|
|
| (160 intermediate revisions by 23 users not shown) |
| Line 2: |
Line 2: |
|
| |
|
| ='''Current Proposals'''= | | ='''Current Proposals'''= |
| ==Abolish Proposal Rule 8 (16 November 2023 – 30 November 2023)==
| |
| I know, I know. "Isn't that just one free support vote for every single proposal?" Hear me out.
| |
|
| |
| First off, many proposals aren't as simple as yes or no. Sometimes there are multiple options, and the original proposer may not like one but include it anyway as a courtesy. Alternatively, a person may wish to make a proposal to settle a controversy, and he or she may still prefer to do nothing. In any case, I think there are sufficient reasons not to rule the proposer unable to vote at all, especially since, in many cases, the proposer is the one with the strongest opinions on the topic.
| |
|
| |
| Of course, I'll leave that decision up to you all. -{{User:YoshiFlutterJump/sig}} 07:04, 16 November 2023 (UTC)
| |
|
| |
| {{Support}}
| |
| #Even outside of the multiple options scenario, I think the vote of whoever propeses should also count for something outside of presenting the idea, so support. {{User:ShadowKirby/sig}} 07:23, 16 November 2023 (UTC)
| |
| #Agreed, the proposer being barred from voting doesn't really work for multiple-option votes. {{User:Pinkyoshifan/sig}} 13:46, 16 November 2023 (UTC)
| |
|
| |
| {{Oppose}}
| |
|
| |
| {{Neutral}}
| |
| #I feel it should be fine but only on multi-choice proposals. For proposals like this one, where it's just support, oppose, neutral, allowing the person who posted the proposal to vote will basically mean a free support vote for it. For multi-choice, I can see the point since the person who wrote the proposal will have one prefence among many others. So, personally, if this passes, I would prefer that it would with that note. {{User:Gigi/sig}} 13:59, 16 November 2023 (UTC)
| |
| #I pretty much agree with what Gigi wrote above. While the argument of "it's just a free support vote" doesn't apply to multi-choice proposals, I do feel like keeping the rule for yes or no proposals only would make for a better change. [[User:Infinite Possibilities|Infinite Possibilities]] ([[User talk:Infinite Possibilities|talk]]) 15:47, 16 November 2023 (UTC)
| |
|
| |
| ===Discussion===
| |
|
| |
| ==Change voting rules for multi-option votes (16 November 2023 – 30 November 2023)==
| |
| Our proposal header warns of the infamous spoiler effect. I think we can do better than that.
| |
|
| |
| For the uninformed: the spoiler effect occurs when, in a three-option proposal, Option A and Option B both score 30 % of the vote while Option C scores 40 %. Option C wins a plurality, but if Options A and B are similar, this means that the majority opposed Option C and it still won out. It's a strong weakness of plurality voting and encourages strategic voting (voting for a less-preferred option in order to prevent the least-preferred option from winning). What can we do about it? Here are our options:
| |
|
| |
| '''Instant runoff voting''': The best solution, in my opinion. Sometimes called "ranked choice voting", it essentially allows you to give differently-weighted votes to different options. I'll give you an example right now: this is my first choice, "multi-option voting" is my second choice and "plurality voting" is my third. If "instant runoff voting" has the least first-choice votes, my vote doesn't lose significance; it instead moves to "multi-option voting", my second choice. This single-elimination process continues until one option remains. ''Note'': Neutral voters would not be allowed to vote on any other option, unless they remove their "neutral" votes.
| |
|
| |
| '''Multi-option voting''': Didn't understand the last option? This might be simpler. You can cast a vote on all options minus one, if you so choose. These votes would all be equally weighted. This is the system preferred on some other NIWA wikis, such as the Super Mario Wiki, to give you an idea. ''Note'': Just as in the above option, neutral voters may not vote for any other option.
| |
|
| |
| '''Plurality voting''': Self-explanatory: do nothing and leave the voting system as-is.
| |
|
| |
| So what'll it be? My preferred option is instant runoff voting, but that's for you all to decide. -{{User:YoshiFlutterJump/sig}} 07:04, 16 November 2023 (UTC)
| |
|
| |
| {{Option|1|Instant runoff (ranked choice) voting}}
| |
| #It took a bit to grasp, but it seems right to count a vote towards something else if another one fails. Would note that one should be able to choose to vote for one option and one option only if they so choose. This option seems to prevent proposals from getting stale due to having more popular options unresolved. Not entirely sure how it'd work in practice but in theory I like this. {{User:ShadowKirby/sig}} 07:23, 16 November 2023 (UTC)
| |
| #If I'm understanding this correctly then it does seem like the best option. {{User:Pinkyoshifan/sig}} 13:46, 16 November 2023 (UTC)
| |
| #Certainly agree about the whole thing about multi-choice proposals. I've often come across times where I notice many people don't want a certain choice to win but then split on voting on two or more options, then the option with most rejection wins still. This would be my preferred method to counter that. I just wonder how to format the voting, but I suppose people can just comment on each option and go "this is my first choice", "this is my second choice" etc. {{User:Gigi/sig}} 13:59, 16 November 2023 (UTC)
| |
|
| |
| {{Option|2|Multi-option voting}}
| |
|
| |
| {{Option|3|Plurality voting (leave as-is)}}
| |
|
| |
| {{Neutral}}
| |
|
| |
| ===Discussion===
| |
| @ShadowKirby: I should clarify that this would not preclude the option to cast only one vote. The effect of this is that, if a user votes for only one option and that option loses, the vote has no bearing on the standing of the other options, which is the same as in the status quo. It's effectively equivalent to a last-choice vote. (Should also note: one would not be able to make two first choices, or the like; ranking should occur linearly or else options not preferred should be excluded.) -{{User:YoshiFlutterJump/sig}} 07:40, 16 November 2023 (UTC)
| |
| :Sounds perfect :) {{User:ShadowKirby/sig}} 07:42, 16 November 2023 (UTC)
| |
|
| |
| ==Disallow links in quotes, flavor text, etc (November 16th, 2023 - November 30th, 2023)==
| |
| I will admit this is minor all things considered, but this has bothered me for a long time. To give an example, take [[Magolor]]'s quote from his page:
| |
|
| |
| {{quote|Hi there! My name is {{color|orange|Magolor}}. I'm from {{color|orange|another dimension}}, but I just love [[Popstar|Planet Popstar]]. I can't get enough of it! Things got a bit hectic [[Kirby's Return to Dream Land|when I first arrived]], but that's all in the past, thanks to [[Kirby]].|Magolor's opening dialogue from [[New Challenge Stages]] in ''[[Kirby's Dream Collection Special Edition]]''}}
| |
| As you can see, this features colored text. Orange and... wait a second, blue text?
| |
|
| |
| Well, yeah, these are links to other pages. However, from a quick glance, one could confuse them with colored text, since there is colored text from the actual game before (in orange). Keep in mind I am only talking about Magolor's own quote, not the text after that has links to [[New Challenge Stages]] and ''[[Kirby's Dream Collection Special Edition]]'': those are fine to stay, as they aren't quotes.
| |
|
| |
| Take another example from Magolor's page:
| |
|
| |
| {{quote|Anyway... MUAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! The time has come for your planet... No! The time has come for the ENTIRE UNIVERSE to bow down to me. And for being such a big help in all of this, your planet gets to go first! Prepare to bow, [[Popstar]]! Welcome your new overlord!|Magolor in ''Kirby's Return to Dream Land''}}
| |
| This one actually features no colored text from the game, but the link to Popstar makes that blue, and one could think this is blue in the game, no? I mean, the emphasis on Popstar would make sense. In short, this misleads the reader.
| |
|
| |
| But you may argue that in Kirby games all colored text is orange/red/yellow, so with the links being blue it's not a problem, since they will always be clearly links. Well, that is the problem: there is colored text with blue text.
| |
|
| |
| New Challenge Stages challenge descriptions like [[Sword Challenge (New Challenge Stages)]]:
| |
|
| |
| {{quote|Can you {{color|orange|master}} the {{color|blue|king}} of weapon-based Copy Abilities?|Sword Challenge Caption}}
| |
| Pause descriptions in ''[[Kirby Super Star Ultra]]'' like [[Suplex]]:
| |
|
| |
| ''This {{Color|red|burns}} with {{Color|blue|fighting spirit}}! Grab {{color|red|foes}} and {{color|blue|throw}} 'em! Learn all 8 {{color|blue|throws}} to be a {{color|red|champ}}!''
| |
|
| |
| Just to name a few. So, personally, we should just get rid of links in any text like that to prevent confusion. And last but not least, another reason I don't like links in text like this is how they often use piped links. Take this one about Kracko as an example:
| |
|
| |
| {{Quote|[[Kirby|YOU...!]] Did you think I'd forget? The [[Kirby's Adventure|time]] you smashed into me with your [[Hi-Jump]]! That [[Kirby Super Star|time]] I was betrayed by [[Helper]]s! Or [[Kirby: Squeak Squad|when]] I was replaced by that [[Mecha-Kracko|mechanical cloud]]! I-I... Sniff... there's something in my eye...|'''VS Kracko''' (Very Hard) Pause Screen description in the American English version of ''[[Kirby Fighters Deluxe]]''}}
| |
|
| |
| It feels really unprofessional to add piped links to "YOU...!", "time" and "when", and the one for "mechanical cloud" like spoils what this is about. I dunno, I never liked it for this reason as well.
| |
|
| |
| To conclude all this, basically, to put it another way, my proposal is to disallow links in any text that is not authored by a wiki editor, so quotes (both from characters and developers), flavor text, official descriptions, translations of anything else that applies, and so on. Just how right now the [[WiKirby:Formatting specifics|formatting specifics]] says that links in section headers should be avoided, my proposal is to also write something like that in that page about quotes, flavor text etc. What do you all think? {{User:Gigi/sig}} 15:02, 16 November 2023 (UTC)
| |
|
| |
| {{Support}}
| |
| #Agreed, I can definitely see how it can get confusing. {{User:Pinkyoshifan/sig}} 15:31, 16 November 2023 (UTC)
| |
| {{Oppose}}
| |
| #I understand your point and while I agree that the colors and links can get confusing I think that the context these links give can be pretty important. I don't find the colored text subjects to be that confusing unless they are blue or red but even then it's not a huge deal if someone accidently clicks on them. I think context is more important and makes it more helpful for readers. [[User:NVS Pixel|NVS Pixel]] ([[User talk:NVS Pixel|talk]]) 16:55, 16 November 2023 (UTC)
| |
| {{Neutral}}
| |
| #Hm...not too sure about this one. On one hand, it does make the colored text subject less confusing, but on the other hand, the links ''would'' help some people understand the context of certain quotes... --[[User:Paistrie|Paistrie]] ([[User talk:Paistrie|talk]]) 15:59, 16 November 2023 (UTC)
| |
| ===Discussion===
| |
|
| |
| {{clear}}
| |
|
| |
| ='''Proposal Archive'''= | | ='''Proposal Archive'''= |
| {{Large|[[WiKirby:Proposals/Archive|Successful proposals]]</br> | | {{Large|[[WiKirby:Proposals/Archive|Successful proposals]]</br> |
