Editing Talk:Bubble

Why isn't the bubble from Super Mario Land 2 included here? That was a pretty significant bubble. [[User:Buddy Christ|Buddy Christ]] ([[User talk:Buddy Christ|talk]])

== Enemies in Bubbles ==

I always found it interesting that the "G(al)oomba/Bob-omb/Cheep Cheep in a Bubble"-type enemies seemingly never had separate articles at any point. Maybe it's just because nobody got around to it, but I seem to remember giving them articles to be dissuaded. With that in mind, why? For starters, the enemy variants do have official names (at least in Mario Mania): the Galoomba is "Goomba in a Bubble", the Cheep Cheep is "Fish in Bubble" or "Bubble Fish", and the Bob-omb is "Bubble Bob-omb". Names alone aren't enough to warrant splitting them, sure, but because of the Bubbles, their behavior is different; with the bubble, they act differently than they would without it. After it pops, they might "return" to normal enemies, but the wiki's no stranger to giving separate articles to enemies with characteristics that don't last forever, such as, say, the [[Winged Goomba|various]] [[Koopa Paratroopa|winged]] [[Parabuzzy|enemies]], the [[Para-Goomba (Super Mario World)|parachuted]] [[Parabomb|enemies]], and even [[Balloon Goomba|Goombas attached to balloons]]. It really seems to me that the bubbled enemies, by all means, should have separate articles. {{User:Time Turner/sig}}
:Sure, why not. - {{User:Walkazo/sig}} 15:59, 7 July 2015 (EDT)
::Their behavior may be different since they're helplessly trapped, but all floating objects in bubbles are basically identical until popped out. Wouldn't this be not unlike splitting ? Block based on content type? [[User:LinkTheLefty|LinkTheLefty]] ([[User talk:LinkTheLefty|talk]]) 16:44, 7 July 2015 (EDT)
:::You're thinking about it a bit backwards; I'm thinking of the bubbles less as item blocks and more as wings and parachutes. They're not containers for the enemies so much as they are attachments to them. {{User:Time Turner/sig}}
::::And you're looking at it wrong, the bubble in itself is the primary entity. What it contains is completely irrelevant until it's popped-bubbles that carries goombas don't behave any different from bubbles that have a koopa in them, while a goomba with wings has different properties from a koopa with wings, and its parent species. --[[User:Glowsquid|Glowsquid]] ([[User talk:Glowsquid|talk]]) 18:59, 7 July 2015 (EDT)
:::::? Blocks don't have different names based on their content - except [[Coin Block]]s, I guess, which we do split, but they behave differently too overall, so it's not a perfect comparison either. [[Para-Goomba (Super Mario World)]] and [[Parabomb]]s act the same too iirc, and the regular Galoombas and Bob-Ombs they become once they land are helpless passengers as long as they're airborne, same as the bubbled enemies. But I actually don't care overly much either way; both sides have valid points, which is probably why nothing's been done about them yet. - {{User:Walkazo/sig}} 19:37, 7 July 2015 (EDT)
::::::I view bubbles as flying packages of enemies rather than actual separate enemies. Goombas can hide in crates in some games, if I recall correctly. Do we create articles on those Goombas? {{User:Bazooka Mario/sig}} 21:43, 7 July 2015 (EDT)

== About the rewrite template ==

The template states the article has to be rewritten because it shouldn't cover every bubble in the series, probably with the reasoning that the article must not focus on simple aesthetic appearances of bubbles. However, every instance of bubbles presented in the article looks reasonable to me. There is no mention of bubbles with simple aesthetic purpose, as that would be unnecessary; all bubbles presented here are actual items or objects in the games they appear in, meaning they participate in some way to the gameplay. I'd say we remove the template. Any thoughts on this? -- {{User:Super Radio/Sig}}
:Now that I check the revision history, I understand the template is a leftover from back when the article actually had pointless mentions of bubbles. But as of now, is there still any stance not worthy of mention? -- {{User:Super Radio/Sig}}
@@ Line 15: / Line 15: @@
 The template states the article has to be rewritten because it shouldn't cover every bubble in the series, probably with the reasoning that the article must not focus on simple aesthetic appearances of bubbles. However, every instance of bubbles presented in the article looks reasonable to me. There is no mention of bubbles with simple aesthetic purpose, as that would be unnecessary; all bubbles presented here are actual items or objects in the games they appear in, meaning they participate in some way to the gameplay. I'd say we remove the template. Any thoughts on this? -- {{User:Super Radio/Sig}}
 :Now that I check the revision history, I understand the template is a leftover from back when the article actually had pointless mentions of bubbles. But as of now, is there still any stance not worthy of mention? -- {{User:Super Radio/Sig}}
-== The article seems too broad. Consider a split? ==
-The bubbles that contain characters, enemies, and items and functionally very different from the Air Bubbles in the 3D ''Mario'' games, and in ''Super Mario Galaxy'' these too different variants occur in the same game. I don't think lumping them together here makes sense due to how distinctive they are from each other in function. Maybe split "Air Bubble" and "Bubble" into two separate articles? - [[User:Nintendo101|Nintendo101]] ([[User talk:Nintendo101|talk]]) 13:19, March 10, 2021 (EST)