| Latest revision |
Your text |
| Line 4: |
Line 4: |
|
| |
|
| I added the conjecture template. <span style="font-family:verdana; color:#red;"><font size="5">'''[[User:Paper Jorge|P]]'''[[User talk:Paper Jorge|aper]] '''[[User:Paper Jorge/sig|Jorge]]'''</font></span> | | I added the conjecture template. <span style="font-family:verdana; color:#red;"><font size="5">'''[[User:Paper Jorge|P]]'''[[User talk:Paper Jorge|aper]] '''[[User:Paper Jorge/sig|Jorge]]'''</font></span> |
|
| |
| Ooooh... so can I remove mentions of the title from the article? {{User:Stumpers/sig}} 16:33, 20 February 2008 (EST)
| |
|
| |
|
| == Split == | | == Split == |
| Line 17: |
Line 15: |
| Aren't the games, live action and animated TV series, and comics all considered seperate from each other? If so, this article should be divided up a bit more to make these distinctions clear, instead of smashing all these conflicting timelines together and sticking a repetative "Appearances" section on the end. - [[User:Walkazo|Walkazo]] | | Aren't the games, live action and animated TV series, and comics all considered seperate from each other? If so, this article should be divided up a bit more to make these distinctions clear, instead of smashing all these conflicting timelines together and sticking a repetative "Appearances" section on the end. - [[User:Walkazo|Walkazo]] |
| :Blitzwing and I are figuring this one out: we both agree that this whole canon and separate timelines thing is just fanon (it's fan additions to separate or combine since Nintendo has done neither), so the question is, would it be weird to combine games and TV shows into one section? It should come up as a proposal whether this is appropriate. Please tell me what is conflicting about this article, and if there are conjectural statements, give 'em the axe per usual. {{User:Stumpers/sig}} 21:56, 16 February 2008 (EST) | | :Blitzwing and I are figuring this one out: we both agree that this whole canon and separate timelines thing is just fanon (it's fan additions to separate or combine since Nintendo has done neither), so the question is, would it be weird to combine games and TV shows into one section? It should come up as a proposal whether this is appropriate. Please tell me what is conflicting about this article, and if there are conjectural statements, give 'em the axe per usual. {{User:Stumpers/sig}} 21:56, 16 February 2008 (EST) |
| ::No, the article's well written. However, in other articles such as [[Mario]] and [[Luigi]] the cartoons, etc. are listed under "Other Appearances" or whatever, whereas here they're smushed in with the games. While the [[The Adventures of Super Mario Bros. 3|car]][[Super Mario World (show)|toons]] and even those odd [[Super Mario Bros. Super Show|live-action sequences]] don't ''really'' conflict with the games (except for Koopa and the Koopalings' appearances and names; and some other little details I don't remember well enough to list) other programs do, like ''[[The Great Mission to Save Princess Peach]]'' and the [[Super Mario Bros. (movie)|''Super Mario Bros.'' movie]]. Fortunately these alternate timelines don't effect ''this'' article; but you're right that we should probably make a Proposal about it in order to set a standard for all artciles. - [[User:Walkazo|Walkazo]]
| |
| :::The problem with not smooshing is that you immeadiately indicate that the cartoons are not part of the canon, which is something we have no official word on. In the current state, by separating other mediums and videogames, we're making a judgement. The only way this separation would not be a judgement would be if we, and this is my opinion, I haven't asked Blitz, labeled the section with said infromation as "Video Game Information" and then proceeded to sort everything by release date, including Yoshi's Island. Sounds wrong, right? If you can think of an alternate to this that also allows us to put sources that clearly come before others based on their storylines in their proper order, let me know. As for the movie and "The Great Mission", (oh, and the Amada series as well), I'm hoping we will be able to separate them. My goal is to separate things that do not attempt to mesh with the games in any way shape or form based on their alternate storylines. The problem with things like the Super Show, which has previously been called alternate-canon, is that it attempts to follow the same continuity as the video games, occuring before and after SMB1. Hope that rambling cleared up some stuff. I hope to get this ball rolling sometime this week. {{User:Stumpers/sig}} 21:15, 17 February 2008 (EST)
| |
| The real problem is that we don't have the official word on most things pertaining to timelines and whatnot. It's official (I think) that the ''Yoshi's Island'' "series" takes place in the past, but other than that we're stuck using release dates; but whose to say those indicate the actual order of game events in the Marioverse. For example, in various [[Mario Kart: Double Dash!!|Mario]] [[Mario Golf|Kart]] [[Mario Tennis|and]] [[Mario Power Tennis|sports]] [[Mario Superstar Baseball|games]], [[Baby Mario]] and sometimes [[Baby Luigi]] show up alongside their adult selves. ''Nintendo'' doesn't explain this, so for my personal understanding of the Marioverse I said these games took place after the main events of ''[[Mario & Luigi: Partners in Time]]'' but before the Babies were sent back into the past. It was the only way I could logically make things work (I guess [[E. Gadd]] ''could've'' kept the time machine around and periodically let the Babies be fetched from the past but this doesn't really fit his character and seems a tad convoluted for things as simple as sportsgames and races), yet it's no more than fanon. My point is, we can't blind ourselves to the glaringly obvious just because ''Nintendo'' didn't say "oh yeah, those shows ''aren't'' the same as the games." In the shows Peach is a redhead, and Bowser's green and bald; yes that's what their sprites looked like in the game, but '''official''' artwork for the games also depict them as their normal appearances. Which do we use? I say we use the latter, meaning the shows are inaccurate to the the game Marioverse, and therefore not the same. Another example is the ''[[Super Mario Adventures]]'' comic; in it, Mario and Luigi meet Yoshi in the forest after falling throuhg a warp pipe in the sky after Bowser kidnapped the princess from her palace; yet in ''[[Super Mario World]]'' (the game) they were reunited with Yoshi in the woods after reading his letter at home after Bowser kidnapped Peach on Yoshi's Island. Difference? I think so! And there are probably way more differences. Just because there's no official ''word'' doesn't mean there aren't official ''differences'' which let us split these timelines. How's that for a loophole? - [[User:Walkazo|Walkazo]]
| |
| ::This really isn't the place for this discussion, so I'll continue it on your talk page, ok? {{User:Stumpers/sig}} 20:08, 18 February 2008 (EST)
| |
|
| |
| == Mister Mario's first appearance? ==
| |
|
| |
| Something I just wondered about and put on [[Mario]]'s trivia section. In the original arcade games, [[Mario]] fought [[Donkey Kong]]. However, later games has indicated that the Donkey Kong in the original games was [[Cranky Kong]], the modern Donkey Kong's dad/grandpa, and the modern Donkey Kong was [[Donkey Kong Jr.]] in the arcade games. We shall also note that, physically, neither the arcade games Mario or Donkey has changed much when comparing to the modern Donkey and Mario. Based upon this fact, this could possibly mean that Mister Mario's first appearance was, in fact, in ''[[Donkey Kong (game)|Donkey Kong]]''. - {{User:KingMario/sig}} 23, February 2008 19:01 (GMT +01)
| |
|
| |
| Don't apes age faster than humans? -- [[User:Sir Grodus|Sir Grodus]] 15:16, 23 February 2008 (EST)
| |
|
| |
| :Yes, which explains why Cranky's an old geezer while Mario's still got spring in his step (and no liver spots). Anyway, it's an interesting theory, but it's pure conjecture. It's been officially stated that the titlar ape of ''Donkey Kong'' was in fact Cranky Kong, but as of yet it's still maintained that it was the one-and-only Mario fighting. You could argue that Donkey Kong was a baby at the same time as ''Mario'' in ''[[Yoshi's Island DS]]'', though it can be assumed that was Cranky Kong too. Plus, Pauline later appears in ''[[Mario vs. Donkey Kong 2: March of the Minis]]'' as Mario's special guest. In ''Donkey Kong'' Pauline was Mario's love interest, so it'd be a bit strange if "Mario Jr." also had designs on her. Of course, Pauline's presence with "Jr." could be explained by saying she's his mother, but that'd make things creepy (her youthful and busty appearance, Donkey Jr.'s love for her, the fluffy stuff between her and Mario, etc.). Anyway, until someone in Nintendo says it was Mario Sr. in ''DK'' we're not adding the game to the timeline; official stuff only. - [[User:Walkazo|Walkazo]]
| |
|
| |
| This theory sounds very cool, but ultimately it's just a theory... but there's no reason you can't put it on your user page. That would be pretty cool to see everyone's theories as to continuity, actually... hmm... Regardless, we don't know anything about Mushroom World monkeys aging faster or slower than humans. I always thought that Donkey Kong (Cranky) was just a lot older than Mario at the time, and that DK (Baby DK) was the same age. There's no reason that a guy in his 20's or 30's couldn't have a fair fight with a 30 or 40 year old, especially if the 40 year old was a powerful monkey with barrels. The DKC TV show commented on Cranky's appearance when he was younger. Apparently he was a buff "stud" (we got to see him, it wasn't just Cranky talking). {{User:Stumpers/sig}} 16:52, 23 February 2008 (EST)
| |
|
| |
| == Canonicity ==
| |
|
| |
| [[MarioWiki:Canonicity]] says, "Comics, cartoons, and movies are difficult to place, so we consider them to be '''alternate-canon'''. All the information in the article is fine, but can we at least say that the Mario's mother in the show might not be the same one as the mother of Mario in the games? It's just the sentences like "Mrs. Mario's passed down her physical appearance to Mario, her oldest, although she used to be skinnier like Luigi." that I'm taking about. I know this was discussed before in a section above, but I wanted to start a new one so different people would respond. {{User:CrystalYoshi/sig}} 20:10, 8 June 2008 (EDT)
| |
| :Sneaky. And yeah, you're right. Those sorta near-contradictions really take away from the article, and simply stating that the different media might have different personas would eliminate that. - {{User:Walkazo/sig}}
| |
| ::Yeah, so could I do that? {{User:CrystalYoshi/sig}}
| |
| :::I'm thinking we need a general statement template to this effect: "The following history section contains elements from various mediums, placed in the ''[[Mario (franchise)|Super Mario]]'' timeline where each source claims to be. However, please note that [[Nintendo]] has made no assurance that different mediums share the same timeline." We'd need a proposal for this, but it would clear up a lot of this. As to the quote CrystalYoshi presented, had I written this article now with the above statement in mind, it would read like this: "Mario's mother appeared as a skinny blonde woman in (source here), but earlier in (source here) she was portrayed as a chubby, manly woman. No explaination has been given for this change." My goal is to place information in order based on where each source claims to be (Super Show was right after Super Mario Bros., Super Mario World the show was right after Super Mario World but before they left for the Mushroom Kingdom again), and then point out inconsistencies without any speculative reasons as to why the differences are there. So, with that in mind I wouldn't recommend putting in speculation that Mario had two different mothers in two different sources based on different appearances (Remember King Boo? He changed appearance in two consecutive main series appearances. Those are as close to Miyamoto as you get, too.), but certainly I wouldn't recommend leaving in the speculation that you find. If I remember right, the way I wrote this article you should be able to simply replace each bit of speculation with a bit about plot holes, etc. On a last note, the Canonicity page was being discussed on the forum by Cobold, Blitzwing, DP, and myself. On my to-do list is to rewrite it, run it by them, and then make a proposal to change that page. We haven't made any progress, but the following was suggested in a chat between Blitzwing and myself: "There is no official canon." And that would be it for that page. Granted, I would hope we could include something like the above, which would, I hope, satisfy those who view everything as canon and those who view only mainstream games as canon and everyone in between. If you want to know my view, I think that we don't have the right to decide what is canon and what isn't because Miyamoto hasn't said a word about it beyond wanting to leave Mario with an open future. {{User:Stumpers/sig}} 23:17, 9 June 2008 (EDT)
| |
|
| |
| == Split ==
| |
|
| |
| I am currently rewriting the article appropriately and hope to upload the rewrites very soon. In the process, I am removing speculation and adhering to the new article organization standard; I figured we should kill three birds with one stone. {{User:Stumpers/sig}} 20:24, 1 December 2008 (EST)
| |
| :Sweet. Once the new pages are up I'll help with the links as much as I can (if my homework doesn't kill me in the meantime). - {{User:Walkazo/sig}} 22:41, 1 December 2008 (EST)
| |
| ::Oh, yes. That is my current state as well with school! If you want something to do in the meantime, you could do Mario's father article while I do Mama Mario, but if not I'll get around to it. Ugh... finding every mention of Mama is going to be a pain. {{User:Stumpers/sig}} 23:10, 1 December 2008 (EST)
| |
| :::Okay, I'll try my best to get around to it; it's the least I can do. - {{User:Walkazo/sig}} 23:28, 1 December 2008 (EST)
| |
