Talk:Peach (item)

This article is part of PipeProject Super Smash Bros., an attempt to improve upon the articles about the Super Smash Bros. Series on the Super Mario Wiki. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the PipeProject Super Smash Bros. page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.

Peach?

Shouldn't we call it Peachy Peach King Mario

No, this item is NOT the Peachy Peach. It is a different Peach in Super Smash Bros. Brawl. My Bloody Valentine

I should make a note about this concern on the Peachy Peach page. I'm sure many others would also be confused. Stumpers! 22:28, 30 October 2007 (EDT)

Speaking of which, should Peach be made into a Disambiguation page? My Bloody Valentine

Definately. I'll get on that. Stumpers! 23:52, 30 October 2007 (EDT)

Never Mind, I did it. :P My Bloody Valentine

And I added on information to that! Did you know the Peachy Peach isn't found in nature? Stumpers! 00:03, 31 October 2007 (EDT)

Rewrite Comments

In the Growth section, the game should be mentioned directly. The quotation system was never supposed to be used for the games (and comics) themselves, it is way easier to say "in Donkey Kong: Jungle Beat", it's more convenient, better to see for the reader, and the links provided in the references are wrong as well. The citing system should only be used for websites and other info of unclear source.

The history section makes use of the "Main Article" template, which is definitely wrong here. "Main Article" would only be correct if the linked article would be "Peaches in Donkey Kong: Jungle Beat". Donkey Kong: Jungle Beat itself is not the main article about Peaches in Jungle Beat, the template has to go. Also, "Alternate Continuities" - We've had the "canon" discussion before, and right now, we've had it as "Appearances in Other Media" - with that description, uses who are not familiar with our policies might still understand what you are talking about, but "Alternate Continuities" speaks in riddles totally.

The appearance section is basically a repetition of the history section, they should be merged, or some could even go as trivia. The game's cover arts are useless here as well, they only lengthen the article unneededly, the names should be enough.

So to say, rewrite needed. - Cobold (talk · contribs) 16:59, 24 January 2008 (EST)

It's true that we currently have no explicit citation policy, but my original proposal on the subject, after which the policy will be written, said:

I suggest that we start to quote our sources, as long as they are not the game (/comic/TV episode/Brawl Dojo) itself

There's no reason to overuse it, and especially no reason to move the name of the games to the References section. - Cobold (talk · contribs) 17:04, 24 January 2008 (EST)

My my Stumpers, I'm surprised you made such an error. All of those references are invalid. If someone else could revert them, I guess I'll start up on the policy... Wa _T^C_@^Y 17:48, 24 January 2008 (EST)

Cobold: in a quarter of the time it took you to write all of that and have that usertalk conversation with Wayoshi (Your talkpages are on my watchlist, btw, I'm not frothing at the mouth searching for injustice or something stupid like that), you could have fixed the citations, template-main's, and even had time to let me know what you and Wayoshi have decided on my talk page. You know I'm not a crazy edit-reverter... you could have saved yourself so much effort and Wayoshi could have been working on the citation policy. :( So, there you go. That's what I think should be done. The only tension that I think could have been caused could be the rewrite template you put there just before one of my edits (which I thought probably solved whatever problem you had). Be sure to specify citation issues next time, ok?

Wayoshi: I'm glad my messing up surprises you. Like Cobold said, all we have are guidelines from talkpages right now, and I assumed that someone would just go and delete those if they didn't like them rather than all this. Silly, I guess, but hey, just so there's no hard feelings, you know now. I hope that, in the time since I originally saw this (I started typing, went away, came back...) that you haven't reverted the page. There are a bunch of important edits that might come with it, as you saw on the main page. It would be great if you could get that policy going so no one else things of my "solution" to its absence.

And finally, that Appearances section. Keep it. It helps compare and constrast the different ways the subject has affected the series and provides visual learners with something to check out (and I am one of those, btw.) when all of the text is too much to take in. I guess this would work better on an article with more games, but there you go. ;) Um... I think that covers everything except for the appearances in other media. I'm not about to segregate what is an isn't in the master plan of the series, so I made it alternate continuities because of what, if I'm not mistaken, other people on the Wiki have decided. I'll leave it up to you, but until we actually get a source saying that the continuity should be divided based on media form rather than continuity, I wouldn't do it. That's just me though. Stumpers! 19:00, 24 January 2008 (EST)