Talk:Koopaphobia

Point?
Is there really a reason to keep this article around? It's just an article detailing a fear of the Koopa Troop as it's portrayed in one episode by a single one-time character, and considering we've deleted Holerö and Happiness, I'd say this is ripe for deletion as well. Plus, phobia is a real-world term, which makes this article feel incredibly generic. 23:53, July 29, 2022 (EDT)
 * This article was created in February 2008. Another stone age relic that is inexplicably still around. 13:44, July 30, 2022 (EDT)
 * It's not even about the condition as it is about the person with the condition, except for a off-handed mention of a tattle from Super Paper Mario. Because what more is there to say? It's a stupid reference attempt to Indiana Jones's fear of snakes, and that's it. 22:09, July 30, 2022 (EDT)
 * kill this article 02:07, August 12, 2022 (EDT)

Move Koopaphobia to a redirect or delete it
So this article covers Koopaphobia, a fictional phobia that existed in that one episode that parodied Indiana Jones. It was just an abstract, one-off joke that never appeared again and is such a vague concept. Therefore, it's pretty unnecessary to have an article for it. There are three ways we can handle this.

Merge with Koopa (species) Since there isn't that much information about the fictional phobia, this could be a good idea.

Merge with Indiana Joe The character is mainly associated with this concept. Heck, the main article's image is Indiana Joe.

Merge with "Raiders of the Lost Mushroom" It's only part of that episode, and once again, it's such a vague concept that it might as well just go there.

Delete it The more I think about this article, I just realize this might not be worthy of covering here. Anyone can just say x-phobia thing, doesn't mean it's notable.

If one of these passes, Koopaphobia will just become a redirect for one of these articles. Proposer: Deadline: August 26, 2022, 23:59 GMT

Merge with Indiana Joe
I wasn't really familiar with the episode itself but it is really part of this one character.
 * 1) Per Bazooka Mario in the prior discussion.
 * 2) Per proposal, all this is is a trait of this one character.
 * 3) the condition isn't worth much comment otherwise.
 * 4) This is almost in the same vein as the Mushroom Universe where an article originates from an 80's cartoon writer quickly phoning in a well-known pop culture joke. Honestly, I think we should delete this article and put it in BJAODN.
 * 5) Per all.
 * 6) Per all.
 * 7) BJAODN material.
 * 8) Per my original comment. It's pretty much BJAODN material at this point.
 * 9) Per all, a one-off joke trait for a single character doesn't need its own article.
 * 10) This page is only relevant to one character. Burn it to the ground and place it in BJAODN.
 * 11) per all.

Delete article

 * I've added this new better decision now. Quite franky, the concept is a joke. Do we really want to cover something that might have just made up on the spot?

Comments
This proposal is entirely unnecessary. Just cancel this and merge the thing. A proposal would be needed if there were opposition or the change would majorly affect the wiki (merging Yoshi (species) with Yoshi, for instance), but this is small potatoes and we're completely unanimous on this. In fact, I was just about merge it today since we were in agreement that this wasn't article-worthy, only to find that a TPP had been made. In this case, a proposal is a pointless formality that will only delay the inevitable for two weeks. 15:18, August 13, 2022 (EDT)
 * That's true, but I think it's important we get attention from more people to weigh opinions. Talk page discussions afaik seem to be more prone to being overlooked compared to talk page proposals. I had to wait for a while for trying to merge Fire Mini Mario to Mario, but didn't get more comments until I started a talk page proposal. 16:48, August 13, 2022 (EDT)
 * If a talk page discussion is being ignored, yes, a proposal is often the only way to draw attention to it, but that wasn't really the case here. It wasn't getting a ton of responses, but I think four supporters and no opposition is sufficient to merge an obscure, small-time article like this one. Plus, the proposal has only further cemented the complete lack of opposition to the merge. 17:13, August 13, 2022 (EDT)