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

Deciding upon pronouns for characters with none (March 24th, 2023 - April 7th, 2023)

A common issue that's come up on the wiki is what pronouns to use to refer to minor characters who haven't been officially referred to in third-person. Right now, there's a discussion about this ongoing with Bouncy, and a lot of anonymous users have made small edits in this vein, usually changing characters with no confirmed pronouns to "it". However, there are cases where this approach seems odd; for example, Super Bonkers is referred to as "it" despite regular Bonkers being referred to as "he", and Keke is referred to as "they" (which I already changed from "it") despite being a reference to Kiki from Kiki's Delivery Service, who is referred to as "she".

Since this issue will likely come up a lot if we don't address it soon, I figured I would create a proposal to establish a formal policy about this. Specifically, it would be a general rule to add to WiKirby:Writing style#Subject characteristics — if a character has no confirmed pronouns, go with what the majority of users feel is correct, as long as it's consistent. Just as an example, a lot of users have expressed the idea that referring to Bouncy as "she" feels correct because Bouncy Sis is, even if she hasn't been officially referred to as such. I don't think gathering a majority opinion has to be done in a formal poll, unless opinions are really split; rather, most can be inferred based on context and getting a general idea of what people think.

The reasoning behind this is because it's very unlikely every character will get official pronouns, so going with what feels right would be a lot less awkward than sticking with "it" for everything. I'm also open to other suggestions or improvements to this policy. StarPunch (talk) 23:01, 24 March 2023 (UTC)

Support

1. We currently have a lot of inconsistency with pronouns, and we have unwritten rules such as "use it/its for enemies when there is no confirmed pronoun, but use they/them for characters". However, with no complete consistency in the series itself, we could, for example, have someone go to Sailor Waddle Dee and change the pronouns to it/its, claiming that we have a character with it/its pronouns, Sillydillo, and we really won't have any other way to say no other than "I don't believe that's right" or "I prefer they/them", since Sailor Dee has no confirmed pronouns. We are already unofficially dealing with lots of conjecture when it comes to pronouns, and since English has two neutral sets of pronouns (it/its and they/them), and you can also argue that he/him is neutral, we really have no way to be 100% neutral without conjecture. On top of all that, the Kirby series is a Japanese series, and the Japanese language deals with pronouns way differently than English, to the point where it's possible to have lots of text about a character but with no specific pronouns to write an article in English about them (such as Gryll), so we can indeed have many cases where there are no official pronouns. Without a proper way to handle them, we will continue with endless debates on what is the right pronoun for a character (such as Bouncy) and we will go in circles. As such, I believe it's very reasonable to just come to an agreement with a simple vote with what kind of "conjecture" we will use for the pronouns of a character; the conjecture exists with or without a set of rules, but without one we will have way less constructive debates. Pronouns aren't something supplementary like a character's gender, they are required for us to write an article about a subject, so if a character has no confirmed pronouns, we will have to choose one for them, there is no way to avoid that. There is no way WiKirby will exist 100% without conjecture in any form, and expecting that is unrealistic. - Gigi (talk • edits) 21:45, 26 March 2023 (UTC)
2. Given the inconsistency introduced by KatFL in third-person pronouns for some Mid-Bosses like Gigant Edge, it is fair to say that Nintendo of America themselves engage in conjecture much of the time, given the original Japanese text is unlikely to give guidance and given HAL may not necessarily have codified genders in mind for many characters (including Kirby), certainly not in a sense that translates cleanly to English. This leads me to believe that the concern with the wiki's conjecture policy is moot. The alternative to recommending a consistent (if conjectural) pronoun use in these cases would be highly constrained writing to play the pronoun game, and this would put a much more significant burden on editors to rewrite edits that inadvertently assume pronouns compared to a simple pronoun replacement for edits that inadvertently use non-consensus pronouns. —willidleaway [talk | edits] 14:16, 29 March 2023 (UTC)
3. Since there are many cases where pronouns change or are simply not given in the games, I don't think there's a simple rule we could use to decide on pronouns that are appropriate for all characters, so I think it makes sense to decide on pronouns for unclear cases like these by coming to a consensus through discussion. Consequently, I support the proposal based on this and the arguments brought forth by the previous supporters. Typman (talk) 14:33, 29 March 2023 (UTC)

Oppose

1. I personally find that there could be better ways of going about this, one of which might be to allow things to stay as they are. We must consider the fact that pronouns shape (and and are shaped by!) the way we look at people and the way we look at things, and even if conjecture is inevitable in the end, I think that for the sake of neutrality we should stick to what we have. Even then, it is true that a Writing Style rule would be very valuable for consistency. -Amari!! :3 14:07, 28 March 2023 (UTC)

Neutral

1. WiKirby has gained a reputation of being non-speculative so far. We'll be playing a role in establishing pronouns of subjects which may prove completely wrong at some point in the future. Even if we get proven correct in other '99%' of times, the mere fact we do not differentiate between confirmed and conjectured pronouns can only weaken perception of WiKirby's reliability regarding both. I want to see opinions from others, so staying in Neutral for now. ⁠–⁠Wiz (talk · edits) 11:06, 25 March 2023 (UTC)
2. While I agree that this would be a definite solution to the issue of people trying to change character pronouns, I agree with Vipz that there is the issue of that it is still conjecture. ---PinkYoshiFan 20:53, 26 March 2023 (UTC)
3. I strongly agree on the fact that we should stay non-speculative. However, the issue of referring to these strange cases still remain, and honestly it's really iffy in general. I'm also not to sure how we would vote without it being too bothersome and clunky in deciding what pronouns to use. GoldenDragonLeaf (talk · edits) 22:08, 26 March 2023 (UTC)

Discussion

I overall agree with the proposal, but I just wanted to ask how we would vote on pronouns. I assume it can be in the page's talk page? Also, I suppose that if someone tried to change the pronouns of a page with no clear reasoning other than "I prefer them like this" it would be reverted, right? - Gigi (talk • edits) 23:07, 24 March 2023 (UTC)

Yeah, talk page discussion was my idea; either that or the Discord. Changing the pronouns without consensus would be reverted. StarPunch (talk) 23:22, 24 March 2023 (UTC)

If the proposal does not go through (and it looks quite close at the moment at least) then wouldn't this be a de facto writing standard anyway? It would just be that it would be an unwritten rule to go by consensus on a character-by-character basis, instead of explicitly codifying it in the style document. I suppose someone could put forward a proposal to codify 'pronoun game' writing for characters with no English pronouns in official use (which for the record I would not support). —willidleaway [talk | edits] 14:40, 29 March 2023 (UTC)

To be clear, this thought isn't to dismiss the proposal as unnecessary, but rather to say that barring 'pronoun game' guidance, some form of consensus-based conjecture may end up being the de facto solution in any case, and I only see benefit to codifying it in the style document. —willidleaway [talk | edits] 14:50, 29 March 2023 (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