Talk:Elevator Key

Merge?
Note: These discussions were moved here from the former "Elevator Key (X-Naut)" talk page.

Do we really need this? We already have the Elevator Key page, which is an item of the same name in the same game. We can easily merge them together by saying "The Elevator Key is the name of two items found in the game Paper Mario: The Thousand-Year Door." And then we'd go into each of them as usual. This would eliminate a short article and a stub by putting them in the same place. Redstar 14:29, 21 December 2009 (EST)
 * I think this would be useful, albeit they have the same item name and are in the same game, they don't look the same. They both serve the same purpose in both Riverside and the X-Naut base. Why not merge them?

Merge Elevator Key (X-Naut) with Elevator Key
They're essentially the same item. Also, look at the above discussion. We should do as Redstar says: "...easily merge them together by saying "The Elevator Key is the name of two items found in the game Paper Mario: The Thousand-Year Door. And then we'd go into each of them as usual."

Proposer:

Deadline: 20:00, 9 January 2009

Merge Elevator Key (X-Naut) with Elevator Key

 * 1) -- Per above.
 * 2) - Per my proposal

Comments
'The end of the discussions moved here from the former "Elevator Key (X-Naut)" talk page. Please do not edit or continue discussion.'

Split the Elevator Keys
These are so obviously different items that I don't think I need to detail exactly how they're different. Yes, they have the same name - should we also merge the tennis player and the golfer for having the same name? If you want to make the case that the keys aren't notable enough to deserve individual articles, there's an entire category that disagrees with you. If you want to make the point that these keys shouldn't have articles in the first place, this is not the place to do so (and take note that this has been attempted at least once before). Right now, let's make things consistent with the rest of the wiki and give these individual articles. One final point: You do not get rid of stubs by lumping a bunch of articles together. It's like trying to get rid of dust by sweeping it under a carpet; you've done nothing to actually alleviate the problem, you've only made it look like everything's fine.

(There is a case to be made for keeping the two X-Naut Fortress keys together, so that option will be presented alongside an option to split all three of them.)

Proposer: Deadline: August 29, 2017, 23:59 GMT

Split all three keys

 * 1) Per proposal.
 * 2) Little fact about keys just cause they look the same doesn't mean they'll unlock the same lock.

Split the Riverside Station key and keep the X-Naut Fortress Keys together

 * 1) Per proposal.
 * 2) I feel this is the best option, as the key from Riverside Station looks very different from the ones in the X-Naut Fortress, which are key cards. However, I feel the only difference between the key cards is their color.
 * 3) Per all.
 * 4) Per all.

Do nothing

 * 1) - The only thing I can find different is their appearances. They have the same name, game, and effect. I see no reason for a split. At least the two Harrys are completely different from each other.
 * 2) Per Alex95. Should we split the various Door Keys too?
 * 3) The article is just way too small for a split to happen. Splits like this make maintenance harder.
 * 4) The reasoning in the proposal were not enough as what is seen in the comments. Per Wildgoosespeeder. The slight difference between the design of the identically functional items is not worth the lose of convenience as a result of splitting an already small article into two, and using identifiers.

Comments
Information on this article, seems like a stub on its own. very little information about the keys are even here. Either way this goes, it is a stub. 15:20, 15 August 2017 (EDT)
 * Stubs are not short articles. Stubs are articles that lack information. Articles that are small are not intrinsically bad. 15:31, 15 August 2017 (EDT)
 * I'll put it this way for better clarification: I was wanting a little bit more info on the keys, if that was even possible. 15:34, 15 August 2017 (EDT)
 * I'm not sure what other information you want to add here? 15:36, 15 August 2017 (EDT)
 * I don't know either. :) 16:21, 15 August 2017 (EDT)

@Alex: But they're different keys, clearly. Just taking the Riverside Key into account, there's an obvious visual difference between it and the other keys, mostly because the other ones are keycards. Presenting them to our readers as if they're one and the same is misleading. 16:32, 15 August 2017 (EDT)
 * They're very obviously not one and the same, I think readers can discern that themselves easily, but at the same time, they're all keys that run an elevator. Only the appearance is different. 16:35, 15 August 2017 (EDT)
 * And the Random House Key and Odd Key both open doors. Should we merge them too? 16:38, 15 August 2017 (EDT)
 * 1) they have different names. 2) they are in different games. The Elevator Keys are a different case. They all have the same name and do the exact same thing. 16:42, 15 August 2017 (EDT)
 * Ah, so if something has the same name, appears in the same game, and acts similarly, then they should be merged, right? I'll get started merging Gritty Goomba and Gritty Goomba, then. 16:45, 15 August 2017 (EDT)
 * Those have the same name and slightly different appearance, sure, but they behave differently. Their stats are different and their attack patterns slightly differ as well, and the Teehee Valley variant kinda has a role in the story progression (taking Peach) whereas the Gwarhar Lagoon variant does not. 16:51, 15 August 2017 (EDT)
 * The two Chuck Guys or Pestnuts, then, and you're going to bring up minor behavior differences, one of these keys goes into a standard padlock and the others are swiped through keycard readers. Yes, they're all just keys, and if you're going to be that vague, then the Gritty Goombas and Chuck Guys are all just enemies. 16:54, 15 August 2017 (EDT)
 * I don't think I have anything more to say here. I'm keeping my vote up, because that is what I think. If the proposal ends up passing, then hey, good job! I'll support it from then onward. 16:58, 15 August 2017 (EDT)
 * Now that we have a break in the discussion, can I ask for your opinion on Ruins Key, which features two keys with the same name in the same article, even though they're both from different games? 17:01, 15 August 2017 (EDT)
 * Um, well...Sure, they're from different games, but they have the same name and do the same things. It honestly makes more sense to keep them as is, but again, this is a different case than the current one. I'm not sure how I'd vote on that one, tbh (SPM info could use an expansion as well). 17:07, 15 August 2017 (EDT)
 * You made the point earlier that the Elevator Keys should be kept together because they're in the same game. Are you saying that it doesn't matter whether they're in the same game or different games? 17:13, 15 August 2017 (EDT)
 * Okay, this got confusing. The Elevator Keys should remain the same because they function the same way and have the same name, regardless of location or game. They're in the same game, so that point is moot in this case. It does matter what game something is from, but that matter should be used when the article is in need of an identifier, not as a point for a split or merge. If what game something was from mattered heavily, Power Star would have four different articles. I know what point you are making with this proposal, and I also know that I'm not explaining this well, but I think my vote is valid. Elevator Keys have the same name and function, which is what matters when naming an article. Yes, they appear visually different, but that is the reason why you made this proposal, is it not? If this passes, great! If not, oh well. 17:30, 15 August 2017 (EDT)

@Niiue: Sure. 20:03, 15 August 2017 (EDT)
 * The problem with both splits is, we'd just end up with a bunch of short articles that say almost the exact same thing. Niiue (talk) 20:08, 15 August 2017 (EDT)
 * They'll be treated the same as any of the other Special Items. Located at location x, obtained by doing y, used to accomplish z. If it helps navigation, I don't see the harm in it. 20:12, 15 August 2017 (EDT)
 * How does it help navigation? Niiue (talk) 20:17, 15 August 2017 (EDT)
 * If someone's looking for information on only one of they keys, they get to be brought to an article covering only one of those keys. It keeps things simple and clear. 20:18, 15 August 2017 (EDT)
 * No, they'd be brought to a disambig listing several pages with the exact same name. Which, honestly, sounds detrimental to me. Niiue (talk) 06:55, 16 August 2017 (EDT)

Should the above proposal that merged the pages have passed in the first place? There are only three votes, and Proposals states that "Any proposal that has three votes or less at deadline will automatically be listed as "NO QUORUM." -- 16:38, 16 August 2017 (EDT)
 * It's not the only proposal like that (and that rule was there since 2007). I'm not sure if it's too late to do something about it, but at the very least, this proposal will settle things properly for the Elevator Key proposal. 16:41, 16 August 2017 (EDT)