Talk:Pink Gold Peach

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

Pink Gold Peach[edit]

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

We don't know yet. BabyLuigiFire.png Ray Trace(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.
A later version of the character select screen from Mario Kart 8
The full character selection screen in Mario Kart 8.
That's only because she wasn't announced when that picture was released. Same applies for Mii and Baby Rosalina.--

Poison Mushroom Orb in Puzzle & Dragons: Super Mario Bros. EditionDigibutterFrancis 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 Ray Trace(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. Icon showing how many lives Mario has left. From Super Mario 64 DS. It's me, Mario! (Talk / Stalk) 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)