Talk:Parabuzzy

This is the renamed Parabeetle for Paper Mario 2. All info for it is on the Parabeetle page. - Yoshi Master

How is the pic stolen paper jorge?--Fg 21:51, 23 January 2007 (EST) And why did you removed it?--Fg 21:56, 23 January 2007 (EST)


 * Someone stole it from www.themushroomkingdom.net. And you were the one who did it. Paper Jorge

Actually I didn't stoled it and I was trying to make this article more detailed by adding the image to it and are you going to put an image on this article?--Fg 21:59, 23 January 2007 (EST)

Only if we find a picture not stolen. You can put a picture with a sprite on it from a site but a picture like that (back background and text) is a NO and means it's stolen. Paper Jorge

Silence now! And add info to mine. - Yoshi Master

Pic Vote
Everyone vote for which image to use for this article.


 * [[Image:Para buzzy.PNG|50 px]]
 * 1) [[Image:Shyghost.PNG]]Chris[[Image:Shyghost.PNG]] 17:23, 13 March 2007 (EDT)
 * 17:41, 13 March 2007 (EDT)
 * 17:41, 13 March 2007 (EDT)


 * [[Image:Parabeetle.PNG|50 px]]

Problem solved, keep Fg's, but add mine too.----
 * Now we just need to make sure that's ok with everyone else. -- [[Image:Shyghost.PNG]]Chris[[Image:Shyghost.PNG]] 17:32, 13 March 2007 (EDT)

Anyway, the first pic has the image of BOTH of the other two, I'm for that one. -- Chris 17:35, 13 March 2007 (EDT)

Yeah, I personally like that one better too. I was just trying to give both people what they wanted.----
 * Now that I actually read what you typed (you know I was kidding, right Aipom?), that's a good idea. Give me a minute, I'll make the change and check in with the rest of you. -- [[Image:Shyghost.PNG]]Chris[[Image:Shyghost.PNG]] 17:40, 13 March 2007 (EDT)
 * Can we all live with this? -- [[Image:Shyghost.PNG]]Chris[[Image:Shyghost.PNG]] 17:42, 13 March 2007 (EDT)

Yes.----

Could you unprotect the page now?----
 * Done. I keep forgetting that I can't just click Unprotect, I've gotta switch it to Default. -- [[Image:Shyghost.PNG]]Chris[[Image:Shyghost.PNG]] 17:47, 13 March 2007 (EDT)

Name
Should this page be moved to Parabuzzy? That's what they're called in Paper Mario: The Thousand-Year Door. Or are they a different species? -- 19:43, 15 March 2007 (EDT)

No this should stay as parabeetle.
 * Why? They were renamed Parabuzzy, so the page should have it's modern name. -- 19:50, 15 March 2007 (EDT)

Well ask a sysop.

Just make a note of it in the PMTTYD section.----
 * I still think this should be moved, since they haven't been called Parabeetles since Super Mario Bros. 3, and Paper Mario: The Thousand-Year Door came out fourteen years afterward. -- 19:57, 15 March 2007 (EDT)
 * Does anybody have a good reason as to why this page shouldn't be moved? -- 20:09, 15 March 2007 (EDT)

Parabuzzy is its current official name and I think the rules are to move pages to the newest name. I  am   Confused  21:40, 9 April 2007 (EDT)

So wait, now since there's a Buzzy with wings we're gonna call Para-Beetles Buzzy Beetles? What OFFICIALLY said that Para Beetles are now Para-Buzzies? InfectedShroom.
 * According to this and this site, both "Parabuzzy" and "Para-Beetle" have the same name in Japanese, Pata Met (Met=Buzzy Beetle). Their appearance changed, but that's nothing special, especially after a very long absence. There are several enemies which were named different at least one time in English, but retained their names in the original, such as Goby (Cheep-Cheep/Pukupuku), Shy Away (Beezo/Tondariya) and Flopsy Fish (Cheep-Cheep/Pukupuku again). I would like to see those merged as well, but that's just my humble opinion... --Grandy02 13:47, 9 April 2009 (EDT)

I added info on Green Para-Beetles.
I added info on the page about Green Para-Beetles, a enemy exclusive to the Game Genie Sky Level.

Merge Parabuzzy to Para-Beetle
Sky Koopa, Shy Away, Goby, these articles are merged because not only do they look just like Koopa Paratroopa, Shy Guy, and Cheep Cheep, respectively, they both share the exact same japanese name, and Japan is the country of origin. So may I ask why Parabuzzy remains separate? Aside from a different shell color, they look the same, and they have the same japanese name. So going by the logic that merged the articles I previously mentioned, I propose to merge this to Para-Beetle.

Proposer: Deadline: April 21, 2011, 23:59

Support

 * 1) If they are the same, why be in different articles? Per Reversinator.
 * 2) I don't see what makes them different and plus we could add on the Parabuzzy section that they are called "Parabuzzy" in those games.
 * 3) Both articles are kind of short. They both don't have red eyes like most Buzzy Beetles do. This is just like moving Mr Kipper to the Cheep Cheep article. The two have a lot in common which is why we should merge them.

Oppose

 * 1) Actually, they're fine separate since they you can see most differences such as that the Para-Beetle has no feet and has an out of proportion head compared to the Parabuzzy, also the two creatures have different attack patterns and such.(However, the Para-Beetles don't really attack at all.) Besides that would be like merging Cheep-Cheep and Deep-Cheep since they look the same but have different colors, attack patterns, and movements.
 * 2) Per UltraMario.
 * 3) Per UltraMario.
 * 4) Per all. Para-Beetles don't attack while Parabuzzies do. Plus they have slightly different looks so they should stay split.
 * 5) - Per all, and per what I said in favour of not merging the articles when it was first brought up on Talk:Para-Beetle. The proposal was incorrect in stating that they look the same besides their shell colour because one has legs while the other doesn't: that alone is reason enough to keep them separate, not to mention the behavioural differences and the fact that one turns into a Buzzy Beetle when stomped on while the other one keeps its wings. Like I said in the comments, we should split/merge things based on facts like these, rather than simply defaulting to a single region's names every time. While Japan often is the more reliable region when it comes to names, I think NoA made the right call this time, and that's all that matters.
 * 6) Per Walkazo.
 * 7) Ahh, ninja'd! Per Walkazo.
 * 8) Embarassing, but per all.
 * 9) there not the same thing even the shell color is different
 * 10) I'll put it off as simply this: two enemies only related by name and appearance.
 * 11) Para-Beetles are your friend, Parabuzzies aren't. What if Toads turned evil and changed names? Also per UltraMario.

Comments
And why are you ignoring the examples I listed? Ok yes, they looked the same, but they had different attacks too. Plus, what about the japanese names? --Reversinator 15:04, 7 April 2011 (EDT)

@Reversinator:Well the Japanese name may be the same as the Parabuzzy but your missing my point about Cheep-Cheeps. Anyways, I have to do homework now so I won't reply to your next comment.--UltraWario3000(talk &middot; edits)
 * And yet, I will reply. About your Cheep Cheep point, since they (presumably) have different japanese names (which, again, is the country of origin), they remain separate. If the japanese names are the same, then that means they were intended to be the same species. This is the same logic that merged Sky Koopa, Goby, and Shy Away, by the way. --Reversinator 15:13, 7 April 2011 (EDT)
 * As I said on the Boomerang Bro. TPP, everyone has the potential to make mistakes, including the Japanese. In your SMRPG examples, the translators were obviously the ones to make a mistake, since all those things are clearly the same as the species they're merged with, which is why we didn't just go with the English names. However, that's not the case here: as the opposers have noted, there are actually differences between Parabuzzies and Para-Beetles (one has legs, one doesn't; that's more than enough reason to split them as far as any biologist would be concerned). The idea that Japan has precedence over everything else worries me as much as if someone said English always takes the cake: we should go with the name that makes the most sense given all the facts we have at our disposal, regardless of what region happens to spawn that name. We should also approach everything on a case-by-case basis: being right about one thing doesn't mean they'll be right about something completely different. As long as someone official says something is different (or the same, if we're going the other way), it's not speculation to keep those things split, and I think it actually does our readers a greater service if we really think about things like this instead of just defaulting based on names alone. - 19:59, 7 April 2011 (EDT)
 * .........Am I aloud to oppose my own proposal? --Reversinator 21:37, 7 April 2011 (EDT)
 * Yes, it's been done before. See here.--Mario4Ever