| Latest revision |
Your text |
| Line 33: |
Line 33: |
|
| |
|
| == Split the Chargin' Chuck variants == | | == Split the Chargin' Chuck variants == |
| {{Settled TPP}} | | {{SettledTPP}} |
| {{Proposal outcome|canceled}} | | {{ProposalOutcome|canceled}} |
| Okay, why are the unique ''Super Mario World'' variants merged? I mean, if we have [[Template:Shy Guys|similar behavioral variants of Shy Guys split out]], than there should be no excuse here. Since the ''Nintendo Mania'' guide names all but two different variants of Chargin' Chuck, I propose that we split out every variant, with a certain exception expanded on in the options below. | | Okay, why are the unique ''Super Mario World'' variants merged? I mean, if we have [[Template:Shy Guys|similar behavioral variants of Shy Guys split out]], than there should be no excuse here. Since the ''Nintendo Mania'' guide names all but two different variants of Chargin' Chuck, I propose that we split out every variant, with a certain exception expanded on in the options below. |
|
| |
|
| Line 72: |
Line 72: |
|
| |
|
| == Consider a variation of [[Boom Boom]]? == | | == Consider a variation of [[Boom Boom]]? == |
| | |
| | {{talk}} |
| In their debut, these guys take three hits to defeat, adapt an invulnerable "crouching" stance after each hit, and usually attack with a simple charge - but are able to jump high while facing the screen. Plus, the Japanese names seem to have a connection (Bunbun and Bull), and a highly similar design aside from the gridiron gear. All in all, these seem to have been intended as a sports-themed version of the SMB3 miniboss, demoted to generic enemy. ''3D World'' does give some divergent evolution to their facial design, but that's about it - otherwise, they're still ''very'' similar, and SMW already tended to heavily alter designs for its newer enemy derivatives. [[User:Doc von Schmeltwick|Doc von Schmeltwick]] ([[User talk:Doc von Schmeltwick|talk]]) 23:06, January 15, 2024 (EST) | | In their debut, these guys take three hits to defeat, adapt an invulnerable "crouching" stance after each hit, and usually attack with a simple charge - but are able to jump high while facing the screen. Plus, the Japanese names seem to have a connection (Bunbun and Bull), and a highly similar design aside from the gridiron gear. All in all, these seem to have been intended as a sports-themed version of the SMB3 miniboss, demoted to generic enemy. ''3D World'' does give some divergent evolution to their facial design, but that's about it - otherwise, they're still ''very'' similar, and SMW already tended to heavily alter designs for its newer enemy derivatives. [[User:Doc von Schmeltwick|Doc von Schmeltwick]] ([[User talk:Doc von Schmeltwick|talk]]) 23:06, January 15, 2024 (EST) |
| :Your points rely quite a lot on speculation, and similarities seem pretty coincidental so I'm saying no. {{User:Swallow/sig}} 17:49, January 16, 2024 (EST) | | :Your points rely quite a lot on speculation, and similarities seem pretty coincidental so I'm saying no. {{User:Swallow/sig}} 17:49, January 16, 2024 (EST) |
| ::In that case, we should probably stop considering [[Koopa Striker]]s to be a type of [[Koopa Troopa]], as they have an equivalent amount of similarities and differences in function, design, and LoO name. [[User:Doc von Schmeltwick|Doc von Schmeltwick]] ([[User talk:Doc von Schmeltwick|talk]]) 17:59, January 16, 2024 (EST) | | ::In that case, we should probably stop considering [[Koopa Striker]]s to be a type of [[Koopa Troopa]], as they have an equivalent amount of similarities and differences in function, design, and LoO name. [[User:Doc von Schmeltwick|Doc von Schmeltwick]] ([[User talk:Doc von Schmeltwick|talk]]) 17:59, January 16, 2024 (EST) |
| :::Koopa Strikers have "koopa" in their name so of course it's considered to be a koopa. I don't think we have ever had ''Nintendo'' tell us that charging chucks are a form of boom boom. -- {{User:Dark-Boy-1up/sig}} 17:20, January 16, 2024 (EST) | | :::Koopa Strikers have "koopa" in their name so of course it's considered to be a koopa. I don't think we have ever had 'Nintendo' tell us that charging chucks are a form of boom boom. -- {{User:Dark-Boy-1up/sig}} 17:20, January 16, 2024 (EST) |
| ::::"Koopa" does not mean "Koopa Troopa." [[User:Doc von Schmeltwick|Doc von Schmeltwick]] ([[User talk:Doc von Schmeltwick|talk]]) 18:31, January 16, 2024 (EST) | | ::::"Koopa" does not mean "Koopa Troopa." [[User:Doc von Schmeltwick|Doc von Schmeltwick]] ([[User talk:Doc von Schmeltwick|talk]]) 18:31, January 16, 2024 (EST) |
|
| |
|
| Line 82: |
Line 84: |
| ::::::I wasn't insulting you, I just needed to vent some frustration with the turn these debates always go. {{User:Swallow/sig}} 18:55, January 16, 2024 (EST) | | ::::::I wasn't insulting you, I just needed to vent some frustration with the turn these debates always go. {{User:Swallow/sig}} 18:55, January 16, 2024 (EST) |
| :::::::Please don't derail this further, but generally when you call someone's thought process "stupid," that counts as an insult. My debate style is based primarily around my autism+ADD and need to have a logical buildup in conversation. [[User:Doc von Schmeltwick|Doc von Schmeltwick]] ([[User talk:Doc von Schmeltwick|talk]]) 18:59, January 16, 2024 (EST) | | :::::::Please don't derail this further, but generally when you call someone's thought process "stupid," that counts as an insult. My debate style is based primarily around my autism+ADD and need to have a logical buildup in conversation. [[User:Doc von Schmeltwick|Doc von Schmeltwick]] ([[User talk:Doc von Schmeltwick|talk]]) 18:59, January 16, 2024 (EST) |
| :::::::: @Doc von Schmeltwick, It feels like you made a point, then someone disagreed and then you started throwing [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_herring red herrings]. For example, you told me that koopas aren't koopa troopas while you seemingly ignored my argument about how ''nintendo'' has never called chargin' chucks boom booms. -- {{User:Dark-Boy-1up/sig}} 18:59, January 16, 2024 (EST)
| |
| :::::::::No? Nintendo never called [[Koopeleon]]s, [[Electro Koopa]]s, [[Snooza Koopa]]s, or [[Suppoko]] kinds of Koopa Troopa but we still consider them subtypes, due primarily to their Japanese names being similar to the Japanese one for Troopas (''Nokonoko''), which can't be said for the Strikers ("Shell Shooter"), which actually have some visual characteristics closer to SPM's Hammer Bros. Nintendo doesn't need to directly say how things are derived (and in fact, they usually don't) because those can be inferred based on context clues. Also, what I said was Koopa Strikers are not necessarily a type of Koopa ''Troopa''. That doesn't mean they're not Koopas in general. For instance, Magikoopas aren't Koopa Troopas but they are Koopas. To say nothing of Bowser, whose name is "Koopa" in Japanese, but he's certainly not a Troopa. [[User:Doc von Schmeltwick|Doc von Schmeltwick]] ([[User talk:Doc von Schmeltwick|talk]]) 19:05, January 16, 2024 (EST)
| |
| ::::::::::Sorry. I misspoke, and I meant to say that you told me koopas are not the same as koopa troopas. I agree that ''Nintendo'' doesnt need to tell us what species is what, I just don't think that just because Boom Booms and Chargin' chucks have a few similarities means that they are in the same species. I understand your arguments about how ''super mario world'' tried to change earlier enemies, but I don't think we have enough proof. -- {{User:Dark-Boy-1up/sig}} 19:31, January 16, 2024 (EST)
| |
| :::::::::::I don't believe the analogy to [[Koopa Striker]] is a strong enough analogy. Chargin' Chucks have much more differences to Boom Boom and whatnot. It's the same issue I have with the attempt to move Big Boo (Dark Moon) to Boolossus in perceived similarities while significant differences are not considered. With an overall lack of evidence and the similarities just not being quite enough (body proportions, eye design, shell design, movement, hairstyle etc are different) I'd rather just treat the two as separate species and just have people come to their own conclusions. Overall, the evidence isn't strong and I don't think it's anywhere near sufficient to the point we have to state this in the article. {{User:Mario/sig}} 21:04, January 16, 2024 (EST)
| |
| ::::::::::::I understand that, but SMW was when they really wanted to differentiate designs - compare Dry Bones between SMB3 and SMW, they could be seen as different enemies. If it weren't for the localized name for the next example, these'd have about as much as common with each other as the Hammer Bro and AFH Bro (basically named "Hurray!" in Japanese). I'll probably end up making a proposal to settle this at some point (and throw in a part for Sumo Bro being derivative of Sledge Bro) as I'm getting opposition on the page itself here but a lot of support in DMs elsewhere. In the meantime, I'll probably look for more direct evidence. [[User:Doc von Schmeltwick|Doc von Schmeltwick]] ([[User talk:Doc von Schmeltwick|talk]]) 21:21, January 16, 2024 (EST)
| |
| :::::::::::::Perhaps but I don't see how design decisions affecting two sets of Dry Bones should be applied between Chargin' Chuck and Boom Boom. We need more evidence, and I wouldn't be comfortable putting that in the article as if we've arrived at that conclusion. Stating some design similarities is probably okay but I would personally stop short at stating any link between the two. {{User:Mario/sig}} 21:24, January 16, 2024 (EST)
| |
| :::::::::::::Could you elaborate on what connection you're seeing in the Japanese names of the enemies? How "Bunbun" and "Bull" are connected aside from starting with the same letter isn't at all apparent to me. Furthermore, while there ''are'' similarities in their behavior, I'd argue that doesn't support them being variants of one another on its own. While variants do often share behaviors, that doesn't mean that every enemy that shares its behavior is a variant of the enemy with which it shares its behavior. To give a counter-example, Spike Tops and Lil Sparkies have, more or less, the same behavior, circling around the edges of platforms and being invulnerable to most forms of attack, but that's not enough to suggest they're variants of one another. The three key points you're presenting here are similarities in Japanese names, a subset of their actions being identical, and visual similarities. That last one is tenuous to me, and, as you say, it requires allowing for a bit of a redesign. Unless I'm missing something more on the connection between their Japanese names, I'm not convinced them starting with the same sound is enough to establish a link. That only leaves their behavior as a point to go off of, and that's already making the assumption we can disregard all the behaviors they don't share. I'm simply not convinced, but I do welcome you to elaborate on the name connection if I have missed something. [[User:Hooded Pitohui|Hooded Pitohui]] ([[User talk:Hooded Pitohui|talk]]) 21:38, January 16, 2024 (EST)
| |
|
| |
| :::Actually, that's a good point? The main argument for Koopa Strikers being a variant of Koopa Troopa, from what I understand, is the English (and other languages whose scripts were translated from English) name for Koopa Striker and Troopa Striker, but aside from that? I mean, it looks kinda like a Koopa Troopa, but so do Hammer Bros in these games. And in the catch card list, the various types of Koopa Troopas, Paratroopas, and Koopatrols appear all together, while the Strikers appear later on in the list alongside other Koopa clan enemies like the Bros and Magikoopas. And unlike the explicitly Koopa Troopa enemies (even the Bones, which admittedly also listed separately), its Japanese catch card description doesn't refer to it as "Nokonoko", but as a "カメ族だいひょう" (Koopa clan representative?), which just mentions the Koopa clan in general. So I'm thinking the Strikers are just their own thing. [[User:Blinker|Blinker]] ([[User talk:Blinker|talk]]) 07:33, January 17, 2024 (EST)
| |
| ::::You and Doc von might be onto something with the koopa strikers actually. Those are some good points! {{User:Dark-Boy-1up/sig}} 8:30, January 17, 2024 (EST)
| |
|
| |
| :(Shifting indent back) I ''do'' think Li'l Sparky is derivative of [[Spark]], but that's a different conversation. Anyways, due to Japanese being a syllabic language rather than a phonetic one, "Bu-ru" and "Bu'n-bu'n" are actually pronounced fairly similar, not just "Bull" and "Boom Boom," which are of course pronounced quite different. This is often the only thing shared with many of their enemy names, if even that; for another SMW example, Porcupuffer's JP name, for example, seems to be a cross between Cheep Cheep and Porcupo (despite functioning more as a Spiny Cheep/Boss Bass combo), spelling the former in a way that invokes a blowfish. When written and pronounced in English, "Puku" and "Fugu" don't seem all that similar, but in Japanese, they are nearly homophones and homonyms. There's a lot of nuance to it that can't really be imitated with English phonetics and characters, simply due to the disconnected roots of Japanese and Romantic/Germanic languages. [[User:Doc von Schmeltwick|Doc von Schmeltwick]] ([[User talk:Doc von Schmeltwick|talk]]) 21:47, January 16, 2024 (EST)
| |
| ::That's a fair explanation, and I appreciate it. I'm not knowledgeable enough when it comes to Japanese to recognize that, so I missed the connection. That does add some strength to the case you're making. I personally find the remaining two points a bit too weak to not oppose this if it does become a formal proposal, absent additional strong evidence, but I can at least see where you're coming from and I'm willing to re-evaluate in the future based on what more may be presented later. [[User:Hooded Pitohui|Hooded Pitohui]] ([[User talk:Hooded Pitohui|talk]]) 21:52, January 16, 2024 (EST)
| |
|
| |
| : I personally think that the similarities are just coincidence. [[User:PrincessPeachFan|PrincessPeachFan]] ([[User talk:PrincessPeachFan|talk]]) 09:00, January 17, 2024 (EST)
| |
