User talk:Hewer

I'll respond on this page

"Weird Space"
The "weird space" was intentional. Before the "weird space" there is a hidden table for the 2nd week spotlights that will be revealed later tonight, and if the table were to be revealed without the weird space after then it wouldnt really look neat. 16:47, February 16, 2021 (PST)
 * Oh, sorry, I assumed it was just a mistake. Hewer (talk|contributions) 04:02, February 17, 2021 (EST)

Green Boo
You never answered my question. If your entire problem with the Green Boo merge is inconsistency with Black Boo, then why aren't you supporting the Black Boo merge proposal instead of opposing the Green Boo merge? For the record, the Green Boo proposal is currently 12-1 in favor of merging and only 2 days away from its deadline, so it's very unlikely it's going to fail at this point. 19:25, July 30, 2021 (EDT)
 * I think that overall, both staying split is better for consistency with how we do things across the wiki than both being merged is (Raving Piranha Plant is its own page despite having less differences from Piranha Plants than the Boos have from each other, and there's this proposal), and it would leave Red Boo still split. 05:28, July 31, 2021 (EDT)
 * Except it's not consistent with how we normally do things on the wiki since we usually don't split color variants unless they're an RPG enemy with unique stats such as White Clubba. That proposal about those Zelda enemies in Hyrule Circuit is a bad comparison since those are entirely different creatures, not color variants, and I honestly don't think Raving Piranha Plant should have been split in the first place. Red Boo is in a gray area due its role in the Mario Party series as a supporting character/species in games where the vanilla white Boo is playable, so the case for merging it isn't as strong as the green or black ones. And again, both staying split is not happening with the way the Green Boo proposal is panning out, so given the circumstances, merging Black Boo is the most consistent option available. 21:21, July 31, 2021 (EDT)
 * I understand that Red Boo's Mario Party information is going to stay split, I just don't think it's very consistent for us to also leave the Super Mario Bros. Deluxe information on that article when all the other coloured Boos have it merged. I don't see why the Zelda creatures being more complex reskins makes them irrelevant to colour variations when at the end of the day they're both just reskins but some have their designs changed more than others. I'd also argue that these Boos are colour variants of an enemy with unique stats, they just happen to not be in an RPG, which I don't completely see the relevance of. 05:39, August 1, 2021 (EDT)
 * The Boos in SMBDX are more comparable to differently-colored Koopa Troopas in Super Mario World (their behavior and speed differs depending on shell color) than they are to stronger versions of enemies in RPGs. Those Zelda enemies are not comparable to color variants; they're entirely different creatures (also see this proposal about Wario World enemies). You can't use that Zelda enemies proposal as a justification for splitting differently-colored Troopas or Snifits. They're not the same thing, and that's just not how the wiki works. As for Red Boo, there's actually a discussion topic about merging the article entirely, Mario Party info included. 18:25, August 1, 2021 (EDT)

Thanks
Hey, I just wanted to say thank you for your recent merge proposal. While I stand by my previous arguments and then some, the way that proposal broke down has been my biggest regret on the wiki, for several reasons. It's been one of the few topics I've been hesitant to revisit. Now that someone else stepped in to do what I thought was improbable and got it to handedly pass decisively, I feel like there's at least a little semblance of closure of sorts. LinkTheLefty (talk) 09:48, August 24, 2021 (EDT)

Greencheep
Hey, I responded on the Blurp proposal. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 23:58, October 7, 2021 (EDT)

Monty Mole in Warioware Touched
Hi, you said that the moles in the opening of Warioware Touched! were Monty Moles? Was there ever a official source that said that those moles were Monty Moles? If not, then the moles in the opening are most likely not Monty Moles and were probably just some generic moles used for the opening only. MontyMoleLoreMaster (talk) 20:52, October 24, 2021 (EDT)
 * They definitely look a lot like Monty Moles and as far as I know the wiki has always said they are, but since the credits just call them 'Moles', I suppose it's possible that they aren't. 05:11, October 25, 2021 (EDT)

Boss Bass
Fair warning, I fought to the teeth to get those merged, and will likewise to keep them. Mario Party Superstars using "Kyodai Pukupuku" for the generic giant Cheep Cheep (which also eats people) effectively confirms it absolutely. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 12:12, April 27, 2022 (EDT)
 * It's definitely the thing I'm prioritising the least out of everything on that list, it's already been there for over a year (not that I'm particularly in a hurry to get any of them done, they're just things that I might do eventually). 12:32, April 27, 2022 (EDT)

Juliet Jelenic
If you want to create a page of Juliet Jelenic, go right ahead. The kid’s only got one credit to her name on IMDb, thats definitely not much to work with. You may as well highlight other actors' names that have NO chance of ever getting created on this wiki since you’re always highlighting hers in particular.

If this were any other wiki, your broken link articles would be swiftly reverted by an admin, no joke. Best to follow protocol. 17:44, May 13, 2023 (EDT)
 * I re-added the link because it's linked on other pages (like Lumalee) and also because it looks really weird for only one actor on that whole huge list to not be linked. Her notability in other projects doesn't change that she is about as notable to the Mario franchise as the other actors, which is what we should be basing these articles on. And I'm not sure what you mean about "following protocol" - according to Manual of Style, "Linking to as many articles as possible, created or not, adds greater navigation to the knowledge base." These aren't "broken link articles", just red links for when someone decides to create the page. 18:13, May 13, 2023 (EDT)


 * Have at it. I am just following the example of other wikis/encyclopedias, they would handle it differently from my experiences. 18:17, May 13, 2023 (EDT)
 * We aren't other wikis/encyclopedias though. 18:19, May 13, 2023 (EDT)

On the subject regarding the 2023 Mario movie and Bomber Bills
I know you're not the only one who had these particular arguments. Still, you are one of the people who opposed my Banzai Bill to Bomber Bill proposal with a rather in-depth reason.

"The Super Mario Bros. Movie actually has a few naming oddities like Blue Shell and Blue Mushroom, as well as calling the Tanooki Suit a Raccoon Suit. Lego Super Mario is also a bit of a stretch to use as evidence since it doesn't use Banzai Bill or Bomber Bill. Since we're yet to see this name in a source that doesn't have oddities like this, and the name "Banzai Bill" was still in use recently, I'd rather wait until the name gets used in more sources (preferably an actual game). I'll gladly support if the name ends up consistently getting used, though."

I'll go over your points, and maybe I could see if I get an explanation for some of your issues. I'm not going to deny that the movie has some inconsistencies regarding how the games work, including their names. As for the Blue Shell, it's worth noting that a Koopa was particularly wearing this one, not a Spiny. In that context, it would make more sense to call it a blue shell since they were having a Koopa wear one. I also thought the blue mushroom was just a case of a slang term being used, similar to how Mario calls Kongs gorillas. I remember one of the characters calling a Maw-Ray an eel. Koopas are even referred to as turtles at one point. The implication I'm getting from this (and don't take this wrong way) is that the Mario movie shouldn't be used because it's not as "official" as the games. I hope I'm not coming off as offensive here, but that's the vibe I got, and I don't know if it's a valid argument to use in not using Bomber Bill as a name. At this point, the Mario franchise is more than a video game one now. I also don't see how the LEGO Mario example was a stretch, considering "Boomer" and "Bomber" are close. --Wikiboy10 (talk) 10:52, May 19, 2023 (EDT)
 * The movie being less official isn't what I was getting at with that argument, what I meant is that we should be consistent with the names we use. If we had already moved Blue Shell and Blue Mushroom to those names then I would've supported the proposal, but we haven't, and those aren't the only examples of the movie using different names without us moving pages (personally I feel like some of those locations could be split but that's another discussion). It's a similar case with the Mario Portal - a good few enemies were moved because of that, like Whimp, Mega Grrrol, Mandibug Stack, etc., but we didn't move the enemies whose names have been in use consistently and recently for multiple games, like "Spike top", "Parachute Bob-omb", and "Bomber Bill". This isn't about the games being more or less official than anything else - if a hypothetical game that does end up using "Bomber Bill" has its own share of weird names that we decide not to use then I'll still be hesitant to support. As for Lego Mario, I still fail to see how Boomer Bill being used as the name is an argument for us to use Bomber Bill. Sure, the names are similar, but they're also not far off from Banzai Bill either. And for the Blue Shell thing, the item in the movie was very obviously the item from the games (we consider it as such), and we've never actually seen a Spiny wear one as far as I know (I've personally always thought that the name "spiny" was in reference to the spikes rather than who wears it). 11:30, May 19, 2023 (EDT)

Removed Proposal
Hi Hewer, this is, I added a proposal to the proposal page, but you have removed it for being qualified as informal discussion. I am rather new to this, so would you mind explaining the difference/what warrants being put on there and what not? Do you think a reasonable amount of users would still respond to my proposal if it was limited to the original talk page (mist)? Thanks for bearing with me. -Paper Enthusiast (talk) 14:17, June 1, 2023 (EDT)
 * The difference is that in a proposal, users vote for or against your idea (see the other proposals on that page to know what I'm talking about). Proposals has guidelines for making a proper proposal. Having it on the talk page is fine though. 14:22, June 1, 2023 (EDT)

Yes, the intention was to have people vote for/against the subject at hand. So if I reformat the talk page according to the "Basic proposal and support/oppose format" section, would I be able to repost on the proposal page? -Paper Enthusiast (talk) 14:30, June 1, 2023 (EDT)
 * I've converted it to a proposal, feel free to add your own vote. 14:37, June 1, 2023 (EDT)

Thank you very much for the help, I'll know for next time! -Paper Enthusiast (talk) 14:41, June 1, 2023 (EDT)