Talk:Super Mario 3D World

Something missing
Where's the koopa shell in Supporting Items?
 * It was in the standard Items segment, but it makes more sense for it to be in Supporting Items, doesn't it? I have moved it. 13:39, 21 February 2017 (EST)

I can't edit the article page for some reason?
 * Page is protected to autoconfirmed levels. It could probably be dropped at this point, so long as no one tries to put in false Switch port information.
 * ...Actually, it should probably stay protected for that reason. 18:02, June 13, 2020 (EDT)

Spelling error
You spelt Touchstone as Thouchstone It bugs me. Fix it please
 * Fixed. 14:36, 26 April 2017 (EDT)

disvantage is not a word
maybe try disadvantage? 73.147.234.34 22:30, 3 June 2017 (EDT)


 * You're right. I'll fix it. Thanks.
 * 22:32, 3 June 2017 (EDT)

Special Worlds named after Mario Kart Nitro Cups?
I just found out that the names of each special world in this game (Mushroom, Flower, Star, Crown) correspond to the Mario Kart Nitro Cups. Should I add this to the trivia section, or is this just a coincidence? 15:46, 26 August 2017 (EDT)
 * Not necessarily the case. The usage of Mushroom, Flower, Star, and Crown isn't specific to the Mario Kart series (used in many other Mario Sports games as well). While it does originate from the Mario Kart series, using these items to symbolize ranks is a too common use for it to be specific to Mario Kart any more. 15:54, 26 August 2017 (EDT)

Decide what to do with the tables
This has been discussed on Featured articles/Unfeature/N1/Super Mario 3D World, but it seems that there isn't a good agreement on what should be done with the tables.

Enemies and Obstacles: I think that the enemies and obstacles should be written with galleries instead of tables. This makes it much smaller and easier to read, and it works properly on mobile (although it may be long on phones). The problem with this though is that it removes the descriptions. In my opinion, the descriptions are not necessary for the enemies because a user who wants to learn more about the enemy can just go to the enemy's article. It seems pointless to have large amounts of info on this page when it is covered in each enemy's article, and people are probably looking to see at a glance what enemies are in the game, not scroll through a long list with detailed descriptions of each of them.

Items: However, I do think it is a good idea to have very short (1-2 sentence) descriptions of the items, but is it worth keeping the bad table? Is there a better way to do it?

Per Alex95 below, we could also do standard long tables like the original ones. These are mobile-compatible and provide the descriptions, but are extremely long.

Proposer: Deadline: January 19, 2018 23:59 GMT

Change Enemies/Obstacles to galleries

 * 1) Per proposal - this is my preferred option

Change both to galleries

 * 1) - This could work. This would be my preferred choice.
 * 2) Per Alex95.
 * 3) Per Alex95.

Long tables like the original ones

 * 1) - View comment.
 * 2) Per Alex95. This is my preferred choice.
 * 3) Always was my preferred choice.
 * 4) Per all.
 * 5) Per all.
 * 6) This sounds like the best choice out of everything.
 * 7) I thought that's what it still had, per all.
 * 8) Preferred choice, per all.

Something else

 * 1) Split article. See my comment below.

Comments
One thing I suggested on the unfeature page was a standard table. Nothing complex like we have now, just a simple chart: (Can be adjusted cause I suck at table coding) 22:47, 4 January 2018 (EST)
 * This is very similar to what we used to have on the article. This would normally be the best option for games without as many enemies, but it made this page extremely long, which is why it was changed to what we have now. When the page is extremely long and not very dense, it makes it very difficult for readers to find information quickly and see it easily. There is also enough inconsistency in the images that reducing the size would make many of them too small. I think it could be a good option for mobile, but it would make desktop viewing very bad. -- 23:27, 4 January 2018 (EST)
 * Yeah, length is the main issue with this type of charge, but it's better than being too wide. The page would be rather long so be sure to consider that, voters! 16:52, 5 January 2018 (EST)

How about we just move the enemy section into its own page, then make the table vertical. (Although TBH, the current tables are completely compatible with my phone, but this would solve problems for all.) Article size clearly dictates that if an article is too long, it should be split. Besides, a standard for featured articles is to be well-detailed, which most certainly applies to subjects such as enemies. If we were to remove the descriptions completely, we should do so for many other featured articles for consistency. -- 17:25, 5 January 2018 (EST)
 * I don't think the table would be long enough to necessitate that. The subpages would be tiny. 17:30, 5 January 2018 (EST)
 * Well, we're talking about a long table here. Turning the tables into a simple, vertical chart would help lenghten the page. -- 17:33, 5 January 2018 (EST)

Feature
Why is this article not featured yet?

Taken care of now, looks like. -- 16:36, March 13, 2020 (EDT)

The Level list
It doesn't look good because of the amount of empty space (IMO). Here's my take using W1 as an example: 04:29, January 24, 2021 (EST)


 * Yeah, looking at this proposed table layout, I think this would be way better for the article itself; that said, I'll wait until some others put in their two cents about the matter. --M. C. - Profile | Talk Page 16:05, January 24, 2021 (EST)
 * There's no additional information other than the level numbering and the level name in the current table, so the proposed layout would work better in my opinion. I'd add a newline after the level numbering to separate it better, but other than that I agree with the proposed layout.--Mister Wu (talk) 17:43, January 24, 2021 (EST)