Talk:Mattermouth

From the Super Mario Wiki, the Mario encyclopedia

Where's the source for the name? --FREAK ~Game GameBros.png Freak~ OUT!

the name is offical as BMB say it in the strategy guide he has. --Lindsay151 21:53, 23 May 2010 (EDT)


Stop considering Mattermouths as Dry Bones[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.

stop calling them dry bones 11-7
They look nothing like a Dry Bones, i don't understand why there that kind of species.

Proposer: Randombob-omb4761 (talk)
Deadline: January 16, 2014, 23:59 GMT, Extended: January 23, 2014, 23:59 GMT, February 6, 2014, 23:59 GMT

Support[edit]

  1. Randombob-omb4761 (talk) Per proposal.
  2. SuperYoshiBros (talk) They have different appearances and purposes. The only thing really similar is that they're skeleton-like and they have the same eye-style. (yellow glowing pupil against black)
  3. Mario (talk) I'll support because we shouldn't use a blanket term of "Dry Bones" to refer to any animated reptilian skeleton; Bone Dragon and Spine Coasters (especially the one in Super Mario 3D Land) are apparently not considered Dry Bones, yet they resemble Dry Bones as much as Mattermouths or more, so Mattermouths should not be considered Dry Bones either.
  4. Megadardery (talk) Per LGM (a.k.a Mario). And per my comments.
  5. Hiccup (talk) Being bones, don't make em' Dry Bones.
  6. Baby Luigi (talk) It's more logical and easier to say that they're NOT Dry Bones than assuming they are. Just how we do NOT lump Rocky Wrenches into the Monty Mole species, we shouldn't lump Mattermouths into Dry Bones just because they resemble one.
  7. Skittles (talk) No evidence suggests they are related. Stating there's resemblance is fine, but not claiming they are a Dry Bones subspecies.
  8. Mario7 (talk) They are completely different species. Per all.
  9. MarioYoshi2 (talk) Per all
  10. Lord Grammaticus (talk) Per all, particularly Mario.
  11. Wobbuffet2000 (talk) Per all.

Oppose[edit]

  1. Walkazo (talk) - They look like Dry Bones skulls so it's not illogical, and lumping them together is good for organization. It doesn't need to be a perfect fit, and the article merely says there's a "resembl[ance]" anyway.
  2. KP (talk) A note to the proposer- their skull looks similar to the Dry Bones's and they have no flesh, so saying that they look nothing like one doesn't make much sense, does it?
  3. Mario4Ever (talk) Per Walkazo.
  4. Bloc Partier (talk) - Per Walkazo.
  5. Phoenix (talk) - Per Walkazo.
  6. Yoshi876 (talk) Per Walkazo.
  7. Pinkie Pie (talk) Check again. Dry Bone are skeletons, and Mattermouth are skeletons. They both look alive, and the both have skull. Please check again to see if you are right. We know we don't know what they resemblance look.

Comments[edit]

@Walkazo: but is a resemblance enough to warrant them as a sub-species?--

User:MegadarderyUser talk:MegadarderyDashbot.png

15:43, 2 January 2014 (EST)

Our use of "sub-species" is garbage: it's an empty term that we slap on anything with a design based on a more generic thing. But I'm not advocating for subspecies designation anyway. Simply saying they're vaguely related would be ideal: leave them in the Dry Bones template and category and leave the links on the article and in the infobox, but replace the sub-species category with a regular species one. - Walkazo 16:04, 2 January 2014 (EST)
I don't totally agree with you, I suggest saying that they are similar but removing them from the Dry Bones sub-species and removing the Dry Bones category.--
User:MegadarderyUser talk:MegadarderyDashbot.png
16:12, 2 January 2014 (EST)

I have a question: what about Spine Coasters from Super Mario 3D Land? They resemble Dry Bones, more so than Mattermouths, in my opinion, and they act alive, so they aren't merely a moving platform, yet they aren't given the Dry Bones category. Should they be considered Dry Bones? And what about Bone Dragon?
Mario Green.pngKaBoom! 20:34, 2 January 2014 (EST)

Also, the skulls of Mattermouths resemble Bone Dragon more closely than Dry Bones. Mattermouths don't have forward-facing eyes like Dry Bones do. Mario Green.pngKaBoom! 20:48, 2 January 2014 (EST)
With the exception of Spine Coaster (whilst I don't like it very much either), I don't agree. As I said before, a resemblance is not enough to warrant them as a sub-species, especially that Mattermouth, Bone Dragon poorly resemble it anyway. I think that the Undead category fits them better than the Dry Bones category.--
User:MegadarderyUser talk:MegadarderyDashbot.png
07:32, 3 January 2014 (EST)
I agree as well. We can go through the route where Dry Bones is a blanket term for skeleton reptilian beings, but this will be speculation territory, and it's easier to say they're NOT Dry Bones rather than they are. NOT being Dry Bones is not as definite as the affirmative.
Mario Green.pngKaBoom! 12:54, 3 January 2014 (EST)

Pinkie Pie: "Dry Bone are skeletons, and Mattermouth are skeletons. They both look alive, and the both have skull."

Also, Spine Coaster and Bone Dragon. Yet, they aren't categorized as Dry Bones. This is like that old proposal where we didn't consider Rocky Wrenches to be Monty Moles, so why should this one be any different? Mario Green.pngKaBoom! 20:29, 24 January 2014 (EST)

I give up.[edit]

Fine Mario, I give up, you win. Mattermouth aren't Dry Bone. :( Pinkie Pie (talk) 16:17, 7 February 2014 (EST)

They're skeletons, but not Dry Bones. I'm relieved this change is in conjunction with Rocky Wrenches and Monty Moles. Mario Green.pngKaBoom! 18:53, 8 February 2014 (EST)