Talk:Peach Blossom

Damage
The official site says nothing about the hearts causing damage. However, should we still state that the hearts cause damage or not?
 * Look at the end of this video: http://youtube.com/watch?v=Zfxo4ThurUw Her Final Smash does do some damage. RedManiac 09:59, 19 October 2007 (EDT)

Incredible Length and Sections
Is all that really needed?
 * In my opinion, it is. I'm trying to find some MarioWiki policy to back it up, but nothing yet.  Here's my arguement:
 * SECTIONS: This article is enormous, like you said. Sectioning it out makes it more visually appealing while helping segment the attack.  The two phase structure of this Final Smash is unseen in any other Final Smash that I know of.
 * EXTERNAL SOURCES: The website description doesn't mention Princess Peach's warp to the center of the stage or the damage delt to opponents. Right now, videos such as the one I mention are our only sources.  A proposal (which will obviously fail) is going to fail because people can put in links to notable YouTube videos.  Linking to the other two sources is just good form when writing articles.  I almost always do it.
 * QUOTE: If you read the whole article, you'll see in the History section that Sakurai's quote is his justification for the attack's inclusion. The attack is not inspired by anything in Peach's history, save a small reference to the "I'm so happy I'm spinning around" thing, which isn't the same as dancing, but the dance is inspired by that, I'm sure.
 * Incredible Length: The Super Mario Wiki is a place for Mario fans to go hog wild and write about minial topics of no real importance to the real world. The fact that we would put a limit on the amount of writing for an attack seems to contradict that.  I could see limitations for items such as the Master of Disguise items, but that was only a consolidation of many pages into one.  The problem was too little information rather than too much.
 * Please comment back, and I should get back to you soon if all goes well with my life... which it might not. Stay tuned.  01:38, 26 October 2007 (EDT)
 * But, something so minor as a simple attack, I don't think you should really go THIS in-depth. Also, that quote really doesn't seem to fit on this article. If you add a quote to THIS article, add one to all the other Final Smash articles. Exteranl Sources, you have a good point there. Get my point?
 * (this was written before your edit)::Not to make this personal or anything, but I found it a little rude that you just deleted that stuff again before I posted my argument. Can we talk about this?  There's really no policy regarding your argument for deletion (based on what you said about the history page, which may have been a joke ;3).  Your arguements are based on the statement, "It's not currently on similar articles on the Wiki, so it shouldn't be here." Yet it is physically impossible for me to do the same treatment for all Final Smash articles at the same time.  This one took me 2 hours at least.  Also, a Wiki is based on building everything up over time, even if that means some articles are left behind while others flourish at a given time.  You shouldn't cut back on my article because you see it as more in-depth than the others.  01:46, 26 October 2007 (EDT)
 * And now my responce to your arguement: How doesn't the quote fit? It's in relation to the article, it's from an official source, and, seeing as the attack is from an in-developement game, the use of a developer's quote is justifiable.  But, if the top space is reserved for characters, why don't we move the quote down to the history section?  Point taken about the other articles, but keep in mind my long edits nowadays are rare.  01:46, 26 October 2007 (EDT)
 * Rudeness: Sorry, didn't mean to come across rude. >_> Quote: OK, but, can we remove it when the game is released? Length: OK, but, I still don't think something as minor as this should be THIS long, but I'll leave it for the time being, and wait for other peoples opinions.
 * Hey, don't worry about it. It's after midnight and you probably just didn't know I was still on.  What I'm thinking about the quote is that we should replace it with what Peach says while performing the attack in the final version of the game if it's notable.  I've moved the quote down there to the history section for the time being, and we can decide on that too with the imput of other users.  Is that okay?  We might want to craft a proposal based on the results of this so that this issue about "how long" can be determined before someone writes something like this.  Oh, and are you okay with putting the external links back for now?   01:56, 26 October 2007 (EDT)  EDIT: Nevermind the bit about the position of the quote... You moved it back while I was editing.)
 * First of all, it isn't after midnight down under. :P The quote can be replaced/moved when the game is released. You can bring back External Links. ;) If we don't get much input here, we can make a Proposal on it. I'll leave the article alone for the time-being.
 * Thanks for your time! I'll pop 'em back in.  02:04, 26 October 2007 (EDT)

All articles should be as long as possible. As long as the information is relevant, well-written, and organized well, any article can be any length. Regardless if the subject is minor in terms og the game, if there is information for it, we should put it in the article. For example, I rewrote the Bowser Crush article, which is about one special attack from one game. A very un-notable subject. However, the article is fairly long because of extra information I found in the official player's guide. As such, this special attack article will be longer than others, andbut that's completely fine. If the information exists out there, we should put it in the wiki. I also want to note that no other article should be taken as precedent on this wiki. Just because other articles don't look like this doesn't mean this one can't look different. In addition, all the other Final Smash articles don't have to look like this one. They will all change in time anyways. -- Son of Suns

Trogga! Trogga!
Okay, Trogga: Based on the Wiki's stance that the battles in SSBB are carried out by trophies based off of the characters (see the "This World..." update on smashbros.com for more, it's acutally backed up by Sakurai), we know that the Peach in the game is not the Peach we know and love, although they... somehow... have the same... personalities... appearances... and everything... Hey, I don't make this stuff up. ;( Anyway, you also know that the world isn't the same if you've looked at the map used in Subspace Emmissary.  There are "key points" from other worlds recreated and placed in there.  Until further notice, I don't want to speculate and call that world some kind of combined dimension, and I'm sure you don't either.  Anyway, that's why I put that in the article.  18:21, 16 December 2007 (EST)
 * I think that's only in the Subspace Emissary mode, not multiplayer (which doesn't really have a plot to begin with). --Trogga 12:39, 17 December 2007 (EST)
 * Very true. Still, you have the issue that Princess Peach of the Mushroom World is not the Princess Peach of the Smash world.  I was thinking that you were right for that reason after I posted my last message.  I wonder if this means we should split the Super Smash Bros. Brawl info from the articles about Mario, Peach, and all of them?  20:27, 17 December 2007 (EST)

Daisy's move, Should we split it?
I think we should split Daisy's move, Daisy Blossom from this page. It has multiple different visual elements, such as key art, that require seperate screenshots, it has different names throughout languages (the key reason why it should be split), comes from only Ultimate and doesn't have anything to do with Brawl and Smash 4 at all. The Smash wiki page is also split. Here is what the page would look like--Memoryman3 (talk) 13:17, October 19, 2019 (EDT)
 * It has a different visual style, but it is otherwise the exact same move. Whether or not it was before Ultimate doesn't really matter, it's already clarified the move is in Ultimate. If it has the exact same information Peach Blossom has, it should just be a name mention on Peach Blossom's page. I added the different names and images, though. 13:38, October 19, 2019 (EDT)
 * Considering the only differences are purely visual, I see no reason to split it when we can just explain how it works on this article rather than having two redundant articles. And no, having a different name doesn't instantly mean it should be split. There have been years of proposals that resulted in merging subjects with different names because they were too similar. -- 13:56, October 19, 2019 (EDT)