Talk:Pink Gold Peach

From the Super Mario Wiki

Pink Gold Peach[edit]

So, This will be Peach's Metal Mario...she's unlockable, right?

We don't know yet. BabyLuigiFire.png(T|C) 18:58, 30 April 2014 (EDT)
It must be, because if you see the first photo, Pink Gold Peach isn't there, then she is in the next photo.
MK8CharacterSelect2.png
MK8 CharacterSelect.png
That's only because she wasn't announced when that picture was released. Same applies for Mii and Baby Rosalina.--

P&DSMBE OrbPurple.pngDigibutterFrancis SPM trans.png 04:36, 1 May 2014 (EDT)

Critical Reception[edit]

We all know that Pink Gold Peach is one of the most hated characters here, so do you think she deserves a section for reception? Marioguy (talk) 17:24, 18 November 2015 (EST)

No. We won't follow Wikipedia critical reception sections on fictional video game characters, as we think it's a bit on the, uh, ridiculous side. We allow reception sections only for video games only. BabyLuigiFire.png(T|C) 17:29, 18 November 2015 (EST)
What Baby Luigi said. Don't take "reception" sections on video game characters (or any character for that matter) from Wikipedia seriously because you can't really *rate* a character, compared to a game or a movie, much less one from a minimalist Mario series. You can note their legacy and their influence, but that's usually left to characters like Mario, Luigi, Peach, and Bowser anyway. All in all, it would be a bad idea to create a reception section for characters in general. Mario Green.pngKaBoom! 17:30, 18 November 2015 (EST)

Ok. Thanks, I didn't know that. Marioguy (talk) 17:52, 18 November 2015 (EST)

Gold Peach[edit]

So, question, should we add Super Mario Party regarding appearances on here, or should we create make the Gold Peach redirect into an actual article for that purpose? Weedle McHairybug (talk) 08:52, 11 December 2018 (EST) EDIT: Never mind, turns out that was just an effect from the Golden Drink. Weedle McHairybug (talk) 08:54, 11 December 2018 (EST)

Protect page[edit]

As crap as this character may be, I feel this page should be protected since it's clearly prone to vandalism (maybe because of how unpopular this character is) Mario Sakuraba (talk) 13:50, September 5, 2019 (EDT)

The vandalism has been a returning vandal, but if it becomes a major issue, it will be protected. Alex95sig1.pngAlex95sig2.png 13:56, September 5, 2019 (EDT)
I highly doubt popularity or lack thereof even factors into a majority of the vandalism that occurs here anyway. --ExdeathIcon.png Lord G. matters. ExdeathIcon.png 15:43, September 5, 2019 (EDT)
Given they've only vandalized this and Baby Rosalina's pages (with both of them generally being regarded as the most blatant roster-filler ever) I'd say in this case it's likely. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 16:57, September 5, 2019 (EDT)
I did say "majority" for a reason. Vandals with personal problems aren't unheard of. I just don't think that's as much the case as Sakuraba seems to think - character quality or popularity certainly doesn't factor into whether or not a page should be protected outside of high traffic, that's for sure. --ExdeathIcon.png Lord G. matters. ExdeathIcon.png 18:46, September 5, 2019 (EDT)
Just making sure. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 18:51, September 5, 2019 (EDT)