Editing Talk:Mario Party Advance

{{no forum talk}}
==Puns==
I don't think the puns section should be there. It's useless, and it reflects poorly on the article, like trivia. Does anyone else think it should be removed? {{user:Mario jc/sig}}
:All the other articles have a "Puns" section, so not having one here would kind of be inconsistent. [[User:GreenDisaster|GreenDisaster]] 14:28, 8 March 2012 (EST)

To be honest, I don't think ''any'' of the Mario Party game pages need the "Puns" section, especially not when the Mini-Games themselves are on a separate page. Not to mention, many of the puns in question are so obvious an intoxicated monkey could figure them out. [[User:Vent|Vent]] ([[User talk:Vent|talk]]) 09:35, 17 August 2012 (EDT)
:I agree with that. --[[User:Glowsquid|Glowsquid]] ([[User talk:Glowsquid|talk]]) 10:16, 17 August 2012 (EDT)
::Click on [[MarioWiki:Proposals#Puns on the Mario Party articles|proposal]] and you will be sent to a proposal on the matter. [[User:GreenDisaster|GreenDisaster]] ([[User talk:GreenDisaster|talk]]) 15:50, 27 August 2012 (EDT)

== Can ==

someone put new character articles on the wiki and do [[MarioWiki:Maintenance|maintenance]] on this game? I never played this, and may even one person, especially my friend [[User:YoshiKong|YoshiKong]] and Glowsquid. This game is a [[mb:threads/17764|stub]].
[[User:Unshy Guy|Unshy Guy]] ([[User talk:Unshy Guy|talk]]) 21:45, 27 October 2013 (EDT)

== Character articles ==

Is it really necessary to have separate articles for all the clients (Goomba, Shy Guy, Ninji)? I ask that here for a few reasons: cause all the characters are from this game and I wanna make sure there's a reason behind it before making a proposal about it. {{User:Tails777/sig}}
:I know this comment was made ''ages'' ago but I feel like I should respond. I believe all those characters should keep their separate pages because they're all minor NPCs that contribute to gameplay and story (which is kinda a given since Mario Party Advance ''is'' set up the way it is). It's why we have pages for things like [[Goomba (Super Paper Mario character)]], because despite having no characterization in name or design, they're still a story character. And quite a few of them also have unique names and designs; [[Hulu]] has as much right to be an article as [[Koopa the Quick]] does (and I don't see anyone trying to merge KtQ to the general [[Koopa Troopa]] page because of "oh no Japanese name"). If we merge all the clients then it would be quite inconsistent to how we handle minor NPCs. [[User:Somethingone|Somethingone]] ([[User talk:Somethingone|talk]]) 18:15, May 17, 2022 (EDT)
::I appreciate the response all these years later, but this was also addressed to me when I made a [[MarioWiki:Proposals/Archive/38#Delete the Mario Party Advance character pages|proposal on this matter]]. Don't worry, I get the point of their existence. {{User:Tails777/sig}}20:00, May 17, 2022 (EDT)
:::They seem like generic characters with a role rather than like individual characters. It seems like a hair split distinction and I can also see the possibility of most of these characters being merged with the generic enemy (with few exceptions like Hulu) and the redirect just links to a section on that page. Mind you, not only Koopa the Quick is named, but there's regular Koopas in that game and Koopa the Quick is a named character. Metal Mario, after all, has an article dealing with both the character and the form; Birdo the character and the species. As for "unique roles", people could potentially have a case for that Strollin' Stu in [[Super Mario Manga Mania]] who has his own chapter to him and a personality, a dialogue (and dialogue quirks), a sibling even, arguably having all the same distinctions as these Mario Party characters, but just in another format, the comic book one. {{User:Bazooka Mario/sig}} 20:22, May 17, 2022 (EDT)
::::If that one Strollin' Stu has all those things then I don't see why they shouldn't have a page, especially if we are splitting so many of the manga characters. As for Birdo, that's a separate thing as that is an example of a character that turned into species. This, however, is a case of "less unique" characters coming ''from'' a species, like how we have [[Bob-omb (Paper Mario: The Origami King)]] split from [[Bob-omb]]. Also in regards to Koopa the Quick, he does not have a unique name in Japanese and the article sayas he's treated interchangeably in Japan, which is usually enough evidence to get most people<!--or at least three--> hooked on a "Let's-a merge!" Train. [[User:Somethingone|Somethingone]] ([[User talk:Somethingone|talk]]) 20:37, May 17, 2022 (EDT)
:::::I would strongly oppose merging Koopa the Quick and Bob-omb with their respective articles (I was even the one who created the article for the latter) for having major roles in the games they appear in. There has been an attempt to merge [[Lava Piranha]] with [[Fire Piranha Plant]] before due to a shared Japanese name, but I really don't see that happening. As for what this discussion is aimed at, I probably would keep these split for similar reasons. {{User:Swallow/sig}} 20:54, May 17, 2022 (EDT)
::::::I don't think so. They aren't as notable as the Bob-omb, as they come off as generic characters appropriated as quest props. As for Super Mario-kun, there's plenty of examples of these individual mooks having chapters to themselves; I've seen chapters with [https://www.mariowiki.com/Rex#Super_Mario-kun Rex being Yoshi's friend and getting brainwashed by Kamek], Thwomp having parents who are sick and whatnot, a Buzzy Beetle squad (iirc? their captain I know has like facial hair I believe and probably that can be an article), a lost child Boo who cries a lot and pees on Yoshi and has a mother who's in makeup. There are exceptions I could make to these such as the Bob-omb Buddy who accompanies Mario in the Super Mario 64 arc, because they play a really major role that it'll be cumbersome to have a detail of their adventures in the Bob-omb Buddy page; [[Yokkī]] is also named and probably plays a big role too. {{User:Bazooka Mario/sig}} 21:23, May 17, 2022 (EDT)
:::::::I understand this is a talk page and is naturally meant to stick to productive talk about the subject at hand, but I find it hilarious how this sprang from an 8 year old comment that I thought was settled when I tried to propose merging all those articles with their parent species in the first place. But to give any sort of two cents on this regardless, I wouldn't exactly be opposed to merging them still, but at the same time, I can fully understand why they have their own articles. As Somethingone said, it's more consistent with other NPCs (which I can easily compare to the likes of even named NPCs from the ''Paper Mario series'') so I wouldn't be opposed to keeping them split either. {{User:Tails777/sig}}00:04, May 18, 2022 (EDT)
::::::::Well I did try to argue merging them years ago. I can also see it going both ways, but my problem is that they're not named and there's not much to distinguish them. Should the Wiggler in Mario Party DS get their own article? They have the same sort of dialogue, story arc, and so on. The Koopa from Mario Party DS has his own page. {{User:Bazooka Mario/sig}} 00:12, May 18, 2022 (EDT)
:::::::::Honestly, the more I think about it, the more I think there needs to be a bigger discussion over the qualifications for articles such as this. Like yeah, they are NPCs who can be comparable to the ''Paper Mario'' NPCs, but then you have a case like Lakitu in ''Mario Superstar Baseball'' or ''Mario Super Sluggers'' or as you mentioned, the Wiggler and Koopa Troopa in ''Mario Party DS''. There are a lot of cases where these minor characters get articles, but a lot of cases where similar ones don't get articles. And while I probably sound like a broken record player over this, similar could be said over some palette swaps; we have articles for colored Magikoopas (though they could easily fall in with other RPG palette swaps) and, again hate to bring this up again, karts like the Blue Biddybuggy or Blue Badwagon, but not for other similar cases. Regardless, it feels like a large inconsistency that needs a lot of discussion, based on how many factors need to be considered. Though this could all just be me trying to sound like I know a thing about how all that would work. No idea. That's just what my brain put together. {{User:Tails777/sig}}21:32, May 19, 2022 (EDT)

== Konami? ==

I doubt that Konami was involved in the development of this game, even when it released on the Wii U Virtual Console; furthermore, the pages for ''[[Mario Party 2]]'' and ''[[Mario Party DS]]'' don't show that Konami was involved in any development, even though they owned all of Hudson's assets by the time the Wii U came out, let alone when these games did, and the same can be said for the original Nintendo 64 games on [[Nintendo 64 - Nintendo Switch Online]]. Konami wasn't even the controlling shareholder of Hudson when this game came out; they would only achieve that status a month later, and even if they were considered "developers", then why doesn't ''[[Mario Party 7]]'', ''[[Mario Party 8]]'', and ''Mario Party DS'' have Konami's name in their development team? I would like to know if Konami had any involvement in making ''Mario Party Advance'' for the Wii U, or if it is just because the developers were bought out. [[User:Altendo|Al]][[User talk:Altendo|ten]][[Special:Contributions/Altendo|do]] 17:12, October 5, 2024 (EDT)