Talk:Peach Blossom

Damage
The official site says nothing about the hearts causing damage. However, should we still state that the hearts cause damage or not?
 * Look at the end of this video: http://youtube.com/watch?v=Zfxo4ThurUw Her Final Smash does do some damage. RedManiac 09:59, 19 October 2007 (EDT)

Incredible Length and Sections
Is all that really needed?
 * In my opinion, it is. I'm trying to find some MarioWiki policy to back it up, but nothing yet.  Here's my arguement:
 * SECTIONS: This article is enormous, like you said. Sectioning it out makes it more visually appealing while helping segment the attack.  The two phase structure of this Final Smash is unseen in any other Final Smash that I know of.
 * EXTERNAL SOURCES: The website description doesn't mention Princess Peach's warp to the center of the stage or the damage delt to opponents. Right now, videos such as the one I mention are our only sources.  A proposal (which will obviously fail) is going to fail because people can put in links to notable YouTube videos.  Linking to the other two sources is just good form when writing articles.  I almost always do it.
 * QUOTE: If you read the whole article, you'll see in the History section that Sakurai's quote is his justification for the attack's inclusion. The attack is not inspired by anything in Peach's history, save a small reference to the "I'm so happy I'm spinning around" thing, which isn't the same as dancing, but the dance is inspired by that, I'm sure.
 * Incredible Length: The Super Mario Wiki is a place for Mario fans to go hog wild and write about minial topics of no real importance to the real world. The fact that we would put a limit on the amount of writing for an attack seems to contradict that.  I could see limitations for items such as the Master of Disguise items, but that was only a consolidation of many pages into one.  The problem was too little information rather than too much.
 * Please comment back, and I should get back to you soon if all goes well with my life... which it might not. Stay tuned.  01:38, 26 October 2007 (EDT)
 * But, something so minor as a simple attack, I don't think you should really go THIS in-depth. Also, that quote really doesn't seem to fit on this article. If you add a quote to THIS article, add one to all the other Final Smash articles. Exteranl Sources, you have a good point there. Get my point?
 * (this was written before your edit)::Not to make this personal or anything, but I found it a little rude that you just deleted that stuff again before I posted my argument. Can we talk about this?  There's really no policy regarding your argument for deletion (based on what you said about the history page, which may have been a joke ;3).  Your arguements are based on the statement, "It's not currently on similar articles on the Wiki, so it shouldn't be here." Yet it is physically impossible for me to do the same treatment for all Final Smash articles at the same time.  This one took me 2 hours at least.  Also, a Wiki is based on building everything up over time, even if that means some articles are left behind while others flourish at a given time.  You shouldn't cut back on my article because you see it as more in-depth than the others.  01:46, 26 October 2007 (EDT)
 * And now my responce to your arguement: How doesn't the quote fit? It's in relation to the article, it's from an official source, and, seeing as the attack is from an in-developement game, the use of a developer's quote is justifiable.  But, if the top space is reserved for characters, why don't we move the quote down to the history section?  Point taken about the other articles, but keep in mind my long edits nowadays are rare.  01:46, 26 October 2007 (EDT)
 * Rudeness: Sorry, didn't mean to come across rude. >_> Quote: OK, but, can we remove it when the game is released? Length: OK, but, I still don't think something as minor as this should be THIS long, but I'll leave it for the time being, and wait for other peoples opinions.
 * Hey, don't worry about it. It's after midnight and you probably just didn't know I was still on.  What I'm thinking about the quote is that we should replace it with what Peach says while performing the attack in the final version of the game if it's notable.  I've moved the quote down there to the history section for the time being, and we can decide on that too with the imput of other users.  Is that okay?  We might want to craft a proposal based on the results of this so that this issue about "how long" can be determined before someone writes something like this.  Oh, and are you okay with putting the external links back for now?   01:56, 26 October 2007 (EDT)  EDIT: Nevermind the bit about the position of the quote... You moved it back while I was editing.)
 * First of all, it isn't after midnight down under. :P The quote can be replaced/moved when the game is released. You can bring back External Links. ;) If we don't get much input here, we can make a Proposal on it. I'll leave the article alone for the time-being.
 * Thanks for your time! I'll pop 'em back in.  02:04, 26 October 2007 (EDT)

All articles should be as long as possible. As long as the information is relevant, well-written, and organized well, any article can be any length. Regardless if the subject is minor in terms og the game, if there is information for it, we should put it in the article. For example, I rewrote the Bowser Crush article, which is about one special attack from one game. A very un-notable subject. However, the article is fairly long because of extra information I found in the official player's guide. As such, this special attack article will be longer than others, andbut that's completely fine. If the information exists out there, we should put it in the wiki. I also want to note that no other article should be taken as precedent on this wiki. Just because other articles don't look like this doesn't mean this one can't look different. In addition, all the other Final Smash articles don't have to look like this one. They will all change in time anyways. -- Son of Suns

Trogga! Trogga!
Okay, Trogga: Based on the Wiki's stance that the battles in SSBB are carried out by trophies based off of the characters (see the "This World..." update on smashbros.com for more, it's acutally backed up by Sakurai), we know that the Peach in the game is not the Peach we know and love, although they... somehow... have the same... personalities... appearances... and everything... Hey, I don't make this stuff up. ;( Anyway, you also know that the world isn't the same if you've looked at the map used in Subspace Emmissary.  There are "key points" from other worlds recreated and placed in there.  Until further notice, I don't want to speculate and call that world some kind of combined dimension, and I'm sure you don't either.  Anyway, that's why I put that in the article.  18:21, 16 December 2007 (EST)
 * I think that's only in the Subspace Emissary mode, not multiplayer (which doesn't really have a plot to begin with). --Trogga 12:39, 17 December 2007 (EST)
 * Very true. Still, you have the issue that Princess Peach of the Mushroom World is not the Princess Peach of the Smash world.  I was thinking that you were right for that reason after I posted my last message.  I wonder if this means we should split the Super Smash Bros. Brawl info from the articles about Mario, Peach, and all of them?  20:27, 17 December 2007 (EST)

Daisy's move, Should we split it?
I think we should split Daisy's move, Daisy Blossom from this page. It has multiple different visual elements, such as key art, that require seperate screenshots, it has different names throughout languages (the key reason why it should be split), comes from only Ultimate and doesn't have anything to do with Brawl and Smash 4 at all. The Smash wiki page is also split. Here is what the page would look like--Memoryman3 (talk) 13:17, October 19, 2019 (EDT)
 * It has a different visual style, but it is otherwise the exact same move. Whether or not it was before Ultimate doesn't really matter, it's already clarified the move is in Ultimate. If it has the exact same information Peach Blossom has, it should just be a name mention on Peach Blossom's page. I added the different names and images, though. 13:38, October 19, 2019 (EDT)
 * Considering the only differences are purely visual, I see no reason to split it when we can just explain how it works on this article rather than having two redundant articles. And no, having a different name doesn't instantly mean it should be split. There have been years of proposals that resulted in merging subjects with different names because they were too similar. -- 13:56, October 19, 2019 (EDT)

In that case, should we merge Mario Finale and Doctor Finale too? What were the page that were split before and merged again? Also, I think because of the visual differences it would be better to split Peach and Daisy’s named moves to save data and loading times - purely visual elements have gotten splits before, and. Also to future proof in case the moves go through visual and functional overhauls and we need to add even more information to clutter one page. The information on the two pages will also be slightly different of course.--Memoryman3 (talk) 14:14, October 19, 2019 (EDT)
 * Should another Smash happen and Peach and Daisy's Blossoms are different from each other, then they'll be split. Mario and Dr. Mario's Final Smashes, as you noted yourself, function differently from each other, whereas Peach and Daisy's do not. 14:17, October 19, 2019 (EDT)

A cosmetic difference is still a difference. Especially if the cosmetic differences are major. I have checked the wiki and I cannot find an instance where something that looks different and is of a different name was ever merged with another. Even Shy Guy Airtub and Airtub R have different pages. I would love to see examples.--Memoryman3 (talk) 14:24, October 19, 2019 (EDT)
 * Then allow me to direct you to this proposal, which, while a different matter entirely, shows clear consensus for disregarding changes that are purely cosmetic.


 * Also, the comparison you made doesn't work, since Shy Guy Airtub R is a clearly-defined stronger variant of Shy Guy Airtub. 14:32, October 19, 2019 (EDT)

The difference with the different colored Yoshis is that they were so many of them and the only cosmetic difference between them was a swap in colour. They were clearly not intended to be seperate characters with different personalites like Peach and Daisy are. Merging them into a single Yoshi species page was logical for many reasons besides their gameplay differences in mutltiple titles. Having a Blue and Yellow Toad page might even be questionable too. As for Shy Guy Airtub and Airtub R, the only differences are relative strength and color. The attack patterns and drop catergories are the same. --Memoryman3 (talk) 14:44, October 19, 2019 (EDT)
 * As a general rule, enemies with differing stats and appearances in RPGs are almost always split. Also, there are some differences between the Yoshi colors - different abilities when holding shells in their mouth in SMW, for example, but it was agreed that those differences were too inconsistent between games and didn't differentiate them enough to warrant an article for every color of Yoshi. And it's obvious that Peach and Daisy are separate characters, but that has nothing to do with them having the exact same Final Smashes. -- 15:09, October 19, 2019 (EDT)

Except that they aren’t exactly the same? The whole theme of the Final Smash is different. Well, there are games that just call any colour of Yoshi or Toad by the original names. If Blue Toad was the only Toad fo example, it would just be called Toad. Maybe it would be a different story if multiple characters each had their own Blossom moves which were similar. But only Peach and Daisy have these moves. --Memoryman3 (talk) 15:34, October 19, 2019 (EDT)
 * There's nothing you could say about Daisy Blossom that you couldn't say about Peach Blossom other than what it looks like. That tells me it isn't deserving of its own article. There's a reason we don't split enemy color variants, but even those would have more unique characteristics than Daisy Blossom. -- 15:37, October 19, 2019 (EDT)

Like the same way you can’t say anything about Shy Guy Airtub R that can’t be applied to Shy Guy Airtub besides the stats table which can easily be merged? Or how you can’t say anything about Doctor Finale that also applies to Mario Finale? Guess these pages don’t deserve their own articles hmm? If Daisy Blossom put people to sleep for 2 seconds longer would it then justify it’s own article? The fact that this is an argument is ridiculous, and I find it funny that literally only Daisy is being targeted. I also bring up the argument of the representation of Seperate But Identical and Cosmetically Different Sides tropes are handled in wikis. --Memoryman3 (talk) 15:49, October 19, 2019 (EDT)
 * Again, those examples you mention do have gameplay differences, which Daisy Blossom does not. Your what-if scenario is a moot point since it's just that, a what-if scenario. Daisy isn't being "targetted", she's just the only Mario Echo Fighter in Smash (Dr. Mario, despite his similarities, does have gameplay differences and isn't officially considered an Echo, by the way) which makes her the only character this applies to. Should we split Daisy's other moves, even though they're identical to Peach's aside from the name and visual changes? If you really feel that strongly about it, start a talk page proposal, but I wouldn't expect many supporters. -- 16:10, October 19, 2019 (EDT)

Here’s two pages that support this however. Roller and Azure Roller are two wheels that are exactly the same in everything but color. Yet they have two seperate pages. This should be enough to justify having Daisy’s specials, which have more differences, in seperate pages. --Memoryman3 (talk) 16:34, October 19, 2019 (EDT)
 * Personally, I'd rather see those pages merged than create a separate article for Daisy Blossom using that as a precedent. Might bring that up later. -- 16:54, October 19, 2019 (EDT)
 * Yeah, color variants of wheels should be merged, but we'll bring that up another time.
 * Daisy's only being "targetted" because she's the subject. If we still had move pages for non-Mario Smashers, Samus's Zero Laser and Dark Samus's Phason Laser would probably be on the same page. The same would be for Simon and Richter if their Final Smashes had different names. 17:03, October 19, 2019 (EDT)
 * What about wheels and karts which have different designs but are in identical stat groups? Personally I think it’s cleaner to keep them seperated and just draw the line if there’s notable name and appearance changes. I would personally keep Phazon Laser seperated but Simon and Richter have the same names and appearances in every move but Holy Water. --Memoryman3 (talk) 17:07, October 19, 2019 (EDT)
 * I'd say if they had clearly different designs, their articles should stay separate. Merging karts just because they have the same stats would get messy very fast. With the examples previously listed, it's not just the fact that the stats are the same, it's that they're palette swapped variants of each other with no characteristics setting them apart. -- 21:53, October 19, 2019 (EDT)

Daisy's versions of moves straight up have different designs though. It's not like they just changed the color and be done with it. Plus, merging moves/items would get messy on search engines. If you type on Google for "Daisy Blossom" you don't get redirected to Daisy Blossom at all. --Memoryman3 (talk) 07:17, October 20, 2019 (EDT)

Proposal: Daisy's moves and other very similar technique related articles
Currently, Daisy's moves, despite having different names and appearances and being used on a different character, are merged with Peach's articles with little relevant information on Daisy's variants. There is a precedent for entites which are almost identical in every way, such as several color swapped Mario Kart wheels, getting seperate articles solely based on their names and appearances and not gameplay changes. With this in mind, I propose seperating Daisy's moves into their own pages, and keeping the variants of the tires seperate, removing visual/gameplay information pertaining to the moves in games which the variants do not appear in, such as Super Smash Bros. Brawl and Mario Kart 7, in order to keep the pages clean and information on the variant easy to find.

Relevant articles include: Daisy Blossom, Daisy Bomber, Daisy Parasol, Azure Roller, Cyber Slick, Hot Monster, Retro Off-Road. If you support, they will stay seperate and new pages for Daisy Bomber, Daisy Blossom and Daisy Parasol will be created, and any other similar move will be treated in the same way if it has a different name. If you oppose, then all articles relating to these will be merged with their originals, due to a lack of differences. If you decide to do nothing, please explain with a good reason why Daisy's moves have less of a reason to be seperated than these identical stat wheels.

Proposer: Deadline: November 3, 2019, 23:59 GMT Date withdrawn: October 20, 2019, 15:46 GMT

Support

 * 1) I believe it is generally cleaner to seperate the articles, despite the lack of gameplay differences. Having a different name and being assigned to a different character, along with different visual themes, is enough in my mind to justify the seperation. Also, I believe making the seperation is friendlier to the end user looking for a specific move - and each of the moves are already given their own segments in the game's training guide. Daisy's named moves are unique in that they are the only ones to not be seperated.

Do nothing

 * 1) - The moves are not different in any way.
 * 2) No difference besides visuals, no reason to split.
 * 3) - Same "broad strokes" argument made, same counterargument given: Though not all of the Mario Kart tires affect kart stats, enough of them do so that it makes no sense to merge them solely based on stats anyway. Different types of subjects receive different coverage, and that standard is completely different from our coverage of Final Smashes. And based on how the Smash Bros. moves we do cover are handle, there is a lack of grounds for a split; if Daisy's is the only case on the Wiki, that's because it is currently the only one within our current scope. Other Echo Fighters/Final Smashes would receive the same treatment were they to fall within that scope; besides that, we have Doctor Finale as an example of a Final Smash that warrants a split, as it has actual functional differences that cannot be neatly summarized with the term "reskin". You have yet to provide evidence that there are any substantial differences not based in the visuals between Peach Blossom and Daisy Blossom, and thus your argument for splitting them is overall weak. Your claim of "end user friendliness" also remains similarly unfounded: the in-wiki search tool already leads "Daisy Blossom" to this page, and there's SmashWiki if a user wants a highly-detailed article on Final Smashes and other moves anyway. Not only does this read like a basic misunderstanding of how search engines work, there is no evidence presented, statistical or otherwise, that suggests this claim has any substance, much less any real benefit beyond the personal convenience of a select few - and as such it seems entirely subjective in nature and lacking in merit. And even with any evidence, we are in no way obligated to act solely in the interest of search result rankings, which seems to be the only real motivation behind this proposal, in any manner. EDIT: No, I do not support the merging of the other listed articles on this basis, nor do I oppose them - those are separate arguments to be made on the appropriate talk pages for those articles, and your obvious attempt to alter the conditions of this proposal to try and end around changes to affect unrelated pages, especially without altering the allotted options, is highly disingenuous to say the least.
 * 4) - It's already properly covered in another wiki, no need to cover it here since the differences are only visual like other users have stated. This is not SmashWiki.
 * 5) Per all.

Comments
"If you type on Google for "Daisy Blossom" you don't get redirected to Daisy Blossom at all." Ya don't say, obviously you'd get results for the actual flower. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 14:08, October 20, 2019 (EDT)
 * Attempt to google "Daisy Blossom Smash". First result is the seperate Daisy Blossom page. Daisy Bomber and Daisy Parasol do not get such quality results because they are merged deep with Peach's moves. -- 14:11, October 20, 2019 (EDT)

Will you just give it up already? I've seen on your talk page and the Wiki proposal page that no-one agrees with you for valid reasons and because of that this proposal is clearly not going to pass. So frankly it's a bit pointless to keep trying. Mario Sakuraba (talk) 14:15, October 20, 2019 (EDT)
 * This strikes me as excessively rude and unwarranted; he was literally told a TPP would be better on the proposals page. 14:17, October 20, 2019 (EDT)

The moves are not different in any way is also a highly flawed argument. I have already demonstrated that there ARE differences. Daisy Blossom doesn't spawn peaches or have images of Peach in the background with hearts scattered around. It is not present in Brawl. By that logic, none of the palette swapped tires or swapped kart bodies in Mario Kart have any differences, but alas, they do have differences, Just visual and naming ones. It's not apples and oranges, it is literally the exact same thing. I am starting to get a hinch that no one wants me to win the proposal because of who I am. -- 14:24, October 20, 2019 (EDT)
 * I don't even know who you are o_O. Regardless, while it's not a palette swap, it's a texture swap, which is the modern 3D equivalent. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 14:33, October 20, 2019 (EDT)


 * The fact that you're thinking of this as a "win-or-lose" matter to begin with is an indicator among many that there's skewed priorities at play - wiki policy should not be used as a proxy for inane fandom wars, nor should it be used to right some supposed wrong on levels that (whether it has any acutal substance or not) we are not obligated to act on (e.g. we are not arbiters of character popularity). This is also said in complete ignorance of the fact established both here and on the comments regarding your proposal - regardless of your reputation, the arguments you've put forth for your changes are just badly made overall and highly lacking in consideration to established policy. And all this is deliberately setting aside the fact that this is still very much a reactionary-in-nature proposal - even then, the nature of how poorly constructed and presented it is ends up giving weight to arguments against it. -- 14:47, October 20, 2019 (EDT)

As for Doctor Finale, the function is almost the same. The only functional difference is that it travels a bit slower and does more damage. That is literally it. The visual differences are more notable and leave a stronger presence. Can be neatly summarised in a single page. But I don't support merging that. The Daisy Blossom article I proposed isn't a stub either, it's larger than most move pages and has a lot of assets specific to Daisy. I'm frustrated that the arguments against this proposal have literally moved goalposts every single time, from not being different enough in general, to not having any gameplay differences, to not being different enough to warrant a spot under not being a different character or enemy, to not being different enough under invisible SMASH BROS guidelines which have not been established, because god forbid that Daisy's cloned moves (the bane of all Smash fans) be covered properly and fairly, which they aren't by the way, Peach's moves take up the vast majority of the page and the Daisy information is largely buried. There is absolutely nothing substantial in the wiki guidelines that prevent Daisy Blossom and Peach Blossom from being seperated, and I fail to see how splitting them up would inconvience anyone. -- 14:59, October 20, 2019 (EDT)
 * Of COURSE Peach's moves take up most of the majority of those pages, they're the original subjects that have been around since Melee. Daisy's moves aren't "buried", they're functionally identical moves with visual differences. Only a sentence or two at the most needs to be given to them. You need to stop attributing opposition to some sort of perceived bias, whether it's against Daisy, echo fighters in general, or yourself, and realize that maybe, just maybe, your argument is flawed and there are valid reasons to oppose it. Daisy is not being targetted. The only reason she's being treated differently than other fighters is because she's literally the only one of her kind in the context of Smash. -- 15:04, October 20, 2019 (EDT)
 * You could say the exact same thing for the wheels in Mario Kart. Azure Roller and the other texture swapped tires can very easily be explained in one sentence on the Roller page. And the hard fact is that much more people are going to come to a move such as Daisy Bomber via search engines than the actual in-wiki search. Daisy's moves also have different names in different languages, and require media such as images to represent them. We already can explain that Daisy's moves function the same as Peach's moves in the first sentence in a seperated article without a problem. All the valid reasons that you gave me can be applied to several pages on the wiki, which is exactly why I believe Daisy is being targeted - clones in Smash Bros. games get negative reception from the fans a lot, even popular influencers, and I think it's best if we just go by the game and classify them as seperate moves to avoid this.-- 15:13, October 20, 2019 (EDT)
 * Going by the game they're not separate since Echo Fighters have the same number. Also no, it's more likely people will search for them in-wiki. And I'm not biased against Daisy either, I like Daisy. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 15:17, October 20, 2019 (EDT)
 * They are though? Echo Fighter just means that the character is heavily derived from another character in abilites and movesets. 13 and 13e are technically still different numbers, the Koopalings for example are skins and have the same number as Bowser Jr - 58. Even if you stack them in the settings, which is not the default, the game still counts Peach and Daisy seperate in records and in the random select, and are still unlocked seperately, much like the statstically identical wheels in Mario Kart. -- 15:23, October 20, 2019 (EDT)
 * If you can say that a subject is exactly the same as something else in the first sentence, that's a good sign it doesn't need an article of its own. As for the tires, like I've said before their original equivalents were also in Mario Kart 7 and have different stats in each game, adding the Mario Kart 8-introduced variants to those pages could potentially be messy and awkward. Plus, we already split every other tire, so it's good for consistency. And no, we're not trying to hide information on Daisy's special moves from search engines because "we hate echo fighters", that's a ridiculous claim. As I've told you already, I like the concept of echo fighters and think they're a good thing for the game. -- 15:24, October 20, 2019 (EDT)


 * Almost the same =/= exactly the same - almost only counts in horseshoes. The point remains that Doctor Finale has some tangible differences that significantly impacts gameplay, where Daisy Blossom does not. The visual differences may or may not be notable themselves and worth adding to the article, but they alone do not justify a split based on current policy and standards, which is what the proposal here is arguing for. As usual, you're arguing in circles back to the Mario Kart tires, which have enough of an impact on gameplay that they warranted splitting, and were each given their own article for consistency - it also helps, now I think of it, that the CPU opponents in those games also tend towards certain kart builds.


 * The reason cited was it "not being different enough", with the lack of difference in terms of gameplay being evidence towards that - a far cry from moving the goal posts, since impact on gameplay and any changes thereof is the standard given for "different enough". The only reason our coverage on different characters or enemies was even mentioned is because you used some examples that you didn't believe warranted splitting but were split anyway to argue for the split of this article previously - and again, the response to that was that those pages had substantial established differences by their standards, where this did not. And again, yes, they are separate Final Smashes for separate characters, but we are not arguing that Daisy's move is literally named Peach Blossom or anything of the sort - we are arguing that the differences present are not distinct enough to warrant a split of this article.


 * That only seems like moving the goalposts because of your presumption that we apply the same exact standard broadly to everything we cover - you keep saying that our arguments against this can apply to anything else on the wiki, but five seconds' worth of casual glancing will show this is obviously not the case, to say nothing of the multiple older Talk Page Proposals people have cited here and elsewhere. Most wikis worth their salt cover characters in a different way from items and techniques, because different types of subjects require different coverage. Anytime we have changed how we cover particular subjects, it has been in response to a question of policy and not because of blatantly invoked bandwagon fallacies like this one regarding the unpopularity of Daisy or clone characters - they have no impact on the construction of the article, and once again we are not obligated to right some Great And Unholy Wrong or otherwise act as arbiters of a character's popularity or lack thereof. Why should we sacrifice our integrity just for the sake of acting contrary to some """influencers""" who have no realistic impact on what we do? -- 15:27, October 20, 2019 (EDT)


 * None of the tires I covered have any gameplay differences from the original tires - and personally, I do not see why we should use seperate standards for classifying almost identical Smash Bros. moves used by different characters vs different Mario Kart wheels with almost the same designs and identical stats, since if you boil it down, it's essentially the same thing. I agree that Goombas and Goombos are not fair to compare as they are different characters altogether, but the texture swap wheels are not seperate characters which should be held to special standards, they are much closer to parts such as items and techniques, You can easily cover CPU preferences under a single page for both the original and color variant of the tire. The vast majority of wikis worth their salt treat the traits of Cosmetically Different Sides and Seperate But Identical, as seperate. Daisy's moves and the Mario Kart wheels BOTH fit under these tropes, and in general, it is cleaner to just mention that they are functionally the same in the seperate article than to try and fit both into one. -- 15:40, October 20, 2019 (EDT)


 * "13 and 13e are technically still different numbers" Epsilon ain't a number dude Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 15:30, October 20, 2019 (EDT)
 * The original Japanese represents Daisy as 13', with the dash being a mathematical symbol for a number derived from another number. -- 15:40, October 20, 2019 (EDT)

Regarding your attempt to alter the terms, you are not allowed to not have a "do nothing" option, as per the rules. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 16:03, October 20, 2019 (EDT)

The identical moves are used by different characters with different designs between them, but no difference in function. The Azure Roller and Roller have different basic designs between them, and like many of the other tires they have a difference in function via their impact on a kart's stats (and thus an impact on gameplay). Some of the tires share stats, yes, but this is not always the case between games - e.g. the other two tires that used to have the same stats as the Roller/Azure Roller in Mario Kart 7 now have different stats in Mario Kart 8. Therefore, they are split.

The reason I mentioned other wikis at all was not to suggest a presence of any "special" standard or to suggest that we should take the same route as any other wiki - indeed, just because X Wiki does it A or B way should not be the reason we do or don't take a certain course of action. The point is to indicate that there will be an inevitable divergence in how each type of page is treated on a basic level (e.g. the style of character pages =/= the style of item pages, the style of item pages =/= the style of attack pages, and so on), and how that divergence develops varies with each wiki. Our character coverage, item coverage, and attack coverage are all different from each other for that basic reason, with our guidelines and policies guiding the particulars of those differences, developing them and in turn being developed accordingly.

This is not to suggest a "we've always done it this way so it should stay that way" argument, either, asfar from it. The proposal process exists to discuss these changes and come to a consensus on what should and should not be enacted - a consensus that you are trying to undercut even now. The grievous dishonesty on display in your attempts to do so through all related discussions to this matter, including this latest attempt to ad hoc discussion of the Roller/Azure Roller and other similar cases into the current proposal, is absolutely bush league. It has been demonstrated multiple times that those are separate cases and should be treated as such, particularly in respect to what was established in the paragraph above this.

Furthermore, it shows exactly how little thought you give to your own assertions that you rail about "influencers" and trying to undercut their supposed targeting, only to then try and not-so-subtly maneuver the discussion into a more favorable outcome so long as it suits you and your needs. The longer this discussion proceeds, the more reason I find to believe that the proposed changes will not provide the benefits they so tout, and the more I doubt that they will provide any real benefit at all.

If you not only fail to provide a compelling argument for your position, but also react to dissent in such categorically deceptive manners and summarily treat even your own stance as though it is of such little account when the convenience arises, then why should we give it any consideration ourselves? -- 16:24, October 20, 2019 (EDT)

I have explained multiple times that there are no differences in function between the Roller and Azure Roller. Every single stat between the two tires are exactly the same in all the games they have appeared in. I don't support merging them at all, but I feel like it is a double standard. -- 16:27, October 20, 2019 (EDT)


 * Then argue that on their pages and stop moving those goalposts over here. -- 16:29, October 20, 2019 (EDT)
 * So naturally, you edited your proposal in bad faith to cover something completely out of scope to try to get users to "agree" to something that they never even voted for in the first place. -- 16:35, October 20, 2019 (EDT)


 * And then you tried to force through the changes anyway! What an absolute joke. -- 16:53, October 20, 2019 (EDT)