WiKirby:Proposals

Your opinions matter!
Welcome to the Proposals page. Here, WiKirby's editors may propose changes to the way the wiki operates, including how to handle certain categories of content, quality standards, or even just making aesthetic suggestions. Any user who has Autopatrol status or above may make a proposal or vote on one, and after two weeks of voting, if it passes, it will be incorporated into policy. Please see below for the specifics on how to make and/or vote on a proposal.
How to make a proposal
Please use one of the following templates to make a new proposal: Single vote: This is for proposals which only propose a single change to the wiki. ==(insert proposal here) (insert date here)== (insert details of proposal here and sign with ~~~~) {{Support}} {{Oppose}} {{Neutral}} ===Discussion=== {{clear}} Multi-option vote: This is for proposals which include many possible changes to a particular element of policy. One option should always be to keep things as they were. It is recommended that no more than 8 options are given in a single proposal, including the "no change" option. ==(insert proposal here) (insert date here)== (insert details of proposal here and sign with ~~~~) {{Option|1|(option title 1)}} {{Option|2|(option title 2)}} {{Option|3|(option title 3)}} {{Option|etc.|(option title etc.)}} {{Neutral}} ===Discussion=== {{clear}} Multi-facet vote: This is for proposals which want to make several smaller changes to a single element of policy (for instance, making several changes to how the main page looks). Each change needs to be voted up or down individually. There should not be more than 5 parts to a proposal like this. This type of proposal should not be made without approval from wiki administration. ==(insert proposal here) (insert date here)== (insert summary of proposal here and sign with ~~~~) ===Change 1=== (insert details here) {{Support}} {{Oppose}} {{Neutral}} ====Change 1 discussion==== ===Change 2=== (insert details here) {{Support}} {{Oppose}} {{Neutral}} ====Change 2 discussion==== ===Change 3=== (insert details here) {{Support}} {{Oppose}} {{Neutral}} ====Change 3 discussion==== etc. {{clear}} Once a proposal is made, the voting period begins (see voting regulations below). Voting period for a proposal ends two weeks after it starts, at 23:59:59 UTC on the 14th full day of voting. An administrator can veto a proposal at any time, although such action should always be justifiable and agreed upon by multiple admins. Administrators should not use this right to add more weight to their own opinions.
Restrictions
Users may propose many different changes or additions to the wiki. The following things, however, may not be voted on: Proposals which target specific users (such as bestowing or removing ranks or rights). Proposals which violate the law, as specified in the general content policy. Proposals which seek to overturn a recently (within the last 8 weeks (or 56 days)) approved proposal. Re-submitted proposals which were recently (within the last 8 weeks (or 56 days)) rejected, and which have not been significantly altered.

Current Proposals

Draw a line of what kind of artwork needs to be uploaded to the wiki (July 1, 2024 - July 15, 2024)

This discussion was kicked off due to recently uploaded artwork for Forgotten Land artwork that is just past artwork slightly rotated and with a simple shadow effect. See for yourself an example, of the Hammer artwork:

Kirby Fighters 2 artwork (left) and Forgotten Land artwork (right)

The main point of discussion of this proposal is how extensive we want our image archiving to be. The right artwork has been deemed by some people to be necessary for the wiki, while for others not necessary. This is obviously just one example, and I will post some others here that are similar but different to the above. So, do we want to draw a line for uploading similar artwork, and thus, how?

For the sake of simplicity, I will call the right image a simple edit of an existing piece of art. While "simple" is relative, I mean something that someone with a basic image editing program can do in a matter of minutes, and it is indeed an edit like that and it's very clear.

You may be wondering about other kinds of variations of artwork. With Hammer again, compare these two pieces of artwork:

Kirby Fighters 2 artwork (left) and Return to Dream Land Deluxe artwork (right)

At first glance, you may argue this is the same case as the previous one, after all the right one is rotated and with an outline. The reason why I consider them different is due to two main reasons: first, the outline added to the image isn't a simple addition like the shadow of the previous one. Adding a shadow around a transparent image is something you can do with a few clicks in Photoshop, same with a simple outline, but this outline is not simple. Take a closer look and you will see the outline is colored and matches the overall color of the part around it, which is how the outlines work in KRtDLD. This is actually my second point: this edit was done because KRtDLD has an artstyle and this is matching that. FL doesn't have the artstyle of "models have shadows around them", but KRtDLD has the artstyle of "dynamically colored outlines around models".

But let's look at another example, this time for Beam:

Kirby's Return to Dream Land artwork (left) and Triple Deluxe artwork (right)

These images appear to be identical if you look at them quickly, but obviously they are different. They feature different shading, and Kirby's face is different as well. This is, like the previous example, an example of a piece of artwork that was edited to fit the artstyle of another game, but it's not a simple edit.

One last example, this time with Fire:

Kirby: Triple Deluxe artwork (left) and Forgotten Land artwork (right)

These two appear to be the case of the first one I listed for Hammer, and essentially that's true, but there is one more difference: Fire's hat. Notice the color of the gem, as well as the fire of the hat itself, it has different colors and overall looks different. So, this is yet another example of a not simple edit.

With these examples, I hope I defined simple edits and complex edits. Example 1 is the former, while examples 2, 3 and 4 are the latter.

For now, I want us to focus on these cases. I would like us to discuss this not thinking of cases of artwork with effects vs same artwork without effects (for example, this vs this), and group artwork vs single artwork (for example, this vs this), these can be another proposal if we see fit. Also, please ignore image quality and size in these, I feel these are separate. And again, of course, when I talk about edits, I mean official edits, not fan-made ones, so let's not think of fantransparency either.

So, in other words yet again, here is my definition of a simple edit:

• A simple edit to an image means any edit to an existing piece of artwork that can be quickly done in an image editing software. This includes rotating the image, flipping it, and applying a simple effect outside the image, like a shadow and a solid outline.

With all these in mind, I ask you all to vote what kind of images of similar artwork you feel should be on WiKirby. I know I cannot put every option, hence my attempt at defining a "simple" edit; if you all feel this needs to be tweaked, this can be in the future, but for now I ask you to vote on this proposal as is, aware that it can be adjusted in the future. - Gigi (talk • edits) 15:39, 1 July 2024 (UTC)

Option 1: Don't allow any images edits

(In other words, none of the images to the right of my examples would be allowed in the wiki)

Option 2: Only disallow images that only have simple edits

(In other words, the right image of the first example wouldn't be allowed in the wiki, the others would)

1. First and only choice. My reasoning for this is because usually images with the "simple" edits are mostly created to fit a specific need for a specific website and nothing else; in fact, you will usually not find them outside of where they were originally posted as they are not edits to the artwork itself like the non-simple ones. For example, the artwork of Sword for Forgotten Land is not originally rotated and with a shadow like it is in the Japanese website, as evidenced by it in the Japanese FL guide. There is countless rotated artwork in websites for instance that if we don't draw a line, could be uploaded to WiKirby and feel redundant. Some examples found here: rotated Cupid artwork, rotated Mini, flipped Burning, rotated and with simple outline Bubble and Hi-Jump, flipped Freeze, etc. I don't feel any of these are different enough for us to go uploaded them on WiKirby. However, the non-simple edits I feel are justifiable since they are usually done to match a new artstyle, or to upload the design of what is being rendered, so I feel we should still allow them on WiKirby, as they are essentially different images. - Gigi (talk • edits) 15:39, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
2. First choice. Minor edits for presentation purposes isn't worth cluttering galleries with, our primary purpose isn't an archive. ---PinkYoshiFan 15:56, 1 July 2024 (UTC)

Option 3: Allow any images edits

(In other words, all the images to the right of my examples would be allowed in the wiki, as it is right now)

1. They're all still official images that I think we should include for the sake of both thoroughness and showing in the most accurate way possible how a subject was depicted in a particular instance. And even if some simple rotations made purely for use on websites and such could be argued as overkill, I don't see the need to establish hard rules preventing them rather than just handling this case-by-case, in case such an image edit with a more substantial usage and need to be uploaded crops up. Hewer (talk · contributions) 15:52, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
2. Second choice. While I feel like some of the complex edits are things that aren't necessary to have around (e.g. RtDLD's multicolor outlines), there's other complex edits (e.g. small coloration differences) that I feel like are relevant and worth keeping. ---PinkYoshiFan 15:56, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
3. I agree with Hewer in that I think we should handle things in a more case-by-case situation. For example, I don't think we should delete any KTD versions of KRtDL renders due to the subtle changes that happened between games. I also think that having full sets of renders is pretty important or at least useful. We shouldn't use old renders to fill in the gaps and say "lol close enough" when we could have the actual correct artwork. ~ Waddlez3121 (click to navigate) 18:53, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
4. First and only choice. This leaves these matters completely closed to subjective interpretation and documents all official artwork and edits. However slight the difference may be, both the original and the edit are official art and I think they ought to be treated as such. -YFJ (talk · edits) 23:13, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
5. First and only choice. I agree with YFJ on that a lot of this is subjective interpretation and I believe that official art should be allowed even if they are just edits. They're still official at the end of the day NVS Pixel (talk) 16:37, 2 July 2024 (UTC)

Neutral

Discussion

For people voting to allow any and all edits, do you all argue then that all images featured here need to be uploaded too? I am just curious if you have all understood what not drawing a line means in the end. - Gigi (talk • edits) 23:50, 2 July 2024 (UTC)

Create categories for names in specific languages (June 21, 2024 - July 5, 2024)

This topic was discussed on Discord, but after it felt like it was settled, arguments against were brought up, which is why this proposal exists. The gist of it is to split Category:Articles which list non-English names by language (Japanese, Korean, Italian, et cetera).

The reasoning here is that, as of now, the category has little to no practical use. I believe it was originally created to track progress of pages which lacked the template, and the description was modified to encourage speakers of the languages to help explain the names. Nowadays, almost every article fits in there, with the exception of those which have conjectural or meta names and therefore don't need the template at all. Reasonably, I don't see anyone using the category for serious purposes.

On the other hand, having categories for specific languages has several benefits: 1. Speakers of the languages will actually be able to find the pages which concern them, rather than the current thousands of pages 2. In a case where the page doesn't mention a name but the speaker knows it, using the split category will help pin it down with alphabetical deduction 3. For languages which have few localizations, it helps give a general overview, which is just interesting from a reader's point of view.

Some downsides which were pointed out are 1. You can't exclude a specific category, so you would still have to analyze several categories if you want to find pages with only a specific (group of) language(s) 2. It's a lot of additional categories for a niche function. In my opinion, most downsides will still mostly remain even with our current system; if anything, more specific search has at least 1-2 additional uses. It's not that much extra work (I already made the template edit draft under a sandbox), so the real issue is clutter.

Finally, even if it is implemented, we're not sure whether or not to separate regional variants (e.g. Canadian or European French). If we judge from a translator's point of view, then there isn't much of a reason to split them; but for research purposes (about localization in different countries), splitting would give extra insight.

Anyway, this is something that is best voted on. If none of the aforementioned options are to your liking, there's always the wildcard option of getting rid of the category altogether. ShadowKirby (t/c) a.k.a. your new overlord ShadowMagolor 13:12, 21 June 2024 (UTC)

Option 1: Split, keep regional variants together

1. First choice. I'm in the translator camp, and I don't think separating variants makes too much sense. ShadowKirby (t/c) a.k.a. your new overlord ShadowMagolor 13:12, 21 June 2024 (UTC)
2. First choice, I'm not in the translator camp but I don't see much purpose in separating language variants. ---PinkYoshiFan 13:22, 21 June 2024 (UTC)
3. Second choice, I don't really mind either way about the regions, but the new categories can be useful. SilvTheGrape (talk) 13:52, 21 June 2024 (UTC)
4. First choice. I do think splitting regional variants is going overboard, but this could be useful for listing pages with, say, Spanish names. It wouldn’t be too many extra categories, either, and it’d be much more useful than the status quo. -YFJ (talk · edits) 15:25, 21 June 2024 (UTC)
5. First choice. I think keeping regional variants together would be better just for less clutter. NVS Pixel (talk) 17:35, 26 June 2024 (UTC)
6. First choice, to avoid clutter in terms of having way too many categories than needed. While regional variants may have differences, ultimately they are the same language. - Gigi (talk • edits) 14:35, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
7. Second Choice. While this doesn't keep in mind the nuances of how different two versions of a language are, having the split will still help translators. GoldenDragonLeaf (talk · edits) 23:29, 2 July 2024 (UTC)

Option 2: Split, keep regional variants separate

1. Second choice. Generally not opposed to the idea of doing this though. ShadowKirby (t/c) a.k.a. your new overlord ShadowMagolor 13:12, 21 June 2024 (UTC)
2. Second choice, either this or above is fine with me but slightly prefer together for less clutter. ---PinkYoshiFan 13:22, 21 June 2024 (UTC)
3. First choice, it would be easier to find out if a translation is missing in one of the regions by keeping them separate. SilvTheGrape (talk) 13:52, 21 June 2024 (UTC)
4. Second choice. It sounds unwieldy to me compared to Option 1, but this can definitely work, and is still an improvement from the status quo. -YFJ (talk · edits) 15:25, 21 June 2024 (UTC)
5. Second choice. I slightly prefer the first option but I'm not opposed to this option either. NVS Pixel (talk) 17:35, 26 June 2024 (UTC)
6. Second choice, feels fine although I am unsure if this is needed, this would be better than it is right now. - Gigi (talk • edits) 14:35, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
7. First choice, as a translator and somewhat familiar with how other languages work even though languages like Spanish are considered one language across the globe Latin American Spanish and Castilian Spanish are completely different from each other. There's also weird edge cases with Chinese where even though Traditional and Simplified are meant to be the same thing with characters that look different, sometimes they have slightly different wording or translations and I feel like those should be documented on the wiki. Finally, while this admittedly is again an edge case, but with Chinese the regional differences are vastly different, where two people from China literally cannot understand each other at all due to how different the regional languages are (the Canton region alone has more diversity in language than the entirety of Europe, for a more Kirby-related example compare the Taiwan and Hong Kong trailers for RTDLD https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dov30IUtAQQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iGlTEsV-oxg) so being able to document those differences easier is very important, in my opinion. GoldenDragonLeaf (talk · edits) 23:29, 2 July 2024 (UTC)

Option 3: Do not split, keep category as is

1. Third choice. The category as is may not be the most useful but it's better than having no category at all. - Gigi (talk • edits) 14:35, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
2. Third choice. Agreeing with Gigi, it might be a niche thing but I'd rather have the category to keep track of pages than not have it at all. GoldenDragonLeaf (talk · edits) 23:29, 2 July 2024 (UTC)

Option 4: Delete category

1. Third choice. I see no use in the category as it is today, something needs to change imo. ShadowKirby (t/c) a.k.a. your new overlord ShadowMagolor 13:12, 21 June 2024 (UTC)
2. Third choice. As it is right now, it's basically just whatlinkshere sorted alphabetically. ---PinkYoshiFan 13:22, 21 June 2024 (UTC)
3. Third choice. The category as it stands is not very useful at all, so with no other changes to it, might as well delete it. -YFJ (talk · edits) 15:25, 21 June 2024 (UTC)
4. Third choice. The category as of now is pretty useless and isn't very helpful so unless if something changes I think deleting it makes sense. NVS Pixel (talk) 17:35, 26 June 2024 (UTC)

Neutral

1. I was the one who was opposed or at least concerned about the specifics of this, but I'm leaning neutral now as I see there's some support for this idea and so it's not as niche as I initially anticipated. I think there is some value to splitting regional variants if this is done, but I can see why you wouldn't want to. My main concern right now is clutter, as we'll have a lot of similar-looking categories even if they're hidden, but if they're serving a purpose then no harm no foul. It's all automated so I suppose it'd be easy to tweak or remove anyway. StarPunch (talk) 17:54, 21 June 2024 (UTC)

Proposal Archive

Successful proposals
Failed proposals
Withdrawn proposals

WiKirby's help and policy

Basic help

Getting started • Categories • Colors • Disambiguation • File uploading • Formatting • Formatting file pages • Moving pages • Protected Page • Redirects • References • Tables • Talk pages • Templates • User Navigation Bar • Userboxes

Advanced help

Advanced tables • Creating navmaps • Creating templates • Custom Signatures • HTML • Page history • Special pages • Tabs • Template documentation • Using infoboxes

Policies

Abbreviations • Article creation • Article manipulation • Audio standards • Blocking of users • Categories • Citing • Community polls • Conjecture • Cookies • Copyrights • Deletion of content • Disputes • Featured content • File use • Formatting specifics • General content • General disclaimer • Glitch disclaimer notes • Glitches • Image standards • Infoboxes and Navboxes • Interwiki • Language • Layout • Localization • Long pages • Naming • Non-Kirby content • Personal content • Privacy • Sourcing standards • Stubs • Talk pages • Trivia sections • User accounts • Videos • Writing style • Writing specifics

Useful links

About WiKirby • Affiliates • April Fools • Archive • Current events • Dedication • Discord • Featured Article Nomination • Featured Picture Nomination • Good recommendations • IPA • Maintenance (Project Clean-Up) • Proposals • Ranks (Bots • Check user • Editor-in-Chief • System Admin) • Sandbox • Social media • Special pages