Talk:Snifit (Super Mario 64)

So, um, according to TMK, these guys' Japanese names are exactly the same as a normal Snifit's. On top of that, i and u are right next to each other on most English keyboards. They look nearly identical (especially in the remake, which makes almost all enemies look more like their traditional forms), and, floating aside, act identical as well--and the originals could jump and hover for a short time anyway. And this very wiki says that they were "accidentally" referred to as Snifits in one of the MPs anyway....

Considering all that, can we really say that they're intended to be different enemies? I'd suggest a merge but have no idea how. Dazuro 19:55, 19 January 2008 (EST)

Hold on, before we can merge anything, we have to discuss it. I'll start a proposal for you now. 19:57, 19 January 2008 (EST)

Yes, I'm aware of the discussion procedure, hence why I said "suggest". Sorry if it sounded like I was jumping the gun there. But thanks. Dazuro 20:36, 19 January 2008 (EST)


 * First of all, they seem like two different species. "Snufits" don't have legs but Snifits do. Also, they are called Snufits in a few copies of the Mario Party game. The same spelling mistake in two games? Sounds more like the "Snifit" part being a mistake. [[Image:Paperjorgesp.png]] Paper Jorge [[Image:Paperjorgesp.png]]


 * But they have the exact same name in the original Japanese games, implying that NoJ designed them as the same creature. Enemies evolve.  Koopas used to, y'know, actually be able to hurt Mario.  Now they can't.  They also used to walk on four legs.  A bipedal non-harmful turtle with a rideable shell vs a quadrupedal enemy with a kickable shell?  If they weren't confirmed to be the same thing repeatedly, that'd be even more suspicious than Snifits-Snufits.  The point is, they originally had the same name, they look and act nearly identically, and their only other name is a simple one-key-space typo away from being the same anyway.  And, to emphasize, the people that originally made the game obviously thought they were the same thing, or else they'd have different names--hell, even Fly Guys, Paratroopas, and the like get completely different names, despite being the exact same thing as the normal version and being capable of being turned into that normal version with a single hit. And while 64's don't have legs, don't 64DS's?  64's Lakitu clouds don't have faces either, you know.  And its "beach koopas" are dressed differently (and are incapable of hurting Mario).  Its Wiggler doesn't turn red.  All of these are aspects of the characters that have been intact throughout every other appearance.  If it wasn't for a single letter in the Snufit's name, no one in their right mind would even consider it within the realm of possibility that they're a different species considering the evidence. Dazuro 00:48, 20 January 2008 (EST)


 * Aaaaah. I understand completly now. I agree now. [[Image:Paperjorgesp.png]] Paper Jorge [[Image:Paperjorgesp.png]]

Also, you should probably vote for the proposal. 12:33, 20 January 2008 (EST)


 * How about you vote for this proposal.

Merge Snufit with Snifit
Super Mario 64 had some pretty odd versions of recurring enemies (Koopas that can't hurt Mario, Fly Guys that spit fire, blue square Thwomps that are essentially moving platforms, Cheep Cheeps that look like Blurps, and Bullet Bills that can't be killed, just to name a few), so it's likely this is the same thing. Not only that, but they have the same name in Japanese, which is the reason Fire Guys and Bubs aren't considered unique enemies.

Proposer: Deadline: April 9, 2015, 23:59 GMT.

Merge with Snifit

 * 1) Per my reasons stated above.
 * 2) I was honestly hoping to hold this off until the Snufit/Snifit Police matter is settled, but I'll give my support early for two reasons: 1) Assuming there are actually copies of Mario Party 2 with "Snufit", it's not the version on Virtual Console, and Nintendo usually has a very good track record of widely distributing their "preferred" / "fixed" (in terms of typos & bugs) versions on the service, and 2) As someone pointed out at the very top of this page, "u" & "i" are remarkably close to each other on a US QWERTY keyboard, and coupled with the latest (most/all?) editions of Mario Party 2 using Snifits rather than Snufits, it's entirely feasible that this was just a typo all along (perhaps only in a player's guide), therefore making these guys Snifits as well.
 * 3) Per all.

Move to "Snifit (Super Mario 64)"

 * 1) The biggest evidence going for this article is the allegedly incorrectly named Snufit Police. There is evidence that Snufit Police is actually named Snifit Police, and since they bear the same resemblance to each other, they should be called Snifits. If not a merge, then we can rename it to "Snifit (Super Mario 64)". I feel like the second option is actually the best way to do it, since it addresses the drastic morphological differences and the questionable naming into a good compromise.

Keep As Is

 * 1) Snufits fly. Not with wings or anything (although that would guarantee an article), but completely on its own, as if it was a Boo or something. No other Snifit has appeared like that, and no other enemy in SM64 had such a drastic difference. Even if, through some odd belief at Nintendo, Snifits and Snufits are supposed to be the same enemy, there's enough to distinguish the two of them.
 * 2) Per Time Turner.
 * 3) Per Time Turner.
 * 4) - Per Time Turner, including his skepticism over the typo theory in the Comments. While SM64DS updated the mask's appearance to be more like Snifits, they still don't have legs, and that's a pretty major departure (like Para-Beetles and Buzzy Beetles). Even Fire Guys might be worth splitting to reflect its unique name and fire abilities. In general, it's better for search traffic to leave enemies with unique names split, so when in doubt, I feel like it's better to avoid unnecessary merges.
 * 5) I like it the way it is so, no merge and per Time Turner.
 * 6) - Per TT, they're FAR too different.
 * 7) Per all.
 * 8) Per all
 * 9) Per all.

Comments
Just a disclaimer for voters - don't let your support or opposition towards mine or this proposal influence your decision on both of them. As the current Para-/Winged Goomba articles demonstrate, naming and species are separate issues, so please treat them as such. LinkTheLefty (talk) 22:00, 26 March 2015 (EDT)

Most of your examples of strange enemies in Super Mario 64 don't hold ground because they're traits and behavior rather than appearances. Are there better examples to showcase how different one enemy looks in Super Mario 64 compared to their original appearances? Thwomps actually might make for the best example though because the original Thwomp are rectangles and covered in spikes while the Super Mario 64 one are bright blue cubes (and it's not one-off; it was recurring in Mario Kart 64 and, more notably, Mario Party games up until Mario Party 6). So, I think you should remove your other examples and use Thwomp as one. 17:37, 27 March 2015 (EDT)

I feel like "they fly" isn't a great enough distinction to give them their own article. After all, they still attack like Snifits. How are Fly Guys breathing fire or Skeeters crapping bombs (in the later games) less notable? Or just... Skeeters in general? 18:41, 27 March 2015 (EDT)
 * Let me throw that question back to you: how come giving wings to a Goomba is enough to give it its own article (Paragoomba), or wings for a Koopa Troopa (Koopa Paratroopa)? They still attack like their grounded counterparts; they just tend to hover/hop around.
 * They're different enemies due to their behavior and that they appeared alongside their non-winged counterparts, so there is a deliberate distinction. Not so here: Snufits and Snifits never appeared alongside together, so there is no evidence against that a Snufit is actually a drastic redesign of a Snifit. But there is evidence FOR that from inferences on keyboard layouts, Japanese names, and similar designs. 19:05, 27 March 2015 (EDT)
 * The "keyboard" thing is a bit too speculative for my tastes (someone made a typo and absolutely nobody noticed?), and I don't see how the Goomba/Koopa behaviour is much different than their counterparts (because they hop?). The similar designs is also a moot point since not only are there numerous differences (Boo-like body, different-coloured mask, no outline around eyes), similarities between species is what all of them ride on them. Having the same name in Japanese is certainly in favour of them being the same, but as it has been shown in the past with, say, Gritty Goomba and its companions, if there are noticeable differences besides the name, the wiki can consider them different enemies.
 * But the thing is, Super Mario 64 changed the appearances and behavior of pretty much every enemy. Just look at the Fly Guys that have no mouths and spit fire, or the blue square Thwomps that don't do contact damage. Binarystep (talk) 22:21, 27 March 2015 (EDT)
 * Gritty Goomba is a different case because it's from an RPG game, and it and its variations are shown alongside together. The Snifit/Snufit case is different because Snufits and Snifits never appear alongside each other. Using your logic "if there are noticeable differences besides the name, the wiki can consider them different enemies", Skeeters would all have different pages. Same goes for Thwomps, Dry Bones, and Koopa Troopas, which all have differences between each other across games sometimes. 19:47, 28 March 2015 (EDT)

@LinkTheLefty: If the only reason you're supporting the merge is a possible typo, then wouldn't that just make this Snifit (Super Mario 64)? -- 19:22, 27 March 2015 (EDT)
 * @SuperYoshiBros - My point of view is a bit like the Grinder/Ukiki/monkey merge experience a short while back - I originally proposed it as "Ukiki (Mario series)" and "Ukiki (Yoshi series), but the more I looked into it, the more I noticed their names and designs were used interchangeably anyway (even in a few foreign language sources), so I felt it was too much of a mess to try rationalizing in the end. The fact that this version of Snifit hovers isn't really that pertinent to the gameplay, since no situation to my recollection ever takes advantage of this newfound ability, so the floating change mostly comes across to me as a part of 3D platforming growing pains more than anything else. Still, that certainly wouldn't a bad option since this oddball Snifit only really appeared approximately once and a half, but I'm not in charge of this proposal (@Binarystep - how would you feel if you added that as a nice middleground third option?).
 * @Time Turner: Evidently, someone noticed, which is why there's a proposal for the name of their police organization. LinkTheLefty (talk) 19:50, 27 March 2015 (EDT)
 * Aaaand rewrote. Binarystep (talk) 21:35, 28 March 2015 (EDT)

Reopening a can of worms + Yurei Mucho name source.
I wanted to reopen a can of worms. Should this proposal have really failed? If LinkTheLefty supported once, would he support again? Anyways, i wanted to ask... Where does the name Yurei Mucho come from? I know the internal filename is a romanization, but where does the actual Japanese name come from? -- 10:56, 14 January 2019 (EST)
 * I can vouch that 「ゆうれいムーチョ」 was seen in a scan of 「スーパーマリオ64DS任天堂公式ガイドブック」 (Super Mario 64 DS Nintendo Kōshiki Guidebook), which unfortunately became a dead link and wasn't backed up. The internal name corroborates with it, which is why that reference was replaced. What's interesting is that Encyclopedia Super Mario Bros., which otherwise based their name of Keronpa Ball on Super Mario 64 DS, reverts back to the Super Mario 64 name. This might mean that the enemy was replaced rather than redesigned, as it's more clearly based on a Boo Guy rather than what looks like a red Boo in a Snifit mask. This could be evidenced by Super Mario Pia, which lists "SM64" as an appearance of Snifit. However, I think it's much simpler to just classify it as a derived species, given the identical role and behavior in both versions. The floating attribute is unique to Snufit, and many of them are placed in a way that it does affect gameplay. If the above proposal were done now, I'd vote to keep as-is. LinkTheLefty (talk) 13:14, 15 January 2019 (EST)
 * Th spherical body in SM64 means nothing anyways, as most enemies in the game used a "picture of ball" texture. (Boo is actually an exception probably for size reasons, and is depicted fully-modeled and somewhat oblong.) Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 13:25, 15 January 2019 (EST)
 * That'd warrant a proposal to decide how to reorganize it, IMO, if there are objections. -- 10:19, 10 February 2019 (EST)
 * @Doc von Schmeltwick do you think it should be reorganized? And in which way? -- 02:50, 13 February 2019 (EST)
 * S'fine as it is. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 03:25, 13 February 2019 (EST)
 * I don't think it's entirely fine as-is, given the evidence. Please note how enemies were off-model in this game (take Cheep Cheep and Thwomp to name a few.) Here's how it should work: SM64 part should be merged with Snifit while SM64DS part can have its own article. -- 05:13, 4 March 2019 (EST)
 * Being off-model wouldn't explain why they're suddenly floating through the air, which is something they've never done before or since. There's also conflicting evidence beyond the ghostly appearance and English name in the Player's Guide, which directly states that they're like "their cousins, the Snifits," on page 13. It'd be a redundant and confusing split since they are functionally identical and can easily share the same article, which is the current and simplest solution. LinkTheLefty (talk) 05:20, 4 March 2019 (EST)
 * Another thing, @FOY, why do you keep saying we're off-model? Autocorrect or something? Because "we're" and "were" are two separate words. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 06:47, 4 March 2019 (EST)
 * @LinkTheLefty, no, because we rely on the creator's intent. We have the Japanese name and the Super Mario Pia implying that they're the same now. -- 09:32, March 20, 2019 (EDT)
 * Pia is more of a messenger than a creator, and the book makes a few too many mistakes with its enemy appearances to be taken at face value; for example, we split Micro Mecha-Bowser as a derivative of Mechakoopa because there was no other source indicating that they are the same thing. Anyway, if it splits the way you're suggesting, Super Mario 64s Snufit will be merged with Snifit while Super Mario 64 DSs Sniffit will be its own article. LinkTheLefty (talk) 09:56, March 20, 2019 (EDT)
 * They clearly have a different Japanese name than the Mechakoopa's. That says, i wonder if any other books implies that they're the same, besides the Japanese name. Must ask to Mister Wu... -- 10:02, March 20, 2019 (EDT)
 * Also, the behavioral difference between 2D and 3D games accounts for that. -- 10:33, March 20, 2019 (EDT)
 * If Keronpa Ball gets all its details in one place, so does this. You can't have your cake and eat it too. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 05:17, April 11, 2019 (EDT)
 * Well. What do we do now that Mario Party Superstars lists Mario Party 2 as an appearance of Snifit? LinkTheLefty (talk) 20:00, October 28, 2021 (EDT)
 * I think both this and the Kamek thing can be summarized as Nintendo not caring about later distinctions when looking at historically shared lang-of-origin names. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 03:25, October 29, 2021 (EDT)
 * Given that it looks like that the same source has other mistakes, I'm inclined to agree. LinkTheLefty (talk) 09:59, January 27, 2022 (EST)

The English Super Mario 64 entry on the official Japanese Mario portal (archive.today mirror in case it won't load) pretty much settles the enemy as a "Snifit". With no traditionally-designed Snifits appearing in the game otherwise, I'm stumped on finding a reason as to why the wiki would consider them anything other than a quirky redesign; the only sources to give SM64 Snifits a name other than "Snifit", "Sniffit", or "Mūcho" is a Nintendo Power guide and a filename (both second- or lower-tier official sources as per the wiki's naming policy), and Mario Party Superstars outright supplants the Space Land iterations with classic Snifits. 21:12, August 12, 2022 (EDT)
 * I think it does need noted here that the distinguishing "Yurei Mucho" is only a file name. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 10:03, August 13, 2022 (EDT)
 * That's what the page says, but I can vouch that「ゆうれいムーチョ」is also present in the Super Mario 64 DS Shogakukan guide. That said, my position on this has shifted a bit - I think it's less a Keronpa Ball situation, and more akin to the game's interpretation of Fly Guy, which for this game only can suddenly breathe fire. In fact, according to Super Mario 64 source assets, Snufit is "mucho" and Fly Guy seems to be either "heyho" or "heyho_fly" instead of "propeller_heyho" or something similarly expected. So my working theory is that the game's Fly Guy was supposed to be an early post-SMB2/SMUSA appearance of Shy Guy, but then someone remembered that a (non-spear-wielding) flying variant appeared in Yoshi's Island so it became modeled and named after that late in development, and meanwhile Snifit/Snufit was basically in the same boat but got overlooked, explaining why two Shy Guy variants got in the game that don't really retain their normal behavior. Regardless, I don't think we ever found out what was up with the Superstars claim that Monty Mole made an appearance in Mario Party 4, so mistakes aren't out of the question on that front. LinkTheLefty (talk) 12:16, August 13, 2022 (EDT)
 * Assuming your Fly Guy theory is true, I don't think Snufit is in the same boat; I find the enemy unlikely to have been an attempt at redesigning Shy Guy into a bullet-shooting entity without taking the SMB2 iteration into consideration. And if the original Snifit design was in fact considered, then they simply adapted it to the environment it is found in. It's also possible that they originally conceived a bullet-shooting ghostly enemy which had no relation to the Shy Guy family, and was only afterwards turned into a callback to SMB2 Snifits, but given the current evidence I'm still more inclined to consider them Snifits in the original sense. I'm taking your word for it regarding the Japanese guide naming them "Yurei Snifits", but a Shogakukan guide is a lower priority source than an official website operated by Nintendo themselves (and more recent to boot). 12:51, August 13, 2022 (EDT)

It should be noted that, with the name "Snufit" only having one source (one page in a player's guide), its Japanese name being the exact same as the regular Snifit, it never being referred to as "Snufit" in the only other game with the same appearance, and now the official Mario Portal calling it "Snifit" too, it seems more and more likely that "Snufit" is nothing more than a typo that hadn't been double-checked (something I always believed was the case); do keep in mind that the U and I keys are right next to each other on a regular QWERTY keyboard, and as someone who seems to keep accidentally typing I instead of O and vice versa, I can attest that this isn't an uncommon occurrence. Arend (talk) 04:46, August 27, 2022 (EDT)

Merge to Snifit Round 2 Boogaloo
See the above discussion. Every English source barring one has been insistent these are just abnormally designed Snifits (Mario Party 2 with the Snifit Patrol, a 64 DS guide using the alternate "Sniffit" spelling, Mario Party Superstars listing MP2 as a normal Snifit appearance, and now Mario Portal in reference to SM64), and the Player's Guide's "Snufit" could have just as easily been a mis-key as much as a deliberate pun. In language-of-origin Japanese, it has been Mūcho consistently aside from the coding and guide for 64 DS, which seems to have become a clean-swept aberration comparable to Mini Mechakoopa.

I decided to go ahead and make a proposal due to the overwhelming support the above discussion has gotten since the Portal was translated, and because it requires overruling a previous proposal.

And no I'm not making an option to split the ball projectiles.

Proposer: Deadline: September 22, 2022, 23:59 GMT

Support

 * 1) - Per
 * 2) I guess that means we'll have to redirect Snufit Ball to Snifit Bullet instead Jokes aside, I was always under the impression that "Snufit" was but a mere typo (the U and I keys are quite close to each other on a QWERTY keyboard), and "Sniffit" is a similar misspelling. We've hade various other enemies having been redesigned for Super Mario 64 (Piranha Plant, Thwomp, Pokey, to name a few) too, and we don't regard those as brand new enemies either. Per proposal.
 * 3) Per proposal.
 * 4) SNUFIT BALL! AZERTY keyboards also have the UI thing, but i digress. Per proposal.

Rename to "Snifit (Super Mario 64)"

 * 1) As in the previous proposal, I like this option. It shares the name with the Snifits of the other game, maintains the design differences between Snifits and this one, and it also maintains the implication this is a version of Snifit. Not PERFECT mind you, but any awkward phrases can be written to be avoided.
 * 2) Given the uniquely strange history where there have been at least two attempts in the past to reconcile the redesign as its own thing, and the redesign itself affecting in-game physical interaction with it, this option makes more sense now than ever. It would also make more sense category/infobox-wise in regards to the Boo Guy connection.
 * 3) Makes as much sense as Ice Mario (Super Mario Galaxy) and Ice Mario to me, so per all.
 * 4) Per all. Wish they had different names but imo it's clear they are different enemies in both design and function.
 * 5) Per all.
 * 6) Per all.
 * 7) Per all AGRESIVELLY
 * 8) They're pretty much "Boo Snifits" in every way.
 * 9) While Waluigi Time's opposition seemed valid to me at first, the fact that every subsequent Mario game and the Mario Portal refer to these as "Snifits" is enough to make me support naming the article "Snifit" with an identifier.
 * 10) Per ball.

Oppose

 * 1) I'm also going to oppose since I'm not sure the new title would be very accurate. "Snifit (Super Mario 64)" suggests a subject that was called a Snifit in Super Mario 64 (it wasn't) and only appeared in that game (it didn't). It's preferable to a full merge, but I still don't entirely agree with it.

Comments
The SM64DS version seems to be a bit more ghostly in appearance, and has a new Japanese name in Yūrei Mūcho. Does that need to be split off while the vanilla SM64 version merges with Snifit, or should the whole thing be merged with Snifit altogether? 01:29, September 8, 2022 (EDT)
 * Considering the technical restrictions the original had to commend with, I don't think the "more ghostly" look in the latter is that meaningful. And these are clearly the same as each other between SM64 and SM64DS, so splitting isn't viable (we don't split the fish enemies between the two games anymore after all, and both of those cases actually have behavioral changes between the two versions). Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 02:11, September 8, 2022 (EDT)

For now, I'm neutral on this proposal. There's been two known, separate attempts, by region, to historically consider these a variant of Snifit. The Super Mario 64 Player's Guide directly calls them "cousins" of Snifits, which to me dispels the idea that Snufit was merely a typo (of course, then Prima's 64 DS coverage had to rename it Sniffit, making it look even more like a typo of Snifit than it did in the first place). Then, as you know, the Shogakukan/internal "YUREI_MUCHO" in Super Mario 64 DS was rebranded based on Boo Guy. Beyond these two instances, every other source out there (besides the banned-outside-its-article English Super Mario Bros. Encyclopedia) refers to the literal translation of its Super Mario 64 name. I would refrain taking Mario Party Superstars too seriously, as it includes mistakes such as claiming that Monty Mole appears in Mario Party 4 and seems to find close variants acceptable as it also claims for example that Monty Mole appeared in Mario Party 10 when it was really just the big version and not a regular one. That said, while this situation has the capability to flip on a dime if Yūrei Mūcho ever came back, Nintendo doesn't seem interested in revisiting these Snifits anytime soon, and at this point, we have more sources naming them Snifits than not. As long as Snufit and Sniffit remain merged, I don't have any particular inclinations whether they're covered within Snifit or their own article at this juncture, as it's basically a reverse-Keronpa situation. LinkTheLefty (talk) 10:29, September 8, 2022 (EDT)

Well I'm in the minority but I'm still open to the idea we get a page of "Snifit (Super Mario 64)" but eh. 17:27, September 9, 2022 (EDT)
 * I actually wouldn't mind if that option were added. It makes more sense now I feel. LinkTheLefty (talk) 17:37, September 9, 2022 (EDT)
 * Yeah. It's a good compromise IMO. It respects the naming convention of the later games but also maintains the design differences and also respects the implications that it's not the same Snifit as the normal ones. 17:41, September 9, 2022 (EDT)
 * I'd support that.
 * I considered it, but thought it wouldn't be viable, but eh, knock yourselves out. Option added. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 22:34, September 9, 2022 (EDT)
 * I made a rough test edit of what that option might look like if it's implemented, give or take. LinkTheLefty (talk) 06:50, September 10, 2022 (EDT)
 * Shouldn't they still be called Snufits in reference to SM64? It seems like Snifit wasn't in use for these until Mario Party 2, unless there's in-game text or something that I'm not aware of. -- 12:21, September 10, 2022 (EDT)
 * I personally think using English Mario Portal in this case would be an acceptable part of the compromise since it's such a unique situation, at least until the unlikely odds of it ever reappearing with its own name again. We don't name Encyclopedia-unified Keronpa Ball between 64 Kuromame Bakudan and 64 DS Keronpa depending on the article, either. But I believe that'd be up to Doc since it's their proposal. LinkTheLefty (talk) 13:17, September 10, 2022 (EDT)
 * I don't think the identifier necessarily means that. There are other articles that give off similar impressions at first glance. But anyway, here's an alternate sample with a more conventional approach. I'm okay with either, really. LinkTheLefty (talk) 22:03, September 10, 2022 (EDT)