Talk:Fuzzy: Difference between revisions
From the Super Mario Wiki, the Mario encyclopedia
Jump to navigationJump to search
Kitapio T. (talk | contribs) (→Oxymoron or Basic Description?: new section) |
m (Text replacement - "([Pp]roposal|[Ss]ettled)(Outcome|TPP)" to "$1 $2") |
||
| (One intermediate revision by one other user not shown) | |||
| Line 8: | Line 8: | ||
==Split Mega Fuzzy and Fuzzy== | ==Split Mega Fuzzy and Fuzzy== | ||
{{ | {{Settled TPP}} | ||
{{ | {{Proposal outcome|green|split 5-0}} | ||
I don't understand why these two are merged because while yes Mega Fuzzies are indeed a type of Fuzzy they are in fact a bigger type of Fuzzy much like how [[Super Thwomp]] is a bigger type of Thwomp. (Also i'd like to know does the Prima guide for New Super Mario Bros. 2/Wii say anything about them. | I don't understand why these two are merged because while yes Mega Fuzzies are indeed a type of Fuzzy they are in fact a bigger type of Fuzzy much like how [[Super Thwomp]] is a bigger type of Thwomp. (Also i'd like to know does the Prima guide for New Super Mario Bros. 2/Wii say anything about them. | ||
| Line 28: | Line 28: | ||
:No I feel that doing it this way is better because some people may not want to split things like [[Giant Ninji]] because they don't have official names. {{User|Raven Effect}} | :No I feel that doing it this way is better because some people may not want to split things like [[Giant Ninji]] because they don't have official names. {{User|Raven Effect}} | ||
::While we're both here, we might as well discuss some of the other merged "big" articles: [[Giant Bowser]], [[Giant Donkey Kong]], [[Giant Banana]], and [[Giant Kirby]]. If we're going to be consistent, these four will be split too, but in your opinion, do they deserve articles? [[User:GreenDisaster|GreenDisaster]] ([[User talk:GreenDisaster|talk]]) 14:39, 21 September 2012 (EDT) | ::While we're both here, we might as well discuss some of the other merged "big" articles: [[Giant Bowser]], [[Giant Donkey Kong]], [[Giant Banana]], and [[Giant Kirby]]. If we're going to be consistent, these four will be split too, but in your opinion, do they deserve articles? [[User:GreenDisaster|GreenDisaster]] ([[User talk:GreenDisaster|talk]]) 14:39, 21 September 2012 (EDT) | ||
Latest revision as of 15:31, May 31, 2024
They appeared in Outer Space in Super Paper Mario which makes it possible that they are aliens.--King Boo 19:57, 29 August 2007 (EDT)
No there not Mr. Guy the Guy
Talk!
- It's a possibility, but I don't really think it's worthy of being mentioned in the article. YELLOWYOSHI398
- Also, like every single Mario enemy will be in outer space in Super Mario Galaxy. Just because something is in space, doesn't mean its an alien. -- Son of Suns
Split Mega Fuzzy and Fuzzy[edit]
|
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. |
split 5-0
I don't understand why these two are merged because while yes Mega Fuzzies are indeed a type of Fuzzy they are in fact a bigger type of Fuzzy much like how Super Thwomp is a bigger type of Thwomp. (Also i'd like to know does the Prima guide for New Super Mario Bros. 2/Wii say anything about them.
Proposer: Raven Effect (talk)
Deadline: October 5, 2012, 23:59 GMT
Support[edit]
- Raven Effect (talk) Per my proposal
- GreenDisaster (talk) Per proposal.
- Tails777 (talk) Per proposal.
- Koopa K (talk) Per Consistency.
- RandomYoshi (talk) – Per proposal.
Oppose[edit]
Comments[edit]
Before we overfill the list of talk page proposals, how about we just make one big proposal for all the merged big enemies? GreenDisaster (talk) 14:22, 21 September 2012 (EDT)
- No I feel that doing it this way is better because some people may not want to split things like Giant Ninji because they don't have official names. Raven Effect (talk)
- While we're both here, we might as well discuss some of the other merged "big" articles: Giant Bowser, Giant Donkey Kong, Giant Banana, and Giant Kirby. If we're going to be consistent, these four will be split too, but in your opinion, do they deserve articles? GreenDisaster (talk) 14:39, 21 September 2012 (EDT)
