Talk:Purple Klaptrap

DKC Purple Klaptraps

I just noticed that purple Klaptraps (not the DK64 ones) appears in Donkey Kong Country, but the only thing they do in it is jumping at the same time as the Kong. Should we at least mention these Klaptraps here (something like Not to be confused with...)? --Metalex123 (talk) 11:48, 7 June 2016 (EDT)

Gonna bump this year-plus-old conversation point to say that I had thought of that as well. Thing is, these were referred to specifically as "Purple Klaptraps" while the ones on DKC were just referred to as "Klaptraps"/"Klap Traps." Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 05:32, 26 October 2017 (EDT)

Merge with Klaptrap

This talk page proposal has already been settled. Please do not edit this section or its subsections. If you wish to discuss the article, please do so in a new section below the proposal.

don't merge 3-4
It's a color variation. The behavioral difference is a simple difference in durability. And since this isn't an RPG, it's not like the former Gritty Goomba/Limbo Bro/Dry Bones/Chuck Guy scenario.

Furthermore, purple Klaptraps appear in the original SNES Donkey Kong Country, where they jump. But adding that to here would be problematic, as the GBA version makes them red. Red ones also appear in DK64, but only in cutscenes. This just seems odd to be split.

Finally, the guide that distinguishes these two also calls Gnawties "Beavers," Kritters "Kremlings," Kasplats "Krushas," and Koshas "Clubbies." That's not even getting into "Bones," "Ghost," "Robokremling," and "Shroom," which if Japanese names are anything to go by, should be "Krypt," "Kreeper," "Krank," and "Kroom," which are far more likely. (Seriously though, why has no one asked Steve Mayles about them yet?)

Anyways, this is an odd color exception, and should be merged.

Proposer: Doc von Schmeltwick (talk)
Deadline: September 22, 2018, 23:59 GMT

Support

1. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) Per proposal.
2. LinkTheLefty (talk) For consistency with how we handle colors.
3. Waluigi Time (talk) Per all.

Oppose

1. Metalex123 (talk) They are considered a separate species in an official guide. We have pages for simple recolors of ennemies on the wiki, so why should this one alone be merged? Let's take the Goombas for example: A gold-colored Goomba, a Goomba with a slight different name, Goombas that are sad & mad and heck, we even have a page for a tower of Goombas. All of these have very minor differences, so why would the Purple Klaptrap not deserve a page too?
2. Results May Vary (talk) Metalex is right--similar, yet different subspecies have their own title. Purple Klaptrap isn't an exception.
3. FanOfYoshi (talk) Yeah, it is concidered as distinct from normal Klaptrap. Does it on a Japanese guide?
4. Yoshi the SSM (talk) It is far different from the Koopa Troopas (which their shells are a good way to be a compromise) and Cheep Cheeps in that they are invincible to most attacks for the other, and the other two aren't. For Shy Guys, we have the ones needed to be split. And this enemy is unique as this enemy isn't defeated by normal attacks on the other with Big Goomba coming close.

Comments

@metalex This is more like Red and Green Koopa Troopas, which are commonly listed as separate in guides. None of those examples you've listed are even remotely comparable, and in fact have some pretty major differences. This is being given a different hue and less weaknesses, and said guide has proven itself to be unreliable at best regarding enemy classification, as I have stated. And no, the only "simple recolor" pages are for specific RPG enemies, like KP Koopas. Platforming enemies like this are against policy to have "simple recolor" pages. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 22:20, 7 September 2018 (EDT)

A Purple Klaptrap has a completely different way of killing it (Oranges instead of normal attacks), they don't attack with their teeth when killed and give Oranges. They sound very different from regular Klaptraps, unlike the Red and Green Koopas, who's only difference is the shell color and the way they move. Also why would the Goombos not be a good example? They're literally just Goombas. They do everything the same, with the only difference being the name. --Metalex123 (talk) 22:31, 7 September 2018 (EDT)

"Goombo" has a completely different design, as its Japanese name would suggest. More chibi. And that does not change the fact that having this be split off is still against policy. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 23:52, 7 September 2018 (EDT)

Okay then, why do we have a page for Big Goombas, for example? They are the same thing as a normal Goomba, but bigger (like the Purple Klaptraps), when defeated they do something different than normal Goombas (like Purple Klaptraps), and are killed in a different method from their original species (like the Purple Klaptraps). If we merge the Purple Klaptraps to the normal Klaptraps, we should also merge a lot of other pages who deserved their own pages. This is not just a simple reskin, this is a sub species of the Klaptraps. --Metalex123 (talk) 00:19, 8 September 2018 (EDT)

We don't use the term "sub-species." And no, a specific recurring enlargement that typically uses completely different graphics is not the same situation as a recolor. And again, this page is against policy. Anyways, what about the purple Klaptraps in the first DKC? Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 00:37, 8 September 2018 (EDT)

I think metalex was going to suggest "not to be confused with" when referring to the purple-color normal klaptraps in Donkey Kong Country Results May Vary (talk) 01:08, 8 September 2018 (EDT)

But it's still a purple Klaptrap. Which is also a red Klaptrap. See the problem here? Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 01:22, 8 September 2018 (EDT)

@FanOfYoshi No, as I said, on an English guide clearly written by incompetents. It's the exact same situation as our Troopas, Shy Guys, Snifits, Gnawties, Kritters, and Cheep Cheeps. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 23:55, 7 September 2018 (EDT)

'*Looks through policy pages* Um... it's one thing to say something is against policy. And another to actually provide a clue (but preferably a link) to the policy. Doing so helps other users find it easier. Especially if it is a link. So can you please either provide a clue or link? Yoshi the SSM (talk) 01:37, 8 September 2018 (EDT)

I've always just seen admins and others say it's against policy (or at least an unspoken rule), and it's been consistently been used as a reason. If we split one thing by recoloring, we split them all, which opens far too many cans of worms regarding Shy Guy inconsistencies. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 03:38, 8 September 2018 (EDT)

Yeah, most of the time when they say something is against policy, they link to it. And if it isn't in the policies, it's probably in the proposals. So you saying that this article is against policy without proof should not be done. But if you have evidence to support that this is indeed against policy, then you don't actually need a proposal unless it's on the border line. And if you have evidence (whether it is clear or it is on the border line), you must provide it so other users can find it (in the event an article is merged or deleted, it is provided in the summary for a record when viewing the history). The way I see it (without proof that this is against policy), this enemy is a unique case. And it should only include the DK64 info to keep it that way. Yoshi the SSM (talk) 11:07, 8 September 2018 (EDT)

I may have been wrong about that. But I seem to recall always being told it was against policy. Anyways, it is against conventions. And what's that thing about the Shy Guys supposed to mean? Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 15:32, 8 September 2018 (EDT)

Ok... I'm going to end this by saying nothing. And I mean Black Shy Guy and White Shy Guy. Yoshi the SSM (talk) 16:59, 8 September 2018 (EDT)

One of those varies between Anti Guy, a Propeller Shy Guy, and a normal Shy Guy (and as such is ambiguous) and the other is an ally. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 17:40, 8 September 2018 (EDT)

It's not against policy, but one of the earliest conversations might have sparked from the idea of splitting Koopa Troopas and Koopa Paratroopas based on shell color, which was a failed proposal. That said, if Donkey Kong 64's Purple Klaptrap has a size difference with standard Klaptrap, then it does admittedly seem to be a bit more involved than most other recolored enemies, but the fact that purple/red Klaptraps exist elsewhere still makes me lean towards support. LinkTheLefty (talk) 23:30, 8 September 2018 (EDT)

I've gotten every banana in that game. ONE Purple Klaptrap was seemingly larger in gameplay, and it is found in an area entered while Tiny is tiny. Therefore, it's just normal sized. And of course, the thing about N64 and GCN games is that size parameters could be abused anyways. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 00:02, 9 September 2018 (EDT)

There is this part from page 33 the Nintendo Power guide ("Tiny’s Shell Game" in Jungle Japes): "As a mini-monkey, Tiny can enter the beehive, use oranges to blow up the giant Klaptrap in the room with the Tiny Switch, then pound the switch. The next room also has two purple Klaptraps and another Tiny Switch. That switch opens the final room with the Golden Banana and an angry duo of a bee and a giant Klaptrap." So it seems like the writer considers it a giant (at least relative to the player character), but it also doesn't use "Purple Klaptrap" as the enemy's proper name. (Also, it would seem on further inspection that the idea to keep various enemy colors merged may have stemmed from an older proposal.) LinkTheLefty (talk) 20:56, 9 September 2018 (EDT)

Anyways, like I said, N64 games had a tendency to screw around with size parameters (take a look at Banjo-Kazooie or Ocarina of Time, for example). The game also features about 4 different sizes of Gnawty around Cranky's lab in Jungle Japes, and there's a seemingly-large Zinger in the same hive the large purple Klaptrap is found. The only one that really should be split is the oversized Kosha (known by the wiki as "Giant Viking Kremling"), since it doesn't respawn and causes a unique effect across Crystal Caverns while it still exists. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 23:32, 9 September 2018 (EDT)

Something I want to add is that, even though this article's creation predates those proposals, it was under the conjectural "Big Klaptrap" title, so it technically broke the initial color proposal when it was moved to Purple Klaptrap instead of merged to Klaptrap. LinkTheLefty (talk) 15:16, 22 September 2018 (EDT)

I know that, but it was flawed even then, as small-sized purple Klaptraps exist in the game, and large green ones can be seen in a cutscene. Either way, someone still needs to contact Greg Mayles about this game's enemies at some point, as this old PRIMA guide is very clearly beyond flawed. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 17:36, 22 September 2018 (EDT)

Regarding the above

The Player's Guide refers to these simply as Klaptraps, with the generic, non-capitalized words "giant" or "purple" occasionally being used for the seemingly-large ones in the beehive (which are intended normal-sized with a Mini Monkey Tiny; there is a "giant" Zinger in the same beehive). Anyways, is there anyone who currently thinks these should stay split? Reminder that the source that referred to these as "Purple Klaptraps" as a proper noun was rife with errors, some of which defy the names the game itself and its instruction booklet give to things. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 21:09, March 11, 2019 (EDT)

I don't think it's really necessary to keep these split. The color + durability distinction can be likened to the gray Krushas from Platform Perils, which are not split. 22:06, April 6, 2019 (EDT)

I agree. I feel like several things brought up later in the comments weren't factored in much of the votes against it, and I actually considered doing a second proposal for that reason. If it still stays split, then we should reconsider if it should be treated as an enemy originally from Donkey Kong Country or a Donkey Kong 64 enemy that happens to share its color with a version-specific variant from the former game, given the two appearances show very different behavior. LinkTheLefty (talk) 08:43, April 7, 2019 (EDT)

Interesting scenario. I'm not sure how to proceed either. -- FanOfYoshi 10:24, April 7, 2019 (EDT)

Let's have some consensus first. -- FanOfYoshi 02:48, April 19, 2019 (EDT)

I'd be in favor of a merge. Niiue - Who has lost his tail? 05:22, April 19, 2019 (EDT)

After nearly two months and no comments, I think it's time for a proposal. A big problem with this article is it's lack of focus - it tries to cover both the DK64 purple Klaptraps and the DKC ones, when the latter are a textbook example of the kind of thing that's comparable to red and green Troopas, and their coloration isn't even consistent between different versions of the game. This results in the utterly awkward mention of red Klaptraps in DK64, even though this article is supposed to be about purple Klaptraps. Though I'd prefer an outright merge, this should at least be restricted to the DK64 ones. If Red Spike Top is allowed to have a separate article, than the DK64 purple Klaptraps can be separate from the DKC ones. That is, if we keep the article. So the options should be: merge outright, DK64 only, or leave as-is. 14:41, June 9, 2019 (EDT)

Merge with Klaptrap or remove non-DK64 information

This talk page proposal has already been settled. Please do not edit this section or its subsections. If you wish to discuss the article, please do so in a new section below the proposal.

merge with klaptrap 10-2-0
To sum up the above:

• The Player's Guide calls these "Klaptraps," only using "purple" as a generic adjective and not as part of its name.
• The source that used "Purple Klaptrap" as a proper noun (the Prima guide) was mistake-ridden, even contradicting names from the game and the manual.
• The durability difference is similar to that of the gray Krushas from DKC, which do not have their own article.

This article is also messy: since that failed proposal a year ago, people started including information about the purple Klaptraps from DKC. Those are exactly the kind of thing that's comparable to red and green Troopas; their only notable attribute is that they jump. They're brown in the GBC version and red in the GBA version, so their coloring isn't even consistent. Also, just because of that color change, there is a completely irrelevant mention of red Klaptraps in DK64.

So, if we keep this article, we should make it specifically about the DK64 enemy, though I'd prefer just merging it outright.

Proposer: 7feetunder (talk)
Deadline: September 21, 2019, 23:59 GMT

Merge with Klaptrap

1. 7feetunder (talk) Preferred option.
2. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) The only "official support" for keeping these split is a laughably-unreliable guide.
3. Waluigi Time (talk) Per all.
4. Obsessive Mario Fan (talk) Per all.
5. Lord Grammaticus (talk) Per all.
6. Power Flotzo (talk) Per everyone.
7. BBQ Turtle (talk) Per all.
8. FanOfYoshi (talk) Second option. After thinking a while about it, i think it should not be kept on its own article.
9. EDShoot (talk) Per all.
10. MarioManiac1981 (talk) After reading its article, I can see why Purple Klaptrap needs to be merged. Per all.

Remove non-DK64 information

1. 7feetunder (talk) Second choice.
2. FanOfYoshi (talk) Best option. I don't think the other ones are the same.

Comments

Removed the source where it's just "purple Klaptrap". -- FanOfYoshi 01:19, September 11, 2019 (EDT)