Latest revision |
Your text |
Line 1: |
Line 1: |
| {{no forum talk}}
| |
| {{FATALK}}
| |
| ==Is this fact?==
| |
| Is this indeed fact, or a clever ruse? {{User:Pokemon DP/sig}} | | Is this indeed fact, or a clever ruse? {{User:Pokemon DP/sig}} |
|
| |
|
Line 24: |
Line 21: |
|
| |
|
| It's real man. No matter how much we despise her, Daisy now has a baby form. A character with no personality... getting a baby form. ._. {{User:Master Lucario/sig}} | | It's real man. No matter how much we despise her, Daisy now has a baby form. A character with no personality... getting a baby form. ._. {{User:Master Lucario/sig}} |
|
| |
| I am Shocked at you people! Daisy is great and how can despise her baby form???
| |
| [[User: Supersmashbrosbrawl]]
| |
|
| |
|
| anyone notice that Baby Daisy's place on the character select screen is where Baby Peach's should be? And there is no Baby Peach, even though she is a starting character? {{unsigned|Super Joshi 7}} | | anyone notice that Baby Daisy's place on the character select screen is where Baby Peach's should be? And there is no Baby Peach, even though she is a starting character? {{unsigned|Super Joshi 7}} |
|
| |
|
| :Baby Peach is right to the right of Baby Daisy... <span style="font-family:verdana; color:#red;"><font size="5">'''[[User:Paper Jorge|P]]'''aper '''Jorge'''</font></span><small> ( [[User talk:Paper Jorge|Talk]]<tt>·</tt>[[Special:Contributions/Paper Jorge|Contributions]])<tt>·</tt></small> | | :Baby Peach is right to the right of Baby Daisy... http://img247.imageshack.us/img247/3473/linkswordmi2.gif<span style="font-family:verdana; color:#red;"><font size="5">'''[[User:Paper Jorge|P]]'''aper '''Jorge'''</font></span><small> ( [[User talk:Paper Jorge|Talk]]<tt>·</tt>[[Special:Contributions/Paper Jorge|Contributions]])<tt>·</tt></small>http://img247.imageshack.us/img247/3473/linkswordmi2.gif |
|
| |
|
| My thoughts exactly... {{User:Pokemon DP/sig}} | | My thoughts exactly... {{User:Pokemon DP/sig}} |
Line 182: |
Line 176: |
| [[User:Fixitup|Fixitup]] | | [[User:Fixitup|Fixitup]] |
|
| |
|
| ==SMB Movie== | | == SMB Movie == |
| Should that be mentioned as Baby Daisy's first appearance? [[User:CrossEyed7|CrossEyed7]] 23:46, 21 April 2008 (EDT) | | Should that be mentioned as Baby Daisy's first appearance? [[User:CrossEyed7|CrossEyed7]] 23:46, 21 April 2008 (EDT) |
| :Hmm...yes, I think so. Also adding information about her short appearance in the movie is fine. <span style="font-family:verdana; color:#red;"><font size="5">'''[[User:Paper Jorge|P]]'''aper '''Jorge'''</font></span><small> ( [[User talk:Paper Jorge|Talk]]<tt>·</tt>[[Special:Contributions/Paper Jorge|Contributions]])<tt>·</tt></small> I don't remember much about the movie but... | | |
| | :Hmm...yes, I think so. Also adding information about her short appearance in the movie is fine. http://img247.imageshack.us/img247/3473/linkswordmi2.gif<span style="font-family:verdana; color:#red;"><font size="5">'''[[User:Paper Jorge|P]]'''aper '''Jorge'''</font></span><small> ( [[User talk:Paper Jorge|Talk]]<tt>·</tt>[[Special:Contributions/Paper Jorge|Contributions]])<tt>·</tt></small>http://img247.imageshack.us/img247/3473/linkswordmi2.gif I don't remember much about the movie but... |
|
| |
|
| Baby Daisy made a short appearance at the beginning of the movie. IT NEEDS A MENTION!! {{User:Pokemon DP/sig}} | | Baby Daisy made a short appearance at the beginning of the movie. IT NEEDS A MENTION!! {{User:Pokemon DP/sig}} |
| :<nowiki>*</nowiki>applauds* I can't believe it... that's just awesome that you would remember that. {{User:Stumpers/sig}} 02:12, 22 April 2008 (EDT) | | :<nowiki>*</nowiki>applauds* I can't believe it... that's just awesome that you would remember that. {{User:Stumpers/sig}} 02:12, 22 April 2008 (EDT) |
| ::Oh dears; I've got an issue with that because I just changed it! But in my opinion, I think Baby Daisy herself needs to be kept game series related, honestly; I doubt the SMB movie really counts. The rest of the info about Baby Daisy is certainly true, so that wasn't changed. And besides, I think it's best to keep the Daisy/Baby Daisy "relation", anyway. --[[User:MeritC|M. C. - "Mario Gals" Enthusiast!]] 15:14, 25 June 2008 (EDT)
| |
| :::We keep info from the SMB Movie, so it ''does'' count. OK? {{User:Toadette 4evur/sig}}
| |
| ::::Ah, I see; I just saw evidence so I do apologize for that. But I still had to clarify some stuff to avoid confusion between movie and game appearances. Besides Baby Daisy for the Mario games is defintely better. Yeah, I'm for the baby gal counterparts including Baby Daisy. --[[User:MeritC|M. C. - "Mario Gals" Enthusiast!]] 21:02, 25 June 2008 (EDT)
| |
| :::::We don't just use game appearances. We use appearances from the movie as well. {{User:Toadette 4evur/sig}}
| |
| ::::The basic idea is that we want to present all official information from the complete Mario series, not just information from the Super Mario video game series and its spin-offs. There are even some forms of media, such as the DiC TV shows, that have a specific place in the timeline, but a bunch of inconsistencies with later games in the series. We still include them in the articles, either in the biography sections or in a special section, but the point is that we want people to decide for themselves which parts of the series they believe fit together. However, I've yet to figure out a way that the movie fits in withe the games, so the only option here is the separate section, which we have done. {{User:Stumpers/sig}} 18:30, 26 June 2008 (EDT)
| |
|
| |
| [[User_talk:XionGaTaosenai|XionGaTaosenai]]: I believe my alteration to the sub-article will clear up any confusion/debate on the movie appearance, but I need someone who knows more about the movie to help me get the details right. Just don't make it too long, and don't add a picture. I think its safe to say that 9 times out of 10 when someone comes to this page, they want info on the games' Baby Daisy, so the movie section should be small and easy to bypass. Thank you, and please tell me if you disagree on my opinions. I'm itching for an intelligent discussion/debate.
| |
|
| |
| [[User_talk:XionGaTaosenai|XionGaTaosenai]]: ...@#$% me and my inexperience... uh, let's NOT start another edit war over my alterations. Let's settle what needs to be settled here, now, before it gets out of hand. Baby Daisy is such a delightful bundle of joy... and controversy...
| |
|
| |
| [[User_talk:XionGaTaosenai|XionGaTaosenai]]: Um, would whoever undid my alterations please show themselves so that we can discuss this and come to a common decision?
| |
|
| |
| I'm not hiding. ' u '
| |
| Okay, so what's up? [[User:ForeverDaisy09|FD09]]
| |
|
| |
| [[User_talk:XionGaTaosenai|XionGaTaosenai]]: Here. I spent an hour typing up a full report of my argument on this matter.
| |
|
| |
| :First off, yes, an infant Daisy (if you can call the movie's Daisy "Daisy") DOES appear in the beginning of the Super Mario Bros. Movie, and this happening needs a mention. However, by no stretch of the imagination can this appearance be considered the debut of the Baby Daisy we know and love today.
| |
|
| |
| :The Movie's "Baby Daisy" is merely a generic infant dropped on someone's doorstep. You see exactly 2 seconds of footage of this "character", and in these two seconds, the "character" doesn't even do anything. At least, not anything that would denote some kind of personality, or establish any kind of distinct identity. This two-second appearance shows nothing to denote any kind of actual character, and thus should not be considered as one.
| |
|
| |
| :Compare this to toaday's Baby Daisy. Today's Baby Daisy was invented to be a fresh face into a new Nintendo game. The REAL Baby Daisy does a lot more than cry for 2 seconds then appear again all grown-up. She walks, she talks, she babbles, she plays baseball and drives a car for freaksake! And she'll probably do even more things as time progresses. She has a distinct personality, and distinct features that give her an identity of her own. In other words, today's Baby Daisy is an actual character. But you all know that already.
| |
|
| |
| :The only thing these two kids have in common is that they are the immature forms of a character named Daisy. They aren't related in any fashion, and by no stretch of the imagination can they be called one and the same. In fact, the infant at the beginning of the live-action movie doesn't even have a name in the 2 seconds she appears. We know the baby is later named "Daisy", but the infant is definitley not ever specifically referred to as "Baby Daisy". As my final argument, the two don't even exist for remotley similar purposes. The infant "Daisy" is merely part of a short scene to set a small amount of backdrop to the movie. The real Baby Daisy is meant to be a new and soon-to-be familiar face in Mario Spin-off titles (and maybe even some main-series games), another choice of playable character to add to the variety.
| |
|
| |
| :Yes, an infant form of a character named and related to Daisy appears in the live-action movie, it does need a mention. However, it should be established that the live-action movie is NOT the debut of the real Baby Daisy. Also, this mention, and the related footnote, should be small, short, and lacking a picture, so that it can be easily skipped/skimmed over by readers who 9 times out of 10 will want to know more about the real Baby Daisy, and not the movie appearance.
| |
|
| |
| Thank you for reading, please tell me your own opinions so we can come to an agreement.
| |
|
| |
| :Everyone in the movie is different from how they are in the games, but that doesn't mean they're different people, just different incarnations of the same character. The young, clean-faced Luigi is still Luigi, the humanoid King Koopa is still Bowser, and the crying baby Daisy is still Baby Daisy. Ignoring the movie would be a huge oversight: we include all depictions of the characters in their articles. Just look at the mention of "[[Warios Weihnachtsmärchen]]" in the [[Baby_Mario#"Warios Weihnachtsmärchen"|Baby Mario]] and [[Baby Wario]] articles, or the "[[Toddler Terrors of Time Travel]]" section in [[Baby_Luigi#"Toddler Terrors of Time Travel"|Baby Luigi]] and Baby Mario, or the "[[Two Plumbers and a Baby]]" depictions of [[Baby_Bowser#"Two Plumbers and a Baby"|Baby Bowser]] and [[Baby_Peach#"Two Plumbers and a Baby"|Baby Peach]]. They look different, and they don't necessarily act the same, but they are legitimate "versions" of those characters as babies, and so they are mentioned in those characters' Baby articles. - {{User:Walkazo/sig}} 19:33, 17 August 2009 (EDT)
| |
|
| |
| ::[[User_talk:XionGaTaosenai|Xion]]: This is correct, and that is why the movie appearance needs a (small) mention. But in all the other above examples you showed, the characters take some legitamate action that defines them as characters. Not so for the Infant Daisy in the live-action movie. Now, if a toddler Daisy showed up causing two-year old type havoc at Mother Teresa's in a scene lasting longer than say, five minutes, I would buy it. But the way it is, I don't think that the Live-Action movie counts as an official legitamate appearance of Baby Daisy.
| |
|
| |
|
| == Protecting == | | == Protecting == |
Line 230: |
Line 193: |
|
| |
|
| :::Because you can't get blocked for doing this. Fixitup tried to force his point, but Garlic Man (and me too in the beginning) just did the same, so there's no reason to block one of them. The only solution thus is to temporarily protect the article. Sorry for the inconvenience, I don't like that either, but there's simply no better solution afaik. {{User:Time Q/sig}} 18:16, 22 April 2008 (EDT) | | :::Because you can't get blocked for doing this. Fixitup tried to force his point, but Garlic Man (and me too in the beginning) just did the same, so there's no reason to block one of them. The only solution thus is to temporarily protect the article. Sorry for the inconvenience, I don't like that either, but there's simply no better solution afaik. {{User:Time Q/sig}} 18:16, 22 April 2008 (EDT) |
|
| |
| Recently another edit war has occurred over her relationship section between me and two others users. At this point, I don't care if it stays or not, but at this point I think it should be protected again to put an end to it. -[[User:Moonshine|Moonshine]]
| |
|
| |
| Just thought I'd chime in with a few corrections.
| |
| *Any article can and will be protected for any reason as the need calls.
| |
| *You can be suspended for starting or participating in an edit war. To my knowledge, only one user has actually been suspended for that, however.
| |
| <br>Thanks and have a great day. -- [[Image:Shyghost.PNG]][[User:Ghost Jam|Chris]][[Image:Shyghost.PNG]] 02:47, 28 April 2008 (EDT)
| |
|
| |
|
| ==Possible relationships== | | ==Possible relationships== |
Line 249: |
Line 205: |
|
| |
|
| More bull, every page has relationship section(S) based on hints from the games, because unless stated in a biography, it isn't a complete fact, but an obvious outcome. They wouldn't have put Baby Daisy anywhere near Baby Peach, had they not been intended to have a good relationship. This is exactly how other pages support character relationships, so I don't see why this one is getting harassed out of nowhere. [[User:Fixitup|Fixitup]] | | More bull, every page has relationship section(S) based on hints from the games, because unless stated in a biography, it isn't a complete fact, but an obvious outcome. They wouldn't have put Baby Daisy anywhere near Baby Peach, had they not been intended to have a good relationship. This is exactly how other pages support character relationships, so I don't see why this one is getting harassed out of nowhere. [[User:Fixitup|Fixitup]] |
| :The MarioWiki is fact, not fiction. They might have thought that. Or not. Other relationship sections have something to base themselves upon, and be it a Mario Party team name. This one has...particularly nothing. - {{User:Cobold/sig}} 19:22, 25 April 2008 (EDT)
| |
|
| |
|
| ::So I guess the giant statue of the two Babies dancing means nothing. Same with Baby Peach, while yes, alone the two just standing next to each other might not be enough to confirm a relationship, you also have to factor in the fact that the two full grown princesses have a good relationship. So I think theres more than enough proof to at least say they might have relationships. -[[User:Moonshine|Moonshine]]
| | == Possible Relationships == |
| :::You could put in the information less formally, e.g. as a Trivia item, mentioning the statue which implies that they have a good relationship. But an entire section of speculation just doesn't fit in my opinion. - {{User:Cobold/sig}} 17:04, 26 April 2008 (EDT)
| |
| | |
| Alright, I'd be fine with that. Again, sorry for getting mad at you about this. =) -[[User:Moonshine|Moonshine]]
| |
| | |
| ==Relationships section== | |
|
| |
|
| No, there is a statue of the two babies, its right behind the one of the adults: | | No, there is a statue of the two babies, its right behind the one of the adults: |
Line 274: |
Line 224: |
|
| |
|
|
| |
|
| Ha, an image being big doesn't matter, as long as it isn't small, we can fix it. I suppose having a picture of the final ending screen would prove the baby peach relation according to the automatic acceptance of this? If not, then I smell something fowl; aside from that commentary I don't think any relationship section needs imagery to prove a point. . [[User:Fixitup|Fixitup]] | | Ha, an image being big doesn't matter, as long as it isn't small, we can fix it. I suppose having a picture of the final ending screen would prove the baby peach relation according to the autmoatic acceptance of this? If not, then I smell something fowl; aside from that commentary I don't think any relationship section needs imagery to prove a point. . [[User:Fixitup|Fixitup]] |
|
| |
|
|
| |
|
Line 282: |
Line 232: |
| | | |
| UGH! I wish it was in a higher quality! [[User:Fixitup|Fixitup]] | | UGH! I wish it was in a higher quality! [[User:Fixitup|Fixitup]] |
|
| |
| Looks like we ALL have to decide whether or not this will belong in the trivia section, or a relationship section....again. At this point I don't care where it goes, but it is worth mentioning. I do however still think that a relationship section will be good, as I feel no reason not to treat this the same as any other relationship. But again, either will suffice as long as it gets mentioned. -[[User:Moonshine|Moonshine]]
| |
| :Yeah, I thought this was settled too. Anyway, like I said to the Sysops, all character relationships have information worth adding, and information based on hints from Nintendo/the specified games. That's what relationship sections are. I don't see why this page, out of any other, is getting such a bag. [[User:Fixitup|Fixitup]]
| |
|
| |
| ==Protection== | | ==Protection== |
| I say that this article should stop being protected. I mean, what if other users have to add information that they know? They don't want to go tell other sysops or 'crats to do it for them -.-' {{User:King Mario/sig}} So unprotect this page! | | I say that this article should stop being protected. I mean, what if other users have to add information that they know? They don't want to go tell other sysops or 'crats to do it for them -.-' {{User:King Mario/sig}} So unprotect this page! |
| :Who protected this page in the first place and where was it decided that it was a good idea? (p.s. I believe I can unprotect this, but I'd like to contact the sysop in question first.) {{User:Stumpers/sig}} 23:36, 24 April 2008 (EDT) | | :Who protected this page in the first place and where was it decided that it was a good idea? (p.s. I believe I can unprotect this, but I'd like to contact the sysop in question first.) {{User:Stumpers/sig}} 23:36, 24 April 2008 (EDT) |
| :: The page is now unprotected {{User:Coincollector/sig}} 23:48, 24 April 2008 (EDT) now users can still editing the page...
| |
| ::Stumpers, it was me, because of the edit war that was going on there. {{User:Time Q/sig}} 05:48, 25 April 2008 (EDT)
| |
|
| |
| ==Edit War==
| |
|
| |
| Alright, enough. State your issues and let's come to a conclusion. Let be the last time this article need be protected.<br>
| |
| If something is agreed upon and I'm not here to mediate or do Sysops things, I will ask my fellow Sysops to please take over. -- [[Image:Shyghost.PNG]][[User:Ghost Jam|Chris]][[Image:Shyghost.PNG]] 02:54, 28 April 2008 (EDT)
| |
|
| |
| OK, I made a [[MarioWiki:Proposals#Speculative Relationships|Proposal]] on this subject. Please take it there before you guys decide to get this page protected again. {{User:Pokemon DP/sig}}
| |
| :Good deal. However, let's keep the page protected until we have an definitive agreement. -- [[Image:Shyghost.PNG]][[User:Ghost Jam|Chris]][[Image:Shyghost.PNG]] 08:21, 28 April 2008 (EDT)
| |
|
| |
| Well, yes, of course. The kiddies won't stop fighting until the final order is made, so the article should remain protected. But... I honestly think that it's just gonna get protected again a week later. XD {{User:Pokemon DP/sig}}
| |
| :You're probably right. Some articles are more trouble than they're worth. -- [[Image:Shyghost.PNG]][[User:Ghost Jam|Chris]][[Image:Shyghost.PNG]] 08:34, 28 April 2008 (EDT)
| |
|
| |
| Heh, this article has been protected three times in one week. XD {{User:Pokemon DP/sig}}
| |
|
| |
| someone needs to put this on here page:<nowiki>{{Mario Kart Wii Playable Characters}}</nowiki>--[[User:Blue Koop|Blue Koop]] 19:27, 3 May 2008 (EDT)
| |
|
| |
| Now that the proposal has passed and we have a solution, should the article now be unprotected? -- [[Image:Shyghost.PNG]][[User:Ghost Jam|Chris]][[Image:Shyghost.PNG]] 17:08, 6 May 2008 (EDT)
| |
| :I feel like as soon as we do it's gonna come back... but I suppose we have to unprotect it again sometime, huh? {{User:Stumpers/sig}} 21:55, 6 May 2008 (EDT)
| |
|
| |
| The page is just gonna get protected again, you do know that, right? :| {{User:Pokemon DP/sig}}
| |
| :Don't jinx it. -- [[Image:Shyghost.PNG]][[User:Ghost Jam|Chris]][[Image:Shyghost.PNG]] 23:33, 6 May 2008 (EDT)
| |
|
| |
| Why not? D: {{User:Pokemon DP/sig}}
| |
|
| |
| == Baby Daisy's Voice Actress ==
| |
|
| |
| Okay, this may sound crazy, but still needs to be asked -- does anyone have any proof in terms of Deanna Mustard being the voice actress for Baby Daisy? I know for sure that Deanna does the "main" Princess Daisy, but just want clarification she also does Baby Daisy (even though it seems all roads point to her in that case). Thanks. --[[User:MeritC|M. C. - "Mario Gals" Enthusiast!]] 21:38, 25 June 2008 (EDT)
| |
| Babies are voiced by the same people.[[User:Nintendofan146|Nintendofan146]] 09:12, 6 July 2008 (EDT)
| |
|
| |
| ==WTF?==
| |
|
| |
| Baby DK has been around longer than Baby Daisy and her article is uber longer than his?! Just because people like Baby Daisy better doesn't meen her article has to be longer than a less liked character!!{{User:Phailure/sig}}
| |
| :What do you want to do about this? Shorten Baby Daisy's article? No. If you think Baby DK's article should be longer, go ahead and expand it. {{User:Time Q/sig}} 12:58, 3 August 2008 (EDT)
| |
| ::This is a Wiki. Length of articles does not always mean notability. In Baby DK's case for example, it means the amount of effort people have put into the article. We have a group of users on this Wiki who are fans of the "damsels" and thus the articles on Peach, Daisy, Baby Peach, Baby Daisy, and Rosalina are complete while articles about the DK series are not. {{User:Stumpers/sig}} 17:11, 3 August 2008 (EDT)
| |
|
| |
| Wow I really hate the fact I have to harshly watch what I say nowadays. Ok, to the person who started this: UHHH?? Then if you care so much improve on his article yourself. [[User:ForeverDaisy09|FD09]]
| |
|
| |
| ==Expansion of Introductory Part==
| |
| The introductory part of this article should be expanded. It's just two short sentences, and looks bad on the main page. I don't know much about this character, so it would be great if someone else could expand it. I didn't want to nominate this article to be unfeatured just for this, but if it isn't done, I will nominate it :P {{User:Time Q/sig}} 13:00, 2 May 2009 (EDT)
| |
|
| |
| == Yoshi island 3ds appearence....? ==
| |
|
| |
| Is she going to appear in the upcoming Yoshi Island 3ds?
| |
| [[User:Goombob|Goombob XD]] ([[User talk:Goombob|talk]]) 14:32, 14 May 2013 (EDT)Goombob
| |
| :Unconfirmed {{User|Yoshi876}}
| |
|
| |
| Questions like this you should probelly not ask, because no one knows.{{User:Kingfawful4321/sig}}
| |
| :Kingfawful is right, we wait until things are announced, only Nintendo knows what's in the game and I'm sure that they aren't 100% certain of everything in it yet. {{User|Yoshi876}}
| |
|
| |
| == Its about her Clothing.. ==
| |
|
| |
| Okay, so we know that currently for Baby Daisy's clothes, it says that for her shoes she wears ''baby dress shoes'', and Baby Peach wears the same shoes, just in pink. But for her article, it says the shoes are ''sneakers''. I'm a bit confused about this, can someone please fix this issue.. :)
| |
|
| |
| --[[User:Peach4Life|Peach4Life]] ([[User talk:Peach4Life|talk]]) Saturday, July 13 2013, 8:45 PM
| |
|
| |
| == Edit request ==
| |
|
| |
| In the "Relationships" section it says "the Mario Kart Wii official player's guide stats that Baby Luigi was frightened of her". "stats" is a typo, it should be "states". The article is protected so I can't edit it myself. Thanks. [[Special:Contributions/121.208.225.26|121.208.225.26]] 21:27, March 11, 2020 (EDT)
| |