General Discussion

Someone's made an article on the Paper Mario character. (Paper Mario (character)) They've already started updating links. Considering all the back-and-forth discussion that hasn't been resolved yet, if I recall correctly, what will happen to the article?
 
it had been plagiarized from the Mario article. That's a major no-no

Also, I'd like to keep the information mostly focused on his Paper jam appearance; sum up the rest of the games this incarnation takes place in with a few words, not full paragraphs. Maybe link it to Mario's article via {{main|Mario}} template.
 
It was inevitable that we'd have to have a page on the Paper Jam character, but yeah, it should ONLY be about Paper Jam, and I've gutted the page accordingly (haven't bothered rewriting the PJ coverage, however). If someone wants to change the fundamental coverage of the Paper Mario series, they'll have to make a proposal.

It'd probably be a good idea to make a proposal about the Paper Jam coverage anyway, since Mario isn't the only duplicate page that will need creation is we agree that this is the direction we want to go. Ideally, we would have had a discussion and come up with a solution before ANY of the pages were created, but better late than never, before more are made willy-nilly.

EDIT: I messaged the user who made the page to explain the situation. I'll probably make a proposal about Paper character pages for all the PJ characters sometime today after I deal with school stuff: a proposal will be the clearest way to decide on what to do, like the film character coverage.
 
So we're merging film characters and splitting Paper characters even if the latter have way more in common with the original character? That doesn't make sense to me.
 
We basically split film characters only because "they look different" and that they're somehow "less canon", when that's contradictory to our policy of not observing any established canon. Bazooka Mario, my twin, pretty much outlined her reasoning in her proposal that I don't really need to repeat here.

Whereas, on the other hand, Paper Mario IS a distinct character in Paper Jam. He's his own entity with his own gameplay, and is referred as a separate character. In that game, he's basically on the same boat as Baby Mario and Baby Luigi. We didn't include any of his earlier appearances because that's when he was called "Mario" and not distinctively "Paper Mario" as Paper Jam would call him. Mario in the film is referred to as "Mario", and the film basically wants the audience to think that that's the same Mario character as the one in the game, hence why it should be remerged.

This is a non-sequitur. Both pages have their own varied reasons on our stance now, and there are no connections or hypocrisy between them.
 
The proposal about merge the film characters implied that the games themselves do not exactly follow the standard for character designs all the time (different art styles). The problem with the paper characters is that Mario & Luigi : Paper Jam incorporates two different games styles , and in the first four Paper Mario games, they were named Mario, Luigi, Bowser, instead of Paper Mario, Paper Luigi. They are surely named like to make dinstinction between the two Marios in Paper Jam. Should we make a page for Paper Toad (species), a page for each paper enemies, and each paper characters that appear in the Paper Mario games?
 
I actually think we should make a page for Paper Toads. Aren't they like, the core thing you do in Paper Jam? Those darned Paper Toad missions? They're like objects you need to retrieve, so I definitely would agree on making a Paper Toad article.

If the Paper enemies in Paper Jam have their own stats, attacks, appearances, item drop rates, and whatever, then I say yes on the creation of those articles as well.

Not sure about the paper characters, but I'm leaning on yes with those guys too, like Paper Bowser and Paper Peach. I don't think Paper Luigi needs his own article though, since his appearance is extremely minor.

The deal is that their appearance in Paper Jam is what is needed to make the split. Any appearances prior will not count, considering that they're basically the same character, just in a different art style.
 
If we let the Paper Mario character on the wiki, and create some of the paper characters that appear in Paper Jam, it will only be for their appearance in Mario & Luigi : Paper Jam?

With rumors circulating about a Paper Mario for Wii U, we will let down the addition of information on Mario's article and we'll put it on that of Paper Mario if the game come to be real and get released. It is because I want to know how we will be adding information to the right place with a page for Mario with information about Paper Mario games and the Paper Mario's page, but only with the information Paper Jam, will we manage to keep consistency?
 
Pretty much. Unless Paper Mario Wii U does the same thing to Paper Jam.

We'll worry about Paper Mario Wii U when it actually becomes a reality. But if it does, we'll do what we usually do and add it in Mario's article if it's not handled similarly to Paper Jam.
 
What I propose... If the Paper Mario for Wii get real, I propose that we look to how they name Mario in this game, if they name it "Mario", then it should be let in Mario's article, but if it end like Paper Jam and name it "Paper Mario" like how they do in Mario & Luigi: Paper Jam, then, we could put the information in Paper Mario's article, but with a little information in Mario's article to let know that Mario was name Paper Mario in Paper Mario for Wii U, if it go on this way.

If the game decide to break to fourth wall, and the game name it "Mario" but talk about his adventure in Mario & Luigi: Paper Jam, then we should put it in Paper Mario's article, right?
 
As I said, we'll worry about it when it becomes real. For now, don't.
 
With all the confusions with the Mario clones characters, I was thinking about the creation of a template about clone characters (Mario= Dr. Mario, Gold Mario, Metal Mario...). For those who appear in the same game with the Mario. This template could also have other Mario characters that appear, like for Luigi, Bowser (Dry Bowser)... I don't know if we have something that look like this in the wiki...
 
We don't need a template for these guys. Pretty sure our documentation of their roles in the games is enough explanation to why they're their own article.
 
Hobbes said:
So we're merging film characters and splitting Paper characters even if the latter have way more in common with the original character? That doesn't make sense to me.
Click to expand...
No, we're merging film characters and keeping Paper characters merged, except the the one game where they are explicitly being depicted as separate characters running around the regular characters, without extrapolating that to say "well, every standalone Paper Mario game must be not the real characters either". We have policies specifically against Reading between the lines (MarioWiki:Good_Writing#Reading_between_the_lines), connecting unrelated games together into fictional chronologies (MarioWiki:Chronology) and making canon judgements about specific series and/or media types (MarioWiki:Canonicity). To split out the Paper Mario series information would be to break policies, just as splitting the film characters all this time was bending them with "but they're different" excuses, and it's a good thing that we're cutting that crap now, and not gonna let it happen for Paper Mario too (hopefully).


Gold Mario and whatnot get separate pages because they're specific power-up forms, so it's a different game mechanic being reflected, rather than characterization. Some bosses also get split into different articles for their different forms, like Dark Fawful or Shrowser, largely because it's simpler from an organization and search-traffic-netting angle: they have specific, unique and self-contained names, appearances, abilities and roles, and can be written about comprehensively as separate articles, letting the main article stay a little let cluttered by outsourcing those isolated chunks of info. These were also reasons for Dry Bowser getting his own page, although his subsequent co-occurences with regular Bowser in spinoffs further justifies it. However, it should also be noted that in all the games with both regular and Dry Bowser, it's still never asserted that they're not the same guy in different forms (unlike the Paper Jam Bowsers): on the contrary, all the MKWii profiles specifically say Dry Bowser is normal Bowser but with his flesh melted off, hence it's justifiably cobbled together into one page, rather than being split into a form and a character. Tanooki Mario and Cat Peach co-occurring in MK8 also hasn't resulted in specific character pages since the game doesn't assert they're separate characters, the information is easily covered in the form pages, and there's concerns that DLC will result in snowballing splits should more forms become playable for lulz in the future.

On the other hand, Metal Mario does have two pages, since in some appearances, it's just a power-up-activated form (Metal Mario (form)), but in others, there's an independently-occurring Metal Mario character (Metal Mario (character)) appearing alongside regular Mario, with plot functions in SSB, and a MK7 profile calling him Mario's "rival". To me, this is more similar to the Paper Jam situation than Dry Bowser, with Paper Mario appearing as a separate character alongside regular Mario in that game, but then in actual Paper Mario games, he's merely being depicted in Paper form, but is still just normal Mario, and so, that info should go into the Mario page (since there's no "Paper Mario (form)", and rightly so). (There's currently no official profiles commenting either way, although knowing our luck, there will probably be future, conflicting profiles about just that...)

One obvious case of "one Mario, two pages" are the Baby characters, but that's because Baby Mario appears alongside Mario a lot, including in M&L:PIT, YNI and various spinoffs, and in all his appearances, he's specifically "Baby Mario" with a fixed depiction and consistent name (and same goes for Baby Luigi and Luigi, etc.). In non-"Baby Mario" appearances of Mario as a baby (e.g. Momotaro, When I Grow Up, "Toddler Terrors of Time Travel"), the information isn't covered on the Baby Mario page except for a passing mention at most, with the regular Mario page being the one that goes over it fully, because it's not "Baby Mario". And again, same with all the other babies, with the current film proposal even specifying that the baby Daisy in the film is not actually "Baby Daisy" and should not be discussed at length there. In a way, this could also be seen as a parallel to the Paper Mario situation, since the past Paper Mario games' Mario isn't Paper Jam's "Paper Mario" as far as we know, and we shouldn't assert otherwise by covering that content on the M&L:PJ character's page.

Search traffic and organization-wise, having separate articles for the true blue Baby characters makes the most sense too, like with the boss forms mentioned earlier, and is also at play in the other high-profile splitting case of Dr. Mario. The only games Dr. Mario and regular Mario occur in simultaneously are SSB games, with the profiles split between talking like they're different guys and saying the one is just Mario in a lab coat, but either way, it's better than nothing and, along with the consistent depiction and separate name, like with the Babies and boss forms, gives us grounds to split them. It does fall along series lines, so it seems like a parallel to the Paper Jam situation, but it's not. Also, unlike with the Dr. Mario spinoff series, which isn't conspicuous in its abdense from the regular Mario page, outsourcing Paper Mario, especially while leaving SMRPG and the M&L games, would be a glaring hole in the coverage, methinks.

Annnnd I'm pretty sure those are all the main clone/doppelganger/etc. cases... Hopefully it makes sense; I rewrote and reorganized chunks a lot to try and make it as concise and comprehensive as possible. P.S. obviously, everything I say about M&L:PJ's Paper Mario also applies to all the other Paper characters in the game - just too much of a pain to write multiple names.

Baby Luigi said:
I actually think we should make a page for Paper Toads. Aren't they like, the core thing you do in Paper Jam? Those darned Paper Toad missions? They're like objects you need to retrieve, so I definitely would agree on making a Paper Toad article.

If the Paper enemies in Paper Jam have their own stats, attacks, appearances, item drop rates, and whatever, then I say yes on the creation of those articles as well.

Not sure about the paper characters, but I'm leaning on yes with those guys too, like Paper Bowser and Paper Peach. I don't think Paper Luigi needs his own article though, since his appearance is extremely minor.

The deal is that their appearance in Paper Jam is what is needed to make the split. Any appearances prior will not count, considering that they're basically the same character, just in a different art style.
Click to expand...
Yeah, Paper Toads, Paper Enemies, and all the Paper characters in M&J:PJ should get pages. I'd argue that Paper Luigi should too - minor or not. People will definitely be searching for him, and it's more consistent to have a page for him. Better a small page than no page.
 
Walkazo said:
It was inevitable that we'd have to have a page on the Paper Jam character, but yeah, it should ONLY be about Paper Jam, and I've gutted the page accordingly (haven't bothered rewriting the PJ coverage, however). If someone wants to change the fundamental coverage of the Paper Mario series, they'll have to make a proposal.

It'd probably be a good idea to make a proposal about the Paper Jam coverage anyway, since Mario isn't the only duplicate page that will need creation is we agree that this is the direction we want to go. Ideally, we would have had a discussion and come up with a solution before ANY of the pages were created, but better late than never, before more are made willy-nilly.

EDIT: I messaged the user who made the page to explain the situation. I'll probably make a proposal about Paper character pages for all the PJ characters sometime today after I deal with school stuff: a proposal will be the clearest way to decide on what to do, like the film character coverage.
Click to expand...
Thanks for that. What bothered me the most was that the page was plagiarized, honestly, but I was also concerned about its coverage. I think coverage should be restricted to Paper Jam just so we can cover this Paper Mario's stats, traits, and attacks in much better detail while we just focus on Flesh Mario on Mario's page. The standard, IMO, should be that whenever the two appear alongside each other and interact and play a significant role, then both should get a page. I also think of the Luigi thing in Galaxy, but my previous point is that they don't really explore it and the game kind of jokes about it rather than take it more seriously in Paper Jam, but you know, this Luigi can get his own page if people really want it because he is treated as a separate interactable NPC who gives you free Power Stars even if you're Luigi, too.

LudwigVon said:
If we let the Paper Mario character on the wiki, and create some of the paper characters that appear in Paper Jam, it will only be for their appearance in Mario & Luigi : Paper Jam?

With rumors circulating about a Paper Mario for Wii U, we will let down the addition of information on Mario's article and we'll put it on that of Paper Mario if the game come to be real and get released. It is because I want to know how we will be adding information to the right place with a page for Mario with information about Paper Mario games and the Paper Mario's page, but only with the information Paper Jam, will we manage to keep consistency?
Click to expand...

Yeah, just restrict it to Paper Jam; any additional appearance that doesn't convey the Paper people as separate from flesh people will probably remain in the parent article.

Hobbes said:
So we're merging film characters and splitting Paper characters even if the latter have way more in common with the original character? That doesn't make sense to me.
Click to expand...
That's a false equivalence. My arguments for merging film characters have nothing to do with how "different" or "similar" they are from the typical Mario games. In fact, I don't even try to bring it up aside from pointing out the giant flaw in that reasoning because all it is is just code for canon arguments. Ninja by Walkazo.
 
Striker Mario said:
I also think of the Luigi thing in Galaxy, but my previous point is that they don't really explore it and the game kind of jokes about it rather than take it more seriously in Paper Jam, but you know, this Luigi can get his own page if people really want it because he is treated as a separate interactable NPC who gives you free Power Stars even if you're Luigi, too.
Click to expand...
Oh right, forgot to include him in my massive post because he doesn't have a page, but I think he should have one - for consistency, and because people might be curious and look for info about the second Luigi: they should be able to come to us, rather than a GameFAQ board or YouTube video. But that'll need to be a third proposal from the current film and pending Paper discussions.


EDIT: Proposal's now up (MarioWiki:Proposals#Deal_with_the_duplicate_Paper_subjects_in_Mario_.26_Luigi:_Paper_Jam), so future discussion should probably be done there instead.
 
Walkazo said:
Put refneeded for claims going both ways for now; beyond that, can't help ya.

Niiue said:
Can someone translate the names of the two maces under the Slugger and Zeus Guy? I'd do it, but I'm on a computer that doesn't display Japanese symbols at the moment.
Click to expand...
I'm at work so I can only use the computer and not verify with my dictionaries yet, but as far as I can find:

Tekkyō Dosun = iron/railway bridge thump ("dosun" = onomatopoeia for a thump sound, and is also the origin of Thwomp's Japanese name)
Makiage Dosun = roll/wind up / hoist thump (from "makiageru", to hoise / to roll/wind up)
Click to expand...

Sorry to resurrect this, but can you post the symbols as well?
 
Yep. I would have done it from the start but I was also working from a computer without script writing abilities. I also actually screwed up one o the words - it should be Tekkyū Dosun, which means "iron ball thump", not iron bridge. (Remind me never to translate stuff while at work again.)

鉄球(てっきゅう)ドスン - Tekkyū Dosun (hiragana for the kanji in brackets)
まきあげドスン - Makiage Dosun
 
Is there anyone who can capture 720p or 1080p PNG images from their Wii U via HDMI or has their Wii U GamePad hardmodded to intercept the video signal for screenshot capture?
 
About the earlier film proposal thing, let's have more discussion.

Even though the film interpreted to mean that the Bob Hoskins Mario is the "real" Mario and the games Mario is a "bastardized" version, how does it change the identity on the character?
 
The creators specifically intended for the film characters to be the inspirations for the game characters in-universe, rather than the movie being a direct retelling of the games featuring the game characters. So the same reason we had to sigh and accept Shigeru Miyamoto's "the Koopalings =/= Bowser's kids" Word of God, so too do we need to accept the filmmakers' "the film characters =/= the game characters" assertion. Which is backed up by the in-film stinger with Iggy and Spike and the Nintendo reps (as confirmed by this official trading card).
 
Fair enough. To avoid further confusion, we just have to write in the film character pages. In my own biases, though, I'm sort of relieved that this putrid sludge stays separate. :P



I don't have the time now, but someone really needs to reorganize Kritter.
 
Would it be a good idea to tuck "development" sections inside the Pre-release and unused content? Because those two are strongly related to each other, especially when tidbits from development often end up as unused content. I'm not necessarily asking for the sections to be merged, but it would be convenient if we had behind-the-scenes information in one spot.
 
No, I think it's a bad idea.

Development section are of course going to occasionaly talk about scrapped stuff, but their purpose is distinct. They describe how something was made, things like the impetus and the creative decisions behind the work, production struggles, or notewortjy facts about how the content was produced. The last link doesn't have anything fit for the pre-release pages at all. The information should stand on its own instead of shutting the sections into those pages because "well, they're both behind-the-scenes stuff"
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back