Editing Talk:Blip
From the Super Mario Wiki, the Mario encyclopedia
Jump to navigationJump to search
The edit can be undone. Please check the comparison below to verify that this is what you want to do, and then publish the changes below to finish undoing the edit.
Latest revision | Your text | ||
Line 7: | Line 7: | ||
==Formal proposal to delete the ''Blip'' and Vic Video articles== | ==Formal proposal to delete the ''Blip'' and Vic Video articles== | ||
{{ | {{TPP}} | ||
The above discussion was never resolved after nearly two years, so this proposal should allow it to finally reach a conclusion. | The above discussion was never resolved after nearly two years, so this proposal should allow it to finally reach a conclusion. | ||
Line 25: | Line 24: | ||
===Keep articles=== | ===Keep articles=== | ||
#{{User|Camwoodstock}} - Considering they mention Mario and Donkey Kong ''by name'' and they appear as the characters themselves, we'd honestly be fine enough to deem this as a notable guest appearance, personally. It's not particularly hurting anyone to keep it here, as this was still early enough into the franchises' existence where stuff like this was still new. While it's ultimately not too big of a deal as long as the result of deletion is "merge it to List of references and we basically cover this like Wreck-it Ralph", if we're fine to give ''[[Captain N: The Game Master]]'' and ''[[Saturday Supercade]]'' their own articles, why ''not'' Blip, right? | |||
# {{User|PrincessPeachFan}}: So, we can give Captain N and Saturday Supercade articles but this one doesn't deserve one because it's not officially licensed/endorsed Nintendo media? | # {{User|PrincessPeachFan}}: So, we can give Captain N and Saturday Supercade articles but this one doesn't deserve one because it's not officially licensed/endorsed Nintendo media? | ||
===Comments=== | ===Comments=== | ||
@Camwoodstock, the question at hand isn't whether or not it deserves an article, but whether or not it is an officially licensed/endorsed by Nintendo media [[User:Spectrogram|Spectrogram]] ([[User talk:Spectrogram|talk]]) 14:46, May 27, 2023 (EDT) | @Camwoodstock, the question at hand isn't whether or not it deserves an article, but whether or not it is an officially licensed/endorsed by Nintendo media [[User:Spectrogram|Spectrogram]] ([[User talk:Spectrogram|talk]]) 14:46, May 27, 2023 (EDT) | ||
Line 35: | Line 33: | ||
Here are some clarifications for the opposition to consider: ''Captain N: The Game Master'', ''Saturday Supercade'', and ''Crazy Kong'' are all verifiably licensed by Nintendo, and thus clearly warrant their own articles under the wiki's coverage policy. In advocating for the deletion of the ''Blip'' and Vic Video articles, the point I'm trying to make is that there is no evidence whatsoever which indicates that ''Blip'' received the same official licensing from Nintendo when publishing their ''Donkey Kong'' comic. If there was even the smallest copyright notice or acknowledgement of Nintendo in the magazine's first issue, then one could make the reasonable conclusion that the comic was licensed and the articles should stay. However, because no such evidence exists, it is very likely that the ''Donkey Kong'' comic in ''Blip'' is an unofficial piece of media not endorsed by Nintendo; the satirical nature of the comic is irrelevant. If the comic is in fact unofficial and the articles were to be kept, it would open the floodgates for ''any'' unofficial or fan work featuring ''Mario'' franchise properties to qualify for their own articles, whether the properties were used wholesale or more subtly referenced; this is why information from such unofficial media belongs on the [[Lists of references]]. {{User:ThePowerPlayer/sig}} 16:46, May 28, 2023 (EDT) | Here are some clarifications for the opposition to consider: ''Captain N: The Game Master'', ''Saturday Supercade'', and ''Crazy Kong'' are all verifiably licensed by Nintendo, and thus clearly warrant their own articles under the wiki's coverage policy. In advocating for the deletion of the ''Blip'' and Vic Video articles, the point I'm trying to make is that there is no evidence whatsoever which indicates that ''Blip'' received the same official licensing from Nintendo when publishing their ''Donkey Kong'' comic. If there was even the smallest copyright notice or acknowledgement of Nintendo in the magazine's first issue, then one could make the reasonable conclusion that the comic was licensed and the articles should stay. However, because no such evidence exists, it is very likely that the ''Donkey Kong'' comic in ''Blip'' is an unofficial piece of media not endorsed by Nintendo; the satirical nature of the comic is irrelevant. If the comic is in fact unofficial and the articles were to be kept, it would open the floodgates for ''any'' unofficial or fan work featuring ''Mario'' franchise properties to qualify for their own articles, whether the properties were used wholesale or more subtly referenced; this is why information from such unofficial media belongs on the [[Lists of references]]. {{User:ThePowerPlayer/sig}} 16:46, May 28, 2023 (EDT) | ||