Pikipedia:Proposals/past proposals

This is an archive of past policy proposals. Please do not edit this page.

Implemented

Game names

We've always italicised names of games outside the Pikmin series, but italicisation of games in the Pikmin series is varied. Now I come to think of it, it would be more consistent, and it would solve the whole Pikmin (game) / Pikmin 1 issue in places because an italicised Pikmin would always be the game. GP

We can italicize all game names. Seems appropriate, makes certain things easier to read. —Jimbo Jambo 09:57, 15 October 2010 (EDT)

Agree, but as below, it should not completely replace Pikmin 1 usage.--Prezintenden

Agree with italics, but I think it should replace Pikmin 1 usage (see below). --SnorlaxMonster

I think an italicized name in palce of Pikmin 1 is the best option... Crystal lucario

Signatures

IMO, they should be short in both the edit page and as seen on the saved page, with a link to the user's user page or talk at the very least, very few, small images, preferably not animated, and placed on the same line as the comment, not on a new line below it. GP

For signatures, it's better if they are no longer than one line in length, contain a link to the userpage or talk page and images must not be larger than two lines of text, and animation should be avoided. --SnorlaxMonster

Perspective in articles

Just confirming 2nd person is bad, 'Olimar'/'Louie'/'the president', 'the player', 'the captain' are good. GP

I think "the leader" would be preferable to "the captain" in at least Pikmin 2 articles, as Olimar is the only captain amongst the leaders. Vol (Talk)

Actually, GP meant that we mustn't use "you", and instead use "the player". And about discussing that, I say we avoid using "you" to the max, except in walkthroughs, like the ones in the cave articles. As for leader vs captain, I don't think it's weird to have 2 or 3 (President) "captains". I'm not sure, but can't there be more than one captain? At least, to the eyes of the Pikmin, there's only one captain at a time. They can't be controlled by two characters simultaneously. So I say it really doesn't matter much. {Espyo^T} 11:10, 4 March 2011 (EST)

What I meant is that while Captain Olimar is an actual captain, the Louie and the President are not, while they are still leaders. The opening scene of Pikmin 2 states that Captain Olimar is the only employee of Hocotate Freight with any merit, or something similar to that effect. It's not a really big deal, but the fact is that Olimar is the only captain, and the word "captain" should only be used when referring to him. Vol (Talk)

Hmm, I'm not sure it's important enough to recommend against using 'captain' to refer to leaders other than Olimar. For one thing, the meaning is obvious enough, and 'captain' is near enough a synonym of 'leader' that it's silly to make a distinction. Olimar's a ship captain; all three are Pikmin captains. GP

User images

The current limit as defined at Help:Files#User images is 10, which I think is a bit high. Should unfit material (considering this wiki should be fine for those the games are - that is, everyone) be banned? GP

Agree. I think I voted for 5 last time. Still prefer that. Unfit material should be deleted.--Prezintenden

Yeah, 5 sounds reasonable. And admins can delete images at their own discretion if they deem it inappropriate. --SnorlaxMonster

I vote 5 Crystal lucario

Talk pages

Confirmation again: sign your comment; indent replies, not just anything you're editing after; don't edit others' comments. GP

Pikmin 1 / Pikmin / Pikmin (game)

There are two cases here: mentions in headings (either the page title or any others), and mentions in article text. I think if we used an italicised Pikmin outside of headings as mentioned above, we'd solve that part. The other case is for things like Category:Pikmin 1 enemies and Emperor Bulblax#Pikmin 1. I think (game) looks weird in those cases, and 1 is technically incorrect, but Pikmin can be ambiguous. Perhaps 1 is the least poor. Any better ideas? GP

I stand by my opinion on this one. I think it should always be referred to as "Pikmin 1" except in the title of the game's article. No, it's not actually the game's name, but it's instantly and easily identifiable as referring to it. —Jimbo Jambo 09:57, 15 October 2010 (EDT)

Agree with JJ.It should always be italicised, but since Pikmin 1 just happens to be the easiest to comprehend, I'd prefer to use that aswell.--Prezintenden

While it may be easier to understand, Pikmin 1 is still a conjectural title. If they wanted the first Pikmin game to be Pikmin 1, they would have changed it with New Play Control! But the title should be italicized to make it less confusing. --SnorlaxMonster

But that's not possible with page titles. Category:Pikmin enemies, say, sounds like enemies in the series, whereas Category:Pikmin 1 enemies is unambiguous. GP

Yeah, in those situations it would probably be OK, but it should be avoided. --SnorlaxMonster

Agree with the two above me, etc... Crystal lucario

Well, sounds like I'm outnumbered here. I always thought "Pikmin 1" looked really, really incorrect. We're a wiki, we can't afford to be that... casual. In my opinion, "Pikmin 1" or "Pikmin (game)" have the same potential to specify the first game. And, while "Pikmin (game)" might seem a bit clunky, it seems a lot more correct. I guess I'm just trying to put professionalism above appearance. {Espyo^T} 18:27, 3 March 2011 (EST)

It's just, when you put it in a noun phrase like "Pikmin (game) enemies" or "Olimar's monologues in Pikmin (game)", it sounds awkward to me. "Pikmin 1", while not correct, is, as Prez said, easier to read and take in the meaning of, and I think this is pretty important too. GP

Yes, I can understand that as well. But all in all, they both look a bit weird. One is awkward, the other is informal. Maybe we can come up with some other alternative like "Enemies in the first game"? ... Even that sounds weird. I guess there's just no way to distinguish the family from the game from the franchise without at least one of them looking weird... As for the monologues page, I know it's just an example, but, off-topic, I suggest we rename that to "Olimar's monologues". For instance, "Olimar's notes" isn't called "Olimar's notes in Pikmin 2". {Espyo^T} 11:10, 4 March 2011 (EST)

Maybe: it's sort of more that they're not named in Pikmin 1, making 'monologues' just what someone decided we should call them, so it's good to have the title more precise. That is, you know 'Olimar's notes' is referring to Pikmin 2; to know what 'Olimar's monologues' is referring to, you'd have to read the first sentence of the article. GP

Article/section capitalisation

A while back, we decided to follow Wikipedia's article naming standards and capitalise only proper nouns. I think this should apply to section headings too. GP

Yeah, sure. —Jimbo Jambo 09:57, 15 October 2010 (EDT)

Agree.--Prezintenden

This is always good. Same goes for categories. --SnorlaxMonster

Glitch articles

Because of the wide range of glitches that might just happen to occur one time, I think we should only have ones for glitches that are common (multiple people have experienced them with little variation in the details) or repeatable (you can make it happen any time, with the right conditions, which should be noted in the article). GP

Agreed, maybe unless multiple players experience the same rare glitch. —Jimbo Jambo 09:57, 15 October 2010 (EDT)

Agree with JJ.--Prezintenden

I'd like to point out that for us to know multiple players have experienced a glitch, it'd have to be enough that there are multiple connected to Pikipedia and that news of each reaches us, which would probably make it not rare. GP

Have a list of minor glitches like the one I made at Bulbapedia. If the glitch cannot be repeated, unless there is a video, don't give it a page. --SnorlaxMonster

Hah, actually, glitches was just created. I think some there have their own articles already, so it needs to be sorted out, but yeah, we could put glitches that don't have much to say about them there rather than create loads of short articles. GP

Action replay

I say reject all mention of it. GP

Sort of agree. Really minor things like making Pikmin black aren't worth a mention, but if it solves some ancient mystery or leads to some revelation, like what's behind that mysterious unbreakable wall (as an example), then I don't think it would hurt. —Jimbo Jambo 09:57, 15 October 2010 (EDT)

Yeah, I agree: anything that can be discovered by action replay only, but exists in the game, should be fine. GP

Agree with the obvious latter.--Prezintenden

If you are discovering hidden things in the game, then they should be mentioned, but you don't need to mention that it was found by Action Replay/cheating device. Don't mention Action Replay at all. --SnorlaxMonster

No cheating devices should/will be mentioned Crystal lucario

I say we talk about it, but not integrally. By that I mean that we should mention that X Y or Z can be accessed using hacks, but we shouldn't enforce users to use them. In my opinion, cheating devices, when used to cheat, make a person lose self-confidence, so the only loser is the cheater. When used to explore the game in exciting new ways however... How could we say no to that? This isn't however a cheating wiki, so we shouldn't just mention it at every opportunity. But stuff like the beta areas articles should mention AR codes to access the stages, if they're made. {Espyo^T} 11:10, 4 March 2011 (EST)

Makes sense. GP

Spelling

As much as I hate to say this, where spelling differs regionally, we should use the USA version (because PAL notes use USA spelling (in most cases (where the treasure was in the US version))). GP

What about that regional spelling thing on Wars Wiki? Could we use it here? Vol (Talk)

Mm, I don't really like using templates, potentially a lot, in simple article text. It just complicates things (editing, actually changing them all over), and only varies for logged in users anyway. GP

What exactly is this Wars thing?--Prezintenden

[1] GP

Seems crazily unnecessary, especially considering EU users are a minority here. It's probably best just to use American throughout the whole wiki, I find.--Prezintenden

I find this....crazy. Compare how many European/Australian users here to American users. Then that would be a answer. Bulborb63 (talk • contribs)

I'm Australian and I think that we should be using American spellings. That Wars Wiki switch just seems unnecessary. The games use American English anyway. --SnorlaxMonster

I agree with everyone who opposes the idea. --Gamefreak75

Opposes the idea of using USA spellings only, or opposes with the template system to localise spellings? GP

Using the template to localize. Just leave the spelling as is. --FREAK ~Game Freak~OUT!

What about us Europe/Australia users? We deserve our article worth! And Spelling! TEMPLATE! Bulborb63 (talk • contribs)

Just get over it. As I stated above, I'm Australian and I would prefer if the wiki used American spelling. I've even trained myself to type "color" but write "colour". You get used to it. --SnorlaxMonster 08:14, 25 October 2010 (EDT)

It's okay for him to disagree.... —Jimbo Jambo 12:37, 25 October 2010 (EDT)

I'm not saying he can't disagree. I'm saying that American spelling isn't incorrect spelling, so it doesn't bother me. He can have his own opinion. --SnorlaxMonster 04:54, 26 October 2010 (EDT)

Headers

Should be completely devoid of any formatting, IMO. No links, italics or the like - on articles. That is, it makes sense to have, say, section headers link to their articles at Pikipedia:featured articles/nominations. GP

There could be other examples where it is necessary, but they would be noted in the future if they are found. But otherwise, I say yes. If you want to link, use template:main. --SnorlaxMonster 03:54, 27 October 2010 (EDT)

Videos

I think we've pretty much decided that video embedding should be used sparingly, only for things like adverts and glitches that are much more easily understood through them than through still images or text. GP

Support

• GP
• RandomYoshi^{Talk to me!} Per Greenpickle nearly said 'J' there...
• Vol (Talk)

Social content

Should be mostly kept off non-user/talk pages, but small amounts, perhaps along with more appropriate things, are fine. The main location for lots of chat about anything other than the running of the wiki and its content should be the off-wiki forums. Even user talk pages shouldn't be used if there are lots of edits in a short space of time, because it fills up the recent changes. GP

Support

• GP
• RandomYoshi^{Talk to me!} I also think that social content should be sent to the forums. All of it, even; if it's not about improving the acticle, then it sholdn't belong on a talkpage. The Chat is also a good place where one might want to go to. 19:36, 13 December 2011 (EST)
• Vol (Talk)

Comments

Hmm, okay, given that we don't have off-wiki forums any more, strike that bit... GP 17:54, 8 December 2011 (EST)

We still have off-wiki forums, of a sort, on the NIWA hub site though. Vol (Talk)