MarioWiki talk:Naming

"European"

European sources usually means the United Kingdom, but can include other countries where games are officially released in the English language.

I don't understand. European media always comes multilingual. N64 games had a language selection, and GameCube, DS and Wii games use the language that your console is set to. A Wii disk is the same for the entire PAL region (Europe/Australia), just the packaging and manual may be different. -Cobold (talk · contribs) 11:16, 10 March 2011 (EST)

Not necessarily. Older games may only feature the language of the country it is released in, but I see your point about more recent games. I will omit that line.--Knife (talk) 12:24, 10 March 2011 (EST)

The most-common-titles policy

I don't like the new policy, its feels like discrimination to me! Just because we got more American views doesn't mean they have more priority. Why isn't this proposed before use? Lakituthequick 16:28, 28 May 2012 (EDT)

It's not discrimination: that's reading too much into it. Porplemontage (talk) (the founder and owner of the wiki) decided the old naming method, wherein everything was North American-based, was better than the First English Name policy. I'm not sure if he posted his reasoning publicly, but what he told the admins was that the change is meant to make the wiki easier to find and use for the largest amount of readers possible. Most people know the NA titles, and will be searching for them on Google/whatever, and if we don't use those titles, we lose hits, which is bad. The users and guests are also mostly North American, and seeing as any title we use is going to seem wrong to a portion of the community, might as well try to inconvenience the least amount of people. Also, unless you're familiar with the First English Name policy and the release dates, the old method could seem a tad inconsistent, whereas using only one region's names is about as uniform as you can get. - Walkazo 20:12, 28 May 2012 (EDT)

So... that's it...

You are 'americanizing' even more this webpage... that's not cool.

Chivi-chivik (talk)

Just look above and read the paragraph. GreenDisaster 11:41, 30 May 2012 (EDT)

If our demographics change, we will use different titles. Master R.O.B.

Welcome to Mario Wiki USA Edition

Well, what can be said? This is none other than 'americanizing' the site. That is basicly 'Discrimination'. The site may have more New World viewers but i'm sure the numbers dom't multiple theirselfs litke there is nothing like The USA viewers are 10x more than European/australian viewers. And being american site builds up misleadings like now more people will think that magikoopa and Kamek is same thing. And by searching "ghost ship" I can find the "gholish galeon" page easily, there is no need to make every article American! I think next poll should be: "Are you PAL, NTSC or OTHER?" --Sinanco {talk&edits} 03:10, 25 August 2012 (EDT)

Look at the second section on this page. I also explained it here, and gave a response to your earlier comment here, as well. There is no point in belabouring the issue further, because this isn't an "America-vs-the-world" thing, and the policy will not be changed. - Walkazo 19:58, 25 August 2012 (EDT)

Can an admin please

Change Mole Folk to Mole (Super Mario RPG: Legend of the Seven Stars)? --APA TKB 10:59, 5 August 2013 (EDT)

Thanks for pointing that out, but rather than merely updating the link, I replaced it with a better example altogether. - Walkazo 16:20, 5 August 2013 (EDT)

Why is the Starshroom called a planet?

Honestly, it's a spaceship rather than a natural space object. I think it should be removed as an example from this page. SmokedChili (Talk) (Thoughts) 09:42, 29 January 2014 (EDT)

Yes, that part of the policy should be updated, especially considering the recent re-evaluation of the term Mushroom World on the Wiki. LinkTheLefty (talk) 13:19, 13 May 2014 (EDT)

Please change this sentence

"This type of name usually comes from beta elements or debugging." to "This type of name usually comes from unused data, developer interviews or development documents.". Because the current sentence is basically meaningless. --Hiccup (talk) 04:05, 25 June 2015 (EDT)

Thanks. --Hiccup (talk) 08:40, 25 June 2015 (EDT)

Name coverage

I am in the process of adding the French names of the locations of Paper Mario: Color Splash in the "Names in other languages" section. Some locations used different names for Europe and America (Mondo Woods = Forêt Wasabig (NOE) and Forêt Grochloro (NOA), but some locations used the same name, so I was wondering, if its the same name, how should we cover this? Should we add both, even if its the same and separate them by French (NOA) and French (NOE) or should we merge them together and just say "French". In my opinion, we should included both so this make it clear what is the name of both region.--^(TALK) 19:47, 30 October 2016 (EDT)

Assuming you mean the {{foreign names}} template, you can use the Fre and FreM parameters if the name is identical in both regions, or FreE(M) and FreA(M) for European and Canadian French respectively. Lakituthequick 21:34, 1 November 2016 (GMT)

Swoop

Since it is the current name, should the link to "Swooper" in the section about changing the names of articles be changed to "Swoop"? It seems odd to have an old name for a page in a section about changing the name of a page. --TheFlameChomp (talk) 19:50, 12 February 2017 (EST)

Good catch. I've updated those titles.

Shokora (talk · edits) 20:00, 12 February 2017 (EST)

Error

It says "If an identifier is needed, the text in parenthesis is determined by:" in the identifier section. Parenthesis is singular, so it should be changed to "parentheses". PikaSamus (talk) 22:12, 18 April 2017 (EDT)

Source tiers 3 and 4

This talk page or section has a conflict or a question that needs to be answered. Please try to help and resolve the issue by leaving a comment.

Looking through the list, the third source tier explicitly mentions Prima Game Guides from pre-2007, then afterwards makes no further mention of them. I realize that the fourth tier incorporates any other Nintendo-licensed media, which does include Prima Game Guides after 2007, but I feel as if it should be reworded to explicitly mention the guides. Source tier 3 only mentioning the guides pre-2007 can lead editors to believe that guides made after 2007 are not valid sources, which can lead to more conjectural titles. Would it be possible to reword it? LB (talk • edits • forum) 03:46, 2 July 2017 (EDT)

The Prima guides are officially licensed by Nintendo as of 2007, so I would think so. Perhaps concurrent with the Nintendo Power's point 2? 10:57, 2 July 2017 (EDT)

Make an exception to source priority for articles with identical names

This talk page proposal has already been settled. Please do not edit any of the sections in the proposal. If you wish to discuss the article, do so in a new header below the proposal.

make exception 12-2
So, according to the current rules, Prima guides are treated as more official than filenames, and Nintendo Player's Guides are treated as more official than Prima. However, considering the recent Hatopop/Cheep Cheep situation, as well as the Klamber/Scuttle Bug and Scorchit/Zeus Guy issues before it, I feel there should be an exception to the source priority rule if the "better" source's name is less specific and likely incorrect than one given by a "low-priority" source.

Proposer: Niiue (talk)
Deadline: October 24, 2017, 23:59 GMT

Support

1. Niiue (talk) Per proposal.
2. Shokora (talk) – I agree that a lower priority source may be used if happens to be more suitable/less confusing.
3. TheFlameChomp (talk) Per proposal.
4. Mario Kart DS Fan (talk) per all.
5. LinkTheLefty (talk) If by "better source" you mean unique or noncontradictory name, I agree. Per all.
6. Semako (talk) of course. And in my opinion, file names should always be preferred over other sources.
7. Yoshi the SSM (talk) Per all.
8. Alex95 (talk) - Considering I supported the Hatopop name, per all.
9. Camwood777 (talk) - These are official Nintendo sources; this feels like a no-brainer to prioritize them above Prima guides.
10. Baby Luigi (talk) Per all.
11. Lcrossmk8 (talk) Everyone seems to be voting for this, so why not? I'm gonna do it too. Per all. And plus, the naming policy confuses me anyway.
12. Toadette the Achiever (talk) It'd definitely help in certain scenarios (for instance, if one source refers to a new variety of Goomba as simply "Goombas" instead of, say, "Barbed Goombas").

Oppose

1. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) Under those circumstances, a proposal should be used on a case-by-case basis, as it's subjective what the "better" name is in many circumstances. Particularly as Cheep-Cheep was a better name in that case :V
2. Ultimate Mr. L (talk) Per Doc. It depends on the name.

Comments

@Doc: How was Cheep Cheep the better name? While it came from a higher priority source, it was more confusing than the current title. Niiue (talk) 05:44, 10 October 2017 (EDT)

Because it was more understandable on the SMS template to a monolingual English-speaker than the Japanese one. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 06:28, 10 October 2017 (EDT)

I disagree. Most people would think it's talking about the more common enemy with that name if anything. Niiue (talk) 07:17, 10 October 2017 (EDT)

But it came with an identifier. And there's only one other bird enemy in Sunshine. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 07:31, 10 October 2017 (EDT)

Even so, it's still less confusing to just give it a unique title. Niiue (talk) 07:39, 10 October 2017 (EDT)

What is a confusing name? Examples are fine, but especially for a policy page, you need a concrete definition. Hello, I'm Time Turner. 09:24, 10 October 2017 (EDT)

In the cases of conflicts between naming I think we should revise priorities, though. While I agree about the situation of PRIMA guides not always being reliable in the names (Bomb-ombs in Super Mario Sunshine are a good example..), Japanese Official Nintendo Guidebooks might reveal official names that are consistent - a case being that of Bats in Super Mario Galaxy, whose Japanese name 「バットン」 was consistent in Japanese among both the Official Nintendo Guidebook of Super Mario Galaxy, the Encyclopedia Super Mario Bros. and even the Super Mario Pia, the latter being published by Pia and written in collaboration with Nintendo, and that name definitely wasn't the name of Swoops, 「バサバサ」, which was instead the name suggested by the internal name. When an official name is consistently used, this shouldn't be overlooked beause of the internal name suggesting something else. Said internal names are derived from Japanese most of the times, anyway.--Mister Wu (talk) 10:15, 10 October 2017 (EDT)

For what it's worth, the internal names for Super Mario Sunshine are inconsistent with the Pia and Encyclopedia SMB, but are actually consistent with the English BradyGames and Versus guides, so somehow those two got a hold of the internal names. The files also make a point of using the "standard" Japanese name for the enemies' folders but then using the weird new names for all of the actual files (models, animations and whatnot). I could genuinely turn this into a splitting spree, Bomb-omb/Neji Bomb et al. Hello, I'm Time Turner. 10:35, 10 October 2017 (EDT)

@Lcrossmk8: I strongly discourage you from voting only to join in the bandwagon. Ray Trace^(T|C) 00:14, 12 October 2017 (EDT)

Can we change the sentence regarding calling Swoops Bats?

It seems to have been directed at the SMG2 Prima guide, but since those have been split, could it be replaced with another example, for instance Crowber? Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 05:39, 10 October 2017 (EDT)

Thanks. I've put Crowber down.

Shokora (talk · edits) 05:56, 10 October 2017 (EDT)

Naming hierarchy question

With the English release of Encyclopedia Super Mario Bros. coming out later this year, where would it fall on the hierarchy if there's contradicting names? For example, Bat (Super Mario Galaxy) is a pretty generic name, if the English release were to change it to something else hypothetically (like "Batton", the Japanese name or something), what would be the proper protocol there, would we change the name to the Encyclopedia one or keep the Prima name? BubbleRevolution (talk) 03:13, 2 March 2018 (EST)

These proposals set the precedent to use legacy names whenever appropriate, so if there's a contradiction between a strategy guide and Encyclopedia Super Mario Bros., the original strategy guide would take precedence in most cases since it was released concurrently with its respective game. Encyclopedia Super Mario Bros. will primarily be useful to replace foreign names. LinkTheLefty (talk) 04:40, 2 March 2018 (EST)

Capitalization and identifiers

If two subjects have the same name but different capitalization (e.g. Red Diamond (Luigi's Mansion) and red diamond (Wario World)), do they require identifiers? I've always been unsure about this one and I need to create an article that will cause a similar scenario, so I'm asking now. 18:55, 10 March 2018 (EST)

Yeah, I'd say so. Having just Red diamond and Red Diamond is not great. --Steve (talk) 18:59, 10 March 2018 (EST)

I agree. It would cause issues with the search function. ^(T|C) 19:03, 10 March 2018 (EST)

Dr Mario

For example, Dr. Mario is a disambiguation page linking to all the other uses of the title, such as Dr. Mario (game) and Dr. Mario (character)

No longer true... - Reboot (talk) 07:06, 27 March 2018 (EDT)

Thanks, it's been changed. Mario JC 07:25, 27 March 2018 (EDT)

Honebon

Since Super Mario Bros. Encyclopedia took out the pronunciation identifiers from Honebōn's name when "translating" it, a different example will probably be needed. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 19:03, 9 October 2018 (EDT)

Switched it to Kaibādo. 16:24, 13 October 2018 (EDT)

Which itself has reason to be moved to "Kai bird." Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 16:37, 13 October 2018 (EDT)

Does it? That's not how the Japanese characters are written. 16:40, 13 October 2018 (EDT)

OK, "Kaibird," forgot how spaces for this sort of thing worked. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 16:50, 13 October 2018 (EDT)

That's a literal translation of the name, but it's not the letters the characters spell out. Is there a different example you want to use? 16:55, 13 October 2018 (EDT)

Hm, maybe I was actually thinking about how "Hokuso" should be changed to "Hawks." Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 18:27, 13 October 2018 (EDT)

Decide how to handle internal naming

This talk page proposal has already been settled. Please do not edit any of the sections in the proposal. If you wish to discuss the article, do so in a new header below the proposal.

cancelled by administrator
As requested by proposer.

Ok, i've seen many internal naming in this wiki, and i'd like to open this. we have been with this multiple times, and while some of them are english, some of them are simple romanizations.

• Option 1= This will affect the "Beamer" enemies
• Option 2=This will not affect examples such as the Beamer enemies, but definitive romanizations will be marked as another language. Bakky, Pattan (i already did it for this one though) to name a few.
• Option 3=The internal filenames will be considered english, and will not have the another language template.
• Option 4=All internal filenames will be considered as romanized from something english, which was written in "kanji" for example, and will all have an another language template.
• Option 5=The "loanworded" internal filenames are the only ones which will not have an another language template.

Proposer: FanOfYoshi (talk)
Deadline: February 25, 2019, 23:59 GMT
Cancelled: February 19, 2019, 11:59 GMT

Consider "loanworded" names, including partly romanized as Japanese

1. FanOfYoshi (talk) Second (and preferred) option, as some "Beamer" enemies are named in the encyclopedia, but we can't cite it. I don't know wether they are named in the Prima guide, but their internal filename is a romanization of their Japanese name.

Consider "loanworded" names english, and consider some internal filenames simply romanized

1. FanOfYoshi (talk) Per proposal. It includes the examples i gave here.

Comments

I'm not sure if we can set a rule. Most of the times the internal names are Japanese names (not really romanized ones, Koopa is not the proper romanization of 「クッパ」, Kuppa, and Catherine is not the proper romanization of 「キャサリン」, Kyasarin), but there are exceptions, the most notable being the Super Mario Maker internal costume names, which were very frequently English names. We also have peculiar cases like Plessie's internal name, which is very likely based on English puns (Raidon for what is basically a nothosaur you ride on).--Mister Wu (talk) 09:51, 11 February 2019 (EST)

You're right, in the sense that most internal filenames are romanized. -- FanOfYoshi 13:15, 11 February 2019 (EST)

Is this proposal really appropriate with this amount of options? It's me, Mario! (Talk / Stalk) 14:10, 11 February 2019 (EST)

I also feel like this proposal is more suitable as a mainspace proposal rather than a TPP as it's a major policy change that affects all of the wiki. Ray Trace^(T|C) 18:25, 11 February 2019 (EST)

Nah, it's fine here since it really just applies to naming. But all of the internal names I've seen so far (that have been posted on the wiki, not from personal file digging) have been using English characters. So I'm not sure I understand what this proposal is going to change. 18:29, 11 February 2019 (EST)

There's a difference between "using Roman characters" and "being an English name." Recall the Japanese playing cards that had romanized names. They aren't English names. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 18:56, 11 February 2019 (EST)

The interesting part is that while in some cases you can see how the internal names are mirroring Japanese names in kana (e.g. Kinopico, where the co part refers to the Japanese 「子」, child) in quite a few other names they aren't really romanized names - they are more like the names that the Japanese kana want to represent, reagardless of whether they actually can or not (see Catherine's case, the Japanese name is「キャサリン」, which should be romanized as Kyasarin, but it actually wants to be a transcription of Catherine).--Mister Wu (talk) 20:36, 11 February 2019 (EST)

@Doc von Schmeltwick, i kinda agree. We can't cite the encyclopedia, and as "Whimp" is a name that originates from the wiki, the only lead is the Japanese name. The internal filename itself is a romanization of the Japanese name, and for some reasons (much like Starbag, it doesn't have the another language template. -- FanOfYoshi 00:47, 12 February 2019 (EST)

Internal Naming? What? ♠GrainedCargo192♠ 13:29, 12 February 2019 (EST)

It's to determine how to treat internal filenames, when using it as an article's name. -- FanOfYoshi 13:31, 12 February 2019 (EST)

@Alex95, they're not only english letters, but these letters have also been used in other languages. -- FanOfYoshi 14:04, 12 February 2019 (EST)

If no one else votes, would the proposal be listed as no quorum? -- FanOfYoshi 12:27, 13 February 2019 (EST)

Yes. 20:40, 14 February 2019 (EST)

I'm not so sure what the proposal is trying to accomplish by tackling "romanizations" in general. By definition, romanization entails the conversion of one writing system to the Roman/Latin script, and because much of it is passes in English, whether the developers are using "true" romanizations will often be indeterminate. Perhaps a better way to frame the discussion would be what to do when an internal name coincides with a known unlocalized name (e.g. Mini Wanwan), which is a more tangible method, and maybe consider the idea of implementing an "internal data" template for article titles; either way, this is too amorphous to have gone straight to proposal in my estimation. Also, since such a proposal is pretty broad, it would help a lot to get the full list of titles on the wiki that reference internal data, and know how each option would affect them. LinkTheLefty (talk) 21:03, 14 February 2019 (EST)

I attempted to make an "internal file name" template a while back, but never ended up doing anything in the end.... Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 21:23, 14 February 2019 (EST)

My first option is on cases like Starbag, if you don't get. -- FanOfYoshi 12:26, 15 February 2019 (EST)

If the idea is to move Petari back to Starbag, I vehemently disagree with giving Super Mario Bros. Encyclopedia an inch after what it pulled. LinkTheLefty (talk) 18:09, 15 February 2019 (EST)

Pretty sure the idea is to give it the "another language" template or move it to Petapeta (the latter of which should be done anyway in accordance with policy), because it's not an English name by any description. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 18:12, 15 February 2019 (EST)

@Doc von Schmeltwick, exactly. Potentially the same for the more tenuous Cheep Cheep/Hatopop situation. -- FanOfYoshi 07:23, 16 February 2019 (EST)

Something as basic as Goomba isn't derived from an English word and direct transliterations do happen, but we can move Petari to Petapeta if that becomes the consensus, though I'm not sure why you seem to be validating Starbag and the other Super Mario Bros. Encyclopedia names. Hatopop is trickier because it's not mentioned in official Japanese guides, "pop" adequately describes it, and it's not a Cheep Cheep in any way, shape or form. I agree there should have been a proposal first, but it's now covered by the above. Ultimately, the idea is to minimize the wiki's foreign titles, so I'm starting to think that the better approach might be to use the another language template for Japanese names we have to unofficially romanize ourselves, use a separate template for official internal data (which may or may not be romanized themselves), and leave it at that. LinkTheLefty (talk) 08:29, 16 February 2019 (EST)

The example you brought up, the word that was used for the Goomba's name (along with Unagi and Sushi) is also an english word, and is given by localizers, not the original company. I'm not validating the Super Mario Encyclopedia's name, my idea was the one that Doc von Schmeltwick was sure of. -- FanOfYoshi 12:30, 16 February 2019 (EST)

The Goomba section states that its name is derived from Italian and/or Hungarian. Also, whether a name comes from the company or localizer is irrelevant, since we're not putting a foreign language tag on, say, Super Mario Bros. Special anytime soon. What matters is the word itself, and the fact is that none of these are actually written in Japanese. LinkTheLefty (talk) 12:45, 16 February 2019 (EST)

So? Internal filenames are never intended to show up to players, and we're actually written in roman letters. -- FanOfYoshi 12:56, 16 February 2019 (EST)

Which is why they're considered last tier. LinkTheLefty (talk) 12:59, 16 February 2019 (EST)

This proposal, is to update it. -- FanOfYoshi 13:01, 16 February 2019 (EST)

Since they're last-tier, the Petapeta thing should have never even been a discussion. It should be moved to Petapeta. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 13:11, 16 February 2019 (EST)

What about cases like Cuttacutta? It is onomatopoeic like many Japanese words, but as far as the Mario vs. Donkey Kong series is concerned, practically everything else is decidedly English. LinkTheLefty (talk) 13:29, 16 February 2019 (EST)

Because the game was made by an american division, which most enemies had their english name (such as the Snifit) in their intenral filenames. -- FanOfYoshi 13:31, 16 February 2019 (EST)

^^^^^^^^ Additionally, SMG has filenames like Mogu for a mole, which are obviously Japanese and not English. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 13:37, 16 February 2019 (EST)

An American division with several Japanese on staff; anyway, too many assumptions are made here for my taste as, for example, Super Smash Bros. Brawl and Super Mario Maker, whose core developers comprised entirely of Japanese, still used some English localizations in there. LinkTheLefty (talk) 13:47, 16 February 2019 (EST)

Regardless, it's pretty clear to me that "Petari" isn't one of them. I personally think it should be based on relative consensus. Most DKJB internal names seemed English enough to work, but not SMG (showing that not even going by studio is a good rule, since theirs were the same). Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 14:00, 16 February 2019 (EST)

Agreed. -- FanOfYoshi 06:51, 18 February 2019 (EST)

While the "Petari" details can be moved to the foreign names template. -- FanOfYoshi 06:58, 18 February 2019 (EST)

Still a very specific case for a proposal of this sheer scope, and it wasn't just one person who agreed with Petari over Petapeta. LinkTheLefty (talk) 08:22, 18 February 2019 (EST)

As they are, I think it should be pretty obvious by now that options 3 and 4 are a bust, and the idea of "definite romanization" is rather loose, but can you further explain how exactly you define "loadworded" and what the practical difference is between all the other options? Also, isn't option 5 the same as option 1? And where's the "do nothing" or "case-by-case" option? LinkTheLefty (talk) 08:22, 18 February 2019 (EST)

Can an admin cancel this for me? LinkTheLefty pointed out that i forgot an option, and, no decision was reached, so i can restart it at any time. -- FanOfYoshi 03:56, 19 February 2019 (EST)

Decide how to handle internal filenames: take 2

This talk page proposal has already been settled. Please do not edit any of the sections in the proposal. If you wish to discuss the article, do so in a new header below the proposal.

canceled by proposer
The fact that i'm restarting the proposal is that i forgot to add a "Keep-as-is" option. As we are currently deciding how to handle internal filenames, Petari is intended to be renamed into Petapeta, i'd like to reopen this.

Proposer: FanOfYoshi (talk)
Deadline: March 5, 2019, 23:59 GMT

Consider "loanword" names, including partly romanized as Japanese

1. FanOfYoshi (talk) My preferred Second option, as the "Beamer" enemies are named in the encyclopedia, but we don't cite it (as i checked in Google Books)

Consider "loanword" names english, and consider some internal filenames simply romanized

1. FanOfYoshi (talk) Per proposal.

Consider all internal filenames english

1. LinkTheLefty (talk) Out of all the proposal options, this is the one that most closely aligns with my preference - with the express addendum that we create an internal data template; otherwise, "all" is too much of a blanket statement, and the romanization options are too subjective as they are simply not working with a technical definition (as mentioned above), which is necessary for coherent, functional policy.

Add an "internal name" template

1. FanOfYoshi (talk) Third, and preferred option.

Keep the current setup

1. LinkTheLefty (talk) While I agree with a clearer naming policy for internal data in theory, none of these options are very practical, so I'd rather we continue to generally classify them as "development names" with room for deeper discussion on a case-by-case basis until a more objective approach comes along; as it is, the implementation of this proposal could only end up creating more problems than it solves.
2. Toadette the Achiever (talk) Since internal filenames can be either English or Japanese, I think this proposal is just too complicated for any other option to pass.
3. Alex95 (talk) - I'm not really seeing a problem with how we have things now. Internal name's aren't the highest priority on the naming list, but we use whatever it is named as in the file name regardless. Doesn't have to be in English.
4. TheFlameChomp (talk) I feel it would make more sense to keep things the way they are, as I feel that the other options would over complicate things.
5. Doomhiker (talk) Per all.

Comments

LinkTheLefty is planning to rename "Petari" into Petapeta. -- FanOfYoshi 07:43, 19 February 2019 (EST)

It being suggested as per the above comments doesn't necessarily mean I definitely plan on it since there was some disagreement on how to handle it in that subject's talk page. Also, I believe cancellation falls under rule 7: "No proposal can overturn the decision of a previous proposal that is less than 4 weeks (28 days) old." LinkTheLefty (talk) 08:42, 19 February 2019 (EST)

Not really. ^(T|C) 09:12, 19 February 2019 (EST)

I see. LinkTheLefty (talk) 10:00, 19 February 2019 (EST)

If the proposal was cancelled, it means no decision was reached, so a new proposal can be started immediately. 12:06, 19 February 2019 (EST)

It almost seems like a loophole since one could say cancellation is a decision in and of itself, but I see it's been done. LinkTheLefty (talk) 23:00, 19 February 2019 (EST)

Here was the template I came up with:

The title of this article is official, but it comes from an internal file name. As such, it potentially reflects an early point in development that may not be the intended name by the final product, may be a developer nickname not intended to be officially used, and may not be in English. If an official name from an English source is found, the article should be moved to its appropriate title.

<includeonly>[[Category:Articles with titles from internal file names]]</includeonly>

-Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 23:38, 19 February 2019 (EST)

Cool! Should i wait the proposal to pass, or i can create the template anytime soon? -- FanOfYoshi 02:09, 20 February 2019 (EST)

Given I made it, I should probably make it when I have permission from the higher-ups to. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 02:30, 20 February 2019 (EST)

Added a "add an internal filename template" option. -- FanOfYoshi 07:46, 20 February 2019 (EST)

I'd remove "file" since that's not always true (possibly adjust it to "internal data" if that is a preferable general term). It is also slightly too wordy, so I'd suggest simplifying the two "intended" parts so that it flows as one concise point (could just remove the whole "developer nickname" bit because it would seem already covered by the prior "intended name" statement). Other than that, it looks good overall, though I'm not entirely sure if the last sentence is completely relevant anymore (ditto with the another language and conjectural title templates) because these proposals mean that it is no longer paramount. Anyway, if there is approval, I'll switch my vote. LinkTheLefty (talk) 07:50, 20 February 2019 (EST)

That says, i regret having voted "Do not allow the book the be cited" in the first place. I disapprove the red Urchin being split under the name "Land Unizo", as "Land" is "loanword", and Unizo is its Japanese name. Anyways, like i said, i don't think that a SME counterproposal to cite part of the book would work, given the margin of votes of the original. -- FanOfYoshi 07:55, 20 February 2019 (EST)

I'm not even sure that's sufficient because, while we have a pretty good grasp of article titles directly taken from us, we don't know the extent of which was from elsewhere. LinkTheLefty (talk) 08:11, 20 February 2019 (EST)

@Doc von Schmeltwick, you kinda misunderstood what i was asking. I was actually asking if we should make it at anytime, or only when the proposal passes. -- FanOfYoshi 12:22, 20 February 2019 (EST)

Either when it's given admin approval or the proposal passes in that manner, which ever comes first (if at all). Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 12:29, 20 February 2019 (EST)

Will it affect most of the Donkey Kong Jungle Beat enemies, such as Bakky, and some Super Mario Galaxy enemies, such as the "Beamer" enemies, and Mandibug Stack to name a few? -- FanOfYoshi 04:57, 21 February 2019 (EST)

Forgot to mention... @LinkTheLefty, you see the "Kassar Brock" internal filename you used, to say that the Message Block's english name is "Perry Block"? Well, no, this doesn't prove anything, as it is a romanization, and Nintendo of America did not give them a name. Speaking of it... Is it really the Message Block, or is it another type of block that acts similarly? Maybe check in the Shogakugan guide, to see if it calls them Message Block, or Kassar Brock, no? -- FanOfYoshi 05:06, 21 February 2019 (EST)

"Perry Block" came from an earlier edit of the article, so adding a reference was fine (though maybe {{better source}} should have been added to be safe). The names aligned, so I believed the original editor was using legit info. Unfortunately, the Super Princess Peach Shogakukan guide is rather basic and doesn't mention it. Anyway, change "internal filename" to "internal name" for the reason I explained, and I'll agree to your template option. LinkTheLefty (talk) 05:47, 21 February 2019 (EST)

What should we do about it? Should it stay on Message Block, or should it have its own article? It seems to reference more the umbrella than the Message Block, given its internal filename romanization. -- FanOfYoshi 06:48, 21 February 2019 (EST)

That should be a discussion on the Message Block talk page. Please remove "file" from name. LinkTheLefty (talk) 06:50, 21 February 2019 (EST)

Problem is, by definition of "internal," any name from within the game itself in any capacity is technically "internal." Mayhap "internal coding name" or "internal data name?" Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 07:28, 21 February 2019 (EST)

I think "internal data" is a valid alternative, though now I'm starting to wonder what other examples of development names we use and if such a template would be better suited more broadly. LinkTheLefty (talk) 07:51, 21 February 2019 (EST)

The title of this article is official, but it comes from a pre-release source or internal data. As such, it potentially reflects an early point in development or developer nickname that may not be the intended name by the final product, and may not be in English. If an official name from a post-release acceptable English source is found, the article should be moved to its appropriate title.

<includeonly>[[Category:Articles with titles from pre-release sources]]</includeonly>

I still think the "developer nickname" thing is valid to an extent. For a non-Mario example, a Crash Bandicoot game apparently had two enemies given vulgar insults for internal names. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 18:03, 21 February 2019 (EST)

There's also this. Niiue (talk) 20:28, 21 February 2019 (EST)

@Toadette the Achiever, please note that the letters used are not only english letters, but are used in multiple languages. -- FanOfYoshi 10:22, 21 February 2019 (EST)

Like i said, i added an "internal filename template" option, for those who are interested, and think that most internal filenames are romanized. -- FanOfYoshi 02:18, 22 February 2019 (EST)

::Should ask to Porplemontage about this template... -- FanOfYoshi 02:32, 22 February 2019 (EST)

Done! -- FanOfYoshi 02:47, 22 February 2019 (EST)

Worked on the template. I kinda feel that this proposal should be cancelled and immediately putted into effect. -- FanOfYoshi 10:06, 22 February 2019 (EST)

The only exception i can see is the Mario vs Donkey Kong enemies. -- FanOfYoshi 10:35, 22 February 2019 (EST)

Great job, stealing a template from someone else's private workspace, after I told you specifically above to wait for me to make it if the admins say it should be made. >_> Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 13:30, 22 February 2019 (EST)

Reopening up something: Source priority proposal and regarding the above

This talk page or section has a conflict or a question that needs to be answered. Please try to help and resolve the issue by leaving a comment.

So regarding the above's first proposal, we are sometimes using the internal filename as a priority when each guides refer the subject to as a thing with the same name. But regarding that, i wonder wether that should have happened. Should this proposal really have passed, given that i would have liked that it depends guide by guide for the more and the less specific names. -- FanOfYoshi 09:38, 10 March 2019 (EDT)

Also, this discussion isn't only about the source priority proposal. -- FanOfYoshi 06:27, 11 March 2019 (EDT)

I'm not folllowing the issue. The conjecture and another language templates are written with the express goal of ideally having minimal usage whenever possible, and the internal data provides a method to meet that purpose regardless of the source priority exception proposal due to falling under development names. Personally, I would have preferred to do things on a more case-by-case basis in retrospect, but I don't think the Land Unizo situation (a proposal) should be the catalyst for readdressing it. LinkTheLefty (talk) 06:35, 11 March 2019 (EDT)

Regarding the Ground Urchin and the source priority proposal: I wouldn't say that "Land" would make it more english. The proof that land is a loanword, because the two Super Mario Land game articles didn't have the foreign names template applied to a section, and... I'm repeatedly telling you that the internal filename partially contains the Urchin's Japanese name.

Regarding internal filenames: I see that we have the "Beamer" enemies. Next are Jump Guarder (which isn't a "Beamer" derivative) and Fire Pressure. Regarding the "Beamer" enemies... Why did you remove the another language template and outright use the romanized Japanese filenames as a "proof" that it is the subject's english name? Same should be done with Fire Pressure. Regarding Jump Guarder: it could have been kept as Jump Garage, given that internal filenames are rather low priority. -- FanOfYoshi 08:56, March 27, 2019 (EDT)

Just to clarify one point: just because it's from a Japanese source, it doesn't meant that the name is in Japanese language. If you look at the HUD of the Japanese version of Mario & Luigi: Superstar Saga or Paper Mario: Color Splash, there are a few English words there. Similarly, some Japanese names are actually just English names.--Mister Wu (talk) 12:46, March 27, 2019 (EDT)

Please note that there is a difference between an english name, and a romanization. I do not have particular issues with Electric Pressure, though, i kinda feel saying that it is the subject's english name is basically citing the encyclopedia... I'd have liked to override the source priority exception proposal I know at least one example that has been moved from its correct english name to its romanized Japanese filename for far more arbitrary reasons. Regarding that failed idea, it'd be better to wait for a consensus to agree for the internal template (which is a can of worm, and i'm a bit stressed about reopening it) Also, i wouldn't say that "Hepburn romanization" would make it more english. -- FanOfYoshi 08:00, March 28, 2019 (EDT)

I think it's better to explain what I mean. Fire Pressure is not the Hepburn romanization of 「ファイアプレッシャー」, said romanization of is Faia Puresshā. The thing is, the Katakana here aren't giving a unique name, they are trying to transcribe in Japanese what is an English name used in Japan, Fire Pressure. Not all the internal names are romanized, quite a few of them aren't romanized names at all. As an example, Catherine, Killer, Haamer Bros. are all English names that are used in Japan. They don't even have an exact match in Katakana, as you can see from their actual Hepburn romanization: Kyasarin, Kirā, Hanmā Burosu. The equations name used in English speaking countries = English name and name used in Japan but written in Latin script = romanized name are imprecise and, in the case of the second equation, often wrong.--Mister Wu (talk) 16:55, March 28, 2019 (EDT)

To clarify on the red Urchin internal filename part, i used "While it contains an english loanword, it wouldn't be much of an english name due to reusing the Urchin's Japanese name", not "It's english but it came from Japan" at all, which is what i tried to clarify earlier in the proposal. -- FanOfYoshi 11:56, March 29, 2019 (EDT)

Which is more or less the same argument Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) used on this talk page. -- FanOfYoshi 12:48, March 29, 2019 (EDT)

Anyways, given how we split the red Urchin, i kinda feel a counterproposal on the source priority exception should be made via MarioWiki:Proposals, then we'd see what to do about that failed idea. -- FanOfYoshi 13:07, March 31, 2019 (EDT)

Another thing LinkTheLefty... Why did you remove the "another language" template on the Beamer enemies pages, and use their romanized Japanese filenames as a "proof" of being their english name? Regarding Jump Guarder, i suggested to move it back to Jump Garage given that the internal filenames are a low priority, and we have cases we already dealt with. For the source priority exception, i made a proposal to make a more case-by-case basis. Then, we'd decide what to do on that failed idea. -- FanOfYoshi 10:38, April 2, 2019 (EDT)

We've tried to explain legitimate romanization to you multiple times (even within this very section), and I've already mentioned that these instances are most certainly unambiguous English words. I reiterate: As a general rule of thumb, if it's legible to an English reader and doesn't require a translation, then chances are, it's English. LinkTheLefty (talk) 10:55, April 2, 2019 (EDT)

Also, the reason i made a proposal for a more case-by-case basis on the source priority proposal on MarioWiki:Proposals is because i don't want to flood this page with more proposals. Also, regarding that failed idea, it's better to wait until a consensus agrees with that. -- FanOfYoshi 10:59, April 2, 2019 (EDT)

Regarding romanized filenames, i saw your edits on Karikari and Kamikami here and here, which you unexplainedly used the romanized Japanese filenames as a "proof" of being their english name. I later readded the another language template to both. -- FanOfYoshi 02:38, April 12, 2019 (EDT)

To be more specific, i ask you a question on why did you do that. -- FanOfYoshi 07:53, April 22, 2019 (EDT)

You are asking about outdated edits which, after more recent discussions, I no longer support. LinkTheLefty (talk) 08:08, April 22, 2019 (EDT)

Still i'd like to make another counterproposal attempt for the source priority exception... Regarding the red Urchin, i wasn't clear on that part. I meant to say "Please note that Super Mario Land and Super Mario Land 2: 6 Golden Coins use "Land" in both their English name and their Japanese name." Regarding that Propeller Piranha édit, it wasn't really clear about what you were trying to do there. I thought you were making obvious that they were the same as previous iteration, while it was obvious. And no, i wasn't validating the encyclopedia in the Petapeta talk page, i just said i've round nothing about new names. Also, what did you mean by the red Urchin's internal filename was "translated", when it contained Unizo, which is the Urchin's Japanese name? -- FanOfYoshi 06:49, April 26, 2019 (EDT)

I was cleared up on the usage of "Propeller Piranha" (which technically didn't have the name "Hootie the Blue Fish" in Yoshi's New Island) by Doc von Schmeltwick, and the fact is that "Land" could have been usable in lieu of "Riku" for Urchin/Unizo; it probably would have been treated as a partial translation like Kiba Pig Popo, but you're asking about a multiple-choice proposal that passed one way fair and square (with an option that I supported as an alternative no less). It's not a current issue or really relevant anymore. I'd be open to revisiting the source priority exception, but you should figure how this affects current exceptions and how to address them. LinkTheLefty (talk) 09:04, April 26, 2019 (EDT)

Should be a more case-by-case basis? Regarding that Urchin thing, given the wording used ("based on the plain English internal name"), i misunderstood what you were trying to do there. (I really shouldn't flood this talk page with more proposals, since it should be a discussion for that internal filename template. -- FanOfYoshi 09:55, April 26, 2019 (EDT)

Regarding the "legible to an English reader" thing, please note that there is {{foreign names}} this template, so they Can understand what it means. Also, what does "Iga" means in Mini Iga? -- FanOfYoshi 09:58, April 26, 2019 (EDT)

I find it still relevant because i have issues with some internal filenames. Maybe one specifically for the template? Regarding the source priority exception, i'd think it'd be more reasonable to make a proposal for it to have a more case-by-case basis, given what you said about current exceptions (which makes me think of Scorchit and Klamber). -- FanOfYoshi 13:03, April 26, 2019 (EDT)

@LinkTheLefty : "(with an option that I supported as an alternative no less)": Not really? There was a major disagreement to change anything.

"It's not a current issue or really relevant anymore." Yes, it's still an issue, and it is still relevant, because like i said, i still particular issues with certain internal names. -- FanOfYoshi 05:04, May 4, 2019 (EDT)

Also, we're lucky enough that most of the Donkey Kong Jungle Beat enemies's internal filenames are translated (like Rolling Frog, Black Fairy, Snow Mole). Some of them are not acurate translation, but are still plain english (like Pea Frog, within the "Puchi" being mistranslated as "Pea" rather than "Petit") And some of them are literally just romanization of their Japanese name (Karikari and Kamikami). -- FanOfYoshi 05:11, May 4, 2019 (EDT)

Yes really, I did support the current title for the land version of Urchin; the comments were veering off-topic and I see you brought it up again on the blue Lava Bubble talk page. Please let it go, it's a done proposal that actually ended to both our satisfaction. Anyway, it has been decided now that direct romanizations like Garigari are considered Japanese, and translating "Puchi" as "Pea" (obviously referring to size just like Mame Kuribō) isn't a horrific choice. If anything, it should make it more evident that a decent amount of those names weren't direct romanizations, so I'm not sure where you're going with this. LinkTheLefty (talk) 08:20, May 4, 2019 (EDT)

I don't really have an issue with Pea Frog. -- FanOfYoshi 08:21, May 4, 2019 (EDT)

Also, the red Urchin isn't really relevant anymore at the time being. -- FanOfYoshi 08:22, May 4, 2019 (EDT)

Then your wording doesn't work, as i thought you were talking about the proposal i made regarding how to handle internal filenames, which is what is still relevant. Also, maybe a proposal specifically for the template? Regarding the other extent of the encyclopedia (which i don't care anymore), it'd be best to wait for Super Mario Maker 2's release, since i plan to split the Innertube and Ice Skate variants of the Goomba at some point. (see the Goomba talk page) Regarding my Mini Iga issue a while back, Special:Diff/2602342 was also because "Iga" has a Japanese root, unlike "Mini". -- FanOfYoshi 08:35, May 11, 2019 (EDT)

The possible Japanese root of "Iga" doesn't really fit the context of the enemy, so it comes across as a nonsense word. LinkTheLefty (talk) 08:58, May 11, 2019 (EDT)

Is it really a bad idea to restart another proposal regarding the above? -- FanOfYoshi 15:25, June 19, 2019 (EDT)

Capitalization rule

This talk page or section has a conflict or a question that needs to be answered. Please try to help and resolve the issue by leaving a comment.

According to Naming: "The words in the title must be capitalized the same way they are from the source, unless it is a proper noun. Proper nouns are capitalized no matter how it is in the source...Exceptions to the proper noun rule can be made if there is some special reason why the proper noun is uncapitalized." What exactly is the purpose of this rule? I think it's unnecessarily confusing, and nowadays can lead to totally avoidable situations such as this one. Why not just have the words capitalized the same way they are from the source, period? It just doesn't seem to be completely applicable for official names anymore unless it is revised to be more about creating a conjectural title. LinkTheLefty (talk) 17:10, April 22, 2019 (EDT)

Yeah, that... doesn't make any sense. I've never seen us capitalize something against how it shows in a source. 17:17, April 22, 2019 (EDT)

I think that's for like if someone's name is lowercase'd or something. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 18:52, April 22, 2019 (EDT)

You mean like if Mario's name was written as "mario" in an off place? I think we can reasonably deem such cases as typos. LinkTheLefty (talk) 09:04, April 26, 2019 (EDT)

The usage of old names in articles regarding Japanese names

This talk page or section has a conflict or a question that needs to be answered. Please try to help and resolve the issue by leaving a comment.

Do Japanese names count as well? I'm asking this due to the ongoing Bull's-Eye Banzai situation (see talk page), the Nipper Dandelion, the Piranha Pod, and the Clampy, the 3 latter of which are going against policy. Also, another question... Is the Clampy mentioned in the Super Mario Galaxy and Super Mario Galaxy 2 guides? If so, what are the options?

• Neither guide mention it at all
• One guide calls it generically "clam", while the other guide doesn't mention it.
• Both guide generically call it "clam"
• One guide gives it a name, and the other calls it "clam"
• One guide gives it a name, and the other doesn't mention it at all.
• Both give it a name

If so, what are they called? -- FanOfYoshi 10:33, July 22, 2019 (EDT)

Or should we make a counterproposal on the usage of old names in articles proposal instead? -- FanOfYoshi 11:14, July 23, 2019 (EDT)

For the Nipper Dandelion, a proposal has decided so, so i think another proposal is needed to counter that, so we can use its Japanese name on its appearances prior to Super Smash Bros. Ultimate. -- FanOfYoshi 12:23, July 23, 2019 (EDT)

Naming policy does not address special cases of subjects receiving an English name sometime after they've gone by a foreign name, so what we have here is an "unwritten rule" wherein a foreign language name is treated akin to an unofficial conjectural title as an exception to chronological consistency due to the Nipper Dandelion proposal. As for Clampy, the closest mention in on page 130 of the first game's guide: "That clam against the outer seawall snaps its shell open and shut, taunting the little penguins with its prize. Mario must swim over to the clam and wait for it to open up. When it does, swim forward and pick up the Star Chip." That's why I also disagree with removing Clampy's original reference - yes, it's an "in-game name", but it didn't receive its current name until much later and even then it didn't appear in-game until way afterwards, making it misleading. LinkTheLefty (talk) 13:05, July 23, 2019 (EDT)

I think a proposal is needed to determine wether Japanese names are acceptable in the old names. -- FanOfYoshi 16:26, July 23, 2019 (EDT)

The thing is, a Japanese (or any other language) name is not the old name of a subject, it's a subject's name in another language. I strongly oppose this idea, and stand by my thoughts during the Nipper Dandelion fiasco; "Passing off a Japanese (or other language) name as a subject's former name in the same vein as Bloober/Blooper or Toadstool/Peach feels misleading. It was never called that in English, we just had to fall back on it because there was no other option, and documenting it as a subject's historical name just doesn't seem right." Bull's-Eye Banzai, Nipper Dandelion, Piranha Pod, and Clampy are all perfectly acceptable names, and ignoring those names for certain games just because they didn't have a name at the time is ridiculous. -- Too Bad! Waluigi Time! 17:04, July 23, 2019 (EDT)

Agreed. TheDarkStar 17:06, July 23, 2019 (EDT)

I'll reiterate my response as well: "It is not explicitly disallowed in policy (note that the use of an English name "regardless of the source" is in reference to the title of the article, which is separate from using legacy names whenever appropriate), and Japanese and English name changes certainly do not have to coincide with each other." Besides, it seems we already have this idea in practice right now with certain articles like the Mad Scienstein, which we refer to as Arewo Shitain-hakase in reference to Wario Land 4. Of course, you can say that is a unique case since they are sort of like different "forms" of the same subject (and because the character originated from elsewhere), but I'll add that Bull's-Eye Banzai's case is also a little different from Nipper Dandelion, Piranha Pod, and Clampy because it did have a name in use, just not a very intuitive one. So really, the current implementation is on a case-by-case basis, though I think policy should be clearer about it regardless. LinkTheLefty (talk) 18:21, July 23, 2019 (EDT)

I think the B-E Banzai should be "King Bill" in that section because it's an English name and "Clampy" should be referred to as such throughout, as the file name for a JP-developed game is nowhere near on the same "tier" of "English-ness" as "Clampy" by any measurement, and treating them as equal is absurd. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 18:28, July 23, 2019 (EDT)

Agreed with LinkTheLefty. -- FanOfYoshi 18:45, July 23, 2019 (EDT)

Also, out of curiosity, what is the Clampy's internal filename in Super Mario Galaxy and Super Mario Glaaxy 2? -- FanOfYoshi 18:49, July 23, 2019 (EDT)

Whoops, I wasn't really paying attention when I mentioned Bull's-Eye Banzai and just listing off the enemies mentioned, yeah that's clearly a different situation altogether and doesn't really have anything to do with this. I still stand by my point for the other three. Mad Scienstein is a bit of an odd situation and should be an exception rather than the rule. -- Too Bad! Waluigi Time! 18:52, July 23, 2019 (EDT)

What about Subcon (species)? -- FanOfYoshi 04:17, July 25, 2019 (EDT)

Doki Doki Panic was only released in Japan, so it's only logical to use their Japanese name there. It should be an exception. TheDarkStar 07:25, July 29, 2019 (EDT)

Give priority to proper nouns over English common nouns

This talk page proposal has already been settled. Please do not edit any of the sections in the proposal. If you wish to discuss the article, do so in a new header below the proposal.

no priority 4-6
Over time, we ended up noticing a few cases in which a subject was named with a common noun in English guides (sometimes capitalized, sometimes not), while it had a proper noun in Japanese. A few examples I recently met are:

• Batton known as bat
• Nokottasu known as Turtle
• Nosshī known as dinosaur

These common nouns in English can be misleading, even for the editors, and as a result the last few months we often resorted to using the Japanese name instead. Since these English common nouns used in place of Japanese proper nouns seem to be a rather common choice in English guides, rather than making many similar exceptions I think it's time to make a rule to deal with these cases by adding this point as the fourth point in the Naming an article section:

• If a subject, who is not named in English in-game text or in English manuals, has a proper noun as first international name from a non-English region but is referred to using only common nouns in English material, the first international name from a non-English region will have priority over the English common nouns. For example, Nokottasu are named after their Japanese name, Nokottasu, instead of their generic English name Turtles

Proposer: Mister Wu (talk)
Deadline: August 13, 2019, 23:59 GMT

Support

1. Mister Wu (talk) At this point I think that a rule is better than many similar exceptions
2. Trig Jegman (talk) Seems more accurately named to me
3. Waluigi Time (talk) This is probably generally better than a guide off-handedly calling it a generic object.
4. Niiue (talk) Per all.

#FanOfYoshi (talk) Agreed.

Oppose

1. LinkTheLefty (talk) What this proposal doesn't mention is that "Turtle" was only capitalized exactly once in one of two English guides, which strongly influenced the decision to refer to them by their Japanese name. Also, the scope of this proposal would be far larger than these four subjects alone (half of which are already in effect anyway); for example, most of these are pretty generically named. Additionally, this proposal doesn't address what to do in the event of name changes such as the Donkey Kong 64 Bat. Finally, the proposal doesn't factor in Japanese names that are, for all intents and purposes, somewhat generic themselves (e.g. magician, rooster, possibly presenter) or the number of times they are directly translated with lowercase formatting - at which point then can we objectively measure it as an "actual" name, especially since Japanese doesn't include capitalization as a definitive marker unlike English? For these reasons, the existing capitalization or consistency qualifications are enough, and the existing source priority proposal above is an adequate way to make naming exceptions without veering into personal preference territory; in fact, said proposal theoretically supports all four subjects that this very proposal specifically brings up, which frankly makes it overall pointless and not worth the potential headache of its application.
2. TheDarkStar (talk) Per LinkTheLefty. If the Japanese name is also not name-like, what will we do then? Use the first name-like name we find? The proposal fails to mention this, as well as numerous other things, including the fact that the source priority proposal theoretically covers all four subjects. I really don't see why we need to delve into Japanese names for genericism if the Japanese names are also generic, possibly even more so.
3. bwburke94 (talk) This is an English-language wiki. We use English names if they exist.
4. FanOfYoshi (talk) If we are going to rename Bat into Batton, i disagree. While it is generic, it is counted as an actual enemy in the guides (it has an entry), as seen here. Per all.
5. Scrooge200 (talk) We're an English wiki, we use English names. Simple as that.
6. Obsessive Mario Fan (talk) Per all. If we only have a Japanese name for a subject, we should use the translation (if we find one).

Comments

In case there were doubts, this proposal doesn't really deal with the discussion above, nor does it directly deal with the case of the name of the Bull's Eye Banzai in New Super Mario Bros. Wii, as in that case a proper noun, King Bill, was used to refer to three different enemies as if it was a common noun, thus requiring further discussion on whether this is enough to apply this rule should it pass. Finally, the aim of the proposal is not preventing the examination and discussion of the various individual cases, as exceptions to or interpretation of rules can still be discussed nonetheless, it's just having a general guideline and avoiding having many exceptions to the rules that are all similar in nature.
P.S:: I know about the case of the bosses of Super Mario Land 2 and... I'd be fine with applying this rule, we already use many Japanese names in that page, recognizing the bosses' actual names which are more creative than sewer rat or octopus would be neat in my opinion, even though in cases like these if we decided to apply the rule it would be highly recommended to add the reported English name as well in the introductory paragraph.--Mister Wu (talk) 21:38, July 29, 2019 (EDT)

To LinkTheLefty (talk), a few clarifications:

• The proposal is worded with will have priority, not will be used for a specific reason: it deals with the decision process, as such it deals with future cases, more than preexisting ones. Users can of course fix the current names with a higher priority, but is not as mandatory as if the will be used term was given. This is also why in the comment above I wrote if we decided to apply the rule
• The first example you gave (Wario Land II) is exactly the reason why this proposal exists: a lot of enemies were simply not named by Nintendo of America, and the use of common names is a testament of that, similarly the second example you cite doesn't even fall within the scope of this proposal, as the page name is already a proper noun
• If the first international name is a common noun, the case falls outside of the scope of this proposal, for this reason, since Presenter can be viewed as a common noun, I now removed that example

Ultimately, the potential scope is broad, but the wording chosen does not mandate action for currently existing pages - even though I think a revision wouldn't be that bad, as I think Ricky is a better page name than Sewer Rat - it's a guideline for the decisions related to future cases, to ease the process for editors who find themselves with a generically named subject who happens to have an actual proper name. Having to find the source priority exception here can be confusing, especially because the wording of said proposal is pretty generic.--Mister Wu (talk) 14:38, July 31, 2019 (EDT)

The "Beamer" enemies should probably be an exception, as they aren't properly named in the guides. -- FanOfYoshi 04:04, August 3, 2019 (EDT)

The first example actually supports my point pretty well because it is an official statement from a Nintendo representative directly stating in no uncertain terms that they are the enemy names in reference to that game, as opposed to a writer coming up with generic descriptors on the spot. We know this is true because "Spear Guy" was also used in Nintendo Power coverage of the game (albeit not for what it was previously assumed to be), along with other corresponding names elsewhere. The second example does not technically fall within this proposal's scope, but that's exactly it: cases of name changes remain unaddressed since we do use legacy names appropriately. LinkTheLefty (talk) 20:20, August 4, 2019 (EDT)

I had little doubt these generic descriptors were the fault of Prima writers or the wirters of the guides in general, they were far too common. Thing is, as official as they are, they are just generic descriptors in place of what is a specific name in Japan, which itself has been very confusing for this wiki (Nokottasu were prposed to be merged because of their generic English name, similarly, Nosshī was kept under the generic section of dinosaurs since it hasn't been given a proper English name). It's not just a matter of legality, it's a matter of Nintendo of America not being as comprehensive in the naming, replacing proper Japanese nouns with common nouns and causing confusion for readers and even editors. Of course, if the generic name is shown in manuals and in-game text, it's too late for us to act, but in cases in which we can highlight how a certain subject does have a proper name and isn't just a generic subject among many similar ones, taking an action in this direction can be sensible.--Mister Wu (talk) 22:38, August 4, 2019 (EDT)

Nokottasu was actually proposed to be merged because we had a section of 「マリオ＆ルイージRPGマメーリア王国カンペキ冒険ブック」 (Mario & Luigi RPG Mamēria Ōkoku Kanpeki Bōken Book) that instead plainly referred to them as Nokonoko in combination with the Big Koopa Troopa redesign/replacement in the 3DS remake, so once again, I'm still not sure what this proposal solves that couldn't be sensibly handled with the source priority exception, as cases like Nokottasu and Banekiti show that similar ideas are currently in effect but was reached through discussion rather than strict policy, which is helped by that sourcing proposal. LinkTheLefty (talk) 09:32, August 5, 2019 (EDT)

The Nintendo Official Guidebooks books from Shogakukan have precedence over the other Japanese books in the naming policy, but this is beyond the point. The idea was not to solve something, but rather to formalize the current status quo so we didn't have to resort to a rather vague source priority exception every time, plus having a rule would help new editors who aren't supposed to go into this talk page to see the source priority exception, which in itself isn't even well specfied in the currently written policy.--Mister Wu (talk) 17:59, August 5, 2019 (EDT)

We weren't aware of the Shogakukan information for almost the entire proposal and just had the other guide to go off on, but regardless: if the main idea is to formalize it, why not just ask an admin to add the part about the already decided source priority exception into policy? LinkTheLefty (talk) 10:45, August 6, 2019 (EDT)

Ideally, it should be the proposer who writes the rule to be added and ask the admin to add it, it doesn't look like the exception was added to the rules though; I guess that after this proposal is concluded we can ask an admin to add a mention to the source priority exception among the rules.

In any case, the idea of this proposal was that when there's a group of cases in which the exception is systematically used, it makes sense to write a rule so the exception can indeed be more of an exception.--Mister Wu (talk) 17:10, August 6, 2019 (EDT)

For future reference, the "Beamer" enemies are generically referred to as "robots", i seriously think this should be an exception, since "robot" is not an actual name, like mentioned above. -- FanOfYoshi 09:36, August 5, 2019 (EDT)

On Japanese names

I fail to see exactly why we are disallowed to translate Japanese names, if this is an English wiki. Throwing away countless English names in favor of untranslated Japanese names is ridiculous, IMO. There's a fine line between sourcing and ridiculousness, and I think we've crossed that line. Translating Japanese names would be beneficial to the wiki, since, you know, this is an English wiki. I'm honestly considering making a proposal to ban foreign names from article names and relegate them to the Names in other languages sections, due to the obvious abuse of the whole "foreign names must be used if you do not have an English source" thing in source priority. I'd honestly prefer a conjectural name over a subject's name in another language, since this is an English wiki. TheDarkStar 14:02, August 25, 2019 (EDT)

I think telling people what amounts to lies would be more "abuse" than what we do here. Don't say "obvious" in totally-subjective situations. Besides, the thing you're suggesting caused innumerable problems. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 14:07, August 25, 2019 (EDT)

Don't be mad! Per Doc von Schmeltwick. -- FanOfYoshi 14:09, August 25, 2019 (EDT)

Look above, i tried to make a proposal on how to handle internal filenames, which failed, but nowadays, i feel neutral about current handling since it has been applied to pages like Petapeta. -- FanOfYoshi 14:12, August 25, 2019 (EDT)

Translation is hardly as straightforward as you seem to think, as direct transliterations of English terms can make up only so many Japanese names. Since there are oftentimes multiple meanings of a word or phrase, and we cannot consult the actual creators for precise accuracy, how do you plan to determine which is the "correct" reading or prevent arguments over article title changes? We are not arrogant enough to believe we are the arbiters of this information - that thinking belongs in the domain of fanon. Rest assured, our Japanese name policy - which changed little if any in a near-decade - ensures stability and was well thought through way before you joined. LinkTheLefty (talk) 15:15, August 25, 2019 (EDT)

I realize I was indubitably wrong and have striked-out my comment above. Thank you. TheDarkStar 15:21, August 25, 2019 (EDT)