Talk:Card Key

From the Super Mario Wiki, the Mario encyclopedia
Jump to navigationJump to search

Split the Card Keys by game[edit]

Settledproposal.svg This talk page proposal has already been settled. Please do not edit any of the sections in the proposal. If you wish to discuss the article, do so in a new header below the proposal.

split 7-3
Even if what I did over a month ago wasn't properly agreed upon, the show must go on.

I'm really not sure why these are merged to begin with, especially given that their only similarity is that they're the same type of key. Other than that, they're both used in different games and have different designs. All in all, I think it makes much more sense for these to be split, given that the Ruins Key split uses the exact same basis.

Proposer: Toadette the Achiever (talk)
Deadline: May 15, 2020, 23:59 GMT


  1. Toadette the Achiever (talk) Per proposal.
  2. Alex95 (talk) - "Same item, different game" isn't much of a reason to be split on it's own. That said, I don't remember any X-Naut Fortresses in Super Paper Mario.
  3. Duckfan77 (talk) Per all.
  4. FanOfYoshi (talk) Per all.
  5. PinkYoshiFan (talk) Per all.
  6. Scrooge200 (talk) Super inconsistent that we split some of these and not others. I'd prefer to split them since I feel that this is just leftover from the wiki's early days.
  7. Goombuigi (talk) Per all.


  1. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) Same name in every language, same general purpose, same generic subject, splitting would inflate article count over what amounts to splitting hairs. I repeat: this is a repeated use of a generic subject, a thing that exists in real life. It's not like these are an especially important plot coupon, we should group based on concept. Otherwise we'd split every differently acting Goomba.
  2. Waluigi Time (talk) Per Doc, I really don't think we need to be splitting keys as much as we have been.
  3. Niiue (talk) Per Doc.


@Doc: The "concept" basis is more easily applied to subjects originating within the Mario universe than to generic subjects. And let's be clear that this policy applies to articles like this one, but cannot be applied to exclusively in-universe subjects by the same logic. Toadette icon CTTT.pngArchivistToadettefont.png(T|C) 12:53, May 1, 2020 (EDT)

No? Then we'd be splitting every instance of bees, and we only do that when the origin language has a non-generic name. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 13:14, May 1, 2020 (EDT)
That case is a bit more complicated, seeing as how most of the "bees" mentioned in that article more closely resemble real-world honeybees, and there's no straightforward method to split them out. Here, though, the case is simple enough to make the difference straightforward and reasonable enough. Toadette icon CTTT.pngArchivistToadettefont.png(T|C) 13:22, May 1, 2020 (EDT)
It's just a "card key," though. If they were "X-Naut Card Key" and "Floro Card Key," that'd be a reason to split, but the subject being described here is simply "a type of key that is made from a scanable card." Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 13:27, May 1, 2020 (EDT)
Except the Ruins Keys were also split despite having identical names in both English and Japanese. Are you saying that said split shouldn't have happened without a proposal? Toadette icon CTTT.pngArchivistToadettefont.png(T|C) 13:35, May 1, 2020 (EDT)
Possibly, though "Ruins Key" is more specific as a name, since a "ruins key" isn't a real "type" of key, unlike a keycard. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 13:42, May 1, 2020 (EDT)