General Discussion

[Hobbes]

Ok, we can wait until she comments, but I for one believe this is not a case of whether the editor wants to leave the tag up but whether the tag is actually necessary for the article.

 

[LeftyGreenMario]

Sorry for not being here, I was sooooooo busy during Christmas, spending hours on creating high-quality mods for Garry's Mod (it paid off, too), I haven't had the time to check the wiki. Oh, I remember the bestiary, I brought up my issues with it, especially how it negatively impacts resolution. Hmm, I think the background color under tattle can be slightly lighter for the sake of better contrast (also, tattle text can be lengthy, more the reason to make it readable). As for color coding, you should also color match in the Legend as well but make sure the text has a blue background that matches in the infobox, so it looks highlighted. That way, people can see the text.

Anyway, take your time. I'm not trying to instill pressure on you if that's you how perceive it. I'm looking forward to replacing those crappily-placed infoboxes though since they're bugging me like a never-ending itch.

I changed the PM templates and bestiary draft (User_talk:Megadardery/Sandbox#Enemy_Stats_chart) to have the lighter-coloured backgrounds (now it's the sane as the backgrounds of the nav templates, so really, it's better this way in more ways than one). I also finished all the rest of the templates (for now - some of them have pretty sparse stats and will hopefully be able to have more stuff added down the road). The examples are (still) here (User:Walkazo/Essays#Infoboxes), and the specific templates are:

User:Walkazo/Test - pmenemybox - PM
User:Walkazo/Test2 - MLinfobox - M&L:SS
User:Walkazo/Test3 - pm2enemybox - PM:TTYD
User:Walkazo/Test4 - spmenemybox - SPM
User:Walkazo/Test5 - pitenemy - M&L:PiT
User:Walkazo/Test6 - pmssenemy - PM:SS
User:Walkazo/Test7 - bisenemy - M&L:BIS
User:Walkazo/Test8 - dtenemy - M&L:DT
User:Walkazo/Test9 - smrpgenemy - SMRPG

Pretty sure the current bestiary template design works too (although I forgot to check it on the wide screen when I was at work today, so I can only say for certain that it looks good on 1024px screens), no more tweaking necessary - or only small adjustments. So unless anyone has any other critiques, I'll try to set up and launch the proposal for implementing the new bestiary design and the horizontal infoboxes (including the redesigns, input and instruction regulations and expanded scopes that come with them) tomorrow.

Wonderful. Simply splendid.

Pretty sure the current bestiary template design works too (although I forgot to check it on the wide screen when I was at work today, so I can only say for certain that it looks good on 1024px screens), no more tweaking necessary - or only small adjustments. So unless anyone has any other critiques, I'll try to set up and launch the proposal for implementing the new bestiary design and the horizontal infoboxes (including the redesigns, input and instruction regulations and expanded scopes that come with them) tomorrow.

No major objections, but I feel that it went slightly overboard with the borders under the stats in the bestiary, it really pops up and looks slightly out of place.

The borders seem fine to me. The contrast is the right color IMO and looks very clean. Lighter colors would blend too much with the tattle box below but not dark enough that it matches the header's colors.



As for the construction template on Mario's article, here was my original rationale: "Slapping an ugly {{construction}} template, as I'm clearly working on this as best as I can, and it's not fair I slap nasty improvement tags on Yoshi and Luigi while this one is intact."

I had a hard time choosing between rewrite-expand and construction because Mario's article isn't as spectacularly bad as the other articles that I've added the template to, like Luigi and Yoshi (in my opinion but it still requires some expansion; I still wish for feedback, and I understand that it's not really a small feat; anyway, the article used to be terrible, but I proofreaded it from time to time so I myself think it's better, but bias is bias) but I added this while I was making major expansion changes. Rewrite-expand implies that a drive-by editor saw this, thought it sucked, and slapped it on. I was working on this, but the problem is that I tend to work in spurts because Mario's article is overwhelming work since it's missing so many things, I even made a laundry list of it in my userpage. My sister is right, though, I can't dedicate all my time to Mario's article as much as I like to since it's not good for my health.

There aren't any hard-defined rules for those tags, but I feel construction is more suitable than rewrite-expand and rewrite because those two, in this case specifically, have heavier implications and has the quality on par with the horrendous Yoshi article when it's more like Bowser's but with missing info. Overall, changing from construction to rewrite-expand or removing construction altogether feels like needless toil; both imply that the article needs expansion, but I think construction suits my needs better. In the end, it's out of personal preference.

 

[Walkazo]

Given how massive the Mario page is in general, having a "rewrite-expand" template might seem a bit silly, even if it is true when it comes to certain topics.

Although my general feeling is that Construction is best used when a page has conspicuously under-construction chunks: empty or missing sections, half-finished tables, etc. Not sure if the Mario page's under-construction-ness is blatant enough to need to warn/apologize to the readers (but I haven't checked the page in a while: my computer doesn't like loading it - usually I jump straight to an editing window, do what I need to do, and then stop loading the page as soon as I know the edit's gone through).

No major objections, but I feel that it went slightly overboard with the borders under the stats in the bestiary, it really pops up and looks slightly out of place.

The borders seem fine to me. The contrast is the right color IMO and looks very clean. Lighter colors would blend too much with the tattle box below but not dark enough that it matches the header's colors.

Not enough contrast (with the background) was why I stuck with the original colour rather than lightening the lines with the tattle block. Plus, I think having the intermediate shade between the header at the top and the tattle at the bottom helps keep things balanced, rather than having the very dark headers contrasting massively with the rest (and I definitely want to keep the headers dark, as that's the PM colour, while SMRPG gets the lighter blue).

Other than that, I want to do the same to the PMTTYD Bestiary, however I'm not sure how to "convert" the stats from this chart (File:Pm2enemystats.png) to a familiar format. The maker of the chart, Jdaster64 (User:Jdaster64) has been inactive for a little while, he has a twitter and a smashboard account though (he has been fairly active on both of these, but I don't have accounts on neither of them). Otherwise, tomorrow, I will *hopefully* sketch the SPM bestiary too.

My TTYD infobox draft already has everything, so just copy it like with the PM one (but then manually add all the values, I guess):

|hp=
|atk=
|def=

|level=
|exp=

|coins=***

|sleep=
|stop=
|dizzy=
|confuse=
|burn=
|freeze=
|tiny=
|soft=

|fright=
|gale=
|ko=

***For coins, instead of having the min and max separate, I just explain to enter it as "min - max" when there's a range. Admittedly, there's no horrible rate calculations using the "Ex%" value: I checked the explanations and whatnot (quoted below), but it just seemed like too much messing around for so little gain (which in turn is hard to succinctly communicate in infoboxes anyway, especially when 3 coin levels are involved).

Coin Drops: Each enemy has a minimum and maximum number of coins they can drop. If the max is greater than the minimum, each additional coin has an “Ex%” percent chance of dropping; for instance, Hyper Goombas have a (0.3*0.3) = 9% chance of dropping 1 coin, a (0.7*0.3*2) = 42% chance of dropping 2, and a (0.7*0.7) = 49% chance of dropping 3 coins. Since the Ex% value is always over 50, the higher numbers of coins are typically slightly more likely than the lower ones.

Like, what are you supposed to do for enemies with two possibilities? KP Paratroopa is 1-2 with 70%, so is the chance of getting 2 (0.7*0.7=49%), meaning 1 is 51%, because if 1 was (0.3*0.3=9%) then what happens the other 42% of the time? Or is it 1 = 9% and 2 is 81%? Or is it just 70% vs. 30%? And what about things like Koopa Troopas only having 1 coin possible, but an ex of 70%? It really is not explained well.

 

[Hobbes]

From my point of view, there's nothing in the page that would make apologizing to the readers necessary. Rather, the template would give a bad impression to readers.

 

[Dardy]

No major objections, but I feel that it went slightly overboard with the borders under the stats in the bestiary, it really pops up and looks slightly out of place.

The borders seem fine to me. The contrast is the right color IMO and looks very clean. Lighter colors would blend too much with the tattle box below but not dark enough that it matches the header's colors.

Not enough contrast (with the background) was why I stuck with the original colour rather than lightening the lines with the tattle block. Plus, I think having the intermediate shade between the header at the top and the tattle at the bottom helps keep things balanced, rather than having the very dark headers contrasting massively with the rest (and I definitely want to keep the headers dark, as that's the PM colour, while SMRPG gets the lighter blue).

Unfortunately, I wasn't clear, I meant the borders between the stats. Three pixels is a bit too much, I personally prefer this look. I don't understand why the borders were added in the first place but I'm not opposing that. Two pixels border doesn't look bad.

Other than that, I want to do the same to the PMTTYD Bestiary, however I'm not sure how to "convert" the stats from this chart (File:Pm2enemystats.png) to a familiar format. The maker of the chart, Jdaster64 (User:Jdaster64) has been inactive for a little while, he has a twitter and a smashboard account though (he has been fairly active on both of these, but I don't have accounts on neither of them). Otherwise, tomorrow, I will *hopefully* sketch the SPM bestiary too.

My TTYD infobox draft already has everything, so just copy it like with the PM one (but then manually add all the values, I guess):

It's easy to put the data in the chart alright, but I was referring the status aliments data being multipliers. It does not specify the likeliness of inflecting the status, neither it does specify the number of turns the enemy is inflected. That's why I don't want to start drafting it right now, otherwise, the coins are a bit too technical for the bestiary (also the A.I. stuff, but I'm not sure how the community thinks of it). So including it in a simple format is perfect.

EDIT: for SPM, we should probably consider the EXP, which varies from an enemy to another. It should be added to the template.

 

[LeftyGreenMario]

Given how massive the Mario page is in general, having a "rewrite-expand" template might seem a bit silly, even if it is true when it comes to certain topics.

Although my general feeling is that Construction is best used when a page has conspicuously under-construction chunks: empty or missing sections, half-finished tables, etc. Not sure if the Mario page's under-construction-ness is blatant enough to need to warn/apologize to the readers (but I haven't checked the page in a while: my computer doesn't like loading it - usually I jump straight to an editing window, do what I need to do, and then stop loading the page as soon as I know the edit's gone through).

If you can rely on me, I can say that it doesn't blatantly look like it's under construction. It might have a strange amount of detail paid to Amada Anime Series: Super Mario Bros. compared to the DiC cartoons but otherwise, if you were a complete nub at Mario series, it would look complete at first glance. And I do think construction template is used for this too, but I have so much trouble between the two so it ends up being purely personal preference.

From my point of view, there's nothing in the page that would make apologizing to the readers necessary. Rather, the template would give a bad impression to readers.

IMO, I think it's more of a warning that "major changes may be made so don't be surprised if you suddenly find a 16-paragraph synopsis on how truly epic Nintendo Puzzle Collection is". As for bad impressions, any other improvement tags would do pretty much the same thing too, and as I said, most other major character pages have this tag already, so establishing a good impression may be out of question at this point.

 

[Hobbes]

But it's not a warning for that, the template clearly states it apologizes for the informal look of the article, which this article doesn't have. Is it necessary to have an ugly, orange template on top of an article to work on it? Definitely not.

 

[LeftyGreenMario]

As opposed to an ugly blue template though? I don't see the point in changing it to another ugly improvement template because I don't want that page to go without an improvement tag. I don't want anyone think that it's an excellent article or anything just at a first glance because it's long and detailed and has images.

I kept it up there because of how long it takes for me to work on it, that I work on spurts, and I said that it feels unfair that Luigi and Yoshi have improvement templates, and I feel rewrite doesn't feel totally right for me to use it, neither does this one. I think their vague generally unwritten purpose grants flexibility for that use, and I don't see a lot of harm in keeping that up there.

No major objections, but I feel that it went slightly overboard with the borders under the stats in the bestiary, it really pops up and looks slightly out of place.

The borders seem fine to me. The contrast is the right color IMO and looks very clean. Lighter colors would blend too much with the tattle box below but not dark enough that it matches the header's colors.

Not enough contrast (with the background) was why I stuck with the original colour rather than lightening the lines with the tattle block. Plus, I think having the intermediate shade between the header at the top and the tattle at the bottom helps keep things balanced, rather than having the very dark headers contrasting massively with the rest (and I definitely want to keep the headers dark, as that's the PM colour, while SMRPG gets the lighter blue).

Unfortunately, I wasn't clear, I meant the borders between the stats. Three pixels is a bit too much, I personally prefer this look. I don't understand why the borders were added in the first place but I'm not opposing that. Two pixels border doesn't look bad.

I don't really see the difference of the in-stat borders, can you show a comparison? I used this to compare it might not be appropriate.

 

[Dardy]

Apparently the borders had been always that way, I didn't notice them before, because they blended with the old colors, however after changing the colors, they seemed to pop up due to the major contrast difference. Take a look at this. Basically reduce the borders for all other templates as well, that's my concern.

 

[Walkazo]

I disagree completely: to me, 3px looks much better than 2px (and as for why bars are needed at all, it's for clarity, especially when you consider that some boxes end up spilling into multiple lines of text, rather than always being a straightforward one-liner "subject-data" setup).

3px is consistent with the vertical forms of the templates with multiple dark blocks at the bottom (i.e. PM, TTYD, SPM and SMRPG), which use similar lines to separate the blocks - using 2px lines was too spindly, whereas with 3px, it's a solid band of neutral background between the "Misc stats" and "Tattle" blocks (or whatever the two headers are). And same with the horizontal bands, really: 2px is still spindly and looks like an afterthought, whereas 3px is bold, solid and deliberate, and even makes the text seem stronger and the cells seem less full of negative space due to the contrast and optical illusions and stuff. Also keep in mind that it's not just PM's colour scheme that needs to be considered: M&L is very light-coloured, and definitely needs the thicker, bolder 3px lines - and consistency between the different RPGs' infoboxes is important.

I don't really see the difference of the in-stat borders, can you show a comparison? I used this to compare it might not be appropriate.

Compare User_talk:Megadardery/Sandbox to the PM infoboxes in User:Walkazo/Essays#Infoboxes. Within the sandbox, there's also the one line above the tattle that's still 3px, vs. the other 4 lines that are all 2px.

 

[LeftyGreenMario]

I suppose the solid horizontal lines can also aid the eye in rolling horizontally as well, right? You might be right when it comes to filling in space, but you stretched it on the last column to accommodate for lengthier location/moves list, which helpfully reduces the space in the columns to the left of it. I like a little border between tattle and the stats.

 

[Banon]

Following Walkazo's contributions to the articles in Category:Articles with titles from other languages:

I think it might be worth digging through Category:Japan Only Games as well. Almost none of them have the {{anotherlanguage}} template. Although you might argue it is not needed for a Japan-only game, this poses a problem as it is not immediately apparent which articles were given a conjectural English name. For instance, Captain Rainbow is all right as it (kind of?) has an English name in Japanese, I Am a Teacher: Super Mario Sweater seems okay since the Japanese was pretty much only English words (well, you get what I mean), but what about Mario Artist: Paint Studio? The original Japanese name and the translitteration are nowhere to be found. I'm not sure if that means the game was planned to be released outside of Japan and has an official English name or what.

 

[Walkazo]

Actually, I think it should go the opposite direction, with {{anotherlanguage}} only for things that should have English names due to having English releases, but don't. It just seems silly to have a template talking about finding English names for subjects that were never released outside of Japan.

Also, just not using it for Japan-only releases means we wouldn't have to wonder about things that already have English names due to Japan's love of English words.

 

[Banon]

I added the template on the Doki Doki Panic article before realizing it would be pretty silly to add it to all those Japan-only games, so I agree on that.

So you're saying that all these articles are properly titled and that, for instance, Mario Artist: Paint Studio's Japanese name only used English words?

 

[Dardy]

@Walkazo: I didn't know exactly what was wrong, I felt like there was a design change. Reducing the border size seemed to fix it in the bestiary, but when I looked at it in the actual templates, it didn't look quite as good as I imagined.

I'm not sure if it is only my eyes, but the notice color in the ML templates looks a bit similar to the enemy name bg (especially in the ML horizontal templates). It can be distinguished sure, but if it could be a slightly lighter. Also why is the ML's notice the same color both in the horizontal template and in the vertical template (███#99FFFF███). But the PM's tattle, the color is correct in the horizontal template (███#CFEEFF███) but different in the vertical template (███aliceblue███)

I also referenced that the SPM template is missing an EXP section. I added it to my draft for the SPM bestiary (User:Megadardery/Sandbox3). But unfortunately, I'm in the exams season (Monday is literally the first exam, but I'm sneaking some time) So I will not be able to draft it probably until the 23rd of January.

The tooltips should probably be on the actual stats, not on the name of the stat (i.e on "90" not on "Max HP") because, the reader is more likely to hover over the stats, than on the name. Otherwise, it wouldn't hurt to have it on both.

 

[RandomYoshi]

For Super Paper Mario, don't use EXP, use Score, since that's the metric the game uses.

 

[Walkazo]

Having an extra, orphaned entry like that looks really bad: better to put it in column 3 and shorten the card description's row, or move the card number out from under the image to make a second entry in column 4 (or find another input). I'll look into it later when I get home from work.

All the templates have the same alternating background colours, with #CFEEFF as the main one and aliceblue as the lighter one. They come from the navigation templates (MarioWiki:Navigation_Templates#Chart), as do all the rest, and as such, are not actually negotiable here because consistency. The main, dark headers are the nav template banner colours (PM: #0000CC, SMRPG: dodgerblue, M&L: #00DDFF), while the subheaders showing the enemy names, the "tattle/misc/notice/etc." subheaders in the vertical infoboxes, and the dividing lines in the horizontal ones, are the main header colours (PM: #74A5ED, SMRPG: skyblue, M&L: aqua), and then the backgrounds for the titles and whatnot in the horizontal infoboxes, and the notices in the M&L vertical infoboxes, are the second header colours (PM: #AADDFF, M&L: #99FFFF, and SMRPG doesn't have a secondary header, but skyblue is light and mellow enough to be reused that this only inconsistency seems fine). The vertical infoboxes don't use the darker colour for the tattle backgrounds on purpose, instead just continuing the light-dark alternating of the above rows, since the dark colour's being used because the tattles or whatever span multiple columns in the horizontal infoboxes, and making them one colour or the other would look bad. The only reason SMRPG's expanded bottom two right boxes don't look terrible is because there's enough rows for it to look balanced instead, and only one row's being skipped, but it's still less than ideal (but unavoidable given the number and nature of all the inputs). The M&L vertical templates only keep the darker colour for their notices because the notices are footnotes, not actual stats, so it makes sense to keep them separated for functional, rather than aesthetic reasons.

The tooltips will stay where they are: it makes more sense for the explanation to stay with the name of the stuff rather than the stats, and this way, they can still be read even if there's no content added and the cell's blank, which is useful because folks might easily want to know what exactly's missing. Having them on both would be excessive clutter, especially for trying to edit the templates down the road: if readers even think to look for tooltips, they'll probably check both before giving up. All current tooltip-bearing infoboxes I've found have them on the names and work perfectly fine.

Believe me, I've been working on or at least looking at and thinking about these infoboxes since September: they are solid and good, and once I figure out which way to best add the SPM exp/score, I'd really like to make that proposal to FINALLY implement them. We don't need a fully-functional SPM bestiary: having one example is fine. However, I don't want to even get that approved with the 2px lines: 3px is how the infoboxes have been all this time and how they're gonna stay, and there should be consistency between them and the bestiary.

EDIT: Alright, added the score/exp variable as well as a "Card Location" to the SPM infobox draft (User:Walkazo/Test4) to balance it out. How/where to obtain the cards is already available on this article (List of Catch Cards in Super Paper Mario), but no clue where we can find the base exp (same problem with all the Internal ID variables: we have a few, but not all of them, so there's gonna be a lot of blank cells).

 

[RandomYoshi]

but no clue where we can find the base exp (same problem with all the Internal ID variables: we have a few, but not all of them, so there's gonna be a lot of blank cells).

We're going to have do to the unthinkable: play the game.

 

[Dardy]

yea, it's the points that you get when you defeat the enemy without any special stuff. Koopas, Goombas and Squiglets are 100 pts for example, while Squigs are 200 pts. And the rocks they spit are 10 pts each. That's what I remember from the top of my head. Also as far as I know, the amount cannot be increased by shaking the wii remote, you earn special additional points that way. You get an increase in points by stomping multiple enemies without touching the ground, or with the same shell/projectile. (Or with the special flowers that speed up, or slow down time pace)

About the SPM bestiary, is it worth the consistency to do it the same style as the PM bestiary, or should we make a normal table so we can regain that sortable feature? It's a simple bestiary/list of enemies that does not have that many stats, so it shouldn't exceed the page width limit.

As for the ML templates, apparently it's an LCD thing, If I look at it from above it looks different colored, if I look at it from below it looks same colored. I need to replace this crappy screen.

 

[Walkazo]

but no clue where we can find the base exp (same problem with all the Internal ID variables: we have a few, but not all of them, so there's gonna be a lot of blank cells).

We're going to have do to the unthinkable: play the game.

It'll actually be way easier than having to fight all the enemies in turn-based RPGs. Like, I can shotgun the game in a couple days if I have time. Which I don't, sadly.

I changed the tooltip to "The basic points gained from defeating the enemy. This amount can be increased by using items and combos." (also changed the input to "score=" since it seems a bit different than "exp=" in other games, and it's good to have the displayed headers and inputs similar at least). Increasing the amount vs. getting additional points is just semantics, really: an increase is the most succinct way to put it, and is more consistent with how coin and exp points are said to be able to be increased using badges and whatnot in other games.

And ah, good to know it was just a screen thing: mine does that too.

EDIT: So no one really gave me a convincing reason why 2px lines in the bestiary draft are better, whereas I had lots of reasons going the other way, so in the interest of consistency with the infoboxes, I changed them to 3px (and added a how-to-color-link name explanation to the template page) and then finally made that proposal about implementing the infobox and bestiary redesigns.

 

[Time Turner]

Just got the Prima guide for Mario & Luigi: Superstar Saga. The first thing I noticed is that there's actually a lot of missing articles on the game, but beyond that, there are some points of note that I want to bring up here.

• The guide lists Mario and Luigi as "Mario Mario" and "Luigi Mario". It's been confirmed by Miyamoto at this point, but is there any room for this info in an article?
• Every enemy is listed at the beginning, and just about all of their attacks are given unique names. I'll probably start adding these names to articles soon, but is it worth adding a section to the infobox or something to list an enemy's attacks?
• If anyone happens to have the Nintendo Power MLSS guide, that would help immensely with checking names. To list an example, Fire Lamp is listed in the guide as "Torch", but I don't want to make any moves in case the name comes from NP.
• I'll also wait on moving Beanbean Guard to "Beanbean Knight".
• Ankoopas are referred to as "giant turtles". The term seems fairly consistent, but it seems way too vague to consider as an official name.

I'll add more stuff if I notice anything else.

 

[Glowsquid]

smasher says he has the NP superstar saga guide and wrote this

<Tailmon>: well the np guide seems to call the fire things "fireplaces"
<Tailmon>: don't see anything about it called "fire lamp"
<Tailmon>: i'll check the other thing
<Tailmon>: the guards just seem to be referred to as guards

you can pm him if you need other things verifed.

 

[Time Turner]

Thank you! I'll contact him asap.

 

[Walkazo]

Hopefully "Ankoopa" is in there because yeah, "giant turtle" seems like more of a half-assed description than a proper name.

For the Mario surnames, I think it'd be worth mentioning: people are always crying about it, Miyamoto or no Miyamoto, so the more examples, the merrier.

 

[Time Turner]

Hopefully "Ankoopa" is in there because yeah, "giant turtle" seems like more of a half-assed description than a proper name.

Nope, it's exactly the same. On the plus(?) side, one page of the Prima guide refers to them as "giant Turtles", with that exact capitalization, so I guess it shows that they half thought of it as a name, maybe? The original user who created the article is long gone, so "giant turtle" is technically what we're stuck with.