for their behavior.

(I'm not talking about those spambots who regularly visit the page, of course, because it's not an alive person who can think for themselves.)