Talk:Boo Guy

Bomb version

According to the Shogakukan (need to find a better way to remember how to spell that than "look at my short-term history") guide for Yoshi's New Island, the bomb-dropping version Template:Media link from the "normal" version. Also apparently the PiT one is Greaper, mayhaps it's a rename? Anyways, how about the two names here? Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 18:14, 19 December 2017 (EST)

It's Relay Heihō (リレーヘイホー). Like Bouncing Bullet Bill, they didn't originally have their own name in Japanese guides, but they got one in Yoshi's New Island, complete with a separate entry internally (G:/content0.game/romfs/stage/cmp_gmk_relayheyho.csv). Who knows why the mace-pulling versions remain unnamed. As for Reihō/Greaper, I'm not sure what happened there - my guess is that the RPG text had space constraints, resulting in the alternate name. However, the name Reihō is also mentioned in its profile in a Japanese Yoshi's Island DS guide. LinkTheLefty (talk) 18:45, 19 December 2017 (EST)

Which page? The enemy guide spells it as "Yurei Heiho" still. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 19:00, 19 December 2017 (EST)

Disregard, I must've misread it. In any case, though I'm not sure about Greaper, I think Relay Heihō should be considered a derived Boo Guy article. LinkTheLefty (talk) 19:20, 19 December 2017 (EST)

T'would make sense, as they now have a distinct name in some language. Remember, Bullet Bill and Bull's-eye Missile Bill were considered to be basically a Green-Red Troopa situation in Japan initially, ie variants of the same enemy (explaining SM64 and SMG), but were eventually given separate names over there as well. In this case, we only have the JP name to work with as of now, but it seems a tad more splittable than Short Fuse and Seedy Sally. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 19:30, 19 December 2017 (EST)

Short Fuse and Seedy Sally have every Japanese guide and Yoshi's Woolly World against them, so Relay Heihō certainly has it easier. LinkTheLefty (talk) 19:51, 19 December 2017 (EST)

Alledged relation to Boos

This talk page or section has a conflict or a question that needs to be answered. Please try to help and resolve the issue by leaving a comment.

The supposed relation to Boos seems to be something completely made up by the Western localization, and as such all Boo Guys should be removed from the "Boo" category and template. In the Japanese version, they were simply "Yurei Heiho", with the American version making the obviously-untrue assertion that they are "Boo Babies." Anyways, since this has caused much confusion it seems, I think it needs to be said that these are not Boos. If they were, the Japanese name would have been the obvious "Tereiho" or something. Besides, "boo" is a generic exclamation relating to ghosts, for instance Mssr Boo isn't a Boo. And these were not designed to invoke Boos, they were designed simply to be ghostly Shy Guys. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 23:42, 13 April 2018 (EDT)

The same thing can be said with Anuboo and Fuzzipede, but if we remove their connection with Boos, then we should do the same thing with Snufits. VOIDTHIS (talk) 20:10, 20 June 2018 (CEST)

Snufits aren't Boos in any way, barring the original spherical shape, and there were plenty of spherical enemies in SM64. Boo was actually more oblong in that game anyways. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 18:43, 20 June 2018 (EDT)

Honestly, I think they've brought up pretty good points. I think we could come up with wording that didn't violate the spirit of terminology, or even end up saying screw it and putting in something that does violate it on the basis that a disclaimer really is potentially quite important.

	+	
	+	

I have also always thought that the boo not being a boo enemy options present NPOV and worldview issues. I would pretty strongly support just eliminating that parameter since I can't come up with a good way to resolve the issues in a template etc. In the text of an article we can say "It is widely considered boos, but is seen as a different enemy in other parts of the world," or "It has been considered a a boo type enemy for many years, but using that term too much has sometimes proven fatal," but stuff like that doesn't really fit in an infobox, template or article. I guess in articles like that we could just not use the parameter in the infobox, template and the like and describe it in the text only... but even with ghosts that are more black and white in game terms I'm not sure that having it as an infobox or template parameter presents any value at all. Anyone wanting to know it should look at a hell of a lot more than just the infobox. Kevin Gorman (talk)