Talk:Galoomba

Title
I think this article's title should be "Goomba (SMW)", since they are officially named Goomba in English. We also have two articles for both Zeus Guys, called "Zeus Guy (Bandit)" and "Zeus Guy (Snifit)", respectively, and don't use the Japanese name for one of them (I don't know their Japanese names, though). --Grandy02 15:03, 24 October 2008 (EDT)
 * Well, did that earlier, but then  moved it back, cause he said it's foreign, but it's still official.
 * However, the template tells "If you find an official name from an English source, please move the article to the correct name.". And the name "Goomba" is official in English. We don't need to use the Japanese name as the title to do distinguish this sub-species from the main species. --Grandy02 15:13, 24 October 2008 (EDT)
 * Well ok. I suggest we talk to Stooben to see his reason on why he moved it back. Any other comments from anyone else except us?
 * The Japanese Name imply it's a different specie from the Normal Goomba, unlike the American name.

If we didn't consider this to be it's own species, this wouldn't have it's own article. Thus, the Japanese Name is better in this particular case. --Blitzwing 15:21, 24 October 2008 (EDT)
 * Then we'd also have to move the newer Zeus Guy to its Japanese name (if the Japanese names are different). And there had to be a different template (which explains why the Japanese name is used). --Grandy02 15:28, 24 October 2008 (EDT)
 * if we don't use the Japanese name for Zeus Guy, it's because we don,t know what the hell it is (For what we know, it doesn't have one).

And Frankly, there's no need to have a big, fugly, honkin' template for something as trivial as this. A trivia will do. --Blitzwing 15:31, 24 October 2008 (EDT)
 * Sounds good to me. What do you think?
 * Grandy02: I moved the article back to Kuribon for a few reasons: 1) Because most people on the proposal agreed to that title, 2) "Goomba (SMW)" isn't an actual species, thus sounds as if it should be merged back into Goomba, (despite the different appearance), and 3) Kuribon, albeit foreign, is an official name. I remember hearing that "Kuribon" translated into "Chestnut People" or something along those lines, though I didn't move it to that title because I was unsure of the name being correct. Blitzwing: I collapsed the template; does it look better now? 16:01, 24 October 2008 (EDT)
 * Yup I was the one who said that. Kuribon means chestnut people in japanese. (But in this case they look like round Kuribon. They don't look like a mushroom shape.)
 * That's right; now I remember you saying that. Thanks. 16:15, 24 October 2008 (EDT)
 * Or its Kuribō. I'm not really sure. Ambidextria

I have a question. In Super Mario World on the GBA it say that the Paragoomba are Goombas right but if the player hits one then does it become a Kuribon? (Because paragoomba are round too). Ambidextria
 * Since we have an article on Paragoombas, maybe the Kuribon equivalent should also have an article? I don't know what their name is in Japanese, though, the ending of Super Mario World only names the Kuribon with parachutes ("Para Kuri") there. --Grandy02 09:10, 22 November 2008 (EST)
 * So that means they have there own sub- species like goombas. Ambidextria
 * Found the name of the winged ones, it is "Patakuri". --Grandy02 10:40, 22 November 2008 (EST)

I moved it
Moved it back.
 * ...Did you read what St00by said..? You didn't even discuss it with us.

Template
The template at the top of the page makes no sense. They have an official name in English: Goomba. -- Son of Suns
 * There was a proposal about this a while ago. Some of the details weren't actually specified though. We decided to split the Goombas from Super Mario World into another article, but we were unsure of what to call it. Originally, we were going to name it, but that didn't pan out, so we named it Kuribon. However, though we discovered that Kuribon translates into "Chestnut People", we have yet to actually move the article. I'm not sure why, actually. 10:13, 22 November 2008 (EST)


 * What's the source for the name "Kuribon?" -- Son of Suns
 * I believe it's somewhere on this page. 10:25, 22 November 2008 (EST)
 * Nope, not there (plus TMK is an unofficial source anyways). -- Son of Suns
 * I watched the ending of the Japanese version on YouTube, but it only mentions the Kuribon with a parachute (Para Kuri), that's why it isn't on TMK. But the official site for Mario Family tells the name, for example. --Grandy02 10:37, 22 November 2008 (EST)
 * Well it has the suffixed Kuri. It could be Kuribō japanese for Goomba or Kuribon the name that we use for this article.
 * Since the "round" Goombas are named different in Japanese and SMW has no "normal" Goombas, it clearly refers to Kuribon. --Grandy02 10:53, 22 November 2008 (EST)
 * Oh. Some the paragoomba in the japanese version are really Kuribon. Ambidextria

Thanks for that info Grandy02! And I believe Kuribō (normal Goombas) roughly translates into "little chestnut kid" while Kuribon ("round" Goomba) translates to "ordinary chestnut person." However, this doesn't solve the issue with the template and the article's name. The official name in English is still Goomba, is it not? So shouldn't this article either be named Goomba or merged with the Goomba article? -- Son of Suns

That what I thought since the names are similar. (I opposed but then removed my vote cause I was confused.) Ambidextria 11:12, 22 November 2008 (EST)
 * We already discussed in a proposal to split the SMW version off the main article, since we should also take account of the naming differences in Japanese, not just the English ones (e.g. Kamek and the ordinary Magikoopas have the same name, Kamek, in Japanese, but they are named different in English). The question is what the article should be named. I already had the same thoughts as Son of Suns, as you can see on this page, but other people had other opinions. --Grandy02 11:16, 22 November 2008 (EST)
 * Grandy02 is right. The proposal pass and name came to be Goomba (SMW) later change to Kuribō. And the names Kuribō and Kuribon are slightly different. Plus Grandy did show me a site with the name. Ambidextria

If we are accounting for naming differences in different langauges, then we should account for naming similarities (and thus merge Kamek with Magikoopa). Of course I'm being a little specious as Kamek has emerged as a distinct character for many audiences, so they should be kept separate in my opinion. Ultimately I think if the proposal agreed that the name should be "Goomba (SMW)" then that's what it should be. It's the official English name of this creature, it just happens to be the same name as another creature. Although personally I would like to see them merged, the name of this article should at least be Goomba, to reflect its official English name and to account for the naming differences in Japanese (by giving this creature its own article in the first place). -- Son of Suns

I have a link that mention there japanese names. Goomba Patakuribō (パタクリボー)= Paragoomba. Well it does have the 'n' on the end. Ambidextria
 * If we have the proposal saying we should change it to "Goomba (SMW)," and also have our previous disambiguation actions (ie Star Rod (PM)) for multiple subjects with the same name regardless of names in other regions, I think it's pretty clear what we should do: I agree with Son of Suns. 23:51, 26 November 2008 (EST)

FULL LIKENESS PIC FOR GALAXY
CAN SOME ONE GET ART WORK FOR GALAXY!?!?4DJONG 18:41, 13 May 2009 (EDT)

Galaxy
Is it just me or do these sub species of Goomba appear in Super Mario Galaxy?

Official Name
I was playing Mario Party Advanced and they call this species of goomba, Goombob or something like that. Should we change the name of this artical?
 * Goombob is an individual character, so nah. --Glowsquid 20:36, 31 July 2010 (UTC)

Merge with Goomba
I saw the proposal for merging the Small Goomba with the normal Goomba and the first thing I thought was "Why isn't this Goomba merged."

Proposer: Deadline: June 19, 2011, 23:59 GMT

Support

 * 1) My proposal so per me.
 * 2) They're the same thing, other than the Japanese name. In the SMW section of the Goomba page, it can mention the difference in name, yet they should be in the same article because of the English name. If I were a dude looking for info on SMW Goombas, I'd look in the Goomba article and not find it there. Not everyone knows it is a different name in Japanese just this once and it would be much easier for them to find it in the Goomba article. Please take this one for the good of the browsers, Opposers.
 * 3) They're not very different. Per All.
 * 4) Just because they look different, does not mean they are different, and their English name is the same, so why does it matter that their Japanese name is slightly different? Per all.

Oppose

 * 1) They look different act different and on top of that they have a different japanese name which is Kuribon while regular Goomba's have the name Kuribō so they were not intended to be the same species much like how spike top and red spike top are not the same species.
 * 2) Well they have differences, such as that this one is more round, and this kind of Goomba has some different kinds of abilities (one of them is being able to fly around in a bubble).
 * 3) Per the reasons we keep Boomerang Bro from M&L:SS separate from Boomerang Bro and merge Spookum with Snifit.
 * 4) - Per all; per the arguments put forth in the Proposal that originally split this page out of the main article. Different official names in at least one language + different looks + different behaviour = different species.  ensures there's no navigation hassles stemming from the logical separation of the two species of Goombas.

Comments
@Bowser's luma heres a list of proposals that have been decided because of Japanese names [], [], [], [] that ones not based on the japanese name but instead based on the Italian name and i would like to point out you supported that one. [], [], [], []. So as you can from this list the japanese name often plays a vital role in decisions combined with the physical differences between the two you can clearly see that the goomba's from SMW are not and were not intended to be the same as regular goomba's

Here's a picture of the one from super mario world called a Kuribon http://www.mariowiki.com/images/3/3b/RoundGoomba.png

and heres a picture of a 16-bit goomba from Super Mario World 2 called a Kuribō http://www.mariowiki.com/images/5/5a/4-1Goomba.PNG notice the difference yet notice how one is round and able to withstand a jump attack and be carried while one is killed with a single jump

Oh BTW Goomba's Shoe, not to burst your bubble but that's actually a screenshot from the 32-bit GBA remake.--


 * Fair enough my point remains the same though

The Super Mario World Goomba behaves differently from the basic Goombas, which is why it's separate from the Goomba article. Though this does question why the Yoshi's Island Goomba doesn't have its own article; it too behaves differently than the basic Goombas. 07:58, 7 June 2011 (EDT)


 * @Goomba's Shoe15: Those TPP actually won on a merge.
 * So? Splits and merges are about the same issue. Splits say that a certain game's enemies look and act significantly differently from the "normal" enemies, and this difference is recognized by at least one branch of Nintendo - be that the English one, the Japanese one, one of the localization teams in Europe, etc. - allowing us to acknowledge the difference as well by giving the two species different pages. Merges are the opposite: if two enemies look and act the same and have been given the same name by any sort of official Nintendo material, regardless of language, we can also say that they are the same. It's about context, logic and using all the resources at our disposal to provide the most accurate and well thought-out organization of material. Admittedly, not everyone agrees on what's "different" and what's "similar" (even Nintendo disagrees with itself), but that's why we have TPPs. The only problem is that people often dismiss the non-English sources, which is completely inappropriate: no one name is more important than any other - what matters is which one is most appropriate given the situation. And, while readers are obviously not expected to know all the translations and inferences we have made based on them, and redirects ensure that everyone gets to the info they're looking for, so the "this messes up navigation" arguments that crop up are also misguided. What would mess up navigation is using non-English evidence for some splits/merges, but ignoring them when voting on other pages: we have a standard established by numerous Proposals that have come before this one and we need to stick to it. -  12:44, 7 June 2011 (EDT)