Talk:Mecha-Bowser

Not the Same
Mecha Bowser and Bowser??? are not the same. They are two different bosses, they are of different sizes, they are made of different material, they are from different games, they are driven by different enemies, and they certainly have very different attacks. They also do not have the same name, obviously. These should be separate. --King Piranha Plant 20:45, 4 February 2007 (EST)

Split time. Paper Jorge

I'll do it. - User: Ultimatetoad

done. - User: Ultimatetoad

Too Many Images
There are too many images on this article. Four images in such a small (when compared to other articles) article is very messy. I was going to remove one of them, but I believe I should get other Users thoughts first.


 * Yeah, there are two many; at least one of the Sunshine pics (I'd say the left one) should go in my opinion. We could arrange them into a Gallery to make it neater and avoid removing images, though, and I think I'll do that at least for the time being.
 * Meh... That's not the only problem. It's called to as a "he" like many other bosses and enemies... TG

Super Mario Galaxy Bosses
There is 4 reasons why I should believe he should be added to super mario galaxies boss template:

1. The music changes on his planet

2. His level is named after him

3. He is the last thing in his level

4. When ever you hurt him( make something fall off) a check point lift will appear. This is down twice, the next time you hurt him he dies. Ganondox

Yes but it dosen't fight Mario unlike the Mecha Bowser in Super Mario Sunshine.--Yoshidude99 06:02, 26 March 2011 (EDT)

Game Appearence Section
Is the game appearence section realy neccessary?I mean, we already have a history section for it so what is the point in a game appearence section?Should it be deleted? Plz respond-
 * That section is necessary because the information is organized by series.
 * Ok, thx for letting me know-

Split the SMG Mecha Bowser off of this article
The Super Mario Galaxy version of Mecha Bowser is so dissimilar to the actual Bowser mecha that debuted in Super Mario Sunshine that it honestly should just be split off. The only similarities the two have are that they are both robots and that they ALMOST have the same name (the SMG one isn't hyphenated). If it weren't for the name, they would be split already, since there is NO other connection between the two. Having them merged makes about as much sense as merging the two Mr. Es.

Proposer: Deadline: August 7, 2016, at 23:59 GMT

Support

 * 1) per proposal
 * 2) The Super Mario Sunshine variant is incredibly different from the SMG version. One actually looks like Bowser, the other looks like a robot - I'm not even fully sure why it's Mecha Bowser in the first place. Their differences in appearance, differences in the way you defeat them, differences in almost everything - they should definitely be split.
 * 3) per all. Also, neither Mecha-Bowser or Toy Time articles don't really explain everything. You can fall down if you stay on the arm to long. It happened to me.
 * 4) The Super Mario Galaxy Meacha-Bowser hardly resembled Bowser at all. It was a completely different robot so we should split them.
 * 5) Mecha-Bowser in Super Mario Sunshine looks like Bowser so, it has to split! Per all!
 * 6) Who even thought these were the same in the first place?
 * 7) Per all.

Oppose

 * 1) As of currently, I'd rather that this article make mention of the Mecha-Bowser esque planet. It's more akin to a planet and all planets, named or not, remain in their respective galaxy articles.
 * 2) It doesn't hurt to have it there. The wording could use better work to say that this is a resemblance or has similarities, not the real thing from Super Mario Sunshine in Toy Time Galaxy.

Comments
I personally don't think the Mecha-Bowser of Galaxy should even get an article. It's basically just a planet so the info should just be in the Toy Time Galaxy article.
 * I have to agree with Tails here. I think the article is better off as a planet section in the Toy Time Galaxy article. 17:31, 24 July 2016 (EDT)
 * I'd disagree: it has more in common with a boss than a planet. 19:45, 24 July 2016 (EDT)
 * I agree with and  more so than . That's kind of stretch or blurs the line there for a boss. -- 00:08, 26 July 2016 (EDT)
 * I need to clarify something: I'm not necessarily saying that SMG Mecha Bowser deserves its own article; that is of little concern to me ATM. I simply feel that its information shouldn't be on this article for the reasons I've already stated in the proposal. 05:46, 26 July 2016 (EDT)
 * You're calling for a split, but usually, when you want to split something off, unless stated otherwise, the thing you want to split off will get its own article. Would you want the SMG Mecha-Bowser get its own article, or merge it with Toy Time Galaxy's planet sections? That's where the TPP isn't clear about. 19:05, 26 July 2016 (EDT)
 * Well, it's too late for me to change the proposal, so if I wanted to fix it up, I would have to cancel it and start over. I wouldn't mind SMG Mecha Bowser having its own article, and it could always be merged into Toy Time Galaxy with another proposal (we could also do it the other way around, but again, I'd have to start this over). SMG Mecha Bowser isn't that much less of a boss than Megaleg is, really. 00:02, 27 July 2016 (EDT)

Can we even argue that it's not even "Mecha-Bowser", it's "Heavy-Metal Mecha Bowser"? 17:50, 25 July 2016 (EDT)

Split the SMG Mecha-Bowser off of this article Redux
Previous proposal by has some misinformation. The name of the Super Mario Galaxy boss is actually Mecha-Bowser, not "Mecha Bowser". This entire time, it seems the mission name Heavy Metal Mecha-Bowser was misread as "Heavy-Metal Mecha Bowser" and no one appears to have proofread it. I have since merged the SMG Mecha-Bowser information with the actual Mecha-Bowser as a result.

However, it's come to my attention that the two Mecha-Bowsers are similar in name only. Just about everything else is different, from its design to its battle tactics. Should the Super Mario Galaxy-related info be moved to, or should the article remain how it is?

Proposer: Deadline: May 15th, 2017, 23:59 GMT

Split the Super Mario Galaxy info to

 * 1) As long as it has length, I can support this.
 * 2) This is my "Plan B" (though the chances of my other choice not winning seem to be very low)

Leave Mecha-Bowser as is

 * 1) I'm fine with this.
 * 2) I feel like this works better.

Remove the SMG information and keep the information to the planet in the Toy Time Galaxy (more info in comments)

 * 1) This is exactly what I was talking about it the comments.
 * 2) Per my comments below. This acts more like a planet than its own boss, where in order to "defeat" it, you need to detach its parts by hitting the switch and watching it explode. It doesn't interact with you at all; the obstacles placed on this planet does, but in no way does it act as an entity independent of the enemy hazards placed on it, unlike pretty much every other boss. Even bosses such as Megaleg have independent actions. This is just pretty much a planet with a name.
 * 3) Per all. I would consider it a planet and not a boss because Mecha-Bowser itself can't interact with you at all.
 * 4) I'd prefer this option. The more I think about it, the more it seems like this is a glorified robot planet thing than an actual boss, as you don't really fight it directly. Per Baby Luigi.
 * 5) This option seems best, as Heavy-Metal Mecha Bowser is the only mission it appears in. Per Baby Luigi.
 * 6) We don't need a new article for a boss that only appears once.  Just keep it to the Toy Time Galaxy page.
 * 7) Per Baby Luigi.
 * 8) I don't think the name "Mecha-Bowser" was necessarily attributed to the right object -- the subject in question is merely called a "toy robot" in the Prima guide, while the term "Mecha-Bowser" instead refers to the miniature, mechanical Bowser look-alikes (which the wiki currently has in the Mechakoopa article, although it might very well be a separate enemy). Since the mission is one of the few times they show up, I think its title was meant to specifically refer to these guys. Per Baby Luigi.
 * 9) It's technically a planet and it doesn't interact with you. It's really not even a boss. Per Baby Luigi.
 * 10) Per Baby Luigi.
 * 11) Per all.

Comments
I'm honestly not sure how I want this to go, so I'm going to hold off on my own vote for now. 12:47, 1 May 2017 (EDT)
 * Is it ok if I add another option to this proposal? It will contain my vote. 12:49, 1 May 2017 (EDT)
 * Depends. What is it? 12:51, 1 May 2017 (EDT)
 * It is option 3 I gave you (only without the moving combat info from to the new article as it is already there), as this is my preferred option. 12:53, 1 May 2017 (EDT) Actually, more like correcting the info based on the other info.  12:57, 1 May 2017 (EDT)
 * So, you mean have the Super Mario Galaxy section's main article be the mission itself? Mecha-Bowser acts more of a boss, so I don't think so. Though the combat can be added to the new page, or expanded on the current one. 12:59, 1 May 2017 (EDT)
 * I have changed option 3 due to the removal of old option 2. Also, the combat is on the new page you created. 13:02, 1 May 2017 (EDT)
 * The combat section is kind of already on the Heavy Metal Mecha-Bowser's layout, though. 13:04, 1 May 2017 (EDT)
 * That is what I said in the previous comment. 13:05, 1 May 2017 (EDT)
 * Yeah, you expanded on your comment when I hit save <_<
 * I'm honestly not sure what it is you want. The combat section is already on the mission page, and there is already information on the boss in the planets section. I don't think a third option is necessary. 13:08, 1 May 2017 (EDT)
 * Once and only once policy states that info should only be mentioned once. I just think that the info will be better suited just on Toy Time Galaxy page. 13:34, 1 May 2017 (EDT)
 * Sure, but if the info is relevant to multiple pages, then I see no reason why the info can't be on multiple pages. 13:37, 1 May 2017 (EDT)
 * I see no reason why to keep it on this article (since this is SMS's Mecha-Bowser which is clearly different from each other). Neither do I see the proposed page being the spot for it because, either (A) It will be short or (B) it will have to bring over the other info moved to the new article. Both options don't please me. 13:45, 1 May 2017 (EDT)
 * Actually, I should let you figure out how the info should be dealt with. 13:58, 1 May 2017 (EDT)

I don't agree with giving this its own article, nor do I agree with leaving it the way it is now, as this thing clearly isn't the same robot from Super Mario Sunshine. This thing behaves more like a planet than it does its own character. I think it's a better idea leave this as it is and perhaps redirect it as a planet name on the Planet List in the Toy Time Galaxy article. 14:00, 1 May 2017 (EDT)
 * Boy, this whole thing got confusing quick...
 * Baby Luigi, do you mean something like this:

A planet by the name of Mecha-Bowser also appears in Super Mario Galaxy, during the mission Heavy Metal Mecha-Bowser in the Toy Time Galaxy. However, the appearance and tactics of this version differs from the one in Super Mario Sunshine.
 * 14:15, 1 May 2017 (EDT)
 * Yeah, I think the best solution is to add a "distinguish" template or whatever on the top of Mecha-Bowser's article that leads to the Super Mario Galaxy planet. 14:19, 1 May 2017 (EDT)
 * Okay, I understand that. I think it's a boss, but others may think it more of a planet, so we'll see how this plays out. 14:25, 1 May 2017 (EDT)
 * @: Sorry, the entire conversation earlier was really confusing to me. I wasn't entirely sure what you were trying to say, so I'm glad came in to offer the exact option in a way I was able to understand :)  14:32, 1 May 2017 (EDT)

Sorry for coming late, but I have important information from the Encyclopedia Super Mario Bros.. On page 100, in the Enemies section of Super Mario Sunshine, the box of Mecha-Bowser states:

「メカクッパ

クッパ型の巨大ロボット. 口から炎を吐 き、胸からキラーを飛ばす. 」

and on page 133, in the section describing the first mission of Toy Time Glaxy, the box states:

「鋼鉄魔王メカクツパ

パネマリオになって進む. 最後に現れるのは、クッパ型の巨大ロボット. 」

Now, without going too much into Japanese, in both case the same name is used (「メカクツパ」), not only that, but even the same description is used (「クッパ型の巨大ロボット」). Finally, Mecha-Bowser of Toy Time Galaxy is referred to as 「鋼鉄魔王」, which roughly means steel demon/sorcerer king, a title which a clear reference to Bowser's 「大魔王」 (great demon/sorcerer king) title. As far as the Encyclopedia is concerned, we have evidence that they refer to the same thing.--Mister Wu (talk) 21:21, 3 May 2017 (EDT)
 * I did find they are both called by the same name, and they could very well be the same robot. However, the two behave and look very differently, as the one from Sunshine acts like a boss, but the one in Galaxy acts more like a planet. Does the encyclopedia say anything else? 21:28, 3 May 2017 (EDT)
 * Unfortunately not in the Super Mario Galaxy section from what I've seen, as it is not in the Enemies section; I can add another detail though: the Mechakoopas in Toy Time Galaxy are called 「ミニメカクツパ」, which means Mini Mecha-Bowser, so the name of the mission refers to the actual Mecha-Bowser. I would also add that in the case of the Green Stars the ones of Super Mario 3D World were merged as well, even though they have a different role (although in Captain Toad: Treasure Tracker the same stars are admittedly again a final goal).--Mister Wu (talk) 21:54, 3 May 2017 (EDT)
 * There's one problem - the full name equates to the mission title, meaning the toy robot is the eponymous Heavy Metal Mecha-Bowser. LinkTheLefty (talk) 22:10, 3 May 2017 (EDT)
 * True, but the description (「クッパ型の巨大ロボット」) is also the same, suggesting that we are still talking about the same Mecha-Bowser.--Mister Wu (talk) 23:23, 3 May 2017 (EDT)
 * Are there other examples of the book sharing key phrases across character descriptions like that? I don't think the name (or part of it) has to be taken too literally given that Mecha-Bowser shares the same Japanese name as general Mechakoopas, and if those are certainly different then I don't see why Mecha-Bowser and "Heavy Metal Mecha-Bowser" have to be the same. What they have going for them so far is that they're both described as a giant Bowser-modelled robot. LinkTheLefty (talk) 23:53, 3 May 2017 (EDT)

Regarding the above proposal
I know that this'll need a proposal, but as usual I want to test the waters with a discussion first. I think these should be re-merged for a number of reasons. Yes, they looks different, but ultimately that means diddly-squat, lots of things get redesigned, and this was merely a thematic one. Furthermore, it seems wrong to have a page for Micro Mecha-Bowser, an ostensible small counterpart, and not for the boss itself. And while the amount they have in common is also really low, the same can be said for many boss counterparts in the game (e.g. Topmaniac and Tarantox). Additionally, the "he's a planet, not a boss" argument is also flawed; all reasons for that can also be applied to Megaleg. All he does is move his limbs (which must be climbed on through their own gravity) while normal enemies attack, and must be damaged on the very top to destroy it, leaving only the ground it stands on as a planet - just like Megaleg. Not only that, but "standing in place, moving his arms like an idiot, and only attacking through fire and enemies" is exactly what Sunshine's Mecha-Bowser did. It was less a "robot" and more of a mech (ie a glorified vehicle), so the likelihood of SMG's not being sentient is also moot (and, you know, neither are Megahammer and the Boomsday Machine). Additionally, he has his own completely unique theme music, which discounting the Gateway and Galaxy Reactor galaxies (ie, plot-crucial locations), doesn't happen for planets. And, perhaps most importantly, the name is the same in both English and Japanese. While the "Mecha Bowser" in Mario Kart is almost certainly a guide-misidentified Bowser Statue, the JP SMG calling this "Mecha Koopa" is likely the only reason Micro Mecha-Bowsers aren't Mechakoopas; the name was already given to something, and if that something was new, why would it take priority over the recurring enemy in that regard when it would be more logical and consistent with other bosses to just have the boss one be "Boss Mecha Koopa" or something like that? Recall Sunshine didn't have normal Mechakoopas, so distinguishing the boss from them then wasn't an issue. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 21:01, January 22, 2021 (EST)
 * It most certainly does not mean diddly squat that the design is completely different. While a change in design does not warrant a split in all scenarios, that doesn't mean it's irrelevant. Chet Rippo, for instance looks completely different in his two appearances, but they still have the same function, meaning it's not just another character with the same name. SMG Mecha-Bowser not only looks nothing like Mecha-Bowser (or for that matter, Bowser in general), they have hardly anything in common whatsoever outside of being robots. Also, your flimsy attempt to compare them by mentioning that they're both "standing in place, moving his arms like an idiot, and only attacking through fire and enemies" sounds more like a desperate reach for a connection than genuine shared traits. The ways they attack with "fire and enemies" are completely different. Sunshine Mecha-Bowser breathes streams of fire and launches Bullet Bills out of built-in cannons while Galaxy Mecha-Bowser just has a Fire Bar on him and a small cannon in a cage on his head (his mouth, I guess...?) that shoots fireballs and enemies just happen to be patrolling his body. That's a flimsy comparison at best. As for them having the same names in English and Japanese, so do Ice Mario and Ice Mario, and they're not the same thing either. Plain old Mechakoopas also have the same Japanese name as the two Mecha-Bowsers, so clearly the name isn't sacred to them.
 * EDIT: For the record, I am neutral on the "boss vs. planet" issue, so I'm OK with SMG Mecha-Bowser getting a separate article (in fact, that was the result of my original proposal before that second one happened), just not merging with the standard Mecha-Bowser. 22:02, January 22, 2021 (EST)
 * It means diddly-squat when one of the games is Sunshine and both of them are alleged "robots" anyway that can just be reconstructed differently and still be the same "character" (for lack of better term), and I already noted the design in Galaxy was specifically to fit with the "toy" theme while Sunshine's was a more vanilla Mechagodzilla parody. As for the Mechakoopa thing, that was addressed in my final point, in that if it were a wholly new entity, giving it the "main" Mechakoopa name while the enemy that for all intents and purposes is the "usual" Mechakoopa gets a "small" adjective wouldn't make any sense from a design perspective, with the name-sharing in Sunshine being a non-issue since the "normal" Mechakoopa was absent. As for the different specifics on how they move, that's primarily based on the difference on how they are encountered, with one being a rail-shooter and the other a colossus climb. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 22:29, January 22, 2021 (EST)
 * I fail to see how your point about the Galaxy version being specifically designed to fit the toy theme somehow makes it more Mecha-Bowser than it otherwise would be; there's a Mecha-Bowser-like construct in Mario Party 5's Toy Dream that clearly does resemble Mecha-Bowser and not a glorified Rock 'Em Sock 'Em Robot with a mohawk and a shell. They could have made SMG Mecha-Bowser look like a toy while still having him resemble Mecha-Bowser. Also, your insistence on completely dismissing the total design difference as irrelevant is hogwash; the fact that one of games is Sunshine does not change this. Yes, a lot of things had unusual designs in Sunshine, but there's a difference between unusual and total dissimilarity. For Mecha-Bowser, Sunshine isn't even the odd one out here, Galaxy is, which makes that even less of an excuse. 23:01, January 22, 2021 (EST)
 * The reason I say it doesn't matter is "Mecha-Bowser" isn't a character, it's a mindless construct, therefore a Mecha-Bowser is still at heart Mecha-Bowser. I see this less as a "biography" and more of a documentation of a recurring concept, similar to all the iterations Bowser's Castle has gone through. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 23:10, January 22, 2021 (EST)
 * Every incarnation of Mecha-Bowser except the Galaxy one is based on the original Sunshine version though. If Mecha-Bowser had more appearances and didn't really have a consistent design, I might not have proposed the split in the first place. Mecha-Bowser, while not a character per se, is closer to that than a recurring location, which tend to differ in design between appearances by nature, especially major ones like Bowser's Castle, due to the sheer amount of roles it plays in games (levels, race tracks, sports stadiums, etc.). Plus, I still can't get over the fact that SMG Mecha-Bowser does not resemble Bowser. 00:06, January 23, 2021 (EST)
 * It looks like a clunky toy robot shaped like Bowser. Again, toy aesthetic, they were going for a tin robot look just like how the original was going for a Mechagodzilla look. Anyways, I personally refuse to believe that an individual entity of the same name and similar specifications in size and behavior in two games in the same series by the same development team released a mere five years apart with the latter game also featuring numerous allusions to the former (think of all the FLUDD-looking things) could possibly be a mere coincidence, regardless of design and role. And if it wasn't meant to be the same thing, why give it that specific name, particularly when there's no Mechagodzilla connection any more? Given how much of a plot point and its dramatic lead-up that undoubtedly took a lot of work to render given the water effects, I sincerely doubt they merely forgot it. (On that subject, we should probably go about finding a file name or something for Bowser's mech). Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 03:05, January 23, 2021 (EST)
 * "It looks like a clunky toy robot shaped like Bowser." - No, it looks like a clunky toy robot, period. To quote the Toy Time Galaxy article, "Its only similarities in appearance to Bowser are its spiked green shell, the spiky collar, and a red protrusion coming out of its head that vaguely resembles Bowser's hair." It resembles Bowser in the same way a 10-year-old boy wearing a red tablecloth as a cape resembles Superman.
 * "Again, toy aesthetic, they were going for a tin robot look just like how the original was going for a Mechagodzilla look." - See my response to the first time you said this.
 * "similar specifications in size and behavior" - They do not have similar behavior. Again, see my first response to you claiming that they behave similarly. Megaleg honestly has more in common with Mecha-Bowser than M-BINO (Mecha-Bowser In Name Only) since it actually attacks with Bullet Bills - you know, like Mecha-Bowser.
 * "And if it wasn't meant to be the same thing, why give it that specific name" - Because the name was already recycled in the first place. If Mechakoopas and Mecha-Bowser are allowed to have the same name in NOJ's eyes, why not use it again? This suggests they think it's OK to just call any Bowser-like mechanical construct Mekakuppa. I simply cannot comprehend why you are so insistent on merging two things that look nothing alike and behave differently just because they share a name. Names aren't everything. They're obviously important, but they are not the gospel. I'm not budging on this. 20:04, January 23, 2021 (EST)
 * It's pretty clear we have fundamentally different opinions on how subjects relate and neither of us is going to persuade the other of anything here. That being said, I would be temporarily satisfied splitting it into its own article. (But I stand by that it looks more than remotely like Bowser. Namely the original sprite that also spawned DiC's "King Koopa" design.) Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 22:45, January 23, 2021 (EST)
 * Even so, you would still need a proposal, as that was one of the options that failed. 22:48, January 23, 2021 (EST)

I think the points of the proposal still stand. It doesn't act like a boss like it does in any other incarnation, it acts more like an interactive planet. It's not even on the same level as Megaleg. idk why they decided to name it "Mecha Bowser" when it looks nothing like the guy and doesn't seem to have any relation to Bowser nor Bowser Jr. I think this is pretty obviously meant to be a different thing. 00:31, January 23, 2021 (EST)
 * In what way is Megaleg any more than an interactive planet? It doesn't even attack, it just moves its legs around awkwardly and lets Bullet Bills do the rest. (By the way, the actual "planet" for Mecha Bowser seems to be the conveyor he's rolling on). And yes, it does look like Bowser, just with a wind-up tin robot aesthetic (like how normal Mechakoopas and/or Micro-Mecha Bowsers, which also barely look like Bowser, are based on wind-up mice). Look at the Yoshi's Safari armored Bowser and you'll see a better resemblence. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 03:05, January 23, 2021 (EST)
 * I barely see a resemblance in any way, and I think that the proposal still stands. 05:53, January 23, 2021 (EST)
 * You really need to stop making the name the ultimate deciding factor when it comes to this sort of thing. I agree with 7feetunder that you're kind of digging around for other excuses. The Galaxy Mecha-Bowser was clearly supposed to be treated differently from the Sunshine Mecha-Bowser, so it's logical for us to treat them differently as well, and please stop being so stubborn about it.
 * Don't need to be rude about it .-. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 22:45, January 23, 2021 (EST)
 * Yeah, that was uncalled for, dude. 22:48, January 23, 2021 (EST)
 * Sorry if I went a bit far, but my point about them being treated differently by Nintendo still stands.

Personally leaning toward them being separate subjects myself, there's just way too much about them that's different. I'd also like to address the statement that "[the designs being different] means diddly-squat when one of the games is Sunshine". Yes, it's true that Sunshine had a lot of bizarre, off-model designs, but that doesn't apply to Mecha-Bowser at all, since it debuted in the game. All of the off-model designs in the game are for subjects that already existed (which is pretty obvious, you can't have an off-model design of something that's never existed before), but everything that originated in the game and has since returned (Petey Piranha, Gooper Blooper, Cataquacks, Piantas, Nokis prior to MK8, heck you can even throw Bowser Jr. on this list) has kept its Sunshine design outside of minor tweaks. Even Petey and Gooper Blooper, which are based on the bizarro designs of Piranha Plant and Blooper seen in this game (or possibly the other way around), haven't been changed.

Anyway, this relies too heavily on name alone in my opinion, which I've become more opposed to as of late and here's why. Whether it's the language the game was developed in or merely a translation, different subjects can have the same name either intentionally or accidentally, and the same subject can have a different name between games, again, intentionally or accidentally. As for the point that both Mecha Bowsers are "of the same name and similar specifications in size and behavior in two games in the same series by the same development team released a mere five years apart with the latter game", I don't think that's very solid when the same development team made a completely different version of the same power-up with the same name in the same series a mere 2 years later. -- 12:34, January 24, 2021 (EST)
 * Thank you for being civil about it, and I suppose unless Nintendo reconciles the two after the former design's appearance in MKT, the Ice Mario thing is aa good enough reason to keep split. Still bugs me they'd rename the "normal" Mechakoopa for it, though. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 13:30, January 24, 2021 (EST)

The Mecha-Bowser in Super Mario-kun
No, I'm not talking of the Super Mario Sunshine arc Mecha-Bowser. In Volume 2 and 4 (SMW arc) a giant robotic Bowser appears and it is called "メカクッパ" (Mecha-Koopa, the same as this Mecha-Bowser). Do we give him a section in here or a separate page?
 * Is it an interpretation of Mechakoopa, perhaps? Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 16:36, December 17, 2021 (EST)
 * Definitely not: it's a robotic Bowser, and the MechaKoopas are TOO much different to be minimally considered related.