Talk:Rocky Wrench

Correct?

"A few Rocky Wrenches man a three barreled cannon in Super Mario Sunshine. Shooting Bullet Bills and Missile Bills." Is this info correct? The species that control the cannons in Super Mario Sunshine don't have shells, yet the ones in SMB3 have Buzzy Beetle like shells. They may be Monty Moles or a new species. Can anyone confirm it, because there is no mention of Rocky Wrenches on any faq or guide.--Spike

Monty Moles man the cannons, not Rocky Wrenches. The text will remain deleted. -- Son of Suns

Should it be mentioned that the manual to Super Mario Bros. 3 clearly states they're a kind of turtle- and thus possibly related to Koopas? Dinosaur bob 21:18, 30 May 2007 (EDT)

SERIOUSLY?!?!?!?!? 3D, um... I THINK NOT TRUE BE TO BEING!

It said something along the lines of, "They may look like moles, but they're actually turtles". It seems that, at the least, there's a possibility the two species could be related. Dinosaur bob 21:23, 30 May 2007 (EDT)

Hmm. Intersting. 3D, please check again and confirm.

Here it is:

"Rocky is a turtle who kind of looks like a mole." It's possible they're related, as they look almost as much like a typical Koopa Troopa as does a Lakitu. Dinosaur bob 21:27, 30 May 2007 (EDT)

Am I the only one whose noticed the shell?
And where does it say they're related to Monty Moles?
- Yoshi Mastar

I was saying that it's possible they're related to Koopas- being turtles that allied with them is some good circumstancial evidence. Dinosaur bob 12:57, 4 June 2007 (EDT)

I don't think they should be compared to either Monty Moles or Koopa Troopas. For now we call them "turtle-like mole creatures" or maybe "mole-like turtle creatures".Knife (talk) 13:47, 11 June 2007 (EDT)

It seems that Rocky Wrenches are shell-less in Super Mario Galaxy... --Someone Else 17:34, 22 November 2007 (EST)

How are they koopas? they look like moles to me and they even act like moles. General bob-omb 14:57, 8 March 2009 (EDT)

They used to have shells (Which could've been cosmetic) But they don't anymore. User:MarioLover54/sig 5:15 PM June 16, 2019 (EST)

Galaxy pic

Nothing too big, but does anyone have a picture of Rocky Wrench as he appears in Super Mario Galaxy? There are many other screenshots and pictures of who characters look in-game, I was just curious if anyone has managed to get a pic of him. - Smashgoom202 01:00, 26 October 2009 (EDT)

right here! -User:superpokezillabros

Sub-Species

Aren't Rocky Wrenches sub-species of Monty Moles? Even that they appear earlier in a game, their most recent look (in NSMBWii) is a Monty Mole with black glasses and blue frame, with the manhole on their head. rend (talk) (edits)

Montey moles do not have shells, also, we can't put that in the article because we have no proofs.Count Bonsula I need blood...

I have (this pic was ripped by a user, and not fanon made) rend (talk) (edits)

Hmm...I'm not sure about that pic.Even if it's real, it isn't mentioned anywhere that rockies are monty moles.I bellive it's better to get a screenshot, then maybe mention that they look like montey moles in Trivia.Count Bonsula I need blood...

Koopa or Monty Mole?

There seems to be a lot of debate about Rocky Wrenches' species of origin. I think its safe to say that in the early years of Mario they were just mole-like Koopas, but since the release of Super Mario Galaxy their signature Koopa shells were removed making them resemble Undergrunts (a species of Monty Mole) and as of New Super Mario Bros. they've been completely redesigned to be regular Monty Moles with goggles and wrenches. So wouldn't it be safe to say that Nintendo now intends them to be Monty Moles and to retcon the idea that they were once Koopas? - Four Paper Heroes 01:09, 12 July 2011 (EDT)

No that is speculation until a source says they are monty moles they should be considered koopas since the only source says they look like moles but are actually koopas Goomba's Shoe15 (talk)

I'm just saying that this picture seems to imply their conversion from Koopa to Monty Mole... <:/ -Four Paper Heroes 01:17, 12 July 2011 (EDT)

So what look at a shellcreeper they look a lot like koopas but there not koopas there just turtles a source has called rocky wrenchs koopas but never monty moles and just look at the guides that have come out for games with rocky wrenches in them and none of them have called them monty moles Goomba's Shoe15 (talk)

This is actually up for discussion?

Seriously? Everyone on this website says that Rocky Wrench is a koopa? Can someone PLEASE link me to some kind of source that says this, even for the older games? Yeah, he may have had a shell in the past, but that doesn't make him a Koopa. Buzzy Beetles have shells, why don't we call them Koopas? Getting passed the older stuff, let's examine his new design: Fur. Buck Teeth. Whiskers. Claws. Pads in his hands. Big white belly. Little black nose. He is a carbon copy of Monty Mole, with goggles. The fact that anyone can say it's speculation to call him a Monty Mole is astounding. At the VERY least, if there IS an actual source that says he was once a Koopa, it needs to be fixed to say that he was retconned into a Monty Mole. However, based on his old design (claws, little nose on a snout), I'd say he was originally NOT meant to be a Koopa and the writers of this article are out of their minds. --Youreserious 02:13, 12 July 2011 (EDT)

I personally never saw Rocky Wrenches as Koopas, I always thought they wore the shells for protection. -Four Paper Heroes 02:25, 12 July 2011 (EDT)

There is a source it's the Super Mario Bros. 3 booklet it calls them turtles that look like moles and moles, also they are called koopas on the Super Mario Bros. 3 page, also it would be even worse for this site to call them Monty Moles since like ive said multiple times there is no source that has ever called them Monty Moles and until one calls them that they are not Monty Moles Goomba's Shoe15 (talk)

Um, this was sorted out when I was a noob here, guys... Look at the top. Ah, how I miss some of those good old boys who've moved on. Begins to yodel a song about 3D ^{Plumber Plumber} 02:49, 12 July 2011 (EDT)

• I repeat: Turtle does not instantly mean Koopa. If the manual had said "Is a koopa that looks like a mole" then yes, you'd put koopa. For now, it's just a turtle. And Goomba's Shoe: Seriously, are you blind or retarded?--Youreserious 00:22, 13 July 2011 (EDT)

You mad that i'm right cause fact of the matter is that Rocky Wrenchs arent Monty Moles in fact there not even related cause the only source says that they are turtles that look like moles so you can back off your little rant until you back your claims up sir Goomba's Shoe15 (talk)

• • I've said it more than once now.

I edited the article to be as correct as possible. The manual, the only source for this information, says "Rocky Wrench is a turtle that looks like a mole." It does not say "Rocky Wrench is a Koopa that looks like a mole." Being a turtle does not instantly mean it's a Koopa (see: Shellcreepers. Turtles, but not Koopas.) Since there is only one source for all of this information, I edited the article to reflect the source. As it stands it is misleading and damages the integrity of the site due to how off it is. Thank you.--Youreserious 01:20, 13 July 2011 (EDT)

Everything else points to them being Koopas even the Super Mario Bros. 3 page on are site lists them in the Koopa enemies section so something had to have called them Koopas at some point Goomba's Shoe15 (talk)

• Nothing points to them being Koopas. The one source we have is from a manual that refers to them as turtles. Everything else on this site has been edited by regular users, not by Nintendo. That just means the other pages need to be fixed as well.--Youreserious 01:41, 13 July 2011 (EDT)

How about this: the Rocky Wrench page always states there were Koopas. In Super Mario Bros. 3, they have shells. DKPetey99^TCE 07:43, 13 July 2011 (EDT) @DKPetey: Once again, the Rocky Wrench Page is wrong. This website is not canon information, it's an archive of information. We don't make things up and they're automatically right. Buzzy Beetles also have shells. Are they Koopas?

My opinion still stands that they were originally Koopas in the old games, but now in modern games Monty Moles have taken their place (as seen in the modern artwork and sprites), so in the past, yes they were Koopas/Turtles whatever, but now in the present they are intended to be Monty Moles, unless of course there's two separate species of Rocky Wrenches, one that's a Koopa/Turtle whatever and one that's a Monty Mole wearing goggles... -Four Paper Heroes 12:38, 13 July 2011 (EDT)

And btw, is that comment about them being turtles from the english manual? If so couldn't it be a possibility that the whole turtle thing is only exclusive to them in the american version? -Four Paper Heroes 12:41, 13 July 2011 (EDT)

And i'll tell you all what ive said every time until a source comes and says they ae related to monty moles they arent related to monty moles there just koopa/turtles who like moles Goomba's Shoe15 (talk)

@DKPetey: The only reason the Rocky Wrench page says they are Koopas is because some user equated being a mole-like turtle to being a Koopa. They are members of the Koopa Troop, but they're not Koopas, especially not now, no more than Goombas are. Nintendo has never stated that they were; therefore, any claim that they are is nothing more than an assumption. @Goomba's Shoe15: They're not turtles anymore. Mario4Ever (talk) 12:49, 13 July 2011 (EDT)

Do you have a guide that says there not not turtles cause unless you do they are turtles Goomba's Shoe15 (talk)

Does this look like a turtle to you? I don't see a shell. Just because they were turtles in SMB3 doesn't mean they are now. Mario4Ever (talk) 12:54, 13 July 2011 (EDT)

They are both. Let's stop arguing! The page is already protected! DKPetey99^TCE 12:57, 13 July 2011 (EDT)

No they are not moles the only source says there turtles who look like moles therefore there turtles until something says otherwise Goomba's Shoe15 (talk)

That source only describes Rocky Wrenches in SMB3. It does not describe those in SMG or NSMBWii because they no longer fit the definition of "turtles that look like moles." Mario4Ever (talk) 13:01, 13 July 2011 (EDT)

If you can find a source that calls them monty moles than go ahead an change it but as of now no source has called them moles only that they look like moles Goomba's Shoe15 (talk)

As Mario4Ever said, this image speaks louder than words: they are no longer meant to be Koopas, they are Monty Moles now, and again that whole comment about them being turtles only exists in the american guide (which are not always perfect) translators aren't perfect you know... -Four Paper Heroes 13:09, 13 July 2011 (EDT)

No true there japanses name is Tortopo which is a Portmanteau of "tortuga" (tortoise) and "topo" (mole). and no they don't not when i can cite my info and you can't until a source calls them moles they are turtles who look like moles Goomba's Shoe15 (talk)

I'm not saying they're now Monty Moles (at best, we could only call them mole-like). All I'm saying is that they're not turtles anymore. They don't have shells anymore. The almost 23 year-old definition doesn't stand when one looks at the Rocky Wrench as seen in the recent games. Unfortunately, Nintendo no longer lists its enemies in its instruction booklets, so there's no way to officially resolve the issue. Mario4Ever (talk) 13:15, 13 July 2011 (EDT)

Exactly. -Four Paper Heroes 13:16, 13 July 2011 (EDT)

Yes there is one call them turtles which the source calls them thats the only option cause there not moles and we have a source that says there turtles that look like moles Goomba's Shoe15 (talk)

You cannot say that shell-less mole-like creatures are turtles according to a definition that describes a mole-like shelled creature as a turtle. Mario4Ever (talk) 13:21, 13 July 2011 (EDT)

I can and i have and i will according to are only source which has not been discredited by and official source they are turtles and thats what they shall remain Goomba's Shoe15 (talk)

Does anyone have a japanese version of the guide? If it says their turtles fine, but as of Super Mario Galaxy they are no longer turtles, maybe they evolved, maybe they made a wish to the stars to be mole-ish, or maybe the guys at Nintendo thought "you know what lets make them look like monty moles so they'll be cuter and less silly looking". -Four Paper Heroes 14:50, 13 July 2011 (EDT)

If you change the species you are making edits based of speculation the eyes are misleadng the source is not the source calls them turtles and no matter how much they look like monty moles they are to remain turtles until a source says they are monty moles they are to remain turtles Goomba's Shoe15 (talk)

I found something on a few japanese sites, apparently the japanese name for the Rocky Wrench from SMB 3 is Pū (プー) and the one from SMG and onward is Mogu (モグ), does this mean something? -Four Paper Heroes 15:27, 13 July 2011 (EDT)

Here's a list of Japanese-speaking users. I suggest asking one of them. Mario4Ever (talk) 17:18, 13 July 2011 (EDT)

Hey what sites did those names come from Goomba's Shoe15 (talk)

@DKPetey: Once again, the Rocky Wrench Page is wrong. This website is not canon information, it's an archive of information. We don't make things up and they're automatically right. Buzzy Beetles also have shells. Are they Koopas? No. Every argument here has said that Rocky Wrenches are turtles. I'll bite on that, the manual says that. But turtles =/= koopas. The article is wrong and hurts the integrity of the website. Change koopa to "turtle" or "mole-like turtle" and it'll be accurate. Remove all references to it being a Koopa throughout the site.--Youreserious 18:20, 14 July 2011 (EDT)

• • Additionally, mogu means "mole".--Youreserious 02:33, 15 July 2011 (EDT)

So discussion is dead

And my argument still stands. No one has proven me wrong. Please fix the article now. ONE source calls them turtles, and turtles are not necessarily koopas. His japanese name is "Mole" in all appearances after SMB3. Remove all references to him being a Koopa from this article and throughout the site. If you can't call him a mole, call him a Turtle-Like Mole, but do NOT call him a Koopa. It hurts the integrity of the site to have such terrible information up.--Youreserious 23:38, 15 July 2011 (EDT)

Finally, the Monty Mole/Koopa issue is over, but in a negative way to say "don't you ever write the Rocky Wrench is a Koopa or a Monty Mole again until there's a official source that tells that the Rocky Wrench is really a Monty Mole or a Koopa". Honestly, I vote for Rocky Wrench being a Monty Mole. Still stating that Rocky Wrench is a turtle is really nasty, unless he's a turtle in a disguise of a Monty Mole. LOL just kidding. XD--Prince Ludwig 00:45, 18 July 2011 (EDT)

Saying it's a Monty Mole based on the above source calling it a Mole, is the Koopa/Turle debate all over again. Xzelion^ETC

Let's wait until the future confirms that wether the Rocky Wrench is really a Monty Mole or a Koopa/Turtle (SMB3's Rocky Wrench, I admit, has kind of a body to that of a Hammer Bro., the artwork of the Rocky Wrench makes it look both like a mole and a Koopa).
The preceding unsigned comment was added by Prince Ludwig (talk).

Rocky Wrenches are Monty Moles

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.

Rocky Wrenches are not Monty Moles. 16-22

A Monty Mole

File:RockyWrenchNSMBW.png

Rocky Wrench (present)

Rocky Wrench (past)

According to Raven Effect (talk), Rocky Wrenches are a type of turtle rather than a Monty Mole, and his reasons are that the English manual of SMB3 (from more than 20 years ago) mentions that they are turtles that look like moles, but modern images clearly shown them as Monty Moles now so the manual's info is clearly outdated and they have clearly been redesigned into Monty Moles (and as they say, pictures speak louder than words), plus they have no traces of their "turtle" origin aka no shell. But whatever the wiki chooses then let it be.

Proposer: FourPaperHeroes (talk)
Deadline: January 2, 2012, 23:59 GMT Extended: January 9, 2012, 23:59 GMT, January 16, 2012, 23:59 GMT

Support

1. FourPaperHeroes (talk) - Per my proposal.
2. Tails777 (talk) The artwork for New Super Mario Bros. Wii does not show them with a shell meaning that they are not turtles. Per proposal.
3. SuperYoshiBros (talk) - Per all.
4. Kokoopa (talk) - Per all.
5. Nintendo64Fan (talk) - Per all.
6. Prince Ludwig (talk) - Per all.
7. King Booranha (talk) Per all.
8. ThePremiumYoshi (talk) - Sincerely, it would be kinda silly to classify them as 'turtles', since they no longer have a shell, and their body composition is identical to Monty Mole's. Per all.
9. Technickal (talk) - Per FourPaperHeroes and ThePremiumYoshi
10. Zero777 (talk) An obvious error shouldn't complicate an obvious enemy.
11. MarioMaster720 (talk) they're CLEARLY Monty Moles with glasses. they look exactly like Monty moles, but with glasses.
12. ManMadeMan (talk) Per all.
13. YoshiGo99 (talk) In their newer appearances they appear as Monty Moles with goggles.No shells at all.
14. Byllant (talk) - It is not a coincidence that Monty Mole and Rocky Wrench are pair together in the enemies section from New Super Mario Bros. Wii guide.
15. BoygeyMario (talk) Per all! They're OBVIOUSLY Monty Moles. I even think they were still moles with the shells on.
16. SWFlash (talk) Per proposal

Oppose

1. Raven Effect (talk) No Source has called them a Monty mole and most names suggest that they are a mole turtle hybrid and being a mole does not equal being a Monty mole
2. M&SG (talk) - See my comment below.
3. Bop1996 (talk) Nintendo hasn't given any proof of them being Monty Moles, but they have given us ample confirmation of them being Koopas, so that should be our decision.
4. Baby Mario Bloops (talk) - Although they are similar, Rocky Wrenches are not confirmed to be Monty Moles.
5. Marioguy1 (talk) - Uhm, Koopa Paratroopas and Koopa Troopa are in the same boat, so are Hammer Bros. and Boomerang Bros. And Goombas and Octoombas. Splitting off all these characters based on minor differences would be insane, as Nintendo has confirmed they are different by naming them differently.
6. B.wilson (talk) STRONGEST POSSIBLE OPPOSE. Similarity with Monty Moles has absolutely nothing to do with what Rocky Wrenches are. Allowing consensus to lean toward support here is absolutely not supposed to happen. In short, there is absolutely no confirmation that Rocky Wrenches are Monty Moles. So shall we continue to be the accurate and reliable Mario source we always were, please?
7. Yoshiwaker (talk) - Per all.
8. Mario4Ever (talk) Per all.
9. Lord Grammaticus (talk) - Per all, particularly Bryce and BMB.
10. Hypnotoad (talk) - If you say that pictures speak louder than words, then I'm going to have to oppose since the pictures of Rocky Wrench past and present are pretty much identical. The reason that the shell isn't seen is due to the pose--the speculative shell is hidden behind the arm and obscured by the angle. Also, per all above.
11. RandomYoshi (talk) - Per B.wilson and Bop. If reliable information from Nintendo is not present on the subject, then why change it to a fanon interputation?
12. Commander Code-8 (talk) Per all.
13. Luigirules33 (talk) Per all.
14. Spidey665 (talk) - Strong Oppose: Rocky Wrenches are NOT Monty Moles. We work to be a good wiki, not a bad wiki with info without sources. Like Wikipedia, we also try to be a reliable source.
15. MrConcreteDonkey (talk) - Per all above. If there's no source saying they are Monty Moles, it's speculation.
16. Walkazo (talk) - As far as I can tell, nothing official has ever said that Rocky Wrenches are Monty Moles, which means we can't say they are either. Prima grouped them together, yes, but that's far from saying one is a type of the other. I agree that Rocky Wrenches are some sort of mole creature, but that doesn't mean they're some sort of Monty Mole, just like how them being a type of turtle doesn't/didn't make them Koopas. By all means, point out the similarities between the two species right up there in the introduction, but that's it: until we get official information to the contrary, anything more would be speculation.
17. Magikrazy51 (talk) I've made up my mind. Please disregard my last comment. Until officially confirmed, Ricky Wrench is far from being a Minty Mole.
18. Skyward Yoshi (talk) Very Strong Oppose: Rocky Wrenches where invented before Monty Moles. They may have something in common but they have not been confirmed that they are. Also look at Talk:Toad Brigade which failed because there was no source of it being confirmed of them being in Super Mario Sunshine
19. LeftyGreenMario (talk) Appearances can change over time. Who knows if the Rocky Wrenches will regain their shells? Right now, we should leave it as it is. I don't want to dive into speculation. I think Rocky Wrenches are moles, but are they Monty Moles? Who knows? Otherwise, I don't want to make assumptions. It's something we seldom do here.
20. Fawfulfury65 (talk) Per Walkazo.
21. Lindsay151 (talk) Per all.
22. Lakituthequick (talk) Vote changed. The manual is official and Nintendo never said that they are Monty Moles between the manuals release date and now.

Comments

It doesn't matter what they look like saying there a type of Monty Mole because they look like one is Speculation Raven Effect (talk)

Whatever the case may be it is clear that the present Rocky Wrenches are no longer "turtles" so we either reclassify them as Monty Moles or someone decides that Rocky Wrenches should be split into two articles, one for the ones that clearly look like Monty Moles and one for Raven Effect's "turtles". Although I'm still in favor of the reclassification. -Four Paper Heroes 19:46, 19 December 2011 (EST)

Per the comparisons of the Monty Mole and Rocky Wrench, it is obviously a goggle-wearing, wrench-wielding Monty Mole with a manhole on his head. -- SuperYoshiBros 19:47, 19 December 2011 (EST)

While Rocky Wrenches now greatly resemble Monty Moles, saying that they're one in the same is pretty much speculation at the moment. M&SG (talk) 08:16, 20 December 2011 (EST)

The Super Mario 3D Land strategy guild says they are moles, not turtles. Now I'm not saying they are Monty Moles, but we can now say they are not turtles. Tails777 (talk)

They also never looked like turtles anyway. The shell in SMB3 looks more like clothing then anything else. -- SuperYoshiBros 16:50, 20 December 2011 (EST)

I suspect the same but the english translations of SMB3's manual say otherwise, but that's only in the english version, if we had the japanese manual we might not even need this poll. -Four Paper Heroes 17:08, 20 December 2011 (EST)

Koopa shells have been shown to be removable, acting like clothing. Since Nintendo actually confirmed the Rocky Wrenches to be Koopas, it's possible that they stopped wearing the shells. The Magikrazy

They once called Rocky Wrenches turtles, never said anything about them being Koopas. Even though Koopas are turtle-like, they are different. Yes, it appears to be an armor to protect a Rocky Wrench's back.--Prince Ludwig 22:54, 21 December 2011 (EST)

They appear to wear Buzzy Beetle shells. Are Buzzy Beetles Koopas? Magikrazy51 (talk) P.S. they definitely aren't Monty Moles, though; they're just regular moles.

No Buzzy Beetles are not Koopas they are Beetles Raven Effect (talk)

@B.wilson I once thought Rocky Wrenchs where Monty Moles and if you look, they are from the same race. Monty Moles do have things in common because they both pop out. New Super Yoshi (talk)

So sharing an attack strategy makes you the same species eh? Raven Effect (talk)

Well, Piranha Plants pop out as well, and there is no similarities to any of the things we are talking about. What people are basing it on is looks. They should also recall that even though they look like Monty Moles in NSMBW and SM3DL, they have no similarities in their other appearances. We need to have proof other than "look at the similarities of the pictures." Baby Mario Bloops (talk)

I would rather like being betrayed than believe that Rocky Wrench was a turtle, 'cause it still sounds nasty.--Prince Ludwig 23:37, 23 December 2011 (EST)

(reply to New Super Yoshi) Like URLs to RS --Bryce talk contributions 01:58, 24 December 2011 (EST)

In the level World 5-4 in SM3DL that whole level is filled with Monty Moles species, Rocky Wrench was included in the level which means he is a member of the Monty Moles. That is saying some live underground like moles and he was grouped with Monty Moles, so he is one.YoshiGo99 (talk)

Appears in a level with Monty Mole species=/=is a member of the Monty mole species Raven Effect (talk)

Guys, isn't it obvious that Rocky Wrenches are in fact MOLES?!? Buzzy Beetles aren't Koopas, yet they have shells. It would be silly to classify them as turtles. We're talking just plain ol' moles here, not Monty Moles. -- SuperYoshiBros 16:52, 24 December 2011 (EST)

Um this proposal is about whether or not Rocky Wrenches are Monty Moles Raven Effect (talk)

Does anyone have the strategy guide for New Super Mario Bros. Wii? Does it call Rocky Wrenches a type of Monty Mole? YoshiCookie (talk) 10:15, 10 December 2015 (EST)

Omp, I do have a guide! The guide doesn't make any reference to Koopas, however it doesn't make any reference to Monty Moles either. Baby Mario Bloops (talk)

I have the Prima Guide, in fact I've reading it and guess what? in the "Pipe Cloggers" (enemies) section, Monty Mole and Rocky Wrench are paired together, the text is as it follows:

Mony Moles and Rocky Wrenches

Monty Moles and Rocky Wrenches are sneaky little creatures. Usually they're satisfied to just hide in the earth. But once Mario gets near, Monty moles will pop out and begin to give chase! Rocky Wrenches, on the other hand, only pop out and hurl wrenches at the plumber. Unfortunately, Mario's plumber's tool box has enough wrenches as it is, Luckily, both enemies can be easily dispatched with a well-timed stomp on their heads!

I think this is the official proof Bop1996 was contradicting, authors usually made mistakes but this do not semms to be a mistake!

--Byllant 22:06, 30 December 2011 (EST)

Nowhere in that does it say that Rocky Wrenches are Monty moles Raven Effect (talk)

You guys shouldn't be so demanding with these case, they never say are the same species but it is intuition to guess why the author pair them together, recalling them having a similar a similar behaviour, no to mention the similar aspect, it could be the contrary, that Monty Moles are actually a Rocky Wrenches subspecies, well, maybe not. --Byllant 16:42, 4 January 2012 (EST)

I currently am neutral on the subject. The opposers state that Rocky Wrenches are just plain old moles that throw wrenches (I call them Spanner Bros.:)). I have always thought Monty Mole are what the Mushroom World calls moles. This is similar to them calling the tortoises "Koopas" or the land of Hyrule calling their chickens "Cuccos" (there is a trope for this called "Call a Rabbit a Smeerp"). Can anyone confirm or, um, un-confirm this? Magikrazy51 (talk)

@Byllant: Yes, they pair them together. However, where does it say that they are both monty moles? I notice that they don't say Koopa, but we aren't going to go by opinion. Whether they are implying it or whether they are just pairing them together because of say stregeties, I don't know. All I know is that there is nowhere in there that proves/deny anything with the matter we are on. Baby Mario Bloops (talk)

I propose we say that Rocky Wrenches are just moles, not Monty Moles. Does anybody agree with me? -- SuperYoshiBros 18:08, 9 January 2012 (EST)

Yes.Magikrazy51 (talk)

Rocky Wrenches are without a doubt Monty Moles

I honestly still have no idea why this is still a debatable topic. The evidence for them being Monty Moles is astounding. I mean, just take a look at the artwork of Monty Moles from New Super Mario Bros. U.

Now, take a look at a couple Rocky Wrench pictures.

File:RockywrenchPMSS.png

File:RockyWrenchNSMBW.png

They both have the same body shape, the same type of claws, the same single tooth in the center, the same number of whiskers on their face; they even have the same dot below their claws. Not only that, but they no longer wear the shell on their back that they had during Super Mario Bros. 3. I think it's safe to say that they wore a shell in Super Mario Bros. 3 just as a protective piece for their backside (even though it doesn't help them), and that them being called turtles was only an assumption based on their shell.

There is so much evidence for them being Monty Moles, and the only evidence for them not being that is just because of one sentence in a booklet which has outdated information (the booklet also said that the Koopalings were Bowser's children, which was shown to later be false information).

If the booklet was wrong about the Koopalings, then who's to say they also were wrong about Rocky Wrenches?

Cevan (talk) 20:15, 13 January 2014 (EST)

Because the booklet wasn't necessarily wrong, or else the "not his children" detail would've been mentioned long ago. The Koopalings being Bowser's kids presented and accepted as fact, and was simply run with until it was explicitly refuted. The same can be assumed for the "mole-like Koopas" bit, and the redesign was likely to fix that more than anything. Plus, Super Mario Galaxy kinda refutes that by existing; their appearance in that game had them much closer to Undergrunts.

Thirdly, Monty Moles didn't appear until SMW, which came after SMB 3 (where Rocky Wrenches debuted). They now look similar to each other in their modern appearances, but that doesn't change the fact that they are still completely different (different 'habitats', different attack patterns, etc. In other words, they look the same, but that's essentially all they have in common. The reason behind their similarity is probably to have them more recognizable as 'mole-like' than anything. Lord Grammaticus (talk) 20:40, 13 January 2014 (EST)

As for them in SMG, they were a type of Undergrunt in that game, and weren't even the normal Rocky Wrenches that had been seen before. This design was undoubtedly chosen since the Undergrunts had already replaced Monty Moles as the "moles of space," so since Rocky Wrenches are a type of Monty Mole they too had been replaced by Undergrunt Rocky Wrenches for the game. Undergrunts are a sub-species of Monty Moles as well, so that's just another reason to classify Rocky Wrenches as Monty Moles if you needed more reasons. As for the booklet, although at the time the information was considered correct, things have changed, as seen by the Koopalings turning out to not be Bowser's children. The same goes for Rocky Wrenches being called turtles in the booklet. Things have changed, and now its turned out that they're actually a sub-species of Monty Moles.

Next, what does them being in a different environment than Monty Moles and attacking differently have to do with them being separate species? Chargin' Chucks attack differently from normal Koopas, however they are still a sub-species of Koopa.

Cevan (talk) 20:53, 13 January 2014 (EST)

You say that as if it's already been decided by Nintendo. That's the problem.

MarioWiki tries to be as reliable a source as possible, and to that end it prioritizes official statements over speculative guesswork, no matter how "common sense" it may seems. You'll notice in the comments above ours - the most recent of which are two years old, if you're somehow still convinced the argument was ongoing prior to your comments - that this is a constant source of debate. While it can certainly be argued that Rocky was intended to be a subspecies, it still shouldn't take priority over any statements (or lack thereof) from the creators themselves.

Also, if Undergrunts are "SMG's moles," then why can't Monty be NSMB'S mole? It's not all that unlikely that the developers went to an already estblished mole design when redesigning Rocky, to keep a sort of consistency within the rest of the main series as they did within SMG's series. We know they've mostly phased out the turtle traits, save for a shell that could simply be protective gear, so that part is reduced to a relative footnote at the beginning of the article.

The thing is, as we're not the developers, we can't presume to know with 100% certainty what they intended. This isn't to say your case can't be made period, but without any sort of official insight, there might not be much to be done towards that. Lord Grammaticus (talk) 23:15, 13 January 2014 (EST)

My argument is that Rocky Wrenches are mole-like creatures, not Monty Moles. Ray Trace^(T|C) 23:42, 13 January 2014 (EST)

Make Rocky Wrench (Super Mario Galaxy) its own page

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.

split 8-0
These guys are obviously intended to be different enemies, resembling Undergrunts more than the usual Rocky Wrench depiction. However, my strongest opinion here is that they have a different Japanese name, where they're obviously supposed to be derived from those species. Just as we split King Boo (Super Mario Sunshine) because of the widely different looks and Japanese name, I suggest we split off this.

Proposer: Baby Luigi (talk)
Deadline: January 31, 2014, 23:59 GMT

Support

1. Baby Luigi (talk)
2. Walkazo (talk) - Per Baby Luigi.
3. KP (talk) Different look and resemblance to Undergrunts, different Japanese name, different attack pattern. I could make a decent article about these guys if the proposal passes.
4. Iggy Koopa Jr (talk) Sounds reasonable, and furthermore, logical.
5. Lord Grammaticus (talk) Per proposal, I can definitely get behind this.
6. Cevan (talk) Agreed. It's quite obvious that they are a type of Undergrunt in SMG.
7. Mario4Ever (talk) Per all.
8. Pinkie Pie (talk) Per proposal and all.

 

Rocky Wrenches are Monty Moles (or vice versa)

So, because the official stance is that Rocky Wrenches are actually "mole-like turtles" because of a 25-year-old manual, I feel that I should point out a few things.

First off, Rocky Wrenches literally look exactly the same as Monty Moles, but with goggles and a manhole cover (and in SMB3, a shell). If it's somehow "speculation" to say they're related because of that, it's also speculation to say that Blurps are related to Cheep Cheeps.

Second, the Japanese name for Monty Moles (チョロプー, Choropū) is clearly based on Rocky Wrench's (プー, Pū), which proves a direct relation (if anything, this proves Monty Mole is a subspecies of Rocky Wrench).

Third, we can even look at other foreign names for Rocky Wrenches, several of which are related to their names for Monty Moles (and, admittedly, turtles as well, but all this proves is that Rocky Wrenches are turtle-like moles, not the other way around).

Fourth, things are retconned all the time. Brick Blocks used to be cursed Toads. The Koopalings used to be Bowser's kids. Cheep Cheeps used to grow wings when jumping out of the water. Koopas used to be powerful sorcerers. Snifits used to "spit the bullets of evil dreams". And while Nintendo has officially retconned the Koopalings, I don't believe they've ever directly said anything about any of the other things I mentioned, so by the logic keeping Rocky Wrenches "mole-like turtles", we should treat everything from old manuals/guides, no matter how ridiculous/obviously currently untrue, as correct (unless it was directly stated as incorrect by Nintendo). On another note, I find it interesting that Porcupuffers are still considered Cheep Cheep relatives, despite having even LESS evidence of being related than Rocky Wrenches/Monty Moles. Binarystep (talk) 08:11, 24 April 2015 (EDT)

There isn't a recent source outclaiming this, and until then, we have to assume nothing. My argument is that they're moles, not Monty Moles, but I don't want to go in yet another debate about this. Ray Trace^(T|C) 01:24, 28 June 2015 (EDT)

There isn't clear evidence, although it's strongly suggested that they "literally look exactly the same" (seriously, redundant redundant much?). They hardly look like turtles, so it's logical to infer that they're turtle-like moles at this point. Still, don't remove the old information. It's better to assume that they're both turtles and moles than assume they're purely moles. It's me, Mario! (Talk / Stalk) 01:33, 28 June 2015 (EDT)

Just want to add that saying these are related to Monty Moles doesn't really contradict the SMB3 manual. If Buzzy Beetles can be derived from Koopas and still be insects, then Rocky Wrenches can be derived from Monty Moles while still being turtles. Niiue (talk) 04:59, 5 October 2015 (EDT)

Actually, I've strongly disputed the characterization of Buzzy Beetles, stating that categorizing them as insects makes such as much sense as categorizing this pathetic cheater Volkswagen Beetle as an insect. I think the SMB3 manual is an outdated source from sheer age and recent redesign of Rocky Wrenches in New Super Mario Bros.. It's me, Mario! (Talk / Stalk) 15:03, 5 October 2015 (EDT)

Bump, but allegedly in Super Mario Maker, shaking Monty Moles will create Rocky Wrenches so wouldn't this mean that Rocky Wrenches should be a derived species of Monty Moles rather than a similar species? It's me, Mario! (Talk / Stalk) 23:50, 30 January 2016 (EST)

Um, what about bone fishes and Dry Bones? Like if you put Dry Bones under water, they turn into Bone Fish. Ray Trace^(T|C) 23:56, 30 January 2016 (EST)

Unlike the fish and the Dry Bones, though, Rocky Wrenches and Monty Moles share an extremely close resemblance to each other. It's me, Mario! (Talk / Stalk) 00:11, 31 January 2016 (EST)

Yeah, I think Rocky Wrenches should be counted as a derived species. Even if it's not officially confirmed, they're clearly based on Monty Moles in post-SMB3 games. Niiue (talk) 18:11, 5 February 2016 (EST)

Rocky Wrenches are now moles

They're moles now. Not necessarily 'monty moles', but they are very clearly moles. Saying 'Rocky Wrenches are mole-like turtle enemies' is completely, 100%, incorrect. It really does just make this site look foolish and stupid by claiming something so completely wrong. My edit is the best way of explaining it. Leave it alone. Meganerd18 (talk) 09:11, 22 January 2016 (EST)

Maybe that would suffice if they were only described as being turtles, but being uncannily mole-like was also part of Rocky Wrench's description since day one, and Super Mario World introduced actual mole enemies as well as established that Koopas/turtles can merely "wear" their shells in the Mario world. Super Mario Maker even remembered to include shells in every other play style design while keeping the close resemblance to Monty Mole when Nintendo could have easily just left it at Super Mario Bros. 3 rather than go with a uniform modern look (like removing Spike Top's six legs). Either way, claiming that they've entirely changed species when the mole comment was clearly there since the beginning would need a direct source to back it up, and up to this point, the only official description to bother noting the species is the original one. LinkTheLefty (talk) 06:17, 25 January 2016 (EST)

The species origin, or Can we be really sure at this point?

The original Japanese manual referred to them as "mole-like members of the Turtle Tribe," or some such thing. Thing is, this could refer to either the greater Koopa species, or to the Koopa Troop in general, which includes enemy Goombas and Piranha Plants. However, "mole-like" would imply that they are SIMILAR to moles, and not moles themselves. However, this could have been retconned. After all, the current ones resemble Monty Moles and share the characteristic "Dii!" noise. But then comes Super Mario Maker, where all the classic styles use a shelled version. However, unlike the original SMB3, the shell now appears far too small for it to enter due to now being sized the same as the Monty. So this again could go either way. It's worth noting that in SMB2, when they wore shells, they would always reappear after defeat, while in NSMBW, where they don't wear shells, they stay defeated, which could signify that the SMB3 ones retract into their shells upon defeat. The problem with this, however, is that they still visibly fall off-screen. The first game they appeared alongside Monty moles, Mario Kart DS, also has them as being edited from Monties, but with a mouth full of sharp, very non-moleish teeth. And then there's the question about the similar species from Galaxy. While the main evidence that they're a different species is the different Japanese name, said name has not been cited, so it's possible they were intended to be the same thing after all. What I'm saying is, there's a lot of ambiguity at this point, and we should probably wait until Encyclopedia Super Mario gives us the final answer. Until then, I suggest listing the species origin as "Koopa (formerly), Monty Mole." Although it can also be said that they aren't derivative of Monties, as they technically came first, so they weren't derivative from a conceptual standpoint. And the similarities could just be convergent evolution, like pigs and tapirs, although that may be stretching it a bit. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 17:26, 15 May 2017 (EST)

I think in that context, they could be referring to mole-like as in a way that they're not 100% sure they are moles, in the way we here call Koopa Troopas "turtle-like" or Crowbers being described as "designed after crows". But the instruction bios clearly refer to them as "turtles who look like moles" so that's the one we go by. I still think it's a better idea to say that their appearance is clearly based off Monty Moles rather than outright say it is, even though inductive logic would say otherwise (we don't really rely on inductive logic on most occasions, as it's very flawed and for articles like this with contradictory sources and appearances, I say it's better left ambiguous), so I think the current state of the article is fine as it is right now. Ray Trace^(T|C) 15:00, 17 May 2017 (EDT)

Rocky Wrenches are a type of Monty Mole

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.

Rocky Wrenches are both Koopas and Monty Moles 5-4-10
So, this again. Thanks to the Super Mario Bros. 3 manual calling Rocky Wrenches a type of Koopa, the wiki's stance is that Rocky Wrenches are completely unrelated to Monty Moles, and are somehow a type of Koopa with only one turtle-like trait. This despite the fact that every post-SMB3 game redesigned Rocky Wrenches to look exactly the same as Monty Moles (albeit with shells and goggles). Additionally, the Japanese names are near-identical (Pū vs Choropū), and most regions give Monty Moles and Rocky Wrenches extremely similar names. Furthermore, the Prima guide for New Super Mario Bros. Wii grouped Rocky Wrenches and Monty Moles together, and Super Mario Maker lets you shake Monty Moles to turn them into Rocky Wrenches, and vice versa.

At this point, citing a 30 year old manual despite an obvious, intentional change is completely illogical. Yes, an old manual said Rocky Wrenches were Koopas. Old manuals also said Brick Blocks are cursed Toads, Cheep Cheeps spontaneously sprout wings when jumping out of the water, Koopas are a race of sorcerers, and Snifits' bullets are made of nightmares. A lot of old info became outdated over time, even if it was never "officially" retconned. Besides, if it's somehow speculation to say Rocky Wrenches are a type of Monty Mole, then it's speculation to say Porcupuffers are related to Cheep Cheeps.

EDIT:

And, since everyone's apparently confused about what this does:

• Option 1 would remove Rocky Wrench from Category:Koopas and Template:Koopas, as well as changing the infobox to list its parent species as Monty Mole. Additionally, Rocky Wrenches would be added to Category:Monty Moles and Template:Monty Moles.
• Option 2 would keep things as they currently are.
• Option 3 would keep Rocky Wrench in Category:Koopas and Template:Koopas, while also adding it to Category:Monty Moles and Template:Monty Moles. Additionally, the infobox would be changed to list its parent species as "Koopa/Monty Mole", similar to how the Boo Guy article lists its parent species as "Boo/Shy Guy".

Proposer: Niiue (talk)
Deadline: August 17, 2017, 23:59 GMT

Rocky Wrenches are Monty Moles

1. Niiue (talk) Per proposal.
2. wildgoosespeeder (talk) How is this thing similar to a Koopa Troopa? That would be like me putting on a Shell and then my species changes from Human to Koopa Troopa (or Buzzy Beetle). That's not how it works in real life. By that logic, that means Mario the human, when changed to Hammer Mario, is a Hammer Bro species. Same thing for Tanooki Mario, Raccoon Mario, and Frog Mario. Just no. Once, Nintendo made the mistake that Ostro was Birdo and vise-versa in the Super Mario Bros. 2, but later corrected it in re-releases and new game entries featuring the two enemies. The modern Rocky Wrench looks more mole-like than the classic Rocky Wrench. Also, Nintendo changes the characters appearance over the years. For example, Iggy Koopa didn't use to have green hair sticking straight up but rather white, orange (limited NES color palate), or rainbow. The translation says "turtle", not "Koopa", although Koopas are turtle-like creatures in the Marioverse. Why wouldn't Nintendo just use Koopa-like or something? I think this was just a fan misinterpretation.
3. SuperYoshiBros (talk) The fact that we aren't considering these guys Monty Moles just because of a nearly 30-year old guide that was released before Monty Moles even existed is ridiculous.
4. 3D Player 2010 (talk) per all
5. Tucayo (talk) - Per all.

Rocky Wrenches are Koopas

1. LinkTheLefty (talk) We don't have any direct confirmation whatsoever that their old story was outright denied or that the perceived current one is even necessarily true. Note that in Super Mario Maker, some things can be shaken that clearly aren't related to each other, such as Grinders into Bumpers or Thwomps into Skewers; the former are circular and the latter are spiked, but those are where similarities end.
2. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) Stop proposing this. Being uncannily mole-like Koopas was their description since day 1. They've just been redesigned to look like a now-established mole species by editing said mole species' model.
3. Alex95 (talk) - We are not the ones that decide what species something is. At the moment, the current official information we have (however admitably out of date it is) is Rocky Wrenches are a type of Koopa.
4. TheFlameChomp (talk) Per all.

They're both

1. Niiue (talk) Per proposal.
2. LinkTheLefty (talk) Regardless, the resemblance and connection to Monty Mole in most newer games is undeniable, but the fact that the new sprites in Super Mario Maker re-add the shells (including brand new sprites for Super Mario Bros. 3 style and excepting New Super Mario Bros. U style) shows that Nintendo still respects and preserves their old story to some degree. Considering them both is a nice compromise, with the bonus of theoretically making maintenance easier.
3. Pseudo-dino (talk) Per all.
4. Yoshi the SSM (talk) They are both. Per all.
5. Baby Luigi (talk) Per all.
6. Supermariofan67 (talk) Per all.
7. The yoshi co. (talk) they they could could be shell-wearing monty moles.
8. Chester Alan Arthur (talk) We can't ignore the fact that this is the love child of a Monty Mole and a Koopa.
9. L151 (talk) Per all.
10. LuigiMaster123 (talk) Per all.

Comments

Is there a third option where we say that they're a type of both Monty Mole and Koopa? Hello, I'm Time Turner. 00:02, 3 August 2017 (EDT)

Fair enough, I'll add that. Niiue (talk) 00:03, 3 August 2017 (EDT)

I was asking for argument's sake; do you think that having both would be a valid option, or do you firmly believe that they should only be considered Monty Moles? Hello, I'm Time Turner. 00:16, 3 August 2017 (EDT)

I don't see why it wouldn't be a valid option. Niiue (talk) 00:18, 3 August 2017 (EDT)

All right, so you have no strong opinion one way or another. Hello, I'm Time Turner. 00:24, 3 August 2017 (EDT)

I mean, the first option is likely preferable since it still preserves the original manual's info (outdated as it may be). Niiue (talk) 00:31, 3 August 2017 (EDT)

Regarding Porcupuffers, their design was indicative of the SMW version of Cheep-Cheep, which was the first in a series of horrible off-model appearances for Cheep Cheep (Yoshi's Island, SM64, Yoshi's Story, Sunshine...). While Cheep-Cheep got its design fixed to look like the original, Porcupuffer's original was based off of the off-model SMW Cheep Cheeps and their graphical lack of wing fins. Now as for Rocky, as I stated above, being absurdly moleish Koopas was their original description, and they're still ridiculously moleish, but redesigned to look like an actual mole species in the Mario universe that wasn't established back then. The original Japanese manula called them "Mole-like members of the Turtle Tribe" when translated, and they have their shells in all the classic styles in Maker, despite all of them being new (with the SMB3 ones being altered for size). We base this off of whatever the official word is, not implication, because that's too speculative to reach certain conclusions. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 00:34, 3 August 2017 (CT)

And Porcupuffers aren't "officially" confirmed to be Cheep Cheeps, they just look extremely similar. Same goes for Blurps. In other words, they're implied to be Cheep Cheep variants. If it's speculative to say two things that look exactly the same are related, then it's speculative to say two similar-looking things are related. Niiue (talk) 01:37, 3 August 2017 (EDT)

I don't know about Porcupuffer, but Blurp isn't a great example since Super Mario Maker indeed calls them Cheep Cheeps. LinkTheLefty (talk) 01:46, 3 August 2017 (EDT)

Huh, wasn't aware of that. Niiue (talk) 01:50, 3 August 2017 (EDT)

In that case, you might want to edit that part of the proposal. LinkTheLefty (talk) 02:16, 3 August 2017 (EDT)

But there is a difference. Porcupuffers haven't been stated to be or not be Cheep Cheeps (discounting the Pinball Land one, the fact that they act like an established Cheep Cheep variant in later 2D games and act like larger Cheep Cheeps in 3D Land/World). Rocky, on the other hand, has been explicitly stated to be one of the two choices, and that is Koopa. So grouping something with something else without official word either way is vastly different than grouping something away from something that it is officially stated they are related to. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 00:47, 3 August 2017 (CT)

Considering that Monty Moles didn't exist in SMB3, Rocky Wrenches weren't specifically stated to not be Monty Moles either. And considering that there's a lot of current evidence that they are Monty Moles (the post-SMB3 redesign, foreign names, Prima guides, Mario Maker), it's ridiculous to pretend they're totally independent from Monty Moles. Niiue (talk) 01:50, 3 August 2017 (EDT)

The story is they look like moles. That's different from being moles. Real-life gophers look sort of like moles, but aren't even remotely related. I just said they were redesigned to match Monty Mole's appearance because they always looked like moles but weren't, and since an established mole species has no appeared, they can make it look like it to continue the "looking like moles" detail. But that doesn't mean they are moles. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 00:55, 3 August 2017 (CT)

Except, their SMB3 design also looked like a mole, but not a Monty Mole. It was a conscious decision to make them an edited version of the Monty Mole design. Not to mention that there are lots of other moles that aren't identical to Monty Moles. Niiue (talk) 02:42, 3 August 2017 (EDT)

Because like I said, there wasn't an established mole species for them to look like back in the day. Now there is. So they look like the established mole species, because they were always intended to look like moles, but be of the Turtle Tribe. They aren't a subspecies. Or even related. It's just mimicry. End of story, unless Nintendo decides to make an official claim in the matter. Now as for the other moles you so rudely edit conflicted me with, those weren't in NSMBW, so they didn't have models to edit to make them look like them. It's just easier to have all mole-like things look similar, so it's more apparent. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 01:47, 3 August 2017 (CT)

Except, if they were supposed to just "look like moles", then why make them look like an established species in the first place? And why did several regions (including the original Japanese games) give Monty Moles and Rocky Wrenches near-identical names? And why did Super Mario Maker let you turn Rocky Wrenches into Monty Moles, and vice versa? Nintendo's never going to make an "official" claim for the same reason they never "officially" said Snifits don't still shoot bullets made of nightmares. Some stuff just becomes outdated after a couple decades. (Sidenote: I'm not sure how the edit conflict is my fault, seeing as how I had no way of knowing you were typing a response).

tl;dr

03:19, 3 August 2017 (EDT)

Because you edited your response, which is an annoying thing to do >.> . Anyways, of course they'd make them look like that game's established mole species, as they're supposed to look like moles. The orignal artwork for Rocky was also fairly similar to the original artwork for Rocky. Rocky probably only doesn't have a sell in NSMBW because it would be difficult to find a way to fit it on the squat body. What you're doing is technically speculation. Even if it seems logical, remember that "logical" is subjective, and we go with what's official. The only official word on the subject is that they are Koopas. Now if that Encyclopedia ends up getting released, and it ends up saying they're moles, that's different, because that's a retcon. But not when there's only one side of official word. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 02:33, 3 August 2017 (CT)

Also you typo'd that image, the description on the left should be a picture of MatPat of GameTheory (preferably with fish eyes), and the one on the right should say "Official Documentation." This series has Koopas that look like Oxen, Chameleons, and Thuggish Frogs, saying they can't look just like an established mole species without being them is preposterous. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 02:36, 3 August 2017 (CT)

What official documentation confirmed Porcupuffers and Piscatory Petes as being Cheep Cheep relatives? When did Nintendo say Snifits' bullets aren't still made of nightmares? The thing is, Nintendo doesn't really care all that much about confirming obscure details about minor enemies, so the closest thing we'll get to "official confirmation" is the stuff I mentioned (the redesign, foreign names, SMM stuff). Niiue (talk) 03:46, 3 August 2017 (EDT)

Piscatory Pete is a Cheep because the Japanese name is literally exactly the same. Snifit Bullets may very well be nightmares, and I still classified them as such on my list of enemies. Porcupuffer is ambiguous, but some languages call them Cheeps. Rockies have never been outright called Monties ever. You're making a leap in logic. Not a large one, but a leap nonetheless. It's best to stick with canon, as this is really a slippery slope kind of deal, where people will start citing "the Rocky Wrench precedent" to start proposing truly ridiculous things. I've seen it all happen before. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 02:51, 3 August 2017 (CT)

Except, Rocky Wrenches were outright called Monty Moles in other regions:

Japanese: Pū (Rocky Wrench) vs Choropū (Monty Mole)

French: Torti Taupe (Rocky Wrench) vs Topi Taupe (Monty Mole)

Italian: Tartatalpa (Rocky Wrench) vs Tantatalpa (Monty Mole)

Korean: Ttu (Rocky Wrench) vs Jjoreuttu (Monty Mole)

This is no different than the foreign names for Piscatory Pete or Porcupuffer. Niiue (talk) 03:58, 3 August 2017 (EDT)

It's no different for Porcupuffer, OK, but Piscatory Pete's Japanese name was outright identical to Cheep Cheep's. Choropu is named after Pu, but not the same. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 03:07, 3 August 2017 (CT)

Fair enough, but it's still pretty clear that post-SMB3 Rocky Wrenches are intended to be related to Monty Moles. Niiue (talk) 04:10, 3 August 2017 (EDT)

Oh, they possibly are, maybe even probably, by some biological quirk that could work perfectly in this series with a squat Italian American battling a Turtle-Ox-Dragon-Ankylosaurus, but we just don't have the official word to say with absolute certainty. Either way, Rocky is already listed under "related species" on Monty's infobox, just not subspecies. The only thing there we actually know to be related to Monty is the Ragumo, due to its description on the Japanese SML2 website calling it "A relative of Choropu?!" I don't want to take a leap of faith regarding this, and since they were explicitly stated to be one thing, I believe they should be classified under that one thing. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 03:17, 3 August 2017 (CT)

I know the Italian and French names are one letter off, but those do make a difference since they actually reference turtles. Mind, they also reference moles in the next word, but as Doc says, this is true to their original description. Monty Moles were named after them, not the other way around. LinkTheLefty (talk) 10:00, 3 August 2017 (EDT)

Technically they're neither they've never been called a Koopa or a Monty Mole. Chester Alan Arthur (talk)

They were "of the Turtle Tribe," which is the Japanese way of saying Koopa. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 01:34, 3 August 2017 (CT)

Note that the original SMB manual seems to refer to all enemies as being part of the "Turtle Tribe". Niiue (talk) 03:50, 3 August 2017 (EDT)

It may be implied in the story section, but the enemy descriptions make it clear which enemies are Koopas. LinkTheLefty (talk) 10:00, 3 August 2017 (EDT)

In Super Mario Maker, Monty Moles are created by shaking a Rocky Wrench. This seems to indicate that they are related, or maybe even that Monty Moles are a type of Rocky Wrench. Also, their bodies are nearly identical. --Super Mario Fan ⁶⁷ (T•C•S) 08:36, 3 August 2017 (EDT)

• RockyWrenchNSMBW.png
• 

Just to better specify a point, the Perfect Edition of the Great Mario Character Encyclopedia, a 1994 book from Shogakukan, lists Rocky Wrenches as being part of the Turtle Tribe, while Monty Moles are not. Sadly, in the two 30th anniverary books we don't have such a classification anymore, the only thing we know from the Encyclopedia Super Mario Bros. is that the name in the new games is the same and that those of the Super Mario Galaxy games are not Rocky Wrenches, they have a different name.--Mister Wu (talk) 19:14, 5 August 2017 (EDT)

@Wildgoosespeeder: It's not just because Rocky Wrenches wear shells, it's because the manual for Super Mario Bros. 3 explicitly calls it a "turtle that kind of looks like a mole". Hello, I'm Time Turner. 15:13, 6 August 2017 (EDT)

Could this be a case of mistranslation of Japanese back in 1988? --Wildgoosespeeder (talk) ^{(Stats - Contribs)} 15:24, 6 August 2017 (EDT)

Here's the page from the manual, if anyone wants to take a stab at translating it. Hello, I'm Time Turner. 15:27, 6 August 2017 (EDT)

Using a slapdash machine translator, the original text (モグラのようなカメ族 - hopefully I didn't get that wrong) came out as "Turtles like moles." It's really hard to tell if that's supposed to mean "turtle-like mole" or "turtle that look like a mole". Hello, I'm Time Turner. 15:42, 6 August 2017 (EDT)

According to the Internet, it's "A turtle that looks like a mole." Hello, I'm Time Turner. 16:09, 6 August 2017 (EDT)

Was that a native speaker of Japanese? I would get other people's translations to make sure this isn't a literal translation. Language is more than just words. There's a lot more to it than that. Some concepts don't translate well to other languages. I think turtle is the keyword here. Yes, Koopa Troopas are turtle-like, but I think Nintendo would have used Koopa Troopa rather than turtle, unless that is what the localizers (non-Japanese) called it, but then we got Koopa in the Japanese games, so, what's the verdict? --Wildgoosespeeder (talk) ^{(Stats - Contribs)} 17:47, 6 August 2017 (EDT)

Anpother important point, it was just confirmed that this page from the Perfect Edition of the Great Mario Character Encyclopedia indeed states that Rocky Wrenches are turtles that look like moles. This definitely puts the distinction between Rocky Wrenches and moles after the introduction of Monty Moles, since the book was released in 1994.--Mister Wu (talk) 19:08, 6 August 2017 (EDT)

I've been in contact with the same translator. I'll relay the bulk of his messages:

Hey! No worries at all. I'm not a native speaker of Japanese, but I've been studying Japanese for 6 years and have lived in Japan for a year, if that helps establish some qualifications. I definitely agree that translations can be tricky, and I appreciate that your friend understands that the act of translation doesn't simply involve literally translating word for word, which is a common misconception!

I'll transcribe the relevant sentence here, as the following sentences have nothing to do with the mole/turtle issue:

モグラのようなカメ族。

This is a very simple statement that I think even a beginning Japanese learner can translate. Let's reconstruct the sentence:

モグラ = mole

モグラのような = mole-like; resembling a mole

カメ = turtle

カメ族 = turtle family; turtle tribe

モグラのようなカメ族 = mole-like turtle family

In more natural English, I had translated this as "A turtle that looks like a mole." I could have also translated the sentence a little more literally ("A family of turtles that look like moles."), but I chose a structure that would be more easily comparable to the sentence in the English manual.

You could get some other opinions on the translation, but I'd be very surprised if they came up with something different.

Looking at the Japanese Wikipedia entry for Monty Mole, it says this:

「チョロプー」はモグラだが、「プー」はカメである。

"Monty Mole is a mole, but Rocky Wrench is a turtle."

The Mario Wiki page on Rocky Wrench confirms this:

They have been described as mole-like turtles, but from New Super Mario Bros. Wii onward they lack shells, which has resulted in them resembling Monty Moles.

Let me know if there's any more info you need! ^

(I then explain that I'm a user from the Mario Wiki and this is what we're discussing)

Ah, that explains the controversy, haha.

All right, so looking more into the term カメ族, it should refer to the Koopa family of turtle-like creatures as a whole. There for, in Super Mario Bros. 3, at least, Rocky Wrench was considered a mole-like Koopa--a turtle that resembles a mole--according to both the Japanese and English manuals.

Whether that no longer applies today, now that the shell is gone, is hard to say.

Anything else? Hello, I'm Time Turner. 19:26, 6 August 2017 (EDT)

What kind of drugs was Nintendo on at the time? :P Just kidding, but I do find it kind of ridiculous that this mole is a turtle. I find this case similar to what a "mountain chicken" is. I swear, you will have much skepticism and disbelief about what we call things sometimes if you Google that. I know that isn't Mario related at all, but it's the best analogy I have to describe how I feel about this. --Wildgoosespeeder (talk) ^{(Stats - Contribs)} 00:26, 7 August 2017 (EDT)

Also, @WildGooseSpeeder, no one is saying they're a Koopa Troopa. It's that they're a Koopa. There is a major distinction between the two terms, and I am utterly fed up with people thinking "Koopa" automatically means "Koopa Troopa" because it doesn't. "Koopa" refers to roughly 99% of all turtle-like creatures in the extended Mario franchise, including Spikes and Buzzy Beetles, which are certainly not Troopas, but certainly are Koopas. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 18:50, 6 August 2017 (CT)

Many people use the short-hand because it is easier to say "Koopa" than "Koopa Troopa". --Wildgoosespeeder (talk) ^{(Stats - Contribs)} 00:26, 7 August 2017 (EDT)

That's not the point, when we say something's a Koopa, you should never automatically think it refers to a Troopa. If we were talknig about Troopas, it'd be easier, and far more concise, to shorten it to Troopa. But these aren't Troopas. 3 sources (Japanese SMB3 manual, American SMB3 manual, and Perfect Mario Encyclopedia) say they are turtles that happen to look like moles, while no official source says they actually are moles, which would make saying they are both speculation and ignoring canon. It wouldn't be out of the question for them to be Koopas, either; there are Koopas that look like oxen, chameleons, rocks, and members of the Battletoads, so a type that looked just like a mole, but yellower, wouldn't be out of the question whatsoever. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 15:45, 7 August 2017 (CT)

Yes, I get that, but most people don't think of Koopa as the species but rather a common enemy in the Marioverse. It's going to be very hard to get people to think different, especially with the enemies that are of the Koopa species, because they are named differently and reference Koopa in their names rarely, if not at all. Koopa is just the de facto standard to call a Koopa Troopa. --Wildgoosespeeder (talk) ^{(Stats - Contribs)} 16:57, 7 August 2017 (EDT)

Then those people need to stop, it's ridiculous to think that. That's like calling all apes humans. Honestly, when I think "Koopa" by itself, I think of Bowser's ambiguously-named species ("Royal Koopa" is the closest to an official name we have for that, but I just call them Koopas). But that's not the point. The point is that Rockies are officially stated to be "Mole-like members of the Turtle Tribe," making them Koopas, and not Monties, especially since Mario Encyclopedia was released after Super Mario World. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 16:09, 7 August 2017 (CT)

Actually Doc von Schmeltwick (talk), I don't think this little debate really matters because Time Turner (talk) came back with the translation and the manuals never said that Rocky Wrenches were of the Koopa species anyways. It said "turtle", which is why I think people are convinced that Rocky Wrenches were of the Koopa species. I'm guessing this is just a fan misinterpretation at its core. --Wildgoosespeeder (talk) ^{(Stats - Contribs)} 17:20, 7 August 2017 (EDT)

When you say "fan mistranslation", who are you referring to? Who's doing the mistranslation? Hello, I'm Time Turner. 17:27, 7 August 2017 (EDT)

It used the same wording as what refers to the Turtle Tribe, which is Koopas. Besides, they are solely associated with the Koopa Troop, Koopas in general were often just called turtles back then, and the only turtles in the franchise that haven't been Koopas are eitherfrom before there even were Koopas or were from other, sometimes tenuously-related series. And it's hypocritical to say it's too assumptive for them to be Koopas but not too assumptive to say that they're moles.Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 16:28, 7 August 2017 (CT)

I said "misinterpretation", not "mistranslation". You have provided me enough information that this isn't a mistranslation. Now I am debating if the verified translated text was just misinterpreted by us on Super Mario Wiki. --Wildgoosespeeder (talk) ^{(Stats - Contribs)} 17:32, 7 August 2017 (EDT)

There are non-Koopas in the Koopa Troop, so if you are arguing if a non-Koopa became a member of the Koopa Troop, they are then Koopas, except that we would have to classify Goombas, Bob-ombs, Piranha Plants, and so many other enemies as Koopas. --Wildgoosespeeder (talk) ^{(Stats - Contribs)} 19:57, 7 August 2017 (EDT)

No one's saying that. They're saying Rocky Wrench is a Koopa because it biologically is a Koopa! Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 19:02, 7 August 2017 (CT)

Does that mean Shell Mario is a Koopa? --Wildgoosespeeder (talk) ^{(Stats - Contribs)} 20:07, 7 August 2017 (EDT)

No it doesn't, you know it doesn't, stop being such a strawman. Rocky Wrenches are stated to be turtles. They are stated to be members of the Turtle Tribe, which means Koopas in this sense, not the Troop. They are Koopas. The shells are from them. Koopas can lose their shells, unlike real-life turtles, after all. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 19:10, 7 August 2017 (CT)

The point I was trying to make is look deeper into what is being said and shown. It could very well be a mole wearing a shell, maybe steel, as armor for its back, and then Nintendo changed the design years later. That's what kind of happens when Mario takes on the shell form. --Wildgoosespeeder (talk) ^{(Stats - Contribs)} 20:20, 7 August 2017 (EDT)

And there you have the problem with your argument: could. With no official word stating they are moles, but multiple official words saying they are "Mole-like turtles," what you are saying is pure speculation and goes against official word, which is not allowed. And even if saying that they're turtles somehow is speculation, you'd be asking for one speculative thing that has some official backing to be replaced with your speculation which has zero backing. You don't replace speculation with speculation, and you don't contradict the official word. Occam's Razor states that the right solution is usually the simplest, and here the simplest solution is to go with the official word. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 19:28, 7 August 2017 (CT)

There's one problem with the official word and that is no official link between turtle and Koopa specific to the Rocky Wrench case. What we have is the exterior, and Occam's razor would favor calling it a mole rather than a Koopa. For Rocky Wrench to be classified as a Koopa, we would ultimately have to see a Koopa in a Monty Mole suit or something throwing wrenches at the player. --Wildgoosespeeder (talk) ^{(Stats - Contribs)} 20:34, 7 August 2017 (EDT)

Do I need to say it again? Turtles that look like oxen, Turtles that look like the playable cast of Battletoads, Koopas are a diverse group. Occam's Razor would be, for this type of site, to put official word before any "Well they look more like.." because that doesn't matter. This is a series where a short Italian-American eats mushrooms to grow big and repeatedly saves a Princess of creatures that don't even resemble her from a Turtle-Ox-Dragon-Ankylosaurus, is it really a stretch for a turtle thata looks like a mole to exist at this point?! Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 19:40, 7 August 2017 (CT)

So, Bowser is an ox, because Miyamoto was inspired by an ox and decided to give a Koopa Troopa a literal horny appearance and made it the king of the Koopas? That is a stretch of the imagination to argue that Rocky Wrenches are Koopas. Bowser is not cattle. You know what else has horns? Goats for one. Bowser is no goat. The Battletoads example is definitely speculation. Who knows what Nintendo intended Spike Koopas to look like because the N64 3D was rudimentary and in its infancy before the GameCube came along to make things look more appealing. As for Koopeleon for another one of your examples, it is very clear what that is a mix of. --Wildgoosespeeder (talk) ^{(Stats - Contribs)} 20:58, 7 August 2017 (EDT)

"Speculation?" I said they looked like the battletoads because that's what they look like, not that that was intentional. And Bowser has more than just horns to make him ox-like, his muzzle is also rather bovid. Either way, the official word still is that Rocky Wrenches are Koopas. End. Of. Story. Stop being too stubborn to realize that official word is where all discussion ends. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 20:38, 7 August 2017 (CT)

Official word never once referenced Koopa. Turtle was the official word. What aren't you getting about that? That's the speculative part of the whole Rocky Wrench argument at this point because of the close relation that Koopas have with turtles. The argument has shifted from Rocky Wrenches being Koopas to did the fans just connect the dots that Nintendo didn't between Koopas and turtles and then use that as an argument to classify Rocky Wrench as a Koopa? --Wildgoosespeeder (talk) ^{(Stats - Contribs)} 22:00, 7 August 2017 (EDT)

Turtle.....TRIBE. And no, it wasn't referring to the Koopa Troop, "Turtle Tribe" almost solely referred to actual Koopas at that point. YOu've gone off on a tangent about how it must have meant the same as Koopa Troop, and not let there be any room for the fact that that is just wrong. If it had been the case, why wouldn't the other instances of the term in the manual have been translated as them being turtles? Also, earlier you said Gamecube graphics are appealing which is rather situational at best ( https://www.mariowiki.com/File:YoshiEggThrow-Melee.png https://www.mariowiki.com/File:Blooperghoul.png https://www.mariowiki.com/File:Cheep-Cheep_Sunshine_Art.png ) Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 21:12, 7 August 2017 (CT)

What is a tribe? Why would it be referring to a species, which is a classification, not a population. That is why it is more logical to say that it might be referring to the Koopa Troop. And since the Koopa Troop has non-Koopa members, Rocky Wrench doesn't have to be a Koopa and isn't a good justification to classify it as one. If you are going to continue debating this, this is one big problem with no 100% correct answer. I gave you my thoughts on why Rocky Wrench is a type of Monty Mole and you gave me counterclaims how its turtle description makes it fit with Koopas. I think there is more evidence supporting dropping the Koopa classification than keeping it. As for my GameCube argument towards Spike Koopas, the GameCube allows for more detailed 3D models and better rendering techniques, which often allows for graphics to look more appealing, but there are some cases where the developers cut corners to fit within constraints to keep a certain framerate or consistency during live gameplay. There was more of that going on with the N64 than GCN. --Wildgoosespeeder (talk) ^{(Stats - Contribs)} 22:24, 7 August 2017 (EDT)

it isn't meaningful to make any argument based on the english term "turtle tribe", because there is no 1:1 mapping between terms in different languages and the original term was japanese. you need to look at the japanese term that was translated into turtle tribe, which is kamezoku. here and here, we can see the information about rocky wrench and monty mole from the perfect edition of the great mario character encyclopedia. on rocky wrench's page, the infobox says shuzoku: kamezoku. on monty mole's page, it says shuzoku: bīsutozoku. so we know that at this time, rocky wrench and monty mole were considered to have a different shuzoku

what is the meaning of shuzoku? casually i might translate it as "species", but since it could be important here i'm going to go into a little bit more depth about what this term means. in a fantasy context, shuzoku is used with the same meaning as the english term "race". wikipedia actually has an entire article about this topic at shuzoku (fantasy). i'm not going to translate the whole thing, but the opening line is "shuzoku is a classification of types in fantasy settings that have multiple varieties of intelligent living things". you can also see for yourself that it links to the english wikipedia article race (fantasy). therefore, i consider the most appropriate translation of shuzoku for the purposes of this discussion to be "race", and i will use it from here on

it's clear that at the time of publication of the great mario character encyclopedia, rocky wrench was considered a member of the kamezoku race, while monty mole was considered a member of the bīsutozoku race. since both are members of the koopa troop, and the koopa troop is not a race but some sort of political organisation, it's clear that kamezoku cannot be translated as koopa troop. furthermore, by going through the other entries in the encyclopedia, we can discover a clear pattern in the usage of kamezoku: it is applied to turtle-like characters (even if they are not associated with bowser), and it is not applied to non-turtle-like characters (even if they are associated with bowser). see, for example, the entries regarding nokobon and goomba. nokobon's race is listed as kamezoku, while goomba's race is listed as kinokozoku. for this reason it becomes clear that the most appropriate translation of kamezoku is, in fact, "koopa"

incidentally, while i don't have any more recent official source than this handy, i also looked around the internet to see how japanese-speaking fans currently use the term kamezoku. it's consistent with the interpretation of the term as being equivalent to the english "koopa". for example, wikipedia's kamezoku page lists only turtle-like characters and the body of the text explicitly excludes goomba as a member of kamezoku. similarly, the page about kuppa notes that although this character's name is bowser in the western releases of the games in which he appears, his original name is used as "a generic name for koopa troopa, or the kame ichizoku that includes it" - 2257^(Talk) 08:48, 8 August 2017 (EDT)

Only two precisations: the book actually explains what the various shuzoku are, as well as the meaning of their name, in this introductory page, which is not at the beginning of the book and thus is pretty hard to find. The Wikipedia page furthermore states that the English Koopa term is used for the various turtle-like creatures, which is correct. I won't delve for now on the history of this English name and its relation to kuppa, as it would be a pretty long story, that likely ended up influencing both the Koopa Troop name and the Koopalings name.--Mister Wu (talk) 10:22, 8 August 2017 (EDT)

(Sorry this took so long, router got turned off in the middle of typing this last night) "Tribe" in fictional settings may also refer to a race, ie the Gorons in Zelda. And as for the N64 modelling, even with that in mind, Spike Koopas still looked like malformed brutes, while the N64 renders of Troopas (https://www.mariowiki.com/File:SM64Koopa.png ), Paratroopas ( https://www.mariowiki.com/File:Mt64paratroopa.png ), Hammer Bros ( {https://www.models-resource.com/resources/big_icons/5/4925.png} ), and Lakitu ( https://www.mariowiki.com/File:LakituBroSM64.png ) looked decent. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 15:42, 8 August 2017 (CT)

So, what does this proposal propose to actually do --Glowsquid (talk) 22:47, 6 August 2017 (EDT)

^ 17:13, 7 August 2017 (EDT)

I'm guessing this is to evaluate if Rocky Wrenches are Moles, Koopas, or both. Based on the results, add/remove categories and modify Koopa (species), if necessary. --Wildgoosespeeder (talk) ^{(Stats - Contribs)} 17:29, 7 August 2017 (EDT)

...You guess? Honestly, I'm completely confused as to how this is all going down. Super Mario Bros. 3 and the earlier mentioned Perfect Edition of the Great Mario Character Encyclopedia says that Rocky Wrenches are a different type of Koopa. If that's the most official word we have, do we really need to have a discussion about this? 17:38, 7 August 2017 (EDT)

They're saying it was retconned, despite the lack of official evidence as such and the fact that they were always supposed to look ridiculously like moles but actually be turtles. Then there's the semantics over "turtle" and "Koopa." Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 16:44, 7 August 2017 (CT)

How official is that source? Is it written directly by Nintendo? Also, I would like some general info on this, but I don't think that Super Mario Wiki is covering it yet (should it?), so I can't definitively verify its credibility for myself at this time, and I would need Time Turner (talk) for round 2 for that particular page with the Rocky Wrench to be translated. --Wildgoosespeeder (talk) ^{(Stats - Contribs)} 18:37, 7 August 2017 (EDT)

The proposer doesn't actually state what modifications to the pages or related are going to happen from the result. This TPP is essentially about voting on Fucking Nothing. That's kind of unacceptable. --Glowsquid (talk) 18:31, 7 August 2017 (EDT)

Additionally, the way the proposal is presented, there is no "no" option, something I generally disagree with. It's boiling down to "something is going to change but I'm refusing to specifically say what, beyond a general agreement on a random fact." While we're at it, where did this supposed retcon take place? There are too many holes here. -- Ghost Jam 18:46, 7 August 2017 (EDT)

Well if this isn't going to be answered soon, I think this'll have to be cancelled or extended.Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 19:57, 7 August 2017 (CT)

Sorry, I misread the end date as being the 7th, not the 17th. My mistake. But not as bad a mistake as continuing to propose against official word.Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 20:59, 7 August 2017 (CT)

What? There is a "no" option, that being the "Rocky Wrenches are Koopas" one, seeing as how that'd keep things the way they currently are. Niiue (talk) 21:02, 7 August 2017 (EDT)

I don't think the proposer intended it to appear that way at first. He did add another option later on. Look at the very top of the comments section. --Wildgoosespeeder (talk) ^{(Stats - Contribs)} 21:04, 7 August 2017 (EDT)

You're speaking to the proposer. Niiue is the proposer. Hello, I'm Time Turner. 21:05, 7 August 2017 (EDT)

Oops. I'm trying to keep track of multiple discussion threads for this proposal. That detail slipped my mind. Seems like this is the highest amount of debate Rocky Wrench has ever gotten related to if it is a Koopa or not. --Wildgoosespeeder (talk) ^{(Stats - Contribs)} 21:18, 7 August 2017 (EDT)

Here's something else to discuss. The first citation on the main page states "turtle tribe", and it is linking to the species. I think that is wrong because it sounds like it is referring to the Koopa Troop instead, and there are non-Koopas loyal to that alliance. --Wildgoosespeeder (talk) ^{(Stats - Contribs)} 18:53, 7 August 2017 (EDT)

Is there a neat, simple, and tidy summary of all of this? Hello, I'm Time Turner. 10:52, 8 August 2017 (EDT)

I'd say that this is going beyond hopeless levels. In my opinion, it's not our duty to determine whether the "new" Rocky Wrenches are Monty Moles. Nintendo should state that, and we should just report what Nintendo states. If Nintendo doesn't state anything, like they are seemingly doing, we should just note the similar appearance - it's undeniable that now Rocky Wrenches look like Monty Moles. Since we already do that, I'm having troubles understanding this proposal.

Regarding the discussion, beside your discovery that the translation of the Japanese Super Mario Bros. 3 manual was correct, one thing we can say is that we found unambiguous evidence that Monty Moles and Rocky Wrenches were distinguished ones from the others in official material released after Super Mario World (namely the Perfect Edition of the Great Mario Character Encyclopedia, although I now also found the same evidence in the Super Mario Complete Encyclopedia, a 1991 book written in collaboration with NintendoMedia:SMCE page 256.png, as you can see hereMedia:SMCE pages 168 169.png and hereMedia:SMCE page 44.png), if you want to go deeper into the discussion and also include the other parts, good luck, as two hot topics are touched: the Koopa Troop and what is the equivalent of the Koopas term in Japan. I might try to gather material that helps clarify these two hot topics, but several walls of text (and probably days of work) would be needed, and something tells me this is probably not the right place for that...--Mister Wu (talk) 13:48, 8 August 2017 (EDT)

Reworking Relations

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.

failed to reach consensus 7-8
I, the self-proclaimed Queen of the Moles, have come to a conclusion, after my studies on the history of Monty Mole's design. Rocky Wrenches are not derivatives of Monty Mole. However, Monty Moles are derivatives of Rocky Wrench. Even in the biological aspect is debatable, part of the reason the "subspecies" parameter was changed to "derived species" was to make the biological aspect of that parameter not be the single deciding factor, and to include things that are directly inspired by the design and behavior. Anyways, here are some key points:

• Rocky Wrench was considered a turtle/Koopa that looks like a mole at its inception, while the turtlish aspects are not present in most games starting from NSMBW, where it looked like a post-SM64DS Monty Mole.
• Monty Moles have always been considered moles (barring the cartoon), though starting with SM64DS, their design became much less like an actual mole and more rodent-like.
• Monty Mole seems to have a more generic name than Rocky Wrench. HOWEVER, this is due to the English localization. In Japanese, Rocky is "Poo" and Monty is "Choropoo," ie a variation on "Poo."
• At the time of Monty Mole's creation, Rocky was still considered part of the Turtle Tribe, according to various Japanese character encyclopedias. This would be continued in other pre-Yoshi's Island guides, at which point "general" guides would stop being so specific and more, well, general. In guides for later appearances, no relation to either Turtle Tribe nor Choropoo would be directly stated.
• In Mario Kart DS, Rocky Wrench's designMedia:MKDS Rocky Wrench Render.png was tweaked to vaguely follow the SM64DS Monty design, but there were still many differences, such as the upper lip color and large fangs. Due to being a flat texture always facing the camera, presence of a shell can be neither confirmed nor denied.
• In NSMBW, Rocky Wrench looks like an aviator Monty Mole. MK7 changed the Rocky Wrenches in Airship Fortress to follow this, and even gave them that "Dee!" noise Monty Moles make in some Mario Kart games.
• Due to Monty Mole's redesign coming first, plus Rocky's more specialized behavior, one might think it logical to put Rocky Wrench as derivative of Monty Mole nowadays. However, this does not change the fact that Rocky in general came first, and has a less-specific Japanese name.
• One could make an argument that the less-specific Japanese name can be compared to Kuribo vs. Kurikuri and Kurin. However, we don't have any relations stated for them, and Kuribo still came before the others.
• One could also argue that this would mess up our template and category classification of them, due to believing that they'd now be listed as "Rocky Wrenches." However, I consider this more of a case akin to Shellcreeper's relation to Koopa Troopa. The one that came first is the overall parent species, but it fell out of favor (in Rocky's case, for a time) in favor of the most basic derivative, which all the other derivatives themselves derive from. Basically, I'm saying that Indy, Goropoo, Flower Choropoo, and the rest will still be considered specifically Choropoo derivatives if this goes through.
• Since there were no Monty Moles at Rocky Wrench's inception, they can't truly be a parent species. Since during the design period and early franchise history they were based off of Koopas, they are the only true "parent species," as they were initially designed after them, even if those aspects have since been dropped.
• (EDIT) Yes, this proposal will have Rocky Wrench still be derived from Koopas, while Monty Moles are derived from Rocky Wrench, making Monty Moles indirectly derived from Koopas. However, as we list a sea slug as being derived from a bat, a mosquito derived from a bee, and an alien octopus derived from a shiitake mushroom, this doesn't seem like a big deal to me.

Anyways, if this goes through:

• Rocky Wrenches will be reclassified as the parent species to Monty Mole.
• As stated above, all variants of Monty Mole, such as Mega Mole and Morty Mole, will still be listed under Monty Mole.
• Rocky Wrench will be removed from the Monty Moles category, and placed into the "moles" category, similar to how Shellcreeper is in the "turtles" category.
• Rocky Wrenches will be removed from the "species" portion of the Monty Mole template and put in a "relatives" section, alongside Ragumo.
• Rocky Wrench will keep "Koopa" as a parent species, due to that being what they were initially designed after.
• (EDIT; figured this was obvious, but I suppose I shall explain it as well) I will make clear in the articles that while Rocky Wrenches were initially intended to be Koopas, that aspect has seemingly been dropped, and that their derivative Monty Mole is presumably not related to Koopas at all.

Proposer: Doc von Schmeltwick (talk)
Deadline: April 27, 2018, 23:59 GMT Extended to May 4, 2018, 23:59 GMT Extended to May 11, 2018, 23:59 GMT Extended to May 18, 2018, 23:59 GMT

Support: Relist Monty Mole (Choropoo) as a derivative to Rocky Wrench (Poo)

1. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) -Per proposal.
2. Niiue (talk) Per proposal.
3. Waluigi Time (talk) Per proposal.
4. LinkTheLefty (talk) Super Mario Maker gives the default slot to Rocky Wrench instead of Monty Mole; due to this, I'm inclined to side with the assessment of Rocky Wrench as the parent species.
5. Chester Alan Arthur (talk) Rocky Wrench's predate Monty Moles and that's generally how we decide the parent species.
6. YoshiFlutterJump (talk) Rocky came three years before Monty, Monty’s Japanese name is clearly derived from Rocky’s, and Rocky is the default enemy in Mario Maker. It would be wrong to call Rocky derivative of Monty; hence, per proposal.
7. Shiny K-Troopa (talk) Trying to apply real-life taxonomy to a silly and inconsistent video game series makes little sense in my opinion, so the mole/turtle controversy doesn't affect me. Enemy design-wise (which I think is more important in this case) it's more likely that MM originated from RW, unless Nintendo itself confirms the opposite. Per proposal.

Oppose: Keep Rocky Wrench (Poo) as a derivative of Monty Mole (Choropoo)

1. Reboot (talk) The current version of the Rocky Wrench is derived from Monty Mole. Even if a version of RW came first, the design that made it a Monty-esque mole didn't. Also, you're proposing that Monty will be under Rocky (as the parent species) and that Rocky be under Koopa. Which will make Monty Moles Koopas....
2. Time Turner (talk) Per Reboot. I am opposed to Monty Moles being derived from Koopas.
3. Yoshi the SSM (talk) Per Reboot (and Time Turner).
4. Toadette the Achiever (talk) Per Reboot. In fact, I think it's better if we classify both enemies as related to each other, but not this.
5. Wildgoosespeeder (talk) The Koopa argument strikes again. After that lengthy debate in the previous proposal, I have concluded that "turtle" is official word, but it was the fans that connected the dots to be of a Koopa species. Rocky Wrench is a subclass of Monty Moles, despite RWs appearing first. Chronology shouldn't determine which is the parent species and child species. It's just how Nintendo "revealed" the lineage. It's like meeting the parents of a friend and saying your friend is the parent of their parents.
6. Alex95 (talk) - Per all. Additionally, what we have already on the article page should be enough: "They have been described as mole-like turtles, but from New Super Mario Bros. Wii onward they lack shells, which has resulted in them resembling Monty Moles, with the exception of the "classic" styles of Super Mario Maker. It is unknown whether or not this means they are now officially considered to be Monty Moles instead of Koopas." It does not seem like they were meant to be moles at the start, meaning their redesign into a "mole-like creature" resembling Monty Moles seems coincidental at best. As a wiki, we must provide concrete proof to our claims, rather than decide how we think a character is related to another by way of proposal. The Japanese name is a start, but do we have anything that actually says they are related? Without any solidified claim, this change would make things downright confusing(er).
7. Camwood777 (talk) - Yeah, no, I'm not going to say a mole is related to a turtle.
8. John Denver Fan (talk) Per Camwood777

Comments

@Reboot We don't classify enemies as "versions" of each other. The current design of Kritter takes a bit from Klomp, but that's still pretty clear-cut, while Shellcreeper had an unused model render in Mario Power Tennis that was an edit of a Troopa. Anyways, it was clearly inspired from Rocky Wrench from the get-go, as the Japanese names show. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 18:33, 13 April 2018 (EDT) @Reboot's second edit Not necessarily. As I explained above, we changed "subspecies" to "derived species" to circumnavigate things like this. It was designed after Rocky Wrench, but didn't have an explicit biological connection (which it technically still doesn't only implication. Reusing a design would count as a production derivative. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 22:09, 13 April 2018 (EDT)

"Rocky Wrenches will be reclassified as the parent species to Monty Mole. [...] Rocky Wrench will keep "Koopa" as a parent species, due to that being what they were initially designed after."

Parent-of-parent = grandparent. You're drawing a direct line from koopa to mole. - Reboot (talk) 22:14, 13 April 2018 (EDT)

Again, it's not solely used in biological situations >.< We have Jumping Blooper as a Blooper, despite it apparently being a jellyfish. Either way, if we do take this biologically, it's worth pointing out that in modern taxonomy, humans are a species of monkey, as well as every other iteration of the evolutionary chain that happened prior. And the extended Mario franchise has featured humans evolving from dinosaurs, this is nothing. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 22:20, 13 April 2018 (EDT)

Also, why is it bad to draw a line from turtle to mole, but perfectly fine to draw a line from bat to sea slug? Or bee to mosquito? Or shiitake mushroom to alien octopus? Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 18:19, 14 April 2018 (EDT)

To all opposing:
Rocky Wrench was based off of Koopas.
Monty Mole was, in design, based off of Rocky Wrench, which was explicitly a Koopa at the time.
So they are, indirectly, based off of Koopas.
I don't get why that's a problem, Ishnail is based off a Troopa but clearly isn't related to them. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 22:41, 13 April 2018 (EDT)

And yet Ishnail isn't categorized as a Koopa beyond a single line in the infobox. Hello, I'm Time Turner. 22:42, 13 April 2018 (EDT)

And again, "parent" and "derived" are not necessarily biological. We have Fishin' Boo listed as a Lakitu derivative despite it not being a Koopa. In fact, its Japanese name didn't even mention Lakitus! (or Boos....) Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 22:44, 13 April 2018 (EDT)

It's not a matter of biology. I disagree with organizing the information in this way. Hello, I'm Time Turner. 22:46, 13 April 2018 (EDT)

And what is your basis other than "I don't like this particular case?" That's all I see from your opposition summary. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 22:49, 13 April 2018 (EDT)

Um... Fishing Boo is a bad example. Even though it's Japanese name doesn't mention either Boo or Lakitu, it is clear that it is a Boo form of Fishing Lakitu. Just like Terekuribō is a Boo form of a Goomba, Snufit a Boo form of a Snifit, Boo Guy a Boo form of Shy Guy, and Octoboo a Boo form of Octogoomba. Yoshi the SSM (talk) 23:27, 13 April 2018 (EDT)

Except dead Koopas become living skeletons. In Japan, it seems to be its own thing, a "spook" that looks vaguely like a Lakitu, but isn't one. And I still do not agree with the classification of Boo Guys as Boos, they're simply Shy Guy ghosts, per the Japanese name. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 23:35, 13 April 2018 (EDT)

Make that a separate proposal, then. Boo Guys vs. Boos has little to do with this matter. ^(T|C) 17:05, 14 April 2018 (EDT)

Already brought up a discussion there. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 17:12, 14 April 2018 (EDT)

Also Snufits are not ghosts of Snifits, they're apparently just "ghostly cousins" to them. But I digress. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 02:27, 15 April 2018 (EDT)

Once again, Monty Moles were derived from Rocky Wrench even when it was explicitly a Koopa. Mechakoopa and Bowser Stunner are also derived from a particular Koopa, despite them being a toy and a floating piece of metal, respectively. Sea Bakky was derived from Bakky. One of those is a bat, and the other a sea slug. That's even further apart than a turtle and a mole are! Since the Japanese names indicate that Monty Mole is a variant of Rocky Wrench, and did when Rocky Wrench was called a Koopa, it's still a derivation. All the facts point to Rocky Wrench being the parent species, even if it was in a different biological class. The Bakkies were in a different biological order! Why should we obfuscate that Monty is based off of Rocky? Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 17:12, 14 April 2018 (EDT)

Unfortunately, Super Mario Maker and Super Mario Maker for Nintendo 3DS don't help opposers, as Rocky Wrenches when shaken turn into Monty Moles. Though by that logic, Bumpers are Grinders. Keys are P-Switches, Skewers are Thwomps, and Checkpoint Flags are Arrow Signs only in context of SMM, but not its remake. Also, it also confirms Bowser Jr. being Bowser, though there are arguments against this situation. As, they are both bosses and they are of the same family tree. However, Monty Moles aren't mentioned by Mary or Yamamura when unlocked.

Anyways. Monty Mole have more subspecies than Rocky Wrench, which most parent to child things don't happen that way... I believe. A no, it's not like individuals, as they produce multiples already. Yoshi the SSM (talk) 18:13, 14 April 2018 (EDT)

Again, Shellcreeper is a parent species to Koopa Troopa, and has no other derivatives, while Troopas have lots, plus all Paratroopas and Dry Bones. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 18:17, 14 April 2018 (EDT)

@WildGooseSpeeder: Your "determining" that it meant "Turtle" was overruled by old official guides that outright had them in a specific class with the "Turtle Tribe," which is their term for Koopas, not just turtles in general. Furthermore, the second part of your argument hinges on them having come up with Monty Mole prior to the development of SMB3, which is some of the most nasty speculation I've ever seen. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 01:33, 15 April 2018 (EDT)

I'm not going to repeat myself here. Just read my comments in the previous proposal, especially the part linking turtle tribe with Koopa Troop and it having non-Koopa members. I don't think we will ever agree on this. As for RW being a subclass of MM, a Hammer Bro is a Koopa (Troopa) that throws hammers, so a RW is a Monty Mole that throws wrenches. --Wildgoosespeeder (talk) ^{(Stats - Contribs)} 01:52, 15 April 2018 (EDT)

.....OK, I will try to keep my composure for this part, as this is a major berserk button for me. A Hammer Bro is not a Koopa Troopa. Troopa is not synonymous with Koopa. It's a specific subgroup. And how can it have been a Monty Mole that throws wrenches then, when there were no Monty Moles? It makes no sense! Furthermore, the term "Koopa" originated in the English instruction booklet for SMB1 as a direct translation for "Kame-zoku" (Turtle Tribe), so it refers to the biological group as a whole. And even when Monty Mole began its existence, Japanese guides listed Poo as part of Kame-zoku, which is not just turtles, but the Turtle Tribe, which was officially translated as "Koopas." Anyways, I'm not saying Rocky Wrench is a Koopa now, but it certainly was at its inception. And due to the Japanese names, it's safe to say Choropoo was based off of the simpler-named Poo, which came first anyways. Saying that they were based off of Monty Moles then, saying that Monty Mole was even conceived then, despite there being no evidence for it and some evidence on the contrary, is not an argument. It's a theory. A Game Theory. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 02:07, 15 April 2018 (EDT)

Current iterations and designs by Nintendo, it is clear Rocky Wrenches aren't turtles/Koopas anymore (or whatever classification they are going by). The way you are presenting your findings, you want it to be in the article as definitive proof they are/were and forever will be Koopas, just like those who came before you in this talk page, instead of noteworthy mention (which is more of a way I would agree how it should be included in the article). As for Troopa in my last sentence, it's in parentheses, as to allude that I realize the difference, like I didn't in the last proposal and now acknowledge, but wasn't sure which term applied in this case. --Wildgoosespeeder (talk) ^{(Stats - Contribs)} 02:32, 15 April 2018 (EDT)

Oh, they're about 90% probability actual moles now, last proposal was because I prefer official documentation. Anyways, when they were conceived, they were intended as Koopas, and that what the "parent species" box is about. Design basis, even if art evolution takes place. I disagree with listing them under Monty Moles since Rockies came first, and figured this would be a nice little midpoint, and honestly the most accurate as well. You may have noticed my additions to the Monty Mole page regarding its design history between games; I'll gladly go into specifics to rewrite this article to say that they were intended as Koopas initially, with the current situation seemingly dropping that, and while Monty Moles are based upon them, Monty Moles themselves are not Koopas. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 02:41, 15 April 2018 (EDT)

At this point, I would recommend making the enemies derivatives of each other, like I suggested in my oppose vote. ^(T|C) 06:06, 16 April 2018 (EDT)

That's still separating enemies into "versions" of each other, which we don't do, barring cases where we split enemies into different pages. What you're asking for is an infinite loop. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 06:12, 16 April 2018 (EDT)

No, what I mean is, simply denoting one as a subspecies of the other (and yes, I believe "subspecies" is appropriate in this case) is a bad idea, plain and simple. And no, the "infinite loop" argument never works, since a) most of the named characters tend to be Monty Moles more so than Rocky Wrenches, and b) Rocky Wrenches don't even have any derivatives, and were simply redesigned to be more like Monty Moles. ^(T|C) 16:08, 16 April 2018 (EDT)

Choropoo is a derivative of Poo. And no, "subspecies" is inappropriate, hence why it was banished to the "frequently misused terminology" list. "Derived" here means "the design was directly inspired by," because Choropoo was physically based upon and named after Poo. Claiming that it "became" a derivative of the other, which came later, is obfuscative and nonsensical. The original Monty Mole design in Super Mario World is a less-reptilian less-mechanic looking version of Rocky Wrench's design in Super Mario Bros. 3, really. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 16:14, 16 April 2018 (EDT)

Chronology alone is a flawed argument. Any comments on the New Super Mario Bros. Wii redesign? Furthermore, the Japanese names don't seem to mean anything significant, and a bunch of the other interlanguage names clearly denote it as a Monty Mole derivative. Not to mention that only one instance of Rocky Wrench's Japanese name was found, so if you can find, say, an official Japanese guide related to New Super Mario Bros. Wii that contains its name, I'd be more than happy to clarify my vote. ^(T|C) 16:51, 16 April 2018 (EDT)

The names don't mean anything individually, yet interlock into each other. As for another example of "Poo?" 3D Land shogakukan. Note how "Choropoo" is never mentioned in Poo's description. As for the NSMBW redesign, they had already been made to look similar to the SM64DS Monty design in Mario Kart DS, which in turn seems to derive from various stock artwork, with the NSMBW appearance changing the lip color and teeth. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 17:07, 16 April 2018 (EDT)

Choropoo is likely derived from 「チョロチョロ」 or 「ちょろちょろ」 (chorochoro), an onomatopoeia for a small animal darting about rapidly, which adequately describes Monty Mole's behavior in the 2D platformers where it "darts" after the player. Choropoo / Monty Mole being a derivative of Poo / Rocky Wrench also seems to be apparent in the Korean name; all other language localizations appear to be inconclusive on the derivative, not vice versa. Finally, Rocky Wrenches retain their Japanese name in various Encyclopedia Super Mario Bros. sections. LinkTheLefty (talk) 17:25, 16 April 2018 (EDT)

Hmm... I can't read Japanese, but I don't see the opposite is true either. If fact, I see the letters for "Pu" for Morty Mole. If only I can read Japanesse... Yoshi the SSM (talk) 17:15, 16 April 2018 (EDT)

Just look at one of the three's "names in other languages" box and memorize the symbols on the end :T Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 17:20, 16 April 2018 (EDT)

Yeah, it is Monty Mole's "Pu" not generic "Pu". Still doesn't help me read it. Yoshi the SSM (talk) 17:24, 16 April 2018 (EDT)

Rocky Wrench is Poo. Anyways, the symbols used in Monty Mole's name Choropoo never crop up once in the description for Poo, meaning there's no statement of "this is a Choropoo with a spanner," and my point is that Poo isn't a Choropoo with a wrench, but Choropoo is based off of Poo, but without a wrench (or any Chelonian characteristics ever). Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 17:30, 16 April 2018 (EDT)

Ignoring Yoshi the SSM's comment, "Note how "Choropoo" is never mentioned in Poo's description." implies that Rocky Wrenches may have received a redesign but were never meant to be related. I guess that's what I meant by "derivatives of each other". ^(T|C) 17:25, 16 April 2018 (EDT)

Still, we're talking about the idea for the enemy, not how it was made to look different later. The Spiny Cheep-Cheep in the SMG games had some simiiarities to Porcupuffer (note the striped spikes), but it's not a derivative thereof. And Porcupuffer isn't a derivative of Spike Bass, despite later stealing its behavior. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 17:30, 16 April 2018 (EDT)

Gah! I didn't mean to say that! I really meant to say that the two should just stay as related species. ^(T|C) 17:39, 16 April 2018 (EDT)

My point regarding the various prickly piscines still stands. Spiny Cheep Cheep isn't derivative of Deep Cheep, other example. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 17:56, 16 April 2018 (EDT)

That's not a good comparison. Those two are clearly derivatives of Cheep Cheep, whereas the Monty Mole/Rocky Wrench is an issue that can be looked at either way. Do you happen to have a better comparison, by any chance? ^(T|C) 20:01, 16 April 2018 (EDT)

I had already mentioned Shellcreeper vs. Troopa, but this is not a terrifically common occurrence. I guess in some games way back when, Bullet Bill was given an armless Banzai Bill-like appearance after Banzai Bill initially showed up? Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 20:24, 16 April 2018 (EDT)

This still happens on occasion, considering Yoshi's Woolly World came out more recently after Yoshi's New Island. LinkTheLefty (talk) 20:45, 16 April 2018 (EDT)

Umm, no? Anyways, anyone have a link to the full Sunshine guide on Imgur? I had access to it a while back, but can now only find pages 18-19... Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 21:01, 16 April 2018 (EDT)

Then it's a difference between artwork and in-game, which is where the arm/mouth discrepancy came from to begin with. LinkTheLefty (talk) 21:21, 16 April 2018 (EDT)

Still, no reason to do it now, since the graphics are no longer 16x16 tricolor sprites that are hard to discern details from. Anyways, that derails from the initial point, in that the design for Banzai Bill affected the design for Bullet Bill, since they decided it was their "high definition" Bullet Bill at the time (which is also why it was immediately rejected from Mario Tennis 64.) Anyways, my original point was that a derivative can affect the parent species. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 21:28, 16 April 2018 (EDT)

Another example would be the Buzzy Beetle in the first three Paper Mario games is based more on its derived species rather than its original or modern designs. LinkTheLefty (talk) 22:00, 16 April 2018 (EDT)

Seeing how in the official Japanese character books of the '90s we have found Rocky Wrenches were consistentlyMedia:SMCE pages 168 169.png statedMedia:SMBD page 40.png to be members of the Turtle TribeMedia:PEGMCE page 183.png and turtles who look like moles, while Monty Moles definitelyMedia:SMCE page 44.png wereMedia:SMBD page 60.png notMedia:PEGMCE page 112.png and seeing how Rocky Wrenches started looking like Monty Moles since New Super Mario Bros. Wii, have you considered the hypothesis that Rocky Wrenches were intended to be moles from the start but were then designed as turtles that look like moles, possibly because turtles seemed more fitting for Bowser's military vehicles? I think that we are very well into the speculation territory, so other hypotheses could be as likely. Anyway, regardless of the relationships in terms of design that might very well be there, putting Monty Moles as members of the Turtle Tribe simply doesn't fit what the official material has been saying since the very beginning and I would rather avoid forcing this - I don't think the designers were really thinking at Monty Moles being turtles even if they indeed based Monty Moles on Rocky Wrenches.--Mister Wu (talk) 09:37, 17 April 2018 (EDT)

I'm saying if a sea slug can be derivative of a bat, a mole can be derivative of a mole-turtle, even if that later (possibly) becomes a mole deriving from a mole. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 10:37, 17 April 2018 (EDT)

I'm not ruling out the possibility that Monty Moles were derived from Rocky Wrenches, it's a concrete possibility due to their name and the mole-like appearance of Rocky Wrenches, I just think that indirectly considering Monty Moles turtles might be a bit excessive - they were always stated to be moles not pertaining to the Turtle Tribe, so we should stress that if we make this change.--Mister Wu (talk) 11:43, 17 April 2018 (EDT)

I think the turtle/mole thing is more or less a settled matter from the previous proposal: Doc points out that Rocky Wrench's classification as the parent species wouldn't affect how Monty Mole is categorized as the derived species, though a third option where Rocky Wrench and Monty Mole are just considered a related species instead of a derivative of the other seems to be what some opposers want. LinkTheLefty (talk) 11:45, 17 April 2018 (EDT)

@LinkTheLefty and YoshiFlutterJump's supports and others who mention SMM: As yes, Rocky Wrench does take priority over Monty Mole. First, I want to reiterate that there are other examples of this that are grouped that are otherwise not thought of together (though Grinders and Bumpers are both circles) and all but one of them were split in the remake. Second, (TheFlameChomp mentions this on his talk page, but I will show evidence) SMM keeps the shell in the SMW version. But what about the designs? Here are the pictures for SMW: . OK. They are similar. But not as similar as SMB's: . But, it's actually clear that SMW Rocky Wrenches are somewhat based on SMW Monty Moles. Why? Because the opposite is not true. Here is proof from SMB3: . While it is clear that SMB3 Rocky Wrench is based on it's old sprite, Monty Mole wasn't changed to fit this. I think this proves that Rocky is based on Monty, and not the other way around. Yoshi the SSM (talk) 17:35, 17 April 2018 (EDT)

And that disregards the fact that Super Mario World also features another bizarre replacement species that only tenuously resembles its parent, as well as the fact that Koopa Troopa, all of its already-existing derivatives, Cheep Cheep, and Lava Bubble all received massively-different designs for that game. Most of which either stuck or continued to evolve from there. And SMM SMB3 Monty Mole does resemble the respective Rocky Wrench, just at a slightly different angle, and with different hands, the latter of which is a difference shared with the other styles. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 17:44, 17 April 2018 (EDT)

Actually, it doesn't or I don't think it does, as it is comparing Rocky Wrenches and Monty Moles of each game style, with only a comparison of SMW and SMB only to allude similarities between them. Same for showing SMB3. And no, the angle doesn't justify it. For one, it's not the same angle as the other two pictures. For another and more importantly, the nose is very different and even longer than Rocky's. Something that is also exclusive to this style. Basically what I'm saying is: when they were given the chance that the developers had to make SMB3 Monty Mole look like SMB3 Rocky Wrench, they didn't take it and made an effort to make the sprite something different, but still use the same color palette. Yoshi the SSM (talk) 18:31, 17 April 2018 (EDT)

I've worked with these very sprites for a year now, I know what I'm talking about. The white is the cutoff line for the nose on both, which is two pixels along the top. And besides, both Monty MOle and Rocky Wrench in the SMW style go into the same angle as the SMB3 Monty Mole in some of their poses, so it's not like those are the only sprites in that angle. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 18:36, 17 April 2018 (EDT)

To all opposing again: As LinkTheLefty seems to have found, it would seem that Choropoo literally means "Poo that darts around." Hence, official nomenclature says that Monty Mole is, in fact, derivative of Rocky Wrench. And if official nomenclature isn't enough proof to say something's a derived species, nothing is, and we should abolish the system altogether. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 17:55, 17 April 2018 (EDT)

I'd support that, so long as we find a term or phase that can replace "species". ^(T|C) 18:11, 17 April 2018 (EDT)

Support which? Following what Nintendo of Japan indicated through the names or getting rid of relation chains? Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 18:28, 17 April 2018 (EDT)

Yeah, I can't explain this without speculation. But, I speculate that they wanted to make sure that they were indeed related from the beginning, but Rocky Wrench only had the simple "Pu" (I write it as Pu, because that's how it looks; not how it sounds), so they couldn't just change the letter formatting but added something to mean what Monty Moles are. Just speculation. If "Pu" had an English translation, then we could see what it actually means. But, it doesn't. Yoshi the SSM (talk) 18:31, 17 April 2018 (EDT)

They also were fully-able to rename Poo in later games, like they did with Bull's-Eye Bill, which was originally treated as a simple color-difference on behavior (a la Troopas or Cheeps). But they didn't. No Suropoo or anything, which could have worked. They kept it the basic Poo. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 18:39, 17 April 2018 (EDT)

It actually makes sense to keep it "Pu", though. They wouldn't want to change "Pu", as they wanted it to be sure it was the same enemy. (We keep Skeeter (New Super Mario Bros.) a different species due to its name being different than Skeeters.) Yoshi the SSM (talk) 18:46, 17 April 2018 (EDT)

Well if Super Mario Pia is anything to go by, Nintendo finally decided that Bob and Neiji Bomb the same as Bombhei, so it happens. And Bob came first. Anyways, that's beside the point. Gabon doesn't seem to mean anything, but we know Gabonhei is derived from it. And even if it had been Suropoo, Choropoo still would be derived from it due to being based off of it and coming later. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 18:52, 17 April 2018 (EDT)

@Alex95 Once again, it does not have to be biological. If they have design basis on a non-marginal level ("marginal" being like Stollin' Stus' resemblance to Burts), then they are derivative. Since they're clearly based off of Rocky Wrench in the beginning, that's what they were designed after, and as such were derived from them. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 22:01, 17 April 2018 (EDT)

But if it's not biological, then what's the point here? I'd still like to see some proof for "Monty Moles are a derivative of Rocky Wrenches" or vice versa. Keep in mind, Rocky Wrenches were a turtle when Monty Moles were introduced. So, since they received their mole-like form sometime afterward, that would make the appearance of a Rocky Wrench based on a Monty Mole, in a possible effort to establish some kind of a connection between the two, no? 22:06, 17 April 2018 (EDT)

How about that the Japanese name of Monty Mole is basically "Darting Rocky Wrench?" That seems like enough proof that Monty Mole was initially based off of Rocky Wrench. And if it has any design basis that is intended to be connected by the player in the initial appearance....that's exactly what "derived" is. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 22:12, 17 April 2018 (EDT)

For the record, in the Super Mario 3D Land PRIMA Official Game Guide, Rocky Wrenches have this description (pg. 15): "Rocky Wrenches are commonly found on airships, but you’ll have to deal with them in a variety of levels. These crafty moles show themselves just long enough to throw a wrench at you before dropping back out of sight. To defeat a Rocky Wrench, dodge its attack and jump on its head." As far as I know, this is the only source calling Rocky Wrench a mole. Another thing to note is that the guide usually merges the game's derivatives under one heading (examples: Banzai Bills and Tail Bullet Bills are listed under Bullet Bills, Inky Piranha Plants and Fire Piranha Plants are listed under Piranha Plants, the "Para" and "Tail" variants in general, etc.), but Rocky Wrenches (and Morty Moles, oddly enough) are listed separately from Monty Moles. LinkTheLefty (talk) 11:27, 23 April 2018 (EDT)

As I said a bit up above, I figured there was a 90-something percent chance they're intended to be moles nowadays. Anyways, thanks for the clarification. Note that I'm wanting this in Category:Moles, just not Category:Monty Moles, for the same reason Shellcreeper isn't in Category:Koopa Troopas or even Category:Koopas. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 11:50, 23 April 2018 (EDT)

@Camwood777 - Your statement is completely negated by voting for one of these two options; in fact, it seems what you and a few others opposing the proposal really want is for Rocky Wrench and Monty Mole to merely be classified as indirectly related to each other rather than directly derivative of one another, which isn't a proposal option. LinkTheLefty (talk) 10:01, 18 May 2018 (EDT)

Split into Rocky Wrench (classic) and Rocky Wrench (modern)

You all are probably annoyed by this discussion, but i haven't seen anyone suggesting a split between their old SMB3 design and their new shell-less NSMBW design. The problem is that this things were seen as turtles in the instruction booklets of SMB3 and lack their shells since NSMBW, which makes them look almost identical to Monty Moles, whilst Montys first appeared later in SMW. So now they are counted as both, but how about splitting it into their classic design which is a turtle derived from Koopas and into their modern design which is a mole derived from Monty Moles. Look for example at Pokey Mummy and Poison Pokey, they're both split and that's not because of their names (for example Forest Fuzzies and Green Fuzzies are on the same page, even though they have different names), but because of the Poison Pokey's lack of the mummy gimmick and the different Rockies belong to completely different species. If you've got better names for the 2 different pages it should be splitted into, then let me know. VOIDTHIS (talk) 15:56, 27 June 2018 (CEST)

Unlike those Pokeys, these are functionally identical, with or without the shell aesthetic. This design difference is like splitting Koopa Troopa and Paratroopa into quadruped or biped. LinkTheLefty (talk) 10:05, 27 June 2018 (EDT)

I'm sorry, but this is unlikely to succeed. It's true that Rocky Wrenches had a design overhaul starting in New Super Mario Bros. Wii, but it was merely aesthetic and didn't change their behavior in any way. ^(T|C) 12:28, 27 June 2018 (EDT)

I definitely feel it is unlikely they are different (apart from slightly different appearances), since their behaviors and names are unchanged. Super Mario Maker also treats them the same, as they have shells in the SMB, SMB3, and SMW styles, but not having them in the NSMBU style. While some enemies in Super Mario Maker do change between styles, I don't feel there is enough evidence that they are different for a split to be necessary. --TheFlameChomp (talk) 12:34, 27 June 2018 (EDT)

This would just cause more confusion than there is already. My vote is no. 12:41, 27 June 2018 (EDT)

Remember me? Yeah, this idea would cause far more confusion than we need. It is not the proper solution. Based on the results on the last proposal, the next proposal I make on the matter will include options to have Rocky be the parent species, as last time, as well as an option for neither being the parent species and both simply being relatives. (And by the way, Pokey is a terrible example, just look at all the designs they've been through.) Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 19:26, 27 June 2018 (EDT)

It's not simply about their design, but about their species. The instruction booklet of SMB3 called them mole-like turtles and in NSMBW they were made to look like the Monty Mole, which didn't exist since the release of SMB3. The whole discussion about the parent species wouldn't be if these were split. Classic Rocky Wrenches would be derived from Koopas (or they would just be simple turtles or a cross between a turtle/koopa and mole) and Modern ones would be derived from Monty Moles. What is more confusing? A page which covers an enemy that has changed its species from a mole-like turtle to a derived species from an enemy that hasn't existed before and is now treated as both species on this page and will probably never find a proper solution for its species roots (the parent species discussion) or two pages for this enemy which won't have this discussion. What is worse now? VOIDTHIS (talk) 16:02, 28 June 2018 (CEST)

I still don't understand why you're fixated on this. No offense, but this is an outright "more-confusing-than-it's-worth" change. It's like splitting Iggy Koopa just because his hair is changed starting in New Super Mario Bros. Wii. It's too complicated. ^(T|C) 10:24, 28 June 2018 (EDT)

This might be confusing for us as a wiki, but for Nintendo, this is irrelevant. They operate on a game experience first basis, so the design is functional to the gameplay and the immediate feeling a game gives, regardless of whether it implies that the species changes because of choices made to follow these principles - in this case, making them moles in New Super Mario Bros. Wii because it's more immediate to see them as such rather than going on with "they look like moles but they are turtles". In the '90s they probably still believed they could make a consistent universe and as such they classified enemies, but said classification has been fully dropped in the 30th anniversary books, and the current posts from Nintendo about the Broodals clearly tell us what is their focus when designing enemies.--Mister Wu (talk) 10:28, 28 June 2018 (EDT)

If they had a different name in (an)other language(s) (preferably Japanese) different from each other, this split would be possible after a discussion. But, it is still called Pu. Only one instance shows a name change and that was for The Adventures of Super Mario Bros. 3 for Italians. Which isn't enough for any split between them. Yoshi the SSM (talk) 12:22, 28 June 2018 (EDT)

Toadette, Iggy's hair color change is something completely different. Look at the first sentence of my 2nd post. I wouldn't have began this discussion if just the shell was removed in NSMBW. The point I'm trying to make is that the instruction booklet of SMB3 said that these are turtles and making them look similar to Monty Moles in NSMBW strongly indicates that these were meant to really be moles now and not mole-like. The thing with the shell is just an indication for this theory that I added. Plus: Just look at this talk page. The purpose of this proposal I made is to eliminate the controversy between their species (Doc even said that she wanted to make another proposal about it). And it won't be so confusing if we just say why we split them into two pages at the top of the talk pages in BIG BLACK, so that no one asks. This is probably the first time something like this ever happened on this wiki (if not then give me examples), so just read the text again carefully and think about it before you comment. VOIDTHIS (talk) 20:00, 28 June 2018 (CEST)

All this has done is convince me that the "related species" option was sorely missing in the last proposal after all. LinkTheLefty (talk) 14:51, 28 June 2018 (EDT)

Duly noted. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 17:39, 28 June 2018 (EDT)

I don't think that we should split. Note how the Koopalings changed over the years. Not only their physical appearance but something else. They were originally considered as Bowser's children while Shigeru Miyamoto confirmed in 2012 that they are not Bowser's children, leaving Bowser Jr. the only child Bowser has with Bowser Jr.'s real mom unknown. --83.156.220.80 03:03, 18 July 2018 (EDT)

Reworking Relations Returns!

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.

Rocky Wrenches and Monty Moles are related to each other 4-9-7
OK.
Time to end this.
Currently, our little friend Rocky here is listed as a derivative of Monty Mole, despite predating them. The rationale behind this seems to be the NSMBW redesign, but it's worth noting that the redesign of Monty from SM64DSMedia:SM64DS Monty Mole.png seems to take more influence from the original Rocky Wrench than the previous inconsistentMedia:SMBD page 60.png inconsistent depictionsMedia:MontySM64.png of Monty Mole, made very apparent in Mario Kart DS, where Monty MoleMedia:MontyMoleMKDS.png looks morphologically more like the classic Rocky WrenchMedia:MKDS Rocky Wrench Render.png than the "Chubby"Media:MontyMole MK64.png moles from the previous iteration of Moo Moo Farm.

Speaking of "Chubby," from what I can tell from screwing around with Google translate, this is a spectacularly-mangled form of Choropoo (Monty's Japanese name), as GT itself mangles that into "Chubby Pooh." Now Poo is Rocky's JP name, with Choropoo being a variant thereof, with the first part coming from Chorochoro, meaning to dart around quickly, as it does in its debut appearance. This means that Montys were deliberately designed with Rocky in mind, and as such, are conceptually derived from them. A similar case exists with Galoomba: it's specifically stated in games to not be a type of Goomba, but we list it as a derived species due to being designed after them. This exists with many other cases:

• Octoomba isn't a Goomba, it's an alien octopus. Still derived conceptually.
• Sea Bakky isn't a true Bakky, it's a floating, glowing sea slug. Still derived conceptually.
• Urban Stingby isn't a Stingby, it's a mosquito. Still derived conceptually.
  

Anyways, like last time, I propose we instead switch the order around so that Monty Mole is derived from Rocky Wrench. This does not mean I'm saying that "Monty Mole evolved from a Koopa" or something like that. That's one of the reasons the wiki got rid of that "subspecies" parameter. Derived=/=biological connection at any given time.

Now, since last time, there were a large amount of people wanting to have an option for having them be non-hierarchical related species to each other, I shall include that as another option, as that's certainly a lot better than what we have currently.

And anyways, just in case anyone is wondering, Rocky Wrench will still be considered a mole, just not necessarily a subtype of Monty Mole. Rockies are default in SMM, not Monties/Montys.

Proposer: Doc von Schmeltwick (talk)
Deadline: September 14, 2018, 23:59 GMT Extending to September 21, 2018, 23:59 GMT

Option 1: List Monty Mole (Choropoo) as a derivative of Rocky Wrench (Poo)

1. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) - Per Proposal.
2. LinkTheLefty (talk) My preferred option, per current and previous proposal.
3. SmokedChili (talk) Based on LinkTheLefty's comments, Monty Mole is in this case the "child species" that became prominent over its "parent species" Rocky Wrench.
4. FanOfYoshi (talk) Yeah, Monty Moles are derived from Rocky Wrench, since it was only predating... And despite the fact that Rocky Wrench have goggles, while normal Monties are just moles, we should list Monties as derivative of Rocky Wrenches.

Option 2: List Monty Mole (Choropoo) and Rocky Wrench (Poo) simply as relatives to each other

1. LinkTheLefty (talk) My secondary choice and probably the best option overall since it should put an end to this recurring subject.
2. Toadette the Achiever (talk) My preferred option, since this is likely the best way to classify them. Though I disagree on the "conceptual" part (Urban Stingbies should be classified as its own species, if you ask me), it's better to classify them as derivatives of each other rather than one being derivative of another, as that would go in violation of the "judgement calls" section of the good writing policy.
3. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) I just want this to stop being a colossal itch for me. If this needs happen, I'll vote for it to happen, as it's still more sensible than the current state.
4. Yoshi the SSM (talk) This makes sense. Until there is concrete fact proving either, this should be taken. This is also the preferred action according to good writing policy.
5. Ultimate Mr. L (talk) Per all.
6. Wildgoosespeeder (talk) I like Option 3 better because of current depictions of both Monty Mole and Rocky Wrench, but to avoid canon-based arguments and if LinkTheLefty's statement of it'll place Rocky Wrench and Monty Mole as neither parent species nor derived species of each other, but instead as closely-related species not explicitly favoring either interpretation, and also give Rocky Wrench a special "related" place in the Monty Moles template is what Option 2 is, I like Option 2 too. If I find out it is not, I'll remove this vote.
7. TheFlameChomp (talk) Per all.
8. rollerC (talk) Per all. If we keep double-voting, this isn't gonna go well.
9. bwburke94 (talk) Per... all, I think.

Option 3: Continue listing Rocky Wrench (Poo) as a derivative of Monty Mole (Choropoo)

#Yoshi the SSM (talk) This is more recent. I can't say the same about commonly accepted or "widely adhered" (as it is unknown), but it is indeed more recent. This is based on MarioWiki:Good writing (read Judgement calls).

1. Wildgoosespeeder (talk) I still stand by my previous votes on this recurring topic. Yes, noteworthy as a Koopa or Koopa Troopa at one point in time (I don't even remember which is appropriate anymore, but one of those terms is correct). Yes, Rocky Wrench came first and Monty Mole came second, but chronological appearance shouldn't be a determining factor of parent and child species. Same thing with naming schemes with Poo being Rocky Wrench and Choropoo being Monty Mole, as they are created as a consequence of game development and installments in a series. A more likely explanation for the chosen naming scheme is that Nintendo didn't think ahead with naming accuracy because they were putting more focus on creating a good game. Story and continuity was a low priority for games back then. Should these bits of trivia (or future findings) define the enemies today? No. Should these details (or future found details) be included in the article? Yes, but only as trivia and nothing more, because these details are circumstantial evidence at best. It is very clear that Nintendo now wants these two enemies related to each other where Rocky Wrench is a derivative of a Monty Mole as depicted by both promo and in-game artwork.
2. Toadette the Achiever (talk) Second choice.
3. Bazooka Mario (talk) I think this makes more sense from a species relationship standpoint but also a wiki organizational standpoint. There is no parent "mole" variant that neatly lists both Rocky Wrenches and Monty Moles underneath it, so we're stuck with trying to determine what's the "basic" unit of a kind of enemy, and I believe that's Monty Mole, especially in contemporary examples (hence I believe the older examples to be irrelevant). If Rocky Wrench does go back to its more derivative design, then that would open a new debate. But as it stands, I think this option still works.
4. Alex95 (talk) - Per all. (And I'm waiting for this Super Mario 30th Encyclopedia book to retcon everything and say they aren't related at all just to screw us over)
5. TheFlameChomp (talk) The is my second choice, per all.
6. VOIDTHIS (talk) Per all.
7. Niiue (talk) Per all.

Comments

Um... What exactly will the proposal do if Option 2 is taken? I would like to support Option 2, but without knowing what it does, I can't vote for it. Yoshi the SSM (talk) 00:53, 1 September 2018 (EDT)

@Yoshi - As I understand it, it'll place Rocky Wrench and Monty Mole as neither parent species nor derived species of each other, but instead as closely-related species not explicitly favoring either interpretation, and also give Rocky Wrench a special "related" place in the Monty Moles template. This is a very good compromise in my opinion and most likely the longest-lasting outcome at this rate.

@Doc - Oddly enough, while Galoombas have been stated not to be Goombas in Super Smash Bros. for Wii U and Mario Party: Star Rush, Super Mario 3D World's Goomba Mask still works on them. Go figure. LinkTheLefty (talk) 11:00, 1 September 2018 (EDT)

@Yoshi We'd use the "related" section of the species infobox parameter. Option 2 is to prevent a specific adherence to "this is how this relates to this," which option 3 keeps. It's still be on the Monty MOle template and gallery, since those are simply noted as "related species" and "species," respectively, though I might make a new section on the latter for simply "other relatives," in which case Ragumo would probably go there too. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 12:14, 1 September 2018 (EDT)

@Toadette Honestly, it might just be best to split up the "derived species" parameter into "variations" and "conceptual derivatives," but honestly that seems to be a little too much. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 12:14, 1 September 2018 (EDT)

@Goose "Inspired by conceptually"="derived." By definition. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 12:14, 1 September 2018 (EDT)

@Doc - I honestly think it would be best to just do away with the wiki's overuse of "species" (like, for example, how exactly does a Shy Guy armed with a paperclip make it another species?), and turn the infobox's parent species, derived species and related species into origin, derived and related, respectively.

@Goose - I'd actually make the argument that story and continuity was more important to Nintendo back then than it is now, but that's another discussion. I'd also strongly disagree with relegating historical details to trivia, because that's close to making a canon call. Like changed names or, say, the Koopalings' (lack of) parent, it should be whatever's pertinent for a given game at the time. LinkTheLefty (talk) 12:30, 1 September 2018 (EDT)

Wouldn't the opposite of my argument (that they are Koopas or Koopa Troopas or whatever, chronological appearance determines parent/child species, and naming scheme being an indicator of lineage) also be a canon call? That is why I am suggesting the details be relegated to trivia, as to avoid the canon argument entirely, which is what that policy page is trying to accomplish (discrepancies should be noted in articles, but not speculated on). --Wildgoosespeeder (talk) ^{(Stats - Contribs)} 13:13, 1 September 2018 (EDT)

Well, it's not a canon call in that case, it's a design order call, and given the games were released 3 years apart, it's far more likely that Monties were designed with Rockies in mind. Especially with the JP names. Anyways, Option 2 is intended as the "we shouldn't be too adamant either way" option. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 13:22, 1 September 2018 (EDT)

Yes, that is exactly what option 2 does. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 13:27, 1 September 2018 (EDT)

Yeah, I saw the "playing dress-up" argument, and that's what got me seriously thinking of having "variations" replace that, since it's accurate, states what it is, and is less-concrete about how the subjects are related, without being as vague as the current "related species." I was debating whether to propose that or this first, but decided that I wanted to relieve this itch first before starting another. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 12:39, 1 September 2018 (EDT)

@LGM This isn't about what's most "basic." That was one of the many flaws of the old "parent/child" species system. This is about what came first and inspired the other. Related example: Beach Koopas are derived from Koopa Troopas, despite being arguably more "basic." Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 15:33, 1 September 2018 (EDT)

Common sense still tells me that Koopa Troopas are still "basic" by being far more common and their "default" state. Monty Moles are far more common and I don't agree with your "this is about what came first and inspired the other". I believe you're making it unnecessarily convoluted by focusing on past designs rather than the more consistent designs recently, which I believe will appear in more games. You might have a case if the moles stayed as they were in Mario Kart DS, but they changed since then, and I think the wiki should prioritize on most recent information rather than dated bios or a few oddballs from the past. It's me, Mario! (Talk / Stalk) 15:38, 1 September 2018 (EDT)

As for Shellcreepers? Troopas apparently "evolved" from them, yet act more basic (they don't do that "go faster" thing), and are more common. Admittedly, the parameters on their infobox change every so often. Anyways, Rocky Wrench has the more basic name in its language of origin. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 15:44, 1 September 2018 (EDT)

Shellcreepers are probably an exception, but my point about frequency of appearances stands. And also, while Japanese names are considered, I don't see how this case is helpful or even relevant for species classification (navigation templates, infoboxes, categories) in the wiki. Japanese names alone rarely seem to be a solid case for classification proposals, as they often require supporting information, which is why the proposed Rocky Wrench -> Monty Mole relationship has failed. It's me, Mario! (Talk / Stalk) 15:48, 1 September 2018 (EDT)

Still though, how can it have been derived from something that didn't exist yet? As I've noted, Rocky Wrench wasn't simply redesigned to look like Monty Mole, but they were gradually redesigned to look more like each other (heck, Monty Mole had two incompatible designs in its own debut game). ie, it's not a one-way street here. Which is a pretty good reason for Option 2. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 15:52, 1 September 2018 (EDT)

I don't think the argument surrounding the semantics of "derived from" is also relevant to the debate, and, yeah, they're gradually redesigned, but at least the contemporary appearances are consistent now and I'm basing my decision on the most recent information we have. Yes, it's weird that Rocky Wrench came first and was gradually redesigned to revolve around a later enemy, but I think it's logical and more helpful for species organization that that would make it a derivative of that later enemy just from design stand points, as that particular design came first. The history is worth mentioning, but I don't think it really plays much of a factor in relationships, not when the modern designs are more consistent and clear-cut. The problem with option 2 is that, as I said in my vote, it disregards the similarities in appearances (and the noise they make in Mario Kart 7 which is shared with the Monty Mole noise), and you'll have to remove Rocky Wrenches from the Monty Mole category, lump it awkwardly with the related species infobox, remove it from the Monty Mole navigational template, and remove the Monty Mole listing from the parent species in the infobox; there's no "mole" umbrella species and I believe "Monty Mole" is intended to be the catch-all. It's me, Mario! (Talk / Stalk) 16:04, 1 September 2018 (EDT)

It would still be in the nav template. And while yes, they make the same "Dee!" sound effect, that doesn't mean one comes before another hierarchically. Basically, they can be considered some sort of "sister species," like Spoing with Sprangler. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 16:10, 1 September 2018 (EDT)

I know this is an unusual case in that the derivative design eventually co-opted the originating enemy, but Monty Mole and Rocky Wrench are literally the franchise's only chronologically-swapped species (unless I'm overlooking something). It's an obvious exception. I don't think Nintendo is entirely interested in directly retconning/replacing previous material, otherwise we would easily see Rocky Wrenches depicted as moles instead of turtles in the other Super Mario Maker styles and Monty Mole would be the default slot in that game, or the original mole-like description would have been quietly removed from the Super Mario Bros. 3 section of Encyclopedia Super Mario Bros. This is almost the equivalent of scrubbing out every mention of the Koopalings as Bowser's children because it's their current story, despite Nintendo only doing it forward for the most part and not bothering to remove existing descriptions of it; yes, it's newer, but we retain the old information where applicable. With the first and third options, I believe it's inevitable that someone is going to come along, disagree with our interpretation of the facts, and repeat the discussion all over again. Just look at this talk page - there is even a recent idea to split Rocky Wrench into classic and modern articles. Option 2's neutrality is really the most practical solution, wiki-wise, if you ask me. LinkTheLefty (talk) 17:25, 1 September 2018 (EDT)

You could have included my option. VOIDTHIS (talk) 01:56, 8 September 2018 (CEST)

I could have, but I didn't want to, as it opens far too many cans of worms on how we handle things. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 20:11, 7 September 2018 (EDT)

And what cans of worms? VOIDTHIS (talk) 00:09, 9 September 2018 (CEST)

I mean, if we consider redesigns as worthy of separate articles once, then it would effect the rest of the wiki. And I don't want to do that. Note Pokeys, Thwomps, and how many feet Koopa Troopas walk on. Monty Moles went through some noticeable redesigning, and then there's almost everything in Super Mario Sunshine. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 18:16, 8 September 2018 (EDT)

Well, Boss Bass and Cheep Chomp are seperated. VOIDTHIS (talk) 00:22, 9 September 2018 (CEST)

That one is a very delicate situation, possibly moreso than this one. Given that Kyodai Pukupuku was used in SMB3 while later games used Bakubaku, there's some notable variation there as well, as well as the whole Big Bertha thing, and how Red Blurp and Blue Blurp seem to be separate variations of Boss Bass, and how Boss Bass's former role of "the giant version of Cheep Cheep" was taken by Big Cheep Cheep, with the new purple coloration seemingly being to be able to tell them apart easier on the small DS screen....very difficult situation. Granted, there's the way we have Short Fuse and Seedy Sally merged to Ukiki, but really, the situation with the eaty Cheeps is kinda a big cluster. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 18:27, 8 September 2018 (EDT)

On that note, though, I do think we should consider moving "Bubba" from the Boss Bass to the Cheep Chomp article, considering that is how at least one sourceMedia:SMP page 62 excerpt.png categorizes them. LinkTheLefty (talk) 23:00, 8 September 2018 (EDT)

S'why I mentioned the name change being then. I recall another that had a screenshot labelled as "Bakubaku," but can't remember the exact conversation. EDIT: Link's been changed, now the one in question is the above one. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 23:04, 8 September 2018 (EDT)

I'd say that we should list Monties as species of Rocky Wrenches. You can call me Yoshi2 to reply me. I call Alex95, simply Alex. -- FanOfYoshi 14:29, 10 September 2018 (EDT)

Comments on the Great Debate

The amount of difficulty this wiki has had with simply noting the observations of their friggin eyeballs is really not a good showing. Requiring citations is important, yes, but when you can literally look at the creature and see that it's a mole, and still insist that it's a turtle because some old source said so, that does tend to hurt your credibility as an encyclopedia and as a person. And, for clarification because this was a strawman that people jumped to (and still were as of autumn 2018, apparently), 'mole' =/= Monty Mole. Rocky Wrench can be a mole without being a derivative of Monty Mole. Just as being human doesn't make the NPCs in New Donk City Mario Bros. Today, Rocky Wrenches are moles (which this wiki at least seems to have settled on). Do with that what you will. 64.228.133.138 21:28, June 29, 2019 (EDT)

The issue was not that it was simply described as a turtle, but rather that it was described as a turtle that looks like a mole, which is something that can still be true even after the redesign, especially given the fact that their lower bodies are barely visible in-game and the mostly recycled model may have eschewed the shell to reduce polygons or out of laziness. After all, there is no question that Beach Koopas are turtles despite being shell-less. Despite a Prima citation referring to the new design as a mole, Nintendo has allowed shelled Rocky Wrenches (albeit with more elements of Monty Mole's design) to continue to exist via the Super Mario Maker games, so this isn't forgotten regardless. That said, I'm not sure why you felt the need to chime in on a dormant topic. LinkTheLefty (talk) 22:48, June 29, 2019 (EDT)

Why?

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.

Why are these classified as Koopas? They definitely don't look like Koopas, and the shell was most recently part of their design in the non-NSMBU styles in SMM2, which was most likely a preservation of the design detail they had at the time. Either way, I'm confused. TheDarkStar 20:30, November 7, 2019 (EST)

You misunderstand what the infobox means. "Variant of"/"parent species" means they were conceptualized based off a different entity, not that they are a "subspecies" or whatever. Poo was initially visualized as a member of Kame-zoku and became actually mammalian later; Choropoo was created based off Poo, but running (hence the names; "Poo" is a "honk" noise, as they are mechanics, while "choro" means running around crazily). Regardless, Poo obviously aren't based off something that came years later. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 20:35, November 7, 2019 (EST)

Another example of what happened can be seen in Baby Bowser: when Bowser Jr. was introduced, his design clearly reminded that of Baby Bowser, and effectively soon the latter was redesigned to become almost identical to Bowser Jr.. Here, something similar seems to have happened: Monty Moles (ChoroPoo) are moles that were likely based on Rocky Wrenches (Poo), consequently the latter were eventually redesigned as moles to better resemble Monty Moles. So Baby Bowser → Bowser Jr. → Bowser Jr.-like Baby Bowser and Rocky Wrench → Monty Mole → Monty Mole-like Rocky Wrench. In any case, multiple sources - even English ones - clearly stated that in Super Mario Bros. 3 they were mole-like turtles, hence that odd line in the infobox.—Mister Wu (talk) 10:27, November 8, 2019 (EST)

Late reply, but since the "variant" parameter indicates what the design was based on rather than any kind of biological definition, I think that's a good reason to list both Koopas and Monty Moles as parent species. Although it's true that the original design was intended to be a Koopa, the current design is unambiguously based on Monty Moles (although the latter were technically based on the former, as indicated by their Japanese names). Considering that Rocky Wrenches don't even have shells in most modern games, I'd say that's proof they're not even based on Koopas anymore, regardless of what might have been intended when they were first introduced. Niiue - Who has lost his tail? 17:57, September 10, 2020 (EDT)

Problem is, by definition, it can't be a variant of something that's already a variant of it. Monty Mole was based on Rocky Wrench, which was later, let's say, retrofitted to look more like Monty Mole. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 19:03, September 10, 2020 (EDT)

That's true. Honestly, I'd prefer listing Monty Mole as the variant since it's more accurate, but I'm not sure how many people would be on board with something that extreme. Niiue - Who has lost his tail? 19:11, September 10, 2020 (EDT)

Koopa

Template:Species-infobox @User:Doc von Schmeltwick, Could we move Koopa from "Variant of" to "Relatives" here? I think that would be a good compromise

Pokemon (talk) 15:14, June 21, 2020 (EDT)

No. It was explicitly created to be one, and how we do species hierarchy is about what inspired what, ergo that would be disingenuous. Rocky Wrench and Monty Mole are the exception for the sole reason that while Monty was inspired by Rocky, details initially given to Monty in 64DS were later given to Rocky, due to Monty becoming more recurring. Now, I would not be opposed to having both a "variant" and "derived" field on the infobox, since that could cover more bases without semantics getting in the way, but that might get a little complex. Admittedly, this is a confusing case, but the fact remains it was created explicitly as a subtype, regardless of how they are currently depicted. It's why Frost Piranha is considered a variant of Putrid Piranha instead of ordinary Piranha Plant. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 15:53, June 21, 2020 (EDT)