319
edits
Tags: Mobile edit Advanced mobile edit |
|||
(154 intermediate revisions by 32 users not shown) | |||
Line 22: | Line 22: | ||
And there's way more that I haven't mentioned (just look up the word "humorous" on here and you'll see what I mean). To summarize how I feel this term has been frequently misused, in a form easily copyable for the rules: | And there's way more that I haven't mentioned (just look up the word "humorous" on here and you'll see what I mean). To summarize how I feel this term has been frequently misused, in a form easily copyable for the rules: | ||
;'''Humorous/Comical/etc.''': "Humorous", along with other similar words, is used from an observational perspective to describe something one finds amusing or funny, which is, of course, subjective on the part of the writer and should be avoided in an encyclopedia. However, it is commonly misused to refer to anything that is specifically written to be a joke or a gag by the authors of a piece of media. These kinds of words should generally be used | ;'''Humorous/Comical/etc.''': "Humorous", along with other similar words, is used from an observational perspective to describe something one finds amusing or funny, which is, of course, subjective on the part of the writer and should be avoided in an encyclopedia. However, it is commonly misused to refer to anything that is specifically written to be a joke or a gag by the authors of a piece of media. These kinds of words should generally be used only when a character or person relevant to the article ''finds'' something amusing. Not to be confused with "comedic", a word that simply means something relates to comedy in general, and is fine to use if a joke is deliberate on the part of a character (or, in case of references to the media's development, a developer). | ||
'''Proposer''': {{User|DrippingYellow}}<br> | '''Proposer''': {{User|DrippingYellow}}<br> | ||
Line 31: | Line 31: | ||
#{{User|Camwoodstock}} Per proposal. Flowery writing is no laughing matter! | #{{User|Camwoodstock}} Per proposal. Flowery writing is no laughing matter! | ||
#{{User|Hewer}} I'd add that "comedic" should be used instead to get across that something is meant to be funny while using more objective language, but otherwise, sure, I'll humour this idea. | #{{User|Hewer}} I'd add that "comedic" should be used instead to get across that something is meant to be funny while using more objective language, but otherwise, sure, I'll humour this idea. | ||
#{{User|Ray Trace}} We should just get rid of that subjective adjective altogether, let readers decide from the context of the quote if it's humorous or not, we don't need to write an editorial about it (ie sentences such as "Patrick gets caught by Sandy's lasso and dragged back, resulting in a nuclear explosion" already conveys to the reader that it's comedic) | |||
#{{User|TheFlameChomp}} Per all. | |||
====Oppose==== | ====Oppose==== | ||
Line 37: | Line 39: | ||
"Comical" and "comedic" should be fine, as those simply mean relating to comedy. [[User:Doc von Schmeltwick|Doc von Schmeltwick]] ([[User talk:Doc von Schmeltwick|talk]]) 19:31, May 12, 2024 (EDT) | "Comical" and "comedic" should be fine, as those simply mean relating to comedy. [[User:Doc von Schmeltwick|Doc von Schmeltwick]] ([[User talk:Doc von Schmeltwick|talk]]) 19:31, May 12, 2024 (EDT) | ||
:"Comedic" is definitely fine, but in multiple dictionary sources I've come across, the definition of "comical" meaning "relating to comedy" is either listed as obsolete and deprecated, or absent altogether. [[User:DrippingYellow|DrippingYellow]] ([[User talk:DrippingYellow|talk]]) 19:43, May 12, 2024 (EDT) | :"Comedic" is definitely fine, but in multiple dictionary sources I've come across, the definition of "comical" meaning "relating to comedy" is either listed as obsolete and deprecated, or absent altogether. [[User:DrippingYellow|DrippingYellow]] ([[User talk:DrippingYellow|talk]]) 19:43, May 12, 2024 (EDT) | ||
{{@|Ray Trace}} That was a really good example of obvious comedy. SpongeBob itself is comedy, so that was a good idea to use that as an example! [[User:SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)|SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)]] ([[User talk:SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)|talk]]) 08:12, May 15, 2024 (EDT) | |||
{{@|Hewer}} I updated the rules blurb, is it good now? [[User:DrippingYellow|DrippingYellow]] ([[User talk:DrippingYellow|talk]]) 11:34, May 15, 2024 (EDT) | |||
:Yeah, that works. {{User:Hewer/sig}} 11:43, May 15, 2024 (EDT) | |||
===Standardize "History in the Super Mario franchise" headings under certain conditions=== | |||
Inspired by [[User:Nintendo101|Nintendo101]]'s [[User talk:Nintendo101/flowerpot|flowerpot]] subpage (from an [https://www.mariowiki.com/index.php?title=User:Nintendo101/flowerpot&oldid=4209600 earlier revision], before it had been removed), this proposal aims to standardize the use of "History in the Super Mario franchise" over "History" if the article meets one of the following conditions: | |||
#It is a generic subject (e.g. [[Grape]]s) or a real person with a fictional equivalent in the ''Super Mario'' franchise (e.g. [[Thomas Jefferson]]). | |||
#It is from the [[Super Mario (franchise)|''Super Mario'' franchise]] but has also appeared in video games not part of it. Popular examples would be the [[Super Smash Bros. (series)|''Super Smash Bros.'' series]] and the ''[[Minecraft]]'' textures, and everything that isn't ''Super Mario'' would appear under a separate heading titled "History in other games." If it encompasses more or different formats than just video games, use "History in other media" instead. | |||
#Crossover content, including Nintendo products, as they appear in ''Super Mario'' media. Such examples would include [[Game Boy]]s, [[Link]], and [[Egg Pawn]]s. | |||
While none of these are necessarily not allowed (as far as I'm aware), standardizing this will help make it clear to readers what is ''Super Mario'' and what is not while reading articles, and prevent potential disputes once a standard has been set. | |||
For the first bullet point, this would help establish that real and generic subjects are not from ''Super Mario'' and makes the History heading less ambiguous. On the [[Dinosaur]] article, for example, are we reading about history of dinosaurs as they exist in real life, up to the point of extinction, or from the ''Super Mario'' franchise? It's the latter. For [[George Washington]], are we reading history about him from the 18th century or as he exists in the ''Super Mario'' franchise? It's also the latter, clearly. | |||
For the second bullet point, this would help eliminate the popular misconception that ''Super Smash Bros.'' is part of the ''Super Mario'' franchise and help better contextualize ''Super Mario'' as it exists in other media, like sometimes ''Zelda'' or ''Minecraft'', rather than being integral to the same degree as their main appearances in ''Super Mario'' media itself. | |||
For the third bullet point, this would eliminate confusion that the history is talking about Nintendo products in general, like when they were produced, the amount of sales generated, etc. and rather mention its appearances within the ''Super Mario'' franchise itself. History on Nintendo products themselves can be found on [[nwiki:|NintendoWiki]]. Similarly, for articles like [[Link]], it helps when the History section specifies it is of Link as he appears in the ''Super Mario'' franchise. Then connections to ''Super Mario'' go under the "History in other media" heading. | |||
For flexibility, I'll provide several voting options in the proposal, with the numbers corresponding to the bullet points above. | |||
'''Proposer''': {{User|Super Mario RPG}}<br> | |||
'''Deadline''': May 31, 2024, 23:59 GMT | |||
====Apply to all three cases==== | |||
#{{User|Super Mario RPG}} I'm for this option. | |||
#{{User|SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)}} Yes. Also, for the flowerpot thing, I have that saved (with a few tweaks) [[User:SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)/Nintendo101's flowerpot old revision saved plus tweaks|here]]. | |||
====Apply to #1 and #2, but not #3==== | |||
====Apply to #2 and #3, but not #1==== | |||
====Apply to #1 and #3, but not #2==== | |||
====Apply to #1 but not #2 and #3==== | |||
====Apply to #2 but not #1 and #3==== | |||
====Apply to #3 but not #1 and #2==== | |||
====Do nothing==== | |||
====Comments==== | |||
For clarity, when I say "standardize," (not to be confused with "allow," since I don't think there's anything in the rules that explicitly forbids formatting in the aforementioned three cases), it means if a page is formatted that way, others aren't allowed to revert it, since it's the standard for how said articles should look. Also, {{@|SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)}}, glad to see that flowerpot page. [[User:Super Mario RPG|Super Mario RPG]] ([[User talk:Super Mario RPG|talk]]) 14:32, May 17, 2024 (EDT) | |||
:"For clarity, when I say "standardize," (not to be confused with "allow," since I don't think there's anything in the rules that explicitly forbids formatting in the aforementioned three cases), it means if a page is formatted that way, others aren't allowed to revert it, since it's the standard for how said articles should look." Thanks for the clarification! My support will still be there. "Also, {{@|SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)}}, glad to see that flowerpot page." Thanks! I wanted to keep/expand on it as a subpage of my userpage, b/c I didn't want any edit conflicts. You and {{@|Nintendo101}} are free to edit it if you want. [[User:SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)|SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)]] ([[User talk:SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)|talk]]) 14:43, May 17, 2024 (EDT) | |||
Wasn't there a proposal about roughly the same thing not too long ago? You're meant to wait 28 days between proposals on the same thing, so if that's the case, we don't exactly wanna wait for a substantial amount of votes before calling attention to it. {{User:Camwoodstock/sig}} 15:12, May 17, 2024 (EDT) | |||
:No, I think this is different. That one had to do with removing franchise headers, which this one doesn't. [[User:SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)|SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)]] ([[User talk:SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)|talk]]) 15:23, May 17, 2024 (EDT) | |||
::Yeah, this one is not about removing headings. It's about modifying "History" to "History in the ''Super Mario'' franchise" in one of three case, and in one case (if there's appearances outside of ''Super Mario''), splitting "History in other games/media" into its own history heading. See what I did on [[Don Bongo]] as an example. [[User:Super Mario RPG|Super Mario RPG]] ([[User talk:Super Mario RPG|talk]]) 15:39, May 17, 2024 (EDT) | |||
Where would appearances in things like Smash and Captain N go in this case? {{User:Koopa con Carne/Sig}} 15:40, May 17, 2024 (EDT) | |||
:"History in other media" (see [[Link]] article). [[User:Super Mario RPG|Super Mario RPG]] ([[User talk:Super Mario RPG|talk]]) 15:41, May 17, 2024 (EDT) | |||
::Makes sense. [[User:SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)|SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)]] ([[User talk:SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)|talk]]) 15:48, May 17, 2024 (EDT) | |||
==New features== | ==New features== | ||
Line 63: | Line 120: | ||
#{{User|Jdtendo}} Per all. | #{{User|Jdtendo}} Per all. | ||
#{{User|Camwoodstock}} Per proposal--these icons are already on the tour articles where they're relevant, so having all of these variations on the courses' galleries is a bit overkill. It'd be one thing if they were in a gallery subpage, but just on the articles itself...? ADDITION FROM THE FUTURE: Per Glowsquid and especially Ray Trace; these images are already on other articles where they are far more relevant, and we shouldn't be prohibiting people stuck with 6GB of RAM or Chromebooks from accessing the wiki in favor of "the same image but instead of Captain Toad in the bottom right with a white outline, there's Yellow Yoshi (Kangaroo) in the bottom right with a white outline" repeated ad-infinitum. Just because ''you'' can load it just fine doesn't mean that it's fine for others, and a wiki shouldn't have a recommended system requirements that's larger than a web browser's. | #{{User|Camwoodstock}} Per proposal--these icons are already on the tour articles where they're relevant, so having all of these variations on the courses' galleries is a bit overkill. It'd be one thing if they were in a gallery subpage, but just on the articles itself...? ADDITION FROM THE FUTURE: Per Glowsquid and especially Ray Trace; these images are already on other articles where they are far more relevant, and we shouldn't be prohibiting people stuck with 6GB of RAM or Chromebooks from accessing the wiki in favor of "the same image but instead of Captain Toad in the bottom right with a white outline, there's Yellow Yoshi (Kangaroo) in the bottom right with a white outline" repeated ad-infinitum. Just because ''you'' can load it just fine doesn't mean that it's fine for others, and a wiki shouldn't have a recommended system requirements that's larger than a web browser's. | ||
#{{User|MCD}} Per all. | |||
#{{User|ThePowerPlayer}} Per [[Gallery:Mario Kart Tour course icons|Gallery:''Mario Kart Tour'' course icons]] (I'm mentioning this in the support reasoning to bring attention to it). The wiki can keep its absurdly large Spriters Resource-esque collection of course icons without looking like a blemish on text-based articles. | |||
#{{User|TheFlameChomp}} Per all. | |||
====Oppose==== | ====Oppose==== | ||
Line 76: | Line 136: | ||
#{{User|Okapii}} Per Hewer. | #{{User|Okapii}} Per Hewer. | ||
#{{User|Doc von Schmeltwick}} - I don't particularly like them, but outright across-the-board deletion of actual sprite-based game assets is an absolute no-no. | #{{User|Doc von Schmeltwick}} - I don't particularly like them, but outright across-the-board deletion of actual sprite-based game assets is an absolute no-no. | ||
#{{User|Memoryman3}} Per all. | |||
#{{User|YoYo}} If this was to pass, then I can raise the argument of other galleries with similar images needing the same treatment. When does it become "too much"? when is a gallery of images that are already about the same thing suddenly become obnoxious? its entirely subjective, and a definite definition would muddle a lot of pages up. All i see here is "I want to remove them because I don't like them." - zero convenience is made here, but a lot of inconvenience is. Per all. | |||
====Comments==== | ====Comments==== | ||
Line 100: | Line 162: | ||
::::::::I don't remember anyone arguing anything about how the characters shown are determined, so that's quite the strawman. I don't see how it really changes anything either way in this debate. And @Shadow2, which characters are on the icons objectively ''is'' information, no idea why you're refusing to accept that fact. {{User:Hewer/sig}} 03:11, May 14, 2024 (EDT) | ::::::::I don't remember anyone arguing anything about how the characters shown are determined, so that's quite the strawman. I don't see how it really changes anything either way in this debate. And @Shadow2, which characters are on the icons objectively ''is'' information, no idea why you're refusing to accept that fact. {{User:Hewer/sig}} 03:11, May 14, 2024 (EDT) | ||
:::::::::I didn't really mean to bring up how the characters are determined as any kind of rebuttal — I only really brought it up for the sake of completeness, since it is a ''little'' more gameplay-relevant than just being completely random. You're right that it doesn't really matter, though. [[User:Ahemtoday|Ahemtoday]] ([[User talk:Ahemtoday|talk]]) 03:28, May 14, 2024 (EDT) | :::::::::I didn't really mean to bring up how the characters are determined as any kind of rebuttal — I only really brought it up for the sake of completeness, since it is a ''little'' more gameplay-relevant than just being completely random. You're right that it doesn't really matter, though. [[User:Ahemtoday|Ahemtoday]] ([[User talk:Ahemtoday|talk]]) 03:28, May 14, 2024 (EDT) | ||
:::::::::Fine then, what '''useful''' information do they provide? The number of stitches visible in Mario's overalls in Super Smash Bros. Melee would be classified by your definition as "information", but we don't include it because it's not useful. And as {{@|Ahemtoday}} has just explained above, there is no useful information in these extra icons. The only useful information is the one single view of each course. A duplicate of the same image with Luigi instead of Mario provides no further useful information and thus should not take up space uselessly. [[User:Shadow2|Shadow2]] ([[User talk:Shadow2|talk]]) 19:09, May 14, 2024 (EDT) | |||
::::::::::I feel like "useless information" and similar arguments have been countered countless times at this point, but basically whether it's "useful" is subjective and isn't up to us to decide, what's important is that it's valid information and we should be presenting it in the best way possible in case a reader is interested. Anyone who wants to know the number of stitches on Mario's overalls can [[:File:Ssbmmario.jpg|go and count]], just as anyone who wants to know what characters were used to represent the courses in Mario Kart Tour can look at the images to find out. You don't decide what is and isn't "useful" for readers, you don't know what they're looking for and they may be interested in what you aren't. And the images don't really "take up space" in any sense (before you say "loading times" or similar, again, we can just [[MarioWiki:Article size|split the galleries]] like we always do). {{User:Hewer/sig}} 11:24, May 15, 2024 (EDT) | |||
:The Mushroom Gorge icons are relevant to the Mushroom Gorge article because they are Mushroom Gorge icons. 🧐 {{User:Koopa con Carne/Sig}} 05:37, May 12, 2024 (EDT) | :The Mushroom Gorge icons are relevant to the Mushroom Gorge article because they are Mushroom Gorge icons. 🧐 {{User:Koopa con Carne/Sig}} 05:37, May 12, 2024 (EDT) | ||
:: In the past we've removed uploads for being excessive, character information for being esoteric or off-puttingly detailled, trivia sections for posting blunt statement of facts that are overly specific or don't have any greater point. [[Mariowiki:Good Writing#Fan Worship|Our own good writing guidelines page]] warn about going overboad on details and while it's specifically about page writing, the same philosophy could be extended to uploads and when "comprehensive" becomes ''too much''. I'm not saying not necessarily that's the case for these icons here (though I would likely vote in favour if the ammendments Sophie suggested above were made) but we've in fact cut information before for being uninteresting/useless/irrelevant. --[[User:Glowsquid|Glowsquid]] ([[User talk:Glowsquid|talk]]) 12:18, May 12, 2024 (EDT) | :: In the past we've removed uploads for being excessive, character information for being esoteric or off-puttingly detailled, trivia sections for posting blunt statement of facts that are overly specific or don't have any greater point. [[Mariowiki:Good Writing#Fan Worship|Our own good writing guidelines page]] warn about going overboad on details and while it's specifically about page writing, the same philosophy could be extended to uploads and when "comprehensive" becomes ''too much''. I'm not saying not necessarily that's the case for these icons here (though I would likely vote in favour if the ammendments Sophie suggested above were made) but we've in fact cut information before for being uninteresting/useless/irrelevant. --[[User:Glowsquid|Glowsquid]] ([[User talk:Glowsquid|talk]]) 12:18, May 12, 2024 (EDT) | ||
Line 136: | Line 200: | ||
::::"they're different enough from each other to show new information individually". What information do they provide? As a casual reader, I look at these and do not understand what these images are, and why Mario is on one while Luigi is on another. [[User:Shadow2|Shadow2]] ([[User talk:Shadow2|talk]]) 00:58, May 14, 2024 (EDT) | ::::"they're different enough from each other to show new information individually". What information do they provide? As a casual reader, I look at these and do not understand what these images are, and why Mario is on one while Luigi is on another. [[User:Shadow2|Shadow2]] ([[User talk:Shadow2|talk]]) 00:58, May 14, 2024 (EDT) | ||
:::::You may want to read that whole sentence again. {{User:Koopa con Carne/Sig}} 02:51, May 14, 2024 (EDT) | :::::You may want to read that whole sentence again. {{User:Koopa con Carne/Sig}} 02:51, May 14, 2024 (EDT) | ||
::::::Right you are, I accept fault in that question lmao... [[User:Shadow2|Shadow2]] ([[User talk:Shadow2|talk]]) 19:09, May 14, 2024 (EDT) | |||
:{{@|Koopa con Carne}} I say this respectfully and in good faith, and I am not signaling you out, as it seems that a few active users share the same sentiment. However, the "spirit" behind that comment bothers me. If readability does not matter, what is the point of having a wiki? What is our purpose? Who is this for? | :{{@|Koopa con Carne}} I say this respectfully and in good faith, and I am not signaling you out, as it seems that a few active users share the same sentiment. However, the "spirit" behind that comment bothers me. If readability does not matter, what is the point of having a wiki? What is our purpose? Who is this for? | ||
:I was a nerdy child. I grew up reading encyclopedias and there are quite a few behind me as I type this. All of these books were curated. They were made to be read. It is not inherently unencyclopedic to make curatorial choices on Super Mario Wiki, and if anything it is an inherent component of the craft. | :I was a nerdy child. I grew up reading encyclopedias and there are quite a few behind me as I type this. All of these books were curated. They were made to be read. It is not inherently unencyclopedic to make curatorial choices on Super Mario Wiki, and if anything it is an inherent component of the craft. | ||
Line 165: | Line 230: | ||
::::::::::Something like [[Tour New York Minute#Gallery|New York Minute]] looks organized well to me. I think the [[Gallery:Mario_Kart_Tour_course_icons#In-game_icons|in-game icons section of the ''Mario Kart Tour'' course icon gallery]] is significantly more difficult to navigate, burdens my computer, and all without substantive cause. Nintendo did not put this together. They did not create these icons with the intent of them being lumped together in a gallery anywhere. ''We'' did that. We are the only reason this exists at all. We should not be using them as an excuse to not disseminate information in an intuitive and healthy manner. - [[User:Nintendo101|Nintendo101]] ([[User talk:Nintendo101|talk]]) 12:09, May 14, 2024 (EDT) | ::::::::::Something like [[Tour New York Minute#Gallery|New York Minute]] looks organized well to me. I think the [[Gallery:Mario_Kart_Tour_course_icons#In-game_icons|in-game icons section of the ''Mario Kart Tour'' course icon gallery]] is significantly more difficult to navigate, burdens my computer, and all without substantive cause. Nintendo did not put this together. They did not create these icons with the intent of them being lumped together in a gallery anywhere. ''We'' did that. We are the only reason this exists at all. We should not be using them as an excuse to not disseminate information in an intuitive and healthy manner. - [[User:Nintendo101|Nintendo101]] ([[User talk:Nintendo101|talk]]) 12:09, May 14, 2024 (EDT) | ||
:::::::::::I usually don't have problems with loading things on this site and yeah, even I struggled on that gallery, so I suppose you're right there. However, it's a moot point either way since that's not the gallery being affected by this proposal. The galleries on the course pages, such as that of New York Minute, are what this proposal is about, and are what I've been describing. And my point with the "Nintendo's fault" thing was more that we generally strive to include as much coverage on the franchise as we can, and icons are a very usual thing for us to include a complete set of in galleries (even just regarding sprites in Mario Kart, I'm pretty sure we have every single course icon from all the other Mario Kart games, not to mention [[emblem]]s, [[Lists of sponsors|sponsors]], etc.). I don't think the repetitiveness of Mario Kart Tour's icons (which is Nintendo's fault) is a good reason for us to not do the same as we usually do with this game. {{User:Hewer/sig}} 12:36, May 14, 2024 (EDT) | :::::::::::I usually don't have problems with loading things on this site and yeah, even I struggled on that gallery, so I suppose you're right there. However, it's a moot point either way since that's not the gallery being affected by this proposal. The galleries on the course pages, such as that of New York Minute, are what this proposal is about, and are what I've been describing. And my point with the "Nintendo's fault" thing was more that we generally strive to include as much coverage on the franchise as we can, and icons are a very usual thing for us to include a complete set of in galleries (even just regarding sprites in Mario Kart, I'm pretty sure we have every single course icon from all the other Mario Kart games, not to mention [[emblem]]s, [[Lists of sponsors|sponsors]], etc.). I don't think the repetitiveness of Mario Kart Tour's icons (which is Nintendo's fault) is a good reason for us to not do the same as we usually do with this game. {{User:Hewer/sig}} 12:36, May 14, 2024 (EDT) | ||
:::::::::::”Nintendo did not put this together. They did not create these icons with the intent of them being lumped together in a gallery anywhere. ''We'' did that.”<br>Then again, Nintendo also didn’t evolve Mario into an expansive franchise with the intent of having it documented by fans on MarioWiki. We are the architects of that endeavor. What Nintendo’s intent was with any given part of this franchise shouldn’t be germane to this site’s purposes. {{User:Koopa con Carne/Sig}} 06:49, May 16, 2024 (EDT) | |||
Had an idea. What are y'all — on both sides here — y'all's thoughts on making an article {{fake link|List of course icons in ''Mario Kart Tour''}}, or maybe {{fake link|Gallery:''Mario Kart Tour''/Course icons}} or something, which could have subheaders for all the courses, maybe even the different variants of the courses. Then, we can easily stick a "see also" template into those gallery sections, linked to the section on that course in that article, and can trim down the images to put less of a strain on bandwidth. [[User:Ahemtoday|Ahemtoday]] ([[User talk:Ahemtoday|talk]]) 15:17, May 13, 2024 (EDT) | Had an idea. What are y'all — on both sides here — y'all's thoughts on making an article {{fake link|List of course icons in ''Mario Kart Tour''}}, or maybe {{fake link|Gallery:''Mario Kart Tour''/Course icons}} or something, which could have subheaders for all the courses, maybe even the different variants of the courses. Then, we can easily stick a "see also" template into those gallery sections, linked to the section on that course in that article, and can trim down the images to put less of a strain on bandwidth. [[User:Ahemtoday|Ahemtoday]] ([[User talk:Ahemtoday|talk]]) 15:17, May 13, 2024 (EDT) | ||
Line 185: | Line 251: | ||
:::Who's making the judgement calls that it's "useful" to have [[SNES Rainbow Road#Course icons|the exact same icon of SNES Rainbow Road with Rosalina in front of it, followed by the exact same icon of SNES Rainbow Road with a Shy Guy in front of it, followed by the exact same icon of SNES Rainbow Road with Metal Mario in front of it, followed by the exact same icon of SNES Rainbow Road with Ice Mario in front of it, followed by the exact same icon of SNES Rainbow Road with Lemmy in front of it, followed by the exact same icon of SNES Rainbow Road with Rosalina ''in a Tanuki costume'' in front of it, only to repeat this cycle again for the R, T, and R/T variants of the track]]? Be honest with yourself--what information do you actually gain from this that a simpler version of this couldn't already tell you? That Rosalina, Shy Guy, Metal Mario, Ice Mario, Lemmy, and Tanuki Rosalina are all in ''Tour''? On the article made for SNES Rainbow Road, where if you wanted to know the roster, you'd probably be searching for that instead? If we had a lower-end computer, we'd want to see images for SNES Rainbow Road first and foremost--not images of the cast of Mario Kart Tour that just kinda happen to feature the exact same images of SNES Rainbow Road as only half of the image. {{User:Camwoodstock/sig}} 12:39, May 14, 2024 (EDT) | :::Who's making the judgement calls that it's "useful" to have [[SNES Rainbow Road#Course icons|the exact same icon of SNES Rainbow Road with Rosalina in front of it, followed by the exact same icon of SNES Rainbow Road with a Shy Guy in front of it, followed by the exact same icon of SNES Rainbow Road with Metal Mario in front of it, followed by the exact same icon of SNES Rainbow Road with Ice Mario in front of it, followed by the exact same icon of SNES Rainbow Road with Lemmy in front of it, followed by the exact same icon of SNES Rainbow Road with Rosalina ''in a Tanuki costume'' in front of it, only to repeat this cycle again for the R, T, and R/T variants of the track]]? Be honest with yourself--what information do you actually gain from this that a simpler version of this couldn't already tell you? That Rosalina, Shy Guy, Metal Mario, Ice Mario, Lemmy, and Tanuki Rosalina are all in ''Tour''? On the article made for SNES Rainbow Road, where if you wanted to know the roster, you'd probably be searching for that instead? If we had a lower-end computer, we'd want to see images for SNES Rainbow Road first and foremost--not images of the cast of Mario Kart Tour that just kinda happen to feature the exact same images of SNES Rainbow Road as only half of the image. {{User:Camwoodstock/sig}} 12:39, May 14, 2024 (EDT) | ||
::::It's not about usefulness, it's about completeness. [[User:Doc von Schmeltwick|Doc von Schmeltwick]] ([[User talk:Doc von Schmeltwick|talk]]) 12:47, May 14, 2024 (EDT) | ::::It's not about usefulness, it's about completeness. [[User:Doc von Schmeltwick|Doc von Schmeltwick]] ([[User talk:Doc von Schmeltwick|talk]]) 12:47, May 14, 2024 (EDT) | ||
:::::This wiki would be about 500 times larger than it already is if we were focused on "completeness" for everything. "Completeness" would suggest uploading all assets from a single game, including all sprites, textures, and text dump, to make coverage of a game "complete". That's not what we do. The images we upload and display on the pages all serve some sort of '''use''' for the reader. Even if you have a gallery with a TON of screenshots, each one is still '''useful''' because it shows off different aspects of the game or subject. These course images are all the same, but with a random character art slapped on top of it that doesn't actually mean anything useful to the reader. [[User:Shadow2|Shadow2]] ([[User talk:Shadow2|talk]]) 19:19, May 14, 2024 (EDT) | |||
::::@Nintendo101: By that logic, to include information in the wiki at all and present it in a logical form is a subjective judgement call. Including information ''is'' the default on Super Mario Wiki, as is presenting it well, and when it comes to images, [[MarioWiki:Galleries|galleries]] are a long-established way to do so.<br>@Camwoodstock: What the icons for a course look like (i.e. the very images used in the game to represent them) are absolutely relevant to that course. There's nothing they're more relevant to. The information it tells you is what characters they chose to use to represent the course. You finding that information boring doesn't reduce its validity as information. And I've already repeatedly argued the "lower-end computer" point, but ok I'll say it again: [[MarioWiki:Article size|just split the gallery like we always do]]. {{User:Hewer/sig}} 12:50, May 14, 2024 (EDT) | ::::@Nintendo101: By that logic, to include information in the wiki at all and present it in a logical form is a subjective judgement call. Including information ''is'' the default on Super Mario Wiki, as is presenting it well, and when it comes to images, [[MarioWiki:Galleries|galleries]] are a long-established way to do so.<br>@Camwoodstock: What the icons for a course look like (i.e. the very images used in the game to represent them) are absolutely relevant to that course. There's nothing they're more relevant to. The information it tells you is what characters they chose to use to represent the course. You finding that information boring doesn't reduce its validity as information. And I've already repeatedly argued the "lower-end computer" point, but ok I'll say it again: [[MarioWiki:Article size|just split the gallery like we always do]]. {{User:Hewer/sig}} 12:50, May 14, 2024 (EDT) | ||
:::::We're not saying "remove the icons entirely", we're saying that we shouldn't be excessive about them. All your average reader is going to want or need is exactly one variant--one for the base version, one for the R version, one for the T version, and one for the R/T version. We don't need 6 icons of the base version, 6 icons of the R version, 4 icons of the T version, and then 7 icons of the R/T version, where the only thing different between those copies is how much King Boo (Gold) they happen to include along the way. You could trim down the SNES Rainbow Road gallery to just the 3 versions with base Rosalina and the 1 version with Baby Rosalina, and you would properly showcase all four icons just as well as you do by including all 23 of them. {{User:Camwoodstock/sig}} 13:01, May 14, 2024 (EDT) | :::::We're not saying "remove the icons entirely", we're saying that we shouldn't be excessive about them. All your average reader is going to want or need is exactly one variant--one for the base version, one for the R version, one for the T version, and one for the R/T version. We don't need 6 icons of the base version, 6 icons of the R version, 4 icons of the T version, and then 7 icons of the R/T version, where the only thing different between those copies is how much King Boo (Gold) they happen to include along the way. You could trim down the SNES Rainbow Road gallery to just the 3 versions with base Rosalina and the 1 version with Baby Rosalina, and you would properly showcase all four icons just as well as you do by including all 23 of them. {{User:Camwoodstock/sig}} 13:01, May 14, 2024 (EDT) | ||
Line 198: | Line 265: | ||
::::::I know the proposal won't delete the icons (though some supporters clearly do want that, while others don't seem to), but what it will do is have the wiki go out of its way to hinder its presentation of these icons for no good reason. I see no reason to define "your average reader" and pander to this non-existent person's supposed needs - that just feels like a more complex way of saying what you personally want to happen. "Your average reader" probably isn't interested in many, many, many things on this wiki, but that doesn't make their inclusion invalid, because another reader might go seeking those things. If the reader doesn't find something interesting, they're free to ignore it, that's not our problem. Our goal as a wiki isn't to only include the stuff we subjectively deem interesting, but to provide complete coverage on the whole franchise so any reader can find the information they seek about the franchise, whatever it may be. {{User:Hewer/sig}} 13:21, May 14, 2024 (EDT) | ::::::I know the proposal won't delete the icons (though some supporters clearly do want that, while others don't seem to), but what it will do is have the wiki go out of its way to hinder its presentation of these icons for no good reason. I see no reason to define "your average reader" and pander to this non-existent person's supposed needs - that just feels like a more complex way of saying what you personally want to happen. "Your average reader" probably isn't interested in many, many, many things on this wiki, but that doesn't make their inclusion invalid, because another reader might go seeking those things. If the reader doesn't find something interesting, they're free to ignore it, that's not our problem. Our goal as a wiki isn't to only include the stuff we subjectively deem interesting, but to provide complete coverage on the whole franchise so any reader can find the information they seek about the franchise, whatever it may be. {{User:Hewer/sig}} 13:21, May 14, 2024 (EDT) | ||
:::::::The current state of [[Gallery:Mario Kart Tour course icons]] is a hindrance to the presentation of this wiki, if not an outright disaster. I've removed just the course icons as a test[https://www.mariowiki.com/index.php?title=Gallery:Mario_Kart_Tour_course_icons&diff=4211579&oldid=4161703], which entails in subtracting '''−142,842''' bytes of content and it's not text-based. {{User:Mario/sig}} 18:20, May 14, 2024 (EDT) | |||
::::::::I don't understand what the "presentation of this wiki" entails here. Not only is the gallery not displayed up-front when you access mariowiki.com, it is relatively obscure--you'd normally have to dig your way through a couple of pages first to get there, unless you directly type its title in the search bar, which implies knowing of its existence beforehand. Furthermore, there's a point to be made that the gallery could further be split into "landscape icons" (the ones you see in in-game profile windows) and "course icons" (the ones you tap on when you're browsing the cups). Coin rush and bonus challenge icons can be removed from that gallery and kept on specialized articles ([[Coin Rush (Mario Kart Tour)]], [[Ring Race]] etc.) I really don't like how slow that page is either, but let's not immediately jump to such drastic solutions. There are ways to make this work. {{User:Koopa con Carne/Sig}} 18:34, May 14, 2024 (EDT) | |||
::::::::...Maybe split [[Gallery:Mario Kart Tour course icons]] even further based on which game they originated from (e.g. {{fake link|Gallery:Mario Kart Tour icons for Mario Kart Wii courses}})? {{User:Arend/sig}} 18:46, May 14, 2024 (EDT) | |||
:::::::::Excuse me. We are hosting an "[https://www.mariowiki.com/index.php?title=MarioWiki:Proposals&diff=4211591&oldid=4211590 asset dump]"? Why? - [[User:Nintendo101|Nintendo101]] ([[User talk:Nintendo101|talk]]) 19:34, May 14, 2024 (EDT) | |||
::::::::::Yes? Do you have a point bringing that up? {{User:Koopa con Carne/Sig}} 19:38, May 14, 2024 (EDT) | |||
::::::::::I genuinely wasn't aware "asset dump" is an actual term that defines a slightly more specialized thing than the one I was describing. I used it in a very literal sense: that gallery, whether or not it's worth keeping around, is a dumping ground of in-game assets. I can't argue with that. Then again, most galleries on this site fulfil a similar purpose, so I don't really see the outrage surrounding its existence. {{User:Koopa con Carne/Sig}} 20:00, May 14, 2024 (EDT) | |||
:::::::::::That's okay. I responded with surprise because, in my experience at least, asset dumps have negative connotations for curatorial projects like wikis, encyclopedias, etc. They are not tied to comprehensiveness or to provide information. They are aggregations for aggregations' sake. If that is something you feel should be supported on the wiki, that's fair, but I don't think that is the active standard. Users have removed sound files, quotes, ''Mario Party'' minigame textures, etc. without this kind of pushback. The only place where that could be be appropriate are dedicated depositories like the Spriters-Resource, and I wouldn't even call them asset dumps. They are beautifully organized and easy to navigate. | |||
:::::::::::Super Mario Wiki is not the only site I help edit and curate. In my experience, trimming is just part of the process, and it really bothers me that it is being treated as an objective wrong. Wanting to keep the ''Tour'' galleries is one thing. Asserting that removing any of these images compromises the "completeness" of the site is just not true. - [[User:Nintendo101|Nintendo101]] ([[User talk:Nintendo101|talk]]) 20:26, May 14, 2024 (EDT) | |||
::::::::::::I don’t think anyone here is arguing that trimming content into something neater is objectively wrong. Some are simply saying that putting these dedicated course icons into course pages is the intuitive thing to do, but that’s repeating the same talking point over and over. What I fundamentally disagree with is the notion that this site cannot have designated spaces for the aggregation of content, like images or quotes, with some users going as far as to advocate removing these icons altogether for reasons that range from subjective (“I don’t like them because they’re too repetitive”) to arbitrary and plainly wrong (“they occupy too much space on the server”-they all make up less than 300mb spread among thousands of thumbnails measuring kilobytes, a tiny amount in a sea of upwards to [[Special:MediaStatistics|80,000MB]] worth of media files) {{User:Koopa con Carne/Sig}} 06:40, May 16, 2024 (EDT) | |||
::::::::Just to be completely clear in case there's any doubt, Gallery:Mario Kart Tour course icons will not be affected by this proposal. Only the galleries on course pages will. {{User:Hewer/sig}} 02:58, May 15, 2024 (EDT) | |||
:::::::::Ok, I knew that, I just didn't like that people thought that it would. The gallery's not the problem, and neither is the Kanaami Road page. [[User:SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)|SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)]] ([[User talk:SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)|talk]]) 08:28, May 15, 2024 (EDT) | |||
I put together a proof of concept on one way to handle this proposal in [[User:SolemnStormcloud/Sandbox#Wii Mushroom Gorge|my sandbox]]. It uses {{tem|main-gallery}} to link to the appropriate section of [[Gallery:Mario Kart Tour course icons]] as smoothly as possible. [[User:SolemnStormcloud|SolemnStormcloud]] ([[User talk:SolemnStormcloud|talk]]) 13:38, May 14, 2024 (EDT) | I put together a proof of concept on one way to handle this proposal in [[User:SolemnStormcloud/Sandbox#Wii Mushroom Gorge|my sandbox]]. It uses {{tem|main-gallery}} to link to the appropriate section of [[Gallery:Mario Kart Tour course icons]] as smoothly as possible. [[User:SolemnStormcloud|SolemnStormcloud]] ([[User talk:SolemnStormcloud|talk]]) 13:38, May 14, 2024 (EDT) | ||
:Seems like a good workaround if icons get trimmed down from course pages. I like that. {{User:Koopa con Carne/Sig}} 14:16, May 14, 2024 (EDT) | :Seems like a good workaround if icons get trimmed down from course pages. I like that. {{User:Koopa con Carne/Sig}} 14:16, May 14, 2024 (EDT) | ||
::I like it. [[User:SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)|SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)]] ([[User talk:SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)|talk]]) 14:19, May 14, 2024 (EDT) | ::I like it. [[User:SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)|SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)]] ([[User talk:SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)|talk]]) 14:19, May 14, 2024 (EDT) | ||
:::Unfortunately, see my comment regarding Gallery:Mario Kart Tour course icons. {{User:Mario/sig}} 18:32, May 14, 2024 (EDT) | |||
::::See my comment there. [[User:SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)|SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)]] ([[User talk:SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)|talk]]) 08:28, May 15, 2024 (EDT) | |||
::Love it! Exactly what I envisioned. [[User:Shadow2|Shadow2]] ([[User talk:Shadow2|talk]]) 19:11, May 14, 2024 (EDT) | |||
::Yeah, that looks like an alright compromise. {{User:Hewer/sig}} 02:58, May 15, 2024 (EDT) | |||
Ok,this is getting to be very crazy! [[User:SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)|SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)]] ([[User talk:SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)|talk]]) 13:41, May 14, 2024 (EDT) | Ok,this is getting to be very crazy! [[User:SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)|SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)]] ([[User talk:SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)|talk]]) 13:41, May 14, 2024 (EDT) | ||
:100kb JPEGs are no laughing matter! {{User:Koopa con Carne/Sig}} 14:31, May 14, 2024 (EDT) | :100kb JPEGs are no laughing matter! {{User:Koopa con Carne/Sig}} 14:31, May 14, 2024 (EDT) | ||
::I never said it was! [[User:SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)|SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)]] ([[User talk:SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)|talk]]) 08:28, May 15, 2024 (EDT) | |||
I've seen The Spriters Resource be brought up in these comments, and it was the first thing I thought of when I saw Gallery:Mario Kart Tour course icons, but on the ''Mario Kart Tour'' Spriters Resource page, I don't think there's actually a place for course icons, not even in a ZIP file. That would make the wiki's gallery page the most easily accessible repository for those sprites on the Internet, to my knowledge; whether or not that's a good thing is up to interpretation. Also, this is off-topic, but Gallery:Mario Kart Tour course icons and Category:Mario Kart Tour track icons have different names, and it's driving me crazy!! [[File:Crazy Wario.png|32px]] {{User:ThePowerPlayer/sig}} 21:47, May 15, 2024 (EDT) | |||
:Wary of delving further into tangential topics, but given "course" is the official terminology, the category is the one that has to change. Unfortunately, since that's way more difficult to change on all of 'em. Might have to get a bot on that... [[User:Ahemtoday|Ahemtoday]] ([[User talk:Ahemtoday|talk]]) 00:03, May 17, 2024 (EDT) | |||
==Changes== | ==Changes== | ||
===Create <nowiki>{{</nowiki>{{fake link|DLC infobox|Template:DLC infobox}}<nowiki>}}</nowiki> template=== | ===Create <nowiki>{{</nowiki>{{fake link|DLC infobox|Template:DLC infobox}}<nowiki>}}</nowiki> template=== | ||
The ''Super Mario'' DLC articles are missing a <code><nowiki>{{</nowiki>{{fake link|DLC infobox|Template:DLC infobox}}<nowiki>}}</nowiki></code> template. I was just wondering if there's a possibility to create the <code><nowiki>{{DLC infobox}}</nowiki></code> template. The following parameters are as follows: | The ''Super Mario'' DLC articles are missing a <code><nowiki>{{</nowiki>{{fake link|DLC infobox|Template:DLC infobox}}<nowiki>}}</nowiki></code> template. I was just wondering if there's a possibility to create the <code><nowiki>{{DLC infobox}}</nowiki></code> template. The following parameters are as follows: | ||
Line 439: | Line 318: | ||
#{{User|Arend}} Per all. | #{{User|Arend}} Per all. | ||
#{{User|EvieMaybe}} per all. better to have it now than to need it later down the line | #{{User|EvieMaybe}} per all. better to have it now than to need it later down the line | ||
#{{User|Jazama}} Per all | |||
#{{User|SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)}} Wow, we don't have this? MAKE IT! | |||
#{{User|Sparks}} I like the sound of this! | |||
====Oppose==== | ====Oppose==== | ||
Line 446: | Line 328: | ||
:Then do you have any better ideas than create the <code><nowiki>{{DLC infobox}}</nowiki></code>? {{User:GuntherBB/sig}} 11:52, May 12, 2024 (EDT) | :Then do you have any better ideas than create the <code><nowiki>{{DLC infobox}}</nowiki></code>? {{User:GuntherBB/sig}} 11:52, May 12, 2024 (EDT) | ||
::...I don't think they were implying that a DLC infobox is a bad idea... at all. All they were saying (aside from complaining about the Smash FLC redirects) was that the Coin Rush DLC packs could implement a DLC infobox as well (which I'm unsure about, given that {{tem|NSMB2 pack infobox}} already exists), and that only ''New Super Luigi U'' doesn't need it since it's got a standalone physical release. {{User:Arend/sig}} 12:03, May 12, 2024 (EDT) | ::...I don't think they were implying that a DLC infobox is a bad idea... at all. All they were saying (aside from complaining about the Smash FLC redirects) was that the Coin Rush DLC packs could implement a DLC infobox as well (which I'm unsure about, given that {{tem|NSMB2 pack infobox}} already exists), and that only ''New Super Luigi U'' doesn't need it since it's got a standalone physical release. {{User:Arend/sig}} 12:03, May 12, 2024 (EDT) | ||
:::How about we use {{tem|game infobox}} instead of <nowiki>{{DLC infobox}}</nowiki>? Would that be a better idea? {{User:GuntherBB/sig}} 22:44, May 14, 2024 (EDT) | |||
::::You still misunderstand, no one in these comments is against the DLC infobox idea. {{User:Hewer/sig}} 03:04, May 15, 2024 (EDT) | |||
I'm starting to feel that GuntherBayBee is posing these questions purely to drum up more engagement in his proposals. It's not exactly the same as [[Special:Diff/4161234|stating to think about voting for an option they already voted for from the beginning]] or [[Special:Diff/4166018|literally asking people that engaged in the comments what option they're voting for]], but in all cases, it was preceded by a lack of engagement in his proposal (although, in this case, it's more because this proposal is sandwiched inbetween several proposals with way more engagement than one could wish for). I would otherwise have no idea why he's trying to bargain different ideas when people are literally ''unanimously agreeing with his DLC infobox idea'' (with not a single opposing vote so far), unless he's ''really bad'' at reading. {{User:Arend/sig}} 10:38, May 15, 2024 (EDT) | |||
:Yeah, same here. [[User:SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)|SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)]] ([[User talk:SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)|talk]]) 10:52, May 15, 2024 (EDT) | |||
===Split the Super Mario universe and the Paper Mario universe=== | ===Split the Super Mario universe and the Paper Mario universe=== | ||
Line 468: | Line 354: | ||
#{{User|LadySophie17}} Per all. | #{{User|LadySophie17}} Per all. | ||
#{{User|SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)}} Well, it's either this, merge the Paper Mario characters into their OG versions like the 1990's Live-Action Mario Movie counterparts, re-split said counterparts, or keep as-is, and that's not even factoring in ALL THE OTHER COUNTERPARTS! | #{{User|SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)}} Well, it's either this, merge the Paper Mario characters into their OG versions like the 1990's Live-Action Mario Movie counterparts, re-split said counterparts, or keep as-is, and that's not even factoring in ALL THE OTHER COUNTERPARTS! | ||
#{{User|Jazama}} Per all | |||
#{{User|TheFlameChomp}} Per all. | |||
#{{User|Ray Trace}} Per Hewer. | |||
====Comments==== | ====Comments==== | ||
Line 516: | Line 405: | ||
#{{User|LadySophie17}} That really doesn't belong there. | #{{User|LadySophie17}} That really doesn't belong there. | ||
#{{User|SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)}} Yeah, no. We might as well take the stance of Sega on Sonic's canon, "Everything is canon". Then again, in the words of {{@|janMisali}}, "How do we know what's mainline?" That only talked about video games, but also could apply to non-games, but I think we need to play safe, so oppose. | #{{User|SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)}} Yeah, no. We might as well take the stance of Sega on Sonic's canon, "Everything is canon". Then again, in the words of {{@|janMisali}}, "How do we know what's mainline?" That only talked about video games, but also could apply to non-games, but I think we need to play safe, so oppose. | ||
#{{User|Jazama}} Per all | |||
#{{User|TheFlameChomp}} Per all. | |||
====Comments==== | ====Comments==== | ||
Line 547: | Line 438: | ||
#{{User|Arend}} I assume the same thing as the rest here and believe this is only about how we list ports/remakes/other reissues on series pages, to which I have to agree with the rest of the opposition: it's best we do not treat these rereleases on the same level as a mainline franchise entry. Nintendo doesn't seem to do that either if the whole [[:File:SMR Notifications 2023-12-20 excerpt.jpg|Mario Wonder being the first sidescroller entry in 11 years]] thing is anything to go by (''[[New Super Mario Bros. U Deluxe]]'' was released only 4 years prior). If we did, it would only look disorganized. (Also, I ''pray'' this proposal isn't talking about rerelease ''pages'' being merged to their original counterpart, which is even worse) | #{{User|Arend}} I assume the same thing as the rest here and believe this is only about how we list ports/remakes/other reissues on series pages, to which I have to agree with the rest of the opposition: it's best we do not treat these rereleases on the same level as a mainline franchise entry. Nintendo doesn't seem to do that either if the whole [[:File:SMR Notifications 2023-12-20 excerpt.jpg|Mario Wonder being the first sidescroller entry in 11 years]] thing is anything to go by (''[[New Super Mario Bros. U Deluxe]]'' was released only 4 years prior). If we did, it would only look disorganized. (Also, I ''pray'' this proposal isn't talking about rerelease ''pages'' being merged to their original counterpart, which is even worse) | ||
#{{User|Sdman213}} Per all. | #{{User|Sdman213}} Per all. | ||
#{{User|Jazama}} Per all | |||
#{{User|TheFlameChomp}} Per all. | |||
#{{User|Mario}} Bad proposal, poorly written and probably breaks several rules we have on the wiki anyway. | |||
#{{User|Ray Trace}} No idea why the comments section has blown completely off the rails in regards to the aim of this proposal but per the opposition. | |||
#{{User|Pseudo}} Per all. | |||
====Comments==== | ====Comments==== | ||
Line 566: | Line 462: | ||
@Hewer, @SONIC123CDMANIA: | @Hewer, @SONIC123CDMANIA: | ||
I didnt mean that every Mario game should be in the same category. No. There are lots of Super Mario Bros. games that aren't canon. That's why I said Mainline games should all be in a category. Ports, Remakes Remaster, Collections included. There's also a special example. What about Bowser's Fury. | I didnt mean that every Mario game should be in the same category. No. There are lots of Super Mario Bros. games that aren't canon. That's why I said Mainline games should all be in a category. Ports, Remakes Remaster, Collections included. There's also a special example. What about Bowser's Fury. ? It's a new Adventure, but it is listed under Ports, Remakes, etc. Other games or Spin offs should be in a different category. [[User:Big Super Mario Fan|Big Super Mario Fan]] ([[User talk:Big Super Mario Fan|talk]]) 16:57, May 13, 2024 (EDT) | ||
? It's a new Adventure, but it is listed under Ports, Remakes, etc. Other games or Spin offs should be in a different category. | |||
[[User:Big Super Mario Fan|Big Super Mario Fan]] ([[User talk:Big Super Mario Fan|talk]]) 16:57, May 13, 2024 (EDT) | |||
:I don't remember anyone saying anything at all about other games or spin-offs, or even remotely implying that "every Mario game should be in the same category", so I have no idea where you're getting that from. And whether something is "canon" is never a factor in anything on this website, regarding both this and the Paper Mario proposal I again strongly suggest you read [[MarioWiki:Canonicity]]. {{User:Hewer/sig}} 17:07, May 13, 2024 (EDT) | :I don't remember anyone saying anything at all about other games or spin-offs, or even remotely implying that "every Mario game should be in the same category", so I have no idea where you're getting that from. And whether something is "canon" is never a factor in anything on this website, regarding both this and the Paper Mario proposal I again strongly suggest you read [[MarioWiki:Canonicity]]. {{User:Hewer/sig}} 17:07, May 13, 2024 (EDT) | ||
:@Big Super Mario Fan: What has certain games not being canon have to do with ports and remakes of mainline titles? No one has said anything about which games are being canon or not in this discussion until you brought. Hell, no one in this discussion has even ''uttered'' the word "canon" before you did (and as you can see, you bringing up canon has brought on a whole different discussion that completely undermines the original topic of the proposal).<br>Truthfully, bringing up canonicity in this discussion about regarding rereleases as equal to the originals (i.e. putting them in the exact same lists and categories as if they're standalone games), would imply that you view ''all'' ports, remakes, remasters, etc. as canon... which muddies the water even more on what could be regarded as canon or not, since certain remakes and rereleases actually provide different or additional content that isn't found in the original version, bringing into the discussion which version is canon and which version is not. See ''[[Captain Toad: Treasure Tracker]]'', for instance: the original Wii U version clearly precedes ''[[Super Mario 3D World]]'', but the [[Captain Toad: Treasure Tracker (Nintendo Switch / Nintendo 3DS)|Switch/3DS rerelease]] precedes ''[[Super Mario Odyssey]]'' instead. Which version of Treasure Tracker is canon, then? That's not even saying about the DLC for the Switch version, which precedes ''[[New Super Mario Bros. U Deluxe]]'', a rerelease of ''[[New Super Mario Bros. U]]'' that should be even older than 3D World ''and'' Odyssey. What is the timeline here?<br>This is why [[MarioWiki:Canonicity]] states that there's no officially recognized canon. Everyone has their own interpretation of what is canon and what is not canon, and changes into rereleases of mainline titles make that matter even more complicated. {{User:Arend/sig}} 12:26, May 14, 2024 (EDT) | :@Big Super Mario Fan: What has certain games not being canon have to do with ports and remakes of mainline titles? No one has said anything about which games are being canon or not in this discussion until you brought. Hell, no one in this discussion has even ''uttered'' the word "canon" before you did (and as you can see, you bringing up canon has brought on a whole different discussion that completely undermines the original topic of the proposal).<br>Truthfully, bringing up canonicity in this discussion about regarding rereleases as equal to the originals (i.e. putting them in the exact same lists and categories as if they're standalone games), would imply that you view ''all'' ports, remakes, remasters, etc. as canon... which muddies the water even more on what could be regarded as canon or not, since certain remakes and rereleases actually provide different or additional content that isn't found in the original version, bringing into the discussion which version is canon and which version is not. See ''[[Captain Toad: Treasure Tracker]]'', for instance: the original Wii U version clearly precedes ''[[Super Mario 3D World]]'', but the [[Captain Toad: Treasure Tracker (Nintendo Switch / Nintendo 3DS)|Switch/3DS rerelease]] precedes ''[[Super Mario Odyssey]]'' instead. Which version of Treasure Tracker is canon, then? That's not even saying about the DLC for the Switch version, which precedes ''[[New Super Mario Bros. U Deluxe]]'', a rerelease of ''[[New Super Mario Bros. U]]'' that should be even older than 3D World ''and'' Odyssey. What is the timeline here?<br>This is why [[MarioWiki:Canonicity]] states that there's no officially recognized canon. Everyone has their own interpretation of what is canon and what is not canon, and changes into rereleases of mainline titles make that matter even more complicated. {{User:Arend/sig}} 12:26, May 14, 2024 (EDT) | ||
@ | :{{@|Big Super Mario Fan}} I never said anything about ALL Mario games. [[User:SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)|SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)]] ([[User talk:SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)|talk]]) 08:38, May 15, 2024 (EDT) | ||
[[User:Big Super Mario Fan|Big Super Mario Fan]] ([[User talk:Big Super Mario Fan|talk]]) 19:21, May 13, 2024 (EDT) Big Super Mario Fan | @Hewer: I read the Canonicity article. But I think's that's not good. Because there definitiv is a canon in Mario. Not only that but there is a Mario multiverse with at least 8 different Mario universes in it. 1. Mario (Super Mario Mainline games + Spin offs) 2. Paper Mario (Paper Mario series) 3. Mario (Mario + Rabbids series) 4. Mario (Super Smash Bros. series) 5. Mario (Animated Movies) 6. Mario (Live-Action movie) 7. Mario (Cartoons) 8. Mario (Comics). There could be even more. [[User:Big Super Mario Fan|Big Super Mario Fan]] ([[User talk:Big Super Mario Fan|talk]]) 19:21, May 13, 2024 (EDT) Big Super Mario Fan | ||
:The fact is, the canonicity article is how this wiki operates, period. There's no way in hell we're gonna start screwing up this wiki's manner of coverage just because certain things might not happen in the same universe. {{User:Nightwicked Bowser/sig}} 19:39, May 13, 2024 (EDT) | :The fact is, the canonicity article is how this wiki operates, period. There's no way in hell we're gonna start screwing up this wiki's manner of coverage just because certain things might not happen in the same universe. {{User:Nightwicked Bowser/sig}} 19:39, May 13, 2024 (EDT) | ||
:loooooooooooooooool where are you even getting these numbers from [[User:Doc von Schmeltwick|Doc von Schmeltwick]] ([[User talk:Doc von Schmeltwick|talk]]) 19:43, May 13, 2024 (EDT) | :loooooooooooooooool where are you even getting these numbers from [[User:Doc von Schmeltwick|Doc von Schmeltwick]] ([[User talk:Doc von Schmeltwick|talk]]) 19:43, May 13, 2024 (EDT) | ||
:You know, the sentence right after the boldened one stating that there's no officially recognized canon (the sencence you're arguing against) states ''"Therefore, arguments over canonicity (canon vs. non-canon) are purely speculative, and are of no importance to wiki articles."'' Your argument about there not only being a definitive canon (which you haven't elaborated on yet), but there being at least eight different Mario universes in a Mario multiverse, ''is exactly that kind of purely speculative that the Canonicity page was talking about''. I'm not even sure if Nintendo would currently recognize several of these as part of their franchise (throwing muck in that whole multiverse idea of yours), such as "live-action movies" (there's only one of those btw) or "comics" (there's the German Club Nintendo comics and the Nintendo Comics System of Valiant btw, I doubt these share a universe). They sure don't recognize ''[[Hotel Mario]]'' as part of it.<br>Moreover, I'm not interested to, for instance, split the Mario page into several different articles that each describe a different incarnation of the character, if your Paper Mario proposal indicates anything. It'd be simpler and more organized to keep it all in [[History of Mario|one article]]. {{User:Arend/sig}} 20:11, May 13, 2024 (EDT) | :You know, the sentence right after the boldened one stating that there's no officially recognized canon (the sencence you're arguing against) states ''"Therefore, arguments over canonicity (canon vs. non-canon) are purely speculative, and are of no importance to wiki articles."'' Your argument about there not only being a definitive canon (which you haven't elaborated on yet), but there being at least eight different Mario universes in a Mario multiverse, ''is exactly that kind of purely speculative that the Canonicity page was talking about''. I'm not even sure if Nintendo would currently recognize several of these as part of their franchise (throwing muck in that whole multiverse idea of yours), such as "live-action movies" (there's only one of those btw) or "comics" (there's the German Club Nintendo comics and the Nintendo Comics System of Valiant btw, I doubt these share a universe). They sure don't recognize ''[[Hotel Mario]]'' as part of it.<br>Moreover, I'm not interested to, for instance, split the Mario page into several different articles that each describe a different incarnation of the character, if your Paper Mario proposal indicates anything. It'd be simpler and more organized to keep it all in [[History of Mario|one article]]. {{User:Arend/sig}} 20:11, May 13, 2024 (EDT) | ||
:Live action? You mean the 1990's one? That's a multiverse in & of itself! The cartoons, comics, AND animated movies are also multiverses in & of themselves! [[User:SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)|SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)]] ([[User talk:SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)|talk]]) 08:38, May 15, 2024 (EDT) | |||
@Arend: | @Arend: I eleberate on the definitive Mario canon (the 1st, main Mario universe). It consists of: | ||
*Super Mario Mainline games (2D & 3D) | |||
*Mario & Luigi series | |||
*Mario Kart series | |||
*Mario Party series | |||
*Mario Tennis series | |||
*Mario Golf series | |||
*Mario vs. Donkey Kong series | |||
*Luigi's Mansion series | |||
*Yoshi's Island series | |||
*Captain Toad: Treasure Tracker | |||
*Super Princess Peach | |||
It's not speculative at all. Those are all heavyly implied things. Some are even semi-confirmed. Comics and Movies are different universes than the Game universes. It wouldn't be good if it's all one one page. Because than people think there is only one Mario. Which is not the case at all. Also there is already a Paper Mario page. But just for Mario & Luigi: Paper Jam. This page could be used for the Paper Mario series. [[User:Big Super Mario Fan|Big Super Mario Fan]] ([[User talk:Big Super Mario Fan|talk]]) 20:34, May 13, 2024 (EDT) | |||
:"Because than people think there is only one Mario. Which is not the case at all." ...there. ''Is.'' Though. This is quite literally what the Canonicity guidelines mean when they say "baseless speculation"--Mario in Mario Golf isn't a different character from Mario in Mario Tennis. Even if we wanted to go along with this when we already moved away from the "Marioverse" term as far back as 2007, this doesn't factor in the dozens of lesser spinoffs and side-games--though to be blunt, trying to argue between the how Mario is in some way "different" between [[Mario's Egg Catch]] and [[Mario Super Sluggers]] is beyond an exercise in futility, and would be less than useless. {{User:Camwoodstock/sig}} 20:43, May 13, 2024 (EDT) | |||
::Well...not really? Do we consider Rabbid Mario the same as Mario? [[User:SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)|SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)]] ([[User talk:SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)|talk]]) 08:38, May 15, 2024 (EDT) | |||
:::No, because he's not. We do, however, consider Mario from the Mario + Rabbids games to be Mario, because he is. My guess is that Big Super Mario Fan thinks Mario + Rabbids just features Rabbid Mario instead of normal Mario, but in reality they both appear in the Mario + Rabbids games as completely separate characters, so it's more comparable to [[Paper Mario (character)]] in Paper Jam if anything. {{User:Hewer/sig}} 11:08, May 15, 2024 (EDT) | |||
::::Yeah, true. Though we do have variants of characters that are completely different merged because of intent (and probably other factors I'm missing) with [[Bowser]] & [[President Koopa]] (which as of this writing isn't the case, but will be because a proposal on this passed). [[User:SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)|SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)]] ([[User talk:SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)|talk]]) 11:33, May 15, 2024 (EDT) | |||
:::::The logic there is that President Koopa is just the movie's version of Bowser. The same can't be said about Mario and Rabbid Mario since they're clearly distinct characters that coexist in the same games, like how the Paper Mario character article only covers his Paper Jam appearance because that's the only game where he's a distinct character to normal Mario. {{User:Hewer/sig}} 11:42, May 15, 2024 (EDT) | |||
::::::No, that's not correct. [[User:SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)|SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)]] ([[User talk:SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)|talk]]) 11:53, May 15, 2024 (EDT) | |||
:::::::Yes, it is correct. {{User:Hewer/sig}} 13:52, May 16, 2024 (EDT) | |||
::::No, I think he ''knows'' that Mario and Rabbid Mario appear both in the ''Mario + Rabbids'' games, and only mistakingly called the actual Mario "Rabbid Mario" once: his reasoning for why the ''Mario + Rabbids'' games take place in an alternate universe, as he provided on [[MarioWiki talk:Canonicity#the Mario universe does have a canon, infact there is even a Mario multiverse!|MarioWiki talk:Canonicity]], is an [https://www.gameshub.com/news/features/mario-rabbids-sparks-of-hope-interview-davide-soliani-combat-worlds-22770/ interview with Davide Soliani] (to be fair, the assumption also matches with the intro of ''Kingdom Battle'', when the SupaMerge hits a ''Super Mario'' poster and causes the Rabbids' washing machine to teleport into its world). His reasoning stems from the idea that ''all the Mario characters from those games'' are an alternate version of the mainline characters (not just their Rabbid counterparts), and as he stated both here and on the Canonicity talk page, he wishes to split these incarnations, as well as ''other'' incarnations from the eight (or more) "universes" he provides: which includes not just ''Mario + Rabbids'' and ''Paper Mario'', but also ''Super Smash Bros.'', ''[[The Super Mario Bros. Movie]]'', the 1993 ''[[Super Mario Bros. (film)|Super Mario Bros.]]'' movie, the DiC ''Super Mario'' cartoon shows and "comics".<br>And to me, that is way, WAY worse than thinking Rabbid Mario is the same person as Mario but from another dimension. {{User:Arend/sig}} 11:43, May 15, 2024 (EDT) | |||
:::::Yeah, you have a very good point! Also, I think the "comics" aren't part of the same continuity, which makes things worse (We'd be splitting Super Mario Kun Mario, KC Deluxe Mario, Super Mario Adventures Mario, etc.).[[User:SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)|SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)]] ([[User talk:SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)|talk]]) 11:53, May 15, 2024 (EDT) | |||
::::::Indeed. On the Continuity talk page, Big Super Mario Fan admits he doesn't really know the comics that well, which is why he simply wrote "comics" as one universe instead. I imagine that if he was aware of how many comics there were, he'd want the incarnations of those to be split off too. {{User:Arend/sig}} 12:01, May 15, 2024 (EDT) | |||
:::::::Yes. [[User:SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)|SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)]] ([[User talk:SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)|talk]]) 12:06, May 15, 2024 (EDT) | |||
@Camwoodstock: That's not what I meant. The Mario in Mario Golf and in Mario Tennis is the same. When we talk about games specifically there are 4 different Marios. 1st the Mario who appears in most Mario Games. 2nd Paper Mario who appears in the Paper Mario series. 3rd Mario who appears in the Mario + Rabbids series. 4th Mario who appears in the Super Smash Bros series. [[User:Big Super Mario Fan|Big Super Mario Fan]] ([[User talk:Big Super Mario Fan|talk]]) 20:50, May 13, 2024 (EDT) Big Super Mario Fan | |||
:I'd ask why you insist the ''+ Rabbids'' one is different of all possible options, but the fact is neither I nor anyone else here cares. You're basing this off nothing at all other than your own preconceived notions, which is the very definition of speculation. [[User:Doc von Schmeltwick|Doc von Schmeltwick]] ([[User talk:Doc von Schmeltwick|talk]]) 20:56, May 13, 2024 (EDT) | |||
::He was talking about Rabbid Mario [[User:SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)|SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)]] ([[User talk:SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)|talk]]) 08:38, May 15, 2024 (EDT) | |||
@Doc von Schmeltwick: | |||
To Answer your question. It's not speculation. Obviously there's the Main Mario, where most of his games take place. Than there's Paper Mario, who's confirmed to be a seperate character in Mario & Luigi: Paper Jam. Than there is Smash Bros. Mario who is a toy/trophy brought to live by imagination. Than there's Rabbid Mario, who was created in the Mario + Rabbids series, as seen in the cutscenes of that game. [[User:Big Super Mario Fan|Big Super Mario Fan]] ([[User talk:Big Super Mario Fan|talk]]) 21:08, May 13, 2024 (EDT) | |||
:You didn't say "Rabbid Mario." You said "Mario from Mario + Rabbids." That's not the same thing. [[User:Doc von Schmeltwick|Doc von Schmeltwick]] ([[User talk:Doc von Schmeltwick|talk]]) 22:19, May 13, 2024 (EDT) | |||
::He MEANT RABBID MARIO! [[User:SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)|SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)]] ([[User talk:SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)|talk]]) 08:39, May 15, 2024 (EDT) | |||
"Heavily implied", "semi-confirmed" — these read to me as admissions there isn't proof. We're a wiki. We work with facts, not guesses. [[User:Ahemtoday|Ahemtoday]] ([[User talk:Ahemtoday|talk]]) 22:40, May 13, 2024 (EDT) | |||
:Well, SOME stuff is, but not fully. [[User:SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)|SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)]] ([[User talk:SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)|talk]]) 08:38, May 15, 2024 (EDT) | |||
:Exactly this. There is a time and a place for headcanons and inferences; a matter-of-fact wiki is perhaps the last place you should be putting them. {{User:Camwoodstock/sig}} 22:41, May 13, 2024 (EDT) | |||
::Yeah, better off putting them in either your Userpage, or you User talk page. [[User:SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)|SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)]] ([[User talk:SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)|talk]]) 08:38, May 15, 2024 (EDT) | |||
@Doc von Schmeltwick: I meant Mario from theMario + Rabbids series. [[User:Big Super Mario Fan|Big Super Mario Fan]] ([[User talk:Big Super Mario Fan|talk]]) 22:58, May 13, 2024 (EDT) | |||
:You mean Rabbid Mario. [[User:SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)|SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)]] ([[User talk:SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)|talk]]) 08:38, May 15, 2024 (EDT) | |||
@Ahemtoday: It has something to do with logic. You know milk comes from the cow, when you buy it in the supermarket. Than you wouldn't write it comes from the supermarket. Also there is evidence. Just watch the cutscenes of Super Smash Bros. or Mario + Rabbids and play Mario & Luigi: Paper Jam. [[User:Big Super Mario Fan|Big Super Mario Fan]] ([[User talk:Big Super Mario Fan|talk]]) 22:58, May 13, 2024 (EDT) | |||
:It is very easy to take a single thing, not interrogate it at all, and use "logic" to extrapolate it to everything with no regard for its actual bearing on reality. If I am to be convinced that Mario in a specific set of games is a different character from Mario in some other set, I require nothing less than an official source explicitly stating as such. To my knowledge, nothing like that exists for any of these cases. [[User:Ahemtoday|Ahemtoday]] ([[User talk:Ahemtoday|talk]]) 23:15, May 13, 2024 (EDT) | |||
::Yeah, cutscenes aren't FULLY official sources, developers are. [[User:SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)|SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)]] ([[User talk:SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)|talk]]) 08:38, May 15, 2024 (EDT) | |||
@Ahemtoday: Well at least for Super Smash Bros., there is an official Interview with Satoru Iwata. http://time.com/3747342/nintendo-ceo-satoru-iwata/ [[User:Big Super Mario Fan|Big Super Mario Fan]] ([[User talk:Big Super Mario Fan|talk]]) 23:59, May 13, 2024 (EDT) | |||
I would like to point out that fellow NIWA wiki, the Zelda Wiki, the wiki for ''The Legend of Zelda'' series, which ''definitely'' features different incarnations of Link, Zelda, and various enemies and NPCs, do not split these incarnations in separate articles and keep them all under the same subjects (e.g. there aren't multiple articles on Link or Octorok, despite there being multiple versions of those). I know that our wiki is not the same thing, but if a wiki based on a series with ''100% confirmed'' different incarnations of the main cast doesn't split their articles, then why ''should'' <u>our</u> wiki do this when the series we do cover don't have multiple incarnations of their characters at all (or it's being "implied" or "semi-confirmed" at best)? {{User:Arend/sig}} 01:33, May 14, 2024 (EDT) | |||
:Good point! [[User:SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)|SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)]] ([[User talk:SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)|talk]]) 08:39, May 15, 2024 (EDT) | |||
@Arend: I give you an example. Following your logic. If a man jumps out of a window the man next to him should jump out too. Just because the Zelda Wiki doesn't split their articles, doesn not mean that we should not do this eather. Also in that Interview it's confirmed that the Super Smash Bros. characters are toys. [[User:Big Super Mario Fan|Big Super Mario Fan]] ([[User talk:Big Super Mario Fan|talk]]) 02:20, May 14, 2024 (EDT) | |||
:While it's fair to say that we don't always have to do what other wikis are doing, it's also important to note that we don't always have to do the ''opposite'' of what other wikis are doing, either.<br>I brought up the Zelda Wiki as an example on why your idea doesn't work, because ''The Legend of Zelda'' series is the most obvious example in there being multiple versions of the same characters, that most of the time look ''way'' different in nearly every installment, and yet the Zelda Wiki does not resort to splitting them (it would only be unhandy and complicated, after all.<br>''Super Mario'' isn't like that. At all. Throughout nearly all the "universes" you've determined, Mario looks the same, and his demeanor doesn't really change throughout most of them either. In essence, ''Mario + Rabbids''!Mario is ''identical'' in appearance and behavior to mainline!Mario, so there's no need for a separate article for Mario in ''Mario + Rabbids''. Same goes for ''Mario & Luigi''!Mario, no need to split that off, either. Most other differences throughout these incarnations are really just splitting hairs and superficial, so when even the Zelda franchise doesn't seem worth to split all it's ''actually different'' incarnations into separate articles, then why should ''we'' be splitting hairs here?<br><s>Also I do have to agree with Hewer that we've gone quite off-topic; I'm just throwing my two cents on this multiverse thing you brought up for no reason</s> {{User:Arend/sig}} 11:30, May 14, 2024 (EDT) | |||
:Good point! [[User:SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)|SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)]] ([[User talk:SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)|talk]]) 08:38, May 15, 2024 (EDT) | |||
Y'all, we've gotten ''way'' off track. This proposal isn't even ''about'' universes. [[User:Ahemtoday|Ahemtoday]] ([[User talk:Ahemtoday|talk]]) 03:32, May 14, 2024 (EDT) | |||
:Yes. [[User:SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)|SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)]] ([[User talk:SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)|talk]]) 08:38, May 15, 2024 (EDT) | |||
Ok, {{@|Hewer}} On the SMA4, also a bad example b/c the Wii U version. {{@|Big Super Mario Fan}} First, none of what you say is fully confirmed. Second, even IF there's a multiverse, there would be more universes than what you specified. Third, this doesn't have to do with universes. Fourth, this needs to stop. [[User:SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)|SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)]] ([[User talk:SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)|talk]]) 08:40, May 14, 2024 (EDT) | |||
:Wii U version then, this just feels pedantic at this point. I think I've already made my point there clear enough, though my main point is that this was a meaningless argument not relevant to the proposal. {{User:Hewer/sig}} 12:04, May 14, 2024 (EDT) | |||
::Ok, good point at that, but it did say "ports, remakes, remasters, & collections". {{@|Big Super Mario Fan}} I'm still waiting for a reply here. Unless you've stopped because you've seen the wrongness of your arguments. [[User:SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)|SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)]] ([[User talk:SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)|talk]]) 13:44, May 14, 2024 (EDT) | |||
@Arend: Easy. The games that are not canon should be listed in a different category than the ones that are canon. Regarding Captain Toad: Treasure Tracker. I can answer this as well. Both versions are canon. Here's the timeline. Captain Toad: Treasure Tracker (Wii U) ➡️ Super Mario 3D World (Wii U/Nintendo Switch) ➡️ Captain Toad: Treasure Tracker (Nintendo 3DS/Nintendo Switch) ➡️ Super Mario Odyssey (Nintendo Switch). The 2. Captain Toad adventure (episode) happens in between. New Super Mario Bros. U / New Super Mario Bros. U Deluxe happen at the same time. Before Super Mario 3D World and Super Mario Odyssey. Because Ports or Remakes add content that wasn't in the original release. But it still happened at the same time. For example Mario & Luigi: Superstar Saga and Mario & Luigi: Superstar Saga + Bowser's Minions happens at the same time. The same applies to Mario + Luigi: Bowser's Inside Story and Mario & Luigi: Bowser's Inside Story + Bowser Jr.'s Journey. The Captain Toad: Treasure Tracker Special Episode happens before New Super Mario Bros. U Deluxe, as they find the Super Crown here. [[User:Big Super Mario Fan|Big Super Mario Fan]] ([[User talk:Big Super Mario Fan|talk]]) 17:33, May 14, 2024 (EDT) | |||
:You've kinda just reiterated what Arend was saying with more words, minus the actually important part: that this is pointless speculation that will definitely not be used as a basis for the wiki's organisation. {{User:Hewer/sig}} 17:39, May 14, 2024 (EDT) | |||
:Wait, you're not making any sense here. First, you're saying that, somehow, the Wii U version of Captain Toad: Treasure Tracker happens ''before'' the Switch/3DS version of Captain Toad: Treasure Tracker, even though it's ''the exact same adventure'', so it would logically take place at the same time, something you state as such later anyway. I mean, I get ''why'' you would say that, given that in the Wii U version, it's directly followed up by 3D World, but on Switch and 3DS, it's directly followed up by Odyssey instead; but if anything, this would more logically indicate a split timeline, not that the exact same adventure happens twice. Then you say that the 2nd Captain Toad adventure (by which I assume you mean the DLC episode) happens ''inbetween'' the Wii U and Switch versions of the regular game (which already makes no sense given that it's DLC for the Switch iteration, so it should happen after that, meaning that ''New Super Mario Bros. U'' would also take place inbetween those versions (specifically after 3D World, because there ''really'' is no room for another adventure to squeeze inbetween; the 3D World opening plays directly after the credits of the Wii U version)... only to THEN say ''New Super Mario Bros. U'' takes place before BOTH 3D World and Odyssey?<br>Basically, what you're saying is this: Captain Toad: Treasure Tracker (Wii U) > Super Mario 3D World > Captain Toad: Treasure Tracker (Switch, Special Episode (DLC)) > New Super Mario Bros. U (Deluxe) > Super Mario 3D World > Captain Toad: Treasure Tracker (Switch, main campaign (even though it's the same as Wii U's main campaign)) > Super Mario Odyssey<br>...bro, I think it would be easier to say that the rereleases happen in an alternate timeline, than what you're trying to explain here, because what I've got out of your explanation doesn't make ''any'' sense. And do I really need to say that this timeline you've given me is also ''highly speculative''? Aka, ''not confirmed''? As in, ''not canon''? {{User:Arend/sig}} 18:17, May 14, 2024 (EDT) | |||
::Also, would it hurt if you had answered my things regarding the canonicity on remakes under where I was actually talking about that, instead of under the Zelda Wiki stuff? {{User:Arend/sig}} 18:21, May 14, 2024 (EDT) | |||
:::Yeah, all of what {{@|Arend}} said IS true. [[User:SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)|SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)]] ([[User talk:SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)|talk]]) 08:39, May 15, 2024 (EDT) | |||
@SONIC123CDMANIA: It is strongly implied, semi-confirmed + you can watch the cutscenes. Second, of course there would be more universes than what I specified. It does have to do with universes, because only the canon ones should be in a category. The others should be in another category. But it shouldn't matter if its a new game, a remake, or a port, etc. It's shouldn't stop. [[User:Big Super Mario Fan|Big Super Mario Fan]] ([[User talk:Big Super Mario Fan|talk]]) 17:40, May 14, 2024 (EDT) | |||
:"strongly implied" | |||
:"semi-confirmed" | |||
:Please just stop. You can ''say'' that it's right, but that doesn't make it true. It's not an official distinction, there's no consistency between the relations of games. This '''again''' has nothing to do with the proposal you are discussing on. If you ''insist'' on having this discussion, it would make more sense to do so on [[Mariowiki Talk:Canonicity]], though it's probably better suited for the forums. [[User:Doc von Schmeltwick|Doc von Schmeltwick]] ([[User talk:Doc von Schmeltwick|talk]]) 17:56, May 14, 2024 (EDT) | |||
::Yeah, Big Super Mario Fan keeps saying those two terms a lot, as if it means anything (plus I wouldn't say that Captain Toad: Treasure Tracker happening twice or that New Super Mario Bros. U happens both before and after Super Mario 3D World is "strongly implied" or "semi-confirmed" in any way).<br>At this point, "strongly implied, semi-confirmed + you can watch the cutscenes" feels like a bad equivalent of the "L + ratio + get rekt" meme or however that goes. <s>(And I still have no idea why they brought up what is or isn't canon themselves, on their own proposal about merging rereleases with mainline titles)</s> {{User:Arend/sig}} 18:38, May 14, 2024 (EDT) | |||
:::Yeah, this is not going well. Also, some "universes" are actually multiverses in their own right! How do you factor THAT in!? [[User:SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)|SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)]] ([[User talk:SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)|talk]]) 08:38, May 15, 2024 (EDT) | |||
@Arend: Okay, here's an easy to understand timeline: Captain Toad: Treasure Tracker DLC ➡️ New Super Mario Bros. U (Deluxe) ➡️ Captain Toad: Treasure Tracker (Wii U) ➡️ Super Mario 3D World ➡️ Captain Toad: Treasure Tracker (Nintendo 3DS / Nintendo Switch) ➡️ Super Mario Odyssey.<br> So there definitly is a canon in Mario. All the way from Donkey Kong (1981) to Princess Peach: Showtime (2024). The things is sometimes the Mario canon is a bit complex. That's why some people say there is no canon. But it's simply not true. That shouldn't be an excuse for the Super Mario Wiki. [[User:Big Super Mario Fan|Big Super Mario Fan]] ([[User talk:Big Super Mario Fan|talk]]) 21:37, May 14, 2024 (EDT) | |||
:It doesn't matter how many times you baselessly declare there is a canon, it won't become any more true ("semi-confirmed" wouldn't cut it even if it was accurate). This is all still pointless speculation that will absolutely not affect how the wiki is organised, and you're extremely unlikely to convince anyone here that your speculative canon and timeline is better to base the wiki on than [[MarioWiki:Canonicity|the way we've been doing it for years]], so I suggest you just drop it, or at the very least, as Doc said, do this discussion on [[MarioWiki talk:Canonicity]] instead of your unrelated proposal. {{User:Hewer/sig}} 03:23, May 15, 2024 (EDT) | |||
:Now you're saying that the Treasure Tracker DLC takes place before ''the Treasure Tracker main game?!'' How does that make any sense at all?! I already said that it makes more sense that it would happen after the Switch version of the game, given that it's DLC for that game. And again, The Switch and 3DS versions are practically the same as the Wii U version aside from the fact that it's directly followed by Odyssey instead of 3D world. Again, it makes more sense to say that the 3DS/Switch version takes place in an alternate timeline (also, your proposed timeline doesn't even come close to "semi-confirmed" or "heavily implied"; saying that the Treasure Tracker DLC takes place before ''any'' of the main games is heavily speculative). {{User:Arend/sig}} 06:39, May 15, 2024 (EDT) | |||
:???? This is making less sense. [[User:SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)|SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)]] ([[User talk:SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)|talk]]) 08:39, May 15, 2024 (EDT) | |||
@Hewer: Yeah, than I will discuss it on the MarioWiki Canonicity page. [[User:Big Super Mario Fan|Big Super Mario Fan]] ([[User talk:Big Super Mario Fan|talk]]) 04:13, May 15, 2024 (EDT) | |||
:We could discuss Mario AND Sonic canon on my talk page. [[User:SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)|SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)]] ([[User talk:SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)|talk]]) 08:38, May 15, 2024 (EDT) | |||
@SONIC123CDMANIA+&ATSA - The Captain Toad: Treasure Tracker DLC comes before the main game, because they find the Super Crown here. Which is then used in New Super Mario Bros. U Deluxe. And yes we could discuss Mario & Sonic canon on your talk page. [[User:Big Super Mario Fan|Big Super Mario Fan]] ([[User talk:Big Super Mario Fan|talk]]) 18:36, May 15, 2024 (EDT) | |||
Treasure Tracker | :I think that official DLC descriptions like [https://www.nintendo.com/us/store/products/captain-toad-treasure-tracker-special-episode-70070000005061-switch/ here] ("[...] you can purchase the Captain Toad: Treasure Tracker - Special Episode DLC to '''continue your journey''' [...]"), website descriptions like [https://www.nintendo.com/en-gb/Games/Nintendo-Switch-games/Captain-Toad-Treasure-Tracker-1348071.html#Overview here] ("'''More adventures''' for Captain Toad and Toadette are available as paid downloadable content!"), and official trailer blurbs like [https://youtu.be/i5_VMuEUdqA?feature=shared here] ("Captain Toad and Toadette are '''back for more adventures'''!") kind of imply that the DLC takes place ''after'' the main game, not ''before''. Moreover, several of the levels in the DLC are revisitations of previous courses of the main game, with the Level names titled in a way that differentiates them from the original, similar to the remix levels of [[World Mushroom (Super Mario 3D World)|World Mushroom]] and [[World Flower (Super Mario 3D World)|World Flower]]. {{User:Arend/sig}} 19:26, May 15, 2024 (EDT) | ||
:Yeah, I agree with Hewer here. [[User:SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)|SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)]] ([[User talk:SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)|talk]]) 08:37, May 16, 2024 (EDT) | |||
@Arend: Oh man! You're not making this easy for me. But the Captain Toad: Treasure Tracker DLC definitely happens before New Super Mario Bros. U Deluxe, because they find the Super Crown here. [[User:Big Super Mario Fan|Big Super Mario Fan]] ([[User talk:Big Super Mario Fan|talk]]) 22:49, May 15, 2024 (EDT) | |||
:Explain the DLC descriptions! [[User:SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)|SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)]] ([[User talk:SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)|talk]]) 08:37, May 16, 2024 (EDT) | |||
:Well yeah, I suppose I ''am'' not making this easy. ''You're'' the one disagreeing with our [[MarioWiki:Canonicity|Canonicity policy]] and claiming that ''all'' the remakes/ports/rereleases take place in the same canon timeline, and ''we'' point out the flaws in your logic. The whole ''Captain Toad: Treasure Tracker'' thing is perhaps the most notable example on why including every singe port and remake in the same single timeline as the mainline games would result in a ''huge mess'', given how the Switch port and its DLC make changes to what follows after the game. {{User:Arend/sig}} 13:27, May 16, 2024 (EDT) | |||
@Arend, @SONIC123CDMANIA, @Hewer: I know Rabbit Mario is not Mario. That was a mistake. I don't really care about the comics. You can't split every Mario incarnation. Because than we'd have 100 Mario pages, 100 Peach pages, Bowser pages. I was only taking about the Important once. For me those are. | |||
1. Mario (Main Mario Universe) | |||
2. Paper Mario | |||
(Paper Mario Universe) | |||
3. Alternate Mario | |||
(Mario + Rabbids Universe) | |||
4. Toy/Trophy Mario | |||
(Super Smash Bros. Universe) | |||
5. Cartoon Mario | |||
(Cartoon Universe) | |||
6. Animated Mario | |||
(The Super Mario Bros. Movie) | |||
7. Live-Action Mario | |||
(Super Mario Bros. Live-Action movie) [[User:Big Super Mario Fan|Big Super Mario Fan]] ([[User talk:Big Super Mario Fan|talk]]) 02:49, May 16, 2024 (EDT) | |||
:1, Rabbid Mario is TECHNICALLY a alternate Mario. 2, I never said ALL versions, as in official AND unofficial, just all official versions. 3, your arguments fail when taking into account multiverses within multiverses. [[User:SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)|SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)]] ([[User talk:SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)|talk]]) 08:37, May 16, 2024 (EDT) | |||
:So you admit that splitting all these incarnations is a bad idea, but still insist on splitting just some of them randomly? Straight up using "I don't really care" as an argument is certainly not helping your (already very bad) case. {{User:Hewer/sig}} 13:52, May 16, 2024 (EDT) | |||
[[User:Big Super Mario Fan|Big Super Mario Fan]] ([[User talk:Big Super Mario Fan|talk]]) | @SONIC123CDMANIA: 1. Yeah but that also includes Mini Mario then. 2. Ok 3. What do you mean with multiverses in multiverses? Can you name me an example? [[User:Big Super Mario Fan|Big Super Mario Fan]] ([[User talk:Big Super Mario Fan|talk]]) 15:39, May 16, 2024 (EDT) | ||
: | :The cartoons, 2023 Mario Movie, 1993 Mario Movie, and the comics are all multiverses in their own rights. [[User:SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)|SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)]] ([[User talk:SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)|talk]]) 08:33, May 17, 2024 (EDT) | ||
[[User:Big Super Mario Fan|Big Super Mario Fan]] ([[User talk:Big Super Mario Fan|talk]]) | @Hewer: Not randomly splitting. Only the important ones. I only don't care about the comics. But I do care about the games. [[User:Big Super Mario Fan|Big Super Mario Fan]] ([[User talk:Big Super Mario Fan|talk]]) 15:39, May 16, 2024 (EDT) | ||
: | :Well we're not splitting any of them and that's that. {{User:Nightwicked Bowser/sig}} 15:46, May 16, 2024 (EDT) | ||
To be honest, this discussion has spiraled so much out of control into this whole canonicity-timeline + split-the-characters thing, that I'm contemplating whether or not we should store this on [[MarioWiki:BJAODN/Proposals]] after this proposal has ended (to clarify, that would be for the comments section alone, not the proposal's actual subject) {{User:Arend/sig}} 17:21, May 16, 2024 (EDT) | |||
: | :My distaste for BJAODN aside, would you mind not openly mocking a user earnestly trying to argue for something? {{User:LadySophie17/sig}} 17:41, May 16, 2024 (EDT) | ||
::Yeah, uh, please do not put what is very clearly just a small child that doesn't know what headcanon is into BJAODN '''''right in front of them.''''' {{User:Camwoodstock/sig}} 18:06, May 16, 2024 (EDT) | |||
:::Flashbacks to when many of my genuine contributions as a 13 y/o ESL were placed in BJAODN and it was among the things that gave me major anxieties that I still had to resolve by the time I turned 20. Some attitudes never change! {{User:Koopa con Carne/Sig}} 18:08, May 16, 2024 (EDT) | |||
::::...Yeah, okay, sorry for the suggestion. I wasn't trying to mock anyone here. I was basically spitballing since I'm kind of frustrated that this down-spiraled, off-topic discussion is ''still'' ongoing and hadn't been dropped earlier. In retrospect, suggesting it for BJAODN would probably be a bad idea and sounds meanspirited, and I apologize. {{User:Arend/sig}} 18:23, May 16, 2024 (EDT) | |||
@SONIC123CDMANIA: | |||
- Why are they multiverses in itself? | |||
- King Koopa is a Live-Action adaptation of Bowser though. | |||
- Cutscenes are canon too | |||
[[User:Big Super Mario Fan|Big Super Mario Fan]] ([[User talk:Big Super Mario Fan|talk]]) | - That Captain Toad: Treasure Tracker DLC description is not canon. It's just Marketing. [[User:Big Super Mario Fan|Big Super Mario Fan]] ([[User talk:Big Super Mario Fan|talk]]) 18:54, May 16, 2024 (EDT) | ||
:Cartoons: Super Mario Bros. Super Show has "a" Earth (live-action segments) & Mushroom Kingdom's planet (Cartoon segments, TAoSMB3, SMW), & also others based on other Mario cartoons (Captain N, etc.). Comics: Super Mario Kun multiverse (Main world, LoZ, etc.), KC Deluxe universe, etc. 1993 Mario Movie: "Earth" & Dinohattan (and I guess the adaptations too). 2023 Mario Movie: "Earth" (cause Brooklyn) & Mushroom Kingdom (and others not seen). For the King Koopa thing, I'm pretty sure it's President Koopa (who is an alternate version of Bowser from 1993 Mario Movie), unless you're talking about King Koopa's Kool Kartoons? For the cutscenes thing, well of course, they're part of the game. For the CT:TT DLC description, isn't marketing canon? For the Mini Mario thing, the form, or the toy? Both are split. [[User:SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)|SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)]] ([[User talk:SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)|talk]]) 08:33, May 17, 2024 (EDT) | |||
@SONIC123CDMANIA: | |||
I didn't know al that. I meant the Live-Action Bowser. Not the Cartoon one. And I still don't think the Captain Toad DLC description is canon. For Mini Mario, I meant the toy. | |||
[[User:Big Super Mario Fan|Big Super Mario Fan]] ([[User talk:Big Super Mario Fan|talk]]) 18:47, May 17, 2024 (EDT) | |||
:"Live-Action Bowser" President Koopa, or the weird-looking Bowser from King Koopa's Kool Kartoons (the one that looks like he's a suit)? And Mini Mario is already split. For the CT:TT DLC description, we'll have to agree to disagree. [[User:SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)|SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)]] ([[User talk:SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)|talk]]) 20:01, May 17, 2024 (EDT) | |||
@SONIC123CDMANIA: I meant President Bowser. I knoe that Mini Mario already his own page. Yeah I have different opinion on the DLC description. | |||
[[User:Big Super Mario Fan|Big Super Mario Fan]] ([[User talk:Big Super Mario Fan|talk]]) 23:03, May 17, 2024 (EDT) | |||
@Ahemtoday: | @Ahemtoday:I thought the MarioWiki doesn't care to much about canon. Then they could include all Mainline games in one category. Captain Toad: Treasure Tracker wouldn't be included anyway, since it's not a Super Mario game. It's a related Game. Also this proposal isn't about canon or not. It's about listing Main Games, Ports, Remasters, Remakes etc. of Games, in the same category. [[User:Big Super Mario Fan|Big Super Mario Fan]] ([[User talk:Big Super Mario Fan|talk]]) 18:54, May 16, 2024 (EDT) | ||
@NightwickedBowser: Don't be so sure.[[User:Big Super Mario Fan|Big Super Mario Fan]] ([[User talk:Big Super Mario Fan|talk]]) 18:54, May 16, 2024 (EDT) | |||
@Arend: I'm sorry if you're not smart enough to understand what I'm talking about. BJAODN is just dumb/joke proposals. This comments section doesn't belong there. It should go to the archive just like the others. [[User:Big Super Mario Fan|Big Super Mario Fan]] ([[User talk:Big Super Mario Fan|talk]]) 18:54, May 16, 2024 (EDT) | |||
:...Look, while I do genuinely feel terrible for suggesting to put it on BJAODN in the first place, it's not because I'm not "smart enough" to understand what you were talking about. My main concern is that the whole discussion has gone off-topic and has undermined the original subject of the proposal by a ''very'' large margin. Of course, I now realize that BJAODN is not the solution here, but there should probably be a discussion on how to prevent future proposals from going off-topic like this after this one ends. {{User:Arend/sig}} 19:07, May 16, 2024 (EDT) | |||
[[User:Big Super Mario Fan|Big Super Mario Fan]] ([[User talk:Big Super Mario Fan|talk]]) | @LadySophie17: You're right. [[User:Big Super Mario Fan|Big Super Mario Fan]] ([[User talk:Big Super Mario Fan|talk]]) 18:54, May 16, 2024 (EDT) | ||
I | @Camwoodstock: Maybe your a small child? Me? No. Definitely not! You know what a headcanon wood be? If I'd say Mario has a 3rd brother. But I only talk about things that are heavily implied, semi-confirmed, some are even fully confirmed. There you have your answer. [[User:Big Super Mario Fan|Big Super Mario Fan]] ([[User talk:Big Super Mario Fan|talk]]) 18:54, May 16, 2024 (EDT) | ||
@Koopa con Carne: That's sad. [[User:Big Super Mario Fan|Big Super Mario Fan]] ([[User talk:Big Super Mario Fan|talk]]) 18:54, May 16, 2024 (EDT) | |||
Yeah, look, let's get back on track here. Your proposal, as I understand it, would put ''[[VS. Super Mario Bros.]]'', ''[[All Night Nippon: Super Mario Bros.]]'', ''[[Super Mario All-Stars]]'', ''[[Super Mario All-Stars + Super Mario World]]'', ''[[BS Super Mario USA]]'', ''[[BS Super Mario Collection]]'', ''[[Super Mario Bros. Deluxe]]'', ''[[Super Mario Advance]]'', ''[[Super Mario World: Super Mario Advance 2]]'', ''[[Super Mario Advance 4: Super Mario Bros. 3]]'', ''[[Classic NES Series: Super Mario Bros.]]'', ''[[Famicom Mini: Super Mario Bros. 2]]'', ''[[Super Mario 64 DS]]'', ''[[Super Mario All-Stars Limited Edition]]'', ''[[New Super Mario Bros. U + New Super Luigi U]]'', ''[[Super Mario Maker for Nintendo 3DS]]'', ''[[New Super Mario Bros. U Deluxe]]'', ''[[Super Mario 3D All-Stars]]'', ''[[Game & Watch: Super Mario Bros.]]'', and ''[[Super Mario 3D World + Bowser's Fury]]'' alongside the actual mainline titles. This is not simpler. There would be more ports/remakes/collections in the "mainline" section than actual mainline games. [[User:Ahemtoday|Ahemtoday]] ([[User talk:Ahemtoday|talk]]) 19:18, May 16, 2024 (EDT) | |||
I | I'm surprised all of you are so willing to engage in what looks like bad faith debate with this user. Oppose the proposal, and leave it at that. {{User:Mario/sig}} 20:01, May 16, 2024 (EDT) | ||
@Ahemtoday here my list. How I would do it (🆕️ meabs games that aren't already in the list, because the others are alteady in the list): | |||
: | ▪︎ Super Mario Bros. | ||
▪︎ Super Mario Bros.: | |||
The Lost Levels | |||
▪︎ Super Mario Bros. 2 | |||
▪︎ Super Mario Bros. 3 | |||
▪︎ Super Mario Land | |||
▪︎ Super Mario World | |||
▪︎ Super Mario Land 2: | |||
6 Golden Coins | |||
▪︎ 🆕️ Super Mario All-Stars | |||
▪︎ Super Mario 64 | |||
▪︎ 🆕️ Super Mario Bros. Deluxe | |||
▪︎ 🆕️ Super Mario Advance | |||
▪︎ 🆕️ Super Mario Advance 2: Super Mario World | |||
▪︎ Super Mario Sunshine | |||
▪︎ 🆕️ Super Mario Advance 4: Super Mario Bros. 3 | |||
▪︎ 🆕️ Classic NES series: | |||
Super Mario Bros. | |||
▪︎ 🆕️ Super Mario 64 DS | |||
▪︎ New Super Mario Bros. | |||
▪︎ Super Mario Galaxy | |||
▪︎ New Super Mario Bros. Wii | |||
▪︎ Super Mario Galaxy 2 | |||
▪︎ 🆕️ Super Mario All-Stars: 25th Anniversary Limited Edition | |||
▪︎ Super Mario 3D Land | |||
▪︎ New Super Mario Bros. 2 | |||
▪︎ New Super Mario Bros. U | |||
▪︎ Super Mario 3D World | |||
▪︎ Super Mario Maker | |||
▪︎ 🆕️ Super Mario Maker | |||
for Nintendo 3DS | |||
▪︎ Super Mario Run | |||
▪︎ Super Mario Odyssey | |||
▪︎ 🆕️ New Super Mario Bros. | |||
U Deluxe | |||
▪︎ Super Mario Maker 2 | |||
▪︎ 🆕️ Super Mario 3D All-Stars | |||
▪︎ 🆕️ Super Mario Bros. 35 | |||
▪︎ 🆕️ Super Mario 3D World | |||
+ Bowser's Fury | |||
▪︎ Super Mario Bros. Wonder | |||
22 games are in this list, | |||
I would add 13 games = 35 games.[[User:Big Super Mario Fan|Big Super Mario Fan]] ([[User talk:Big Super Mario Fan|talk]]) 20:44, May 16, 2024 (EDT) | |||
@Mario:I have good arguments. And I'm good at discussing things with other people. [[User:Big Super Mario Fan|Big Super Mario Fan]] ([[User talk:Big Super Mario Fan|talk]]) 20:44, May 16, 2024 (EDT) | |||
@Arend: Look. Don't blame this on me. I just made the Proposal. I could'nt know that it would go off-topic. I don't want this eather. [[User:Big Super Mario Fan|Big Super Mario Fan]] ([[User talk:Big Super Mario Fan|talk]]) 20:52, May 16, 2024 (EDT) | |||
:The topic began to diverge when you said: ''"I read the Canonicity article. But I think's that's not good. Because there definitiv is a canon in Mario. Not only that but there is a Mario multiverse with at least 8 different Mario universes in it."'' You begun reading the Canonicity page upon Hewer's suggestion (who could not have predicted that you would react like this at all), who in turn suggested you to do that in the first place because you told him and SONIC123: ''"I didnt mean that every Mario game should be in the same category. No. There are lots of Super Mario Bros. games that aren't canon."'' Note that prior to this, ''no one has ever uttered the word "canon" in this proposal at all'': people only begun talking about canonicity and multiverses ''after'' <u>you</u> brought up those topics. I'm sorry man, I don't know who else to blame here BUT you. {{User:Arend/sig}} 21:12, May 16, 2024 (EDT) | |||
::@Arend: Yes I said that. But I couldn't know that would discuss this further. But I think those people misunderstood me. Because I said three things. Canon, Multiverse and Timeline. But most of it doesn't matter for thid proposal. It's about what games should be included in a section and what in another section. [[User:Big Super Mario Fan|Big Super Mario Fan]] ([[User talk:Big Super Mario Fan|talk]]) 23:25, May 16, 2024 (EDT) | |||
'''Stepping in as sysop:''' This topic has gotten far off on a tangent and likely won't go anywhere. Keep comments after this directly relevant to the proposal. If you have nothing else to add regarding the canoncity of the Mario franchise, which is mostly a moot point anyway and our stance in the wiki will not change on this, vote on the proposal. I won't personally stop you from making comments on canoncity but you can continue argument inside, say, collapsed content. {{User:Mario/sig}} 21:20, May 16, 2024 (EDT) | |||
:What about replies to previous comments? [[User:SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)|SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)]] ([[User talk:SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)|talk]]) 08:33, May 17, 2024 (EDT) | |||
[[User: | ::You can comment freely as if I never said anything but I'm just trying to steer the discussion back to what it's supposed(?) to be, which is about the proposal to merge remakes and whatnot and not necessarily about if there is a canon or not to the Mario universe. {{User:Mario/sig}} 11:55, May 17, 2024 (EDT) | ||
: | :::...I never said that. I just was asking if it was fine to reply to previous comments, not make new ones. [[User:SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)|SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)]] ([[User talk:SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)|talk]]) 11:59, May 17, 2024 (EDT) | ||
::::Yes you may. {{User:Mario/sig}} 12:00, May 17, 2024 (EDT) | |||
:::::That's all I wanted to know. Thanks! [[User:SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)|SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)]] ([[User talk:SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)|talk]]) 12:07, May 17, 2024 (EDT) | |||
===Create seperate pages for Level themes=== | ===Create seperate pages for Level themes=== | ||
Line 701: | Line 708: | ||
====Support==== | ====Support==== | ||
#{{User|Big Super Mario Fan}} - Per my proposal. | #{{User|Big Super Mario Fan}} - Per my proposal. | ||
#{{User|SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)}} Well, the proposer said it wasn't for repetition, so sure. | |||
#{{User|MegaBowser64}} Per proposal | |||
====Oppose==== | ====Oppose==== | ||
#{{User|Sparks}} Categories are enough. If there were to be articles of different level themes across all ''Mario'' games, it would get much too repetitive. Adding category identifications to the bottom of level articles sorts them all without the need for many extra pages. | #{{User|Sparks}} Categories are enough. If there were to be articles of different level themes across all ''Mario'' games, it would get much too repetitive. Adding category identifications to the bottom of level articles sorts them all without the need for many extra pages. | ||
#{{User|Camwoodstock}} Per Sparks. These would get very repetitive, very quickly. | #{{User|Camwoodstock}} Per Sparks. These would get very repetitive, very quickly. | ||
#{{User|Mario}} I'm not going to support a proposal that's poorly put together. Elucidate your course of action. | |||
#{{User|Ray Trace}} The [[Level]] page I feel is already adequate for covering the themes (could maybe use an expansion). As for the Airship, Ghost House, etc. those are at least marked with a unique icon in the world map whereas a generic snow course isn't so I feel those are exceptions rather than the rule. | |||
#{{User|Sdman213}} Per all. | |||
#{{User|Nintendo101}} Per Ray Trace. | |||
<s>{{User|BMfan08}} We already have a [[Level]] page to discuss nuances of the types of levels. Making separate pages for these would be repetitive, as Sparks and Camwoodstock said, and I fear that the listing of the levels would be longer than the description of the themes.</s> | <s>{{User|BMfan08}} We already have a [[Level]] page to discuss nuances of the types of levels. Making separate pages for these would be repetitive, as Sparks and Camwoodstock said, and I fear that the listing of the levels would be longer than the description of the themes.</s> | ||
Line 729: | Line 742: | ||
::Yeah, after giving things some thought from everyone here, I'm removing my vote for the time being. I'll abstain though, only cause I'm not entirely sure what the proposer has in mind for such articles. I'm not interested if the end goal is repetition for the sake of it. [[User:BMfan08|BMfan08]] ([[User talk:BMfan08|talk]]) 14:05, May 14, 2024 (EDT) | ::Yeah, after giving things some thought from everyone here, I'm removing my vote for the time being. I'll abstain though, only cause I'm not entirely sure what the proposer has in mind for such articles. I'm not interested if the end goal is repetition for the sake of it. [[User:BMfan08|BMfan08]] ([[User talk:BMfan08|talk]]) 14:05, May 14, 2024 (EDT) | ||
:::I don't really know WHAT the proposer has in mind, which is why I'm abstaining. [[User:SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)|SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)]] ([[User talk:SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)|talk]]) 14:11, May 14, 2024 (EDT) | :::I don't really know WHAT the proposer has in mind, which is why I'm abstaining. [[User:SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)|SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)]] ([[User talk:SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)|talk]]) 14:11, May 14, 2024 (EDT) | ||
@SONIC123CDMANIA: | |||
I tell you what I have in mind. There should be pages for level themes likes Grass lands, Deserts, etc. They should be structured like the pages about Ghosthouse, Airship and Castle. | |||
[[User:Big Super Mario Fan|Big Super Mario Fan]] ([[User talk:Big Super Mario Fan|talk]]) 17:45, May 14, 2024 (EDT) | |||
:(facepalm) I knew THAT, I'm talking about the other comments. Is this just for repetition, or not? [[User:SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)|SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)]] ([[User talk:SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)|talk]]) 08:38, May 15, 2024 (EDT) | |||
No, it's not just for reptition. It's also interesting to know about such things. | |||
[[User:Big Super Mario Fan|Big Super Mario Fan]] ([[User talk:Big Super Mario Fan|talk]]) 18:42, May 15, 2024 (EDT) | |||
:Ah, ok. Thanks. [[User:SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)|SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)]] ([[User talk:SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)|talk]]) 08:44, May 16, 2024 (EDT) | |||
@Mario: | |||
As I wrote. The Proposal is about creating pages for Grassland, Dessert, Water Level themes (History, Apperances), that a built like the pages for Ghost House, Airship, Castle. | |||
[[User:Big Super Mario Fan|Big Super Mario Fan]] ([[User talk:Big Super Mario Fan|talk]]) 20:55, May 16, 2024 (EDT) | |||
===Break alphabetical order in enemy lists to list enemy variants below their base form=== | ===Break alphabetical order in enemy lists to list enemy variants below their base form=== | ||
bit of a wordy title, so let me explain. | bit of a wordy title, so let me explain. | ||
as they stand, enemy lists are sorted purely alphabetically. this causes some minor organization issues, for example: the "B" section of every enemy list being crowded with just about every Big variant in the game. i think that's not a useful communication of information. what i propose is that instead, variations such as [[Big Goomba]]s, [[Horned Ant Trooper]]s, that usually don't appear on their own, would be listed right after the base form even if it breaks alphabetical order. of course, since there can be more than one variation of an enemy, those would then be listed alphabetically, placing [[Big Goomba]] before [[Mini Goomba]]. | as they stand, enemy lists in game articles are sorted purely alphabetically. this causes some minor organization issues, for example: the "B" section of every enemy list being crowded with just about every Big variant in the game. i think that's not a useful communication of information. what i propose is that instead, variations such as [[Big Goomba]]s, [[Horned Ant Trooper]]s, that usually don't appear on their own, would be listed right after the base form even if it breaks alphabetical order. of course, since there can be more than one variation of an enemy, those would then be listed alphabetically, placing [[Big Goomba]] before [[Mini Goomba]]. | ||
some games split new enemies into their own table, so if a game introduces a new variation (such as something like a Big Gamboo) they would just be on the new enemy table. | some games split new enemies into their own table, so if a game introduces a new variation (such as something like a Big Gamboo) they would just be on the new enemy table. | ||
Line 743: | Line 776: | ||
#{{User|EvieMaybe}} as proposer. | #{{User|EvieMaybe}} as proposer. | ||
#{{User|SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)}} Yeah, sure. | #{{User|SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)}} Yeah, sure. | ||
#{{User|Big Super Mario Fan}} I think that's really a good idea. | |||
#{{User|JanMisali}} Per proposal. | |||
#{{User|Super Mario RPG}} Yeah, I'm fine with this. | |||
#{{User|Jazama}} Per all | |||
#{{User|ThePowerPlayer}} Per proposal. | |||
#{{User|Yook Bab-imba}} This is something that has bothered me forever, so I agree wholeheartedly. | |||
====Oppose==== | ====Oppose==== | ||
<s>#{{User|Megadardery}} As the proposal currently stands, it doesn't offer a well-established alternative to the alphabetical order. I assume you mean that you want to merge the following as well ([[Paratroopa]]s is grouped with [[Koopa Troopa]], [[King Bob-omb]] is grouped with [[Bob-omb]]s, etc). Doesn't this mean, we are just grouping by species? [[List of species]] kind of already fills this purpose. Alphabetical order makes the most sense for an uncategorized exhaustive list of enemies, where List of species page fills other purposes.</s> | |||
====Comments==== | ====Comments==== | ||
Would you be open to drafting an example of what you'd like to see changed on your userpage or a sandbox? I'm kinda visually oriented. - [[User:Nintendo101|Nintendo101]] ([[User talk:Nintendo101|talk]]) 19:48, May 14, 2024 (EDT) | |||
:Some time ago I formatted the ''[[New Super Mario Bros. 2#Enemies and obstacles]]'' in a manner similar to this proposal. This game has the gold variants, and having them clumped together just because they all begin with "gold" was odd (in fact, most enemies in this game are just variants), so I took the liberty to rearrange it. {{User:Yook Bab-imba/sig}} 12:58, May 17, 2024 (EDT) | |||
@Megadardery: I'm pretty sure Evie is just talking about enemy lists on game articles (e.g. ''[[Super Mario Bros. Wonder]]''), which tend to ''always'' list enemies in alphabetical order regardless of enemy variants. Evie mentions how enemies are listed on games a lot. {{User:Arend/sig}} 20:09, May 14, 2024 (EDT) | |||
:indeed, i kind of forgot to specify. retouched phrasing to clarify. [[User:EvieMaybe|EvieMaybe]] ([[User talk:EvieMaybe|talk]]) 23:42, May 14, 2024 (EDT) | |||
::Oh, I apologize, I thought this referred to [[List of enemies]]. I'll redact my vote, I agree that alphabetical order in articles is clunky, but I think chronological order (order by appearance in levels) makes the most intuitive sense. As it's less "subjective" than other forms of grouping--{{User:Megadardery/sig}} 06:47, May 15, 2024 (EDT) | |||
:::You know, that's not a bad idea either. We'll have to see what Evie thinks of it, though. {{User:Arend/sig}} 07:25, May 15, 2024 (EDT) | |||
::::Weird, I remember looking at the linked page once and that was how it was structured! Did something change since then, or was that a different page? Maybe it was [[List of species|this]]?? [[User:SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)|SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)]] ([[User talk:SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA)|talk]]) 08:41, May 15, 2024 (EDT) | |||
==Miscellaneous== | ==Miscellaneous== | ||
''None at the moment.'' | ''None at the moment.'' |
edits