Talk:Mario (film character)

Non canonical ?
Why is this character considered not as the same as Mario ? I know there are differences, but isn't supposed to be the same character ? Is it because it is considered non-canon ? I don't understand.. 13:34, 8 November 2012 (EST)
 * If you feel it should be with Mario you can create a proposal.
 * We had a proposal where it was decided that the movie characters were just to different from the regular versions of the characters to be considered the same.
 * Miyamoto himself claims that the film was purely made for fun. This has nothing to do with the Mario we know. The film just takes ideas from the series and turned it into something a little darker and creepier. 15:03, 8 November 2012 (EST)
 * Okay, I got it. It's better like this anyway :) 16:34, 8 November 2012 (EST)

Full name ? Mentionned in Mario article ?
I haven't seen the film, but it is written here that its full name is given : Mario Mario. Shouldn't we rename this page "Mario Mario" or "Mario Mario (film character)" ?

I have another question : As Mario (film character) is supposed to be Mario (even if they are too different and that we consider them as two different characters), shouldn't we create a subsection in the Mario article about his appearance in the film, where we explain that they are not considered as the same characters, with a link to the Mario (film character) article ? I hope you have understood me.

06:30, 10 November 2012 (EST)


 * This has been discussed here and here before it's creation. Mario (film character) is more distinguishing than Mario Mario, and less of a mouthful than Mario Mario (film character). It would also be consistency with articles like Princess Daisy (film character) or Toad (film character), as no last names are given for them in the movie. Also to answer your other question, a whole different character is being portrayed in the movie, despite the name. The personality, traits and background are different and I think it is a stand-alone subject worthy of its own article.


 * 06:41, 10 November 2012 (EST)


 * I agree with you, but I still think that a subsection in the Mario article (and the Toad/Daisy/Bowser/Luigi/Goomba ones) saying something like this "Main article : Mario (film character) A character named Mario Mario appear in the Super Mario Bros. film. He is based on Mario, but he isn't considered as the same character due to many differences."
 * would be great and not too much. 06:52, 10 November 2012 (EST)


 * There is already an at the top, but perhaps a brief section will be okay.


 * 06:57, 10 November 2012 (EST)


 * I think that it would be useful to explain why we have two separate articles. Imagine that a random guy want to see the Mario article. And he sees the . He goes to the film character article and then : "Why Mario have two different articles ?". But if you think it is redundant, then I won't do it. 07:05, 10 November 2012 (EST)


 * I didn't say it was reduntant; in fact go for it. But I'm just saying to keep the section brief. But it may be good to elaborate on what sets these two characters apart.


 * 07:24, 10 November 2012 (EST)


 * Ok :) But due to the fact that I haven't seen the film, I couldn't do the differences part immediatly. 07:32, 10 November 2012 (EST)


 * I've seen the film. I'll finish it off.


 * 07:43, 10 November 2012 (EST)

Is it a mistake that the Mushroom King film character is considered as canonical and has a non-brief subsection in his article ? 07:59, 10 November 2012 (EST)

Move the page to "Mario (Super Mario Bros. film)"
According to our new policy, the words in parenthesis should be the name of the game if possible (or the name of the media). That's why I think we should move this page to "Mario (Super Mario Bros. film)". 17:47, 1 January 2013 (EST) PS: I meant this proposal, but in fact that's this policy. 16:46, 8 April 2013 (EDT)