Talk:Chancellor

Merge with Minister?

If the two characters are the same name in Japan, and even in the American games they both look very similar (moustache, green spots, etc.) and play similar roles in the goverment, should we merge the two pages into one? Stumpers! 09:40, 14 August 2008 (EDT)

Well, there's no confirmation on them being the same character. They do look similar, though. If they had had the same name everywhere, then they could've been the same person (Thus I have merged the two Merlon pages). I don't know what to say. IMO, they seem like the same person(How'd he get demoted to Minister in PM, I dunno), but hard to say. Marcelagus (T • C • E)

Previously, we've had this problem with Kamek. NoA named him Kamek instead of following NoJ and naming him after his species. We wondered: should Kamek be merged with Magikoopa because his Japanese name is the same? We decided not to based on Yoshi, Birdo, and Toad, major players who are named after their species. This is a little different though. Still, we didn't create separate articles for Princess Toadstool and Princess Peach. Stumpers! 14:48, 14 August 2008 (EDT)

Well... it's kind of hard, because as of phtsical appearance, the main thing is the design on their mushroom, and their Moustache. The mustaches are different colors in each game(What, did he get older in PM?), and as for mushroom design, there's just so many others with the same pattern. (As you can see, Herb T. even has the mustache going on). I think there still might be some info/proof lacking just yet to merge these articles. There might be an in-game hint of somekind, loosely connecting the two characters, but as for now, there's no sure way of knowing.

File:Battle T.PNG Marcelagus (T • C • E)

For now I think just linking to the other article is fine. I'd like to do as little conjecturing as possible. ;) Stumpers! 15:24, 14 August 2008 (EDT)

The Minister and Chancellor have the same title in Japan - Kinoko Daijin (Mushroom Cabinet Minister). I think it's safe to say that they're the same character, and remember, if NoA tampers with it, he technically wasn't demoted. LinkTheLefty 15:14, 12 November 2008 (EST)

Plus, the only big difference in his design is the white mustache. He could have simply aged somewhat by Paper Mario. Remember, there are actually a lot more references to Super Mario RPG that got lost in translation either due to separate translators or legal reasons, so I think it's safe to say it's meant to be the same character. LinkTheLefty 22:10, 13 April 2010 (EDT)

Toadsworth

Since Stumpers wanted to know when Toadsworth was referred to as a chancellor: In Paper Mario: The Thousand-Year Door, Goombella tells the player that Toadsworth is the Mushroom Kingdom's chancellor. At least she does so in the German translation (and the German translation is based on the Japanese original). --Grandy02 17:00, 12 November 2008 (EST)

Thanks, Grandy! I suppose it would make sense: the Chancellor becomes the Minister, and then Toadsworth took over his old position, perhaps? Stumpers! 19:23, 12 November 2008 (EST)

Differences between Chancellor and Toad Minister

List of differences between the Chancellor and the Toad Minister:

• The Chancellor has a black moustache, while the Toad Minister has a white one.
• The Chancellor's wearing is distinctively the same as the normal Toads, while the Toad Minister wears a green shirt with a red and yellow vest (very similar to the Grass Land King's vest in All-Stars and Game Boy Advance remake.

Their Japanese names are the same, but they have some differences in appearance. FanOfYoshi (talk) 05:53, 30 August 2018 (EDT)

I think it would be speculating to merge the two just on Japanese name and on two similar roles from two very different games. It's me, Mario! (Talk / Stalk) 13:12, 30 August 2018 (EDT)

Still, by this logic, one could make a case that Iggy Koopa is different from Iggy Koopa. Now saying that he was some sort of prototypical Toadsworth would be speculation, but this seems more inferential to me. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 14:14, 30 August 2018 (EDT)

We've been over this with the Wilt Shroom and the Dried Shroom before--just because the Japanese name is identical doesn't make for a merged page. The two have enough differences in roles to warrant differing pages. ~Camwood777 (talk) 22:06, 21 September 2018 (EDT)

Also, Needlenoses and Spiked Fun Guys have the same name as Pokey in Japanese, but have a different English name. -- FanOfYoshi 03:58, 21 October 2018 (EDT)

Merge this page with Minister

This talk page proposal has already been settled. Please do not edit any of the sections in the proposal. If you wish to discuss the article, do so in a new header below the proposal.

do not merge 6-9
The two articles are too similar to remain separate, as proven by a list of differences above, which is:

• The Chancellor has a black mustache, while the Toad Minister has a white one.
• The Chancellor's wearing is distinctively the same as the normal Toads, while the Toad Minister wears a green shirt with a red and yellow vest (very similar to the Grass Land King's vest in All-Stars and Game Boy Advance remake.

Those differences are too little to have this article remain separate.

Proposer: GrainedCargo192 (talk)
Deadline: December 27, 2018, 23:59 GMT Extended to January 3, 2019, 23:59 GMT Extended to January 10, 2019, 23:59 GMT

Merge

1. GrainedCargo192 (talk) Per Proposal.
2. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) I'm all for having only one proto-Toadsworth article, given the similarities between the two.
3. Glowsquid (talk) Per proposal.
4. bwburke94 (talk) Per proposal. The two characters are likely the same.
5. Niiue (talk) Per all. Paper Mario had a ton of callbacks to Super Mario RPG.
6. rollerC (talk) Per all, especially Glowsquid below.

Don't Merge

1. FanOfYoshi (talk) Per what Bazooka Mario and Camwood777 said above. I'm also not hyped in merging.
2. Toadette the Achiever (talk) The Japanese name and similar appearances are a start, but I'll only support if their personalities are mostly the same too (and similar in general to Toadsworth himself).
3. Bazooka Mario (talk) I don't see the real need to merge the two compared to just having two separate pages that can deal with a short paragraph of similarities. It'll avoid speculation altogether, unlike merging.
4. Bloober (talk) Per Bazooka Mario.
5. Scrooge200 (talk) Per Bazooka Mario.
6. Doomhiker (talk) Changed my vote, as even if there are intended to be the same person, any potential speculation should be avoided. Per all.
7. TheFlameChomp (talk) Per Bazooka Mario.
8. WeirdDave13 (talk)} Per all.
9. LudwigVon (talk) Per all.

Comments

I'm not too hyped in merging. -- FanOfYoshi 02:04, 13 December 2018 (EST)

Green cap, gold-trimmed robes, same role, proto-Toadsworth, same JP name, same lack of plot importance, all in all pretty similar. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 11:17, 13 December 2018 (EST)

Then why is his mustache white? -- FanOfYoshi 02:04, 14 December 2018 (EST)

Because hair grays as people get older? Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 16:21, 14 December 2018 (EST)

The only thing left for me to agree that they are one and the same is if the Minister has roughly the same recurring personality trait as the Chancellor (and, all in all, the same personality as Toadsworth): constantly worrying about Peach's safety. ^(T|C) 10:12, 15 December 2018 (EST)

Chancellor definitely does, and the few times Minister is seen, that seems to be his main concern. Admittedly, during that time, everyone's locked in the castle, so that'd sorta be his job anyway. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 17:14, 15 December 2018 (EST)

I don't think that's enough to draw me in. The Minister needs to be really worried about Peach almost all the time, not because he knows Peach is actually in mortal danger. ^(T|C) 12:52, 18 December 2018 (EST)

He only appears at three parts of the game, one of which is with nearly every other NPC. You only get to speak with him in two instances, only one of which is repeatable after the following important event (and that instance also being very close to the end), so there's no telling how he feels for over 90% of the game. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 13:03, 18 December 2018 (EST)

Along with other subjects like Star Hill and several recurring items, it's pretty clear that this character is one of the things that survived the transition from Super Mario RPG 2. Having said that, I've considered reapproaching the topic of having the Paper Mario subjects somehow split or distinguished from their counterparts due to Mario & Luigi: Paper Jam (I know it was put to a proposal, but it's incredibly awkward when our paper character articles list their first appearances as Paper Jam despite the name "Paper Mario" existing for the character since at least Super Smash Bros. Melee, not to mention certain other things of note like Paper Jam having Tower Power Pokey from the previous game and directly hinting at the then-upcoming paper Koopalings make it blatantly obvious that it's supposed to be the same Paper Mario in these games). Not sure how it would go about though - the cleanest method I thought of was maybe proposing to mimic the way Wookieepedia uses tabs for "Canon" and "Legends" articles, but that probably wouldn't be too feasible. LinkTheLefty (talk) 15:03, 15 December 2018 (EST)

@LinkTheLefty We should (re)start the proposal IMO. Is it for splitting the Paper Mario counterparts from the original characters? -- FanOfYoshi 09:47, 16 December 2018 (EST)

That's the idea, with possibly an option to include items and locations (which could mean that Star Hill gets split three ways). LinkTheLefty (talk) 14:55, 22 December 2018 (EST)

Regarding "speculation," please recall that there is a difference between speculation and inference. If it were speculation, there'd be little-to-no ground to stand on, but with inference, a leap of logic can be made if there is enough evidence without an official statement of "these are the exact same characters." Please remember the principle of "show, don't tell." Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 15:14, 20 December 2018 (EST)

"Enough evidence". There is not enough evidence. This is speculation on two characters on two very different games. Paper Mario may have nods to Super Mario RPG and original intention may be Paper Mario being a sequel to Super Mario RPG but Paper Mario turned out to be a very different game and has its own continuity and series. We can write information about those nods, but to say they're the same, I think, is a stretch. It's me, Mario! (Talk / Stalk) 20:44, 23 December 2018 (EST)

What happened to the "continuity" by Color Splash? Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 21:55, 25 December 2018 (EST)

There was clearly a continuity in the original games though, which technically stuck around by Sticker Star thanks to the Goombella cameo. -- Too Bad! Waluigi Time! 22:46, 25 December 2018 (EST)

That continuity wasn't lacking in SMRPG, not only through this, but through things like Star Hill/Shooting Star Summit and the castle having a surrounding village. Back in those days, anything was basically assumed continuity with

every other thing, hence Luigi's diary mentioning a few of the random spinoffs. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 22:49, 25 December 2018 (EST)

I have no idea why having the SMRPG and PM depictions of Star Hill on the same page was uncontroversial, but the idea that two characrters who have similar appearances, identical roles in the respective games they appear in, very similar personalities for their brief speaking role, one of them appearing in what was originally intended to be a sequel to the other character's game and which retains multiple overt and subtle links to its original lineage, and who have the same name in the source language of both games may infact be the same character is just too radical of a leap of logic to make. --Glowsquid (talk) 10:04, 28 December 2018 (EST)

The proposal had far less votes, for starters (4 votes), and the page history has shown that there has been action to merge the Star Hills too. I feel there's a consistency problem with how we deal with two otherwise different objects with shared names/traits with two failed attempts to merge Wilt Shroom and Dried Shroom. I find it strange we don't have articles on the separate Star Hills in addition to a page about Star Hill location, but we do, as well as having a one big page on them, on the different Rainbow Roads, Luigi's Mansions, Mario Circuits, and so on... Anyhow, I find it far more useful if we had separate pages on the Star Hills or the Toad Towns in addition to one big page, as we've done with some recurring locations; it'll help cut down article bloat and we have more leeway for detail. But that's a different subject, and tbh, not sure if it's even applicable to Chancellor. It's me, Mario! (Talk / Stalk) 13:18, 4 January 2019 (EST)

Merge to Minister: REDUX

This talk page proposal has already been settled. Please do not edit any of the sections in the proposal. If you wish to discuss the article, do so in a new header below the proposal.

failed to reach consensus 7-8
These characters not only have the same lang-of-orig name and role between games of which the latter is an intentional spiritual successor to the former, they have a very similar appearance, the exact same personality, and basically the same speaking patterns. Let's compare some lines:

"Chancellor:"	"Minister:"
Princess! You CAN'T be serious! You're NOT thinking of joining them, ARE YOU? This is sheer madness... You're a Princess! What will people say?! Now then! Thanks to Mario, the Princess is back. I now declare this date to be known forever as,... ...Hey, wait a minute! You don't suppose... Could it have been this “Smithy” who attacked our Kingdom? I fear we have no cause to rejoice. In fact, Mario, we must ask you for yet another favor... Please...on behalf of all of us, you MUST defeat Smithy... It is the only way we shall ever live in peace again.	Oh, Mario! You came at long last! As you can see, we're in a horrible situation! Princess Peach is who knows where and her beautiful castle is being run by Bowser's horrid staff of rejects. Nothing fills me with more joy than serving this castle with my heart and soul, but right now there's nothing I can do. We have no choice but to rely on you now, Mario. Please, at least save our dear Princess Peach!

Without further context, these could easily come from the same character in the same game. And considering we have Dried Shroom, Ultra Shroom, and Shooting Star Summit merged with their SMRPG iterations, this split seems like an odd relic.

One last thing, I checked, and "chancellor" and "minister" are effectively synonyms, being both vague terms for "head of government." They can contextually carry different connotations, but definition-wise it's up to one's own preference. In that respect, the English "names" are functionally the same too, so there's really no reason to not merge pre-Toadsworth exhibit A to pre-Toadsworth exhibit B.

Proposer: Doc von Schmeltwick (talk)
Deadline: April 4, 2022, 23:59 GMT Extended to April 11, 2022, 23:59 GMT Extended to April 18, 2022, 23:59 GMT Extended to April 25, 2022, 23:59 GMT

Support

1. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) - Per
2. Blinker (talk) - Per proposal. I think it makes sense to cover the green-capped mustachioed toad minister in Super Mario RPG and the green-capped mustachioed toad minister in the spiritual successor to Super Mario RPG in the same page.
3. LinkTheLefty (talk) - After some thought and a few more points raised in the comments, I'm leaning towards support. Sure, this might not -literally- be the same character for reasons I've gone over, but I want to bring up another Super Mario RPG-crossing proposal: Shaman. Technically speaking, Shaman might be owned by Square Enix, and so the similar Paper Mario characters can't officially be called the same Shamen, even if they are an allusion to them (this might be why they were retired after the first three Paper Mario games). Despite this, the proposal decided to keep classing the Paper Mario characters as Shaman characters. We can't have it both ways: either similar arguments apply here, or we rethink if the Paper Mario characters ought to be wholly separate entities as well.
4. Wikiboy10 (talk) - Per LinkTheLefty's points really. I also mentioned my big deal in the comments.
5. Somethingone (talk) Initially opposed, but after looking closer, I do agree to a merge now. After all, Japanese names aren't the sole split-n-merge decider, just look at Bull's-Eye Bill. We ain't making a page for all of its variants despite the Japanese name, nor are we re-arranging everything Big Boo-related because of its Japanese names.
6. TheDarkStar (talk) - per proposal
7. Mario4Ever (talk) - Per proposal, specifically the point about items/locations in both games not being covered separately.

Oppose

1. Hewer (talk) Per LinkTheLefty, but also I just think it's speculation to say any two characters are the same definitively until it's officially confirmed.
2. Archivist Toadette (talk) Speculation again. In any case, LinkTheLefty's reasoning is even better.
3. Niiue (talk) Per LTL.
4. Sdman213 (talk) Per all.
5. Swallow (talk) Per all.
6. FanOfYoshi (talk) Per all and my previous statements, and initial thoughts above. I also still stands my thoughts.
7. Mustard Machine (talk) Per all.
8. Ray Trace (talk) Per all, but this is just a leaning, as I can see the case brought forward as well that he is the same character.

Comments

I also want to add, in Japanese, both the Chancellor and the Minister have a penchant for referring to Mario as 「マリオどの」 (Mario-dono, Master Mario) - just like Toadsworth. However, there's only one thing that doesn't add up. In Paper Mario, at the beginning of the Peach scene between chapters 5 & 6, Twink muses how Peach has gotten bolder about sneaking around lately, and then she sarcastically responds: "I'm behaving like a delicate princess, just like the Ministers taught me to!" And yes, this plural is present in the Japanese version: 「だいじんたちの いいつけどおり ちゃんと お姫さまらしく おしとやかに してるわよ」 note 「だいじんたち」 (Daijin-tachi, Ministers). This indicates that there is/was at least one other Minister, but we simply don't see any others - unless that's alluding to the off-screen, Super Mario RPG one as a separate character. What do you make of that? Additionally, I'm unsure about Chancellor's copyright sitch: he's derived from Nintendo-owned Toad but he may be considered an original character, and as far as I know those belong to Square. EDIT: Oh, another thing related to speech patterns: in the Japanese version of Super Mario RPG, the Chancellor often refers to himself in the third person - he doesn't appear to demonstrate that quirk in Mario Story. EDIT2: Also, it turns out that their Japanese names aren't completely identical like it was believed for the longest time: the Chancellor is 「キノコ大臣」 (Kinoko Daijin, Mushroom Minister) while the Minister is the simpler 「だいじん」 (Daijin, Minister) - I think the confusion stemmed from "Toad Minister", which looks more like localization of the former rather than the latter. Granted, I should mention that Super Mario RPG shortens 「キノコ大臣」 to 「大臣」 sometimes, but it's likely due to text space, and again, there's still the other matters. LinkTheLefty (talk) 07:04, March 21, 2022 (EDT)

With the copyright thing, since Nintendo owns the species and he's such a generic idea for a character, that most likely wouldn't matter (though it could explain Toadsworth). As for the truncated title, that's likely to do with how little importance he has in PM's plot. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 14:20, March 21, 2022 (EDT)

Okay, since I don't know Japanese, I'd like to ask: does 「だいじんたち」 necessarily imply a group of ministers? I ask because I was just putting some stuff into DeepL, and I noticed 「マリオたち」 being translated as "Mario and his friends", and something like "the Minister and the others" would make more sense in this context. Blinker (talk) 18:48, March 23, 2022 (EDT)

Good point. Yes, that's another way to read that. Let me just say for the record that I'm more neutral about this merge than necessarily opposed to it: to recap, I think there's a case for (reminiscent design [down to the mustache shape and posture], similar role in the castle [one of the Princess's top aides], prototypical Toadsworth quirks ["Mario-dono"]) and against (different Japanese speaking styles [Woolsey might've even tried to preserve the original third-person quirk as a "royal we" in English though it slips on occasion and it's not obvious since he's hardly ever alone], slightly changed/simplified title [in the game at least, not accounting for any guides], potential legalities [could it factor into why Toadsworth's appearances by extension have been more sporadic?]). LinkTheLefty (talk) 19:10, March 23, 2022 (EDT)

Before I vote, I want to mention that even if these two are separate characters, that doesn't change the fact that it's another Toad chancellor and that they could just be more than one, just like Petey Piranha and Birdo. Take for instance the Sand Birds which was determined to be merged. To be fair, LTL's points and the fact that even Hewer feels that this is pure speculation are giving me the idea to oppose. Wikiboy10 (talk) 07:24, March 25, 2022 (EDT)

Actually, I think that's a fair point to bring up too. There are plenty of articles where the subject isn't always literally the same, but because of extreme conceptual similarities they are covered in the same article (Sand Bird is your example; I can point to the "Big" series of enemies, which are self-explanatory size variants where devs don't necessarily have to reference each other to reach the same point, as well as shared locations and common game elements within reason, etc). Though I don't think it's too often that this applies to a character specifically unless it's a species rep, whereas here we have subjects with the same job. I do want to point out that my glance at online Japanese circles, which tend to be somewhat strict with name/design changes such as formerly considering Lady and Pauline to be separate characters until they were yelled at politely told otherwise in Pauline's Smash trophy, do generally consider the Chancellor/Minister to be the same character, and don't even bring up name differences, so I could be missing a guide or something. LinkTheLefty (talk) 10:57, March 25, 2022 (EDT)

@Ray Trace: it's less about it being the same character (which I didn't agree with) and more about it being the same concept. LinkTheLefty (talk) 08:04, April 24, 2022 (EDT)

Comments

So, most of the opposing votes were for LinkTheLefty having opposed this proposal, but LTL found that the Chancellor/Minister are considered to be the same character by Japanese guides. Now what do we do? PrincessPeachFan (talk) 10:53, April 28, 2022 (EDT)

To be clear, I was really neutral until I realized the support was approaching it from the angle of the proto-Toadsworth concept/role rather than as literally the same character, which I had some reason to doubt. I do intend to follow through with another Shaman proposal at some point for internal consistency now that it didn't pass again - that wasn't idle talk. LinkTheLefty (talk) 11:08, April 28, 2022 (EDT)

Merge with Minister: Take 3

This talk page proposal has already been settled. Please do not edit any of the sections in the proposal. If you wish to discuss the article, do so in a new header below the proposal.

Merge Chancellor with Toad Minister 7-3-1
Giving this a shot. Above, I mentioned that after the second proposal's failure, I'd make another Shaman proposal for consistency. What changed? Goomboss. That merge has been tried several times, but finally succeeded in no small part due to Swallow's suggestion. So, I'd like to apply that reasoning here. I've changed my mind mid-proposal last time, so I've laid out my support and oppose reasons in the comments, which you can refer to if you need a refresher. But to get to the point, the bottom line still stands: whether or not these are literally supposed to be the same individual is not the true takeaway here, but rather, it is that both characters are the same proto-Toadsworth concept. They serve the exact same role, and the mannerisms of both portrayals are extremely similar to Toadsworth, especially in Japanese versions. In the end, covering prototypical Toadsworth in one article is reasonable. Unlike the above proposals, I'm adding a vice-versa option: merge Toad Minister with Chancellor instead, so that Chancellor will be the title of the merged article rather than Toad Minister. The main reason for this is that "Chancellor" has more screentime and has dozens of instances where his name shows up in game text, whereas the full name "Toad Minister" only shows up in a single semiobscure line of text (Goombario's Tattle) and "Minister" outweighs it few more times, so the latter was probably the intended name all along.

Proposer: LinkTheLefty (talk)
Deadline: December 31, 2022, 23:59 GMT

Merge Chancellor with Toad Minister

1. Arend (talk) Primary choice: similar roles, similar Japanese names, similarly minor compared to the rest of their respective games, similar cap spot color, and also the fact that Paper Mario was originally intended to be Super Mario RPG 2, so of course Paper Mario has a couple concepts originally from Super Mario RPG, such as the Merlon family being directly inspired from the Shamans, and the Shooting Star Summit having a nearly identical Japanese name to that of Star Hill (and is merged with said article, as is Mario & Luigi: Partners in Time's Star Hill). I'm fine with either option, but I pick this one as primary because "Toad Minister" is the more recent name; plus that SMRPG's translator Ted Woolsey has given classic enemies completely different names that only appear in SMRPG (such as Cheep Cheep to Goby).
2. LadySophie17 (talk) Primary choice per Arend.
3. Seandwalsh (talk) Per Arend. And the Goomboss merge shouldn't have happened, but this is long overdue.
4. Somethingone (talk) Per Arend.
5. Killer Moth (talk) Per Arend.
6. Wikiboy10 (talk) Honestly, this is less about a character and more about generic chancellor-type characters that have similar broad names. If these chancellors had two completely different names (like the first one being Bob and the other being Tom), I think this would be a different story. Merging to this, since it's the latest name.
7. Blinker (talk) Similar concept, similar name. Using the most recent (English) name makes enough sense.

Merge Toad Minister with Chancellor

1. LinkTheLefty (talk) Per the rationale that pushed the Goomboss merge but I really will revisit Shaman if this fails again.
2. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) - Per my "concept, not individual" preference.
3. Arend (talk) Secondary choice.

Keep Chancellor and Toad Minister split

1. Hewer (talk) Per the previous opposition, this is still speculation without hard official evidence and that's not something I think we should be basing merges on, even if they're similar characters. Similarity =/= the same thing. I also fail to see what Goomboss changes, as I feel like that merge had more solid evidence in its favour than this.

Comments

@Hewer: How was the Goomboss merge any more compelling, considering that the Chestnut King was completely off-screen and was described (albeit embellished) in a totally different manner? I know the translations in other languages had a hand in it, but it'd be unfair to point to that as a reason since official European localizations of Super Mario RPG don't exist, and even they somehow did, they would be much more limited owing to practices and restrictions at the time (for comparison, only two SNES RPGs, Final Fantasy Mystic Quest and Secret of Mana, had the budget to have their own cartridges produced with Japanese, English, German, and French text). LinkTheLefty (talk) 07:39, December 18, 2022 (EST)

I think Goomboss made more sense because of basically all the support arguments on that proposal, mainly the identical names in every non-English language and that the game repeatedly mistranslated references to the first Paper Mario throughout (which to my knowledge isn't a factor here). Had the Chestnut King name been correctly translated, there would never even have been debate surrounding whether to merge them. In this case though, as far as I know there's nothing to indicate anything was mistranslated here since the names appear to be different in Japanese anyway, and just as you said there are no other translations to suggest they're the same. The fact that there are no other translations just means there's less evidence here than in the Goomboss case, I don't really understand your comment about 'unfairness'. Given that the main thing the Goomboss merge had going for it, the matching names in other languages, are missing here, and the only other evidence to merge them I can see is that they are similar, I still think a merge would just be too speculative. Hewer (talk · contributions · edit count) 09:15, December 18, 2022 (EST)

Comparing non-English/Japanese languages just isn't applicable here since those are nonexistent and wouldn't even be realistically comparable under the right circumstances (in contrast, Nintendo starts later cramming more languages with their own fonts and formats into single N64 cartridges, and by GCN space and money was less of an issue entirely). There are actually more things than you'd think that are off in localization about Super Mario RPG, as Square members were the ones in charge of translation, not Nintendo, so you do get misunderstood references to older games and other stuff. The Chancellor does share the (also more common) shortened form of his name with the Minister if you factor that the Japanese Paper Mario dialog uses less kanji to give it more of a storybook feel. LinkTheLefty (talk) 09:41, December 18, 2022 (EST)

If the other translations for SMRPG don't exist or wouldn't be trustworthy, that doesn't then make TTYD's other translations less notable. They still helped to prove Goomboss and Chestnut King as one and the same, and I think the fact that there is no such evidence here means we should default to keeping these split because they aren't officially confirmed to be the same, not to merging them based on similar Japanese names alone. Innocent until proven guilty, or in this case, different until proven the same. As for SMRPG's English localisation, that doesn't really matter considering Paper Mario was the second of the two games, so it would be the one to reference SMRPG, and I can't think of any other references to previous games that the first Paper Mario mistranslated (but this is a bit of a tangent considering the Japanese names are different anyway). Hewer (talk · contributions · edit count) 15:28, December 18, 2022 (EST)

Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence, or in this case, European translations of Super Mario RPG versus Paper Mario. FYI, the English Paper Mario localization also missed several references to Super Mario RPG (which I'd chalk up to different teams' level of familiarity). As for the Japanese names being different: in the strictest possible interpretation? “Yes.” In reality? Japanese phonetics flip between writing systems all the time if you glance around a bit, so no, not in any meaningful way. I have the Super Mario RPG Shogakukan guide, and even it only refers to the character as 「大臣だいじん」 (Daijin, Minister) on pages 37 and 38. I don't happen to have access to the Paper Mario Shogakukan guide, but the point stands: the Minister's name matches the Chancellor's common name in Japanese. LinkTheLefty (talk) 10:51, December 19, 2022 (EST)

Star Hill (星のふる丘 / 星のふるおか) seems like a more relevant example of the "flip between writing systems" thing, being from these two games. Also, I'd like to point out that this exists, which covers every time the Mushroom Kingdom has had a king. I think the two ministers belong in the same page more than most of those kings. Blinker (talk) 12:05, December 23, 2022 (EST)

Just do a new article. SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA) (talk) 10:25, December 21, 2022 (CST)

Not quite how this sort of thing works. Nightwicked Bowser 11:37, December 21, 2022 (EST)

I'm on the fence of what to vote for, but I do want to say that it was a lot easier with Goomboss as Chestnut King was an implied character that was entirely covered on List of implied characters and with the strong evidence we had of it referencing Goomba King there wasn't as much trouble of moving that to Goomboss's page. This is a bit more complex, since both of these characters appear physically and have their own full articles, so I'm not so sure of using the reasoning I applied with Goomboss here. Nightwicked Bowser 11:37, December 21, 2022 (EST)

I want to support this, but I'm unsure what option to choose. It would be silly if the merge ended up as a tie due to collective indecision over the article name. Blinker (talk) 12:09, December 23, 2022 (EST)

Well, I can give another reason why I believe "Toad Minister" is a translation mistake. If you speak to him early in Peach's Castle, he introduces himself with the following line:

わたしが　キノコ城の　だいじんです
(I am the Minister of Mushroom Castle.)

Which is pretty close to the English localization, but if you Tattle him later in Bowser's Castle, Goombario says:

この人が　『だいじん』なんだ
(This person must be the “Minister”.)

I think what happened is someone thought his full title was「キノコ城のだいじん」(Minister of Mushroom Castle / Mushroom Castle's Minister), remembered that「キノコタウン」(Mushroom Town) was localized as "Toad Town", and so the line was contextualized as "This is the Toad Minister." That, or the line was supposed to be translated as "This Toad is the Minister." Incidentally, you can compare that phrase to how Toad initially mentions the Chancellor at Mario's Pad in Super Mario RPG: キノコ城の　「キノコ大臣」(Mushroom Castle's “Mushroom Minister”). LinkTheLefty (talk) 09:42, December 25, 2022 (EST)

Toad Minister moved to Chancellor

For record sake: a talk page proposal (Talk:Toad_Minister#Move_to_Chancellor) in Toad Minister succeeded, so I've moved the page to here. It's me, Mario! (Talk / Stalk) 18:01, November 19, 2023 (EST)

Split Chancellor and Minister

This talk page section contains an unresolved talk page proposal. Please try to help and resolve the issue by voting or leaving a comment.

Current time: Wednesday, July 31, 2024, 06:14 GMT

Please allow to begin by apologizing for reopening another can of worms, but I really feel this is an injustice that absolutely needs to be corrected. The Toad Minister and the Chancellor are clearly two different characters, made by two different developers for two different games (yes, I know PM was developed as a "spiritual successor" to SMRPG). I also apologize in advance for the length of what became a dissertation on the subject, but there’s so many points that I feel went unaddressed in previous debates.

The TLDR is that there are ample examples across the wiki of minor characters receiving independent coverage and discouragement of speculation, so this merge should have never happened in the first place.

Concept vs. character debate

A prevalent argument in previous debates on this subject was that we’re making an article for a “concept” (Toadsworth prototype) rather than a “character”, but I have to disagree with that premise. The articles are about two, distinct characters; not about the concept of what Toadsworth evolved from. We differentiate between the Toad Brigade and the toads that appeared in Super Mario Sunshine. That proposal passed overwhelmingly, so why would we classify the Chancellor and the Minister as the same character? There was an argument that both Minister and Chanellor were “Toadsworth-prototypes”, but is the same not true for the SMS Toads vs. the Toad Brigade? We also differentiate between Proto Piranha and Piranha Plant and Mecha King Bob-omb and King Bob-omb. Whereas Porto Piranha and MKB aren’t a “prototype” in the same developmental sense as Chancellor and Minister may be to Toadsworth, they are closely related characters that are clearly based on another character. Perhaps they are considered unique enough to have their own page because, as enemies, they have stats and are more than just an NPC, but I think the pure fact that they are not the same thing is enough to constitute two different pages.

Moreover, with the introduction of Toad General, who is basically Toadsworth 2.0 (outrageously replacing him, but that’s a conversation for a different time), are we just going to merge Toadsworth into his 2.0 counterpart’s page? Obviously not. Do we want to have one page for all the Toadsworth-adjacent characters, including Minister, Chancellor, Toad General, and even Toadsworth the Younger? That doesn’t seem right. If we can have different pages for all the various enemy prototypes, then surely Minister and Chancellor can exist as separate pages (just as Toad General and Toadsworth the Younger should exist as separate pages from Toadsworth). Using that logic, why not just merge Pauline into Princess Peach or all the baby pages (Baby Mario, Baby Rosalina, etc.) into their adult counterparts? For goodness sake, we even differentiate between Bee and Honeybee (as we should). Why do we differentiate between Bee and Honeybee? For the same reason we should differentiate between Chancellor and Minister; they are two different species / characters from different games, from different studios, that are directly (or indirectly for that matter) implied to be the same thing. Add the speculation about Chancellor, Minister, and Toad General being Toadsworth-adjacent to Toadsworth’s History or Trivia section if we really have to have some kind of coverage on the concept of a Toadsworth prototype, which I don’t think we need in the first place.

Related studies

Bruce and Rob (Paper Mario: The Thousand-Year Door), two different characters from two different games, are both black Bob-ombs. They are two, distinct, unique characters. What’s the difference between saying Chancellor and Minister should be merged and saying Rob and Bruce should be merged? Chancellor and Minister don’t look identical, but Rob and Bruce do, san Rob’s hat. Rob may speak with a “Russian” accent while Bruce does not, but that’s no different from dismissing the evident age gap between Chancellor and Minister, unless we really want to get wild and speculate that not only do PM and SMRPG take place in the same timeline but there’s a significant time game between the events of PM and SMRPG. Who’s to say that Rob isn’t the same person as Bruce; he just moved to Fahr Outpost, changed his name, and put on a hat? I don’t see how that is less speculative than saying Minister and Chancellor are the same person because they occupy similar roles and have a somewhat similar appearance. Where do we draw the line?

More to the point, both Harry (Paper Mario) and Herb T. are Toads with green caps that appear in the Paper Mario series as shopkeepers. The same argument that led to Chancellor and Minister being merged applies to these two characters; they both look similar, fulfill similar roles, and appear in related games. Obviously they are different characters that deserve their own pages, no matter how minor they are, so I argue the same logic should apply to Chancellor and Minister.

1 UP Heart and 1-Up Mushrooms functionally share the same purpose, but they appear in different games, made by different studios, and have a different appearance. The list can go on and on of pages that exist as extremely related or inspired by other subjects, but I’m hard-pressed to find many examples where pages were merged solely based on speculative similarities between subjects rather than confirmation they are the same. That is not to say that such examples do not exist, as they do, but it is far more common to see splits than merges, particularly when it concerns different subjects from different games with different appearances.

A notable example is Chestnut King being merged from List of implied characters into Goomboss. As the proposal stated, “The Chestnut King is identical to the Goomba King’s name in Paper Mario in every version of the game except English”, which eliminates much of the speculation over whether or not they are the same character. The same is not true for Chancellor and Minister. They use variations of “minister” and “chancellor”, but this case is not as concise as Goomboss / Chestnut King, so I argue the merging of Chestnut King is incomparable to the Chancellor-Minister debate.

Speculation

The MarioWiki:Manual of Style discourages speculation. I have observed from some of my own ideas how speculation can be counterproductive to maintaining a coherent and factual wiki. The fact that there is so much debate over whether or not these two are the same characters inarguably proves that we are engaging in speculation to assert they are the same character. I’ve learned that speculation is a slippery slope that is best avoided when possible, so why are we giving a pass on speculating that Chancellor and Minister are one and the same? There is some evidence to suggest that might be the case, just as there is some evidence to suggest Podley is Beanish, but making a decisive conclusion (such as merging the pages) necessitates absolute clarity, which is lacking on this subject.

Japanese Text

The article states that the translation of both of their Japanese names amounts to “Chancellor/Minister”, but these titles usually mean different things in English. A chancellor is normally the head of a government, whereas a minister is merely an official within a government. This isn’t always the case, but it is how the titles are generally used. I don’t speak Japanese, so I don’t know if this difference, or to what extent, exists in Japanese. I find this the most compelling reason to merge the articles, but I don’t think it absolutely disqualifies them existing as separate characters, especially given all the other points I previously made. We have many characters who share the same name (in Japanese or English), but that doesn’t mean they’re the same person, particularly when their “name” is just their title. For example, there's no question that Minister of Massage, an inarguably more minor character than either Chancellor or Minister, has no relation to either Chancellor or Minister despite a similar name in Japanese to Minister.

There have been a few good debates about Japanese translations on Talk:Wilt_Shroom. The consensus on that page for several years was to keep Wilt Shroom and Dried Mushroom despite their names being similar in Japanese, though they were more recently merged by a proposal with four participants. Not to belittle the validity of a smaller turnout in voting, but the fact that several more users had historically argued against the change speaks to a greater desire to keep subjects such as these separate. This is a point currently being debated in Talk:Clothing#Keep_the_Mario_.26_Luigi_Clothing_pages_as_list_articles, where there's multiple convincing arguments that sometimes such a small turnout on a proposal that could have easily been overlooked results in a change that isn't necessarily reflective of a sound majority, particularly when its an issue that has been debated multiple times over the years. On this page specifically, it took three proposals to merge the pages. The last proposal saw a higher voter turnout than the example I provided, but we've seen 15 unique votes in favor of merging and 15 unique votes in flavor of keeping separate. It's clear this has been a controversial debate, and I hope that by adding some additional arguments we can settle it with a stronger majority.

(* "Unique votes" refers to votes from individuals, i.e. not recounting votes from people who voted in multiple proposals.)

Conclusion

The full TLDR with what I believe are the most important points is as follows:

1. A similar proposal differentiates between The Toad Brigade and the SMS Toads.
2. The argument for having a "prototype" page for an existing character has little grounds, per everything from baby pages being different from adult counterparts to similar examples like Peach and Pauline existing separately.
   1. This argument is further derailed / complicated by the introduction of the Toad General.
3. There is nothing in any official material that even remotely suggests these are the same character; its all speculation.
   1. Their Japanese names may share some similarities but are nevertheless dissimilar enough, especially when considering they appear in different games developed by different studios, that it is speculation to definitively classify them as the same person.
4. There is a plethora of examples of minor characters having their own pages rather than being merged into pages of similar but not identical characters. See literally any NPC in a Mario RPG game.
5. This has historically been a divisive debate; the cumulative consensus is currently tied, but prior debates lacked many of the points raised in this debate, as well as new information such as the introduction of the Toad General. I argue that this, therefore, provides framework an additional review.

All these debate points aside, consider this from the perspective of someone playing PM or SMRPG. If someone played PM and said “Hey, this Minister guy is pretty cool. I’d like to learn more about him, so let me go to Mario Wiki.”, they are met with a page that is mostly devoted to a different character from a different game that has nothing to do with the character they were interested in reading about. That person was me.

Thank you for reading my dissertation on Toadsworthology and related studies, and please vote to split this into the two, independent articles both characters deserve to have.

Proposer: DrBaskerville (talk)
Deadline: July 12, 2024, 23:59 GMT

Support: Split Chancellor and Minister

1. DrBaskerville (talk) Per proposal.
2. Hewer (talk) This is one of the most speculative merges I've ever seen pass and the idea of merging based on similarity rather than being the same thing conflicts with plenty of other splits on the wiki. Per proposal.
3. Camwoodstock (talk) Per Hewer especially; we don't see why we shouldn't split these considering we split things that are even more identical than the Chancellor and Minister.
4. DesaMatt (talk) Per all.

#FanOfYoshi (talk) I haven't changed my stance on this. Per proposal, and per all. Although, saying "outrageously" replacing Toad General is a bit biased/subjective and redundant (i'd deem it'd need to be removed), but whatever. I still am not convinced SMRPG and Paper Mario's Ministers/Chancellors are the same guy.

Oppose: Keep merged

1. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) - As was argued in the original proposal, it doesn't really matter so much if they are or are not the same specific character s'long as they have the same in-universe role - look at all the different-looking characters on the Mushroom King article, for example. A "chancellor" and a "minister" are for all intents and purposes the same thing, and it's best in my opinion to keep all the unnamed proto-Toadsworths from what started as a spiritual successor in one basket.
2. Blinker (talk) Even if they may not be the same individual, that doesn't mean they aren't the same character. Just look at Merlon. I also don't understand why this proposal is focusing so much on, erm, Toadsworthology. SMRPG's Chancellor and Paper Mario's Minister have a lot more in common than just being similar to Toadsworth.
3. Arend (talk) Per fellow opposers, and what I previously iterated here.
4. LadySophie17 (talk) Per all. They're the same picture.
5. Seandwalsh (talk) Per all.
6. PaperSplash (talk) To me, it's less about them both being being "Toadsworth-prototypes" to me and more that they share the exact same title in the source language of their respective games, per Doc von Schmeltwick's Mushroom King argument (and said title lacks the significant additional qualifier and contextual difference in role that the Minister of Massage has). The distinction in title was purely introduced in translation which in my opinion makes arguments about their respective semantic differences irrelevant (again, especially given the lack of a significant difference in role in actual context). I feel that this is another case of "this wouldn't even be a debate if the translations stayed consistent" as argued with the Chestnut King/Goomba King in the merge proposal. And as for why their respective translated titles in all other languages don't match unlike the latter's, that mainly comes down to the other European translations of PM and the SMRPG remake (and the Chinese one in the former's case) being largely based on the English one, and the original version of TTYD in contrast had each European language largely refer directly to the original Japanese script and then do their own thing from there (along with them each evidently doing their homework on the Japanese terminology used in the first game and mostly staying consistent with how it initially ended up in their language whenever applicable, except for English which stumbled quite a bit in this area and Italian which didn't have a native translation of the first game to compare with, although they did refer to the English one in some cases). I also don't think the "different studios" argument holds much water in the first PM's case; it is a spiritual successor to SMRPG and as LinkTheLefty mentioned in the merge proposal, there are several other apparent references to SMRPG in the Japanese script of PM that the English translation overlooked, but we still acknowledge all of them to varying extents, so deeming this pure speculation would result in us refusing to acknowledge the clear connections that we acknowledge elsewhere. I also agree with the the arguments Blinker made in this proposal and the previous one in favor of them being merged.
7. Technetium (talk) Per all.
8. FanOfYoshi (talk) Come to think of it...
9. Jdtendo (talk) Per all. Plus, I think it's likely that the Minister was intended to be the same character as the Chancellor considering their similar looks (albeit with some color differences), identical Japanese title (daijin), and the fact that Paper Mario was originally conceived as a Super Mario RPG follow-up.

Comments

@Doc von Schmeltwick: This argument is one I completely fail to understand since it could be used to justify countless other weird merges, as mentioned in the proposal and my vote. If this article is supposed to just be a dumping ground for Toadsworth-like characters, what about Toad General and Toadsworth the Younger, and even Toadsworth himself? Why are Dash Mushroom and Mushroom split? Why are Rotten Mushroom and Poison Mushroom (and potentially Cursed Mushroom) split? Why are Goombario and Goombella split? The list goes on. Hewer (talk · contributions · edit count) 11:26, June 28, 2024 (EDT)

In-universe role (as in, their occupation title), not out-of-universe role (as in, their gameplay function). Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 11:41, June 28, 2024 (EDT)

Okay, Mushroom Genie and Genie of the Lamp. Baby Mario and baby Mario. Princess and Princess. Kamek and Wizakoopa. And again, Toad General. Hewer (talk · contributions · edit count) 12:00, June 28, 2024 (EDT)

Don't know too much about Party, I had nothing to do with that decision, I'd be happy merging those Chomps, "Kamek" in that game is the species, and Toad General has no counterpart. And again, this doesn't count named characters, otherwise we could merge both of these to Toadsworth. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 12:06, June 28, 2024 (EDT)

My point with Wizakoopa was that he fulfills the same role in that game as Kamek in other games, and my point with Toad General was that he could be merged to Chancellor for the same reason as Toad Minister, being another Toadsworth stand-in, high-ranking Toad. And I disagree that Chancellor and Toad Minister are unnamed. Chancellor and Toad Minister are names, creative or not. Hewer (talk · contributions · edit count) 12:15, June 28, 2024 (EDT)

They're titles. Again, the Mushroom King's various appearances have more differences here, yet they are merged. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 13:33, June 28, 2024 (EDT)

Mushroom King is actually a great example, but for a different reason than I think you're arguing. There can only ever be one king in a kingdom, so it makes sense that all references to the Mushroom King are contained on the same page; the same is not true for a minister. There are almost invariably multiple ministers in a government, e.g. Minister of Defense, Minister of State, Minister of Education, Minister of Culture, etc. I believe the Toad Minister is specifically referred to as the "Minister of Peach's Castle" or more closely to the original Japanese text "Minister of Toad Town". He's the minister of a specific domain, suggesting there are other ministers of other domains, unlike a king. Chancellors are typically like kings in that there is generally only one; they are heads of state / government, so there is generally only one. A difference exists in real-world politics between chancellor and minister, and I don't know we wouldn't assume that a difference between ministers and chancellors exist in the Mushroom Kingdom as well. We assume a difference exists between wood and stone in the Mushroom Kingdom, but that's never expressly stated. You're trying to prove a negative. I highly doubt we'll ever get an extensive breakdown of the government structure of the Mushroom Kingdom, so to assume that minister and chancellor are the same is speculation that I believe is best resolved by treating the characters as unique rather than evolved forms of one another or saying that one page is sufficient to cover the "office" because the offices, from my perspective, are not the same. Dr. Baskerville 15:12, June 28, 2024 (EDT)

In terms of real world equivalents, I view Toad Minister as more like the caretaker of Peach's Castle (like a mayor of a city) and Chancellor more like the head of government (like the president of a country). President and mayor are different offices, just as minister and chancellor are different offices. Again, this is not confirmed by anything in the games, but I think it is clear based on the fact that they are given different titles in both Japanese and English. If they were intended to occupy the same office, they would be referred to by the same office in the original Japanese as well as translations. Even if they are meant to hold the same office, we've seen multiple instances of different characters holding the same "office" but still being treated as unique individuals. Dr. Baskerville 15:25, June 28, 2024 (EDT)

"If they were intended to occupy the same office, they would be referred to by the same office in the original Japanese as well as translations." What. First of, they ARE referred to by the same office in the original Japanese version, that being daijin. The fact that SMRPG usually specifies that he's the "Mushroom minister" doesn't change that. And don't you think the different names in English are better explained by the fact that the two games were translated by different people? It's not particularly helpful to be theorizing about the lore implications of a glorified translation difference... Blinker (talk) 16:41, June 28, 2024 (EDT)

By the way, regarding that difference between chancellor and minister, I give you the "Chancellor of the Exchequer", who, according to Wikipedia, "is a senior minister of the Crown within His Majesty's Government" in the United Kingdom. There is also the "Lord Chancellor", who "is the highest-ranking traditional minister among the Great Officers of State in Scotland and England in the United Kingdom". Not exactly wood and stone. Blinker (talk) 11:10, June 30, 2024 (EDT)

@Blinker: It doesn't mean they aren't the same character, but it also doesn't mean that they are. If there's nothing actually telling us that they are the same, this remains speculation. Hewer (talk · contributions · edit count) 12:00, June 28, 2024 (EDT)

This MIPShole again, huh? This brought a lot of new arguments to the table; I won't lie; I think this proposal brought a lot of new points and I do appreciate that this addresses most arguments. My two cents at the time was that we are exploring the concept of a generic Toad chancellor character that happened to nearly identical names in Japan and have the same colors for their caps. I think one of the biggest things I have is that while Nintendo has never stated outright they are the same character, they have not stated the opposite either, leaving it up in the air. There's the also the concept of Canonicity and that can leave its own can of worms in regard of whether or not these instances of Toad chancellor are the same character. Part of me feels that another possibly is to put a part conjecture as we can definitely say, they could be the same, but they not be, so don't this an official confirmation. Wikis aren't really meant to be reliable information after all. This concerns the instances of Kremlings riding minecarts. The big thing here is that it is obvious they take inspiration from each other to the point common knowledge suggests they are the same thing. Yes, common knowledge should not be a total qualifier, but it is the reason why this issue is as difficult. I do feel this proposal does attack a strawman to certain degree because, we're not considering merging Pauline with Peach. That's just silly and it's so obvious they are not the same character and no none is suggesting that nor is that it even remotely comparable to two green chancellors who have nearly similar names, with minister being a homage. TheUndescribableGhost (talk) 14:53, June 28, 2024 (EDT)

To be clear, I'm absolutely not suggesting Pauline and Peach should be merged; that's just an example I provided against the "prototype" argument that prevailed in previous proposals. I appreciate you saying this proposal brings up new points that makes another review plausible. Dr. Baskerville 15:12, June 28, 2024 (EDT)

"Wikis aren't really meant to be reliable information after all" ...What? Even if we can't guarantee that the wiki is 100% accurate and correct at all times because of its editable nature, that doesn't mean we don't try to be as accurate as possible. Anyway, we should default to splitting rather than merging if we don't know whether two things are the same, since merging would imply that they are the same. See examples linked in my vote. Hewer (talk · contributions · edit count) 16:57, June 28, 2024 (EDT)

Seconding what Hewer said about accuracy. I overlooked that in my response. Dr. Baskerville 20:32, June 28, 2024 (EDT)

I know this is irrelevant to the points being made, but the use of the word "outrageously" here feels subjective and redundant. -- FanOfYoshi 16:24, July 1, 2024 (EDT)