Talk:Super Mario (franchise)

Dear Lord (no offense to atheists :P)
This article pretty much sucks and its like one of the main articles around here a group of pipe projecters need to get together and redo this or something...

What this be
See like the Donkey Kong (series) article on Wikipedia? This is supposed to be the same deal except for Mario. -- Steve (talk) http://www.porplemontage.com/images/firefox_27x15.png 16:39, 4 November 2006 (EST)

No edits!
I think I'll have to get rid of collaborations, sadly. This just isn't working out. 20:02, 29 November 2006 (EST)

How's This?
I expanded the article quite a bit. I tried to stick with platformers, but I added in anytime Mario entered a subseries (Mario Kart, Mario Tennis, ect.) I would like to add a section later about each subseries as well as a section about spin offs. What do you guys think?

Wanderingshadow 10:53, 30 November 2006 (EST)
 * Very nice, and thanks for helping. Two minor issues:
 * Try to italicize all game titles on this wiki.
 * Each header needs two equal signs, not one, and each sub-header then needs three, not two. Never one equal sign.
 * 15:06, 30 November 2006 (EST)

revert?
Why did you revert my edit? All the things I know about mario are problably already on this wiki! The least I can do is give a timeline of the events in the marioverse. Let me help in a way I can, or I would be a timewasting user!--Dummmmmmy 21:36, 7 September 2007 (EDT)
 * We don't really need a seperate article on the History of the Marioverse. Mario (series) is good enough, all the history goes on that page. No need for another page.
 * I agree with DP.

No Mario power tennis or super smash bros. melee or super smash bros. brawl?????!!!!!
Why is there Mario tennis but no Mario power tennis? That game was way better than Mario tennis. (I also got Mario tennis power tour for the gameboy advance) And what about super smash bros. melee? That was one of the best game for the Game-cube. --Super mario fan 17:55, 15 January 2008 (EST)Super mario fan

Its not that they weren't allowed to be in the article, its just that this article needs some major updating. 17:56, 15 January 2008 (EST)

Possibility of a shooter?
Please no! It would ruin the good Mario feeling! User:MarioMop
 * Yoshi's Safari is a Mario shooter, released as early as 1993. - 18:03, 15 February 2008 (EST)

That's different. I meant a first-person 1 with lots of blood and gore. User:MarioMop

Beta SMG
The picture of Super Mario Galaxy is Beta and is slightly misleading. Can it be changed? 00:09, 9 September 2008 (EDT)
 * Of course. Why don't you find a good picture from the article on Super Mario Galaxy or elsewhere off Wiki and use it?  10:47, 9 September 2008 (EDT)
 * I'm wondering if this is a good picture. Is it? 22:43, 9 September 2008 (EDT)
 * That's fine! 00:45, 11 September 2008 (EDT)

Wikipedia as Reference Sources
Why are we citing Wikipedia as a source of factual information? Like this wiki, Wikipedia needs to back up its information with other sources. We shouldn't be citing Wikipedia as a source. It defeats the whole purpose of citing information in the first place. -- Son of Suns
 * Agree, citing a wiki that everyone can edit in another wiki that everyone can edit as well is no good. --Grandy02 08:50, 21 November 2008 (EST)
 * Yeah, there's no point in citing Wikipedia because of this factuality problem, and also because their Mario articles well, sucks. --Blitzwing 09:43, 21 November 2008 (EST)
 * All of the citations have been replaced. 15:43, 21 November 2008 (EST)

Information from Spin-Offs
Listing games from spin-offs is just rehashing information that is already on the spin-off series pages, and also by their inclusion, we would logically include spin-offs like the entire Yoshi series, etc. Should we go ahead and move the games to their appropriate articles and put blurbs on this page about when the spin-offs began? 13:05, 1 December 2008 (EST)
 * Well, as far as in the main section of the article (that includes summaries of all the main Mario games), I only included the first game of each spin-off because they could be considered notable for starting the spin-offs. As for the Spin-off and Partner series sections, they will just give very brief overviews of those series game mechanics (ex: The Mario Kart series is a sub-series that pertains strictly to Mario and related characters competing in racing championships. [...]). I didn't plan on having the article explain every single game from every single sub/partner series because that would: A) Rehash other articles material vastly, as you stated; and B) It would make the article unnecessarily long, as it should only pertain to things directly related to the Mario series, and only contain small amounts of information about series related to it. 13:12, 1 December 2008 (EST)
 * Oh, yeah, I was cool with that - it's actually what I was hoping would happen, but it's just that you have the Paper Mario (series) and Mario & Luigi (series) entries in there as well. And by the way, may I say excellent work?  20:23, 1 December 2008 (EST)
 * Cool, glad that's what you expected. As for the Paper Mario and M&L series, I only left them in there because they have very large storylines. I always thought they were part of the main series, but this site says otherwise. Do you think they should be taken out? Also, thanks for the compliment. :D 20:45, 1 December 2008 (EST)
 * I think they should be left on the main series page, since they're pretty much core Mario games with gimmicks, not stand-alone projects (i.e. the Yoshi's Island series). They have unique aspects, yes, but while that groups them together it doesn't have to set them apart from the rest as well. They're also, as Stooby mentioned, rather substantial games, and I feel not including them would seem like a glaring omission. And, they're rather small (3 or 2 games), so it's not like it's going to clutter up the page like any Mario Kart coverage would, for example. - 22:34, 1 December 2008 (EST)
 * Very true on all points. I think we need to find an official definition of what the Mario/Super Mario series is before we go further.  Great work again!  23:14, 1 December 2008 (EST)

Release years
Sorry if I annoy you with this again, but wouldn't it be better to use the original years of release, regardless of region? That means that Super Mario Bros. 3 was actually released in 1988 and so it came out before Super Mario Land. Chronology also tells so, so it's even a guideline to go by the original dates. --Grandy02 13:23, 1 December 2008 (EST)
 * I can do that, and then put the flag of the country in which it was released next to it. 13:25, 1 December 2008 (EST)
 * Yeah, would be nice, it's important that the games are in correct order. --Grandy02 13:35, 1 December 2008 (EST)
 * Okay, I'll get to that right away. 13:39, 1 December 2008 (EST)
 * There, how's that? 14:39, 1 December 2008 (EST)

Yoshi's Safari
This game isn't listed yet, but I think it should go in with the main Mario titles, not the Yoshi spin-off section. Unlike the Yoshi games, the "o" in the title of Yoshi's Safari is not a Yoshi Egg, so that suggests it's not a Yoshi game. It doesn't really have anything in common with the Yoshi games, and it stars (adult) Mario, not Yoshi. Saying it is a Yoshi game because it has "Yoshi" in the title is as speculative as my reasoning for why it shouldn't be considered a Yoshi game. It's currently included on the Yoshi (series) page, but the reason I've brought it up here is because it poses a bit of a conundrum for this page in particular: Yoshi's Safari is the first game to refer to Princess Toadstool as "Peach", something that is currently being attributed erroneously to Super Mario 64. If Yoshi's Safari is listed with the main Mario titles everything turns out smooth, but if it's relegated to the Yoshi series, it gets a bit more dicey. Switching from "Toadstool" to "Peach" without explanation would be unprofessional, but making a special note of it in SM64 ' s entry would be a tad clunky... - 01:40, 24 December 2008 (EST)
 * I think that could be done. The reasons you bring up sound valid, (most specifically the point about the "o" in the titles). At the very least, they should be in both series pages, but I'd support removing the game's information from the Yoshi (series) article and rewriting it here. 01:47, 24 December 2008 (EST)

You have to be careful about the Peach/Toadstool business. In Yoshi's Safari she's called Peach, but in Super Mario RPG which was released after Yoshi's Safari she's still Toadstool. The change was only permanent since Super Mario 64. I also don't think this is so important that it should get several mentionings. - 05:38, 24 December 2008 (EST)
 * I'll wait for some more feedback before doing anything then. 21:19, 27 December 2008 (EST)

The game most related to Yoshi's Safari is Super Mario World. It features the same enemies (such as Chargin' Chucks), the same bosses (the Koopalings), and the same items (such as Berries). Do whatever you want with the game's information, but as a proud owner of Yoshi's Safari, I can definitely tell you the game is closely linked to Super Mario World, not Super Mario World 2: Yoshi's Island. =) -- Oh, I should also note you play as Mario throughout the game, unlike most Yoshi games where you play as Yoshi (of course).
 * You're SO lucky! I've been trying to get Yoshi's Safari for years... Anyway, your observations are bang-on, and while Yoshi's Safari isn't the only Yoshi title that has very little in common with Yoshi's Island, it's certainly the most unique. Yoshi and Yoshi's Cookie are both run-of-the-mill puzzle games, whereas Yoshi's Safari is the only Mario (rail) shooter; this in itself should make Yoshi's Safari significant enough to merit inclusion with the other "core" Mario games. - 02:00, 28 December 2008 (EST)
 * Alright, Son of Suns's additional information convinced me to add an entry for Yoshi's Safari. I added some of the information you all provided, so I thank you for making suggestions. :) 21:51, 28 December 2008 (EST)

Question
What kind of information should this article have about the Mario cartoons, comics, and movie? Should that be mentioned in the "Cultural Impact" section? Or what? I never got into Mario's alternate media, so I really don't know. 22:05, 31 January 2009 (EST)
 * I dunno, Stooby. I once made a proposal to not include information from the Mario movie, in the Mario article, but the vote was to include the information. Even though I hated the movie, I think they were right. I mean, it is on the complete mario series. I would just include all mario information all over, and not just in the cultural impact section. But thats my opinion. --
 * A Mario Media section perharps?
 * Good idea. I'll go with making an "Alternate Media" subsection. 23:13, 31 January 2009 (EST)
 * "Alternate Media" is probably not the best section title, as it implies "alternate canon." Trying to think of a better section title... --
 * Wikipedia has a "Mario in other media" section in their Mario series article. --

I suppose that'd work. Thanks. 23:29, 31 January 2009 (EST)

Mario & Luigi RPG 3
I was wondering: should I insert an entry for M&L3, or should it wait until we have more information on it? 00:34, 1 February 2009 (EST)
 * Waiting until it's released would probably be best, that way the hastle of incoporating new information as it comes trickling in won't become a part of this article too. There could be a section for "Upcoming" stuff, with a list and a brief exposition for each confirmed upcoming game. M&L3 ' s blurb would be along the lines of: "The third installment in the Mario & Luigi series. Mario, Luigi and Bowser are all playable characters, and are aided by Peach, Toadsworth and many other recurring characters. The main villain is Fawful, who scemes to take over the Mushroom and Koopa Kingdoms." Of course, some games will have less information pertaining to them than M&L3. -  00:49, 1 February 2009 (EST)
 * Sounds good to me. 13:36, 1 February 2009 (EST)
 * I still think listing Mario & Luigi titles on both their series page and the Mario (series) page is redundant, but this article is fantastic. 16:01, 1 February 2009 (EST)

Reviews
Would using GameRankings be more complete and easier method of showing how critically successful a game is, rather than selecting a couple reviews from the internet? 14:58, 12 March 2009 (EDT)

King Boo
King Boo is an important character in the Mario series. Is it okay if I add him to the major characters section?
 * Since even Waluigi is in there, and King Boo is the major antagonist for Luigi, I'd give my ok, but I don't know what the others might say about this. - 12:33, 23 September 2009 (EDT)

New Super Mario Bros. Wii to be Added
We need to add New Super Mario Bros. Wii to the game list! Absorr 12:04, 7 January 2010 (EST)

Koopalings and Kamek
The Koopalings and Kamek are important characters in the Mario Series. You can insert them in the section of characters? --Mikiuz 09:06, 12 February 2010 (EST)

Koopalings, yes, Kamek maybe. Shouldn't there be a section on NSMBWii?

In fact, they have to do a section on New Super Mario Bros. Wii. I can not because I have knowledge of English is not very high. --Mikiuz 01:57, 13 February 2010 (EST)

What Does That Even Mean
I recently changed the page to be protagonists, antagonists, and then species rather than just character and species. Beforehand though, I tried placing King Boo and Petey Piranha in the species section, but somebody undid that. The only problem here is that numerous other enemy characters appear just as often as these two do. I'd like to know how we can have these two in the antagonists section when so many other enemies appear as playable characters enough times? ForeverDaisy09 20:58, 16 February 2010 (EST)
 * I must admit, is hard categorizing that and many people will oppose. KIng Boo and Petey Piranha are individual characters, their species are Boos and Piranha Plants -- 21:17, 16 February 2010 (EST)
 * A species is when multiple of their kind appear in the same game, like Goomba or Koopa Troopa. A character is an individual, like Petey Pirahna and King Boo.

Aside from King Boo, Petey Piranha have appeared as species before. ForeverDaisy09 22:26, 16 February 2010 (EST)
 * I would think moving Petey Piranha under "antagonists" would be best, since his entry is about the character. 14:06, 17 February 2010 (EST)
 * When was Petey Piranha an antagonist? --
 * Does Super Mario Sunshine ring a bell?
 * Does the idea Petey has been a boss in one game clue into the idea that maybe he should just be listed as the species he is like the other characters who have appeared as often as he has? ForeverDaisy09 19:50, 17 February 2010 (EST)

@Reversinator: Do minor bosses count as "antagonists"? When I hear the word antagonist, I think main villains, e.g. Bowser, Wart, Ganondorf, Dimentio and the like. I believe that's what the definition of the word is. --
 * Then how about changing the names from protagonists and antagonists to heroes and villains?

Petey is hardly even a villain though. Like every other enemy species he just happens to be a retaliating enemy in certain games. King Boo is known for being evil. Petey is just like any other enemy character like Wiggler. Also, what about Kamek? Is there a difference between Kamek and Magikoopa? I don't get it. ForeverDaisy09 20:16, 17 February 2010 (EST)
 * The gender, AFAIK. -- 20:39, 17 February 2010 (EST)
 * They're both called Kamek in Japanese, IIRC. --

So aren't they the same character? ForeverDaisy09 23:06, 17 February 2010 (EST)
 * King Boo, Petey Piranha and Kamek are all individual characters, not species. Kamek can be separated from average Magikoopas by behavior - he was the guy who raised Bowser and appeared in a number of games, just like how Yoshi can be told apart from other members of his species because of the special role he plays in certain titles. King Boo is another character who keeps showing up: he may look different in his many appearances, but we have no solid reason to believe they're different people. Same goes for Petey: there may be more than one giant mutant Piranha Plants running around (as evidenced by Mario Hoops: 3-on-3), but for the most part, it is suggested that the playable Petey Piranha at the very least is a recurring individual, and to say otherwise would be overly speculative. Nintendo gives us very little to go by when it comes to continuity, so second-guessing something as basic as names is more than we can afford. - 00:21, 19 February 2010 (EST)

So then why isn't Kamek on this page? And also, the Wiggler who appears playable is different from normal Wiggler's as it actually has arms and such. ForeverDaisy09 00:43, 19 February 2010 (EST)
 * Kamek should be on the page: he's made enough appearances and done enough stuff to warrant a mention (I'd add him myself if my computer could handle it). On the other hand, the Wiggler character isn't major enough for an entry (the species' section is fine, though). - 01:30, 19 February 2010 (EST)
 * By the way, those two Pety Pirahna-lookalikes aren't Petey Pirahna. They're Malboros from the Final Fantasy series.