Talk:Gray Brick Block

Proposal: Move to Concrete Brick Block or Concrete Block

Template:SettledTPP Template:ProposalOutcome Listen people, I know Talk:Cyclops was a flop, but I think we should move to Concrete Brick Block or Concrete Block. Reasons: 1. Grey/Gray controversy. 2. They look and act like concrete.

Proposer: Paperphailurethemariomonster99 (talk)
Deadline: July 6, 2011, 23:59 GMT

Move to Concrete Brick Block

1. Reddragon19k (talk) I guess I'll per myself!

Move to Concrete Block

1. Paperphailurethemariomonster99 (talk) Per Me! (And my Proposal.) I personally like this name more.

Do nothing

1. Goomba's Shoe15 (talk) No unless you have a source that calls them concrete block than no they look like grey brick blocks and theres no source at all that even implies there made of concrete so no
2. Mario4Ever (talk) It's not really a good idea to substitute one form of conjecture for another. Per Goomba's Shoe15.
3. Mariomario64 (talk) – Per the two above me.
4. Xzelion (talk) – Per all.
5. UltraMario3000 (talk) Per all.
6. Walkazo (talk) - It's all conjectural, but "Grey Brick Block" is purely descriptive, whereas "concrete" is purely speculative, which is much worse.
7. Mario Bros.! (talk) Per Walkazo

Comments

@Goomba's Shoe15 The game implies that. e.g. only being broken by heavy objects, the fact that they are gray, the fact they don't glisten etc. Niiue - Who has lost his tail?

No it implies its harder than a brick block nothing implies it's made of concrete Goomba's Shoe15 (talk)

They don't glisten. Niiue - Who has lost his tail?

So you trying to tell me that theres no other element in the world that doesnt glisten Goomba's Shoe15 (talk)

There's an apostrophe (or if you don't know what that is, here: ') in "doesn't" and "there's", and you should say "So you're trying..." and the blocks are not Stone Blocks. Niiue - Who has lost his tail? P.S. You are an insult to Goomba's Shoes.

Real bricks don't glisten, too. Also, GS15 might've forgotten the apostrophe, so I don't mind that. Also, how is he an insult to the Goomba Shoes? It's just his username, with an added number! Arend (talk)

@Reddragon19k: You can't really "per yourself" without a valid reason. ThirdMarioBro (talk)

Merge Gray Brick Block to Rock Block

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: Friday, November 29, 2024, 05:30 GMT

I keep thinking about what I had said about the Gray Brick Block and its similarity to the Rock Block from Super Mario 3D World in this previous proposal. Now, the Rock Block article in itself is a bit of an umbrella article for rock-like hard blocks that aren't necessarily Hard Blocks, but that is another can of worms I'm not willing to dissect at the moment; for now, this proposal is about merging the Gray Brick Block due to its similarities to the Rock Block from 3D World.

As for those similarities; both are gray Brick Blocks that do not glisten, and are indestructible through normal means (Gray Brick Blocks can only be destroyed by Hammer Mario's hammers or Statue Mario, SM3DW Rock Blocks can only be destroyed by Mega Mario or enemy manipulation); as for differences, the 3D World blocks just appear to be bigger.

Now the only major hurdle regarding the merge would be the lack of an official name for the Gray Brick Block: as far as I can tell, there are no sources for this object's name. The closest I could find is the flavor text of the Japanese e-Reader card for the level Puzzling Pipe Maze, since it actually addresses the block, yet even that isn't very helpful, since the block is only referred to as "a new block invented by [Roy's] brilliant self", never referred to with an actual name. Form and function is all we have for this, but I think it's similar enough for the 3D World's Rock Block to allow a merge; something that is part conjecture seems better than a small, separate full conjecture, and as I stated, the Rock Block article is already an umbrella article for similar rock-like blocks.

Proposer: Arend (talk)
Deadline: January 2, 2024, 23:59 GMT

Support

1. Arend (talk) Per proposal.
2. SolemnStormcloud (talk) Per proposal.
3. Camwoodstock (talk) We didn't know that part conjecture template existed; we were on the fence at first seeing as we hadn't heard of articles with partial conjecture to them beforehand (having looked it up, it turns out that it's a fairly remote template--probably the most relevant case here would be its use in Millstone), but knowing that we have proper protocol for this exact circumstance, we don't see why not. ;P
4. ThePowerPlayer (talk) Per proposal.