Talk:Bob Hoskins

Glowsquid has a point. WE SHOULD CENSOR/REMOVE that part.


 * I was under the impression that articles needn't be censored, seeing as this is a direct quote. -- Booster

Articles need censoring.


 * The No Swearing rules only applies to userspace not articles & direct quotes.

Actually, I am strongly agaisnt censoring quote. I was only pointing out that there is innapopriate stuff, and that Conker shouldn't be excluded because of that. Censoring should be destroyed. Glowsquid
 * We censor only in userspace.

Well, we should do something. maybe a notice on the top of teh page. Something.


 * No need, as this is a main space article. -- Son of Suns
 * OMG!!! IT HAS THE "F" WORD IN IT!!! That is horrible, we shouldn't have that there.
 * Also the whole part containing the F word seems a little pointless.
 * I think it has a point. It's his views on the movie, although it may be better in the film article itself. -- Son of Suns

Maybe we need a proposal To stop spam!


 * The problem is, where do you draw the line? As I've noted before, Peach and Daisy wear some very revealing soccer outfits.  Should that be censored? -- Son of Suns

Maybe Template:Censor might be good saying "Warning: This article contains swearing and/or adult content" or stuff like that. Uh...as I type this I'm beginig to think the wiki went too far.http://img257.imageshack.us/img257/9276/papertoycf7.gif Paper Jorge! I give paper cuts so stand back! http://img257.imageshack.us/img257/9276/papertoycf7.gif


 * Isn't adult content is relative? Kids should not be able to read SSB Melee content, as the game is rated teen.  The violence is too much for kids under age 13 to handle, and they should be warned. -- Son of Suns

Uh, more like below 8 (just because I'm 10 and I watch South park once and awhile), but I think this is how a template would work say:

This article has content not sutiable for people under the age (?). Preceed with caution.

The (?) is a number we come up with.
 * Just put a note that it has Swearing on it, and be done with it. Yeesh, no need to argue about this. And, SSBM was only rated "T" because they had no better rating at the time, if they did, they would of rated it a bit lower. It isn't even rated PG down under, only G8+ (G is the most child-friendly rating, PG comes right after it).

Whose to say what is mature or not? Many articles may be too "mature" for some people - there is a lot of violence in the Mario series. Should we add a warning template to most every single article in the wiki? -- Son of Suns
 * OK, so, you are saying that slight violence and minor sexual themes are worse than constant use of the "F" word. Yep, that makes a LOT of sense. (Sarcasm)

Enough. This is getting way out of hand. If a gamee script/quote/screen shot/whathaveyou makes use of profanity, it will be included in any copies of said material we use on the wiki. This is an encyclopedia, we do not censer.

And I personally find the idea of a 'warning' a person that he/she may see mean words and icky pics absurd. -- Chris 23:09, 23 September 2007 (EDT)

Many (including myself) think that the Baby Yoshis singing in Yoshi's Story really sound like they are saying a...ole. Should we put that template on these two pages? Glowsquid

Should we have this "quasi-template" on the DK Rap article too? I mean, someone's gonna find Hell offensive. Same goes if we describe Magikoopa's role in Mario Party 8, a bunch of Europeans found his use of "spaz" (or something) highly distateful, with it apparently being profanity over there or something. -- Sir Grodus
 * The word was "spatic", it actually got pulled out of the shelves in the UK because of it, it's an abusive word toward those with learning difficulty, apparently.

Glowsquid

We should do this: F**** instead of adding a template or leaving it out, the f word could be censored, they don't even say it on tv!


 * Maybe not at the times you watch TV, or on the channels you watch. Nothing should be censored in an encyclopedia. - 11:17, 25 September 2007 (EDT)

Vote for Template:Mature
Add Template
 * 1) The "F" word is a very horrible word, people should be given at least a warning about the page.
 * 2) Per DP
 * 3) If this doesn't go through,I at least think it should be censored.( Toadbert101 |[[Image:TBPaper.PNG|30px]]| Give a yell |Sez:) 02:01, 27 September 2007 (EDT)

No Template
 * 1) Time Q
 * 2) Glowsquid As Sir Grodus showed, there's a lot of possibly offensive content in the Marioverse. We woud end up with everyone putting this template on every pages. Heck, Mario himself could be considered offensive to Italians since he's pretty much a stereotype/caricature. Glowsquid
 * 3) Son of Suns - Per what I've said, what Sir Grodus has said, what Glowsquid just said. Articles should not be censored.  Freedom of speech man.
 * 4) - Per SoS.
 * 5) Per Son of Suns and Sir Grodus. --
 * 6) Per, everyone else.
 * 1) Per, everyone else.

Results

It's been four days and just about everyone that cares has cast a vote. Consensus is 7-3 on not using Template:Mature.

As a note, someone stated that, instead of using the template, censoring the words. This is an encyclopedia. We do not censer. However, if anyone feels that we should, please make a Proposal. -- Chris 07:05, 28 September 2007 (EDT)
 * Since the conscensus is to not use this template, shouldn't said template get deleted?

Glowsquid
 * I'm currently running a few searches to see if there are any other articles that it may be used for. If I find none (which I'm sure I won't), I'll delete it. -- [[Image:Shyghost.PNG]]Chris[[Image:Shyghost.PNG]] 07:10, 28 September 2007 (EDT)
 * Thank you. - Glowsquid

Orangeyoshi When you had this vote, I didn't know it was happening. (I'm not even sure I was registered back then!) But then I read this whole page, and I noticed it's true that we should have had a warning template. Everyone who thought so is right, and there's a specific reason why we should have a warning, but it's a little hard to explain. I just want to say, for all of you who voted against the template, I could prove each of you wrong if you wanted me to. But... it's too late. It won't help me at all.

I made a proposal. Go there.

Wait, who won InfectedShroom and Glitchman's proposal? Is it going to get censored?
 * InfectedShroom withdrawn the proposal before it could pass. So yeah, there's no official status on what to do with the swear words. --Blitzwing 18:23, 12 February 2008 (EST)
 * Toadette 4evur took action again before there was any consensus *yawn*. So, are we gonna use the template that Porplemontage proposed? 19:08, 12 February 2008 (EST)

I want to, or we could leave it censored like that. Whichever one you prefer.
 * Or we could just leave it uncensored :P No reason why this option should be excluded. The old proposal brought no consensus, so either there's a new proposal or we follow the admin's suggestion. 20:06, 12 February 2008 (EST)
 * I'd say use Steve template. this way, the article is censored, but the ``offending`` content is still here. The way it's censored as of now just look retarted. --Blitzwing 20:18, 12 February 2008 (EST)

So, has anyone made the template? Does anyone know how to make the template? And Blitzwing, how come you like to use the infinitive form of verbs when the he/she/it conjugation is needed? You just do it 'cause you think it's funny? Or 'cause you know it'll annoy everyone?

Wait, wut? I thought I said to delete it cuz it had expired... The censoring side won by one vote. I didn't withdraw...


 * Apologies, I misinterpreted the comment you left on the proposals page. Anyway, the show-hide template sounds like a nice idea to me. -- 20:23, 14 February 2008 (EST)

Forget it, leave it the way it is, it's better that way.

Uh, no CY. And that's OK, KPH. The hide/show box sounds pretty good. Let's do that.

No, the template should say that the quote contains swearing, so that people know why it's hidden and kids know not to click show.
 * The best solution would be changing the text of the buttom from "show" to "show rest of the quote (contains swearing", however this seems to be impossible due to technical limitations. But adding a text directly into the quoation marks also looks bad. - 18:51, 22 February 2008 (EST)
 * I'd personally try to find a different qoute to post; then delete the current one. But hidng it sounds good. Let's do do it.

But most people don't want to do that, so I'm okay with censoring (which won the proposal, I don't understand why InfectedShroom doesn't want to do it anymore) or the template they have now, but with a notice telling that there's swearing and that's why it's hidden.
 * Didn't you or someone else say that Wikipedia uses such a template? How do they do it? 19:13, 22 February 2008 (EST)
 * We can't properly say who won the proposal, as the wording was modified and both sides were very close. Consensuses aren't made by winning 50,5% of the votes but a remarkable majority. Currently, nothing is decided, so automatically we should do that what doesn't get any complains. And when the show/hide goes okay with everyone, there's no reason to change it. - 19:34, 22 February 2008 (EST)
 * But think about it. Not in the point of view of Cobold or Time Q or whoever is reading this, but in the point of view some kid who has never heard of our debate. He'd se this and say, "What the heck is this "show" thing, and editing mistake?" Not everyone knows about the swear words, just us. No one has any reason to say there's something wrong with putting a note of the swearing in the quote, so that kids (good ones at least) know to to click show.
 * Technically, Majority means above 50%. But it doesn't matter. We do need a warning, though, because as CY said, we at the wiki are the only ones who know about the quote. But as Cobold said, we are unable to do that because of technical limitations... Hmm... I'll try editing around a little...


 * Hmmm... I added something, but I'm sure someone won't like it...


 * "Explicit materials" sounds a little weird. How about just "swearing"? Can I change it?


 * Good. Which is better, "Warning" or "Notice?"


 * Warning is better. ``Notice`` just mean that something is unusual or that you should look at it. Warning is well... a warning. --Blitzwing 20:57, 24 February 2008 (EST)


 * Good!

Yay! (Confetti falls from the sky, balloons are floating up into the air) The wiki is kid-friendly! Everyone agrees on this solution! I'm really glad, when I first came across this page I thought there would never be a solution to make it kid-friendly. And now there is! - 15:50, 25 February 2008 (EST)

Pah, kid-friendly on an Encyclopedia? This Wiki is pathetic. Xzelion tells me that the rules state that cursing is allowed on Articles, just not on Userspace (that said, I'm having a tough time FINDING the rules. ^^;). So, you want to break this rule just to make the Wiki 'kid friendly'? You should get a warning for breaking this rule, actually. All this censorship is pointless. I'm calling for a removal of the "Show/Hide" feature once again, and leaving the article as it was before.

No, not after we've done all this work! Steve said we should do this, he's the founder of MarioWiki, he would not suggest it if it was breaking the rules. And we had a proposal, and this side passed (by one vote, but still passed.) And I don't understand why you're saying this, becuse at the top of this same exact talk page, you said: "OMG!!! IT HAS THE "F" WORD IN IT!!! That is horrible, we shouldn't have that there." And you voted on the vote for the mature template. Now you're saying I deserve a warning? First of all, InfectedShroom did it, not me. Second of all, he shouldn't get a warning because Steve said this is what we should do. Third of all, everyone agrees that this works. How can you say that? 20:58, 25 February 2008 (EST)

First of all, that was back when I was all about the Community, not about the Wiki. I care more about this Wiki being profressional now. Have you EVER seen a profressional Encyclopedia being censored before? What happens if Mario turns from "Kid-friendly fun" to "Violent, gorey horror"? Will you stay at this Wiki and accept the change, or will you leave? The point is, regardless of our focus, a Wiki is a Wiki, and censorship has never been a good thing for it. Second, did you REALLY think I was talking to YOU only? I was talking to everyone who chooses censorship over profressional work. I'm not saying YOU should get a warning, I'm saying all the people who are trying to censor this should get a warning, as it is breaking a rule. Third, everyone agrees on it, but that doesn't make it any less justified if it breaks a rule. But, assuming I haven't ACTUALLY seen the rule itself (Xzelion only told me, I've never seen it), I guess I should stop talking. I can't even FIND the rules. ._.

I agree that the Show/Hide feature should be removed... But the swearing itself should be censored. No matter what the rules say. Rules aren't always right you know, and this rule does not work. This may be an encyclopedia, but it is an encyclopedia based on a series of KID-FRIENDLY games. Having this quote included and un-censored will just cause trouble. Snack 22:58, 25 February 2008 (EST)
 * THAT'S WHAT I'VE BEEN SAYING ON THE FORUM. Glad someone listened.


 * Kid-friendly games...hmm, yes you have a point there. But censoring encyclopedia is...bad, in my opinion. The show/hide option should remain-let's just leave it like that. http://img247.imageshack.us/img247/3473/linkswordmi2.gif Paper Jorge ( Talk&middot;Contributions)&middot; http://img247.imageshack.us/img247/3473/linkswordmi2.gif Also, it isn't so kid-friendly if there's T games in the series (Smash Bros. games and DOnkey Konga games-also E10 rated games)

Yes, Snack is absolutuley right about the "This may be an encyclopedia, but it is an encyclopedia based on a series of KID-FRIENDLY games" thing. That's exactly what I've been trying to say. But this works to protect the quote to and more people like it... so I'm going to settle for this. I don't want to get into the argument again.

I still disagree with the "Kid-Friendly" thing, but, assuming I've only heard about that rule from Xze, and never seen it myself, I'm gonna disregard. For all I know, he could be lieing to me. So, keep the article the way it is, I'll just be sitting over there... =P

LOOK HERE, EVERYONE. This is the MARIOWIKI, not the HALO 3 WIKI. If this was a wiki based on, say, an "M" rated game like Bioshock, people would expect that we would have stuff like this and steer clear. But Mario games are ALWAYS rated E/E10+. There is a MUCH better chance that a young kid could be scarred by this than by going on the Wikipedia, or the Bioshock wikia. GET IT? We always have been a little different; we make our own rules here. OK? It's all right for an encyclopedia like ours to censor this stuff.


 * OMG, there's a huge warning that warns kids. If the kids want to be scared then let them click on show. There. They see what they shouldn't have. Their fault. http://img247.imageshack.us/img247/3473/linkswordmi2.gif Paper Jorge ( Talk&middot;Contributions)&middot; http://img247.imageshack.us/img247/3473/linkswordmi2.gif

I'm talking about if the proposal goes through and the "warning" gets removed. The warning is a great idea and will be just fine.

Thank you 3D. That's what I was trying to say. 20:12, 26 February 2008 (EST)


 * D'oh. http://img247.imageshack.us/img247/3473/linkswordmi2.gif Paper Jorge ( Talk&middot;Contributions)&middot; http://img247.imageshack.us/img247/3473/linkswordmi2.gif

The quote should be fully shown, and the page should be unprotected. This site has porn ads, I don't see why swearing is problem. 21:55, 31 March 2008 (EDT)
 * I don't see it either, but too many people do, as a proposal indicated. 07:21, 1 April 2008 (EDT)
 * I didn't ask for the page to be protected. That wasn't part of the proposal. If someone uncensores it, we change it back and note the results of the proposal in the edit summary.
 * It was protected due to an edit war, some user repeatedly changed "swearing" to "cursing". 06:30, 2 April 2008 (EDT)

God in heaven, this argument is still going on? Are we now arguing about keeping the that ugly as hell template? -- Chris 06:44, 2 April 2008 (EDT)

Please can't we just keep it? We've already discussed this stuff, I've said what I've had to say, the proposal passed (even though it was only by one vote) and Steve, the founder, made this suggestion. So can't we just keep it this way?

Cursing & Swearing
Is there even the slightest difference in the meaning of those words? - 17:27, 28 March 2008 (EDT)

Well, cursing could mean like "You and your family are cursed for eternity". So, just to make it clear. Then again, swear could mean "I swear to god, I didn't do it!", but it's less likely to misinterpret swear than curse.

Yeah, I agree. The kids on the site know what swearing means. But I'm fine with either, as long as the show/hide features get taken away. 17:36, 28 March 2008 (EDT)

...Why aren't we censoring it? It seems unfair to other articles.

I wanted to censor it, but others liked the show/hide better. 21:09, 4 August 2008 (EDT)

Hmmm... someone changed the quote. Is that okay? 21:17, 4 August 2008 (EDT)
 * I'm not really seeing how that quote has anything to do with Hoskins work on Mario. -- [[Image:Shyghost.PNG]]Chris[[Image:Shyghost.PNG]] 03:10, 5 August 2008 (EDT)

How about we trim the quote, so it just says ''' " The worst thing I ever did? Super Mario Brothers." " ''' --
 * Thank you! I thought the same thing when we had a massive, overblown proposal about this sometime back!  If anyone still cares, bring it up here, but its time we stopped letting our views on censorship get in the way here: if no purpose is served, it's not needed, right?  21:57, 10 November 2008 (EST)
 * It should've been done that way from the start. Good idea. 00:37, 11 November 2008 (EST)

Could someone please change the swearing? http://www.mariowiki.com/images/3/3c/Waluigidance.gif Waluigi48 http://www.mariowiki.com/images/3/3c/Waluigidance.gif

You're a little too late buddy.-- 14:03, 21 October 2009 (EDT)
 * We've deciced not to cencor quite some time ago in a proposal. It passed 12-0. - 14:29, 21 October 2009 (EDT)

New Quote
I didn't take the time to read the entirety of the previous discussions, but it seems there was issue over Hoskins' use of profanity. My issue is that the quote is rather deprecating towards the film, which has a fair amount of fan appreciation. Why don't we just get a new quote and side-step both issues? Seems simple enough. Redstar 05:31, 6 March 2010 (EST)
 * Fan appreciation doesn't matter here, it's Bob Hoskins' personal opinion, and it's perfectly fine in an article about him. That doesn't mean we can't put a better quote here though, in case we find one. 06:25, 6 March 2010 (EST)
 * Fan appreciation isn't necessarily my rationale for replacing the quote. It just seems rather counter-productive to provide any sort of anti-Mario series opinion when something more endearing could be provided... For Hoskins, does the quote need to be from the actor, or would a quote from his character (which is the reason for our interest of him on this encyclopedia) work? Redstar 06:28, 6 March 2010 (EST)
 * Why counter-productive? Just because we're a Mario Wiki doesn't mean we must praise everything related to Mario, in fact we should stay neutral and depict things like they are, not like we want them to be - if Hoskins said he doesn't like the film, there's no reason not to put it here. As for your question, we should have a quote either from the actor, or about the actor, or none at all (but that's not really an option here since we already have a suitable quote), but not from his character, that's too far-fetched IMO. 06:38, 6 March 2010 (EST)
 * I agree with Time Q on all points. Also, the fact that the man who portrayed Mario hates the film with such venom is infamously interesting, and I doubt we could find a better quotation that sums up Bob Hoskin's relationship to the series anyway. - 19:38, 7 March 2010 (EST)
 * Anyways, society has become so corrupt that where I live, I don't go one day without hearing the word f*@k or sh%t. Also, it's not like people are never going to hear the word, so why prevent such things. They may not hear it in English, but maybe in their native language depending on where they live. I blame it all on the rap music... and I agree with Time Q and Walkazo.--
 * I wonder if there is a such thing as AntiMarioism or something. @Redstar: In other wikis or wikias there is usually something against that book/movie/video game/etc and they still put it in. There's nothing wrong with that quote, except that we need to replace those swear words with something more appropriate. -

As a professional wiki, we must be objective. There is no reason to replace that quote. -- 20:56, 7 March 2010 (EST)

Censor it, please. If some random guest enters the Wiki and sees this page, they're gonna quit, right? ...Not that my suggestions matter.

This quote is HORRIBLE.We have to remove it!It's not that bad if we remove it!Not every character has his own quote!I mean come on!This quote insults the Marioverse!And he has nothing to do with the Marioverse!This quote is outside the game/Anime and movie!
 * As has been stated many times before, the Wiki should have an objective view on the Mario series (not "Marioverse"), so quotes that criticise something Mario-related have their right to be on here just like quotes that praise it. And while you're right in that the quote is of course not from the movie, it is a quote about the movie by someone who worked on it, so it makes perfect sense for it to be on here, especially considering Bob Hoskins is a real person and not a "character", so it's not really possible to use any quote from actual Mario-related media (his lines from the movie don't work, as he says them in-character as Mario and not as himself).--vellidragon 13:47, 8 April 2010 (EDT)


 * (applause) Culex 23:22, 8 April 2010 (EDT)

Proposal
The quote of this page is horrible.I propose we delete it because it has a horrible word in it.

{{Scroll box|content= Proposer: {{User:Mr bones/sig}} Deadline: April 30 2010, 23:59

Delete

 * 1) per proposal
 * 2) per bro.The quote is horrible.
 * 3) I couldn't believe my eyes! It's horrible. Who put it there in the first place? If we're going to have this rubbish and least censor it.

Leave it

 * 1) - Per reasons above and reasons stated in the one million previous attempts to remove the quote.
 * 2) - The wiki is not censored. Hoskins honestly told his opinion on the making of the movie, which makes for a fitting quote. His rather harsh words aren't against the Mario franchise at all, and not even the film in general, it's just that Hoskins didn't like the circumstances during the movie's production.
 * First: No censoring. Second: The quote is perfect. It perfectly sums up the subject's point of view. Third: If you suggest to delete it, first propose a better quote to replace it with, otherwise we lose information.
 * 1) This is his opinion, it's okay to have an opinion on something. It's not like Bob Hoskins is going to come to the Super Mario Wiki and vandalize this, so it's okay. And he didn't criticize the movie or anything, he just criticized the production (AKA per Grandy). Per all.
 * 2) - Per all.
 * 3) Per my comment above.
 * 4) I am Zero! I was one of the many users ho supported the proposal to uncensor that, it is believed that the visitor has the right to know as much information as they want, and plus nobody said this website is kid friendly. Zero signing out.
 * 5) - Per all. What is wrong with it? A bad word? So??
 * 6) Have you seen what passes as PG13? Censorship is really uneven. They can say "Fuck" only once (the word is used here, because it's the word in question), but other words and expressions can be used freely (which I will not list for fear of offending all of your delicate sensibilities). I feel that any kids who have ever kept a window open in a populated area or have cable TV have likely already come in contact with this word.
 * 7) I only stumbled across this article once and I was curious about such an issue. Kids of today won't probably know about the movie anyway, since it's so obscure. Per all, but I disagree with Tucayo. I'm SUPER sensitive when it comes to bad words. They fail hard. But this wiki doesn't revolve around me, so...
 * 8) - Per all. It's not our job to shelter the little children who may stumble across this article; it is our job to present our readers with as much information as possible, and censoring that quotation would be the opposite of that because, like it or not, it is a valid (and interesting) piece of information, f-bombs and all.
 * 9) - We are an encyclopedia - I have read tons of encyclopedias with this word (and worse) and not one has censored it so why should we? Because we are an encyclopedia that is not about the english language? Because we're not a book? Because we're not important enough? NO, we are an encyclopedia nonetheless, we are a wiki (which is better than a book IMO) and we are more than important to the person who comes on here looking for Bob Hoskins and if they don't want swearing that's too bad for them, some people want realistic quotes. If they don't want swearing don't read the quote or just don't read the article.
 * 10) - It's useless to delete it, because the quote uses the word F**kin' JUST three times. That's not even a quart of the quote itself! If it appeared several more times (ten or so), then it may be able to delete the quote. But if you really don't want it, censor those three words.

Comments
The way it is, this proposal is invalid. You don't state a reason to remove this quote, other than it's "horror", which is not a valid reason. 11:28, 16 April 2010 (EDT)
 * This "horrible word" is a word Hoskins used to give his opinion. We're an objective encyclopedia, so we have no right to decide which words are "horrible" and which are okay - our duty is to depict things the way they are. 11:34, 16 April 2010 (EDT)

Then why doesn't each user give his opinion like bob?
 * Because what we cover is the Mario series, not the fans of the Mario series. Bob Hoskins is an important person related to the Mario series, while user XY is not. 12:04, 16 April 2010 (EDT)

Let's just let this proposal til next sunday okay?
 * Well, I'm just noting that your side does not really have any arguments... oh, BTW, talk page proposals last two weeks, I corrected the deadline. 14:48, 16 April 2010 (EDT)

Why don't we just shorten the quote to exclude the word? It could just be: "The worst thing I ever did? Super Mario Brothers."

A good idea indeed,if we do that,the bad word is gone,and the quote is still doing his job by expressing bob's opinion.


 * Excluding a word is still censoring it. Besides, it won't be the same quote any more; it will be something Hoskins never actually said. We need to be true and factual.

What? He said that, I just got rid of the other stuff in the quote and shortened it.

Fawful's right,he did say that!And it's a full sentence!


 * Yes, but removing it doesn't show his opinion on the subject. The quote is actually quite detailed on what he thought of that movie.
 * Still, though, I'd prefer the less detail one. I'm not at all fond of swearing, and I think we should delete that part of the quote or replace it. If only we could find another quote...
 * Yes, I completely agree with you for the opinion of swearing. I would delete it in no time, if it weren't so detailed and personality driven.

Why can't the words have ********** these types of censoring? Is there something wrong with that? 17:44, 18 April 2010 (EDT)
 * There is. We are an encyclopedia, tehrefore, we present facts, true, unmodified facts. -- 20:38, 18 April 2010 (EDT)

If somebody can find a better quote, it can be replaced; swearing shouldn't be a factor. --

}}

Suggestion
I'm against censoring the quote. I'll just start with that.

On another note, however, I would like to move the quote from the top of the page to the body of the article. I would add a paragraph similar to or exactly like this:

"Though the [SMB] movie has gained a rather large fan following, Hoskins himself despised filming it. 'The worst thing I ever did? Super Mario Brothers.,' said Hoskins, in a Guardian interview, 'It was a fuckin' nightmare. The whole experience was a nightmare. It had a husband-and-wife team directing, whose arrogance had been mistaken for talent. After so many weeks their own agent told them to get off the set! Fuckin' nightmare. Fuckin' idiots.'"

In a separate paragraph, readers are not forced to infer outright that Hoskins was in the movie. With the quote at the top, readers must read on simply to find out that he acted in the movie. It looks better in context; we are an encyclopedia, so we shouldn't just leave our readers guessing on what a certain article is about, especially when the initial reading contains swearing.
 * Good Idea, except where would the quote go? 19:40, 23 April 2010 (EDT)
 * When I thought up the idea a few days ago, I figured it could go between the two paragraphs on the article.
 * It has a large fan following? -- 10:59, 24 April 2010 (EDT)
 * IDK, I just needed a good opener. I might be able to think of a better one, but it's really just the idea that I'm throwing out there. 12:33, 24 April 2010 (EDT)
 * I disagree with your assertion that readers aren't able to tell for sure if Bob Hoskins worked on the movie from reading only that quotation: it opens with "The worst thing I ever did" and goes on to talk about directing, which is pretty straightforward (not to mention the fact that most people probably navigate to this page from other movie-related articles). To make it more explicitly about the movie, we could always link to the film when he mentions "Super Mario Bros.": that'll make sure people don't think he's talking about the game (if that's a concern for you). And, while we are meant to present facts as clearly as possible, I always think of the opening quotation as more of a blurb meant to give readers a quick idea of the character's personality (or in this case, a person's relationship to the Mario series) and at the same time, grab their attention, which the current quotation does very well. Articles also look more complete with an opening quote, so unless you have something good to replace it, I think we should leave our current quotation right where it is for now. -  18:21, 24 April 2010 (EDT)

Here is an idea! What if we censor it like how they censored Snakes on a Plane for T.V.? “The worst thing I ever did? Super Mario Brothers. It was a friday nightmare. The whole experience was a nightmare. It had a husband-and-wife team directing, whose arrogance had been mistaken for talent. After so many weeks their own agent told them to get off the set! Friday nightmare. Friday idiots.” I'm posting this to show how the words are somewhat essential. Without them, it really lacks a lot of oomph. He used those words because he felt the accurately described how he felt about it. It's how he wanted to express himself. If we censor the quote we're also censoring him, and I feel that's disrespectful. Furthermore, I for one and tired of these monkey-fighting snakes on this Monday-to-Friday plane. -- 22:32, 24 April 2010 (EDT)
 * I don't really know if you're serious, but - definitely no. You say censoring the quote is disrespectful, yet you propose to do exactly this. Hoskins didn't say "Friday", so we won't put it there. 04:58, 25 April 2010 (EDT)
 * I agree. What's the big deal with the quote anyway. They already have the word "dumbass" on kid's television shows! Anyways, why prevent someone from reading it. Everyone, I bet, has heard, or at least will hear the word "fucking" (excuse my language) later in life. Like I said, it has become a common society word like the word "the". --
 * (1) Sarcasm and the internet seem to be incompatible. (2) No I was not serious. This is why my entire tone changed above and below the quote. It was in actuality provided to show how in censoring the quote, it would lose something. -- 11:00, 25 April 2010 (EDT)
 * Okay... I'm relieved then ^^ 19:32, 25 April 2010 (EDT)

Why is everyone worried about a f-word. I don't know anywhere where you can't hear a swear. I hear swears like 200 times a day. 11:14, 25 April 2010 (EDT)
 * I'm thinking the assumption is that if we start using bad words we'll all form an indie punk band and dye out hair unnatural colors and become drug addicts. Or something. I've never understood the concept behind "bad words". I always chalked it up to social pretension. People use the word, people want to feel superior to those who use the word so it is deemed "bad" by those who want to feel superior. Sadly those who want to feel superior have more influence and then the idea is adopted and becomes normal. And also kiwi fruit look unusual. -- 12:59, 25 April 2010 (EDT)


 * @Turkishcoffee: Too late for that...But anyway, I agree. So in total, the quote should not be censored. --

@Walkazo: Well, I guess it's a matter of opinion at this point. I think it's quite unclear with no background; despite the fact that the users probably got to the page from anther movie article, we can't be sure. Though it talks about directing, video games, too, have directors. Linking wouldn't help unless the users hovered their mouses on the link. And, again with the opinion, I believe that beginning with quotes in general is a pretty cheap fallback for an attention-getter. They don't have any background behind them in the first place, so they become useless. But it's just my opinion. 20:02, 25 April 2010 (EDT)
 * Face it Mr bones!You hear that word everyday!The quote is too much detailed!And it's hoskins opinion after all.Well, as much as I hate to say this but you guys are right.The quote shouldn't be censored.But i'll do my best to find another one!

Take the quote out completly
Um i'm just saying John what-his-face for Luigi did not have a quote at all so mabe we should permanantly so this proplem could end.
 * Maybe that's because Luigi didn't participate in the guardian intreview...I hate to say this but...The quote is real, detailed so we can't remove it...
 * Not to mention the "problem" isn't even the quote, but people constantly complaining about the quote. "This problem could end" if people were to accept that it's not going to be removed for reasons stated a million times before. John Leguizamo not having a quote isn't a reason for quotes to be removed from other articles that do have them either; if Leguizamo has no quote in his article, someone should add one if there is a relevant one available, not attempt to achieve consistency by removing this kind of content from other pages.--vellidragon 13:51, 13 August 2010 (UTC)

Let's have a show and hide thing saying that it contains swearing. 07:25, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

Replace Quote
What about a new quote to replace the current one? I think the real issue is that having a quote, be it negative or not, outweighs not having one at all. However, the current quote is both outright negative and contains profanity. Surely there's something better to use? In fact, I've found several potential replacements that far better portray Hoskins and the film.

Proposer: Deadline: December 05 2010, 21:52 GMT

Replace Quote with option #1
Suggested replacement #1:


 * 1) - Per proposal

Replace Quote with option #2
Suggested replacement #2:

Keep Current Quote
Current quote:


 * 1) Sigh, look at the reasons for opposing in the other 'Proposal' section. Per all those. Also, that first quote is terrible and has nothing to do with Mario. The second one is nothing special. Anyway, it's just a little bit of swearing. What harm will it do, most everyone has heard a swear word in their life, and this article is off the beaten track anyway.
 * 2) Per MrConcreteDonkey. Plus, the current quote only contains a very low level of profanity, not enough to be shocking for anyone IMO, except maybe for very young children... who can't use a computer yet anyway. The current quote is great and doesn't need to be changed.

Comments
MrConcreteDonkey: Hoskins offered that quote to describe the craziness of the film's production. While he doesn't explicitly mention the film's title in the quote he still discusses the movie and why he came onto it.
 * What the heck? That means nothing? The point is that the current quote shows his true feeling about the movie. Also, please read all of the 14-or-so reasons in the TPP above. 17:39, 22 November 2010 (UTC)