MarioWiki:Proposals/Archive 3

Support Split

1. Cobold (talk · contribs) - The Super Mario Wiki has its own section for special moves, so it is pointless to put masses of them on the same page.
2. Plumber 14:36, 26 July 2007 (EDT) They all have sufficent content.
3. PRETxZELion ^{E T C} theres enough info for them to merit there own articles.
4. YellowYoshi398 – Most of the jumps seem worthy of articles and have enough information.
5. <<< Knife they do have enough content, thank me for that :). I propose we at least keep a short list of Jump related moves however.
6. Max2 (C) Read Plumber's comment below (the first one)

Oppose Split

Comments

We'll just use {{main}} Plumber 14:45, 26 July 2007 (EDT)

Support Merge

1. <<< Knife – we did this for PMTTYD, so what makes Paper Mario's chapters any more special enough to remain separate?
2. Plumber 15:01, 26 July 2007 (EDT) same as Knife
3. Cobold (talk · contribs) - The storyline is the main part of a game. It's unreasonable to split exactly that from the article.
4. Max2 (C) I agree with Knife.
5. Beanbean (Talk) I agree with Max and Knife.

Oppose Merge

Comments

You are offering Support Split and Oppose Merge. That's not fair. :P - Cobold (talk · contribs) 14:58, 26 July 2007 (EDT)

Hmm, what a weird mistake I made.<<< Knife 15:02, 26 July 2007 (EDT)

Support Merge

1. <<< Knife – Macho Grubba is only a form encountered in a boss battle once. I'd say Mr. L deserves an article more Macho Grubba since he antagonized Mario's crew almost half of the game (though I'm not saying we should split Mr. L either).
2. PRETxZELion ^{E T C} - What Knife said.

Oppose Merge

1. Max2 (C) Macho Grubba is a boss with a unique moveset, as well as being a tranformation of Grubba.
2. We can't be inconsistent. Rookie and Mr. L are merged because they have no different powers from their normal forms. But Macho Grubba has different powers than Grubba, warranting an article. Plus, we must be consistent, as you don't see Fire Mario merged with Mario, do you? Plumber 15:30, 26 July 2007 (EDT)
3. Full Metal MoogleMacho Grubba is a boss, and also progres's the story line. Macho Grubba should deserve his own article.
4. Pokémon DP He is a seperate form. If you merge this with Grubba, then just merge Sheik with Zelda, or Zero Suit Samus with Samus.
5. Master Crash as fire mario has its own, macho needs its own, fire mario is a level up, while rookie is just a different identity.

Comments

Support Merge

1. Gofer Having article on Unnamed, unimportant character is rediculous.
2. Pokémon DP Merge them into one page. It is pointless to have articles with such low information.

Oppose Merge

1. Max2 (C) It was already decided, Knifey Needle.

Comments

Wasn't this decided long ago? Plumber 15:37, 26 July 2007 (EDT)

Support Merge

Oppose Merge

1. <<< Knife this doesn't make much sense since they are more like NPC than partners and have never helped Mario.
2. Plumber Even the person who put the template on (me) agrees with Knife.
3. Cobold (talk · contribs) What Knife said.
4. YellowYoshi398 – Like Knife said, these are only partners in the loosest sense. They don't fit in with the partners on {{partners}}.

Comments

Support Merge

Oppose Merge

1. Max2 (C) They are only inside the generator. If we kept that tradition, we might as well merge everything into the Earth article, which would be merged into Outer Space, which would be merged into the Marioverse.
2. Plumber 15:32, 26 July 2007 (EDT) It is not the Generator, it lives in the Generator. Should Earth be merged with everything?
3. Cobold (talk · contribs) - Species do have a high ranking. Objects like the generator do not. If anything, Goop Generator should me merged with Piranha Plant in the Generator. But I doubt it's necessary.

Comments

Species do have a high ranking. Objects like the generator do not. If anything, Goop Generator should me merged with Piranha Plant in the Generator. But I doubt it's necessary.

Why did the above vote by me get removed? What's wrong with it? I have a reason. Please explain yourself. - Cobold (talk · contribs) 16:05, 26 July 2007 (EDT)

Mario is a part of the Mario Bros, shall I merge them? And shall we merge the Koopalings into Koopaling? Max2 (C)

Ummm... sure? I didn't even vote and I'm being attacked...<<< Knife 16:33, 26 July 2007 (EDT)

You're the one that proposed it. Max2 (C) not me.

He didn't propose it, he just moved it. There was an ongoing discussion on the talk pages of the related articles. Also, you cannot compare things like that. - Cobold (talk · contribs) 16:36, 26 July 2007 (EDT)

Proposing it doesn't mean I support... sheesh.<<< Knife 16:35, 26 July 2007 (EDT)

Sorry. And, the plant is part of the generator. Not THE generator. Max2 (C)

Support Merge

1. <<< KnifeThere can be a section about the colors of Yoshis, similar to Toads. I don't see many distinctive properties about the Yoshi colors and they should be merged into this article.

Oppose Merge

1. Plumber 16:10, 26 July 2007 (EDT) They deserve articles with Category:Sub-species.
2. Max2 (C) different personalities, major differences in Yoshi's Story (So 've heard), and they are much different then the Toads, who are pretty much all the exact same.
3. YellowYoshi398 – In games such as Super Mario World, Yoshi's Story, and Yoshi Touch and Go, colors of playable Yoshis have affected gameplay, and while Yoshi colors such as Blue Yoshi have been officially named, Toad colors have not. Yoshi colors strike me as worthy of articles.

Comments

"Major differences in Yoshi's Story (So 've heard), " Actually, the only diferences is that they like better (Read: They gain more health when they eat one.) the fruit that matche their color. Really, Only the Black & White yoshi stand out of the crowd. And where the Yoshi with different colloration showed a different personality? I played SMW, SMW2 and YS, and they din't seem to act different. Gofer

I am waiting for a response, where did indivual colored Yoshi showed different personnality? Gofer

I don't really think they ever have (not that I've played every game out there), save for some individual Yoshis (like Yoshi and Boshi and the PiT Yellow Yoshi) who seem to have personalities regardless of their color. The SMA2 manual did give its Baby Yoshis personalities based on their color, though, by applying adjectives such as "hotheaded" to the baby Red Yoshi. YellowYoshi398

Actually, Yellow ones have always had that personality *no offence YY* Max2 (C) Lazy and hungry.

Move to Paratroopa

1. Cobold (talk · contribs) - It's their most-commonly used name.
2. PRETxZELion ^{E T C} - Per Cobold

Move to Parakoopa

Leave at Koopa Paratroopa

1. User: Walkazo Changing it to Parakoopa could be just as silly as changing Pink boo, the name used in several games, to Red Boo, the name used in Mario Party 8.
2. Phoenix It sounds more official this way.
3. Stumpers! It's the full name. The fact that the abbreviation has been used in its place in later games really doesn't mean that the name has been changed. I would say that something like this would only be applicable in the case of Bloober's name change to Blooper.
4. Plumber per Stumpers

Comments

Parakoopa should still be a redirect, at least. Max2 (C)

Of course. Just like Peach should redirect to Princess Peach, etc. Stumpers!

And Mario should redirect to "Mario Mario"? PRETxZELion ^{E T C}

I don't think so: that was his name only in other media. Rather, I would put Mario Mario as a redirect to Mario. Here's the thing: they're called the Mario Bros., but that doesn't mean their last names are Mario. It's just an assumption we've made based off of information from the Real World. Who knows how it works in the Mushroom Kingdom? Besides, remember how Wario and Waluigi are called Wicked Bros.? Perhaps the ___ Bros. thing doesn't even signify brotherhood. Stumpers!

In Yoshi Island they are brothers as they were delivered to the SAME Parents User:Walkazo

I wasn't saying they aren't brothers. Simply that relying on the whole ___ Bros. concept to work as it would in our world isn't trustworthy, though, you see? All I'm saying is that we don't know their last names. Stumpers! 13:42, 11 August 2007 (EDT)

Merge

1. PRETxZELion ^{E T C} - Per Above
2. Gofer Theyy are too minor to warrant an article.
3. Wa _T^C_@ | Mi Youtube – there's 130, right? And they each have the same info? Sounds like a job for a table page.
4. Cobold (talk · contribs) - Too minor objects, and too many of them.
5. <<< Knife 16:40, 10 August 2007 (EDT) too many orphaned pages appearing.
6. Plumber Per Cobold.
7. Stumpers! I find it ironic that my support was deemed "unsupported" by someone who writes "per so-and-so" after all of his posts. Please don't get rid of my vote. All I said was that we should do this only if we have a way to link readers to the part of the page where the item is, and not just to the top of the page. Here, I'll through in some good, hard boiled support. "Too many pages is nasty." Yay... it's been said before!

Keep Separate

Comments

Also all of these show up on the Orphan Pages. PRETxZELion ^{E T C}

Because of a bug. Plumber 14:21, 12 August 2007 (EDT)

No actually I linked them to the MOD article and they're all gone :P PRETxZELion ^{E T C}

OK, this proposal already ended!!! Yeah; and I finished working on the table; but it needs more infomation about the rest of 130 Wario's Treasures! *goes moving this part* RAP... Let's get a move on to the tables I MADE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Delete or Merge Glitch Articles

1. Son of Suns I am the proposer and my reasons are given above.
2. Sir Grodus I had this idea a while back, but forgot about it. And yes, putting the glitch articles all in one place seems best; though I'm not opposed to just getting rid of them completely, since I see no real use in having them anyways.
3. Wa _T^C_@ | Mi Youtube – 1000s of minor errors in programming are better put on 1 good-sized page
4. Mr. Guy the Guy Talk!^E I think they should be deleted, but also keep the Small Fire Mario page because it appears in a few more games.
5. <<< Knife 23:09, 24 August 2007 (EDT) glitches are unintended results of the developers, thus they are non-canon. I don't even think they should get a list page.
6. YellowYoshi398 – Most glitches aren't notable enough to merit their own articles, and, as Wayoshi said, there are just too many of them. A List of Glitches page is a good idea.
7. ~PY - I agree with YY
8. Plumber, I agree with PY
9. Max2 (C) Agree with YY, Knife, and Wayo.
10. Walkazo - I agree with YY, Knife, Wayoshi and Max2. Also, lots of glitches don't even have their own articles, being mentioned in the "Trivia" or "Glitch" sections of their games' artciles only. It's a pain to find these glitches in the Wiki, but they don't have enough info to be anything more but stubs. Lump all the glitches together and it will make everyone's lives faster and easier, deleteing them will just make the people who want to read about them angry.

Keep Glitch Articles

Comments

Go by Lists

1. <<< Knife 20:08, 25 August 2007 (EDT) Since microgames tend to be 5 seconds long (unlike mini-games), I don't see why we should give each one of them an article. I think we should keep boss microgames though.
2. Master Crash i've played a little micro-games before, and there really short, i go with knife here.
3. ~PY Microgames don't have enough information to make it one article.
4. Phoenix - Per the three above. They're just way too insignificant.

Make Articles for Every Single Microgame

1. Full Metal Moogle I think they do deserve an article.
2. Son of Suns - Every single microgame is officially named I believe, and it is my personal wiki philosophy to support an article for any officially named game element. Also, microgames change a lot based on the difficulty. New challenges are added, as well as new characters and backgrounds. One microgame soemtimes feels like three microgames in one with a common objective. There is a lot to be said about each microgame.
3. Mr.Vruet info|talk|chat What Son of Suns said.
4. ~Uniju(T-C-E) They should each get their own article...
5. Plumber I must say that I have shared Mr. Anakin's thoughts on this subject.
6. Max2 (C) They all have enough info. The problem is no one will ever take the time writing them.
7. RAP... Keep them as full articles. I believe they could be created in a infomative way since I started writing the microgames starting with the first WarioWare game. Here are some examples of microgame articles written by me: Crazy Cars, The Maze That Pays, and Super Wario Bros..
8. Pokémon DP Dude, if you are gonna put them on one big list, put all the Mario Party Mini-Games on one big list.
9. Luigibros2I all ready started to make Micro game articles I don't my work to go to waste.

Comments

I just want to say that any micro-game article will probably have more information than many of our item articles, especially Paper Mario items (This item can be cooked with this item and another item. This item heals 25 HP. vs. This micro-game was developed by this character. To play the game, the player must do this. On higher difficulty levels, more enemies appear.) Some articles don't have a lot of information, but that does not mean they don't deserve to be articles. Also, I don't think we should split up any current lists of micro-games until the articles are created (and not be created as stubs). -- Son of Suns

Everyone seems to think a microgame article would be like this:

"(name) is a microgame where you must (whatever)"

But they wouldn't. They could have info on all difficulties, levels, a few of them have cheats, and the like. Max2 (C)

Although (most) Microgames do have more to write about than their name and what you do (as Max2 pointed out), they still don't have enough to be full articles. It's a pain to have to go from tiny little article to tiny little article, it would be faster and easier for people to learn about the Microgames if they were all together in one big article instead of 1000s of little ones. And this same mantra should be applied to other stub-esque articles, like Paper Mario items (as cited by Son of Suns), glitches, and many, many more. - Walkazo

I believe a "full article" is relative term. To me, I feel anything that is officially named is worthy of an article, regardless of size. Although the article may be small, it shows the world that we feel everything officially recognized by Nintendo should be recognized by us. Everything is important, and everything official deserves an article. Categories and list pages can organize this multitude of articles. If someone wants to read all the Microgame articles, they can go to the Microgame category. Although this takes a few extra clicks of the mouse, this tiny effort is symbolic of the effort Nintendo went through to create the subject. Now I am not going to start any flame wars over this, and I will agree to merges if the community does. But ultimately, the philosophy I just mentioned will be one I will always advocate and hold on to. -- Son of Suns

I can respect that. - Walkazo

My comment is directed toward Pokemon DP: The difference is that the Mario Party ones are mini-games, whereas the WarioWare ones are micro-games. The ones from the Mario Party series have much more bulk to them and therefore warrant their own articles. Microgames on the other hand, are small and rapid-fire, over in seconds. Not worthy of their own article if you ask me. Phoenix

Mini-games from Mario Party and microgames from WarioWare have the same amount of "bulk". The only difference is that mini-games last longer. Both have players repeating the same action over and over - mini-games just make you do the action over a longer period of time. -- Son of Suns

Merge

1. Gofer

Keep it that way

1. Mr.Vruet info|talk|chat They are different and deserve different arcticles.
2. Plumber They are completely different species.
3. 3D, totally different. I agree.
4. YellowYoshi398 – Per above; they're different species.
5. ~Uniju(T-C-E) They are DIFFERENT...
6. ~PY Yep, they are different enemies. You can't merge them just because they have the same name.
7. Walkazo and PP Different enemies! One is a Bandit, the other is a snifit! Different species for crying out loud, mergeing them because they have the same name is crazy!
8. Pokémon DP Keep, they are differant enemies. Although, Plumber should've asked someone before spliting them.
9. Paper Jorge! I give paper cuts so stand back! They're two different species with the same name.
10. Phoenix - Separated like this, it's easy to avoid ambiguity and thus, confusion.
11. There different keep them apart--Luigibros2 20:08, 9 September 2007 (EDT)

Comments

If then, I guess we should split the Merlee (aswell as the other shaman) article to the various PM incarnation, they are different. Gofer

Gofers got a point, and they are both called zeus guy. but i'm staying neutral.

Master Crash

That is only assumed, not officially stated. - Cobold (talk · contribs) 14:52, 26 August 2007 (EDT)

But then, so is the Zeus Guy thing. They act different, look different, but have the same name.

Gofer

Split the Articles

1. Dodoman
2. Mr. Guy the Guy Talk!^E Per guys whose name are Dodo
3. Max2 (C) no reason not to, I agree with the claims above completly.

Keep them Merged

1. Son of Suns - They shouldn't be merged because Bowser Bones is an unofficial name. The skeletal Bowser is just named Bowser. It's the same character and the info seems more important in the Bowser article itself - I would rather read about Bowser's death and afterlife in the Bowser article than have to go to a entirely different article.
2. Cobold (talk · contribs) - No need for an additional conjectural article.
3. Gofer Per SOS.
4. PRETxZELion ^{E T C} Per Son of Suns
5. Pokémon DP Per Son of Suns.
6. Walkazo - Per SOS. Besides, for all we know Bowser's been a skeleton plenty of times already (NSMB's not the only time he was dumped in lava, after all). His many deaths and afterlife experiences are better placed within his article, not a conjecturaly named one based on only one of those instances.
7. Phoen