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

WiKirby:Proposals: Difference between revisions

From WiKirby, your independent source of Kirby knowledge.
Jump to navigationJump to search
Line 11: Line 11:
{{Oppose}}
{{Oppose}}
#Strong oppose on this, myself. As someone who avoided ''Forgotten Land'' spoilers and considered avoiding them crucial to my experience, I think removing the courtesy of alerting someone who may accidentally stumble in a page only to get spoiled is a really bad move. As much as it can be easy to avoid certain pages specific to a certain game, the ''Kirby'' series is known for its surprise return of characters, mechanics, and even often music, so someone could be checking a page not directly related to FL and get accidentally spoiled. I would be really sad to see this template get removed. Also, I don't think it's fair to compare this case with a series like Fire Emblem, because RPGs are very story heavy, and thus of course spoilers will be everywhere. Now ''Kirby'' isn't story heavy at all, but it still has spoilers. I can't mention any examples here because I don't want to accidentally spoil someone who may read this really. If anything, I would rather us to probably review the time something is considered a spoiler and what we consider spoilers for any game, but I would really not like to see the spoiler template get removed. {{User:Gigi/sig}} 11:55, 5 April 2022 (UTC)
#Strong oppose on this, myself. As someone who avoided ''Forgotten Land'' spoilers and considered avoiding them crucial to my experience, I think removing the courtesy of alerting someone who may accidentally stumble in a page only to get spoiled is a really bad move. As much as it can be easy to avoid certain pages specific to a certain game, the ''Kirby'' series is known for its surprise return of characters, mechanics, and even often music, so someone could be checking a page not directly related to FL and get accidentally spoiled. I would be really sad to see this template get removed. Also, I don't think it's fair to compare this case with a series like Fire Emblem, because RPGs are very story heavy, and thus of course spoilers will be everywhere. Now ''Kirby'' isn't story heavy at all, but it still has spoilers. I can't mention any examples here because I don't want to accidentally spoil someone who may read this really. If anything, I would rather us to probably review the time something is considered a spoiler and what we consider spoilers for any game, but I would really not like to see the spoiler template get removed. {{User:Gigi/sig}} 11:55, 5 April 2022 (UTC)
#Oppose. I personally have found some use out of it, respectively around the release of KF2. The Fire Emblem comparison imho misses an important point. FE handles stories very different from what Kirby does. And honestly, I just prefer the template as sort of a "last resort" for a reader who goes on a random page, as unlikely as that may be. [[User:Infinite Possibilities|Infinite Possibilities]] ([[User talk:Infinite Possibilities|talk]]) 03:36, 6 April 2022 (UTC)
{{Neutral}}
{{Neutral}}


Revision as of 03:36, 6 April 2022

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

Do away with the spoiler template? (March 30th, 2022 - April 13th, 2022)

So, in the wake of Kirby and the Forgotten Land's release, a lot of spoilery information is being added to articles. Naturally, under current policy, all the affected pages should be tagged with the spoiler template, but that got me thinking. Other wikis, such as Fire Emblem Wiki, don't bother with a spoiler template at all, but just issue a blanket statement on the front page saying the wiki contains spoilers. I wonder if it would be worth us doing the same, so that we don't have to keep track of where the spoiler template ought to go. I don't personally hold much stock in one choice or the other, but I thought it would be worth bringing up. Let me know what you think. --Samwell (talk) 00:31, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

Support
  1. Agreed. One year seems like too long and there are probably people who would say it's too short, so having anything based in time can go. Also if we have a template then we're bound to miss some cases at some point, and there are some places we can't put it (like if a page with a spoiler in the title shows up in a maintenance special page). ---PinkYoshiFan 11:46, 30 March 2022 (UTC)
  2. Many times it's good to warn a reader of what they're about to read, but I think it's common sense to not read wiki articles or sections relating to video games you don't want to be spoiled about. It can also apply to any older titles someone might not have played. ⁠–⁠Wiz (talk · edits) 12:21, 30 March 2022 (UTC)
  3. Never thought about that before, but it makes a lot of sense to do away with it now that you bring it up. Usually there's a warning on the sitenotice about spoilers anyways, which can be seen on every page. -- Jellytost♡ (talk) 22:47, 30 March 2022 (UTC)
  4. Having this template is bound to cause disagreement about what does and doesn't constitute a spoiler, and anyone trying to avoid spoilers probably won't be reading pages about those spoilers anyway. Hewer (talk · contributions) 11:46, 5 April 2022 (UTC)
Oppose
  1. Strong oppose on this, myself. As someone who avoided Forgotten Land spoilers and considered avoiding them crucial to my experience, I think removing the courtesy of alerting someone who may accidentally stumble in a page only to get spoiled is a really bad move. As much as it can be easy to avoid certain pages specific to a certain game, the Kirby series is known for its surprise return of characters, mechanics, and even often music, so someone could be checking a page not directly related to FL and get accidentally spoiled. I would be really sad to see this template get removed. Also, I don't think it's fair to compare this case with a series like Fire Emblem, because RPGs are very story heavy, and thus of course spoilers will be everywhere. Now Kirby isn't story heavy at all, but it still has spoilers. I can't mention any examples here because I don't want to accidentally spoil someone who may read this really. If anything, I would rather us to probably review the time something is considered a spoiler and what we consider spoilers for any game, but I would really not like to see the spoiler template get removed. - Gigi (talk • edits) 11:55, 5 April 2022 (UTC)
  2. Oppose. I personally have found some use out of it, respectively around the release of KF2. The Fire Emblem comparison imho misses an important point. FE handles stories very different from what Kirby does. And honestly, I just prefer the template as sort of a "last resort" for a reader who goes on a random page, as unlikely as that may be. Infinite Possibilities (talk) 03:36, 6 April 2022 (UTC)
Neutral

Discussion

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=326982"