MarioWiki:Main Page talk archive 22

Instruction Manuals
Just so everyone knows, Nintendo now keeps various instruction manuals from newer games on their website in PDF form. They may prove to be a helpful source of information for editors, so consider downloading them to your computer if you think that could help you improve our articles. Here's the link: Nintendo Instruction Manuals =D --
 * If it weren't for the miles of distance between us, I'd be hugging you right now... as strange as that sounds. This is going to make things so much easier!  20:10, 25 November 2008 (EST)
 * Excellent work finding that, SoS! This'll definitely help the wiki in many ways. 20:12, 25 November 2008 (EST)

I quite noticed this, since I wrote the article of the WMOD staff list. And despite the fact I know a certain website that keeps most the instruction manuals scanned in PDF form, SoS, Stumpy, Stooben; want me to share it? >:3 It might turn out good for all of us. :3 FYI, I also uploaded some more rare SMRPG images a while ago... from the SMRPG manual. ^_^
 * Um, okay, what is it?
 * * Jumps over himself trying to stop you from leaving* Please share!! 22:30, 25 November 2008 (EST)

(chuckles) Ok ok... :3 I don't normally share it to anyone except certain people I trust. But anyway, here it is: replacementdocs Guys, good luck. There may be some good oldies! Although I have about over 20 resources for me to use, I may write some guideline about it... I may think about it... :p
 * Thank you! 21:11, 27 November 2008 (EST)

Internet browsers
In the internet, there are different browsers for us to choose from, :3 like the recent Google Chrome, and Apple's Safari now for the Windows operating. As those browsers develop more and more, do you think that we look over the wiki in a different point of view just by using a different internet browser? And for simpler aspects, what type of internet browser do you use and why do you use it?

As I found out the differences, unfortunately yes. In order to make this quick, here's the short version: I noticed when I was looking at one of the aboutfile templates placed on long file names. When I told Wayo that there was a problem with the aboutfile template, but mentioned that there was nothing wrong. He was using Firefox, and I was using IE7. He checked the difference, and it was finally spotted. They say there was no way to get rid of it.... hm. Recently I was editting this section, Chemistry and saw two differences between the internet browser I used now and IE. My browser showed me that it looked visually fresh, while using the IE browser it looked bland.

I'm using Safari right now. One of the fastest browsers known to mankind man! XP It's fast, and flexible, feeling very calm but powerful indeed. I heard the browser passed some test that no other browser cannot... check Wikipedia for details I guess. Do you think that we should use the same internet browser? Or modify the coding that makes it compatible to at least all the modren-day browsers? Warning: This certain section may or not be viewed in a millisecond if you look at the right. XD. *coughadcough*

I notice that too when I used a windows XP but now I use a Windows Vista to get here. If you used a windom XP on here all the words on the article look different aswell. But if you user windows Vista word on article seem different. I guess and user see some thing different depening on the machine their using and the system right. What do you mean by using the same internet browsers? Some user might have Windows while others have Apple. 07:10, 26 November 2008 (EST)

I use a earlier version of IE, my computer's from 2001. Surpresingly everything works and looks fine. I realy have no problems, except sometimes it has a problem and shuts down if someone edits a User Talk Page when I'm looking at it, not mine, but the busier ones, like Wayoshi's.

I use Firefox to block all the ads on this page. I don't want my surfing experience being disrupted by anybody who wants me to buy their stuff.

I don't think we should have a different coding for each browser. They should all work in alike ways, and there might only be few display issues with them. - 11:09, 26 November 2008 (EST)

All the web browsers that take us to the internet right? So there all alike but used in different systems. 11:48, 26 November 2008 (EST)
 * Now that's not exactly true. Browsers download the raw HTML code and then build up the site following that code. A few code commands may be interpreted differently by different browsers. Certain image file types might also not be compatible with all browsers. (e.g. .SVG and Internet Explorer) - 13:47, 26 November 2008 (EST)

I also use firefox, and the only difference is that in firefox, the edges of the side bar and the upper part are round, and in IE, they're pointed, like this ¬

I've got an outdated IE (5.0) like Nerdy Guy, and I can see everything fine except for the boxes showing what coding to use on pages like Help:Editing. It's a pain, but it's never stopped me from editing or viewing the Wiki. - 17:39, 26 November 2008 (EST)
 * Oddly, I've switched between Windows '98 (Juno), XP (Firefox), and Vista (Netscape), and have noticed no difference in the site's appearance. 21:15, 27 November 2008 (EST)

Hm, many different opinions... from the outdated, to the newest, and to one of the most different browsers. And two interesting points Cobold. Heh, raw HTML. :3 Do we think that we would focus on making the appearance of the wiki compatible to most of the browsers? Or the newest browsers? Or a little of both? Just a suggestion and curious in wondering about this... :3 If DP reads this (but he doesn't), I'm sure he'll continue listenin' music... *coughcoughdarrrkcough*

I use Safari as I use Macs. It PWNs. The Wiki does in fact look better on this browser than on Internet Explorer at my school computers.

Copier
Recently, our logo has been copied by another Mario Wiki on Wikia. Is someone fluent in Italian and please tell them to change their logo?

Ahhh!!! And the Main page too.

Yeah...It's like our wiki in Italian...Like that would be cool if it was a part of our wiki but yeah...they did copy us! I wonder if Steve will say anything....with his amazing Italian knowledge (hahah) MC  Hammer  Bro.  20:02, 27 November 2008 (EST)

He knows Italian!?!?! But they stole the logo without permission. What can we do? 20:05, 27 November 2008 (EST)
 * They're using our stuff that's copyrighted, I think Steve should decide what to do


 * No Steve doesnt know italian...i don't think. I was just kiddin around. But this mario wiki in italian is seperate from the other mario wiki from wikia right? [[Image:Hammer Bro. SSBB Art.jpg|30px]] MC Hammer  Bro. [[Image:WormGuy.PNG|30px]] 20:14, 27 November 2008 (EST)

Oh. Well I think this Mario Wiki is only in english. (Some one post a proposal to make a spanish wiki and it failed. So I'm asuming from that this Mario Wiki is only in english.)

Try using this I only know a few words in Italian.


 * Grapes- I ment there is also another mario wiki from wikia...it is in english but is very small. I was just wondering if thre was any relationship with the two. [[Image:Hammer Bro. SSBB Art.jpg|30px]] MC Hammer  Bro. [[Image:WormGuy.PNG|30px]]

Oh. Any ways I sent a message on the main page on Mario Wikia Italian one. Thanks DL 789 for the translation thing! -_^

Well, i've wanting to make a proposal of this, but now seems like a better moment to say it, we shuold change the logo, c'mon, its old and its starting to become boring, so we should make a contest to make a new logo

Look at this.It's in English.

I think they copied it from the Main Page. I wonder what Paper Jorge will say since he the one who made that template. Plus, the words on it are English not Italian.

Actually, they would be allowed to use the content per the GNU FDL used for this Wiki. But only if they mention their source and the original authors. But they don't seem to do so, they just copy and translate the content and even partly forget to change the words into Italian (for example, one headline in Strutzi's article is still "Birdo in Subcon", Strutzi is Birdo's Italian name). Their current way of using English Mario Wiki's content contradicts the license. --Grandy02 12:01, 28 November 2008 (EST)
 * Hmmm I see. Even the calendar they copied is still in English. 14:09, 28 November 2008 (EST)
 * That diffently proves they copied us. Let's get our pitchforks and march on down to Wikia Hosting ask them what they're going to do about this. That wiki is plagerising, and stealing our words, too.

I found this This is what I found "If sources specifically allow it, copy from them; alternatively, cite those that don't"and"Try not to use a copyrighted image! Create something inspired by the logo for your wiki's subject, not a direct copy"

So there in trouble?
 * Acorrding to what he said, yes.

Logo
Mario Italiano really doesn't concern me right now. However, this has raised the subject of the wiki logo (thank you Italy). I'm up for changing our logo to this one uploaded by if he and the community are on board with it. To be honest, our current logo has lasted way longer than it ever should have. -- 23:18, 27 November 2008 (EST)

Per Steve. So far the current logo has been there for about three years right, so it kinda out of dated. So should we have a vote on this?
 * I didn't get the Mario Italiano part, but this logo would bring in some fresh air. - 09:01, 28 November 2008 (EST)
 * Mario Italiano is a Wiki that has been stealing a lot of our content: templates, logos, etc. On the new logo: I think I remember little to no opposition to the logo when Arend first showed it to us.  Let's use it!  11:50, 28 November 2008 (EST)
 * I have no opposition to changing the logo. 14:26, 28 November 2008 (EST)
 * We got to relise that Mario Italiano might steal our new logo once we put it up
 * NG has a point.
 * This isn't to combat Italiano; it is for our own sake. Italiano is the biggest joke on the Internet and doesn't deserve the extra traffic we've given them. -- 16:41, 28 November 2008 (EST)
 * I'm not trying to get people to blow them up, or anything. I'm just saying that we should just not be surprised if they steal it.
 * Hopefully they will. -- 19:46, 28 November 2008 (EST)
 * Huh? What do mean by that Steve? Is this some sort of a trick?

Yes. -- 19:54, 28 November 2008 (EST)

I think Steve is plan is to get them in trouble. Since that image is copright to Mario Wiki.

Inform a Wikia staff member like Uberfuzzy or Catherine Munro and they will probrably find a way to deal with it. Aluigi, The Luigi Legend! Whut Stuff? 20:00, 28 November 2008 (EST)
 * Steve's gonna make an offer they can't refuse.  20:03, 28 November 2008 (EST)

Dun dun duuuuunnnnn. An offer like what.

MOLDY CHEESE!!!!!!!! Aluigi, The Luigi Legend! Whut Stuff? 20:07, 28 November 2008 (EST)

pfft oh yah lets take them to court we got a ball and a hoop right outside thats rite.

WHUT BISCUITS?! Aluigi, The Luigi Legend! Whut Stuff? 20:12, 28 November 2008 (EST)

Wut does food have to do with this?

Bored. Princess GRAPES. SLASHY SLASHY SLASHY Aluigi, The Luigi Legend! Whut Stuff? 20:20, 28 November 2008 (EST)
 * Aluigi!?! Are you that spammer Aluigi 2????

Don't worry he ain't going to spam anymore.

Yeah, I reformed and explained to Stooben. And I was known by many sockpuppets, Aluigi 2 was just 1 of them. Aluigi, The Luigi Legend! Whut Stuff? 20:31, 28 November 2008 (EST)
 * Oh cool! Anyways, back to Steve. Is this going to backfire in any way?

You'll never know untill it happens.

What is the plan/offer anyway? Aluigi, The Luigi Legend! Whut Stuff? 20:42, 28 November 2008 (EST)
 * If Steve told us, then Italiano would know the plan too. 20:44, 28 November 2008 (EST)

K, got it. Aluigi, The Luigi Legend! Whut Stuff? 20:47, 28 November 2008 (EST)
 * Yah, we gotta be careful. If word gets out, it can blow up this entier plan!!!

The Italians Mariowikiers are very sneaky people. They could already know about it!

Yay the logo changed.

Ours or theirs? Aluigi, The Luigi Legend! Whut Stuff? 21:03, 28 November 2008 (EST)

Ours.
 * How come I can't see it? Anyway if the Italians know our plan doesn't that mean they won't copy stuff. Either way, we win, we win!!!

I don't know? I can see the new logo. Maybe some one change my monobook thing. I have no clue.

BTK DID IT!!! Aluigi, The Luigi Legend! Whut Stuff? 21:15, 28 November 2008 (EST) No not really LOL!!!

I see it now. I guess I didn't see it right a way because I live ina different Time Zone

Oh wait really?
 * Well I'm not sure. Maybe it just got delaied because my laptop runs slow some times, when there is mass editing.


 * Oh

NICE. 04:31, 29 November 2008 (EST)

Yes, nice (and it was kinda my idea to change it)

Yay, you changed the old logo into my new one. This logo is designed by my brother. He also made a 2nd version of it. If you want to see it, just ask.


 * Yes, where can i see it?
 * It's on Steve's talk page.
 * ok, thanks.

Mario italiano made a proposal to change the logo, will they copy us again???

A question of ethics: articles about hentais

 * 'Note: This discussion was moved here from the Proposals page.

I was able to find some mario hentais online and they are official ones not fan made ones. Like the one for super mario rpg. However it would kind of be bad to go into the and this wiki has never had a disscussion about this yet. So I'm asking, should we be allowed to do articles about hentai if they are official or is it to innopropriate for the wiki. I want opinions from all of you.

1)Please format into a proposal as suggested above.

2)I severely doubt Nintendo has created official Mario hentai.

3)If you can prove Nintendo has authorized Mario hentai, then under Canonicity it would be acceptable material for the wiki. --

Do you want a link to the hentai I found?
 * The odds of Nintendo making hentai of Marioverse characters is extremely low, but I won't completely dismiss the possibility. Even so, if we were to make the article(s), we'd need to make a template for the pages saying that the article contained information about adult material.


 * Send the link 17:27, 30 November 2008 (EST) I'm not interested in seeing, it's a dirty work but someone must do it. 17:27, 30 November 2008 (EST)

It's odd that you brought this up. I randomly remembered the MarioRPG hentai a few days ago. Anyone remember what happened with FF7? It was popular, people started to forget about it, guy in Japan releases a series of hentai doujinshi about FF7, popularity kicked back up and here we are 10 years later, FF7 is still running strong.

I've thought that maybe something similar might have happened with Mario at some point. Marketed hentai's (and by 'marketed' I mean 'stuff that was sold in a store at some point in time') might be worth covering, as well as other unlicensed marketed merchandise. Thoughts?

Also, I'm skipping the ethics debate, as it has no place here. We are an encyclopedia, encyclopedias don't censor. --
 * Unlicensed Marchandise? Meh. But I'd really think Pirate Games deserve some kind of spot here. --

The one Ghost Jam is talking about is the one I found and i cant get the link out until laura3 leaves my room


 * I agree with Ghost Jam and feel ethics is of no concern for a wiki. However I don't think we should cover unlicensed Mario merchandise, as it was not officially recognized by Nintendo.  If we cover one unlicensed product, what's to stop us from writing articles about every single unlicensed product, including pirated games, fan games, etc. (which are all in some way marketed or advertised, and sold [either in terms of actual exchange of money, exchange of time, etc.]).  We should stick to official material. --
 * The problem is, this creates a small double standard. Many of the products we have listed on the merchandise page/category aren't actually licensed by Nintendo, despite the Nintendo Seal of Approval pasted on them. --
 * Unfortunately Mario merchandise is not my speciality, so I wouldn't know the specific products you refer to. If Nintendo somehow authorized the production of a piece of merchandise, I feel it should stay.  However, if a piece of merchandise is a forgery with a false Seal of Approval, it should go. How we determine that, I'm not exactly sure, but we should do out best to uphold that which is official.  --

[Link Removed] the mario hentai adult content warning.


 * I'm starting to think we should move this discussion to the forums.... --
 * As long as no policy decisions are made there! Haha. =) --
 * That it is hentai shouldn't be the problem, we discussed multiple times that we won't censor stuff. But this manga is doujin, isn't it? Doesn't doujin refer to fan-made content? We should only cover this manga if it was officially licensed, was it? Proof is needed. Wouldn't say that it isn't possible, I've also seen some odd officially licensed Kirby manga, which weren't hentai, but still featured a lot of sexual jokes. Anyway, if you want to see a non-dirty (aside from a piece of underwear) page of this odd SMRPG manga, go here. --Grandy02 05:57, 1 December 2008 (EST)

Wikipedia at least mentions fan made stuff somewhere so we should add it as a part of the smrpg article.--Inuyasha Zero 09:22, 1 December 2008 (EST)
 * We already had a proposal about the mention of YouTube Poop in articles such as Hotel Mario and Mama Luigi. The proposal failed, because it's fanon and unofficial. The same goes for this. Only if the manga was officially licensed, it can be covered. At first, you said it's official, which is it now? --Grandy02 16:55, 30 November 2008 (EST)


 * We're not Wikipedia. --
 * Per SoS. So, you just stated that it's fan made rite? Then, this conversation has no point too it, since we do not allow fanon and made up stuff in articles.

I read the doujin article on wikipedia and it said how it works in the japanese economy, besides nintendo of america is the company that does the licensing stuff. How do we know The Great Mission to Save Princess Peach was licensed, if we should keep the article about that we need the license, if it hasnt actually been licensed then we should do an article about the hentai.--Inuyasha Zero 12:32, 1 December 2008 (EST) do not close this disscussion until we get licensing information and steve gives input
 * So, if I can just recap: the hentai in question was professionally released by someone other than Nintendo, right? So, unless Nintendo of Japan supported it, as it did The Great Mission to Save Princess Peach, then this belongs on the references pages, not as its own page.  Same would go for the Spaceballs TV show episode where Princess Peach appeared in a overly sexualized nature.  12:40, 1 December 2008 (EST)
 * Well, we don't know the hentai was professionally created. It could be distributed amateur work, so it may not even belong on the references page.  And regarding The Great Mission to Save Princess Peach, we should look into whether it had some form of approval from Nintendo (which is the most probable case, as I'm sure Nintendo would sue any company that tried to use its copyrighted characters to generate a profit).  If it can't be proved that it is unofficial, then it should stay. --   P.S. No offense to Steve, but we don't need his input on everything.  If we wants to give input he is free as anyone else to do so.  This wouldn't be a very good wiki if only one person made all the decisions. =)

I know this is off topic but I've only seen the spaceballs movie, not the tv show.--Inuyasha Zero 12:51, 1 December 2008 (EST)
 * Here's the Wikipedia article. One episode, Grand Theft Spaceship, features several video game parodies, including Princess Peach and Yoshi, as you can see in the clip. The show is apparently pretty messed up, though... I've never seen a full episode.  13:02, 1 December 2008 (EST)
 * Shut Up, Shut UP!!! We don't need porn!!! Just understand, if we put it there, we would all get into a fight like we did with the Bob Hoskins quote. Plus, LITTLE KIDS GO HERE, YOU IDIOTS!!! Just by having this disscusion we are giving little kids links to porn!!! Stumpers!!! Get rid of that link at once!!! Let's just froget about this., no more porn talk!!! We are disscusing things made by perverted fans!!! It is not offical no matter what!!! We are not gonna out it here!!! I will personaly delete anything put about Hentai, Porn, or what ever perverted thing anybody outs here!!! Everybody stop talking aboout this, and delete this enteir conversation!!!

You can't delete it. Some body well just undo it.
 * What if we use that hid function that hids the history?
 * Whoa, whoa, whoa. Just calm down for a minute. Now, I understand this is a very touchy subject, especially on a site than is 95% inhabited by children, but there isn't any need to get upset. Now, it's perfectly fine if you don't like porn and that you don't want other children to see it. Personally, I wouldn't want children to see it either. But, we are an encyclopedia that accepts official information no matter what it may be. Now, I do believe that we found out the porn was not licensed by Nintendo, but the conversation has kind of moved on to whether or not we accept unlicensed Nintendo products. (Like The Great Mission to Save Princess Peach.) I highly doubt that Nintendo would officially license hentai, but if they did, and it was about Mario characters, then we would have to accept it. We'd put up advisories all around the article, and obviously protect it from vandalism, but the odds of Nintendo even licensing it are '.' big. So, please try and refrain from getting so upset about this. 16:32, 1 December 2008 (EST)
 * Yah, but the porn ain't offical.

St00by right if it licensed it offical. P.S What hid thing your talking about NG? O_o
 * NG: Yeah, the porn that he linked us to was unofficial. I'm just saying if there was any official porn. Grapes: There's an option Sysops can use to hide revisions, though we only use it if it's absolutely necessary. 16:38, 1 December 2008 (EST)
 * Whatever will be done, it wouldn't be a bad idea to hide the versions which include the link to the hentai site, that's really not something what kids should see AND it doesn't seem to be official, after all (if it was, it would be another case, of course). But don't get offensive here, please. The discussion in a whole shouldn't be deleted, though. Hm, I still wonder why Inuyasha Zero said that these manga are official at first... --Grandy02 16:40, 1 December 2008 (EST)
 * He probilly wanted to trick us.
 * Never say never.
 * What do you mean by that?

Anyway, we should delete this section because, imagne the following:

You are a simple 7 year old boy, you read this and think to your self "What's porn?", so you type "porn" into Google. You find a link, and BAM!!! Those 3 more years you would've had of child hood innacence, gone before your eyes!!! You are a man now, A HORNY PERVERT MAN!!!
 * Clam down NG.

Not that Nintendo would ever endorse Mario hentai, but if we did we should accpet that decision and not freak out. And even if Nintendo did create hentai, I don't think we should have to censor the wiki. What is "acceptable" and what is "perverted" is completely arbitrary, subjective, and biased. Putting a warning on an article about its content is completely POV. Hentai is no better or no worse than any game in the Mario series that you play (the games might even be worse...*cough*Petey Piranha*cough*). It all depends on your personal tastes and absolutely should not be enforced as the standard for other people. We should be inclusive and welcoming, not judging. --
 * Sorry, I just got emotional.
 * He's right.
 * Who's right?
 * Son of Suns.
 * Yah, but to me, barfing, voilence, and fart jokes don't bother me, Hentai does. To me, it warps someones view of an charcter, leading to spam on our acticles

Porn and unlicensed, things that are considered somewhat okay right now on this wiki but not okay if both of them are used, read wikipedia's policies, in theirs porn has an equal status of being a topic as it does anything else adn for god's sake stop saying Nintendo's the one making the porn. In Japan you can sell some stuff in markets without rights to the characters so why would the guys want to get a license if they don't have to. Ponder these words while they don't make sense to you. The thing is people will sell the hentai in stores with no license and we're going by the american book. Keep thinking that hentai has to be made in Japan for it to be hentai and there going by Japanese standards.--Inuyasha Zero 17:33, 1 December 2008 (EST)
 * That's it!!! I'm leaving for real this time!!! If you guys want to make articles on porn that's fine by me!!! If you want to get angry E-mail from Moms, fine by me!!!


 * You lost me Zero. But I will say I don't think anyone has said Nintendo is making the hentai (although they did open up a chain of "love hotels" in the 1960s).  I'm sure a ton of unlicensed Mario content is distributed throughout Japan and the world (via the Internet).  I don't think the Mario anime movie is one of them.

And no one is making articles on hentai. Chill out. E-mails from "angry moms" don't concern me at all. --
 * ...IZ: We are not Wikipedia. We do not have Wikipedia's rules. We will not accept anything that is not licensed by Nintendo. Any articles that are currently unofficial will be up for debate as to whether or not to keep them. Now, unless you can find solid proof that Nintendo licenses Mario hentai, then there is nothing to discuss. NG: If you want to leave, that is fine; it's not up to the community. However, as of now we have no reason to make articles about Mario hentai . 17:46, 1 December 2008 (EST)
 * OK I'm back. I was gone for 15 mintunes goofing off at the fourm.

http://www.gamingsanctuary.com/System_FAQ_SNES_FAQ3.html I guess nintendo doesn't license hentai, there's a way to end this topic--Inuyasha Zero 19:16, 1 December 2008 (EST)

Then can we delete this.
 * The conversation has been delt with, however, we should keep this on the talk page for references that may come up in the future. And, I don't think we can just remove this just like that.

Nerdy Guy: if you really that link gone, feel free to take it down, and you should notice that, even though I technically should have, I have not added that reference to the references pages. 20:35, 1 December 2008 (EST)
 * I'm not going to, I realised that Spaceballs is not a porno, it's a parady movie/series. Spacenuts is a porno I heard about on the radio.
 * Of course the spaceballs cartoon is blurring the lines... ugh. Anyway, even if someone did make a Mario reference in a porno, I don't think it'd be mainstream enough to make it to the references pages.  At least, I would hope not.  16:30, 2 December 2008 (EST)
 * No, I don't think it would be, because technically they're considered "underground". Only certain people are supposed to get access to those sites (adults), so it's not supposed to be where everyone can see, like our other internet references. 16:37, 2 December 2008 (EST)


 * A pornography reference may actually be more mainstream than many of the references we list, like all those minor songs from bands no one has ever heard of. And a lot of pornography sites don't have restricted access, meaning everyone who wants to can see them (that is, they are mainstream).  And how do we decide what to include on online references or not?  Some of them seem pretty minor, and a Mario pornography site may actually garner more traffic then the ones we list. --
 * Oh no you don't, parents might start blocking use from thier computer, causing use to lose traffic and evntuly crash from lack of users.


 * The goal of the wiki is to cover everything Mario related, not appease parents. --

You're awful paranoid about this whole deal, Nerdy Guy. You're succumbing to one of the fallacies of logic -- the slippery slope. That's when you take one action and naturally assume it's going to lead to a bunch of other actions (the "slippery slope") eventually culminating in something disastrous. While I don't believe your fears are unfounded, I do think you're making this bigger than it should be.

We are an encyclopedia. If there does exist Nintendo-licensed Mario hentai out there (I admit it makes me sick just thinking about it) we have a responsibility to include it. 18:10, 2 December 2008 (EST)


 * Alternatively, we eliminate all the references pages and just focus on official material only. --
 * This is the second time in the last five minutes I'm going to have to say, per Son of Suns. It would make our job a heck of a lot easier.  That being said, we also cover the history of the Mario series.  And THAT being said, I feel that our references pages go way more in depth than necessary.  Yes, cultural impact should be noted, but we have more than enough examples from uber-mainstream sources such as prime time television (the Simpsons, Futurama, etc.), other video games, notable websites (Homestar Runner) and movies that we should never have to list random nods such as the one I mentioned above (Spaceballs TV show's parody of Yoshi and Peach).  In short, I'd emphasize the importance that references have on showing cultural impact, but also say that, in the event that a very minor, yet slightly mainstream, source (again, my example) popped up, we wouldn't need to list it.  18:47, 2 December 2008 (EST)


 * That being said (haha) perhaps it would be best to merge major cultural references (what constitutes a "major reference" will of course have to be determined by the community) into the Mario (series) page. That page is about the entire series generally, including its history, especially as it intersects with other areas of culture (such as the Universal vs. Nintendo copyright case).  The Mario series article could have a section about the series' impact on the rest of popular culture. --
 * Yeah, I definitely think that by relying on games to tell a series' history, we're missing the greater story. I think we should take the work Rooben is doing on Mario (series) right now and add a history section to it which includes the court case and popular culture impact - of course, we could site sources like crazy for the latter bit, and that would take away from the community issues.  00:32, 3 December 2008 (EST)
 * I'd have no problem with that. There could be a section right below "Critical Reception" called "Cultural Impact". I think that not only would that solve our massive effort on the references pages, but it would also make that article fuller. I'm all for that. 01:01, 3 December 2008 (EST)

What about SSX on Tour, in the Japanese version it different from the USA SSX on Tour. In the japanese version, Princess Peach wore some thing that young kids shouldn't see. (I not going to say it. O_o) Is that like hentais or something. 15:34, 6 December 2008 (EST)
 * No, that's because in Japan that's normal, not Taboo.
 * She wore something that was removed in the USA version of the game because the was contant was too strong or something. (Seriouly I not gonna say what she wear.O_o)  16:12, 6 December 2008 (EST)
 * Things like that are acceptalble in Japan. Just give me a picture or a link to one, so I can figure out what you're talking about.

Ugh really. O_o Yeah that was the thing Peach was wore in the Japanese version of SSX on Tour. (They even post images. X_x)
 * Just give me a link, so I know what you where talking about.

Yeah it was! O_O I can't belive it ether why Nintendo why...
 * Thongs are not always considered sexural in Japan, they are considered everyday clothes. Thing are differnt in Japan, that's why the charcters in the Super Mario Armada Series had guns and knives, and some enemies had beer in the Japanesse version of Wario Land 3.
 * Yeah and just like how Boswer pose was changed for the USA release of SMRPG.
 * I actually thought that thongs ARE everyday clothes (and not just in Japan). Maybe it's different in the US again. I know that the US are less open for nudity and sexual topics (I've read the strangest things about "controversies" there) than Japan and parts of Europe, but just because someone wears skimpy clothes, it's not porn. For a character from a child-friendly series, Peach in this case, a thong is untypical, though. But it exists (and this time, it is official), and cultural differences shouldn't lead to censorship here (I really wondered about how some people here had problems with the word "hell"...). --Grandy02 17:49, 6 December 2008 (EST)
 * In the US, people think mentioning the word hell permotes Christianity, because there's so many Athiests here.

SO. About that proposal mentioned way back the start of this discussion. I had something I wanted to comment on during that proposal, but didn't do to not having enough time to participate the inevitable discussion that would follow.

If you loot at other fandoms, you'll notice that most of their wikis are separated evenly between 'fact' and 'fandom'. In general, all aspects of the fandom should be covered to some extent, especially ones that have had a great impact on the franchise as a whole (either to raise/lower popularity or of niche importance). Very much unlike other franchises, however, Mario doesn't have many of these. Outside of a select few, maybe Super Mario Bros. Z and three or four long-time fansites, most of the fandom is made up of garbage thrown together by idiots.

This kind of brings us to a cross roads. Should be still to only official games/products/media, which means we have a handful of established articles that need to be trimmed or outright deleted, or would a small amount of unofficial inclusion be allowed, which means we have to decide what these things are and what of the aforementioned 'handful' needs to be adjusted?

Personally, I feel that the various commercially released hentias deserve a mention. Unofficial as they are, they exemplify the Mario's otherwise intangible fandom. I see it as a kind of evolution that all fandoms eventually go through, one that Mario has yet to fully to through.

/soapbox -- Chris 19:21, 6 December 2008 (EST)


 * Based on an earlier part of this discussion, the plan seems to be to keep articles to official material only, which means eliminating all the "references" style pages. However, on the Mario (series) page we have created a section on the series "Cultural Impact" where we can place major appropiations of Mario by the rest of popular culture.  If the wiki agrees to it, the hentai information can be mentioned in that section, as popular culture is made up of both "official" producers of culture and consumers who produce their own cultural commodities. --
 * As long as we only put no links of any kind, I'm OK with it.
 * So, just to clarify, for an unofficial source to have inclusion it must (1) display the extent of the SMB series, ie, show how far it has reached or (2) have played a significant role in the fandom of the series or (3) obviously and knowingly (no speculation) effected the central series. 18:50, 13 December 2008 (EST)
 * It sounds right, but can you give us some examples for 1 and 3 to make it a bit clearer? Here's one for 2: Lemmy's Land - it's a fairly large fan-site, it's well-known and it's been around for a while. At least, that's what I think, which is the problem with unofficial stuff: no matter what, people are going to disagree about what merits inclusion. Even those three requirements are wide open to interpetation... - 20:14, 13 December 2008 (EST)


 * I think a "Cultural Impact" section would been more in Stumper's category one than category two. As Walkazo has pointed out, what to consider a "major" aspect of Mario fandom is extremely relative.  I think the section would work best if it showed how Mario is affecting pop culture outside the fandom of the series.  Or, if fandom is included, only those elements of fandom that have made a major impact on the rest of pop culture (or culture in general).  I can't actually think of any examples that stand out right now, but say a fan discovers a new star and names it after some star-related element in the Mario series.  That act of obvious Mario fandom now has implications for everyone else (or at least scientists).  So ultimately we should be looking for elements that have impacted people outside of those who are actually in this "Mario fandom sub-culture." --
 * I really like that definition. (1) meant something that shows Mario's impact: for example, Mario's expansion into cameos in other major video games, TV shows, etc. and the fact that Mario was more recognizable than Mickey Mouse for a little while.  (3) is something that had influence on the series - example: Alice in Wonderland inspired the Super Mushroom, so you could mention Alice in Wonderland.  18:25, 14 December 2008 (EST)

Guidelines
Should we think of ways to inforce the guide lines more? We don't want another fight like the Hentai one. We should show our more important guidelines more, like "No unoffical infromation". That whole fight above started because a user didn't know we don't accept unoffical info.
 * We would like new users (a la welcome committee template) to a page called "MarioWiki:[Any Number Here] Things Every Editor Should Know Before Editing" and list some of our most important guidelines, such as canon (there is none), unofficial info, etc. Just an idea, though.  I think the current template does a pretty good job of linking to everything important.  20:42, 3 December 2008 (EST)
 * Opions, too. Some guy called Mmmmmman keeps putting his opions every where.
 * The Mmmmman got blocked. 07:07, 4 December 2008 (EST)

Great idea NG.--Inuyasha Zero 18:38, 4 December 2008 (EST)

How about naming it "MarioWiki:[Any Number Here] Things Every Editor Should Know Before Editing", we should name it "MarioWiki:Things editors should know about this wiki", and we could show what you should know, and list things frowned upon here, like responding to other users on your talk page instead of the other user's. (This is because I missed things newer users said because they responded to me on their talk page, instead of mine.)
 * Check out Help. That's basically everything you just said, put here. And it has guidelines and information on how to write an article and whatnot. What else do we need? Many editors add information that belongs in the article they're editing. Just because a couple of people have done something like this, doesn't mean everyone else will start being like that.
 * As for an Editing 101-type article, that'd be Manual of Style. However, I personally have learned the most about editing by simply reading articles and watching other Users. - 20:15, 7 December 2008 (EST)

Did You Know...?
I don't know what other users think, but, in my opinion, the "Did You Know...?" section is not updated with regularity. I am getting tired of reading the same, so I would suggest to update it.

It been updated recently.

Can I use the old wiki logo?
Hello to all! On the italian Mario Wiki(http://it.mario.wikia.com/wiki/Pagina_principale), the logo is the old one of this wiki, and somebody told me that: so I'm asking you: can I use it (giving credits)? If not, I'll remove it. Thanks for the attention :). --Enderjin 08:49, 6 December 2008 (EST)

Sì che mi è stato. chiedere è il suo logo e lui è il creater di questo sito.

(Yeah that was me. ask Porplemontage it's his logo and he is the creater of this site. )

Japanese to English Translation
For anyone who knows Japanese, I was wondering what is being said at the very beginning of "Super Mario Issunboshi." I just want to know how close it is to the original "Issunboshi" tale, where the elderly mother (Mama Mario in this case) wishes for a child, even if he is just one inch tall, and her wish is granted. Any additional translation, including quotes, etc. would be appreciated, but not necessary: I just need to know if there is more information regarding Mama Mario's appearance in "Issunboshi" that I haven't yet added to her article... so it'd be nice to know if there are any more references to her other than the one where Mario asks her to let him explore the world (if that in fact is what she does). Here is a YouTube video of Issunboshi. Thanks so much in advance! 20:00, 7 December 2008 (EST)
 * I know a few people (non-members) who are fluent in Japanese. If no one around here does it, I'll see about getting one of them to take look. -- [[Image:Shyghost.PNG]]Chris[[Image:Shyghost.PNG]] 15:05, 15 December 2008 (EST)
 * Thanks so much, Ghost Jam! I'd given up! 18:46, 15 December 2008 (EST)

Pyoro and Paper Plane
Two DSi titles, Pyoro and Paper Plane, are currently mentioned on our front page. The former is a game based around WarioWare series character Pyoro, but I'm not sure as to what the latter is. Here is my question: should we cover the video game Pyoro? As you'll remember, we deemed that covering the Banjo-Kazooie and Conker series would be beyond our scope, as they were spin-offs of spin-offs and thus too far removed from the Mario series. Similarly, Pyoro is a spin-off (from WarioWare) of a spin-off (from Wario) of a spin-off. However, I'd like to emphasize that, in light of Rare leaving Nintendo, it seems that our justification for today should be that Banjo and Conker are fully independent series (ie there are no crossovers such as Mario vs. Donkey Kong or Super Smash Bros. and the series are run by separate creative think tanks). Obviously, my vote would be that, yes, we should cover Pyoro. I would like to know where the rest of the wiki stands on this, and whether or not it requires a proposal? 18:26, 16 December 2008 (EST)


 * I would say yes, and that we should have Banjo and Conker on this wiki, but only the games licensed by Nintendo, as they are as official as any other spin-off or cross-over. There is an officially established link between Donkey Kong and Banjo/Conker (that is, those past games are still integrated into the greater Mario franchise and not fully independent), just as there is a link between Wario and Pyoro.  A remake, as we have established on Canonicity and Chronology, is not more official than the original, and thus Banjo and Conker content should be re-established here in some form.  Just as we cover games like Hotel Mario, published by a distinct company Phillips, we should cover Banjo and Conker, developed by Rare and published by Nintendo. Both Phillips and Rare created Mario connections as separate creative think tanks from Nintendo, but because Nintendo recognized these semi-indepedent actions as legitimate, we cover Hotel Mario, and should cover Banjo and Conker. Blitzwing said it best in a current proposal: we deem some things "official" and some not, which is "nebulously defined criteria" that is "used to exclude everything the one who used it doesn't like."  This is what has happened to Banjo and Conker content - just because Rare was sold, somehow this information is deemed no longer official, although Mario content developed by Phillips, which Nintendo authorized on a limited basis and is no longer in effect (i.e. Phillips can no longer make Mario games) is considered official here.  Doesn't make sense to me. --
 * That's actually a very good idea: we need a firmly set, objective rule for what is included and what isn't, and yes, while Rare was with Nintendo, they both did establish a link between the mythos of Donkey Kong, Banjo, and Conker. 00:49, 17 December 2008 (EST)

Here’s what I’m thinking. Based on Canonicity, we would cover any “Mario related” media product given some sort of official authorization by Nintendo at some point in time.  All content from such sources should be allowed on this wiki, without speculating what content from what source is "more" official than other content from another source. As Nintendo has never established an official canon regarding the Mario series, we cannot say newer or older Nintendo games, media, content, policies, etc. are more "official" than the others. They are all essentially as “official” as each other.

So what should the Mario Wiki cover? As there is no official canon, any official source from Nintendo related to Mario and his universe would be allowed. As far as the “universe” goes, we should cover all franchises, series, games, etc. that have emerged from or spun-off from the original Donkey Kong arcade game, Mario’s first game. This would include all Nintendo-authorized video games about Mario, Donkey Kong, Wario, Yoshi, Banjo, Conker, and Pyoro. All content from games in these series should be allowed on the wiki. Games not authorized by Nintendo but starring these characters or franchises, such as the fan game Super Mario DX: Blue Twilight or Microsoft’s Banjo-Kazooie: Nuts and Bolts would not be allowed on the wiki.

Content from Nintendo franchises, series, and games that have not emerged from Donkey Kong or its many sequels and spin-offs but instead have emerged as their own independent franchises (such as The Legend of Zelda, Star Fox, etc,) would not be allowed on this wiki, except for cameo information regarding “Mario related” subject appearances. This content would also not be restricted, as long as the content is related to the Mario subject. For example, the Thwomp article has a very good section about the Thwomps appearances in The Legend of Zelda series. The amount of content regarding Thwomp in its official Nintendo cameo appearances should not be regulated, as long as the information stays on subject (i.e. all the Zelda information in the article has to pertain to Thwomp, not say Link’s friend Marin who also appears in the game). As there is no official canon, we cannot say such information about Thwomp is “false” just because it is not in a Mario game. Its up to individual users and readers to decide what is “true” for them.

The last area we would cover would be cross-overs, which can be considered both a “spin-off” (a new franchise based around characters of an older one) and a “cameo” (featuring Mario characters in another franchise) simultaneously. Cross-over games would include the Super Smash Bros. series, Mario & Sonic at the Olympic Games, Itadaki Street DS, etc. Like a normal spin-off game, we should cover all the information in the cross-over. However, we can only cover information in the cross-over and not add additional content from the previously established franchises. For example, we can fully cover all the information regarding Ganondorf from Super Smash Bros. Melee and Brawl, but we cannot cover his boss battle in The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time or his personality in The Legend of Zelda: The Wind Waker, etc. Only information from the cross-over would be permitted.

However, that does not mean we cannot regulate content as it is dispersed throughout the wiki. While we shouldn’t limit the amount of content from any of these sources/subjects, we can organize information based on the relative importance users feel it has to the Mario series and the Mario wiki. As you argued in the merging of SSB special moves proposal, content should not be compromised even if it is merged into a bigger article. Similarly, instead of giving every Subspace Emissary enemy its own article, the wiki has agreed to merge all those articles into the Subspace Army article. This is fine as long as we don’t regulate the amount of content about each of the subjects listed in the article. Again, there is no official canon regarding this information, so the amount of content should not be regulated (that is, all information regarding the subject is valid), but we can as a wiki give more emphasis to Mario enemies by giving them all individual articles and less emphasis to SSBB Subspace Emissary enemies by merging them into one article. Likewise, we can put the Zelda information about Thwomp in a Cameo section at the end of the article, instead of giving it prominence in the beginning. As such, proposals would be less about what is “in” and “out,” and more about how the wiki wishes to organize content from different series, sources, etc. in articles.

What do you think? --
 * It's very complete - and I can't think of anything in there that's groundbreaking or controversial, so hopefully the rest of the wiki will accept it. The only stumbling block I could see would be allowing Banjo and Conker content.  But, let's take a look at the history of that issue: our reasons for disallowing them were, as far as I can tell: (1) We had an associated wiki, the Rare Wiki, that would take the content.  That wiki has since grown dormant.  (2) Rare broke off from Nintendo - covering the whole universes of Banjo and Conker would be to cover non-Nintendo published content.  However, you've already got a compromise for that: we'd only cover Nintendo published content. (3) Conker's Bad Fur Day: our Wiki has a history of censorship, and I have a feeling that many, like myself at the time, longed to see that content removed. (4) Speculation regarding Rare and Nintendo's intention for removing the two characters from Diddy Kong Racing.  Until someone can get an official source saying why the change was made, no one can say that it was because Nintendo didn't want the characters connected to the Mario universe (but, even using that logic is flawed: since when have we used continuity to dictate coverage?).  Besides, what problem would Nintendo have with Banjo?  Bringing back Banjo and Conker allows us to better justify coverage of Pyoro and to a lesser extent Smash Bros..  Frankly, we either DO cover Banjo, Conker, and Pyoro or we DON'T cover any of them, in my opinion - we need consistency.  It's not going to hurt anyone to do so, and the casual browser will have a fun time seeing that the three series were at one time connected.  We'd only be adding subjects from four games as well: Banjo-Kazooie, Banjo-Tooie, Conker's Pocket Tales, and Conker's Bad Fur Day. That's it!  Definitely not going to stress our servers or whatever.  So, what do you say, SoS?  What's our next move?  11:47, 17 December 2008 (EST)


 * Well first I think what I wrote above, with some aesthetic improvement, could become the basis of the Importance Policy to help resolve issues in the future. Regarding Banjo and Conker content, we would also have to include Banjo-Pilot and Banjo-Kazooie: Grunty's Revenge, as they are officially licensed Nintendo games.  So six games.  For now, what we should do is create two articles: one about everything in the Banjo series and one on everything in the Conker series.  As you can see, I revived all our old content (and spruced up some entries) to serve as the basis for these two articles.  These two articles would fit our Canonicity policy and allow as much Banjo and Conker content as possible, while minimizing exposure to users who don't want to view such information by keeping it only to two articles.  Like I said above, we can't limit content, but we can decide to organize it.  If at a later date the wiki decides to allow individual articles for each Banjo and Conker subject, so be it.  But if not, this is the minimum we would have to do to stay consistent with keeping Hotel Mario and Pyoro and other series/games.  The articles would also resolve some of your concerns: 1) Banjo and Conker was moved to RareWiki, but now that wiki is inactive - these two articles would allow active contribution to Conker and Banjo information while preventing Banjo and Conker content from "taking over" the wiki, which was the reason RareWiki was created in the first place. 2) Yes, only Nintendo licensed products.  Just as we cover Mario games from other companies approved by Nintendo, we should cover Banjo and Conker content approved by Nintendo. 3) All mature Conker content will be on one page, and if we really have to we can put a warning on the top of the page.  Users can then easily avoid such content as it will be only in one place on the wiki. 4) Yes, nothing has been said, so the original is as official as the sequel.  Even if some announcement was made, the games themselves would still contradict it, and according to Canonicity we would point out such contradictions and move on, which means Banjo and Conker content would stay anyways.  So the best course of action would be to create those two articles, and let users who want to edit them.  Then we can stay consistent. --
 * Hold on - Banjo-Pilot and Grunty's Revenge were only approved by Nintendo insofar that Nintendo gave THQ and Rare permission for the games to be on the Game Boy. That's standard.  Assuming we do get rid of the references pages, we wouldn't include a reference as "official" simply because it appeared on a Nitnendo system, so by the same logic, we shouldn't cover a Banjo game just because it was on a Nintendo system.  12:42, 17 December 2008 (EST)


 * All those references would be official though, as they are given legitimacy through Nintendo's approval to include such content on its systems. They are all officially licensed by Nintendo, which is the standard for being claimed as "official" according to Canonicity.  If they appeared on a non-Nintendo system, then it might not be official. For example, Mario references in Alex Kidd in Shinobi World and Banjo-Kazooie: Nuts & Bolts, would not be official cameos, but simply passing references not authorized by Nintendo.  In games licensed by Nintendo, even if the reference was created by a third-party, like Phillips or Squre-Enix or Rare or THQ, it would simply act like an official cameo.  Just as we have cross-overs between Mario and third-party characters developed by third-party companies and approved by Nintendo, we also have Mario cameos in third-party games licensed by Nintendo.  Nintendo did not have to license the production of Banjo-Pilot and Banjo-Kazooie: Grunty's Revenge, but because it did, and gave the games its Official Seal of Quality, it established that any references made are approved by Nintendo.  The Official seal means "that this product is licensed or manufactured by Nintendo."  There is approval by Nintendo, and it is not up to the wiki to decide what has more approval than something else. Some games for Nintendo systems, like Bible Adventures, were not licensed by Nintendo, so any references in those games would be unofficial. We are not simply saying any game that appears on a Nintendo system is official, only those games with the Official Seal, which is a sign of legitimacy. That doesn't mean we can't organize this info to make it less prominent (put it in a cameo section, etc.), but the content itself is official. --  P.S. The problem with the references pages is not the video game references, as I believe those are all officially licensed cameos.  The problem is when Mario is mentined on TV shows or in songs obviously not approved by Nintendo.  They are just passing references made by others, not a product licensed by Nintendo.
 * Ah. That completely changes things.  I was under the illusion that the Nintendo Seal went on every title released for the system.  I was not aware that it went beyond that.  16:48, 17 December 2008 (EST)

SoS, why did you go ahead and restore all those articles without a proposal??? 18:36, 17 December 2008 (EST)
 * Wayo: Isn't it against the rules to make proposals about Banjo and Conker? &#123;&#123;User:Uniju :D/sig}} 19:18, 17 December 2008 (EST)
 * True dat. I suppose he couldn't well make one, then.  Of course, we are only allowed to block a proposal for a period of time since the last proposal on the topic passed/failed, and I'm sure it's been longer than that period already.  It's definitely been longer than six months.  19:25, 17 December 2008 (EST)
 * Then that makes this rash action even worse then, right? Surely we'll revert it until everyone agrees? 20:40, 17 December 2008 (EST)


 * I restored the articles to serve as redirects, not to serve as independent articles. I said that they cannot be expanded.  We can only have the two series articles (in a wiki of 9000), which is official information under  Canonicity.  (Note only games licensed by Nintendo are allowed, just like the policy.)  I restored the original articles because it would be unfair if the writers of the original content I adapted did not receive credit.  They were the original writers, not me, and they need to be shown in the history of the page. --
 * I still think we should all agree on such an action, especially one well-contested several times beforehand. 22:28, 17 December 2008 (EST)
 * This is not about creating articles on everything Banjo and Conker, Nintendo and Microsoft information, which previous proposals were about. This is about only compiling the officially licensed material from Nintendo, which is currently allowed under our policies.  This is extremely fair, as there is only one article for each series, in order to prevent such articles from over-running the wiki.  Given the acceptance of many other sub-series (Wario Land) and sub-series of sub-series (WarioWare) and sub-series of sub-series of sub-series (Pyoro), it is not radical to include official Banjo and Conker content licensed by Nintendo.  To remove it would mean we have to remove similar content separated from the main Mario series, such as WarioWare.  Furthermore, all content is only on two pages, which is very avoidable if so desired, but still allows this official content to have a place somewhere on the wiki.  Everything is in line with MarioWiki policy. --
 * I think I'd still feel better if we could vote on this issue - or rather, vote on a new guideline for inclusion and exclusion and then act accordingly. But, Wayo, I do believe that it was unfair of me and others to place that condition at the top of the proposals page without explanation and then get upset at Son of Suns for not doing a proposal.  Meh, I don't know who is right, but let's just keep everything in place now, do a proposal, and if it fails, revert the work.  To revert the work now only to have to bring it all back would be silly.  01:42, 18 December 2008 (EST)

This dont looks very good
Look this http://antimw.wikispaces.com/ =/


 * Don't worry about it. Everyone has a right to an opinion. =) --
 * How utterly childish. I should feel honoured that he took his time to write an entire article on me. - 08:34, 19 December 2008 (EST)
 * I'm not sure if someone has the right for the public posting of an "opinion" like THAT. I don't know what's about the US, but in Germany, you could report an offense against that, since it's an heavy insult against individual, non-high-profile people. --Grandy02 08:48, 19 December 2008 (EST)

Well this definitely is that bad troll we've seen replace article content into that ASCII graphic. 09:08, 19 December 2008 (EST)

Who could have written it?
 * The user calls himself "Master Smoke." --Grandy02 10:17, 19 December 2008 (EST)

To respond to Grandy02, there are defamation laws in the United States, although they run counter to the First Amendment of the Constitution (the right to freedom of speech), so it gets tricky distinguishing what is "defamation," knowingly false information released to the public to misguide others, from what is "opinion," which by definition is not true or false. Another problem, since defamation is not defined the Constitution, is that all fifty U.S. states each have different laws that define what defamation is, be it strictly or abstractly. In this specific case, it would be hard to file a criminal or civil case about this, as it is over the internet using the names of anonymous user accounts. We don't know who specifically is writing this, nor can we say "Cobold" or "Grandy02" or "Son of Suns" have been the same person who uses each of these accounts. That doesn't mean there have been multiple people using each account, only that we can never know for sure, which makes prosecution of flaming on the internet extremely difficult. --