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.
 * What are you talking about? The level has a variation, but the Daisy Garden still has two Petey Piranhas. ForeverDaisy09 18:22, 19 February 2010 (EST)
 * Huh. I forgot about Daisy Garden.

"'Super Mario' series"
The article currently states that The most popular games in the series consist of what is known as the "main" series or the "Super Mario" series without giving any closer definition of what is meant by that; what would the "'Super Mario' series" include? Every game whose name starts with "Super Mario"? The rest of the sentence seems to imply this: 2D and 3D platformers, at least one per home console and one per handheld. "Super Mario Bros." and "Super Mario Land" are listed as sub-series however, and so is "Super Mario", making it appear as though these were seperate, which would make the aforementioned statement about the "Super Mario" series including at least one game per console and handheld false. If the "Super Mario" series is a sub-series of this, the "Super Mario Bros." and "Super Mario Land" series would have to be sub-sub-series in order for the statement to be true. There is currently no indication of this, however, and the whole "Super Mario" series thing in general is very confusing to me. Could somebody clear this up?--vellidragon 21:28, 13 April 2010 (EDT)
 * Then we should get rid of the "'Super Mario' series" section.

stares at text. Uh, what? I don't really understand what you are talking about, sorry.

The "Super Mario" "series" shouldn't exist. The "Super Mario" "series" should be simply the "Mario" series. Super Mario Land and its sequel should be in the main section (Super Mario Land 3 shouldn't be here because it's not part of the Mario series anymore; it's now the beginning of the Wario Land series). Any other games that have series of its own should be a spin-off (Mario Party, Mario and Luigi, Paper Mario, etc.)  00:15, 5 May 2010 (EDT)

Too many missing!!
When this was nominated for an FA, I claimed that some of the older games were missing. I made a huge understatement. Many, Many Many games are not shown in the list. I'm willing to fix it but I'll need help. 05:19 6 May 2010

That's Strange
When this was nominated for an FA it was brought up in the comments that Roslalina was not in the Major Chracters section, another claimed she could not be there as she has only been in two games. Then why do we have the Ice Flower in the Items section when it has appeared in the same number of games??

She shouldn't be in Major Characters.

Super Mario 3D series
What? How is that a separate series? Shouldn't it be merged with "Super Mario"?

02:09, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
 * I don't get what a "Super Mario 3D" series is even supposed to be; there's not a single Mario game that has "Super Mario 3D" in the title, it's simply specified as a bunch of unrelated games that happen to be 3D platformers in the article. Is there any official word or anything the like even claiming that such a "sub-series" exists?--vellidragon 23:47, 21 October 2010 (UTC)
 * The Super Mario 3D Series term relates to all games in the (previously-known-as) Super Mario series that are 3D. It is apparently defined as a seperate series though I have removed the "Super" part because "Super" is not required.
 * I agree with vellidragon: this "Mario 3D" series has always struck me as being unofficial (actually, the "Super Mario" series did too, but at least its name was based on actual titles), and with the 3DS about to introduce games that are actually three dimensional, it's going to become rather misleading. An official source for the term should be provided, and if there isn't one, perhaps this "series" should be reconsidered (maybe via Proposal). - 22:50, 22 October 2010 (UTC)

Super Mario All-Stars - 25th Anniversary Edition came with a "Super Mario History" Booklet, in which all the 2D and 3D platformers were listed as a single "Super Mario" series, not as separate "Super Mario Bros." and "Mario 3D" series. Since we now have an official term for the games (and seeing as almost all the wiki already uses "Super Mario" History sections for the core games), I'm going ahead and re-combining the two sub-series. - 22:43, 28 December 2010 (EST)

In the resent nintendo interveiw they say Super Mario Bros. series, and refer to the most resent game in that series as New Super Mario Bros. Wii. This impllies that the Super Mario Bros. and 3D Mario Games as separate. -IGGY7735
 * People sometimes get things wrong in interviews, and I've seen "Mario", "Super Mario" and "Super Mario Bros." all used interchangibly for the games over the years, depending on who's talking and how informal they are, and a whole host of other things to take into consideration. Going with something in writing is always better - especially when the alternate involved the word implies: reading between the lines can be just as bad as speculation (which itself would still be involved here - they didn't say "Super Mario 3D series" too, did they? If not, that's still completely unofficial). Really, I don't understand why you want to split this series up so badly: the wiki is fine the way it is. - 00:22, 3 February 2011 (EST)

Locations
I think there should be a locations section. Some could be :
 * Toad Town
 * Princess Peach's Castle
 * Bowser's Castle
 * Yoshi's Island (possibly)
 * Isle Delfino (possibly)
 * Maybe a thing for worlds 1-8 from the platformers
 * Toad Houses

I'm not sure about any others.

I also think that Firebars should be in the objects section.

That is kinda a good idea!

Missing Crossover
There isn't Mario & Sonic at Winter Olimpic Games in the crossover list


 * Add it. If you feel something should be added, you should add it.

But i didn't play the game so i can't say anithing about it


 * Just read the article, comprehend it, and add it! I've done a lot of stuff that I never played the game.

DK
Does anyone mind if I move the Donkey Kong and Donkey Kong Jr. games into the Donkey Kong (series) article, since the two games aren't really Mario games? I just want to make sure it's fine before I remove all that stuff.

Yeah, go ahead, but can you just COPY it there? Since Mario DOES appear in those game.
 * Yeah, but they are Donkey Kong games, part of the DK series. They are not actually in the Mario series, even though Mario is in the game. If you ask me, the first Mario game was Mario Bros., not Donkey Kong.

Well, its his first appearence. Donkey Kong is still part of the Mario series you know. I'd advise you to keep it there. At least Donkey Kong HAS to be there, since its Mario's first game. Maybe we can disinclude Donkey Kong Jr. You can ask Steve about this. I have to go now though
 * Steve only answers questions about technical problems with the wiki n' stuff. Mario appeared for the first time there, yes, but so did DK. And considering the fact that the game is called Donkey Kong, you have to say it's part of that series.

Yeah, so you can put it in both series. Mario is after all, and with all due respect, more important than Donkey Kong. I mean with all the spin-offs inculding Donkey Kong, its always MARIO something. Also, if Donkey Kong (and Yoshi and Wario) were individual series, they would be lower than call of duty and resident evil on the bestseller lists.
 * What does series popularity do with any of this?
 * IMO Donkey Kong and Donkey Kong Jr. are games in the Mario series. Either that or they are part of their own series. The DK series games feature different characters than those in the Mario series. I think it should just be kept there personally.
 * Well, I wanted to put a list of games in the Donkey Kong series articles that is like the one in this article, but I just don't think it would make sense without Donkey Kong and Donkey Kong Jr. I find it odd that Nintendo is celebrating the Mario series 25th anniversary, when Donkey Kong was released longer ago than that.

The (landmark) game released 25 years ago was Super Mario Bros., two years after the release of Mario Bros. and four after DK's original release. Unless you consider Mario Bros. a part of another series then Nintendo is probably celebrating the Super Mario series. I still think Donkey Kong (and DKJR.) would be considered part of the Mario series or another sub-series of its own.
 * Yeah... would it be OK to have the games in both articles? I mean, it could be considered as part of both series. Or perhaps the two series could have branched off of Donkey Kong and Donkey Kong Jr.? Also, Mario was known as Jumpman in those games, so I just can't think of then as actually Mario series games.

I don't know, it's already been integrated into the Mario series...it's more of a Mario series game even if it branched off into a second series. Super Mario World branched off to the Yoshi series, Super Mario Land branched the Wario series. I don't think we should be inconsistent just because the name doesn't begin with Super Mario :/

P.S. I removed the indent on purpose, that is indented way to far in for my liking, I usually remove it at 3-4.

OK, what about Donkey Kong 3? That's not considered to be a Mario series game, and it makes no sense to have that as the first Donkey Kong game, since it's a sequel.
 * :O - Oh my! I think this thing should be entirely reversed to get DK3 moved into the Mario series.
 * And DK2 too I guess... I find it all messed up and confusing :/
 * DK2 is already part :/


 * Anyways, I think that these things should either be merged with the Mario series or moved into their own series...though I don't know what it could be called...anyways, should I do the move or do you want to or do you not want to do it at all?

I'm too busy to move anything. If we are going to make a separate article for those games, call it Donkey Kong (original series) or something.
 * Also keep in mind that Donkey Kong 94 and the Mario vs. Donkey Kong series are continuations of the original DK games - at least in spirit... I think the simplest thing to do would be to include the games in both series, like you proposed earlier, Fawfulfury65. It works just fine for the navigation templates, after all. - 21:12, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

"Other Series"
The section "Other Series" currently has only a single sub-section, which makes no sense, while "Mario and Crossover Series", which seems to relate to other series, is a seperate section. However, when trying to edit "Other Series", the Mario and Crossover section appears in the editing window below "Partner Series" for some reason as though it was part of the same section. Was it meant as a sub-section of Other Series?--vellidragon 23:59, 21 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I believe I fixed it, there was a problem with the table. I don't see how that could cause a glitched up header but I fixed the table and the header moved so...let's just take it as a blessing!

Reorganization
I hope no one minds, but I went ahead and moved around a bunch of the sections, turned some things into sub-sections, and changed a few headers. I moved the series and alternate media content up beneath the games because I felt that would better reflect how the rest of the wiki is organized: with all the titles first in a History section, followed by everything else. I grouped the items, objects, characters and species into one section, since I think it makes the page look more organized and easier to navigate: now the unique "Critical Reception" and "Cultural Impact" sections clearly stand out from the sub-sections of in-universe content above them. Aside from minor rewrites and maintenance work (which I'm doing in edits other than the main rearranging one), I didn't change any of the actual content. - 16:10, 5 November 2010 (UTC)