Talk:Dorrie

Is Dorrie a specie? In the Mario Party mini-game, Tug-O-Dorrie, there are four multi-colored Dorries. Also in NSMB, it is unlikely that it is the same Dorrie from Hazy Maze Cave.


 * In MP, I think those are just Dorrie platforms. In NSMB, however, I think it could be different, as the Dorries from that game and SM64 look much different than in MPs.


 * Oh no, those Dorries from MP4 are real. The NSMB Dorries do look like their Super Mario DS cousin though. By the way, does anybody have official artwork for him?


 * There are two Dorries in NSMB. --NOT from a Yoshi Seriously, though.

Dorrie has official artwork? -- Sir Grodus

The Dorrie in SM64DS has the same look as the Dorries from NSMB. I'm pretty sure they're a species. - Yoshi Master

Well, I think Dorrie is a species. And if it is, we should probably remove it from the Characters page...

Dorries in Tug Of Dorrie were BALLOONS! Oh my God, they were STINKIN' SEE THROUGH! *calms down*

Ummm... no they weren't... 15:31, 22 June 2007 (EDT)

Um, yeah... Got a picture for proof? (The one on Dorrie's article is too small) -Dodoman


 * There's a larger version of the same image here. (I suppose that sorta makes 'em duplicates... I'll take care of that.)


 * Oh, thanks YellowYoshi. They don't look see-through to me. o_o

So, now we have to rewrite Dorrie's article? Fanfreakintastic. But with that, a suggestion? If Dorrie is indeed a species, we probably don't need to refer to every one as male just because it says so in MPAdvance. Teh Dodo

Is it possible for the Dorrie in Hazy Maze Cave to eat you? I swear that when I had Super Mario 64 I saw Dorrie eat Mario. Dorrie stuck his head down into the water towards Mario, and then Mario lost all his health and just... died. Has tha happened to anyone else here? Snack 11:57, 14 December 2007 (EST)

No... *runs upstairs and tries it*, I'll get back to you.


 * I couldn't get it to work. It's probably just a glitch. And in response to the Tug O' Dorrie pic, they do look rather balloonish. ~DarkZero [[Image:DarkZero Sig.gif]] 07:50, 25 June 2008 (EDT)

I think that happened to me before once tooPikmin theories (talk) 19:02, 5 June 2016 (EDT)

Character
Feels weird to suggest this, since I pushed for Dorrie to be a species, but is it possible that all the Dorries happen to be the same character? I just recently played MP5 and saw how balloonish they look.-- 20:31, 8 December 2009 (EST)
 * Well, in Mario Party Advance, Dorrie is simply called "Dorrie" instead of "the Dorrie" so you might be right.
 * I'd split it. The Dorrie with goggles is probably supposed to be the same character, while the ones from Mario Party are just of the same species. Redstar 20:39, 8 December 2009 (EST)

The Dorrie in Mario Party is based off of the Dorrie in SM64 though. And since the Dorrie with goggles appeared in SM64's remake, it is likely that they are all the being.-- 21:36, 8 December 2009 (EST)
 * While there isn't necessarily a canon to the Mario series, I'm wary of "counting" the sports and recreation games... But, since we do, Dorrie can't be all of the colors, so we should at least consider a general species. Redstar 21:46, 8 December 2009 (EST)

Aren't the multicolored Dorries in MP5 balloons?-- 22:25, 8 December 2009 (EST)

Gender
I thought Dorrie was female. The name is feminine and I thought a source (forgot it; maybe it was the player's guide?) referred to it as female. Oh, and I'm not talking about Mario Party GBA. 21:29, 2 August 2010 (UTC)
 * That's exactly what I thought too. If only we still had the Super Mario 64 game guide. 23:33, 2 April 2013 (EDT)
 * Well the game itself refers to Dorrie as he and the game usually takes precedent over game guides.

Dorries (species?)
There's multiple dorries, they're all on this page, so should we make all the dorries into their own page and this one separate, or make all the dorries this page collectively? Chat Man (talk) 14:58, 28 October 2017 (EDT)
 * I know there are multiple Dorries in Super Mario Odyssey, but do other games have multiple Dorries, too, like Mario Party? 15:00, 28 October 2017 (EDT)
 * Tug-o-Dorrie has multiple Dorries at once (one to carry each player). 15:32, 28 October 2017 (EDT)
 * Those aren't actual Dorries, though. You can see the joint connections. 15:36, 28 October 2017 (EDT)
 * Oops, didn't see that. Looks like Super Mario Odyssey is the first time multiple Dories show up at the same time then. 15:43, 28 October 2017 (EDT)
 * Multiple Dorries previously explicitly appeared in the main series right in New Super Mario Bros. for Nintendo DS, where there are different-sized ones you can ride. Mario Party Advance, however, does have a Dorrie as an NPC, but this was done to several others that are usually species. That one should have an article like those other Mario Party Advance characters; other appearances seem to be inconclusive and can easily be given the same treatment as the Unagi and Klepto articles, which also started off as one each in Super Mario 64. LinkTheLefty (talk) 15:48, 28 October 2017 (EDT)
 * Apparently, the blue one in Odyssey is referred to specifically as "Dorrie" while the other ones are "Dorries," ie as "a Dorrie." I think? Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 22:37, 28 October 2017 (EDT)
 * I actually just now reached the Lake Kingdom, so I'll keep an eye for that if true. Didn't get the guide so I have no idea how it's referred to there. LinkTheLefty (talk) 23:25, 28 October 2017 (EDT)

I say we remove any instances of other Dorries from this page, and make a separate page for the species as a whole. Chat Man (talk) 22:40, 28 October 2017 (EDT)
 * I also don't recall the NSMB ones being differently-sized from each other, but then again, their levels aren't back-to back.... Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 23:04, 28 October 2017 (EDT)
 * Well, the Dorries in NSMB are different sizes. The first one being as tall as Mario, while the second twice as tall as Mario. 23:19, 28 October 2017 (EDT)
 * Does singular Dorrie have a definable personality? What exactly makes it more worthy than Unagi and Klepto of an entirely separate article? Not every creature by itself is a character; after all, according to Nintendo's current story, Yoshi isn't a character. I just don't think it's wise making more articles with an inevitable "possible appearances" section if it can be helped. LinkTheLefty (talk) 23:25, 28 October 2017 (EDT)
 * It's more valid that every stinkin' MPA character getting their own page, I mean why do they get pages but not the two Goombas from the Mario anime? It's about as valid.... Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 23:34, 28 October 2017 (EDT)
 * It's because Hulu and Goombob and Coach and others all get articles. When all of them have just as much screen time, dialogue, and general interactivity, if not more, then a single name should not be the deciding factor (and they do have names, albeit generic ones). 23:38, 28 October 2017 (EDT)

Now, I'm no expert on Dorries but I would make a page for Dorrie (Character) which would include information on the Dorrie from Hazy Maze Cave in 64/64 DS, the Dorrie from NSMB and the Dorrie from the Lake & Mushroom Kingdoms in Odyssey. The Page Dorrie (Species) should include all other Dorries Including the Crazy Cap & Mario Party 5 Dorries. The Mario Party Advance Character should have its own page however. Seandwalsh (talk) 00:26, 29 October 2017 (EDT)
 * Presuming the solitary Dorrie from Super Mario 64 is taken as a character appearance, what links it to the New Super Mario Bros. and Super Mario Odyssey Dorries besides generic appearance? LinkTheLefty (talk) 00:36, 29 October 2017 (EDT)
 * It was treated as an individual back then and recycles the model directly from 64 DS? I don't know. Size didn't stay consistent for Bowser in that game either. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 00:49, 29 October 2017 (EDT)
 * Bowser's size changed because he was powered up when revived by the cauldron, not to mention multiple Dorries did appear across different bodies of water in the same level. Point is, saying that these are all appearances of the character Dorrie is playing it far too loose. Additionally, why even have a character article if the Mario Party Advance Dorrie will be arbitrarily split from that as well? It will literally just be Super Mario 64, minus the Mario Party Advance appearance which is actually a character depiction (even getting its own cast roll ending and all), plus an overlapping guessing game for basically everything else that this article already covers adequately. It's really unneeded for something that realistically only amounts to a minor writing inconsistency. LinkTheLefty (talk) 01:38, 29 October 2017 (EDT)
 * Soooo....what is your position on how it should be handled then? Keep them merged? Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 02:07, 29 October 2017 (EDT)
 * Right now, it's to keep the article in one piece except perhaps for the Mario Party Advance appearance, for consistency with those characters as well as other Super Mario 64 creatures such as Unagi, Klepto and Fwoosh, who are all in the same boat as Dorrie. At this point, our default option should be splitting a "(character)" article off of the species, not the other way around, especially considering most such articles are increasingly appearing to be in legacy status if anything (that, and our guide source implying singular Dorrie also obviously writes the likes of Ukkiki, Sushi, Bub and Bubba in singular tense, even though there was two of them each in-game). LinkTheLefty (talk) 10:30, 29 October 2017 (EDT)

Besides the generic appearance there's the fact that the ones I think should be on the page Dorrie (Character) are in most cases referred to simply as "Dorrie" rather than "A Dorrie". There's also the fact that they're blue but that might just be a common colour for the species, similar to how green is a common colour for Yoshis or Red is a common colour for Toads. Seandwalsh (talk) 00:54, 29 October 2017 (EDT)
 * I think as small amount of appearances as are here, that may not be necessary, especially with the ambiguity of some. I may propose that the MPA articles be re-merged, as they're relatively short with information in what can be easily put in the articles, and from a very obscure game to boot. There's been talk to re-merge Mouser (The Super Mario Bros. Super Show!), after all, and Klump (character) probably should as well, as manuals treat the species as one individual typically. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 01:16, 29 October 2017 (EDT)
 * Unless you're also planning on merging Hulu and the rest, no. Merging them just makes it that much harder to find information. Shall we merge every NPC to their species' page and save people the trouble of having to look for them? Also, what relevance does the obscurity of the game have when it comes to making articles? Every named character gets an article regardless of where they come from. You don't get to just write them off like that. 02:15, 29 October 2017 (EDT)
 * Hmm, lemme think, other generic individuals without articles..... Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 02:27, 29 October 2017 (EDT)
 * First of all, that doesn't respond to anything that I said. Second, something being inidiviualized is not, in and of itself, enough for something to receive a separate article. It involves the character's role in the story and gameplay (especially in comparison to other characters). This is why we're fine with giving articles to subjects that have no official name. All of that's a moot pint anyways, since their generic names are very much used as proper names for them, and a single name shouldn't be the single element that causes a subject to not get articles. If you tell me that Goombob deserves an article and Goomba doesn't deserve an article solely because of their names, then I'll call that ridiculous. Third, what if I put forth that somebody of the examples you linked to should receive separate articles? What then? Tradition alone is a terrible reason to do anything. Fourth, your examples are kinda hard to fully appreciate if you're only willing to give a vague and sarcastic comment about them. 02:35, 29 October 2017 (EDT)
 * I wouldn't call it ridiculous. More depth to my statement? I don't see why the individual LaKEEtu in Super Show needs no more article than some random squid thing and is instead lumped with the LAKihtus. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 02:38, 29 October 2017 (EDT)
 * Can you elaborate on why it isn't ridiculous, especially when you're again not responding to the majority of my points? 02:40, 29 October 2017 (EDT)
 * I believe I have responded to most of your points. A character with a generic name who has an important role and decent screen time has more right to have their own page than "someone you talk to in one game and oh yeah they given you a minigame thing. And yes, the generic named ones do'' have less reason to have their own articles, especially given there apparently is no central "Yoshi" character anymore. Apparently a lot of species just have members with the species name, and appearing in one instance for a few minutes should not make it gain an article if an important, lengthier instance in another won't. It's arbitrarity, and that's bad. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 03:25, 29 October 2017 (EDT)
 * You still haven't touched on the uniquely named characters in Mario Party Advance whose roles are equal to those of the generically named (but still named) characters, nor my proposition about giving articles to the examples you listed, nor did you actually go into detail about your examples (I still don't know how Yurarin Boo and Faster Than a Speeding Penguin relate to this), but regardless. On the topic of examples, what are you talking about when you mention someone who "has an important role and decent screen time"? An important role and decent screen time in relation to what, and in what context? Also, we clearly still have a page on the individual Yoshi, as we do with Toad, Birdo, and others, so regardless of how things are being set up today, that point is meaningless. Also, arbitrary in what sense? Are you saying that it's not arbitrary to only give articles to pages with obviously unique names? That completely ignores the possibility of giving articles to subjects who aren't named at all, despite the notable role they play. How is that not arbitrary? 14:08, 29 October 2017 (EDT)
 * OK, I've had time to think about it all day, and can see both sides of this. Hulu is sorta a different case, due to being the sole female Shy in official material, as well as her unusual color scheme, but then again, Thwomp and Whomp are also valid due to enemy versions appearing in some minigames. I'll stop pursuing this now. For now, anyways. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 23:29, 29 October 2017 (EDT)

We should just alter this page to make it for all dorries collectively Chat Man (talk) 01:42, 29 October 2017 (EDT)
 * I say we leave it for the Dorrie character. We can easily say "members of his species" if the yellow and purple ones aren't explicitly called Dorrie, and if they are, just convert the whole page to a species page. Not to mention, three games have had multiple Petey Piranhas, but we don't change the whole page to turn him into a species. 03:30, 29 October 2017 (EDT)
 * From what I can tell only one did, and it got split. Puzzles & Dragons....I'm not sure how to qualify it, as I don't quite understand the gameplay, and Super Mario Sunshine, the episode title outright states it's the same specimen. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 04:00, 29 October 2017 (EDT)
 * I was actually referring to Puzzles, Mario Hoops 3-on-3, and Mario Sports Mix. In these 3 games, identical-looking Petey characters appear on the screen at the same time. (For Puzzles, I understand it as random-enemy battles, but if you could have enemies as your party members; see how Petey could end up in your party and as an enemy.) MarioComix (talk) 05:13, 29 October 2017 (EDT)

Somebody make this a talk page proposal, it'll make this easier (also the dorries in mario oddessy are refered to as "Dorrie". Chat Man (talk) 14:13, 29 October 2017 (EDT)
 * I've reached Lake Lamode, and the game certainly makes it out to be that Dorries are a species, even when there's only one in Lake Lamode. MarioComix (talk) 05:02, 31 October 2017 (EDT)

There's two in Lake Lamode, and whatever happened to this page is... weird, did we ever come to an agreement? Chat Man (talk) 00:49, 2 November 2017 (EDT)

I'm not sure what happened, but we can't leave this page like this it's... stilted, yeah that's the one. Chat Man (talk) 00:07, 6 November 2017 (EST)