Talk:Cheep Chomp

I don't think this is called a Cheep-Chomp. It probably is a Big Bertha (fish) or a Boss Bass. It does have one tooth and some shoot Baby Cheeps just like the two other big fish. The only difference is the color. I think this is too similiar to be a separate specie. I'll leave it for now until someone finds an official name.--Spike


 * I believe this is the official name (and as such is a seperate enemy). If someone has the Player's Guide it would be very helpful (as all the enemies in the game are listed in it). -- Son of Suns


 * Huh, yeah you are right. According to this site it is named "Cheep-Chomp".Spike[[Image:Spike_sheild_badge.PNG]]

If these are Cheep-Chomps, then what are the aquatic Chomps that bite you for one damage when you fall in the water in Paper Mario: The Thousand Year Door?


 * Nibbles. --

It says in the article they appear in new Super Mario bros Wii.I can't find them anywhere in New Super Mario Bros Wii.--Swooper888 20:38, 25 December 2009 (EST)

Never mind I found them--Swooper888 00:08, 26 December 2009 (EST)

smaller ones
I remember encountering smaller versions of Cheep-Chomps? What game are they in and what are they called?

Question
If Cheep Chomp is a Cheep Cheep, what is that small purple Cheep Cheep? A PORCUPUFFER? --WhiteYoshi2014 (talk) 20:43, 1 July 2014 (EDT) "Yoshi Ranger strikes again! Remember kids, only you can prevent burnt Marios."

Cheep Chomp = Bubba?
So, as I was searching the Internet for any Japanese names of the enemies that didn't have theirs mentioned here yet, I came across this interesting discovery: Cheep Chomp and Bubba have the same Japanese name, バクバク (bakubaku) which is onomatopoeia for chomping. It appears that "Bubba" was only a localisation of some kind for Cheep Chomp, which has since Super Mario 64 gone through design changes. The behavior of these two is also similar.

What should be done with this? Merge the two pages or keep them separate with the mention of the possible connection? I mean, I'm not making the proposal yet, still deciding on that. SmokedChili (Talk) (Thoughts) 05:43, 14 October 2014 (EDT)


 * I'd seek a merge since they also practically have the same function/main attack, but a proposal would be best since concensus might instead be that they don't look similar enough (although this isn't as big a difference as some others). LinkTheLefty (talk) 21:01, 14 October 2014 (EDT)

There's something else I forgot to mention: There's also a boss going by a similar name. That boss's English name? Bessie Bass.

So now it's not just "Cheep Chomp = Bubba?", it's "Boss Bass and Big Bertha = Cheep Chomp = Bubba?" That won't be easy to swallow if I make the proposal. SmokedChili (Talk) (Thoughts) 06:11, 17 October 2014 (EDT)
 * According to Japanese Wikipedia, Boss Bass and Big Bertha are "Kyodai Pukupuku" or "Giant Pukupuku" (巨大プクプク), while Bessie Bass is "Big Bakubaku" (ビッグバクバク) - and it also describes Bakubaku as both Bubba and Cheep Chomp, as well as the version of Boss Bass from Yoshi's Island DS. So from this, it seems like Kyodai Pukupuku was its original name, and then it was changed to Bakubaku at some point. LinkTheLefty (talk) 11:38, 21 October 2014 (EDT)
 * Also, the Bub enemy from Super Mario 64 is indeed a Cheep Cheep like in the Japanese version and their appearance in Mario Party 3, which further explains why their designs were "replaced" in Super Mario 64 DS. At the very least, I think that deserves a merge considering they were called Cheep Cheeps in the English version of the latter game. (I've also checked in this extensive Mario series dictionary, and it reaches the same conclusion as the above.) LinkTheLefty (talk) 14:30, 21 October 2014 (EDT)

Merge Big Bertha, Boss Bass, and Bubba with Cheep Chomp
FAILED 4-10

That's quite a mouthful, isn't it? Well, it just so transpired that all these enemy characters (more or less) went under the same name in Japan, they're all hungry fish of similar shape and size, and the former three have been dropped out of recent games in favor of the latter. Cheep Chomp is like a unifier of older designs to begin with, so barring some attachment to the original localized names, this makes sense. Speaking of which...

"They lose their identity if this happens!"

This is already the case with Big Bertha and Boss Bass's designs being so similar in the first place, as well as Bubba being 'replaced' with a Big Bertha acting more like a Boss Bass in Super Mario 64 DS. For simplicity's sake, placing them all under the same moniker as intended eliminates unnecessary confusion.

"But Big Bertha and Boss Bass are different genders!"

I don't think those names are an absolute to go by, and even then, the difference has mainly been extrapolated over their appearance together in one game. The behavior associated with them in Super Mario Bros. 3 alone is used to try to ascertain unverified (or possible) appearances. "Cheep Chomp" is more inclusive.

"Bubba looks different enough!"

See Bub.

Proposer: Deadline: January 22, 2015, 23:59 GMT.

Support

 * 1) Per proposal.
 * 2) Despite the fact that Big Bertha and Boss Bass appeared in the same game, I know that you are referring to the one in Super Mario 64 DS. I believe that it should be merged, because the less pages we have of the same thing, the more convenient it is for the viewers.
 * 3) Same Japanese name and we already merged Bub with Cheep Cheep.
 * 4) Per all. Bessie Bass, which has the appearance of Boss Bass / Big Bertha, is identified as a Cheep Chomp in Japan. Bubba may look radically different from the others, but is still a Cheep Chomp in Japan. It may be the biggest example of an enemy going through a redesign that makes it look almost unrecognizable.

Oppose

 * 1) Big Bertha houses the Baby Cheeps (SM64DS nonwithstanding), which is a behavior limited solely to that species. I'm uncertain about the other two, but I think that alone is enough for, at least, Big Bertha to be separate.
 * 2) Big Bertha and Boss Bass are explicitly stated to be the males and females of there species which warrants a seperate page, act differently in their games. Secondly, I opposed bub and Cheep Cheep, due to lack of resemblance and a diffferent official name. Third, why Cheep Chomp? It acts differently than all of them, being an aggressive persuer and attempting to pull players in while permanently chasing them. Surely thats a different attack pattern, appearence, and name.
 * 3) Cheep-Chomp looks different from the rest of the group. Factor in the significantly varied behaviours of some of these fish and it becomes impossible to support this proposal.
 * 4) What I'm getting here is that we want to merge Big Bertha and Boss Bass cause they're similar in behavior to a Cheep Chomp. Similar behavior doesn't mean they should be merged. I feel that this is being forced upon the Grinder as well as its similarities to an Ukiki are compelling a merge, despite the enemies being different in key ways.
 * 5) Per all. Also, Boss Bass reappeared in Yoshi's Island DS, a few months after the introduction of Cheep Chomp in New Super Mario Bros., which is proof that it wasn't completely "phased out" in favor of Cheep Chomp.
 * 6) Per all.
 * 7) Bubba not only looks different from a big bertha and cheep chomp but he also has a different English name which is stated in two different games which to me signifies that he is not supposed to be the same thing as a big bertha and cheep chomp.
 * 8) Per Tails777. "They act similarly" is not a strong enough reason to merge articles together. They ultimately are different characters, no matter how related.
 * 9) Per all. The oppose votes have simply made a more compelling argument, but I knowledge Walkazo's concerns below.
 * 10) Per all.

Comments

 * Incidentally, in the comments of that Bub proposal, I mentioned I would to limit this to just Big Bertha and Bubba since they occupied the same "slot" in Super Mario 64 (DS), but then we'd have to go with Bubba over Big Bertha since it actually shows up in game text, which would cause disparagy. That's part of the reason I think this route, while more encompassing, leads to less convolution. LinkTheLefty (talk) 22:34, 7 January 2015 (EST)
 * I'd agree to subspecies, but merging them is too far. Toad-brigade model CTTT.png Toad   and his brigade! Toadette model CTTT.png 22:41, 7 January 2015 (EST)
 * I considered proposing Big Bertha and Boss Bass keep their articles as sub-species of Cheep Chomp, but that still leaves plenty of guesswork over which is which (not counting where or if Bubba would be factored). This scenario helps clean up those instances where it can be either fish. As for an enemy's general behavior and appearance, that's really whatever's most convenient for the creators (for instance, Micro-Goomba). Big Bertha's and Boss Bass's patterns aren't strictly consistent outside of Super Mario Bros. 3, which seems to be the benchmark because it happens to be their debut as well as the only time they clearly show up together. LinkTheLefty (talk) 23:48, 7 January 2015 (EST)
 * Simplicity is second to accurate information on this wiki. And the patterns are consistent outside of SMB3, try Yoshi Island Ds and Super Mario 64 DS.Toad-brigade model CTTT.png Toad   and his brigade! Toadette model CTTT.png 23:56, 7 January 2015 (EST)
 * But it was technically accurate information in the first place - all the resulting article would need to do to be the best that it can is successfully identify places where the enemy is explicitly localized as Big Bertha or Boss Bass. As for Super Mario 64 DS and Yoshi's Island DS, I have tried them, and there are obvious alterations to their attack pattern since their first appearance (albeit more to suit the gameplay than anything else, but it's still muddled as it is). LinkTheLefty (talk) 00:01, 8 January 2015 (EST)

After actually thinking about it, Chocolate Mario, just the color alone does not mean that the four are not the same. Nintendo likely forgot about the color, and instead did a recolor. Another possibility is that they wanted to differentiate it from the Big Cheep Cheep so that players would not become confused and consequently, eaten. In addition, on the page for Big Cheep Cheep that I posted a link to, it says that it is similar to Boss Bass, meaning that there would have been confusion if Boss Bass appeared in, say, New Super Mario Bros. Megamario15 - The REAL Mario (talk) 16:55, 8 January 2015 (EST)
 * To clarify on the situation a bit more...

The Japanese only used two names for the big man-eating fish (one used for earlier materials, and another used after Super Mario 64); the English localizers initially gave two simultaneous ones to describe the underwater and "flying" variant (Big Bertha and Boss Bass, which were really not unlike the underwater and "flying" Cheep Cheeps in the original game), a third for the early 3D design (Bubba), and a fourth for the later 3D design (Cheep Chomp). In miscellaneous appearances, it appears that whichever name used to identify it is either conjecture or up to the writer's whim rather than for any substantial reason - hence why Boss Bass and Big Bertha are easily confused for each other. Since it seems the intention is that these are all the same creature, the idea of the Cheep Chomp banner is to mitigate the confusion by using the latest name as the species, when speaking about it in general, and also for the newer purple incarnation; however, while Big Bertha, Boss Bass, and Bubba would redirect to the new Cheep Chomp page, the purpose is not to erase all the instances of those names - rather, my idea is for the article to acknowledge this evolution, but when describing specific appearances, it would use those older names in the appropriate sections only if they can be cited with a proper source (otherwise, if the name for that instance is unverified, it uses Cheep Chomp by default). LinkTheLefty (talk) 17:28, 8 January 2015 (EST)
 * It appears that I need to get brushed up on my Cheep Chomp history. Maybe I should read the article that we're talking about. Thank you for clarifying... again. Megamario15 - The REAL Mario (talk) 17:33, 8 January 2015 (EST)

@ SuperYoshiBros - But again, though... Boss Bass [reference needed] came back under Bubba's/Cheep Chomp's Japanese name, clearly showing that they were considered the same at that point. That, and it's been almost a decade since Yoshi's Island DS, so I wouldn't exactly call it recent. LinkTheLefty (talk) 18:05, 8 January 2015 (EST)
 * No, Boss Bass actually appeared in Yoshi's Island DS. See? [[File:BigCheepCheep YIDS.png]] And again, it WAS still after Cheep Chomp was introduced, so they were still separate species at least at the time. -- 20:39, 9 January 2015 (EST)
 * Boss Bass* ("or possibly a Big Bertha") has the Japanese name of Bubba and Cheep Chomp in that appearance. Really, this whole situation would be like insisting Cheep Cheep and Cheep-cheep be split, since Cheep-cheep alleged sprout wings when flying out of water according to the original translation, and Cheep Cheep doesn't have that trait so they must be entirely different. LinkTheLefty (talk) 21:25, 9 January 2015 (EST)

There's also the fact that "Cheep Chomp"s are a different colour than the classic fish, but seeing as Cheep Cheep come in purple, yellow and green as well as red, that argument doesn't hold much water either (pardon the pun). - 23:12, 9 January 2015 (EST)
 * However, your argument also has room for rebuttals. Remember The Super Mario Bros. Super Show!? You probably do, seeing as you gave me a link to something similar in the same timeframe. Remember how in the first two episodes, Toad's cap was an inverse of its normal colors? Also, do you remember that back around the creation of Donkey Kong, Mario wore red overalls and a blue shirt (also seen in the aforementioned show)? And how thwomps used to look like blue stones with faces? Your argument is as valid as the one you are trying to shoot down. I rest my case.


 * By the way, the pun was a nice way to end your argument. You should do that more often. Megamario15 - The REAL Mario (talk) 13:48, 10 January 2015 (EST)


 * Well, back in the day there were lots of technical limitations which is why sprites on the NES (and rarely, SNES) have different colors than they do today, such as Mario's brown shirt in the original SMB. Super Show came out early in the series and so just went off of these early sprites (which sometimes carried over into artwork as well). Technical limitations is obviously not the case with Boss Bass/Big Bertha, because they retained their orange coloring in future games like All-Stars, Super Mario 64 DS, and Yoshi's Island DS. -- 19:35, 11 January 2015 (EST)


 * If anything, my point was pro-merge, but I'm actually still on the fence. On the one hand colours are often one of the main differences (along with power and location differences) between pairs of RPG enemies and whatnot (some of which even share names, yet get split), but on the other hand, colours are ignored for Koopas, Cheep Cheep, and various other things, even without the "graphical limitations" argument, and in spite of other slight differences and even separate listings in manuals and whatnot in some cases. It's rather messy. - 23:46, 11 January 2015 (EST)

Guess I'll make a little logic rundown before this proposal ends.
 * Bubba = Cheep Chomp: Same official Japanese name.
 * Boss Bass/Big Bertha = Cheep Chomp: Since Bessie Bass, a Boss Bass/Big Bertha appearancewise is a bakubaku, her species in YIDS technically share the same official Japanese name with Cheep Chomps.
 * Boss Bass/Big Bertha = Bubba: The former replaces the latter in the DS remake of SM64. Same role, and also the same official Japanese name, which seemingly replaces "kyoodai pukupuku", the name the former is known as in SMB3 in Japan.
 * Boss Basses in YIDS? This game was developed by a company other than Nintendo, and very likely during the same time as NSMB. Therefore, it is plausible that while Nintendo changed the current design to Cheep Chomp, Artoon didn't follow with this.
 * Enemy behavior? Varies from game to game and depending on how the franchise develops. For example, a regular Paragoomba originally flew and spawned Microgoombas, while a red variant simply hopped towards Mario. Nowadays, the two have been made into a single enemy. Going by Big Bertha's page on this wiki, it's that enemy who appears in SM64DS. If that's true, then its behavior has been changed too.
 * Enemy appearance? They have mostly remained unchanged in the franchise, but there are expections. The biggest one, other than Boss Bass/Big Bertha/Bubba/Cheep Chomp, is Thwomp. It went through quite a many changes until getting its current look, and even that varies. Mostly in 2D games, it's got spikes on its edges. In 3D games, it's instead a frame... thingy.

So really, I believe this is why these pages should be merged. The Japanese names are the original names (usually) and thus I give them priority when considering potential linked enemies. The English names may be different, but in the end, they are just English names. Not really something that should recieve priority over the original Japanese names (expect according to the rules of this wiki). I also don't get these concerns about having a same thing split into different articles because of a different function, even if a link exists. Personal bias, can't understand or yet another wiki policy? SmokedChili (Talk) (Thoughts) 09:11, 20 January 2015 (EST)


 * That's the gist of it. In hindsight, perhaps I could have given my opening statement better wording since it looks like a fair share of the opposers didn't seem to fully understand the arguments (one exception I'll deem worthy is the very first opposing point about Baby Cheeps, the main rebuttal of which I can honestly come up with besides slightly deviating traits is the admittedly weak in comparison "can't we just roll with that?"). Really, while this is probably best on a case-by-case basis, it's not like a deeper look at localization inconsistency has not already merged (or sometimes even split) articles in the past. This might've been a tall order since it dealt with more than two articles, but overall, I can't help but be a bit disappointed that this didn't at least end up being a closer call... LinkTheLefty (talk) 13:11, 22 January 2015 (EST)

Merge Cheep Chomp and Boss Bass
Cheep Chomps look (with the exception of color) and act exactly the same as Boss Bass, have the same Japanese name (based on Bessie Bass), and notably appeared around the same time that Boss Bass stopped appearing.

Proposer: Deadline: June 24, 2015, 23:59 GMT

Support

 * 1) Per proposal.
 * 2) Per this proposal and the above one (minus grouping Big Bertha together since it's considered mouth-brooding, as well as Bubba since that's already accomplished with Boss Bass).

Oppose

 * 1) Aside from the Japanese name (which as far as I'm concerned is the only name that is the same) and their similar actions, they have little to no real similarities. Cheep Chomp may be a replacement for Boss Bass, but that doesn't mean merge them for it. Two different sub species with similar actions is still two different sub species. We gonna merge Goombo and Goomba just because they act similar? I'd think not. So yeah, per Time Turner below me.
 * 2) Honestly, all of these merges regarding the fish enemies have left a bad taste in my mouth since they've started, like Bubba, Bub, Flopsy Fish, and who knows what else. For the moment, I'll stick to this one; the closest thing we have to proof is a different name in another language (which I will always argue isn't enough, and using Bessie Bash to justify it is going way too far) and similar behaviour (which is par for the the course), and these are not definite enough for me. There's nothing absolutely definite to say that the Cheep Chomp is the same enemy as the Boss Bass. However, the biggest reason I disagree is for one simple question: why? What do we gain by lumping all of these fish into a select few articles? It's technically simpler for navigation, but heck, we can merge any number of articles to make it simpler for navigation, but convenience to the reader is lost. Someone who searches for Flopsy Fish, something that appears entirely distinctly from Cheep Cheeps, is going to be confused as to why they show up in the article for Cheep Cheeps with seemingly no reason, with the article claiming that Flopsy Fish are actually Cheep Cheeps, and personally, it's something I find jarring. This is especially true if they're searching through Google; there's a tiny blurb that gives no context to where the information is located, and the link brings them straight to the top. Wanna read about Flopsy Fish? Too bad! Every single other source is going to act like these enemies are entirely separate from all the enemies that you're merging them to, which is subsequently passed on to our potential readers, and this whole process really just serves to create confusion. Have some faith in the English translators, by the way; regardless of what the Spanish or German or even Japanese names are, I'm pretty sure that the English guys know what they're doing (SMRPG notwithstanding), which is of special relevance to us because we are an English wiki. We've gone too far down the rabbit hole, and I want out.
 * 3) Per Tails777 and Time Turner, also Cheep Chomps and Boss Basses are drastically different from each other with very little similarities they're only similar by eating the player whole and instantly killing them Boss Basses jumps something Spike Basses and Porcupuffers would do, Cheep Chomps are purple and are never found in the surface and they don't jump, so it's safe to say that Cheep Chomps and Boss Basses shouldn't be merged.
 * 4) Per all. Boss Bass appear in Mario Kart DS and Yoshi's Island DS which was released in 2005 and 2006, not long before the first appearance of Cheep Chomp in New Super Mario Bros. DS in 2006. I don't think Nintendo change the color of the same enemy suddenly in only one year or less.
 * 5) Per all. This is about the same as the last proposal you did.
 * 6) - Per Time Turner. I've supported my fair share of merges over the years, but the recent trend is troubling. I only abstained from the fish TTPs he mentioned before, because I didn't think my general misgivings about merges was enough reason to oppose and get sucked into yet another big debate, but yeah, let's make a stand now. There is nothing wrong with having lots of little articles about slightly different takes on enemies: thoroughness in niche wikis is good as long as it doesn't get silly, and splits on an English site based on different English names, when backed up by design and/or behavioural differences more significant than the likes of RPG enemy palette-swaps, is not silly. A small handful of extra one-off appearances pages does no harm: just use  on the parent page and you're set for navigation, and having the separate names ensures we get all the search traffic and don't risk frustrating readers with redirects where they expect articles. And merging recurring enemies like this seems even more unnecessary: there was one enemy design for a while, and then that was replaced by another enemy design and another name in at least one language, so why not have pages about both? Now, if Cheep Chomp ever came in Boss bass colours, or vice-versa, then maybe it could be more like the multicoloured-yet-singular-species Cheep Cheep, but no, it's not: it's a solid divide, and personally, as a biologist, I agree with the English namers in that they're different species. And I'm sure a lot of non-biologist gamers, who may or may not even care about the Japanese names, feel the same way, and will wonder why the Super Mario Wiki of all places doesn't have a page for something as basic as a "Boss Bass".
 * 7) Per all. Also, a few things. First, I may be wrong but as far as I know Boss Basses have never made the sound that a Cheep Chomp makes when chomping. Second, aside from Super Mario 64 (DS) and non-canon material Boss Basses are known to jump out of the water to attack while Cheep Chomps don't. Heck, in the non-remade former they weren't even called Boss Basses, possibly due to their different behavior and appearance confusing the developers. I guess you could also say that Cheep Chomps may be a bit more aggressive in their approach.
 * 8) Per all.

Comments
Cheep Chomps feel like their own species though. They're much different than Boss Bass. Walkazo stated earlier that Cheep Cheep have color variety, but Cheep Chomps are consistently purple with green fins. While it's a point that Cheep Chomps replaced Boss Bass and they share the Japanese name, I'm still a bit iffy on the merge. 17:10, 10 June 2015 (EDT)
 * I don't think Cheep Chomps replacing Boss Bass is a good merging point. They are still different Cheep-Cheep sub species.

@Mario - Since we also count Bubba as Boss Bass after a previous proposal that factored in Super Mario 64 /DS, a little color variety (red and orange/yellow) is fine. Redesigns like this are almost like shell colors, and if you compare the SM64DS and NSMB models, they're extremely similar to the point of basically being a mere recolor. Keep in mind that the New Super Mario Bros. games modernized/standardized the roles and revised/updated the designs of a few of the older enemies, which generally carried over into spinoff titles: for example, Big Goombas now split into multiple Goombas (which is going to be a trait in Mario Maker), Piranha Plants are now more commonly seen outside pipes, Rocky Wrenches now look almost exactly like Monty Moles, Fish Bones now home on in Mario, etc. The major difference between a Boss Bass and Cheep Chomp in the platformers is that Boss Bass skim along the surface and Cheep Chomp dwell deeper underwater, but in Sticker Star, Island Tour and Mario Party 10, Cheep Chomp act just like Boss Bass in this regard.

@Tails - The question is whether or not they're the same species ("sub species" is almost certainly antiquated), not that they're different but are being merged for the heck of it. Most opposing votes were more directed towards Big Bertha and Bubba, which aren't in question at this juncture. What exactly is it about Boss Bass and Cheep Chomp that you think makes them a separate species? LinkTheLefty (talk) 18:00, 10 June 2015 (EDT)


 * Their appearance for one is different, but my main point is similar actions doesn't necessarily mean we should merge them. In all honesty though, I'm pretty sure Time Turner summed it all up.
 * Man, if that's a summary, I'd hate to see what the full text looks like.
 * I've read the entire thing. LinktheLefty, not only are Cheep Chomps consistently purple, they have a slightly different design. I was about to add on to that, but the color was the first thing that struck me. As I said, the color variant argument doesn't work as well here because we haven't seen Cheep Chomps in a different color. I feel it's like merging Deep Cheep since the only difference is that they have angry eyes, although Deep Cheeps do have a different Japanese name. 18:41, 10 June 2015 (EDT)

@TT The Flopsy Fish merge is a very horrible example of why merges are bad, considering the obscurity of the "Flopsy Fish" name and their appearance, most people likely think of them as Cheep Cheeps anyway. Besides, this is a wiki, we should be as factually correct as possible, not allow a bit of misinformation here and there because of nostalgia and fanon. Binarystep (talk) 18:34, 10 June 2015 (EDT)
 * Ah, yes, because I was referencing fanon and nostalgia, which is especially applicable because Flopsy Fish didn't appear in a 2014 game and Cheep Chomp didn't appear in a 2015 game, constantly to justify my vote, right (seriously, what are you talking about)? Also, the Flopsy Fish name shows up in, at the very least, the official guide for the game, which might not be the absolute most imperative source, but it's hardly some long-forgotten website in a foreign language. Speaking of, you're using the Japanese name of a pretty-much unrelated boss in Yoshi's Island DS to justify this merge, so "obscurity" probably shouldn't be a point you're bringing up. I'll also throw in a [citation needed] for most people believing them to be different enemies, which kinda goes against what you're saying about sticking solely with the facts and not people's opinion. Besides that, though, what misinformation? As I've said, all you're going on are names in other languages and similar appearances, and I've already pointed out that those two bits of information are not the be-all and end-all for deciding what to do. The fact is that going about this as "factually" as possible involves leaving them separate, since you have no actual, decisive, definite proof that the two enemies are one and the same. You could say that you're making logical connections, but I say that you're connecting a dot on Earth to a dot on Pluto; people have different opinions on how to interpret what's available to us, and with nothing definite, the only way decisions can be made is by basically going with personal opinion (though while still being guided by the actual information), just as it happened with Boss Bass and Parabuzzy. You say tomato, I say tomahto, and I highly doubt that we're going to convince each other to say the other word.
 * Uh, are they actually called "Flopsy Fish" in New Island? Binarystep (talk) 19:40, 10 June 2015 (EDT)

One more question: that Boss Bass has been replaced in favor of Cheep Chomp, would it better assume that it's a different species replacing a different species or would it be a redesign and a rename? I believe the different species one uses much less assumptions though, but the strongest argument the merge has, I believe, is that Cheep Chomp essentially replaced Boss Bass's role, although Cheep Chomps are less aggressive (they don't jump out and eat you, at least not in New Super Mario Bros.). So uh, the proposal saying that they act "exactly the same", no, it's not "exactly the same", only similar. "Exactly the same" has redundant words too. 19:38, 10 June 2015 (EDT)


 * @Time Turner - No offense, but my summary of your tirade is: "I'm tired of this, so why should I care?" While an emotion-driven response such as that is not unrelatable, it's not really a particularly rational point to make in the discussion. Complaining about other proposals breaking established traditions isn't going to reverse them, nor should it have an affect on current ones. Besides, even if this is an English wiki, Mario is not conventionally developed in English, and we say to not strictly adhere to only one of the localizations at face value.
 * @Mario - I'm really not seeing any noticeable differences in the enemy design besides coloration and maybe mild clarity. These are the DS appearances in 3D I'm looking at: Super Mario 64 DS, Mario Kart DS, and New Super Mario Bros.
 * @TheHelper - Here's one example of some jumping Cheep Chomp on the water surface, which I've already mentioned just before...
 * @LudwigVon - Mario Kart DS as a counter to change is irrelevant since as you state it was released before New Super Mario Bros., and Yoshi's Island DS is unlike Yoshi's New Island in that it doesn't try too hard to fit 2D enemies in the modern aesthetic. Time between appearances also isn't always a factor in a design - for instance, the point that Ukiki started consistently appearing in a design closer to Yoshi's Island over Super Mario 64 was in Mario Party 7, after three other appearances within the same year.
 * @Binarystep - I'm not sure why you referenced Bessie Bass specifically in your proposal, but for the record, the names work as follows: Kyodai Pukupuku (Giant Cheep Cheep) is the name of both Boss Bass and Big Bertha in Japanese Super Mario Bros. 3 guides (which we've sourced in those respective articles), Bubba refers to two enemies (one which was just an ordinary Cheep Cheep from the first Mario Party and the other being what's called Baku Baku in Japan), the Boss Bass design returned in Yoshi's Island DS and was known as Baku Baku rather than Kyodai Pukupuku (possibly to differentiate from the MIA Big Bertha), and the Cheep Chomp has the same name as the SM64 Bubba and the YIDS Boss Bass (also documented in its article). Simply put, two major redesigns and one rename that go full circle, all associated with the same basic function and rough silhouette of an enemy. LinkTheLefty (talk) 19:45, 10 June 2015 (EDT)
 * Oh, you do not get to just dismiss all my points just because you think I'm being "emotional" and not actually reply in any way, especially when there are numerous people that agree with me so clearly you shouldn't just throw it out. I find that incredibly rude and disrespectful to not only me, but to everyone else that perred me as well, since they're all following my reason just like I am, and to brush off all of us is something I will become extremely emotional for. Also, see my reply to Binary's comment; there's that bit about tomatoes that I think is relevant here.
 * I'm sorry, but that really is honestly how I read your whole chunk of vote... Since you say your mind is "mush", I'll believe I'm just horribly mistaken about your intended message from when you typed it out. LinkTheLefty (talk) 20:10, 10 June 2015 (EDT)
 * And again, you ignore everything I've said. I have a bad headache and I can't concentrate properly, you got me there, but for crying out loud, you didn't even attempt to give a rebuttal because I'm being "emotional," and even that's absolutely no excuse to just dismiss everything I've written. Besides me, there are other people that clearly agree with me. What are they, chopped liver? If you're unwilling to argue with me, argue with them at the very least.
 * The vote's more like "I'm tired of this, so I'm gonna try and stop it from happening here too based on X, Y and Z reasons", which is a legit stance, not some irrational, emotional tirade, and I personally had no trouble following it, "mush" quip be damned. - 20:32, 10 June 2015 (EDT)
 * @Time Turner - What I saw when I read your vote in particular is something that could've stood to use the restraint of brevity to address the point, but the bottom line I took, also judging from the clear tinge I sensed over mostly unrelated proposals, is that you were more interested in declaring "enough is enough" rather than countering the arguments presented here or otherwise contributing to this weeks-long topic. Basically, more "I disagree because I disagree with this 'merging' thing and I don't like it" and less "I disagree because I disagree with the supporting points and/or have information & rationale to back me up" (which, when you did that previously, helped me to eventually come around with the position of Big Bertha a while back). I get that some people express disdain with the latest renewed proposals (which shouldn't be done unless something significant can be brought to the table), but this shouldn't be confused with one of those. This isn't the same proposal verbatim or repurposed - the Big Bertha and Bubba aspects bogged consensus and are eliminated, so there's no reason to look down upon this as a quick retread. Users have the freedom to propose merging/splitting changes in ways they feel are accurate and beneficial, so while redundancies are upsetting, it doesn't need to be lambasted in general. Again, maybe you articulated it in a way that I misinterpreted the full meaning, and the last thing I want to do is offend anyone...but when you conclude that we've "gone too far down the rabbit hole, and I want out," what exactly is the aim and connotation of that statement? ... Anyway, I almost want to suggest again to drop everything until Mario Maker is out, but at this rate, I almost expect it to still be met with resistance in the event that it or a future title provides clearer answers just because of the growing negativity towards certain merging. To clarify, when you open by saying the facts aren't definite enough for you, that reason is absolutely fair and I can't have any gripes with it. Basically everything from "the biggest reason" to "I want out" is what my response is directed towards. I've replied to everyone else involved so far (including correcting Binarystep), so it's not like I haven't been "unwilling to argue" today - I just have trouble completely understanding why that reason is a legit focus in this discussion.
 * @Walkazo - You added that the colors of Boss Bass and Cheep Chomp are meant to show a clear, definite divide. I don't know specifically what kind of fish Cheep Cheep are designed after (if one was even in mind at all), but the Super Mario 64 Player's Guide describes Bub as a "koi" - with that in consideration, since purple and red Cheep Cheep are uncontroversially deemed one and the same, wouldn't it stand to reason that "big brother" Boss Bass/Bubba/Cheep Chomp/whatever can have similar color variations and still be considered the same species? (I realize that the word may have had very little thought put into it, but let's assume for the moment that koi is their real-world equivalent). LinkTheLefty (talk) 22:10, 10 June 2015 (EDT)
 * @Lumastar - Keep in mind the wiki's stance on canon (also, sound effects were always kind of a weak aspect - generations of hardware, Piranha Plants audibly chomping as well, etc.). LinkTheLefty (talk) 00:26, 11 June 2015 (EDT)

@Time Turner - So you think that Flopsy Fish merged with Cheep Cheep is going to give readers who are accustomed to see them as separate enemies a hard time to search for info here? Then inform them better. For example, how about creating "Name origin and history" section that gives an explanation for the English name, the Japanese name, and lists all the enemies with English names which share this same Japanese name? Mario series originates from Japan, after all. In spite of this wiki focusing on English material (especially American), we still have to deal with worldwide information from different languages. I also see Flopsy Fish merged with Cheep Cheep as a benefical alternate example to deliver info, because it will generate discussion about the information, its accuracy, and how accurate the localizers are, which may lead us to new pieces of info we may not have noticed before. SmokedChili (Talk) (Thoughts) 05:19, 11 June 2015 (EDT)