Talk:Toadsworth the Younger

Toadsworth the Younger?

I noticed that at least two times in the game Young Toadsworth is called "Toadsworth the Younger" (with that same capitalization and everything). Is "Young Toadsworth" more official, or what? --YellowYoshi398 19:12, 11 December 2006 (EST)

I guess, but the old Toadsworth always refers to him as Toadsworth the Younger but then again, Toadsworth the Younger always refers to Toadsworth as Toadsworth the Older. I guess it is more canonical, but it still isn't his "official name" so should a conjecture template be placed. Same thing with Young Elvin Gadd.Knife (talk)

I actually think both should be merged with their respective older counterparts. -- Son of Suns

I think so. Anybody else vote? User:Knife/sig1

I agree with the merge of the two articles. - Gabumon^(talk) 13:01, 23 September 2009 (EDT)

I don't really think they should be merged... We're not about to merge Baby Mario with Mario. (Or are we? I hope not...) Then again, I guess a baby version of a character is more individual than a younger one... I'm not really sure. --YellowYoshi398 11:27, 3 February 2007 (EST)

It Said In PMTTYD that Toadswotrh (the Older) was 60. If Mario is 35, (Nintendo says) and Baby Mario is 1 (or younger) Young Toadsworth is approxamitly 25. Max2

I'd agree with Max2 a little bit. I doubt at the time Mario and Luigi were in the past the Baby Bros. were 1. They don't wear diapers anymore and they're not in carriages or anything. I would say that when Mario and Luigi went to the past the "past" was 1975. The game was released in 2005, so that would mean the Mario Bros. traveled thirty years back in time. This also means Mario and Luigi were born in 1970. Anyway, Toadsworth was 60 in Paper Mario: The Thousand-Year Door, which was 2004. One year later he is 61. Sixty-one minus thirty is thirty-one, Toadsworth the Younger's age.
The preceding unsigned comment was added by Mariofan132 (talk).

Why dont we move this to Young Toadsworth? I think thats a better name --(talk) The 'Shroom 19:08, 23 September 2009 (EDT)

Even though he is obviously a young Toadsworth, this is the closest to an official name we have.--Knife (talk) 16:01, 25 September 2009 (EDT)

Merge with main Toadsworth article

While not strictly within the scope of my recent proposal, the situations are similar enough that this page warrants re-examination and proposal of a merger. The two Toadsworths are not separate characters, only differently-aged versions of the same one. Spock Alt and Spock Prime (a similar example) from the recent film occupy split articles because Spock Alt becomes, quite clearly, a different character. The difference here is that "Toadsworth the Younger" will continue to become the older Taodsworth and not a different character. Redstar 23:32, 26 November 2009 (EST)

I agree, per Son of Suns' previous statement.--Knife (talk) 00:40, 27 November 2009 (EST)

The same could be said about the other baby characters. Hello, I'm Time Turner.

I wont like to see this merged. If we merge this I will demand to get the Babys merged, as it is the same situation. --™ The 'Shroom 17:46, 27 January 2010 (EST)

Per Tucayo, I don't want to see this or the baby's articles merged.--Mateo (Talk · Contributions) 18:17, 27 January 2010 (EST)

And then there's Young Elvin Gadd. Hello, I'm Time Turner.

Actually, Young Elvin Gadd has been merged, but I suggest we leave it as is.--FREAK ~Game Freak~ OUT!

No, I mean wether or not to split Young Elvin Gadd. I mean, if this stays, then that needs to be reverted. Hello, I'm Time Turner.

If we merge these articles it'll be a diasaster. In the game it's like they are different people. It just doesn't seem right. ' FireBabyLuigi11I wasn't thinking "God". That was one of his creatures and he threw it at me!

It can't be merged! They are two seperate characters and have different personalities. Have we merged Mario and Baby Mario or Luigi and Baby Luigi? No. And that's not any different than this. If they are merged, I shall simply seperate them again.M&L Just because you're in red doesn't mean you're strong. Have at you! 23:55, 1 February 2012 (EST)