Please remember that WiKirby contains spoilers, which you read at your own risk! See our general disclaimer for details.

WiKirby:Proposals

From WiKirby, your independent source of Kirby knowledge.
Revision as of 23:57, 26 January 2022 by Wiz (talk | contribs) (→‎Discussion)
Jump to navigationJump to search
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:

  1. Proposals which target specific users (such as bestowing or removing ranks or rights).
  2. Proposals which violate the law, as specified in the general content policy.
  3. Proposals which seek to overturn a recently (within the last 8 weeks (or 56 days)) approved proposal.
  4. Re-submitted proposals which were recently (within the last 8 weeks (or 56 days)) rejected, and which have not been significantly altered.
Voting regulations
  1. Proposal adding and voting is open only to registered users who have attained Autopatrol status and above. Users who do not have Autopatrol+ may still participate in discussions.
  2. Users who are currently blocked will not be allowed to vote, and any outstanding votes they have on proposals will be removed. Any proposal made by a user who is blocked during the consideration period will also be removed.
  3. All votes must be signed with signatures (type four tildes (~~~~.)) Unsigned votes are automatically negated, regardless of any points made.
  4. After two (2) weeks of voting, a proposal will be immediately enacted if the number of supportive votes is greater than the number of opposing votes, or, in the case of multi-option votes, any option receives a plurality consisting of three or more votes. In the event of a tie, the proposal may be re-voted upon with a one week duration, or annulled by the administrators.
  5. In the event a proposal has seven (7) unanimous support votes OR ten (10) support votes and no more than two neutral votes, as well as the support of a bureaucrat, a proposal may pass in only one (1) week instead of two.
  6. If a supported proposal is vetoed by the administrators, it is considered failed and should not be started again for at least 8 weeks (56 days).
  7. If a proposal fails to garner three (3) supporting votes (or 3 votes on any one option in multi-option proposals), it will not be considered.
  8. The original proposal maker may not vote on their own proposal if it only contains two options (i.e., "yes" or "no" proposals). However, proposers may vote on their own proposals if they have three or more options.
  9. All votes must be supported by a substantial reason from the voter. Simple and/or unproductive comments like "I agree" or "No that's stupid" will result in the vote being removed.
  10. The original proposer may cancel the proposal for any reason during the first three (3) days of its run, and it will not be considered failed. Admins may veto subsequent proposals if this is abused.
  11. Voting users may change their vote at any time before a proposal's deadline passes, but should update their timestamp if doing so.
  12. Discussion must remain civil at all times! Any uncivil discussion will result in the offending users' votes being negated, and possibly lead to strikes or a block.
  13. Excessive campaigning for any proposals will result in the campaigner's vote(s) being negated, or proposal being removed if applicable.
  14. Proposals about minor article manipulation (such as splits, merges, renames, or deletions) should not be created, unless the scope of the discussion is particularly large; otherwise, these should be handled on a case-by-case basis, through discussions or polls on the talk page of the article in question.
  15. It is recommended that a single user make only one (1) proposal at a time. Though simultaneous proposals from the same user are allowed, they are discouraged; this should ideally only be done if multiple issues are in question, and not many proposals are already active.
  16. For multi-option votes, voters are encouraged (but not required) to indicate a first, second, third, etc. vote. The exception to this is neutral votes, which must be the only vote if chosen.

Current Proposals

Add a poll widget to the main page (January 21st, 2022 - February 4th, 2022)

Greetings. I noticed there's a big blank spot on the main page right now, under the Random Video box, and I figured something ought to go there. After a bit of brainstorming, I think I know what that ought to be: a user poll widget. The idea would be similar to what Pikipedia has on their main page. At regular intervals, we set up a poll and ask users to vote on various things relating to the series, such as what their favorite color of Kirby is, or what Copy Ability they like best, lighthearted stuff like that. I think it would be a good way to add a little more engagement to the site for regular readers. What say you all? --Samwell (talk) 04:04, 21 January 2022 (UTC)

Support
  1. I like the idea! It sounds like a fun addition to the main page that would do away with all that empty space most of us see. The idea of more community engagement is pretty exciting, even if this isn't the biggest change out there. Honestly, I see only positive things coming from this. -- Jellytost♡ (talk) 05:21, 21 January 2022 (UTC)
  2. This is also a good way to see how many readers we have. They don't have to always be simple. We can brainstorm and form questions in the Discord server, probably make a new channel for it. ⁠–⁠Wiz (talk · edits) 05:32, 21 January 2022 (UTC)
  3. Agreed. Increasing engagement and filling empty space is always good. However, would there be a place to view the results? ---PinkYoshiFan 11:59, 22 January 2022 (UTC)
Oppose
Neutral

Discussion

To address PYF's question, if you take a look here on Pikipedia, you can see that poll results can be viewed. This is specifically an archive for them. You can see other details about the polls we'd probably use as well if you look around a bit in this general area. -- Jellytost♡ (talk) 06:47, 25 January 2022 (UTC)

Having a dedicated archive (like news) makes sense. Although if we do this, how would we implement it? MarioWiki uses an external website, but there is an extension that allows for polls to be on-wiki. ---PinkYoshiFan 00:24, 26 January 2022 (UTC)
Yeah, hosting polls on our own is definitely better in my opinion. ⁠–⁠Wiz (talk · edits) 23:57, 26 January 2022 (UTC)

Do away with userlang templates (January 19th, 2022 - February 2nd, 2022)

For a while now, WiKirby has allowed openness in terms of American and British English spelling within general words by using these "userlang" templates (most of which can be found here if you want to take a look). As a lot of you probably already know, these simply switch around letters for certain users, from American English to British English spellings, depending on an individual's personal account settings. It looks something like this when coded:

fav{{o}}rite

While I appreciate the effort to standardize words for more users, I personally think it's very unnecessary. For one, the effort that goes into searching for the appropriate words for this seems like way too much effort than it's worth. There will almost always be some words here and there that won't be found and corrected, in part of most new editors having no idea this is something we do here. I actually think this is possibly a big problem for general readers/casual editors. Maybe someone will come across, say, "favour" because of their settings, but then later catch "favor" on a page, because we just simply cannot add these templates to every single appropriate word across the wiki. This easily could be confusing to new users, especially if they try to go in and "fix" the supposed spelling mistake, only to find random brackets that I will note many anonymous editors tend to remove as-is. This likely makes it difficult for some people to understand what guidelines we really have set down here in regards to spelling.

Maybe I went overboard as to why I'm against these templates since it's a fairly small request/change, but yeah, that's the idea I'm going with here. I think having one set guideline for spelling would improve the wiki for the better and make things more efficient and understandable for everyone.

Just to be totally clear, I am not requesting the removal of regional game name templates. I honestly think those are worth having around. How do you guys feel about this? -- Jellytost♡ (talk) 05:44, 19 January 2022 (UTC)

Support
  1. If there was a way to implement this site-wide without templates then it would probably be a good thing. However, trying to manually get every instance of the word in any and every given page is too much, especially when new users usually have no idea that they exist, and when it's ultimately English both ways, there doesn't seem to be enough benefit to outweigh that. ---PinkYoshiFan 14:39, 19 January 2022 (UTC)
  2. I don't think it's really worth all that work of these templates just to have a couple words be different for the few signed in only users. As a side point, some other things different between versions, such as in-game descriptions, should have both versions be visible, instead of using UserLang. --kirb 15:49, 19 January 2022 (UTC)
  3. I am in full support. To be honest, I've never really liked this practice in the wiki for multiple reasons. For one, as a non-native English speaker myself, I often don't know alternate spelling of words as I mostly learned American English and that is what most commonly found over the internet, so people like me won't even use them properly, making it so that other editors would need to review edits on lookout for words with different spellings in British English. And as I pointed out in the Discord server, we currently have pages like Holo Defense API with the userlang template used all over it, which makes it such a pain to edit. I faced that myself a while ago with this edit, that should had been simple, yet it was extremely confusing. Also, at least as far as I'm aware, all spelling differences are very minor and usually consist of a single letter, so I just feel overall it's too much effort for something so small. Again, as a non-native English speaker, I didn't notice many of these differences of spelling over the years, are they really that important? Finally, these differences only are visible to logged in users who specifically selected British English as their language, so it's too much effort for such a small number of editors that probably wouldn't mind if they saw "defense" instead of "defence". So, yes, I support removing the userlang templates, for in-game text we should list both in the page itself like we do for Smash Bros. trophy descriptions already, and the game name templates are fine to stay. - Gigi (talk • edits) 16:50, 19 January 2022 (UTC)
  4. Did you know that Wars Wiki, the original inventors of the userlang template system, abolished it after a period of time? They probably had a good reason for it! I think it just creates a more complicated system that is less helpful for the new readers and editors. Trig - 19:45, 19 January 2022 (UTC)
Oppose
Neutral
  1. For now, I'm going to stay neutral on this proposal, because I think there is a case to be made either way, and I really want to see what the community at large thinks before I pick a side. --Samwell (talk) 05:48, 19 January 2022 (UTC)
  2. Neutral about spelling (at least for now), but I support stoping usage of UserLang to hide information from other users. I also slightly lean towards removing regional name changer templates and stuff like that, since they can't be applied everywhere (such as tabs or aboutfile) and causes clutter. Superbound (talk) 16:27, 19 January 2022 (UTC)
  3. At that point, there's not much reason to keep regional game name templates either. We should explicitly either fully support British English or not at all. Something that wasn't mentioned - metric and imperial units - should both be listed. I generally agree with other arguments; they can be complex in some cases, although I don't think newbie editor confusion should be the main reason we remove features from the wiki. ⁠–⁠Wiz (talk · edits) 22:43, 19 January 2022 (UTC)

Discussion

So, I want to have a list of every template that will get affected if this passes through. For what I get, the following templates will get deleted, along with a description of what each one does, for quick reference ("us" is if the reader has the language set as American English, while "gb" is if it is set as British English):

  • {{er}} us=er - gb=re
  • {{gray}} us=a - gb=e (gray - grey)
  • {{installment}} us=l - gb= (installment - instalment)
  • {{l}} us= - gb=l (l - ll)
  • {{maneuver}} us=euver - gb=oeuvre (maneuver - manoeuvre)
  • {{o}} us= - gb=u (o - ou)
  • {{tire}} us=i - gb=y (tire - tyre)
  • {{z}} us=z - gb=s

If there is a template missing from the list, add it please.
If there is a template in the list that won't get affected, delete it please.
If there are some templates that won't get deleted, but that still will get affected in some way if this passes, please add it/them to the list in some way.
If there is some error here, or you feel that some wording/structure of the list could be better in another way, feel free to change it. -Kirbeat (talk) 06:18, 19 January 2022 (UTC)

I will go ahead and put it out there that this general template will be affected as well. -- Jellytost♡ (talk) 06:30, 19 January 2022 (UTC)

If the proposal passes and the templates are deleted, which spelling will we use? Or will there be no rule, and users can use any spelling they want to? Superbound (talk) 16:27, 19 January 2022 (UTC)

The regional game variants of the UserLang template (Kirby's Return to Dream Land/Kirby's Adventure Wii, for example) will be here to stay, as mentioned up-top. Seems that the generalization equivalents for stuff like colour, favourite, grey, etc. are going to go if the proposal passes. – Owencrazyboy17 (talk)
If we get rid of the UserLang templates but keep the regional game name templates, what will we do with instances like the first line of Kirby's Return to Dream Land? StarPunch (talk) 20:27, 19 January 2022 (UTC)
As specified on the Discord, I think the best idea for now would be to default to the American English name as a title and in the description, with the British name as a redirect going forward. The original userlang template (linked on my comment above) would be archived and go unused in mainspace. When/if someone makes another proposal for the regional game templates, we can sort out more then. I also want to address the comment Vipz made by saying that the removal of these isn't primarily because of "newbie confusion". That was mostly something obscure I noticed while thinking about this. I would say the large effort and confusion overall for all of us, just for a few people, is the main reason I'd like to abolish this, along with wanting consistency to be prominent.

Hopefully all of that makes sense. -- Jellytost♡ (talk) 00:08, 20 January 2022 (UTC)

Personally, I'm kind of in the same boat as Vipz, and think that if we are going to do away with the userlang templates, then the game name changer templates should go as well. Leaving those in place would create another awkward halfway house situation like what we had with the reception sections. As for imperial vs metric units, I think it's fine to list both generally speaking. --Samwell (talk) 00:52, 20 January 2022 (UTC)

Yep, I getcha. Will most likely make another proposal for those after this one (unless someone beats me to it). I just didn't feel comfortable with requesting that much of a change in one proposal without having some discussion first. I basically thought a small step first would be best. -- Jellytost♡ (talk) 18:50, 20 January 2022 (UTC)

Proposal Archive

Successful proposals
Failed proposals

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
KSA Parasol Waddle Dee Pause Screen Artwork.png
Retrieved from "https://wikirby.com/w/index.php?title=WiKirby:Proposals&oldid=304237"