Talk:King Boo (Super Mario Sunshine)

Well, Japan isn't always right. Also notice that the "Boss" term has been applied to Petey Piranha (Boss Pakkun), Gooper Blooper (Boss Gesso), and Wiggler (Boss Hana-chan). That trend would likely be kept up for this one, and they were keeping it up for this King Boo. That doesn't make it separate from the other King Boo. You're all just way too gullible. Just because some of the slightest changes were made overseas, doesn't negate any such translations.

Now how do you explain Lakitu King and Giga Lakitu, hm? BooDestroyer 06:31, 15 May 2011 (EDT)

He has the same crown as the current King Boo, and it was only his second appearance...Bowser has gotten changed a little over the years, and the Koopalings are still changing. I think we should merge this with the original King Boo again. --Koopapoopa 22:34, 20 May 2010 (EDT)


 * No, the great difference lies on their japanese names, here is named "Boss Teresa", while the other is called "King Teresa".
 * ...Is it THAT great a difference? The "Boss" thing is kept up for the others in this game too. BooDestroyer

Koopa Troopas are called Koopas in most games, Terrapins in Super Mario RPG, and looked very different. Princess Toadstool is now known as Princess Peach. Also, he's still called King Boo in the US. --Koopapoopa 09:11, 27 May 2010 (EDT)

His appearance says it all.It is a complete differant person.

A change in appearance does not mean the character is different. Is the Mario in Mario & Luigi different from regular Mario because you can't see his mouth in the artwork? Perhaps a better example would be your signature, Mr bones. Dry Bones' appearance have a great deal of difference between Paper Mario and the rest of the games. They are the same species.
 * The change in appearance was not the reason for the split. It was the names Nintendo gave to them in the original Japanese version that distinguished between the two characters. Different names in the original, different characters, separate articles. - 03:39, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

What the heck?
Why did you separate this article? It's the same character!

The answer is right above your comment.
 * Yeah well I don't care what the japanese say


 * Mario is a Japanese production. Thus the original canon is the Japanese one. We must follow the Japanese continuity, even if the one we have is different. So King Boo and Boss Boo are different characters. Koopalmier 15:46, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

We do!

rename
Since the Japanese name translates to Boss Boo. Should rename this article Boss Boo instead of King Boo (Super Mario Sunshine)?
 * He has an official name in english, so that's the name we use.
 * So we're going on the Japanese name and the English name at the same time, but they contradict each other? We're doing something wrong.
 * The japanese name shows that this King Boo is a separate being. But since we have an official english name, that's the one we use.

I've got it! (?)
just as Britain has a Queen and Italy has a Monarch, these two boo kings are the kings of boos in different lands! I know it is just fanon, but it would make scense. Lu-igi board
 * Italy it's a republic...

Reason why it should be like this
This is just in case someone wants to complain abou the split. No matter which language we would follow one article would be split. If we went by the english names we would have to split the king boo from Super Mario 64 DS because he's called "BIG Boo" in english. He's called King Boo in the japanese. This should NEVER be merged again (unless a special someone orders it or we go by the english names). The king boo from Super Mario 64 DS looks more like King boo than this one. User:MarioMaster720

King Boo is always King Boo
i understand the opposing arguments, and yes they are in different lands, but then Petey Piranha. He lives on the Isle of Delfino and he was boss of the ice world in new super mario bros.! so if we are going by that logic, shouldn't Petey be split. And for Japanese, Boss is a re-accring thing in Super Mario Sunshine for the first word, the probably wanted him to fit in. He is the same, and remember: they are ALWAYS improving graphics, he may look different because of the bit type. As for super mario 64, Big Boo wasn't him, bigg Bo was a defeat-by-punching. King boo was called King boo in the DS version as far as i'm consurned, and Big Boo was there as well. So having two different looking bosses, with different ways to defeat WITH THE SAME NAME would be stupid. need i say more, I say, think of UNSPLITING, THEY ARE THE SAME! i would like to see a good come-back! 86.147.117.255 14:30, 30 January 2013 (EST)

I agree. Where is the evidence that this King Boo and the King Boo from Luigi's Mansion are the same? Is it because they look different or something? If so, that would be like giving Iggy Koopa two articles called "Iggy Koopa (Super Mario Bros. 3)" and "Iggy Koopa (New Super Mario Bros. Wii)" and giving Petey Piranha "Petey Piranha (Super Mario Sunshine)" and "Petey Piranha (Mario Pinball Land)". Does that make any sense? -signed a.k.a. Shy Troopa or  John Roberts 12:36, 3 February 2013 (EST)
 * Um the Japanese name is different implying that it's a different character thus per the precedent set by this wiki the characters are to stay split.

As i said before, they were going for an ongoing occurrence (petey, Glooper Blooper and the green wiggler "full steam ahead" boss guy had this occurrence as well) to have the first name:BOSS. like latin names for animals: if King boo were an animal, his genus or something like that would be "Boss", they were probably and MOST LIKELY going for that! he is the same, if anything split the King Boo of the "Luigi Series" as he looks different from every other king boo, who looked like this guy. he, like petey, can live in other places (King boo=boo woods, isle delfino. Petey= isle delfino, world 5 (NSMB). so he shouldn't be split. Japanese name was like a Genus. 86.147.117.255 14:54, 4 February 2013 (EST)
 * I don't think it should be merged for multiple reasons. First off, this one is created by Bowser Jr.. It dislikes spicy food, rules a different species of Boo, and is overall a different character. Not to mention that they look completely different. - 11:34, 18 June 2014 (EDT)

Talk Page Proposal: Merge with King Boo
I actually disagree with this but obviously this TPP needs to happen. While he is referred to as Boss Boo in the Japanese version, he is referred to as King Boo, like King Boo, in America. In addition, despite his different appearance, this is King Boo's second appearance and a beta redesign isn't out of the question. On the other hand, King Boo has always been referred to as "King Boo" in other languages except this guy, besides in Super Mario 64 DS where, in America, he was called Big Boo (but this is easily explained away as a translation error, since he has the same appearance as other King Boo incarnations). Thoughts?

Proposer: Deadline: July 2, 2014, 23:59 GMT

Support

 * 1) per proposal
 * 2) There is no evidence that this King Boo and the LM King Boo are not the same.

Oppose

 * 1) I realize I'm supposed to support my own proposal, but this was made for other people who disagree that haven't made it yet. Anyway. This is the only incarnation of King Boo that has a different name in Japan (Boss Boo), all others are King Boo.
 * 2) First, I'd like to address the translation error from Super Mario 64 DS. It's indeed a translation error that's not intentional because in Mario Kart DS, the bosses in Mission Mode are all borrowed from that game, and King Boo is known as "King Boo" in that game rather than Big Boo. Also, I've read that this King Boo is made from goop and he dislikes spicy food, something totally different from the regular King Boo. And finally, his Japanese name is his origin name, which means he was intentionally from the getgo made to be a different character than the one from Luigi's Mansion. He also looks quite different from the other King Boo incarnations.
 * 3) Per myself up there.
 * 4) Per all.
 * 5) Per all. No, just no.
 * 6) Oppose because they are different characters with different traits. Things with the same name that are different should be separated and kept that way.
 * 7) If Peanut opposes his own proposal, why make it in the first place?
 * 8) Per all. We have enough evidence to support them being separate characters.
 * 9) They are different characters. Boss Boo was likely renamed "King Boo" in other regions due to his similarities with the real King Boo. Regardless, the people who designed Super Mario Sunshine created Boss Boo as a different character, so we should consider him that, too.
 * 10) - The page was split via a TPP in the first place, so no, we didn't need to vote on it again, but anyway, per all, and per the reasons in the old proposal.
 * 11) Per all.
 * 12) Per Walkazo.

Comments
@Sean Because it has been a recurring argument on this page. I felt the need to settle it. Peanutjon (talk) 23:51, 18 June 2014 (EDT)
 * That's also not a valid reason to cast a vote, Sean. Please edit your vote to include a valid rational. -- [[Image:Shyghost.PNG]]Chris[[Image:Shyghost.PNG]] 01:29, 19 June 2014 (EDT)

Y'know I was kinda hoping some of the people who disagree would show up :/ Peanutjon (talk) 16:32, 19 June 2014 (EDT)
 * You could always try leaving a message directly on their talk page, to notify them of this proposal.
 * That'd probably count as fishing for votes.
 * It'd only be a violation if he asked them to specifically vote for one side of the proposal. Simply bringing attention to the proposal is harmless.

No, it not harmless. The person you tell may side with you because they might feel that if they don't, you'll get angry and do something. - 17:48, 19 June 2014 (EDT)
 * If the person feels the pressure when the pressure is absent, it's the person's problem. 18:56, 19 June 2014 (EDT)
 * I went ahead and did it. If it is inappropriate, I'll get a warning and never do it again. :) Peanutjon (talk) 22:26, 19 June 2014 (EDT)
 * It's the fact that the pressure can get to the person that makes it hard. It's fine on my standards if you know the user well enough though. - 01:17, 20 June 2014 (EDT)

I don't exactly see why this proposal is necessary. A user can look at the above comments and see why the pages are separate, and if he or she still disagrees, he or she can propose it himself or herself. 19:01, 27 June 2014 (EDT)
 * I think it's just for the purpose of setting an official standard on it to reference in case someone does attempt to split it.--Vommack (talk) 19:02, 27 June 2014 (EDT)

@Koopa Guy, read the actual article, the Japanese name bit is evidence enough. 18:39, 30 June 2014 (EDT)