Pikipedia:Proposals

For archived proposals, see Pikipedia:Proposals/past proposals.

==  ==
=== Support ===
* 
* 
* 

=== Oppose ===
* 
* 
* 

=== Comments ===
* 
* 
* 

This page is used to propose changes, additions, or removals to Pikipedia's policies, guidelines, procedures, or staff members. To make a proposal, copy the contents of the box to the right, edit this page, and paste them at the end. Replace the title with an appropriate title, and in the first "Support" bullet point, explain your reasoning and sign your name.

Other users on the wiki can then sign their support or opposition, optionally making extra comments, and if staff agree, the change will be implemented.

---

Nomination for patroller: KawaiiKiwii

Support

• I am nominating myself to be a patroller. I believe that I would be an asset to the wiki, especially during the busy time of documenting Pikmin 4, due to my love for the series, along with my good and in-depth edits. During the Pikmin 4 documentation period, I have made several enemy articles, alongside other articles, have uploaded ~300 files and continue to do so. I think it would also help having more staff members to help Soprano as the wiki has got a lot more popular with edits due to the release of Pikmin 4. To conclude, I believe the Pikipedia will benefit with me as a staff member but of course I'm happy to hear your opinions on the matter. — {Kiwii_(talk)} 00:15, July 30, 2023 (EDT)

Comments

• While you are very good at editing, I'm not totally confident you should be promoted to patroller just yet. For now, you've been given the autopatrolled right. — Soprano_(talk) 23:27, August 4, 2023 (EDT)

Fansparency policy

"Fansparency", a portmanteau of "fan transparency", is when an official piece of artwork with a colored background (or a screenshot) is edited by a fan to have a transparent background around its subject. This makes the image easier to use in other contexts, but it also makes it an unofficial version of the image. Opinion is divided on how to treat fansparency on the wiki, which is why I'm starting a discussion on the topic where we can work out what the Pikipedia policy on this should be. I don't have a strong opinion on this myself, so I'll let other people present their cases. — Soprano_(talk) 05:34, September 10, 2023 (EDT)

My personal stance is that I'm personally fine with fansparency only when it is done to screenshots and when the image clearly marked as being "fansparency'd" in its file page. -Gulliblepikmin 05:40, September 10, 2023 (EDT)

Of course, fansparency should only be applied where no alternative presents itself. But what do we consider “no alternative”? Say we have a really low-quality but transparent official image. In that case, do we use it, use non-transparent better quality images, or do we allow fansparency even though there is an official transparent image? This situation may apply to things like some of the P2 renders. Supremekirbo (talk) 07:30, September 10, 2023 (EDT)

I feel the need to bring up that a good chunk of the Pikmin 2 flora and fauna renders on Pikipedia (the really tiny ones with terrible contrast from about 2006) were already tampered with, as they're sourced from the Pikmin 2 Player's Guide, which has screenshot boxes partially covering some of the renders. The person who uploaded the images just edited those boxes out and tried to fill in the blanks, which was pretty easy due to the low resolution of the scans. -Gulliblepikmin 09:34, September 10, 2023 (EDT)

I am very firmly and strongly against any and all forms of fansparency. There are a plethora of reasons for this, from it being an arguable copyright violation (editing without express permission from holder), to it not being authentic to what would actually be encountered, whether that is in game, in a guide, or in print media, and because honestly most people do a pretty terribly job doing fansparency, either by causing color distortion with improper erase techniques or by not properly vetting stray white pixels. Many pages across both here and other wikis will have backgrounded images in their infoboxes and galleries, and I would much rather a good looking gameplay screenshot over a crusty, poorly edited fansparent image. Our representation should be as close to authentic as possible without being able to be used in substitution: Having inferior quality or inauthentic files does not help that goal. Trig - 10:37, September 10, 2023 (EDT)

At least now we have the Piklopedia icons from Pikmin 2 switch, that gives us the original artwork in the highest possible quality. And from what I can tell, they aren't AI upscaled either.--NintendoPanda101 (talk) 11:36, September 10, 2023 (EDT)

Canon and regional differences on Pikipedia

Pikipedia's canon policy and treatment of regional differences are in need of significant changes. This is prompted by the release of Pikmin 1+2, which made significant changes to the first two games, and Pikmin 4, which greatly complicated the canon of the series, as well as more long-term issues like the inconsistent coverage of information from non-English versions of the games, and the unusual structure of the Canon and Pikipedia:Canon policy pages. This is a complex topic with multiple interacting parts, so this proposal has multiple parts to it as well, which are covered in subsections. There should be discussion on each part to reach a consensus before a final vote is held. — Soprano_(talk) 01:05, December 28, 2023 (EST)

Regional differences

Currently, Pikipedia:Canon policy states that the North American English version of each Pikmin game is the most canon version for the wiki. Whatever is true in this version should be documented first, then the European version, then the Japanese version. The reason for this is that Pikipedia is written in American English and that most readers are from that part of the world. This approach has some problems though and has led to disagreements, particularly in the Armored Cannon Beetle/Horned Cannon Beetle debate. Another issue is that for the first two games there's a difference between a regional version of a game (the three discs with slight differences, distributed in Japan, Europe, and North America), and a localization of a game (the translations into the many languages the games are available in). I've written about this issue more in Talk:Region. It's pretty clear this policy needs an update, so let's discuss. — Soprano_(talk) 01:05, December 28, 2023 (EST)

While a majority of the Canon policy seems perfectly fine, one section that I believe needs to be rewritten, is the Conflicts section of the policy, referring to Japanese text being considered non-canon. This simply sounds like we no longer care about accurate information when it comes to documentation. Official English translations have a notorious history to, in some cases, completely change character personalities, or story context, or even just incorrectly name items, and simply ignoring the original Japanese text, which is the true description of a franchise like Pikmin, a Japanese-made game, feels like we simply don't care.

Notable current examples on the wiki involving erroneous, official English translations:

1. The Armored Cannon Beetle vs Horned Cannon Beetle. We even document on both articles that it is a mistranslation in Pikmin 1, and that the Japanese text calls them the same thing.
2. The relation between the Armored Cannon Beetle, and the Cannon Beetle Larvae. For a long while, it was assumed that the scientific name was what was mistranslated, but as of 4, again, an error in translation in 2.
3. Hey! Pikmin family names. Numerous family names in Hey Pikmin have incorrectly translated Family names. For example, the Electric Spectralid is part of the Floaterbie family, rather than the Flutterbie family, despite in the original Japanese text, both families are イエシジミ科 . In fact, English is the only language with these kinds of issues.

I understand there are concerns with changing a policy like this, as it effects the whole wiki, past, present, and future. However, as stated previous, accuracy of information should be our top priority, and throwing the original Japanese text away for what seems to be pure convenience, sets a poor example of not only how the wiki is structured, but also sets a poor precedence for other wikis. This policy, to my understanding, was added back in 2014, which was a time it was difficult to really get reliable information about Japanese text for not only games, but media in general. However, in the past nearly 10 years, not only has more reliable methods of acquiring, and translating the original text now much easier and far more reliable; Google Translate has vastly improved, and deepL, an AI neural machine translator, has become extremely popular for it's accurate translations. On top of that, it is now extremely easy to communicate and talk with native Japanese speakers, and to my understand, some Japanese speakers do use our wiki, as there isn't really a Japanese Pikmin Wiki. I think this policy is just simply outdated, and needs an overhaul to meet with modern standards, especially with Pikmin now being a very international game, with games like Bloom and 4 being popular around the world.

--JPM (talk) 23:23, December 27, 2023 (EST)

I'm in favor of taking into account things written in the original language because for the people who are interested in learning all about Pikmin coming to this wiki, they would find it interesting to learn about things they missed or had no way of figuring out, the information really doesn't even need major portions of an article written for them, they can just be written under trivia.

--Nvortex (talk) 00:31, December 28, 2023 (EST)

I think it's unhelpful to treat this as a Japanese vs. English issue. Because the Pikmin games are not just released in Japanese and English, they're also in French, Spanish, Italian, German, Portuguese, Dutch, Korean, and Chinese. All of these are official versions of the game with Nintendo-approved translations that we should trust to be accurate. In the few situations where there are notable differences between versions, what if we treated it like a vote, where whatever is the case in most languages is what we consider most canon? Ideally, Pikipedia would document all the language versions equally, and the only reason we don't is because knowledge of languages other than English among Pikipedia editors is not very good. Unfortunately this is very difficult to change, but I think it's something we should aim for. — Soprano_(talk) 01:37, December 28, 2023 (EST)

I'd like to point out that, often, translations into languages other than English are done from the English translation rather than directly from the Japanese script. So, no matter how competent the translators are, any differences or mistakes in the English version can be expected to spread to other translations. Of course, this doesn't apply to every language in every game, but it's worth keeping in mind, I think. 2 B (talk) 15:09, December 28, 2023 (EST)

I'd like to ask if this would affect the classification of the Glowstem as belonging to the Glowcap family, or the Margaret belonging to the same family as the Creeping Crysanthemum as opposed to the Dandelions. Other family-related changes (Flint Bug, Mitite) were reverted in Pikmin 4, after all. 2 B (talk) 12:59, December 30, 2023 (EST)

The nature of canon

Before the release of Pikmin 4, the Pikmin series had a simple timeline, with only minor conflicts between games. However, Pikmin 4 has broken this, as its story is in some ways a retelling of the first game that introduces many details that conflict with other games. This has forced a major rewrite of the Canon article, but I feel the current state of the article is not ideal. We need to work out not only how to restructure this article, but also how to change the canon policy to deal with the fact that games can have contradicting facts. It's possible future games will introduce more contradictions, so working this out now would be a good idea. — Soprano_(talk) 01:05, December 28, 2023 (EST)

My preferred solution for the Canon article is to completely rewrite it into a Timeline article. It would cover the story of each of the consistent timelines in the series in separate sections, and then have a section at the end discussing how they connect together. There would be sections for Pikmin and Pikmin 2 together, Pikmin 3, Pikmin 4, and Hey! Pikmin, and these stories wouldn't be described as if they're part of a single consistent timeline. As for the other part of the question, I think that since all Pikmin games continue to exist when newer games come out and people still play older games, we should treat all games as canon even when there are conflicts. However, when choosing what to prioritize, we should document the situation in newer games first and then older games. — Soprano_(talk) 01:37, December 28, 2023 (EST)

Yeah I agree with this, making it a timeline is definitely a right move since it makes it more easier to read. — GGabryy_(talk) 08:38, December 28, 2023 (CET)

Pikmin 1+2 changes

The GameCube and Wii versions of Pikmin and Pikmin 2 have 3 regional versions: the Japanese version, US version, and European version, with the US and European versions having several language options. These versions have various differences, especially in Pikmin 2 where the treasures in each version are different. However, the Switch port of these games has merged the versions, so there is only one version of the game, based on the US Wii version, that has all the language options from the older versions plus some new ones. This means that treasures that were previously exclusive to the US version now have names and notes in Japanese and European languages. In addition, treasures featuring product placement of real-world brands have been redesigned to remove the product placement, and various textures including Piklopedia and Treasure Hoard icons have been replaced with higher-quality versions. This creates a big headache for the wiki as several tough decisions have to be made.

Previously, treasures with regional differences could simply have each version of the treasure documented separately, either in separate articles or paragraphs depending on the treasure names. But now we have the situation where if someone's playing the GameCube or Wii versions, these differences apply, while if they're playing the Switch version, the US version applies in all regions. How do we describe this on treasure articles without making things confusing? (Pikipedia has an informal policy that newer versions of games take priority over older versions, and it might be worth either writing this down to make it official or reforming it to simplify this situation.)

The treatment of icons is another issue. It would be nice to replace the 40x40px icons from the GameCube and Wii versions with the 160x160px icons from the Switch version. For Piklopedia icons this is not hard, and the icons have already been uploaded, just not used widely. But for Treasure Hoard icons this is a big challenge. The icons are for the new non-branded treasure designs, which often look different from the old designs. And since they only include treasures from the US version of the game, they may have to be shown alongside old icons in object lists when a treasure is different in the 3 regional versions of the GameCube and Wii versions. Considering the mix of icon styles that would result, it may be worth continuing to use the old icons, even for Piklopedia icons, but this would involve showing old treasure designs in object lists when the latest version of the game has a different design. There's no ideal solution, but we have to work out a solution, so that's what this discussion is for. — Soprano_(talk) 01:05, December 28, 2023 (EST)

Structure of the canon pages

Some people (such as Flamsey) have commented that the way we document Pikipedia's position on the canon is quite strange, with some things documented on the Canon page and some things documented on Pikipedia:Canon policy. It is quite an unusual split and I'm not aware of any other game wiki that does things this way. Restructuring these pages to show the information in an easier-to-understand way would be a good idea, but how could this be done? — Soprano_(talk) 01:05, December 28, 2023 (EST)