Talk:KP Koopa

MERGE
A bit like Mr Bones' Spookum one. I believe this page should be merged with KP Koopas-since only 2 appear in the game and they are characters, it's likely that they are the only 2. They are not a different species, they have just dyed their shells and are not important enough for their own page. According to KP Pete's tattle, "That's a KP Koopa. It's a Koopa Troopa of a slightly different color. Looks like its abilities are just like any Koopa...". @Anyone who opposes: The three KP Koopas in PMTTYD are from the Glitz Pit. They are the only ones. Colour or location does not matter. Are you saying we should make separate articles for Red Koopa Troopas from Petalburg? Or Blue Goombas from W1-2 of SMB? NO! The tattle confirms it (and it is just a tattle for a character (KP Pete)): "It's a Koopa Troopa of a slightly different colour." Not a good reason to be split. It just wears a Shell DYED Gold. And after one page of searching I have found this to be true. From the log about KP Paratroopa: "A Koopa Troopa who's dyed its shell." Therefore, it confirms that they just dyed their shells, and KP Pete and his friends were regular Koopa Troopas once, as with (If any others exist) all KP Koopas.

Proposer: Deadline: September 2nd, 2010 (24:00)

Merge!

 * 1) Per Proposal
 * 2) Merging into KP Koopas seems rational. Better than Koopa anyways.
 * 3) More logical, and merging with KP Koopas means that there should be no arguements over them being a sub-species or just a fancy Koopa fighting team.
 * 4) I agree. But only if it's merged with KP Koopas.

Don't Merge!

 * 1) KP Koopas have different tattle information than Koopa Troopas, are different colors than Koopas, and appear in different locations than them. Plus, they are listed as separate characters. Basically, they are a similar sub-species of Koopa Troopas.
 * 2) Let me ask you something: do you have any proof that they´re just recolored Koopas? No
 * 3) Per Fawfulfury65.
 * 4) Per Fawfulfurt65.
 * 5) - Per Edo
 * 6) - Per the Fury
 * 7) - Per FP27.
 * 8) - Per FF65. All the talk of "species vs. sub-species vs. colour morph" is inconsistent, unscientific and speculative; it's best to simply let Nintendo decide which enemies are unique with its name games.
 * 9) I am Zero! Per all. Zero signing out.
 * 10) - Per Walkazo.

Discuss. You have two weeks starting frooooomm---NOW!
I somewhat don't get this. What is the reason to merge? My spookum one is the japanese name.
 * KP Koopas are just Koopa Troopas who dyed their shells gold, yes? Well, then they are not a sub-species, and there are only 2 seen, meaning KP Koopas are just decorated Koopa Troopas. If only 2 appear in the whole game, then they probably are the only ones, most Glitz Pit enemies have different colours, clothing etc. KP Koopa is not worthy of a page. It's stats are almost the same as a regular Koopa.

KP koopas are memebers of a fighting team? It mens they're characters? Should we merge all of the goomba characters into the goomba article???
 * You don't understand. I'm not planning to merge the characters article, but the species article. The KP Koopa article refers to them as a species but really all it is is a fashion move. KP Pete and his 2 friends probably are the only ones.

KP Koopas are warriors, it's their grade or something. And KP Pete is one of them!
 * Where does it say they are warriors? Anyway, if they are not regular Koopas, why does it say that "It is explicitely stated that KP Koopas have the same abilities as normal Koopa Troopas, and merely differ in coloration"? This is similar to your Spookum proposal as they are just a different colour. And if it is a rank, then it is moreso similar to aforementioned TPP.

@Reversinator: Yes, actually: "It's a Koopa Troopa of a slightly different color." The tattle for KP Koopa and KP Pete is the same even. So FF65, that is a character tattle for KP Pete, so it is meant to be different. Honestly, I am facepalming here. FF65 is wrong because the tattle for King K and KP Koopa is the same. Mentioned everywhere, the only real difference is the colour of the shells. And yet again, should we make different articles for Red Koopas from Petalburg. IT DOESN'T MATTER ABOUT THE COLOUR OR THE LOCATION!!!
 * 1: King K is a notable character. He's minor but, still deserves a article. Like, would we merge Red and Goomba with the goombas? No. There are characters. All characters deserve there own article. Look at the Koopa article. In the infobox (History, first game, etc.) there are character links to koopa characters in the infobox. So we should keep a King K article. 2: location, tattle, and sub-species matter MrConcreteDonkey.
 * @Fuzzipede27: FACEPALMFACEPALMFACEPALM! I AM NOT PLANNING TO MERGE KING K! I'm planning to merge the linked article, KP Koopa, about the species. The location of a species doesn't matter-Koopa Troopas are found all over the place and don't have separate articles for where they are found. The tattle is the same as King K's tattle, and sub-species matters...I think you are talking about King K again. KP Koopas are just Koopa Troopas. They aren't an official sub-species, they just have different coloured shells!

@MrConcreteDonkey: I said KP Koopas don't have the same tattle as Koopa Troopas, I didn't say King K and all them didn't have the same tattle. Also, King K and KP Pete have the same tattle because they are both KP Koopas.
 * First of all, King K and KP Pete are the same person. Second, I said KP Koopa and King K had the same tattle. KP Koopas have a different one because they are characters. 'KP Koopa' is probably just a term coined by King K and friends because their team name and the tattle, which probably got it from the team name, is the only source of the name. 18:02, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Sorry, I haven't played PM2 in a while, and I forgot they were both the same people. Anyways, you have no proof that it is a term made up from King K. The game names them differently from Koopas, so they have to be a sub-species, meaning they must have their own article.
 * The article says that they are just Koopa Troopas who have dyed their shells. That does not mean it's a sub-species. You can't spray paint a raccoon purple and call it a new sub-species. 18:10, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
 * And the name means nothing. What proof do you have that it isn't just a term made by King K? The game names them differently, but I believe it's because they are just nicknames because of the Glitz Pit name. 18:13, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

NOO! The name means everything! How did you know it's a term used by king k or whatever that guy's name is? We need proofs and proofs are in the game!

Nicknames? Soo...All the koopa troopas are nicknamed KP Koopas? NO! I never played PM2, but from what I read in the article, those guys are a fighting team! If you're in wikipedia, are you gonna merge all the football teams into a human article???!

The game itself consider the KP Koopas to be different enemies (tattle log). That they have identical abilities doesn't matter, because they're still identified as different.

Also, Mr bones, please stop making multiple messages in a row. You're getting way too excited over this. --Glowsquid 18:35, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
 * No, Mr Bones. It's the species article, not the team. They aren't confirmed as a species, just as the name of the fighting team. We don't have enough proof to say which one, but they are not a different species. just because they dyed their shells gold.  18:46, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
 * And you still don´t have any proof that the shells are dyed. While the tattle does say that they´re Koopas of a different color, that doesn´t mean that they´re dyed. There are tons of different Koopas with different colors.
 * READ. THE. ARTICLE. It says that on the article. Everywhere it says the only difference is that they have different colour shells. Please rethink your reason, Reversinator, you have been proven to be wrong. 19:00, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
 * It says it in the article, which is wrong.
 * It's in the tattle! 17:05, 20 August 2010 (UTC)
 * If it is wrong then why is it there. It cannot be wrong. Look, most likely the only KP Koopas are, the KP Koopas from the Glitz Pit. I think the article should be merged with the Glitz Pit team or the actual species because just dying their shells gold does not make them a sub-species. They are characters, not a sub-species, and this is confirmed. Why would someone like Walkazo put it there if it was false. The tattle provides further proof as it says they only differ in colour. KP Koopas are not a species and not regarded as characters in the article, so they must be merged into the characters page. And if you think they were born like that, then what about SMW's yellow Koopa Troopas?
 * They must have been born that way, because the game does not say that the shells are dyed. Yellow Koopas, however, are EXACTLY the same as Koopa Troopas, just different colors.
 * So the game doesn't say it. Oh, that must mean they all like spiders and have 18 teeth because the game doesn't say otherwise. You're going by pure conjecture, if they never appear again they why would they be born that way.
 * Rare species? The developers didn't feel like putting more in? And the game is the official source, so if it doesn't say their shells are dyed, you have to assume they were born that way.
 * What the game does or doesn't say doesn't matter. If the game doesn't say their shells are dyed. And if you are right, then yes Yellow Koopas are like regular ones but differently coloured, but so are KP Koopas! So your argument is invalid.

What? What the game says does matter! In fact! If the game says they're not dyed, it means you just made it up and it's fanon!
 * I made it up? It's been there a while and nobody has changed it. 17:05, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

Exactly Mr bones! But seriously, you guys are taking this WAY! to far so settle down.

@GP That's because we're discussing.(the two sides get some ideas, proofs and all that to enforce their opinion!) :)

I hate TPPs. I just wanted to cruise through the pages and vote, but now I'm tangled in discussion. But yes, if it's not in the game, it's fanon. Only official information belongs on the wiki.

Never Mind! I agree with you Mr bones!

"Why would someone like Walkazo put it there if it was false." - I actually can't remember exactly where I got the "dyed" info (I rewrote the page a looong time ago), but I think it was from elsewhere on the wiki. As for the "sub-species" stuff... that's all very up in the air around the wiki: a lot of things are called species or sub-species that wouldn't even be considered different races in real life, and in lieu of any official regulations, I tend to take everything to do with Mario "biology" with a grain of salt nowadays. - 18:33, 20 August 2010 (UTC)
 * WHOA! IMPORTANT INFO HERE! From the log about KP Paratroopas it says: "A Koopa Troopa who's dyed its shell." That is ovbiously all the proof I need! 17:09, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
 * So now I have proved most of you wrong... 09:03, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

So? What if they dyed their shells gold? Still, they're meant to be different from Koopa Troopas. Like their name says. And don't say the name isn't important, because it is. If the original creator wanted them to be different. Then, they are different. We see alot of named Koopa Troopas, like Koopa Koot, and the Koopas Bros.
 * Yes, but what proof do you have that there are more in the world. If there was, then they would have appeared in PMTTYD, after all, Mario did travel everywhere and still didn't see any of them. 10:26, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

I didn't say there are more of those KP things in the world...
 * Exactly, and that must mean that the characters KP Koopas are the only 3 KP Koopas in the world. If their shell is dyed gold, they can't qualify as a different species. Like spraying a raccoon gold and calling it a KP Raccoon. 10:31, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

I read the article. There is nothing that refers to them as a specie.
 * Yes, '''the refers to them as a species. That is the only purpose of this article and it's doing it wrong. 10:36, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

article itself''' No it doesn't! Can you pick me a word that proves that the article refers to those koopas as species?
 * First of all the Koopa Troopa article refers to them as a sub-species, which is untrue as their shells are only dyed gold, secondly, if the KP Koopas article is for the fighting team then what is this for? 10:42, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

Then the koopa troopa article should be fixed, not this! I don't get the second line of your comment.
 * I meant if you don't think this article is about the species, then why is it here? There is already an article about the fighting team and that has all the stats on it. 11:16, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

How about merging this article into this one, instead of the Koopa Troopa article? 12:10, 23 August 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm happy to merge into either. 12:17, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

Yes merge into KP Koopas.
 * Yes, I said originally to merge into either Koopa Troopa or KP Koopas and to be honest now I see that is the best option. 12:21, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

Well, after I saw the glitz pit article. Merging it to the KP Koopas is better! I'm okay with that!

Cool. I just pointed it out as we're unsure of whether they are a species or just a fighting team. This way, we can, as the phrase goes, 'play it safe'. 13:12, 23 August 2010 (UTC) EDIT: Aren't all the oppose votes currently redundant, as it has been decided to merge with KP Koopas, not Koopa?
 * No, they're not redundant: the argument is that KP Koopas (the "species") are separate from Koopa Troopas and therefore deserve their own article (separate from the Koopa Troopas and from the Glitz Pit team) is still valid. Of course, "species" is the wrong thing to call them: they're not even a "sub-species"; the better thing to do would be to call them a "type" of Koopa Troopa, or simply saying they are Koopa Troopas, like the current version of the article (the category notwithstanding), since anything else is speculative and largely unscientific. However, the "species" problem runs through the entire wiki: dealing with it is an endeavour unto itself, and certainly not something to be decided in a TPP. - 18:36, 23 August 2010 (UTC)