Talk:Koopalings

Anybody think we could use this image somewhere, its assembled sprites of what the Koopalings would have looked like in Super Princess Peach. -- Sir Grodus
 * Would have looked like. It's not canon because it's custom sprites. 16:12, 21 January 2007 (EST)

Klaus Kratchet
 * That is NOT custom. It was found in the ROM.

Heirs?
How are they ALL bloody heirs? I'm fairly sure that the eldest would be the heir. That is, Ludwig. MamaWaluigi 16:28, 20 August 2007 (EDT)

Who says any of them are heirs? Bowser is still in command. 16:36, 20 August 2007 (EDT)
 * The bloody page does. MamaWaluigi 13:59, 21 August 2007 (EDT)
 * Mind your language, cursing is monitored on the wiki. - 14:01, 21 August 2007 (EDT)
 * But that wasn't a curse. And what is wrong with cursing? Even 9-year olds do it. Although, it is an outburst of over-emotion, it's not that bad. MamaWaluigi 19:24, 22 August 2007 (EDT)

I agree with MamaWaluigi, Ludwig should be next in line, however if something should happen to both Bowser and Ludwig, I think the second oldest should be next in line. (This, of course, being that "King" Ludwig having no koopalings himself).Shadow Master 15:28, 28 May 2010 (EDT)

TV Show Names
When they're not named Von Koopa and Koopa Jr. in TAoSMB3, why do their pages say so? - 14:41, 19 September 2007 (EDT)

I changed the Ludwig article around; Big Mouth only had Jr. in his name in DVD features, which the article states. -- Sir Grodus

For both names and ages, would the show be considered as canon as the games? I mean, Nintendo had no connection as far as I know, and plenty of things happened that seem doubtful for game canon. PPF
 * See here. In short: There is no official canon in the Mario series. 17:48, 24 August 2009 (EDT)

Kinda Pointless...
I don't really see the point in having this article if we already have ones on the individual Koopalings, seems redundant; anyone else agree? -- Sir Grodus

Well, I dunno. The Koopalings page has more info on the koopalings as a group, and the other ones have different info based on the individual koopaling, so in that case, all the articles including this one is valuable to the Wiki. --The Game Prince

Bowser Jr.
He is NOT a Koopaling, they scrapped the Koopalings for him, they never appeared in a real game since Bowser Jr. popped up.
 * The Koopalings have since been used to describe all of Bowser's children, and Bowser Jr. is one of his children.
 * Bowser Jr. was never actually called a "Koopaling", and the originals where always called the "Koopalings", after Bowser Jr. appeared it seems they retconed it so that the Koopalings never existed, and that Bowser only had one kid. So it wouldn't be "Koopalings" and he would not be a "Koopaling".
 * Fine, keep him off the page.
 * Ehm, the Koopalings did appear in Mario & Luigi: Superstar Saga, after Bowser Jr.'s appearance in Super Mario Sunshine. - 03:39, 29 September 2007 (EDT)
 * I wouldn't say the Koopalings have been retconned out of existance, since there's still the ocassional referrence to them, like in Super Paper Mario, or the unused sprites in Super Princess Peach. Funny how they're referrenced in games where Bowser Jr. never appears. It's like there's two Mario Universes or sommething (JK). I know that Iggy (or was it Larry) made a brief cameo at the start of Super Mario Sunshine when FLUDD scans Mario, but that just screws things around even more. -- Booster
 * The Sunshine appearance of Iggy was only to show an image of Super Mario World. It has no value when discussing whether Bowser Jr. is a Koopaling or not. -  05:54, 30 September 2007 (EDT)

Is it possible Bowser Jr is all the Koopalings combined into one?--Bob-omb Boris 06:14, 3 August 2009 (EDT)

Now that Bowser Jr. has been confirmed to appear in NSMB Wii along with the other Koopalings, is he or is he not on now? Luigifan95 22:52, 19 October 2009 (EDT)
 * He is not, until he officially gets called one. - 22:58, 19 October 2009 (EDT)

I'd say he's not, since they make a point of keeping him separate from the others in NSMB Wii, see where he jumps on top of the cake and they beside it. He seems like a superior to them. PPF

I heard someone say that in the official guide for NSMBW say that Bowser Jr. is one of the Koopalings, and that they are all still kids, but i can't confirm that, if someone can please do so. Besides it doesn't make any sense if bowser jr. isn't one of them, Kooplaings (AKA Bowser Kids) it's just "Koopa Sibblings", as all of them have Bowser as father, it wouldn't make any sense separate them. --CookiePinguy 12:26, 14 November 2009 (EST)

The term "Koopaling" does not just refer to them being Bowser's children. This goes back to how the Japanese names are translated - in Super Mario Bros. 3, they were first known as the Kokuppa 7 Kyôdai (Seven Koopaling Siblings), and in New Super Mario Bros. Wii they are instead called the Kokuppa 7 Ninshû (Team of Seven Koopalings) and the Kokuppa no Teshi'ta (Subordinate Koopalings). The basic gist is that they work as a group; Bowser Jr. is not a Koopaling in this sense because he was either to young to join their ranks, or that he's heir to the thrown (or both). LinkTheLefty 11:30, 2 January 2011 (EST)

Nintendo
What happened to Nintendo,huh?They don't wanna put the Koopalings anymore? Also Bowser Jr. isn't a Koopaling 'cause he isn't referred as one only Bowser's child.

It's probably just easier to use one character than seven (or eight). -- Sir Grodus 15:24, 10 December 2007 (EST)

Agreed (and go to the forums). 21:28, 10 December 2007 (EST)

Merge
Should we merge all the Koopaling article with the Koopalings article?
 * No, unlike Ashley and Red, The Koopalings all have enough individual info (Different battle tactics, action in the DIC cartoon trilogy... ect.) to be worthy of their own articles.

Blitzwing

Bowletta
Was it ever stated that the Koopalings were actually fooled into thinking she was their father? They could've just been following her orders so they weren't punished, or they could've been hypnotized (which I think is the since they curiously didn't have any lines in the game). As for whether or not Junior's a Koopaling I just say he is 'cause it's easier to talk about Bowser's kids as "the Koopalings" as opposed to "The Koopalings and Bowser Jr."; still, Nintendo hasn't said he is one so I have no problem with listing him as somewhat seperate from the original Koopalings (as he is in the article at the moment), it seems like a sensible compromise between the two views. - Walkazo

We can probably just remove that stuff about Bowletta in the trivia completely, since we don't know the actual circumstances how they came to work for her and don't want to dwelve too far into speculation. -- Sir Grodus 17:02, 5 January 2008 (EST)

Personality and strength
I'm really confused with the Koopaling's abilities, and how they are in relation with their personality and strength.

- Larry seems to be a sportive guy, as it is seen in "Hotel Mario" and "M&L: Superstar Saga". So he may be a bundle of power, always wanting someone to play tennis (or another game) with him.

- Morton is big and a bit fat. So he may love eating (or may he even like Sumo-ringers?)

- Wendy seems only to think about her bracelets, rings and her makeup. She may be very greedy, wanting everything she has not (as her personality is described in the TV Show)

- Iggy may be the crazy inventor of the koopa family. He invents thinks, that may not always work correctly, but sometimes are really good (like the mechs he built in "Yoshi's Safari")

- Roy seems to be a stereotypical bully, thinking that he is the coolest and the strongest of all. He may just have fun with beating weaker ones (like he did with Iggy in the Comics)

- Lemmy likes jumping around on his ball, so he may be the family's clown. Despite of being the second oldest, he is the smallest, and the crybaby (he cries in "M&L: Superstar Saga", when he is hit)

- Ludwig finally, seems to be the most intelligent member of the family, not an inventor like Iggy, but a creative head, as he likes composing (what Shigeryu Miyamoto may have thought when he created him, so he gave him the hair of Ludwig van Beethoven)

And to have something to compare their strength, you could take "M&L: Superstar Saga". I don't know their exact values in HP and attack strength, but I think I have a row that could be right:

- Lemmy and Wendy may be the weakest, as they both seem to have lesser HP than every other Koopaling. So they make self-copies to hide their weakness, but this is no help for them (even not Wendy's time Bob-omb)

- Iggy, Morton and Larry don't seem to be very special in attack strength and HP, but this may only be because Iggy and Morton are the first of the Koopalings and Larry is the youngest.

- Ludwig and Roy may be the strongest ones, mith seemingly the most HP of the Koopalings and the most dangerous attacks (Lundig's shell spin and Roy's multiple shockwaves). By my thoughts, Ludwig' shell spin is the strongest attack of all Koopalings, but Roy is also very dangerous because of his many HP and his time Bob-omb. Ludwig van Koopa

A lot of that is just speculation though. Interesting, but not applicable to the article. FD09

I Have a Dream (Not That One)
Most of you can see I've been cleaning this article a lot lately. I just want everyone to know they won't even recognize it by the time I'm ready to nominate it to be featured. Look forward to a quality increase. FD09

I think it was you, who wrote that the birth order of the Koopalings is not confirmed at all, so I write it in this section of the talk:

When it is only confirmed that Larry is the youngest and Ludwig the oldest, not only the order they are fought in SMB3 could be their birth order, but the order they are fought in NSMBWii as well. I think their new order would be a bit more likely, as Morton is now the biggest (and maybe the second oldest), and Lemmy may now be one of the youngest Koopalings, as he is the smallest. Ludwig van Koopa

Hmm, I don't recall messing with much birth order info. HOWEVER. Regardless of what you might speculate towards, other than what is stated in the VIDEO GAMES, regardless of a koopalings size or appearance order does not matter unless STATED. No speculation allowed sorry. FD09

Personality and Such
Are all of the traits on their perosnalityes from just the video games? If not, when it says something like Ludwig is cruel, in needs to make an example of it that clarifies if it is a trait form the video game sor something else. Panchito

Full names
Now I am full aware that it don't say this, but shouldn't each of the Koopalings be Prince (or Princess in Wendy's case) like Prince Bowser Koopa Jr. They are the Koopa Kingdom's heirs, King Bowser's kids, makes since to me- Clarkmaster!
 * You have a good point, but those parts of their names are never mentioned in the video games or cartoons (as far as I know), so it can not go into the article.

Photos
Can someone explain why we cannot have photographs of each Koopaling?--ThatlovesIggy 15:37, 29 March 2010 (EDT)

I understand we have main articles for photos, but wouldn't it be better for the article to have photos there?--ThatlovesIggy 15:42, 29 March 2010 (EDT)


 * The sections of text are far too small to have an image near them. With a decent-sized image of each Koopaling by each section of text, the article would become cluttered. Because of this, the image at the top of the page will suffice.

Bowser Jr. is a Koopaling?
I sent an e-mail to Nintendo Italy and I asked if Bowser Jr. is a Koopaling. They responded at me with:

Dear Customer, we inform you that the Koopalings are 8 (Bowser Koopa Jr., Larry Koopa, Morton Koopa Jr., Wendy O. Koopa, Iggy Koopa, Roy Koopa, Lemmy Koopa and Ludwig von Koopa) and are all children of Bowser. Bowser Koopa Jr. is therefore also a Koopaling. We should change the page... --Mikiuz 08:35, 31 May 2010 (EDT)--
 * We'll see about that, I just sent an email for the amiricain nintendo.

Okay then, I got their answer, here it is:

Hello, Thank you for writing back to clarify that you are able to play the American releases of our games. That said, I'm afraid there isn't a direct answer to your question about Bowser Jr. Nintendo excels at making sure our fans can get back story information, character descriptions, and--most importantly--the information they require to complete the games that we publish. This can happen through our website (www.nintendo.com), Player's Guides, and Nintendo Power magazine. Having said that, many details about our games and the origins of the characters will remain mysteries, left to the active imagination of the player.

I guess we should just leave it then.

Mario is Missing
I REALLY need someone to clear this up specifically. From what I can gather Larry is the only one in the NES version, everyone but Larry, Morton, Wendy, and Lemmy appear in the SNES version, and then everyone but Lemmy and Morton appear in the PC version, BUT Morton and Lemmy are still mentioned in the game's story, and Lemmy is shown in official artwork despite not appearing in the game? Is there anything else I'm missing? UhHuhAlrightDaisy 21:39, 22 August 2010 (UTC)

Last I checked, none of the Koopalings appeared as Bosses in the NES version, the only Boss was a Koopa Troopa posing as Bowser. I used to own the SNES version. The only Koopalings appearing in it, were in this order. Ludwig von Koopa, Iggy Koopa, and Roy Koopa. Although Lemmy appears in the PC version's artwork he doesn't make any formal appearance in game, the same is true for Morton as well, making them the only two Koopalings to not appear in ANY of the games. this link below features part 1 of a walkthrough for the PC version. Lemmy Koopa617

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uzb57x74gls&feature=search
 * Ok the part about Larry NOT being in the NES version is news, but I covered everything else you said already. Thanks though. If anyone else knows anything more specific it's appreciated. UhHuhAlrightDaisy 03:15, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

why were the koopalings gone for so long?
The koopalings were gone for quite a while until they made their newest appearence, but my question is why?
 * Only Nintendo knows. -- 20:44, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

Koopalings Truly Bowser's Children?
So I've been thinking as to whether or not the Koopalings are truly Bowser's children. For starters, in royal family, the eldest is the heir to the throne and not the youngest, meaning that if the Koopalings are Bowser's children, then Ludwig Von Koopa would be the next Koopa King instead of Bowser Jr. It makes me wonder if "Bowser's seven children" is more of a symbolic title, as opposed to literal.

For example, in Christian mythology, angels are called the "Sons of God" yet Jesus Christ is God's only literal son, so do y'all see what I mean about Koopalings being Bowser's symbolic children?

It would explain things like why Bowser Jr. outranks Ludwig Von Koopa, and other things like Morton Koopa Jr. being a junior. As if these are younger Koopas of Bowser's Koopa sub-species, that behave as governors to Bowser, yet since the Koopa Kingdom is a monarchy and not a republic, then these governor koopas would be prince koopas, making them symbolic "children" of King Bowser. This could also explain why the Koopalings were absent for so long after Super Mario World; perhaps Bowser stripped these governors of their power for failing him, yet in New Super Mario Bros. Wii, Bowser gave them another chance with his literal son in charge of them.

Maybe I am over thinking this, but it has always been unclear as to why Bowser Jr. debuted way after the Koopalings, and it be a shocker to Princess Peach on Pinna Park when she said "So, you're Bowser's son!?!" implying that she either 1, knew Bowser had a kid, but never met him or 2, that she was surprised that Bowser had a kid at all. If the Koopalings were Bowser's true children, as well, then wouldn't Peach have said something more like, "So you're one of Bowser's sons!?!"

Again, I'm way over thinking this, but I'd love to hear some feedback as to your thoughts on this.

DARTHZERIMAR 22:07, 24 January 2011 (UCT)

The Koopalings are in fact Bowser's children. We're talking about video games here, not real life. I'm pretty sure in the SMAS25AE booklet it says Bowser's children are helping or something like that. So, they are real.

Yes, but the whole point of my argument is whether the definition of "Bowser's children" means "biological offspring" or more of an honorable title given to 7 high-ranking Koopas, tied second only to Bowser (and eventually third to Bowser Jr.) I know many of y'all will be adamant on "Bowser's Children" being literal, but there are many more examples of a leader's top-ranking lieutenants being referred to as his "children" or "sons."

Another perfect example is when Koopa Kid is split into the Red, Blue, and Green K. Kids in Mario Party 5, where they call Bowser "Dad" and Bowser is shown grounding them from playing with their Mario action figures. This is a seemingly clear example of Parent-Child relationship, yet it is pretty much agreed that Koopa Kid, from Mario Party, is not really Bowser's offspring.

DARTHZERIMAR 22:35, 24 January 2011 (UCT)


 * You're reading too much into the Koopaling stuff: our job on the wiki is to report the official information, not speculate on what "children" means. The Koopa Kid's use of "dad" is interesting, but you still can't discuss it like this here. As I said in the below section, bring these discussions to the forum. - 23:42, 24 January 2011 (EST)

He might be onto something, though. True the Kokuppa were known as siblings in Japan, but them being his kids might've been an American invention. I'll have to check sometime. LinkTheLefty 00:28, 4 May 2011 (EDT)

Meaning of the Name "Koopaling"
Hey, I've been wondering this one for a while, as well, but has Nintendo confirmed what the meaning of "Koopaling" even means? The way I see it, there are 3 possibilities:

1. Koopa Underling. Explanation: The Koopalings are the underlings of King Bowser Koopa, which they are. Problem: Other than to Bowser, they are underlings to nobody else.

2. Koopa Youngling. Explanation: The Koopalings are child or adolescent Koopas, which they are, not to mention their original title as the "Koopa Kids." Problem: The use of the root word "-ling" to describe something as young, typically implies infancy or young childhood, which the Koopalings (other than Lemmy Koopa MAYBE) are not.

3. Koopa Sibling. Explanation: The Koopalings are a group of 7 siblings, which they are (assuming they are Bowser's literal biological children)  Problem:  Bowser Jr. would, by definition of sibling, be the 8th Koopaling, which he is confirmed not to be, by Nintendo.

Therefore, which "-ling" definition most describes the Koopalings? I suppose there could be a bit of all 3, but if one had to give only one "-ling" word to merge with Koopa, then which one would it be?

DARTHZERIMAR 22:23, 24 January 2011 (UCT)


 * Nintendo has stated that the Koopalings are Bowser's children, and these sorts of discussions don't belong here anyway: they belong on the forums. - 23:34, 24 January 2011 (EST)

Who is Bowser's wife?
I never seen his wife, but there must be one. Where did the koopalings come from if there isn't a wife? SuperPaperFan 15:51, 6 December 2011 (EST)
 * Again, this type of talk belongs on the forums, not the talk pages of articles here. Please don't post more discussion on talk pages unless you are trying to improve the articles.

Actually i was.
 * The UK's Nintendo Power once mentioned a wife in an article that's probably not supposed to be taken seriously. This section in the "Implied Character" list is the full extent of the information we have on the matter, and everything else is speculation. - 15:02, 7 December 2011 (EST)

Link needs to be fixed
In the trivia section, the link to Mario's Early Days goes to a disambiguation page. Can someone fix it? Jdrawer 18:31, 25 February 2012 (EST)

Koopalings in 3D Land?
The article says that they were planned to be in SM3DL. This should be removed as there is no reference that proves this. Someone look into this ease?

Physical Appearances
Should I add that Morton and Wendy have shown the least amount of change? They're the only 2 who didn't get their shell, hair, size, and/or face altered in any way. KoopaKiller13 19:52, 24 June 2012 (EDT)

Not Bowser's children
In an interview with Game Informer, Miyamoto stated that the Koopalings are not Bowser's biological children, and Bowser Jr. is Bowser's only biological child. Link: --A Pimp Named Slickback 15:34, 14 September 2012 (EDT)
 * From the same interview: Mario and Luigi do not have family names and Mario is not an actual doctor. Koopalmier (talk) 15:42, 14 September 2012 (EDT)


 * He didn't said biological. It's because currently they "stopped" stating they were Bowser's children and started saying they were Bowser's minions, even in New Super Mario Bros. 2. We cannot confirmed they aren't Bowser's biological children, nor that they aren't his children neither because they were meant to be his children. It says that the current story (now) is that the Koopalings aren't his children and Bowser Jr. is his only child. So, how was it before, and how it will be in the future? Will Shigeru and the developers start considering them as Bowser's children again? People should know that, even Bowser care a lot for the Koopalings too regardless for his care for his descendant, it was a long time that we never seen Bowser treating them like his children since Bowser Jr. made his debut. If they weren't Bowser's children, it's more than exceendingly cruel for them.--Prince Ludwig (talk) 19:55, 14 September 2012 (EDT)


 * Clearly the only explanation is that Bowser disowned them. I added a bit to the introduction and the "Family Relationship" section saying that they're "currently" not considered to be his kids. However, I don't think this is enough to go back and retcon over 20 years of calling them his children: that's the story that everyone knows and is expecting, and I think we should leave it intact while the interview statement is left as more of a footnote. - 21:51, 14 September 2012 (EDT)

Ah, finally. Thank you Walkazo. I feel a lot better now. ^_^ --Prince Ludwig (talk) 06:10, 15 September 2012 (EDT)


 * Except that they were never his children in Japan, right? Wasn't this simply a translation issue, just like Peach being called Toadstool? As far as I know the American canon had them as children until Super Mario Advance 2 was released, then they were simply referred to as his "generals" or minions from then on. They were siblings, and of the same species as Bowser, but not necessarily Bowser's children. Miyamoto isn't really retconning anything, he's simply fixing an inconsistency between the two canons that has technically not actually been mentioned ever since they started reappearing. In Japan, they were never thought of as his children, which is presumably why they were forgotten for so long and why Bowser Jr. exists. Fizzle (talk) 10:15, 15 September 2012 (EDT)
 * He said they aren't his children. That means that THEY ARE NOT HIS CHILDREN. That is what Miyamoto himself said. They aren't related to Bowser at all. Those who disagree just can't face the truth.


 * Just forget what I just said there. I was just angry. What I'm trying to get across is that there is even proof that they are not Bowser's kids. For example, Bowser never shows fatherly love to the Koopalings like he does with Jr. I say they aren't his kids and any pages saying that they are should be changed as such. However, I am aware that some people disagree with me. I suggest we make a proposal on this. Mario3D64 (talk) 10:59, 15 September 2012 (EDT)
 * We need to mention that they originally WERE his kids in the English canon, in Super Mario Bros. 3, Super Mario World and... presumably Yoshi's Safari, but that has been retconned since then and never been mentioned since. Serious question, when was the last time they were referred to as his children? Fizzle (talk) 16:38, 15 September 2012 (EDT)
 * If I had to take a guess i'd say the NSMBWII prima guide (I base this off of the fact that Bowser Jr. is called a Koopaling in it. Also the guide for Super Mario Advance 4 does refer to the Koopalings as Bowser's kids.
 * I don't think Prima guides (or even some official guides) can be taken as "canon" exactly. While they are a source of English canon, particular in terms of names for things, they are also known for their mistakes and assumptions. Heck, it calls the Koopa Clown Car a "carriage", which is just weird. I haven't seen them referred to as Bowser's children for a long time, I even remember the official website for SMA2 referring to them as "generals" and that was ages ago. I will check the SMA4 guide you mention, but I think other sources should be looked at, mainly manuals. Fizzle (talk) 16:57, 15 September 2012 (EDT)
 * The wiki policy states that Prima guides are in fact canon since they are officially licensed by Nintendo (also the Super Mario Advance 4 thing I think the manual also calls them Bowser's kids.)
 * There are levels of canonicity, that's my point. Manuals would usually override guides, for example. And Miyamoto certainly would. As SMA4 was a remake it's hard to say, did it just copy and paste the plot from the original manual? Either way, ever since they reappeared in the NSMB series I'm not sure if they were ever called his children, and in Japan they've never been known as that to my knowledge. Fizzle (talk) 17:25, 15 September 2012 (EDT)
 * Different levels of canon don't really exist on the wiki except the fact that I believe Nintendo Power guides trump Prima guides and games trump manuals. Also according to this guy the Koopalings were Bower's kids in the original Japanese manual for SMB3 (or at least that the context implies it).
 * That whole bit is particularly interesting, thanks for that, and ties in with Miyamoto's recent comments. It seems an issue of interpretation, and since Bowser Jr. came along, the interpretation is that they're not his actual children. presumably. I get the feeling this whole issue requires a section on the page pretty much devoted to it, so as to explain the inconsistencies with them once being Bowser's children and now them no longer being so. Fizzle (talk) 19:24, 15 September 2012 (EDT)

Hey guys, let's not argue. Can you guys at least realize he didn't state that they weren't his children from the beginning and that he never said that they weren't related to Bowser? He said that the current story is that the Koopalings aren't Bowser's children and that Bowser Jr. is his only child, which means that they can be considered as Bowser's children again. He didn't said "biological", "related", any of sort. One more thing, the Koopalings are meant to be Bowser's children for the very beginning, which means that we should do so in Mario's current era instead of changing the story. You know, we argue because we don't agree that the Koopalings aren't Bowser's children, something we can't deal with. We like the Koopalings a lot more than we like Bowser Jr.

Yeah, Bowser Jr. often upset lots of Mario fans after Super Mario Sunshine, when he replaced the Koopalings AND Boom Boom, eventually being like the combination these 8 Koopas (Bowser's faithful son), so it's like that it's the character the cause of these problems.--Prince Ludwig (talk) 20:45, 15 September 2012 (EDT)
 * I don't think we were arguing, just discussing. I'm not sure what your point is though, either they're his children or they are not. At the moment, the canon is that they are not, and so the article should reflect this, right? While it may change in future, like you suggest, I find this quite unlikely, unless they plan to retcon Bowser Jr. out of the series. I see this as Miyamoto attempting to correct the American canon to the Japanese canon, where their status as Bowser's children was never that obvious in the first place. PERHAPS it might change again in future, but the fact is that they are not his children now. And I'm not sure where biology comes into it.
 * Don't get me wrong, I quite got used to them being his children, but with Bowser Jr. in the continuity it never made much sense, so I'm happy to go with the concept that they are not, and are simply young versions of his species who act as his minions. Obviously he still dotes on them as if they are children somewhat, and presumably they are all siblings, but they're not his actual children, because that's Bowser Jr.'s role now. Fizzle (talk) 20:59, 15 September 2012 (EDT)

I know, right? So, I wouldn't consider as them not being Bowser's actual children (though we can still say Bowser is their father). But that's kind of cruel because I still see them as Bowser's children. They had many things they got from their father. Meh, we can say they have a different role since they are all adults now. It really is up to Bowser Jr. now... :/--Prince Ludwig (talk) 21:18, 15 September 2012 (EDT)

Woah, Fizzle you're at Mario Wiki to! Yay! Besides that, I never really considered them his children either... besides I don't think Bowser can have 7 children that have a drastically different physical appearances than his physical appearance. As such, we still need to put that they were refered to as his kids in the Super Mario Super Show and some of the games. --XXSuperXXNintendoXx (talk) 22:28, 15 September 2012 (EDT)


 * Oh, indeed, my proposal is to mention their original role then state that now they're considered his generals rather than children, or something to that basic effect. And yeah, I'm here too! The Mario Wiki is a lot more active than the Zelda one so I doubt I'll be as busy here but there are a lot of crossover enemies in the games so I logged on to help fix inconsistencies between the two wikis. The Koopalings are just something I felt like I needed to jump in on after I read the story. Fizzle (talk) 08:12, 16 September 2012 (EDT)
 * Actually, we might have to mention it as being possibly just English exclusive. Even LinkTheLefty, the guy you referenced earlier, also mentioned that one of the hints to their being Bowser's children, Larry referring to Bowser as "Oyaki", can also just as easily be intended to mean that they have fanatical devotion to Bowser (as Oyaki, besides the implied father aspect, also is used as a term of endearment or closeness). Besides, in the Japanese versions at least, any hints towards possible lineage to Bowser effectively ended with Super Mario World, where its manual does not list any blood relations to Bowser at all. Anyways, I rewrote portions of the article to reflect the change, as they were most likely intended to be a fanatical task force in the Koopa Troop anyways. it wouldn't be the only time that a task force has referred to themselves as if children to their leader even when they don't actually have blood relations to said leader. Weedle McHairybug (talk) 14:28, 16 September 2012 (EDT)
 * That "task force" idea is WAY more speculative than interpreting "the 7 little-Bowser siblings" (which is what this scan translates to: see here for the explanation) as "Bowser's 7 kids", and the 俺様の息子達 quote translates directly to "my children". The nature of the Japanese language means there's a bit of wiggle room, but in both cases, the familial connection is about as strongly implied as it could be: any other interpretation is a bit left field. Besides that, your also putting a lot of words in Nintendo's mouth here. All Miyamoto said in that Q&A was that Nintendo's "current" story is that they're not Bowser's kids (see the scan for yourselves - the full quote is: "Our current story is that the seven Koopalings are not Bowser's children. Bower's only child is Bowser Jr. and we don't know who the the mother is."). Where is all this "they're meant to be Mini-Bowsers" stuff coming from? All I found was a random guy's comment on the Screw Attack forum that reported the Q&A, and since you provided no references for your changes (which involved copy-and-pasted stuff directly from Link The Lefty's talk page, which is technically plagiarism, fyi), I have to ask, where exactly has Miyamoto "stated that the characters were intended to be 'Mini-Bowsers'"? Going back to the confirmed quote, the "currently" implies that Nintendo used to go by the "Bowser's kids" story, and while he could be referring to NoA's more explicit take on the matter, he doesn't actually specify: he could easily be talking about NoJ, or both - we don't know, and we shouldn't presume to know. All the scraps of Japanese content strongly indicates that they were his kids there too at first, so all the "English translation" speak should be toned down or cut out entirely. Additionally, the Koopalings have been understood to be Bowser's kids for over 20 years - that's a lot more than "some mediums", and that sort of offhand dismissal of decades of Mario history should definitely be scrubbed from the pages. We have to say that the story is fuzzy and all that, but we should not act like this one quote trumps the rest of the history, because it doesn't, it just adds to the mess - a mess we have to deal with neutrally. None of this "Junior sucks / the Koopalings look nothing like Bowser" chatter: save those sorts of opinions for the forum. This is not about legitimizing one school of thought or preserving another: it's about reporting their convoluted history as clearly and accurately as possible. Sorry, but your rewrites do not do this at all, and must be changed (I'd do it myself if I had a couple more hours of free time tonight, but frustratingly, this is not the case). - 21:51, 16 September 2012 (EDT)
 * Fine, I'll try to undo the edits. Thought I was helping, but I guess not. I hope Miyamoto elaborates soon on what he meant by "currently." As for the mini-bowsers thing, I think I read about it on Wikipedia. It mentioned something about their original intention being replacements to Bowser. I'll try to find out if there's a source besides Wikipedia, though. Actually, the Nintendo Power guide did refer to Ludwig as being Bowser's second in command frequently, even when they would have used heir if to imply familial relationship. When people think of "second-in-command," they usually would think of the line of command in a military organization, so we might need to at least keep the military aspect. Let me point out, however, that I never had any doubt prior to that magazine article that the Koopalings and Bowser Jr. were both Bowser's children, not even once. And Miyamoto was most likely referring to the American audience anyways (as LinkTheLefty pointed out, the Japanese Wiki mentioned that any hints at the Koopalings being related to Bowser in the Japanese versions ended as early as Super Mario World, so I doubt that he would need to address it to the Japanese audience, since they most likely would have deduced that they weren't that). Weedle McHairybug (talk) 22:02, 16 September 2012 (EDT)
 * I honestly used the Mini-Bowsers on my Talk Page as an example of people who look at the scan but don't see the evidence of Bowser being their father - I think I've heard of the analogy in the immediate reaction to Miyamoto's quote, but I don't remember where exactly. It could have been on the Screw Attack forums. There's nothing off hand that links it to Miyamoto. コクッパ7兄弟 (Kokuppa 7 Kyōdai [Bros.]) was their original group name in the Famicom version of Super Mario Bros. 3, but if Miyamoto, Tezuka and the current staff no longer consider the Koopalings to be Bowser's own children at this point then it could easily be just that - a group name. As I said below, their group name kept changing in Japan, so this is the only time in a manual that they call themselves siblings (it wouldn't be the only time - didn't one of the later sports spinoffs call Wario & Waluigi the Wario Bros. and Luigi & Yoshi the "Green Bros."?). Their relation is heavily implied, yes, but I made the case that オヤジ (Oyaji) can very easily be taken another way. I'll admit that the 「俺様の息子達」 spoken by Bowser is a bit harder to explain because it is far more natural to read that as Bowser talking about his own children than the other way around. In fact, there's almost no mistaking that statement, but from my recollection that would pretty much be as direct as the manual gets. However, while you can simply read it as "my children", Bowser is being cartoonishly arrogant when he says this (俺様 is literally ore-sama). It's hard to take him seriously when he refers to himself so highly - it's like he's trying to be more imposing, but it comes across as stuck-up and immature. It reminds me of how he was insecure in Super Mario RPG. Also on the Japanese side of things, I've read that Super Mario-Kun considers the Koopalings to be Bowser's children, although I myself can't confirm or deny this. Though if you've been following my Talk Page, you'll see that I'm anxious to get my Super Mario Bros. 3 manual scanned. The small bit of research I've made is based on Japanese Wiki and how its only source is Super Smash Bros. Melee and in the characters' speech bubbles of the Famicom manual, as I don't personally recall this detail when I looked through it. There's not much more I can add at this moment; it would probably be best to wait until I am able to scan it - we'll have more conclusive translations then. LinkTheLefty (talk) 00:18, 17 September 2012 (EDT)

Not Bowser's Kids?


Oh my god, according to this the Koopalings are not Bowser's children. Oh my god, could someone verify this- I'm starting to panic? Moolala (talk) 19:58, 16 September 2012 (EDT)


 * We've already got that topic covered above. Either way, technically, their relationship to Bowser was not actually mentioned in the Japanese materials, so it's likely they are basically the Mario equivalent of the Sons of The Boss/The Cobra Unit from Metal Gear Solid 3 (eg, people who are fanatically devoted to Bowser's cause to the extent that even though they are technically not related, they are close enough to acting like his children). Weedle McHairybug (talk) 20:05, 16 September 2012 (EDT)
 * Actually, I do have a small follow-up to that. Someone directed my attention to this video earlier, and in it the announcer identifies them as Bowser's kids when they talk about the airships. Now keep in mind that this is a pre-release sneak peek, but we can see that the Japanese audience was intended to understand them as Bowser's kids before they abandoned the idea. In the context of the original published Famicom manual itself, there is nothing that directly states this to my knowledge; there is a great implication at a familial / close relationship in some of the flavor speech bubbles each character had (which I've already covered for now, but I'll get to the rest at a later date and see if they speak of Bowser in a different tone), which can be taken either way. Outside of Super Smash Bros. Melee and maybe some other Famicom-era materials (it warrants a small investigation, but I see no sign of others post-release), it would seem that there are no other Japanese materials that directly state their relation and that it's basically a context issue with how some people interpret the flavor dialog. Since Miyamoto has said that he and his staff don't consider Bowser as their father, I'd personally view the Koopalings as more like young nobles, maybe indirect relatives, or otherwise somehow grew up around their king on a more personal level given Larry and Bowser's informal language - but I digress since that's heading into theory territory. I think that they were meant to be Bowser's own kids at the time, but Nintendo left the wording ambiguous upon release then changed their stance by their second appearance in Japan. I also think anything the series creator says without the objection of Takashi Tezuka and other staff ought to trump most sources in terms of the games, since that's essentially as close to "Word of God" as this franchise will get. I did find his idea of the Mario characters as a troupe of actors interesting - maybe he believed the Koopalings originally would have served a good role as Bowser's children, but does not at the moment because he views the Mario characters as malleable (hence "current")? Just a thought. On a side note, I should mention that their group name seems to change with each major appearance in Japan - they were first the コクッパ7兄弟 (Kokuppa 7 Kyōdai [Bros.]) in Super Mario Bros. 3, then they were the コクッパ7人衆 (Kokuppa 7 Ninshū [Team]) in Super Mario World. I believe they were just コクッパ in Mario & Luigi (I don't know about Yoshi's Safari). After their hiatus, they came back in New Super Mario Bros. Wii as クッパの手下[たち] (Kuppa no Teshita[-tachi] - or Koopa's Subordinates). LinkTheLefty (talk) 22:44, 16 September 2012 (EDT)
 * Well, if they were intended to be malleable actors, that would probably explain why the Paper Mario games and Super Mario Bros. 3 were implied to be curtain plays, or the ending for Superstar Saga being a movie theater. Weedle McHairybug (talk) 23:07, 16 September 2012 (EDT)
 * Just gonna throw my two cents in and say that for me the fact that he says that the current story is that they aren't his kids implies that they were at one point his kids.
 * Well, at first we believed he was just referring to the American canon, but after what LinkTheLefty has stated I guess they were implied to be his actual sons in Japan too. Bowser really does say "my sons" in the Japanese manual, however Wendy is among them, so perhaps this was always somewhat vague and could be translated as "my heirs", and not meant to be literal offspring. Either way, it was probably retconned when Bowser Jr. joined the fray, because however you swing it they are no longer his offspring or his heirs. Hey, at least they weren't forgotten. Fizzle (talk) 13:19, 17 September 2012 (EDT)
 * It could mean that they have grown up and are no longer considered children :P

Oh wait hold on, there was a section about this above. Moolala (talk) 07:50, 17 September 2012 (EDT)


 * It's right Raven, they are grown-up adults, especially Ludwig von Koopa. All that's left is Bowser Jr., who currently slowly mature.--Prince Ludwig (talk) 17:46, 17 September 2012 (EDT)

Things that should be cleared up.
So when I was giving this article a look-over, two things in particular stuck out to me: the claim that Lemmy and Morton are mentioned in the PC Mario is Missing manual as loafing around (which I find iffy because the Koopalings weren't even mentioned by name in the console manuals), and the claim that Iggy / Ludwig created their mechs in Yoshi's Safari. Both statements lack a tangible source, and I feel they should be cited because I'm not sure if they are fanon ideas or if Nintendo really did officially state this. Is someone able to confirm or deny this with official backing? LinkTheLefty (talk) 14:35, 20 September 2012 (EDT)
 * The first are probably true due to the fact that they don't appear in the game while the others do (of course I don't own the pc version so I can neither confirm nor deny anything) and I can't confirm the Yoshi's Safari one either because I don't own it. So we are now stuck because on one hand they could be false and on the other hand they could be true but we have no way of knowing because we don't have the manuals so the real question is do we want to remove info that might be true because we can't confirm it (also I think it's important that we find out who added that info.)
 * Actually I am now 100% convinced that the Mario Is Missing info is true because it was added by one of are finest editors and I trust his word completely.
 * They should still list sources... I can see in the "Mario is Missing" section that someone mentioned Lemmy and Morton's artwork is in the PC manual, but it does not say anything about the reason they are missing in action. You can, however, find console manual scans and transcripts very easily online. I can say that the Yoshi's Safari mentions nothing, so unless it came from some obscure strategy guide then I have doubts. Morton and Larry are also in the SNES Mario is Missing manual. LinkTheLefty (talk) 15:55, 20 September 2012 (EDT)
 * Alright I think we can remove the Yoshi's Safari one (because I don't think Nintendo Power made a guide for that so any guide would be unofficial) however I still trust Sir Grodus who did in fact add the Mario is missing info in.
 * Yeah, nothing in-game, in the manual or on the boxart of Yoshi's Safari mentions the origin of the mechas (although the back of the box calls the Koopalings Bowser's offspring again). I haven't had any luck tracking down the NES or DOS versions of the Mario is Missing! manuals, but I confirm that Lemmy, Morton and Larry are all pictured in the SNES version (as well as a screenshot from Ludwig's room), with the text stating that "Bowser and his bad boys are back to a life of crime" (and with Wendy not getting a picture or an in-game appearance, it is just the six boy Koopalings involved in the SNES version). However, Wendy is on the back cover of both the NES and DOS boxes, and Lemmy's on the latter one as well. I think we should remove all that questionable info; who added the MiM! tidbit isn't the greatest argument against doing so anyway, since there's always the chance that Sir Grodus was misled by a faulty source (which could have even been the wiki itself, if he was simply moving preexisting misinformation around). - 21:10, 20 September 2012 (EDT)