discuss: sourcing names

Glowsquid

Glowsquid

Shine Sprite
Retired Forum Mod
Retired Wiki Staff
'Shroom Consultant
The standards for naming pages on the wiki, particularly those relating to enemies and items, are a bloody mess. If something is not named in the game itself, you can bet the name won't be sourced and that it will be impossible to infer where it comes from. This needs to change.

Lol. Who cares?

1: Mario nerds, the demographic this site ostensibly services, do care. Users routinely ask the source of a given article's name on its talk and the wiki has been accused of making up "fanon" for accurate, but obscure, information.

2: It's the right thing to do. Applying a strong, consistent standard for sourcing names ensures transparency and means we don't have to constantly justify ourselves, and perhaps less obviously, reduce odds of deliberate misinformation or poor but non-malicious judgement calls. If the wiki can't do the quality control for something as basic as the identifier of its articles, then what does that mean for the rest of its content?

To take an actual example, there was some kiddy who made his entire editing career of moving {{conjecture}}-tagged pages to "official names" he made-up. As nobody nothered to quality control, the attempt wasn't noticed until the rest of the internet had assumed those names to be the "real" ones. This should not happen again.

Do we really have to cite sources for things that are in the game itself?

Most of the time, citing sources for things that are named directly in the game or bundled material is not necessary. Sourcing the Mario Kart 8 kart parts, for example, would be a waste of time as the names are right there on the screen.

But in some cases, citing sources for a name is prudent, and thus warranted. If the name for a thing isn't given in a standardised fashion and only comes from an easily missed NPC dialogue, it's a Good Idea to put where it comes from and a direct quotation using the reference tags. This also applies to easily-overlooked passages in the bundled material (see everyone's favourite husbando Sunglasses Vendor).

What sources are considered usable? In case of conflict, which name should I use?

Mariowiki:Naming has this described in more detail than is humanly necessary, but the gist is Game > English > Non-English and Nintendo Power > Prima.

Should foreign names be held to the same standards of sourcing?

Yes. Infact, I'd argue they should be held to an higher standard since we routinely get idiots running the English name through Google translate, but that discussion is better off in another thread...

Can I just mention the source in the edit summary?

No. Sources should follow the standards outlined on MarioWiki:Citation Policy.

Since most pages were created in 2007 by children with no regard to these "reliability" and "quality control" things, so the exact source may be hard to find. If you dig in the history and/or talk and manage to find the name is from "the Prima Guide", it's ok to write "... named in the Prima Guide" somewhere in the article and tagged with {{pageneeded}}, although the reference hould be expanded as soon as the relevant document is available.

butthurt much

THIS IS VERY IMPORTANT OKAY



Got no clue as to where a name come from? Post your request and I'll edit the OP!

 
Big YES on sourcing info in general, and especially regarding titles. And not just mentioning the sources offhand in edit summaries either: don't be lazy, put the ref tags in the actual articles. It's not that hard, especially with practice, and there's a nice long policy page about them, including how-to stuff (MarioWiki:Citation_Policy#What_to_put_as_references) - currently linked to in the SiteNotice, I might add (which is very handy).

Also, while folks are generally a bit better at souring stuff for upcoming games, when it gets released, that doesn't mean every reference should get stripped out: I've seen people spread misinformation that refs are only important for unreleased content, and that is DEAD WRONG. Like Glowsquid said, if names of karts or whatever are on the screen, then sure, remove the ref to the blurry pre-release YouTube video, but otherwise, the idea with refs is the more the merrier, and pages should accumulate refs over time, not shed them. In fact, if you find a broken ref, rather than removing it, you should try to replace it with a new ref - or, barring that, at least leave {{refneeded}} behind to mark the void. In general, when in doubt, use {{refneeded}} (or do the research yourself and provide the needed refs).

Some pages will simply be conjectural named forever since no real name exists, but as long as we mark it with {{conjecture}} and make sure people know we did make that name up, rather than trying to pas sit off as authentic, it's fine. It's all part of the transparency goodness Glowsquid mentioned.

Glowsquid said:
the wiki has been accused of making up "fanon" for accurate, but obscure, information.
Click to expand...
lolwhat? The title we have is mentioned in an official trophy and somehow that means we made up the name and then, what, tricked Nintendo into using it too? People are odd.

Glowsquid said:
To take an actual example, there was some kiddy who made his entire editing career of moving {{conjecture}}-tagged pages to "official names" he made-up. As nobody nothered to quality control, the attempt wasn't noticed until the rest of the internet had assumed those names to be the "real" ones. This should not happen again.
Click to expand...
Oh man, I don't remember that somehow. Who was it, again?

Glowsquid said:
Sunglasses vendor
Click to expand...
fix'd
 
lolwhat? The title we have is mentioned in an official trophy and somehow that means we made up the name and then, what, tricked Nintendo into using it too? People are odd.
Click to expand...

Well, the implication is that the wiki made up the name and some NOA intern read the page and then used it in the game, making it canon.

(What's the neologism about how falsehoods in Wikipedia articles get picked up in "professional" sources, making them "true", again? Man that would be useful.)

I don't really *blame* Slush for thinking that since the wiki did start a fair few urban legends. With these things, I've come to assume "It's probably from the Prima guide" but we shouldn't have to expect our readers to think that way too. It's why I made this thread.

Oh man, I don't remember that somehow. Who was it, again?
Click to expand...

http://www.mariowiki.com/Special:Contributions/Mecha-Boss_Unit
 
Glowsquid said:
But in some cases, citing sources for a name is prudent, and thus warranted. If the name for a thing isn't given in a standardised fashion and only comes from an easily missed NPC dialogue, it's a Good Idea to put where it comes from and a direct quotation using the reference tags.
Click to expand...

This is a good idea. I've tried to add such references to articles in the past, but they were shot down for being too trivial, even though the relevant names only appeared in optional, situational dialogue.

It is important to source in these specific scenarios to combat accusations of fanon. If a name's origin is not immediately apparent, people will want to know where it came from, and when no satisfactory answer can be given, will conclude it was just made up.
 
This is a good idea. I've tried to add such references to articles in the past, but they were shot down for being too trivial, even though the relevant names only appeared in optional, situational dialogue.
Click to expand...

well you've got my blessing to add them back.

btw Walkazo, good point about people just throwing the refs in the edit summary and not the actual article. I added it in the OP.
 
Recently, I've changed a page name because the name was found in the Super Mario-Kun (Pump Mario). Comic books and manga can count as sources for names as well, right?
 
Yes, provided they are officially licensed.
 
MW:NAMING lists the sources in order of descending idealness:

1. Name provided in-game or in the enclosed instruction manual (games take priority over manuals)
2. Name from a Nintendo Player's Guide
3. Name from a Prima Games Strategy Guide
4. Name used in officially licensed media (i.e. cartoons, movies, magazines, comics and web content)
5. Development name (for stuff never named in the final product or related media)

So yeah, comics and manga are okay, but if a name comes from 2-5, it should get a reference - doubly so, in the case of Super Mario-kun, since it's non-English and non-game info. Pretty much the only time you don't need an info is when the name's very blatantly stated in the English version of a game or its manual (list of enemies, character select screen, etc.), but requiring a ref doesn't make a source invalid at all - more like the opposite, really.

This is a good idea. I've tried to add such references to articles in the past, but they were shot down for being too trivial, even though the relevant names only appeared in optional, situational dialogue.
Click to expand...
The people who shot you down were idiots, then.

Glowsquid said:
Oh man, I don't remember that somehow. Who was it, again?
Click to expand...
http://www.mariowiki.com/Special:Contributions/Mecha-Boss_Unit
Click to expand...
Oh yeah, that kid.
 
"Resident Demon" (lowercased) is from Squawks dialogue before the minigame, but it's really dumb: It's clearly meant to say "The demon that resides inside this thing", not "The name of this thing is literally 'Resident Demon'". I have no clue for the rest, and I'd say tagging them with {{conjecture}} for now is pretty safe.
 
I never liked how a whole lot of names were derived from dialog taken out of context: most of the Wario Land II bosses (Giant Snake, Giant Bee, Ghost (Ghost (Wario Land II boss)), etc.) and the Luigi dunk come to mind primarily. The bosses are "named" in their stages' titles, but it's always "Defeat the [blah]", showing that it's describing the boss and not actually naming it. A game objective telling me to "Beat Up the Guard" doesn't mean that the person I'm beating up is literally named "Guard". The Luigi dunk... It's very clearly an out-of-context, one-off line indented to be a joke. Taking it as the move's actual name is silly.

Walkazo said:
Glowsquid said:
Oh man, I don't remember that somehow. Who was it, again?
Click to expand...
http://www.mariowiki.com/Special:Contributions/Mecha-Boss_Unit
Click to expand...
Oh yeah, that kid.
Click to expand...
How did he actually change so much without anyone ever really putting their foot down to stop it? I mean, there's lack of quality control and all, but that seems like a huge lack of quality control, and I would like to think someone would be smart enough to call his bluff.
 
I never liked how a whole lot of names were derived from dialog taken out of context: most of the Wario Land II bosses (Giant Snake, Giant Bee, Ghost, etc.)
Click to expand...

I would say the fact their names are capitalized indicate they're meant to be taken as proper names,. They fit in with the generic naming of most of the other WLII subject at any rate.

Luigi dunk is like resident demon (ie; bad.)

How did he actually change so much without anyone ever really putting their foot down to stop it? I mean, there's lack of quality control and all, but that seems like a huge lack of quality control, and I would like to think someone would be smart enough to call his bluff.
Click to expand...

Nobody gave a shit abour quality control. Nobody.
 
Glowsquid said:
I never liked how a whole lot of names were derived from dialog taken out of context: most of the Wario Land II bosses (Giant Snake, Giant Bee, Ghost, etc.)
Click to expand...

I would say the fact their names are capitalized indicate they're meant to be taken as proper names,. They fit in with the generic naming of most of the other WLII subject at any rate.
Click to expand...
Eh... They're capitalized as part of the stages' titles, and the stages use the standard "capitalize everything but the conjuctions" for their titles, so I wouldn't call the capital names decisive.
 
Shulk said:
Glowsquid said:
I never liked how a whole lot of names were derived from dialog taken out of context: most of the Wario Land II bosses (Giant Snake, Giant Bee, Ghost, etc.)
Click to expand...

I would say the fact their names are capitalized indicate they're meant to be taken as proper names,. They fit in with the generic naming of most of the other WLII subject at any rate.
Click to expand...
Eh... They're capitalized as part of the stages' titles, and the stages use the standard "capitalize everything but the conjuctions" for their titles, so I wouldn't call the capital names decisive.
Click to expand...

So what would the alternative be if that's the only instance of them being named? Making a name up?

I'd say a generic name that might just be a description but comes from the actual game trumps a conjectural name.
 
Well, my point wasn't to have a radical name change for the articles, but simply to treat the names as generic terms and not as the giant snake being called Giant Snake (so instead of "Giant Snake is a blahblahblah" it'd be "The giant snake is a blahblahblah").
 
Should we delete the redirects that were created from moves derived from poor judgement then?
 
Shulk said:
If you're talking about Boss-Unit's moves, most definitely.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I was.

Also, shouldn't Luigi dunk be called Mole Luigi in consistency with Mole Mario? I think there were other allusions to the mole nature, too, just look at one description in the Chateau de Chucklehuck (I believe it's called "Mole Living Room", although the Mario one is called "Mouse Living Room" or something like that), and you find them when you get those Red and Green goblets.

Luigi dunk sounds a hell too much like a Mario Hoops 3-on-3 move, and that's what I initially thought it was, lol.
 
Actually, I just went back through the game to confirm if there was some sort of official name, and I swapped between various languages as well. Most walkthroughs I saw used "Mouse" and "Mole" as their names, which likely came from the tutorial rooms for the moves (called "Mouse's Living Room" and "Mole's Living Room", respectively, and this is consistent across all languages). The moves aren't directly called this, but this could be an option for names, considering that "Mini-Mario" doesn't have a source for it and "Luigi dunk" is "Luigi dunk". I'd be for moving the articles to those names, but would a conjectural tag be necessary?
 
Unless you read the name in an official thing (game/manual/website/whatevs), it needs {{conjecture}}. Then just try and use the most fitting conjecture - in the "Mole Luigi" case, it matches a known name, so it seems pretty instinctive and accurate, unlike "Luigi Dunk", which as mentioned before, sounds like a basketball move and doesn't have much to do with anything.

Also, what I've done in the past sometimes is use {{conjecture}} when I took lowercase text and turned it into a proper noun (with the text then quoted as a ref). The only examples I have off the top of my head have one more step removed, as they're also translation, but hopefully you get the gist: Big Ball and Mechanical Fish.

Personally, I much rather treat names as proper nouns - so "The Giant Snake", not "The giant snake", since then they fit with all the other enemies and things that have been given proper nouns, and so, don't stick out in lists and things. And really, naming the page would be conjectural regardless of whether it was uppercase or lower case, so might as well make it consistent; as long as a {{conjecture}} tag and a reference are provided explaining the name choice, rather than passing it off as fact, it should be fine.
 
I got a copy of the Nintendo Power guide and I have added the reference to the page.
 
Also, I feel this is worth saying: Don't be afraid to slap {{refneeded}} on foreign names whose sources aren't obvious (ie: the subject isn't named ingame).
 
On a related note, if things need a ref (whether it's already marked with {{refneeded}} or not), don't just automatically strip it from the page, because it could very well be true. As long as it's marked, wasn't added by a known liar or whatever, and isn't clearly something Google translate spat out (or is otherwise obviously bogus), I'd say there's no terrible harm in leaving it up in the meantime.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back