The problem of papers and babies

YoshiFlutterJump

YoshiFlutterJump

Power Star
MarioWiki
YoshiFlutterJump
Currently, our baby articles (see Baby Mario for reference) cover all baby appearances of the character (including the Yoshi's Island games) and not just the ones in which they appear independently from their adult counterpart (such as Partners in Time and Mario Kart). However, this is terribly inconsistent with our paper articles (see Paper Mario (character) for reference), which only covers the independent appearances of the character (such as Paper Jam) but not their info from the Paper Mario series.

I'm unsure exactly how to go about this, but one thing is certain: we can't just keep an inconsistency like this on our wiki. I originally thought about just splitting off the info for the YI games into the main character article, while keeping the independent appearances seperate, but then I remembered Baby Bowser (who appears independently from Bowser in Island DS and New Island, but not in Island 1). Going through with that plan would just make things seem a bit disorganized, because Baby Bowser would have his Island DS and New Island info, while Island 1 would be on the main Bowser article.

Another option would be to merge the Paper Mario series info into the Paper article, leaving a brief mention of them on the main article, but ultimately, that wouldn't be optimal either, as they don't appear independently in those games, unlike in Paper Jam. Doing that would just make the main articles seem incomplete.

I understand that you might argue that it's fine the way it is, and while it's not a terrible inconsistency, it is enough to be bothersome, to say the least. Any ideas on what to do with this would be appreciated.
 
my gut feeling is that it would be more consistent to cover all appearances of a given form of a character on that character's page

i.e. keep the baby articles the same but transfer paper stuff to the paper articles
 
The difference with the baby articles (like for Baby Mario) is that in the games, he is referred to as specifically "Baby Mario", even including his first appearance in Yoshi's Island with a lower-case "baby" rather than a proper case. In Paper Mario, he was never once referred to as "Paper Mario" but rather "Mario", until Paper Jam or in games like Super Smash Bros. where it's necessary to have it to differentiate himself from Mario. Including in other media was Mario turned to a baby, he wasn't ever referred to as "Baby Mario" there too, hence why Baby Mario's article doesn't cover appearances in the Super Show and what not. Also, Super Mario Advance 3, Yoshi Touch & Go, and Yoshi's New Island all had Baby Mario technically appear independently of Mario (Super Mario Advance 3 came with Mario Bros., Touch & Go featured high score icons featuring Mario, and Yoshi's New Island had Mr. Pipe-Mario in it).

The main reason Paper Jam is the main exception is finely detailed in this proposal, Walkazo's post regarding this still holding up today as well as your earlier failed proposal. I don't think you have any stronger arguments so I think the status quo works just fine here.
 
You know, there's something I found just today. The eShop description for the game (I'll link to it here), explicitly says, and I quote:

Characters from the Paper Mario universe...jump out of a book and into the world of Mario & Luigi...
Click to expand...

This isn't speculation. This isn't reading between the lines. This is the straight word from Nintendo. These paper characters aren't just based off their Paper Mario series appearances. This basically says, loud and clear, that Paper Mario and the Mario from the Paper Mario series are one in the same.
 
the thing is, that little description immediately got retconned the second color splash was released, which once again refers to paper mario as simply "mario".

A mystery is afoot on Prism Island and only Mario™ can solve it——by restoring the land's vanishing colors with his new Paint Hammer. Puzzling battles await, but never fear; there's always a clever way to dish out the powerful Battle Cards up his sleeve. These fresh layers of strategy make this one of the most action-packed Paper Mario™ adventures ever!

It all begins when Mario receives an odd letter in the mail and heads for the unknown in a small boat. What he finds is a series of hilariously mysterious moments, each a clue that inches him closer to answering the riddle of Prism Island. To restore its former glory, he must first rescue the Big Paint Stars. Luckily, Mario's new companion Huey has granted him the power of paint, which can be used to recolor the exotic locales he'll hit up on his journey. Examine environments for clues, revive color-drained Toads, and even participate in strange events like the game show "Whifit or Snifit." Whatever it takes to make a splash on Prism Island!
Click to expand...

considering that this discrepancy occurs still only in one game where it is absolutely necessary to make that distinction as there are multiple marios, the Paper Mario (character) page should still stay as it is.
 
It's not like his name is Paper Mario, though. His name is still Mario, but is called Paper Mario when it is necessary to differentiate him from the real-world Mario. The Paper Mario-series Mario and the Paper Mario from Paper Jam are clearly the same guy, made further evident by the Paper Jam eShop description. I see your point, but I feel that the naming argument is outweighed by that eShop description.

At the very least, I'll go ahead and add a little bit about this to the Paper Mario book article. Nothing major, simply affirming that it is indeed the Paper Mario universe that the book holds.
 
uh, that's exactly why he has a separate article, specifically because he was given a different name, specifically for that appearance. his appearances in the other games would be detailed moved from the other articles were he called "paper mario" in them as well, but...he's...not. even Baby Mario independently of Mario in yoshi's island games was always called "Baby Mario", dr. mario (while occasionally called mario in some descriptions) was called "dr. mario" in dr. mario 64 and dr. mario express's european eshop description. for paper mario's case, it was specifically only in paper jam and his trophies that he was ever called "paper mario"; independently of mario, he was never called "paper mario".

you're really putting in too much weight in one description of the game without factoring in extra context from other games. i also don't necessarily agree with your paper mario book article, it says that it contains "characters from the paper mario universe", not actually saying "the paper mario universe itself", as you're drawing connections that aren't necessarily there.



furthermore, i believe you haven't read some of my links i have posted. i'm going to cite a key point in walkazo's proposal what should happen if paper mario is split. that's right, it'll create a huge inconsistency, meaning practically every character needs to have their content jettisoned off like that and it'll create a navigational cluster*bleep*

Split coverage of the Paper Mario series entirely due to the M&L:PJ showing that the paper world exists in a book in the regular Mario universe. This means that for consistency, everything that appeared in both series should get split, which is insane from an organizational/comprehensive coverage standpoint and runs afoul of numerous policies and fundamental organization standards. For one thing, the mere assertion that all previous Paper Mario games happened in the M&L:PJ book is reading between the lines and linking unrelated games together into a single narrative, which is against the rules. It also comes dangerously close to making forbidden canon judgments about the Paper Mario series, and even ignoring the "the book's not the real world" angle, it's still placing Paper Mario into its own chronology by separating it from the regular Histories of all the subjects, and we haven't organized articles like that for MANY years, much less split them over it. The only vestige of that sort of thinking is the separation of the film characters, under a biased "they're different" excuse, and that is currently being fixed by another proposal. Even Dr. Mario, while superficially splitting out info based on series origin, is actually more along the lines of the aforementioned Baby characters (as well as other things like Dry Bowser and different forms of boss enemies), in that he's split because he has a specific name, appearance and function with self-contained info that folks are likely to search for, with extra justification that he appears alongside the regular Mario in SSB. And so, because this flies in the face of how we cover things in the Super Mario Wiki and would result in the creation of hundreds of superfluous pages that would snarl up organization forever, I strongly suggest we do NOT do this.
Click to expand...
 
Mmm, good point about the Paper Mario book article. I'll change the wording of that to be closer to what the description actually says.

As for the naming argument, I do see your point. But the thing with the babies is that it was necessary to say they were babies, or else the player wouldn't fully understand the context. Paper Mario, on the other hand, was originally a mere aesthetic before (sorta) growing into another character entirely.
 
he's not growing into another character entirely. he's still treated as virtually the same character as mario in color splash. the protagonist mario in color splash pretty much shares multiple key traits with his mainstream counterpart aside from genre differences and aesthetics.

also, you should read my post edit above.
 
I'm not saying that Paper Mario has a separate personality, but he's still kind of distinct and his own thing, similar to Baby Mario. I do oppose the existence of our Dr. Mario character article because he's hardly distinct at all, but that's a story for another day.

And about that comment you quoted...yikes. Yeah, if we did that, we would produce some utter chaos. So yeah, I think it's fine the way it is now.
 
in terms of wiki stuff, idk i'd put personal headcanon aside when it comes it and personally, i doubt paper mario being his own thing was intentional. baby mario would technically fall under that had he not been referred to as "baby mario" and put aside as his own playable character. it's why baby mario also has a summary in mario's article (though I do think that some of the yoshi's island coverage in mario's article should really be cut down as it heavily overlaps and the smaller details such as game specific entries should be covered in baby mario's article)
 
YoshiFlutterJump said:
I'm not saying that Paper Mario has a separate personality, but he's still kind of distinct and his own thing, similar to Baby Mario. I do oppose the existence of our Dr. Mario character article because he's hardly distinct at all, but that's a story for another day.

And about that comment you quoted...yikes. Yeah, if we did that, we would produce some utter chaos. So yeah, I think it's fine the way it is now.
Click to expand...
I say the whole idea of Smash Bros. further cements Dr. Mario getting his own page, but I feel Dr. Mario is okay as his own article as it's a neater way of clustering all appearances of that very specific alias in one article; that alias is frequently recurring, and, as a bonus, Dr. Mario seems to be treated as his own character in the Kodansha manga. Mario's article is very big already: I think it makes sense for Dr. Mario to be split. For your curiousity, there has lengthy debate in the past (say hi to 2010 me) regarding how we treat Nurse Toadstool especially in relation with Dr. Mario.
 
I think that the Paper article should stay the same, because it's usually implied that it's just a version of Mario in two dimensions, and is only separated from Mario in M&LPJ
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back