MarioWiki:Featured articles/N1/Grubba

Support

 * 1) -- An extremely detailed article that contains a long biography on Grubba, as well as a "Powers and Abilities" section for when he transforms into Macho Grubba. The personality section describes how Grubba first appears as well as the side-effects of what his shallowness did to him. It also contains a fair amount of images, as well as good intro.
 * 2) Wow. This is a great article for being in just one game- a series of great articles too (articles like Gus.)
 * 3) per all, this is a very good idea k.
 * 4) - Once again, Stoobs does not fail to blow me away. Congrats for a great article!
 * 5) This article is just epic. Great job St00by!
 * 6)  Yes, I agree. This article is very well-written. Especially the personality part. You described Grubba's personality a lot better than I did. Nice job.
 * 7) - I totally did some massive edits on this article. And Stooben rewrote most of it, which is why it's good, as it's been Stoobified.

Oppose

 * 1) - The article has several low-quality images.  The shots need to be of higher quality so that you can actually make out the characters when you enlarge the image.  (Also, some background questions need to be resolved on the bottom of this page.)  Also per Stumpers' comments below, that there is POV in the Personality section.

Comments

 * Thanks for the compliments, guys, I really appreciate them! :D 21:54, 17 January 2009 (EST)

This is a wonderful article. I have several questions/comments, and depending on the answers, minor changes to the article may be required.


 * 1) In the background section, there is no mention of the power draining machine until it is used on Prince Mush. If I didn't know the story of the game, I would be very confused.  It just appeared out of the blue in the article.  It should be mentioned earlier in the article where this machine came from, or at least that it existed.
 * 2) The article says that Grubba gave Mario a thirty coin gift for unknown reasons. I always thought it was a bonus for Mario reaching the Major Leagues (like a company bonus).  Am I totally off-base or is there evidence to support my idea?
 * 3) What does the "Double Attack?" column in the Powers and Abilities section mean? That should be explained in that short paragraph prior to the chart.
 * 4) Could you explain the "slight arm movement" topic in the Physical Appearance section? I'm not sure what you are trying to get at...
 * 5) And from the Trivia section...what's a "Grubber?"

--


 * 1) Well, since I'm the one who added that, I guess I could go ahead and explain. "Grubber" has many meanings, and among all those meanings is a slang term, which means to "eat" or "feed", and that's most likely referring to the fact that Grubba would "snack" on other peoples' energy (as he worded it when he transformed into Macho Grubba).

--

Since SolarBlaze was kind enough to answer the fifth point, I'll answer the other four.
 * 1) I looked through my game guide again and found two tiny sentences that roughly explained the origins of the power-sucking machine. Hopefully I did okay at writing that.
 * 2) I apologize for that. I own both a glitched version of the game &mdash; which contains alternate text, battle sequences, and textures than the regular version &mdash; and the original version. I got the text between the two mixed up, so you are right about it being a gift for making it into the major league. It wasn't a company bonus, but it was a sort of encouraging gift provided by Grubba.
 * 3) "Double Attack" is an official term referring to an enemy being able to attack both Mario and his partner in one shot. I added a brief note under the table explaining the term, in case anyone doesn't know what it means.
 * 4) To be completely honest, I have no idea why I put that there. Then again, I was editing that at around 4:00am, so that probably explains it. :P

03:16, 18 January 2009 (EST)

Wow this met requierments in 1 day?


 * 1) Thanks.
 * 2) Thanks.
 * 3) Thanks.
 * 4) Okay, I was actually referring to that whole paragraph about the arm movement. I'm not sure why that topic needs to be mentioned.
 * 5) Thanks.

=) --

Lol, Stooben you were writing about how good the article is and I chuckled for obvious reasons. (But it certainly is very good)

I don't want to oppose and remove the FA status, but here's several complaints: much of the story is told from Mario's limited point of view, not including the backstory. Too much detail is given to Mario. Instead of focusing on Mario's actions, we should be focusing on Grubba's, like noting that Grubba is implied to have sent the threat to Mario, incapacitated Andy and that other fighter, and so on. We should also reveal Jolene's intentions from the get-go. There's a problem with the writing style that is sort of hand-in-hand: it's written like a story rather than an encyclopedia. Also, shouldn't the abilities of Macho Grubba go solely on Macho Grubba's page? On this page, I would think we'd want to just say, "Grubba is physically weak due to old age without the assistance of his power-sucking machine. However, with the machine he can transform into Macho Grubba, who has a variety of powers and abilities at his disposal." 15:05, 19 January 2009 (EST)
 * The focus given on Mario is, (to me, at least), still giving a heavy amount of focus on Grubba's actions. Like, the sentence explaining when Mario made it to Champion status, it says that he was stationed in the Champ's room that day; directly afterwards, it explains how he is directed by "X" to go find the ghost in the room &mdash; which is actually Grubba talking in his office. That sentence explains that Grubba, while talking to himself, was overheard, which lead to his secret being discovered. While I do admit that many sentences show focus on Mario, they explain his perspective of Grubba's actions, since Grubba's perspective is never seen. About the "Powers & Abilities", I like your example. It could explain how Grubba has no power in his normal state, and then could have a link saying, "for more information, see here". The "here" would link to a section of Macho Grubba's article explaining his powers and abilities. 21:10, 19 January 2009 (EST)
 * I'm hoping that someone uploaded chapter 3 onto Youtube (I'm going to look for it now, I think) and that with careful analyzing I can figure out Grubba's actions. I'll take another look and see what I can do for the article.  21:52, 19 January 2009 (EST)

Stumpers' List o' Woes
 * 1) We need tattle data for him. Otherwise, we should put on a "tattle data needed" tag, and thus the article cannot be featured.
 * 2) Currently, the physical description section does not offer any information that cannot be glazed from looking at the artwork at the top of the article. Unless someone protests, I'll remove it.
 * 3) The personality section makes claims about Grubba having paranoia - something that he did not have. He was actually very level headed throughout.  It also gets POV when saying that Grubba was a "good guy."  Yes, he is jovial and kindly so long as you don't get in his way, BUT... I hardly think it is our place to say whether a character is a good guy when they are an antagonist to the series' "good guy," Mario.

Thanks for listening and please post any complaints about my rewrite. 17:12, 20 January 2009 (EST)


 * I actually like the Physical Description section because it compares Grubba to other Clubbas and Tubba Blubba, something that is not obvious from the picture (they may not know what either one looks like). It should stay.  And the only "POV" we can really include is claims made by Goombella or other characters in the game - essentially, how other characters view Grubba. --
 * True, but I don't believe we need to describe what he is wearing, for example. I didn't mean Goombella's POV, by the way.  If it is Goombella's point of view I've found, it should be noted as such.  19:25, 20 January 2009 (EST)


 * Oh okay. Yeah, I really don't have much opinion on the appearance section besides comparing Grubba to other Clubbas - that's interesting.  We should know Grubba does wear clothes unlike other Clubbas, but whether all his clothing should be described is subject to debate.  And yeah I didn't mean to imply that you thought that.  I just wanted to point out that some level of "POV" is acceptable, as long as is is the POV of the game. =) --

Let's just say that Stumpers rewrote the article since he made it look better than I did. :D (No, that is not sarcasm.) 20:36, 20 January 2009 (EST)
 * Yeah, but you did the hard part of writing what I rewrote! I grabbed so many factoids mentioned in your original version that it was purdy darn tootin' easy! Thanks for doing it, Stooben!  And it was my pleasure to rewrite it!  21:58, 20 January 2009 (EST)
 * Thanks! I guess teamwork is the key to success! =) 22:27, 20 January 2009 (EST)

Wait...so Grubba was never champion of the Glitz Pit? --
 * To the best of my knowledge, he was. Unless there's some lost test somewhere...? 23:31, 20 January 2009 (EST)
 * Well according to the article now, he was the creator and manager of the Glitz Pit and never a fighter there. What is right? --
 * I actually found the game's script and went through it. However, the script did not include the side conversations like those in the bar or Bandy's observations.  However, according to what Grubba actually says to Mario, he was a martial arts fighter and became manager after he could no longer fight.  The Glitz Pit is a "combat sport" arena.  I'm trying to remember if the Glitz Pit is explicitly created by him, but I do know this from the script: Jolene's little brother, Prince Mush, was the FIRST champion, so it's a very new arena.  No previous owner is ever mentioned.  When Mush disappeared, Rawk Hawk became the champion of the pit, followed by Mario.  So, unless we want to say that the sixty-year-old Grubba could defeat Rawk Hawk, Mush's rival, in battle, then no, he was not a champion of the Glitz Pit.  About the images, there is only ONE image of questionable quality (remember our images are supposed to be low resolution for them to be fair, legal use), but we must consider this regulation: "…include a reasonable number of images of good quality if said images are available."  Feel free to prove me wrong by finding a higher quality image, but I believe that's as high of quality that you're going to find.  So, unless you feel that you can obtain a better image of Grubba defeated or can name a website that has one, I'd like to request that you remove that part of your oppose.  The other part is a very good point, though.  13:44, 21 January 2009 (EST)


 * Why would the arena be new if Prince Mush was the first champion? Grubba could have fought Prince Mush when they were both younger, thus becoming the champion.  I have no idea if he was champion or not though...we should investigate by checking some of the other comments from characters.  That fact was on the wiki for a long time so maybe it has some credibility.  About the images, a number of users here have captured images directly from the game, creating high quality but low resolution screenshots.  So the images exist in the game, someone just has to get them.  And it's not the opposer's job to fix up the article, but the supporters, so I don't have to get these images.  I propose that the images either be replaced or completely removed, then I will remove my objection. --
 * Length of time that a fact has been on the Wiki means nothing. You'll remember that for a long time the Wiki believed the television shows, comics, and multiple other alternate media sources were to be considered, "alternate canon."  Obviously, as you now admit that is not true, but for quite some time it was accepted as fact because it had been on the Wiki for a long time.  As such, I wouldn't consider length of time something is on the Wiki to imply any credibility.  This may sound offensive, but please do not take it as such: You are opposing an article crafted and supported by two very highly reputed bureaucrats because an image is not of high enough quality for your liking.  The image is high enough quality for people to tell what is going on, especially with the image caption.  As much as I appreciate your concern, I find it unrealistic to expect myself or the other supporters to take 5 or more hours of our lives to play The Thousand-Year Door until we defeat Grubba, just so we can retake a screenshot that you want retaken, even though it does not violate policy.  I would rather spend those five hours rewriting other articles than fixing a concern, which as I stated in my previous comment is largely unwarranted.  Additionally, these high quality screenshots you mention are taken through emulators or video recording gameplay.  It's hardly fair to expect users to illegally download a ROM or pay large sums of money for a ROM ripping machine or a video recorder because you want one image to be of higher quality.  18:07, 21 January 2009 (EST)


 * Yeah that's true. We still need to figure out if Grubba created the Glitz Pit, and if he didn't, if he was ever a fighter at the Glitz Pit.  For all we know, Prince Mush could be sixty years old as well (perhaps even "preserved" by the Gold Star).  Who knows?  Still we need to figure that out to remove possible speculation.


 * And I don't expect you to go find higher quality images unless you want to. I am saying that if you don't, the images should be removed.  They detract from the quality of the article for their poor quality and thus are not appropriate for an FA.  It's perfectly fine to have one or two images.  And the oppose vote is perfectly in-line with FA policy.  The FA policy states: "…include a reasonable number of images of good quality if said images are available."  If images of good quality are not available, then they don't need to be included. --
 * The image is of high enough quality to do its job, and that is to augment the article, which it does. That is the central part of my argument and you have not addressed it, instead repeating that the image is of "low quality" according to you and you alone.  The fact that you feel it is not of high enough quality when Stooben and I both approve of it should not be grounds for not featuring the article.  The policy does not say, "...include a reasonable number of images approved by Son of Suns if said images are available."  I don't know, perhaps the policy needs to be rewritten so that this dispute we're having can't happen again, just like I proposed we put a character limit up instead of talking about the notability of the topic.  However, if I take down this image we are setting a bad precedent.  Think: if a bureaucrat blocks one of the Wiki's best articles because of an image he doesn't like, and another bureaucrat complies with that block, what's to stop other users from doing the same?  Instead of focusing on the content of the article, we'd be moving the focus to whether or not every single who cast a support/oppose vote thinks all the pictures are of high enough quality.  I believe it was while you were retired, but one user once blocked an FA because its images had small logos in the corner.  That was his idea of a low quality image.  Of course, that oppose was disputed and taken down because it was one user's OPINION on something that didn't matter compared to the good content of the article.  Why did we do that?  Two reasons: (1) The article was well written and deserved to be FA. (2) We didn't want to set a precedent.  As I mentioned, the Wiki supported my proposal that made one of the FA rules less subjective to prevent people from being able to block any article they pleased for reasons that weren't important.  We're in the same situation now.  18:52, 21 January 2009 (EST)


 * I feel the images don't augment the article but make it of lesser quality because of their inclusion. The images are blurry and you can't actually make out all the characters in the screenshots - that's why they are of low quality.  And since when has Stoobs explicity supported the images in the article? And the FA policy does not say "only include articles that Stumpers thinks are FAs."  FAs are completely subjective - there is no objective standard for what is high quality and low quality.  That this article is "one of the Wiki's best" is as OPINIONATED as me saying the images are of low quality.  Images are part of the content.  Everything on the page is part of the article - everything has to be of high quality.  Plus you still have to prove Grubba created the Glitz Pit.  --
 * Stooben said it on the image's talk page, right above your comment that you didn't like the image. Son of Suns, do you realize what we are doing?  We're good Wiki buddies and we're starting to come to blows over such as small point.  I feel as though you are avoiding the key points of my argument, and I'm sure you feel the same way about me, so let's end this before it escalates any further.  I accept blame for my role in this and apologize for letting it go this far.   I found myself writing and rewriting a message to refute you, but I finally deleted it because we were working towards the same goal - perfecting the Wiki.  It would be stupid of me, and it was, to fight with you over one image.  Whether this article is featured or not isn't important to the grand scale of the Wiki, really.  Let's agree to disagree on this point, and let's think about objective ways the judge the "good quality" of an image to avoid this issue in the future.  In terms of this article, let's base our decision about the image on other people's input, not just our own.  You can remove it for now if you'd like, but let's make sure Stooben is okay with that.  20:09, 21 January 2009 (EST)