Editing Talk:Deep Cheep

==Appearance in NSMBU==
Do they really appear in NSMBU? I mean, there's artwork of them, but I don't remember seeing any. [[User:Aokage|Aokage]] ([[User talk:Aokage|talk]]) 11:44, 2 January 2013 (EST)

I have the same question, I have indications that appears or in [[Tropical Refresher]] or in [[Porcupuffer Falls]] or in [[Swim Your Life!]] but eh not been confirmed so it's possible it then appears in a next DLC or is in some [[Challenge Mode (New Super Mario Bros. U) | challenge]] or a [[Coin Courses]], so for now I will try to investigate if is found in the game, and later I'll give you an answer ok? .
[[User:Marioyoshi|Marioyoshi]] ([[User talk:Marioyoshi|talk]])
:So, do they appear at all? --[[User:Hiccup|Hiccup]] ([[User talk:Hiccup|talk]]) 10:58, 23 January 2015 (EST)

== Appearance in Super Mario Maker or not? ==

When you shake Cheep Cheeps into green ones in NSMBU style they highly resemble Deep Cheep except that they don't chase you why is that?

== Yoshi's New Island section shouldn't be here ==

I honestly can't agree with Green Cheep Cheep in YNI being covered in Deep Cheep page just because of the internal filename when everything else from its behavior to the supplementary sources we have at hand contradict this. This is more like Deep Cheep's files being used as a basis for the green Cheep Cheeps in the finished product, which makes the filename an artifact and should have a trivia note at most. [[User:SmokedChili|SmokedChili]] ([[User talk:SmokedChili|talk]]) 05:11, February 9, 2020 (EST)

== Stop considering the green Cheep Cheeps in certain ''Super Mario Maker'' styles to be Blurps and Deep Cheeps: take 2 ==

{{SettledTPP}}
{{ProposalOutcome|failed|4-9|Failed}}
So I attempted this on the Blurp talk page a while back, it failed mainly because they "still act like Blurp," which while true I do not find a valid reason. The fact of the matter is the green versions are consistently called "Cheep Cheeps" in ''every'' style, and [[River Fish in the Forest]]'s description doubles down on this. '''''Nothing''''' in any of the ''Super Mario Maker'' series '''ever''' uses the names "Blurp" or "Deep Cheep," only the wiki does ''in spite'' of what the games explicitly say. Also, it's not like the games didn't change names between styles and themes for ''other'' entities, like Spike Trap becoming Jelectro and Sea Urchin. Furthermore, this can't be a "Search Pukupuku" if it doesn't search. As for the nature of the design, Lakitu in ''Super Mario Kart'' reuses Fishin' Lakitu graphics, but we no longer consider that to be an actual Fishin' Lakitu appearance; the same goes for Chomps in ''Donkey Kong Land'' using Chomps Jr's design.

Basically, I'm wanting to fix the enemy table and gallery labels on the SMM game pages and simply note on these pages that the design was used for that game, but no longer consider it an actual appearance (similar to how some articles list name appearances on ''Mario Golf'' scoreboards).

'''Proposer''': {{User|Doc von Schmeltwick}}<br>
'''Deadline''': April 30, 2022, 23:59 GMT

====Support====
#{{User|Doc von Schmeltwick}} - Per
#{{User|LinkTheLefty}} Per the [[Talk:Blurp#Consider the Super Mario Maker games a design cameo rather than a full appearance|previous proposal]]'s support. Why don't we call Peach's Daisy color scheme in the older ''Super Smash Bros.'' games a full-fledged appearance of Daisy while we're at it?
#{{User|FanOfYoshi}} Per all, and my initial statements. There's no proof they're intended to be actual Blurps and/or Deep Cheeps. Just because they use the same sprites doesn't mean they're supposed to be this specific species.
#{{User|Blinker}} Per proposal. I'm fine with the Sand Cheep bridge staying uncrossed for the time being.

====Oppose====
#{{User|Hewer}} Per the [[Talk:Blurp#Consider the Super Mario Maker games a design cameo rather than a full appearance|previous proposal]]'s opposition. If something appears, it should count as an appearance.
#{{User|Somethingone}} "and River Fish in the Forest's description doubles down on this." - The River Fish in the Forest article literally shows in the infobox that there's regular-styled cheeps and blurps. How do you know it's specifically talking about the blurp-like ones and not the regular ones? And your design point isn't very strong; "Fishing Lakitus" were confused with Lakitus for a long time because they're literally just Lakitus with Fishing Poles, a trait later adopted by many many many normal lakitus. Blurps have a very different color AND a very distinguishable characteristic (the eyeglasses), so they're not going to be sharing designs with normal Cheeps unless Nintendo actually wants to retcon and merge two species into one. I think it's fine to call the ones in SMM/SMM2 Deep Cheeps and Blurps. Also, what about [[Slave Basa]], which is called a [[Swoop|Basa]] but is clearly a Fang variant? What about [[Sand Cheep]] which is called a Cheep Cheep but is clearly a Blurp?
#{{User|Waluigi Time}} Per all.
#{{User|Archivist Toadette}} Per previous proposal's opposition, especially 7feetunder's comment about the "intended goal" of the proposal.
#{{User|Mustard Machine}} Per all. Somebody needs to figure out if there's a more controversial topic in mariowiki history then goddamn fish.
#{{User|WildWario}} Per all.
#{{User|Bazooka Mario}} This and the previous Blurp proposal seems to be drastically overthinking this. If there's some weird inconsistency in a game, just take note and move on. Don't see why there needs to be a proposal over this.
#{{User|TheFlameChomp}} Per all, as well as the opposition from the previous proposal.
#{{User|Mario4Ever}} Per all.

====Comments====
@Somethingone: "The River Fish in the Forest article literally shows in the infobox that there's regular-styled cheeps and blurps. How do you know it's specifically talking about the blurp-like ones and not the regular ones?" Er, no? Try looking down a bit. There is precisely one (1) ''Big'' Cheep Cheep. No regular Cheep Cheeps by our definition. Also note that [[Para-Beetle Transfer]], for example, mentions Para-Beetles by name, like Jelectro / Sea Urchin and unlike Blurp / Deep Cheep. [[User:LinkTheLefty|LinkTheLefty]] ([[User talk:LinkTheLefty|talk]]) 12:14, April 16, 2022 (EDT)
:That's just a minor technicality. Keep in mind that official sources can sometimes make mistakes. {{User:Archivist Toadette/sig}} 13:55, April 16, 2022 (EDT)
::I just want to say that the Peach=Daisy in Smash comparison you're making is not a very good one, that is clearly just Peach dressed like Daisy. This however, it's the Blurp / Deep Cheep appearing that happen to be referred to as "Cheep Cheeps". {{User:Swallow/sig}} 13:59, April 16, 2022 (EDT)
::The only "mistake" here is ''openly defying the categorization used by '''all''' languages in '''all''' relevant games''. Note the "all"s. It's not a "minor technicality" if it's consistent. It's not a mistake, it's blatantly a deliberate choice. To defy it therefore, is by definition fanon. Also, I made my (altered) intended goal ''very clear'' here in the last sentence. [[User:Doc von Schmeltwick|Doc von Schmeltwick]] ([[User talk:Doc von Schmeltwick|talk]]) 14:25, April 16, 2022 (EDT)
::Yeah, calling it a "minor technicality" frankly sounds like another way to say not to nitpick it apart, considering that was addressing at least a whole padded line of text of that oppose vote. And not to get off track, but I fully stand by the same Peach/Daisy comparison being perfectly apt here. Look at Daisy's {{media link|SML Daisy Art.png|original}} design. Now look at Peach's ''[[smashwiki::File:Peach Palette (SSBM).png|Super]] [[smashwiki::File:Peach Palette (SSBB).png|Smash]] [[smashwiki::File:Peach Palette (SSB4).png|Bros.]]'' recolors. These characters become nigh-indistinguishable, and if the games didn't give us a giant "Peach" label we'd no doubt had had discussions over whether to call her "Daisy" (following that Luigi's ''Smash'' voice was initially just Mario barely pinching his nose). By this logic, {{media link|PMTTYD Mario L Emblem.png|this}} is Luigi because he was originally represented as a very simple {{media link|MB Luigi Artwork.png|recolor}}. Consider the fact that the new sprites in ''Super Mario Maker'' tend to {{media link|Rocky wrench.jpg|respect}} older design elements. Same deal; these are aesthetic skins. If it was only one product, sure, maybe that can be let go - but you also have ''Super Mario Maker for Nintendo 3DS'' and ''Super Mario Maker 2'' (which corrected Bull's-Eye Blaster), meaning that we're to ignore not one, not two, but ''three'' instances of this in a row. [[User:LinkTheLefty|LinkTheLefty]] ([[User talk:LinkTheLefty|talk]]) 14:45, April 16, 2022 (EDT)
:::I'm not going to get into a debate over this, I most likely won't say anything else, but the TTYD recolor is just stretching it here, especially for a game that has Luigi in it and even has [[I wanna meet Luigi!|them both appear onscreen at the same time]]. {{User:Swallow/sig}} 15:17, April 16, 2022 (EDT)
::::{{media link|TwoMarios.png|Okay then.}} [[User:LinkTheLefty|LinkTheLefty]] ([[User talk:LinkTheLefty|talk]]) 15:19, April 16, 2022 (EDT)
:::::How does that relate to this discussion? The argument here is that both being on-screen proves they are different entities, it has nothing to do with how many there are. {{User:Hewer/sig}} 05:25, April 17, 2022 (EDT)
What about [[Sand Cheep]]? Its Japanese and English names are both based on Cheep Cheep's, but the wiki treats it as a Blurp presumably because of its appearance. [[User:Blinker|Blinker]] ([[User talk:Blinker|talk]]) 15:18, April 16, 2022 (EDT)
:Blurp is already derived from Cheep Cheep. Sand Cheep may need reexamined though, admittedly. [[User:Doc von Schmeltwick|Doc von Schmeltwick]] ([[User talk:Doc von Schmeltwick|talk]]) 16:40, April 16, 2022 (EDT)

I'll just leave my overall view on the proposal here. I am unsure which to vote for, however I do think the way these are organised are adequete enough but I wouldn't mind if these sections are rewritten to reflect that these games refer to them as Cheep Cheeps that use the design of Deep Cheeps and Blurps respectively. That would be a much better solution than getting rid of these mentions entirely. {{User:Swallow/sig}} 15:25, April 16, 2022 (EDT)

Y'all seem to be focusing on Blurp, despite (or dare I guess, ''because of'') the elephant in the room being that identifying the NSMBU-style ones as "[[Deep Cheep|Search Pukupuku]]" when they by no means search and are identified only as the ''normal'' [[Cheep Cheep|Pukupuku]] is incredibly disingenuous and misleading. [[User:Doc von Schmeltwick|Doc von Schmeltwick]] ([[User talk:Doc von Schmeltwick|talk]]) 23:57, April 16, 2022 (EDT)
:Why would they look identical to Deep Cheeps if they were meant to just be normal Cheep Cheeps? {{User:Hewer/sig}} 05:25, April 17, 2022 (EDT)
::To fit with the style's established aesthetic. [[User:Doc von Schmeltwick|Doc von Schmeltwick]] ([[User talk:Doc von Schmeltwick|talk]]) 05:29, April 17, 2022 (EDT)
::Regardless, if they are Search Pukupuku, ''why don't they search''? [[User:Doc von Schmeltwick|Doc von Schmeltwick]] ([[User talk:Doc von Schmeltwick|talk]]) 13:57, April 21, 2022 (EDT)
:::Because they're the same situation as Jelectro/Spike Trap; an enemy replacement for one theme that shares the same slot in the gameplay as the enemy they replace. For them to be able to search they would've had a separate menu option/game entity in the game, but according to the files they're palette swaps of the same <tt>PukuPukuGreen</tt> entity(and Jelectro is the same situation, as the internal name data dump makes no mention of <tt>Shibire Kurage</tt>). I am removing my vote due to reading this over, but I do want to say that Japanese names aren't always indicative of an enemy's functions/classifications([[Roto-Disc|"Cookie"]] is clearly not edible, [[ComBat|"Sweaty Youngster"]] doesn't sweat in-game, [[Reznor|"Peace Sign"]] isn't peaceful, etc. etc.). [[User:Somethingone|Somethingone]] ([[User talk:Somethingone|talk]]) 14:51, April 21, 2022 (EDT)
::::It's the in-game vocals and labels too, Jelectro and Urchin are listed differently from Spike Trap but all green fish are just listed as "Cheep Cheep." [[User:Doc von Schmeltwick|Doc von Schmeltwick]] ([[User talk:Doc von Schmeltwick|talk]]) 15:14, April 21, 2022 (EDT)
:::::Yeah it's inconsistent but I just don't see it as a strong reason to argue at length over. From how I see it, I'm not really on-board trying to enact changes on shaky terms being ''Super Mario Maker doesn't have these specific lines for these extremely derivative fish'' and ''the Japanese name for this generic creature now isn't applicable in this one game'' and it's evident from the oppose from this proposal and the earlier ones that I'm not the only one who thinks this. {{User:Bazooka Mario/sig}} 22:45, April 21, 2022 (EDT)
::::::It follows the same logic of considering DT's Nipper Plants to be regular Nipper Plants and not Fire Nipper Plant IMO. The design is the ''only'' attribute suggesting they might be the other species, and in my opinion that's arbitrary and unconvincing. [[User:Doc von Schmeltwick|Doc von Schmeltwick]] ([[User talk:Doc von Schmeltwick|talk]]) 00:16, April 22, 2022 (EDT)
:::::::Well we all know Nintendo has played fast and loose with a lot with these, resulting in being arbitrary splits and merges. Why not extremely briefly mention ''Dream Team''{{'}}s Nipper Plants in Fire Nipper Plant while most of the information is found in the main article? {{User:Bazooka Mario/sig}} 15:01, April 22, 2022 (EDT)
::::::::That is precisely what I want to do here. People who've only played SMM are only gonna think of them as Cheep Cheep anyways. [[User:Doc von Schmeltwick|Doc von Schmeltwick]] ([[User talk:Doc von Schmeltwick|talk]]) 15:17, April 22, 2022 (EDT)

@SomethingOne Yes, and we call Heavy Troopa a Paratroopa rather than a normal Troopa. Variants of variants can have names more like the original, and that does not correlate with a base species using a variant's design. [[User:Doc von Schmeltwick|Doc von Schmeltwick]] ([[User talk:Doc von Schmeltwick|talk]]) 00:19, April 22, 2022 (EDT)

== Comments ==
I do get that the Deep Cheep is called Search Pukupuku in the Japanese Super Mario Maker, but if this guy from the Super Mario Maker games acts like Green Cheep Cheeps and ''are called that in game'', then we should merge these two articles instead of the whole "they have Deep Cheep's appearances, ergo they should stay separate" (which to me is becoming increasingly common on the wiki). [[User:PrincessPeachFan|PrincessPeachFan]] ([[User talk:PrincessPeachFan|talk]]) 08:10, May 1, 2022 (EDT)
:Actually my point is it's ''not'' called "Search Pukupuku" in SMM, but just "Pukupuku" - making it indeed just Cheep Cheep. [[User:Doc von Schmeltwick|Doc von Schmeltwick]] ([[User talk:Doc von Schmeltwick|talk]]) 13:51, May 1, 2022 (EDT)
: So, if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck then it ''is'' a duck and should be merged. (And I've noticed a fair few proposals have been opposed due to the fact that the characters have the same look ''even though'' they have the same Japanese names such as Bubble and Crazee Dayzees). [[User:PrincessPeachFan|PrincessPeachFan]] ([[User talk:PrincessPeachFan|talk]]) 15:13, May 1, 2022 (EDT)
::I argue that "walks like a duck and quacks like a duck" is also paradoxically applicable here too, especially provided the overall inconsistent relationship between Japanese and English names (I do not believe Japanese names are reliable indicators on deciding to split/merge; developers in Japan also probably had a similar approach of playing fast and loose with names) throughout the wiki that does sometimes necessitate editor judgement call. {{User:Bazooka Mario/sig}} 15:32, May 1, 2022 (EDT)
::: So, if you don't believe that Japanese names are reliable indicators on deciding to split/merge, then we should merge Blue Coin/Silver Coin from Super Mario Bros. 3 with the DDKR Silver Coins and re-merge the Ice Snifits, right? The point is, these "Deep Cheeps" are just Green Cheep Cheeps and furthermore, the Green Cheep Cheeps have the exact same file name as Deep Cheeps in Japan. [[User:PrincessPeachFan|PrincessPeachFan]] ([[User talk:PrincessPeachFan|talk]]) 12:56, May 2, 2022 (EDT)
::::Japanese names are not always the ultimate decider for merging and splitting things, and I think you're missing the point a bit with the situation here. As I said during the proposal, I'm personally a bit indifferent about the whole thing but the opposition stated that it was from the Deep Cheep/Blurp design being used that constituted as an appearance, languages didn't have much to do with it. The Bubble Dayzee/Crazee Dayzee thing however, from what I can tell the matching Japanese name was the only strong reasoning for merging, whereas the enemies themselves behave differently which is why the proposals failed and we are leaving them split (and this is from them appearing in the same game; the Paper Mario appearance isn't very relevant there). I should also point out, [[Talk:Goomboss#Have the Chesnut King on the List of implied characters redirect to this page|we currently have a proposal going on solely drawn from the Japanese name that is most certain to pass]], which is a case of mistranslation. {{User:Swallow/sig}} 13:32, May 2, 2022 (EDT)

:::Why would we even merge the ''DKR'' Silver Coins based on Japanese names when that game isn't even ''from'' Japan? If we decided everything based on Japanese names, then [[Vanna T.]] would be merged with [[Toadette]], and [[Boo Guy]]'s ''Partners in Time'' info would be moved to [[Greaper]]. {{User:7feetunder/sig}} 13:37, May 2, 2022 (EDT)
::::PrincessPeachFan: I didn't say Japanese names should be disregarded, but more like they aren't a consistent piece of information to rely on when deciding to split/merge/rename articles; i.e. sometimes they're good crutch especially supported by other evidence, but not all the time. Clarification: the Chestnut King matter is more clear-cut due to every other language sharing the same name as each other barring English ''and'' the weird inconsistent English translation aspects of Thousand-Year Door making that English name even more suspect. {{User:Bazooka Mario/sig}} 18:27, May 4, 2022 (EDT)