Talk:Goom

Goombas?

Both the English AND Japanese names indicate they're a sub-species of Goomba (and they look pretty similar to Galoombas), so should these be considered a relative? Binarystep (talk) 14:55, 29 April 2015 (EDT)

No, there's a difference between related names and related enemies. It's in the same boat as Stu: the Japanese name is also derived from kuri, and they're another Goomba equivalent, but they're not a type of Goomba. In both cases, saying their related would be misleading: the articles simply noting the similarities in name, role and/or appearance are good enough. - Walkazo 15:08, 29 April 2015 (EDT)

There's technically no proof Galoombas are related to Goombas, then. Binarystep (talk) 15:11, 29 April 2015 (EDT)

To be honest, my opinion on all this is that Goombas/Galoombas/Gooms/possibly Stus aren't directly related, but are all derivatives of some unnamed parent species, sort of like how Buzzy Beetles are a type of Koopa, but not considered a direct relative of Koopa Troopas specifically. Binarystep (talk) 15:19, 29 April 2015 (EDT)

Delete Goom

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.

delete 8-0
Just like Puff before it, Wanderin' Gooms are clearly the parent species, making this article hypothetical at best.

Proposer: LinkTheLefty (talk)
Deadline: July 31, 2015, 23:59 GMT

Support

1. LinkTheLefty (talk) Per.
2. SuperYoshiBros (talk) Considering there's no "plain" or "default" Goom, this page is pointless. Per proposal.
3. Bazooka Mario (talk) Puff seems like a good precedent to use in this case.
4. Pseudo-dino (talk) Per Puff deletion.
5. PowerKamek (talk) Per all
6. Binarystep (talk) Per all, I actually planned to make this but never got around to it because of computer issues.
7. Lumastar (talk) Per all. We don't even have to do much in terms of moving information to other pages.
8. Magikrazy (talk) Per.