Template talk:Species infobox

This should be only used on Major Species in more than one game, or something we don't want articles to be over crowed with templates like say if we added it to the Gloomba article. Or maybe not to be used on Sub Species.
 * Also I'll start adding these tomorrow.


 * This template will get way too big for a lot of major species. Just think of all the notable Goombas, all their sub-species, and all their affiliations throughout the years.  That's why we have templates and lists at the bottom of the articles. -- Son of Suns

"Orgin"
The variable "species-orgin" and the description "Species Orgin" (missing an i in or i gin) has been used on all species pages for almost a year and nobody noticed? I don't think it's a good idea to edit all sub-species pages to correct that, maybe we should keep the variable name and just change the description to origin? - 12:54, 4 September 2009 (EDT)

Expandable
I'm not good with templates. Is there a way to allow the sub-species and notable members sections to become collapsable?
 * Never mind, I found out. It's with |expand=expandable

Derived and Parent species
I'm a bit curious if this refers to a design standpoint, a biological standpoint, or a mixture thereof. If it's a design standpoint, would it actually make Rocky Wrench the "parent species" to Monty Mole? Should Koopa be listed as a derived species of Shellcreeper? The Smash Wii U/3DS stated they're the "ancestors," after all... Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 22:33, 8 March 2018 (EST)
 * I have done the thing with the Koopa and Shellcreeper, since it's outright stated in a game, but I'm still curious over the exact rules regarding the meaning of this. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 01:36, 11 March 2018 (EST)
 * As far as I know, last time Nintendo made an article about something reminiscent of biological affiliation was on of the Perfect Ban Mario Character Daijiten/Perfect Edition of the Great Mario Character Encyclopedia, like 24 years ago. From what I've seen, the best we'll ever get now is that the member of the Turtle Tribe are turtles, that Glydon is similar to flying lizards, that Draggadon is a dragon, that Plessie is a dinosaur and so on... so it makes sense to associate from a design point of view, specifying the nature of the association. In the case of SSB4 we can just report the text and the affiliation as is, the problem is that the original text was improperly translated (or maybe they went with the PAL terms, because in Italy Koopas are the Koopa Troopas, while Bowser Jr. is sometimes rather described as a little turtle even in made-up parts). It's obvious that Koopa Troopas are based on the previous Shellcreepers due to their shared behavior and design, but most other members of the Turtle Tribe pretty much only share being turtles from a design point of view.--Mister Wu (talk) 07:47, 13 March 2018 (EDT)

Simplify terminology to take into account different enemies that are actually of the same species
Cases like those of Flutters and Baby Cheeps show that sometimes members of the same species that are part of a subgroup (e.g. baby version, grown-up versions) might still be on separate pages for various reasons, including having own name and peculiar appearance. For this reason, I think we should remove the species parts in the various parts of the infobox so that we no longer imply that being on different pages always means that they are different species. After all, Related, Derived and Parent should still be clear enough. Should we go on updating the template? Are there other changes you think might improve the template?--Mister Wu (talk) 08:32, April 8, 2019 (EDT)
 * I personally like the word "entity" with this, as it's not as vague as not having a noun at all, but would describe any relevant subject well. I also find that there potentially should be a section for a "sister entity" like with the case of Spoing and Sprangler, where they are clearly partners of some sort, but lack any sort of hierarchy between them, and simply listing them as related alongside Scuttlebug seems a tad off. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 10:48, April 8, 2019 (EDT)

After a discussion we had, these are changes that can be implemented to avoid mentioning species:
 * Reanme Parent species to Variant of
 * Rename Derived species to Variants
 * Rename Related species to Comparables
 * Add a Relatives field for particular cases in which none of these fields are appropriate

Comments are welcome, if nobody is against these changes, they will soon be implemented.--Mister Wu (talk) 18:58, August 3, 2019 (EDT)
 * I think comparable should be singular. So, for example:
 * Goomba:
 * Variants: Paragoomba, Hyper Goomba, etc
 * Relatives: Galoomba, Goom, Goombo, etc
 * Comparable: Masked Ghoul
 * Strollin' Stu could potentially fit in "relatives" or "comparable." It's not a perfect system, but it's better than what we currently have IMO Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 22:40, August 3, 2019 (EDT)


 * Wouldn't it take an insane amount of work to rename all of these? Results May Vary (talk) 22:43, August 3, 2019 (EDT)
 * For the renamed paramters, we just rename the displayed text for now, the names of the parameters are kept as-is - renaming the parameteres would be a nice long-term goal, but it must be seen if a bot can do such work, in the meantime changing the displayed text is fast and addresses the relevant point of shifting the focus from the species, better fitting the current usage of the template.--Mister Wu (talk) 23:19, August 3, 2019 (EDT)
 * Agreed with Doc, comparables plural feels clunky and awkward. The rest sounds good. -- 13:04, August 4, 2019 (EDT)
 * I applied the changes, if there are other remarks, corrections or suggestions about the changes, please post them in this discussion.--Mister Wu (talk) 20:25, August 11, 2019 (EDT)
 * Agreed. -- 13:39, August 12, 2019 (EDT)

Terminology
It was fine the way it was before! MarioLover54 (talk) 20:22, August 19, 2019 (EDT)
 * It really wasn't. Please read the above section. Continuing to spam pages with "it was fine before" counts as using talk pages for unconstructive purposes, which you were previously blocked for, and may be blocked for again if this continues without an actual argument. 20:36, August 19, 2019 (EDT)