Talk:Mattermouth

Where's the source for the name? --

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
They look nothing like a Dry Bones, i don't understand why there that kind of species.

Proposer: Deadline: January 16, 2014, 23:59 GMT

Support

 * 1) Per proposal.
 * 2) 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)

Oppose

 * 1) - 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) 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?

Comments
@Walkazo: but is a resemblance enough to warrant them as a sub-species?-- 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. - 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.-- 16:12, 2 January 2014 (EST)