General Discussion

Those pages weren't initially merged into the implied lsits and I thought it was dumb when it happened.
 
Time Turner said:
When linking to Wikipedia when it covers a subject in much greater detail than the wiki (such as Joan of Arc or Earth), what's preferred: linking to the page in the intro paragraph, or using Template:Wikipedia at the bottom of the page?
Click to expand...
My view is to link to the page using "[[Wikipedia:" on those historic Mario's Time Machine characters, because we're only specifically describing their appearance, personality and how the character fits into that video game. Same with Earth: it's not exactly the same Earth as represented on the Wikipedia article. Using {{Wikipedia}} on such pages suggests that you can do further reading on the exact same subject.

That being said, I think {{Wikipedia}} should ideally be used on neutral subjects which aren't restricted to in-game appearances, and those which we don't give full coverage to. Such as the Virtual Console article, and the articles on handhelds and consoles.

Striker Mario said:
And I do think your idea is great, YoshiKong. I too always worry that sources simply won't be available in the future and we have to take steps for something like that. It's great that, for instance, you did store the KC stuff. And yes, we should upload the individual page instead of using an external link so it's easier to maintain.
Click to expand...
Yes, but it was only a suggestion for the time being. We already disallow full page scans of game guides (which would have otherwise provided supplementary material for articles, such as confirming an official name). I am yet to confirm whether complete Nintendo Power or other official magazine pages are considered on the same tier.

Striker Mario said:
KC stuff
Click to expand...
Forgive me, but what is KC? :-\
 
YoshiKong said:
Normally I am very conscious of making sure that we can view our referenced sources in the years to come. Often when I see that a MarioWiki article link to an old website or some external forum discussion, I have the instinct to save that webpage as a PDF and then store it. For example, the only source that a Donkey Kong game was being worked on for the CD-i, has only been seen on a developer's Linked-In profile. Should that profile be removed or edited in the future, no worries because I saved a PDF.
Click to expand...
well lets hope you saved em all because the whole collection has now been removed
 
Time Turner said:
Presumably KC Deluxe/KC Mario.
Click to expand...
Oh, of course. I've always seen the letters "KC" paired with "Deluxe", so it didn't click for me.

@Bazooka Mario/Baby Luigi: Another idea, I'm thinking that perhaps all this backed-up content (PDF webpages and KC Deluxe scans) should be stored in the one place, especially if us or other users were to help out with making a copy of content which could eventually become defunct. I'm envisioning a shared Dropbox folder or OneDrive link (I only use those two cloud storages), and whenever one of us copies something we can just stick it in the one location. And then when a referenced source finally folds (I'm most worried about that official Wario World website at the moment), then we can just have the content available and ready to pull from the shared location.

What do you guys think of this? Perhaps I can try to set something up if it sounds like a good idea.

@GBAToad: The KC Deluxe collection?
 
YoshiKong said:
@GBAToad: The KC Deluxe collection?
Click to expand...
nah man the nintendo power collection
dunno what happened but now they're all gone
https://archive.org/details/nintendopower&tab=collection
 
K said:
YoshiKong said:
@GBAToad: The KC Deluxe collection?
Click to expand...
nah man the nintendo power collection
dunno what happened but now they're all gone
https://archive.org/details/nintendopower&tab=collection
Click to expand...

It's gone from archive.org, but you can still find the scans if you dig a bit (the whole collection was just taken from another site and put up on archive.org)
 
K said:
nah man the nintendo power collection
dunno what happened but now they're all gone
https://archive.org/details/nintendopower&tab=collection
Click to expand...
Well shit. I hadn't even had the chance to download any of the PDFs. Someone's onto us.

Thinking positive, Nintendo Power NA is much less elusive than the KC Deluxe magazines. I'm expecting that full issue scans are available elsewhere.

Edit: Basically what Glowsquid said.
 
When editing the gallery page of a certain character, like Peach, should trading cards be included, like the ones from Mario Super Sluggers? I do know that trading cards are used in the "Official profiles and statistics" page.
 
A51_Trooper said:
When editing the gallery page of a certain character, like Peach, should trading cards be included, like the ones from Mario Super Sluggers? I do know that trading cards are used in the "Official profiles and statistics" page.
Click to expand...
Sure, that's fine.

Trading cards showing characters should ideally be placed in a "Miscellaneous" header (for major galleries such as Peach) under "Artwork", with a short caption stating that it's a trading card, with a link to the game/media that the card series was created for.
 
I'm loving how I'm not even bothering removing support reasons here.

Honestly, that rule should be removed altogether. I don't expect people to read every single rule here, but the Featured Article's voting system works in the similar fashion to proposals, so it's logical to assume that it uses a similar voting system here, hence why it's overly common for people to leave support reasons in the Support header, and could possibly bring up other suggestions to improve the article without also splicing the comment off into the comments section. And what's the harm of leaving the reason on there in the first place? Otherwise, there's so much pointless edits just removing equally valid reasons as the nominator has (which is basically either repeating the nominator's points or agreeing with him or her) that I think is extremely counterproductive and really tiresome to continuously and wastefully concentrate effort into removing support reasons for no good reason I can think of aside from the what I think is very weak "well support votes are useless anyway" logic.

Fan votes aren't much of a problem anyway; one oppose and the nomination is wrecked until the oppose is removed. If there is blatant fan-votes we could remove it but I don't see the point if it does nothing outside from boosting up to the 5 votes required for the FA to pass.
 
I wouldn't mind seeing the reappearance of support reasons. It'd basically be like the proposals: the majority of users would be able to add on their own reasons for supporting it, and those that don't have anything new can simply say "Per all". It'd also be a way to weed out fan votes, since it would force users to evaluate both the article and the nominator's arguments. Even if they say "per all", it implies that they've done the minimum of reading and agreeing with what the nominator wrote.

While we're on the topic of featured articles, is there any reason the Unfeature section (MarioWiki:Featured articles/Unfeature) is split into its own article? It just seems like one more article to edit when it can easily fit into the main article (MarioWiki:Featured articles).
 
I picked up a "previews" issue of Nintendo Power at a thrift store for 25 cents featuring an interview with Miyamoto. It mostly talks about the new Ocarina of Time, but there are a couple of references to Mario within the interview and throughout the issue. I'm not sure if this information would be of use to anyone, so I've scanned any Mario-relevant pages and I'll dump them here. I can scan the whole issue if someone wants me to, but unless you really want to hear about Xena and Hercules, Hybrid Heaven, and Ken Griffey Jr. Baseball 2, it's not all that necessary.

Album is here! (black bars are due to me editing out someone's address)
 
Ho, nice! There's a unique pre-release Donkey Kong 64 logo in there. Anyone want to call dibs on uploading that?
 
No, don't do that. It could easily be rotated through an image editor, such as what was done here (File:Mario's Dream Tennis Beta Logo.png) (it was from the same scan). I could do that and make the background white tomorrow morning, if no one beats me to it.

By the way, is there a publishing month for the magazine shown anywbere?
 
So in the underground PC board, LudwigVon, BLOF, and I, and probably more people, agreed that the banners at the top of some pages (Proposals, FAs, etc.) are outdated, inconsistent, and kinda ugly. Should we get better banners or just lose them altogether?
 
To elaborate:

We've been designing a banner for MW:Polls, and we want to keep it consistent with all the other banners. However, we've noticed that all the other banners seem unfitting and unappealing. This is due to the randomness of the images used. What does Mario Kart have to do with proposals? What does Flying Mario have to do with Featured Articles? What do smiling, posing characters have to do with the 'Shroom? All the images are simply official artworks that seem randomly picked.

Additionally, the filter makes the banner seem "edgier" than necessary. They're generally darkish in color and tone, which doesn't fit in with the lightheartedness with the rest of the website or the Mario series.

Finally, some of the words do not even stick out. "The 'Shroom" is somewhat camouflaged, and "Proposals" is in pretty small font.
 
I love them, the proposals banner just feels like it belongs there. Maybe aesthetically, or historically (it has been there since mid 2009). I would not like to see them removed. If anything, people could try and come up with ones which are less... "edgy".

And then a community vote could be arranged.
 
I don't care about the banners either way but I think it's a thing that could be brought up to see if people are interested in abandoning the current banners
 
At the very least, I'd like to see some consistency between the banners. All of them use different fonts and they all look like they've been passed through different (and kind of ugly, if I may say so) filters.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back