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  And, to emphasize, the people that originally made the game obviously thought they were the same thing, or else they'd have different names--hell, even Fly Guys, Paratroopas, and the like get completely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)