Talk:Spine Coaster

Bonecoasters also appear in sm3d land...--Boidoh 13:04, 23 December 2011 (EST)
 * Could you add the info? - Four Paper  Heroes  FourPaperHeroes.jpg 13:07, 23 December 2011 (EST)

Move Bonecoaster to Spine Coaster
First of all, I think we should move Bonecoaster to Spine Coaster, because the former was from NSMBWii's Prima guide, and the latter was from NSMBU (it says so in the levels it's in). According to this, in-game names take priority over Prima. Also, I think we should move NSMB2 info to Skull Raft as they have more characteristics of them than Bonecoasters (Skull Rafts cruise along the lava, Bonecoasters go on a track over it).

Proposer: Deadline: December 22, 2012, 23:59 GMT

Support

 * 1) Per proposal.
 * 2) Per the part of the proposal that pertains to this. Can't say I agree with the other part of it, though, pretty much for the same reasons as Marshall Dan Troop.
 * 3) See below comment.
 * 4) - Per BowserJunior.
 * 5) - Per BowserJunior.
 * 6) - Per (updated) proposal
 * 7) - I agree with both parts.
 * 8) - Per all.

Comments
They don't really act like Skull Rafts since they move around and stuff also Skull Rafts weren't living creatures they were like 4 skulls tied together.

Spine Coaster is definitely more official…I mean, it's IN-GAME!! But about the NSMB2 skull creature…I actually think they're a completely different thing.-


 * You're right...they don't really act like Spine Coasters at all, but not Skull Rafts either. What would we call it though, Spine Raft? Is there a name in the Prima guide (since levels don't have names in NSMB2)?


 * Proposal changed.

Anyone mind that I made the move prematurely? Its not like the Oppose side would grow within two days, anyway. DonnyKD (talk) 05:05, 21 December 2012 (EST)


 * Enforcing a proposal before it has been passed is a level two offense. Please don't do it again. Just let the TPP run until the deadline. Until then, I'm moving the pages back.


 * 05:11, 21 December 2012 (EST)

Reorganize?
The skeleton's name is a mess. While New Super Mario Bros. Wii and New Super Mario Bros. U have their traditional snake-like design, they're based on a coaster, and the New Super Mario Bros. 2 one differ vastly from the coaster. It only travels along lava, is bigger, works differently, doesn't have the roar which the Reznors's sounds similar, and looks more like a dinosaur than a snake. The Super Mario 3D Land one is a large lift that looks like a skeleton with its face being "push/pulled" à la Sketchup. However, this is purely aethistic as its Japanese name is just "Lift". -- 15:11, June 7, 2019 (EDT)
 * I think the article should be split. Their Japanese names are different, as well as their designs and functionality. Obsessive Mario Fan (talk) 15:43, June 7, 2019 (EDT)
 * I definitely agree with splitting the New Super Mario Bros. 2 one, which shares its Japanese name with a slow-falling bone platform from New Super Mario Bros. Wii, but I'm not so sure about the Super Mario 3D Land one. It is called a lift in Encyclopedia Super Mario Bros., but only in when describing World 8-Bowser: Part 2; it is otherwise absent in the list of items & obstacles, which depicts two different types of moving platforms under "lift" which suggest that it's used as a broad term. On top of that, the internal name for the track platform itself is BoneRollerCoasterParts, which is extremely close to the Japanese name Hone Coaster (Bone Coaster). It is noticeably wider in Super Mario 3D Land, but so is something as basic as a Donut Block in 3D games. LinkTheLefty (talk) 16:00, June 7, 2019 (EDT)
 * Out of curiosity, what are the internal filenames in the other games? -- 04:02, June 8, 2019 (EDT)


 * "More like a dinosaur than a snake?" I think the comparison you want is "more like a Dry bones than a dinosaur," since the NSMBW thing was clearly a lengthy dinosaur with that head. But yeah, while it makes sense to assume they're the same with no proof otherwise (like assuming SMG Monty was Rocky Wrench before getting other proof), at this point there is proof they're different. However, this is more tenuous proof than that. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 04:25, June 8, 2019 (EDT)
 * Yes, this is what i mean. Agreed. -- 04:28, June 8, 2019 (EDT)