Talk:Magic Wand

(First topic)

Where does the name "Magic/Koopa Sceptor" come from? I've only seen Magic Wand, so... LinkTheLefty (talk) 12:22, 13 May 2014 (EDT)

Title of this page

For the page name, why is "wand" lowercase? Was that intentional? --TheMorningFlash (talk) 21:26, 11 November 2017 (EST)

I've been meaning to say something about this myself, actually. SMB3 stylizes it as "Magic Wand" during Toad's speech, iirc. Not sure if that changed in All-Stars or SMA4, though so I'll check on that in a bit. 21:49, 11 November 2017 (EST)

Okay, so, it is named "Magic Wand" in Super Mario Advance 4. Wondering if there are any differences in more recent games before I move this? 22:08, 11 November 2017 (EST)

This revision may answer your question. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 22:23, 11 November 2017 (EST)

Eh, not quite. What is the "official source"? 22:24, 11 November 2017 (EST)

Bumping this, SMA4 indeed uses "Magic Wand". Since it's both a higher source priority and more recent, is there any reason not to move it? -- Too Bad! Waluigi Time! 15:28, May 27, 2022 (EDT)

Remove Magikoopa wands from this article

Title. Hey, soo why does this page cover Magikoopa wands? I don't think it should cover Magikoopa wands.

"Magic Wand" exists to cover the item in Super Mario Bros. 3, which was the goal of levels and a part of the game's narrative. They keep appearing as less relevant design elements of the Koopalings, and normally we don't cover those. We don't have articles for the sunglasses of Cooligans or the hooks of Hook Guy. (I could use Spear Guy's spear, but hook is funnier.) But I think we know how it goes: "once notable, always notable". The fact that magic wands are an item one time, and get an article for that one time, means that the article has cover all of of the magic wand's appearances even though they are not item. So we end up covering the Koopaling's choice of weapon.

Magikoopa wands are not the Koopaling wands. For one thing, they look different. Once we enter 3D and Nintendo figures out what the Mario aesthetic should be as a baseline, Magikoopa wands are consistently yellow with a handle that ends in a point. Koopaling wands are consistently silver with handles that do not end with points. Further, the state of the article's Magikoopa content is dire. Magikoopa wands were added to the article's scope by this 2017 revision, by changing the intro's "The magic wands (also known as Magic Scepters) are magic items that are often seen in the hands of the Koopalings," to "The magic wands (also known as Magic Scepters) are magic items that are often seen in the hands of the Koopalings & Magikoopas." In the intervening eight years between that revision and now, the only content added to this article related to Magikoopa wands has been images in the gallery. So now it looks like a giant content gap: this article that is supposedly about Magikoopa wands has nothing to say about Magikoopa wands. This is the kind of gap that makes me question the editors of a wiki. If people aren't willing to add content to meet the full breadth the article's scope, and this is seemingly because article's scope is stretched in a way that is questionable, we should probably return the article's scope to normal to quickly resolve the problem. In this case, that means restricting this article's scope to Koopaling wands specifically. Salmancer (talk) 21:31, November 6, 2025 (EST)

Actually, the Magikoopa wands are only covered in the header and gallery as you said, so those can be deleted. After all, we just end up repeating what's said on Magikoopa and Kamek's pages. PrincessPeachFan (talk) 07:50, November 16, 2025 (EST)

Magic Wand Redo

This talk page proposal has already been settled. Please do not edit this section or its subsections. If you wish to discuss the article, please do so in a new section below the proposal.

Cover Koopaling Wands only 4-7-0
As pointed out above, the Magic Wands are supposed to be for the Koopalings and yet Magikoopa wands were covered during 2017 before being deleted and Magikoopa wands are also covered in the header and the gallery. As such, we can do one of three things: 1. Cover all magic wands and considering Peach (Halloween)'s Magic Wand is listed, it already has precedence. 2. Change the article to only focus on the Koopaling's wands and delete the Magikoopa and Tour stuff. 3. Do nothing at all.

Proposer: PrincessPeachFan (talk)
Deadline: December 1, 2025, 23:59 GMT

ALL DA WANDS, Support

1. PrincessPeachFan (talk) Per proposal.
2. Altendo (talk) Considering the introductory paragraph literally has "Magikoopas" there, I think it's reasonable to use this page to cover their wands as well. I haven't done a lot of research on this, but I also think that their functions work similar, if not the same (for example, Kamek's wand grows Bowser in New Super Mario Bros. Wii and New Super Mario Bros. U, and the Koopalings' wands grow him in New Super Mario Bros. 2, on top of their already existent magical attacks). I also don't see a reason to split an item simply because of who its user is (oh god, look at Hammer and its different uses, but it's still one page).
3. Sorbetti (talk) The page is called Magic Wand, not Koopaling Magic Wand.
4. Martendo (talk) Per all.

Koopalings Only! Support

1. Hewer (talk) I think this article should be about the distinctive subject that is the Koopalings' wands, and that that's always been the main intention of the article. Lumping in a bunch of other wands like it's a generic subject feels a bit everything but the kitchen sink.
2. Altendo (talk) Second choice, I suppose, per Hewer.
3. Salmancer (talk) I guess I'm obligated to vote on this proposal? Short answer, per Hewer and myself in the above section. The two kinds of wands are distinguished visually, so they aren't the same. Therefore they don't need to be on the same article, since they are distinct subjects. Also, the current state of written Magikoopa content on this article is close to zero, which makes the editors of this wiki look bad. This makes me not want Magikoopa wands to be on the same article as Koopaling wands. Magikoopa wands go back to being written about exclusively on Magikoopa's page, and Peach (Halloween)'s identical wand should also be on Magikoopa. and Peach (Halloween)'s wand is converted into a note on this page. (And also goes on Peach's page, but the story of how we should disseminate character costumes on character pages is a tale for another time.) Additional arguments: so check my edit summary of the 08:49, November 2, 2024 revision to this article. "Noooo, this Dr Mario World section is certainly not just the History of Koopalings section minus four of the Koopalings." This is why I believe we usually don't cover design elements on separate articles. It's straight up taking X from other article, rearranging it a bit, and placing it in Y article. (Which is true for that revision. Check the relevant History of Koopalings revisions 1 2) I firmly believe we have to do this for the Koopalings, thanks to having a Magic Wand article, but where we can avoid doing this we probably should. It's kind of annoying from a reading standpoint when going from History of Koopalings to Magic Wand, and doing it for Magikoopa to Magic Wand would only increase the annoyance factor. We can avoid doing this for Magikoopas by just putting information on the design elements and role of Magikoopa's wands on Magikoopa's page. Which has a Physical appearance section already discussing the wand's design. Make wand design and function a full paragraph, put paragraphs in the history section about wand design changes, and we're done. And in a more sensible form factor than jamming Magikoopa wands into an article about a different subject, then writing a bajillion History sections in Magic Wand that are all diced up remixes of existing sections from Magikoopa's History.
4. LadySophie17 (talk) Per Hewer and Salmancer. Also I dislike how the other option is vague about what would be included here or not.
5. Camwoodstock (talk) Per Hewer and LadySophie. A page about the other wands isn't a bad idea, but we figure that having the Koopalings' wands on their own page is the most sensible idea--making this article just broadly "any magic wand" is a very bold thing to say about a franchise this expansive!
6. Arend (talk) Per all. The majority of the article is focused on the Koopalings' magic wands anyway; plus while we do tend to see the Koopalings without their magic wands, we rarely ever see Magikoopas without theirs. Peach (Halloween)'s magic wand actually looks like a golden version of the Koopalings' magic wands, so it could feasibly be covered in a notes section. The one more tricky part is where the Koopa Scepter of The Super Mario Bros. Super Show should go as I asked below (given that it appears to be not based on the Koopalings' magic wands at all but rather Bowser's dark magic from the first SMB), but with enough research and information, it could feasibly get its own article?
7. EvieMaybe (talk) per all

Comments (Wand Wonderings)

What about Wanda's? Mario & Wario already has a category and a navbox in this page, despite not having a section. — Lady Sophie ^(T|C) 15:08, November 17, 2025 (EST)

@Sorbetti: That's because the Koopalings' magic wands are called "magic wands", not "Koopaling magic wands". Similarly, Penguin isn't titled "Penguin (design that originated in Super Mario 64)", and yet it only covers instances of that design, being split from penguin (generic). Hewer (talk · contributions · edit count) 03:39, November 18, 2025 (EST)

I think the differences between a Koopaling Magic Wand and a Magikoopa Magic Wand are minuscule and imperceptible because they are clearly related, so having both on one page seems appropriate to me. Besides, unlike the penguins, if the proposal fails, what will happen to the Magikoopa Magic Wands? That said, I would prefer an option that includes information only about Magic Wands of Magikoopas, Kamek, and Kammy Koopa on the page, not just Magic Wands in general. Sorbetti (talk) 15:50, November 18, 2025 (EST)

They're coloured differently and have a slightly different shape, which is a consistent, intentional design difference, certainly not "imperceptible". I don't think the fact that magic wands have a fairly consistent look in the Mario franchise should prevent the specific items used by the Koopalings from getting a page to themselves. As for where we should cover Magikoopa wands: the Magikoopa page. As Salmancer argued in the above section, we don't have a separate article for Hook Guy's hook. Hewer (talk · contributions · edit count) 03:34, November 19, 2025 (EST)

If the Magikoopa's Magic Wands aren't going to be included here, nor will they have their own page, why can the Koopalings' Magic Wands be included? Their only notable appearance is in Super Mario Bros. 3, which is noted in the page's introduction: "In Super Mario Bros. 3, Magic Wands are stolen from the Mushroom World's kings." Otherwise, it seems redundant to cover every appearance of the Magic Wands since they were tied to the Koopalings, and the article ends up talking more about the Koopalings' involvement than the Magic Wand itself. "Most of the Koopalings use different weapons. Larry, Iggy, and Ludwig continue to use Magic Wands. As usual, Larry shoots out blue fire with his wand. Iggy, as usual, shoots out green fire with his wand." "Magic Wands in New Super Mario Bros. 2 are used in combat by all of the Koopalings except Wendy. Additionally, although Lemmy retains his wand's ability to conjure circus balls, Morton's normal spells are instead replaced with conjuring spiked balls in his fight with Mario." Unless the article is rewritten to talk more about the Magic Wands and less about their occupants, then I prefer to also include the Magikoopas, which have also maintained a similar design. Sorbetti (talk) 15:00, November 19, 2025 (EST)

The Koopalings' magic wands should have an article because of their major appearance in Super Mario Bros. 3, and the article should also include later appearances of those wands in order to be a complete article that thoroughly covers its subject. Magikoopa wands aren't included in that because they aren't the same subject as the ones used by the Koopalings. That's my understanding at least. Hewer (talk · contributions · edit count) 16:28, November 19, 2025 (EST)

The article currently also has a section for The Super Mario Bros. Super Show, where the following is all that's stated:

"On The Super Mario Bros. Super Show!, King Koopa occasionally holds a similar magic scepter he calls the Koopa Scepter."

I imagine that would be removed too once the proposal passes (the second option specifically), but the way it's presented implies that this too is a notable object. So, would that mean it gets its own article as well, or would it be better to treat it like the Magikoopa wands, and move that info to Bowser?
The really annoying bit is that the above sentence really is all that the section notes. There's no information listed in which episodes the Koopa Scepter appears, nor what it does or what King Koopa can do with it. From this page alone, there's no way of knowing how notable the Koopa Scepter even is, which in turn means we don't know if the scepter is notable enough to deserve its own article. But it also has a name that is bolded in the section, so it HAS to have some importance... rend (talk) (edits) 08:33, November 19, 2025 (EST)

One episode would be Flatbush Koopa where King Koopa used it to turn people into bricks. PrincessPeachFan (talk) 08:54, November 19, 2025 (EST)

The correct intermediary is probably splitting Koopa Scepter into its own article. It wouldn't be the worst stub, thanks to Fireball Punch being the wiki's floor, and we can sort the situation out later Salmancer (talk) 09:23, November 19, 2025 (EST)

Correction, Koopa Scepter would be above the floor after the Flatbush Koopa appearance is added. Salmancer (talk) 12:10, November 20, 2025 (EST)

So it has since come to my attention that King Koopa also uses a magic scepter in "Do You Princess Toadstool Take this Koopa...?", as well as in "The Koopas are Coming! The Koopas are Coming!"; however, neither of these eps calls it the Koopa Scepter like "Flatbush Koopa" does. In the former episode, it doesn't really have a name, and Mario informally calls it "Koopa's magic scepter", whereas in the latter episode, Redcoat Koopa calls it his "ice scepter". Would that mean all of those scepters would be placed in separate articles, or do we put them in a merged article for magic scepters in TSMBSS? While I would prefer the latter, the former makes more sense given that they all have different names... at least it would make more sense than having two different articles on the Golden Plumber's Helper, anyway (or at least two different articles called as such). rend (talk) (edits) 07:58, November 23, 2025 (EST)

@Salmancer Looking at her profile art (and its 2D equivalent), the wand of Peach (Halloween) appears closer to be a golden variant of the Koopalings' magic wands, rather than a Variant of Kamek's/the Magikoopas'. The gem's rim and the staff's handle are both straight and rigid (like a true cylinder), whereas the Magikoopa wand's rim has rounded edges and the handle is more conical with a rounded tip. Peach's wand also has a section from the rim to the handle that consists of two segments like the Koopalings' wands, whereas this section on the Magikoopa's wand is a single segment. rend (talk) (edits) 11:39, November 19, 2025 (EST)

Hindsight being 20/20, I probably shouldn't have used art where Peach's arm covers up the wand's handle as reference. (File:My Nintendo Halloween 2025 wallpaper desktop.jpg) So no placing it on Magikoopa's article. Salmancer (talk) 12:10, November 20, 2025 (EST)

@LadySophie: It's not really vague. It's if we should cover Magikoopa and Peach (Halloween) here as well given that Magikoopa's wands are covered in the header and the gallery. PrincessPeachFan (talk) 19:40, November 19, 2025 (EST)