Category talk:Game series

Remove "(series)" identifier from titles that don't need it

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: Thursday, January 2, 2025, 14:10 GMT

It seems that every game series on this wiki has a "series" identifier. This makes sense for game series that actually need the identifier, however, there's some that just completely don't need it. I've heard many say it's for "consistency", but that doesn't make any sense. Identifiers are used to distinguish pages with titles of the same name, not just to make it similar to pages that actually need the identifier. I believe the "series" identifier should be removed from the pages that don't need it. The pages that don't need this identification yet still have it are;

• Famicom Grand Prix
• Just Dance
• Mario & Sonic
• Mario + Rabbids
• Mario Baseball
• Mario Discovery (I'll talk more about this one later)
• Mario Kart
• Mario Strikers
• WarioWare

Per a discussion on the Mario Discovery page, the series' logo refers to it as the "Mario Discovery Series", therefore, the "Mario Discovery" name isn't the full title. If this proposal gets through, I'd like for that page to be named as so too.

Proposer: Starluxe (talk)
Deadline: October 15, 2024, 23:59 GMT

Support

1. Starluxe (talk) Per proposal
2. 7feetunder (talk) I don't understand this whole argument about "clarifying" things at all. Yes, having the identifier there "clarifies" that it's a series, but so does the first sentence of the article. Why does the Paper Mario article not need to "clarify" that it's about the game and not the series until you actually start reading it, but Mario Kart has to let you know right away that it's a series even though none if its installments share a title with it? If someone seriously searches "Mario Kart" looking for a specific installment, they already have to read the series article to find the installment they want anyway, so the identifier isn't actually helping the reader, it's just making the article slightly more annoying to link to.
3. Koopa con Carne (talk) per feet.
4. Altendo (talk) I often prefer consistency, but in this case, I feel like adding the (series) identifier at the end for series that don't have a game with the exact same title feels like a waste of space. It redirects there anyways, so I feel like removing them would just make it a lot easier to directly link to without extra loading time created by redirects. Either that or the series name without the (series) identifier can be made a disambiguation page that links both the series and first game in said series. I'm leaning more towards just removing the (series) identifier for series that don't need them.
5. SolemnStormcloud (talk) Per all.
6. Hewer (talk) I was originally planning on not voting, but since "Mario Discovery Series" seems to be an actual name and I don't want "Mario Discovery Series (series)", I guess I'll support.
7. Jdtendo (talk) The identifier is redundant, per all.
8. Axii (talk) Per proposal.
9. Shy Guy on Wheels (talk) Per all. I see no reason to disambiguate when there's no other pages sharing the same title.

Oppose

1. Nightwicked Bowser (talk) Even if these titles are not shared with other articles, the identifiers still serve to straight-up show it's about the series as a whole.
2. Nintendo101 (talk) I agree we should not employee consistency for consistency's sake - only if it is beneficial. In this case, individual video games and books are italicized as well as series and franchises, and I don't assume readers will immediately know the difference when they look up a page's name. Many people call individual games WarioWare in shorthand and may not know the names of individual titles, for example. I think "(series)" is immediately clarifying and harmless, and I would prefer it is retained.
3. Sparks (talk) Per all.
4. Pseudo (talk) Per all.
5. EvieMaybe (talk) having the clarification helps more than it harms
6. ThePowerPlayer (talk) This could very easily misguide someone into thinking that e.g. a game named simply Mario Kart exists.
7. Pizza Master (talk) I'm not understanding how removing these identifiers is helpful or necessary. Wouldn't this make more sense as a Changes proposal than a talk page proposal anyway? Per Evie.

Comments

I mean, what makes the game series so important that only they need the specification if it doesn't have a shared name? At that point, we'll have names like "Mario (character)". But I could get behind WarioWare and possibly Mario Kart becoming disambiguation pages. Starluxe 16:51, October 1, 2024 (GMT)

Could you elaborate on what you mean by "importance?" My position here is that incorporating "(series)" is immediately clarifying, helpful, and harmless. — Nintendo101 (talk) 12:24, October 1, 2024 (EDT)

What considers a subject in need of clarifying no matter what? What makes game series different to other subjects? I don't see any reason why game series that don't share titles need identifiers, but other pages don't. Starluxe 21:08, October 1, 2024 (GMT)

Okay, I understand. To me, clarifying that the subject of the article is a "series" in the title is one of the ways the systematics of the franchise are communicated to readers, and that is not trivial in my view, in part because we are a video game wiki first and foremost. How games are organized and how the relate to each other is valuable and contextualizing to understand, and important to communicate. It is not quite the same as distinguishing the things in the games (i.e. characters, enemies, items, etc.) that happen to have the same name. That is my view, at least.

More substantively, for a lot of players and potential visitors to this site, Mario Kart is the name of whatever game they had most recently played, so in a conceptual sense a Mario Kart article is already occupied by Super Mario Kart, Mario Kart 64, etc. So including "(series)" at the end of the Mario Kart (series) article is just immediately clarifying that: 1.) there are multiple related games called "Mario Kart" and 2.) the one you are looking for is listed here (which also means it is already serving the same role a disambiguation page would). I think including "series" in the title makes that all the more readily apparent. I have not really heard a persuasive reason that removing "(series)" would be an improvement. - Nintendo101 (talk) 17:24, October 1, 2024 (EDT)

Another thought I've had: take the word "series" out of the identifier having the title be like "Paper Mario series". Nightwicked Bowser 16:57, October 1, 2024 (EDT)

I don't think I would be opposed to that. - Nintendo101 (talk) 17:24, October 1, 2024 (EDT)

I'm in support of this idea even moreso than my current vote to remove the identifiers. SolemnStormcloud (talk) 14:00, October 4, 2024 (EDT)

@Hewer As someone who's still on the fence on voting, I think that we don't necessarily have to add a (series) identifier if the official title already includes "Series" in it. I mean, our article on Arcade Classics Series isn't called Arcade Classics Series (series), is it?
BTW @Starluxe, about the proposal itself, wouldn't Mario Baseball (series) also be affected? There's nothing else with that title already, even the games within said series (Mario Super Sluggers doesn't even have "baseball" in the title. A big reason why I think it's okay to rename DK (series) to DK: King of Swing (series) but that's irrelevant to the conversation). rend (talk) (edits) 01:12, October 4, 2024 (EDT)

I agree with this 100%. Why add "series" to the article title if it is already in the name of thing? - Nintendo101 (talk) 01:26, October 4, 2024 (EDT)

You're right that it's unnecessary, that's why I don't want it. But I think having just one or two series pages that don't have the "(series)" identifier is a more egregious inconsistency than the one that the "(series)" identifiers already cause, so I want to avoid that too. Hewer (talk · contributions · edit count) 02:41, October 4, 2024 (EDT)

Similar to Arend's comment about Mario Baseball: why is Famicom Grand Prix excluded? That link currently leads to a tiny disambiguation with just the series and its two games. Hewer (talk · contributions · edit count) 02:58, October 4, 2024 (EDT)

Wait, why does that disambiguation page even exist? This isn't like three things sharing the exact same title, and they're all related in the way that Hewer already described. That's like as if Mario Kart was a disambiguation page. "Famicom Grand Prix" should've just been a redirect to the series page regardless of this proposal. rend (talk) (edits) 11:23, October 4, 2024 (EDT)

Also, I've said this on Talk:DK (series) before, but I actually think that the Mario & Sonic series page should be moved to Mario & Sonic at the Olympic Games (series). As I've stated back then, literally every single game in this subseries takes place at the Olympic Games, and always features the words "at the Olympic Games" in their titles; whereas simply Mario & Sonic would imply it's a broader series that includes a variety Mario and Sonic crossovers that don't necessarily take place at the Olympic Games, which is not the case at all. It seems that "Mario & Sonic" was chosen by the community for the sake of brevity rather than accuracy, much like that old psychic lady.
As such, since there's already two titles with that name, it would require the (series) identifier if we do rename it to the Mario & Sonic at the Olympic Games series. rend (talk) (edits) 11:19, October 4, 2024 (EDT)

Yeah, I've never understood why we don't use the full title for that series. Hewer (talk · contributions · edit count) 11:39, October 4, 2024 (EDT)

I agree that the Mario & Sonic series should be referred to as Mario & Sonic at the Olympic Games (series). I also see no reason to vote in support solely because of "Mario Discovery Series", which could easily be covered in its own proposal to title it in the same way as the Arcade Classics series. ThePowerPlayer 13:58, October 4, 2024 (EDT)

I know it could be covered in its own proposal, but unless this proposal passes, the result of moving it to the proper name of "Mario Discovery Series" would be either inconsistency (if it didn't get the "series" identifier) or redundancy (if it did). Also, in response to your "this could very easily misguide someone" argument: how so? The fact that the article covers a series would still be made immediately obvious by the start of the article. Hewer (talk · contributions · edit count) 14:35, October 4, 2024 (EDT)

I've removed that unnecessary "Famicom Grand Prix" disambiguation page and I'm thinking about moving "Mario Baseball (series)" to "Super Mario Stadium". Non-English names are better than conjectural names, anyway. Starluxe 20:16, October 4, 2024 (GMT)

Shouldn't both series be included in the proposal though, so that we don't have an inconsistency in the meantime? Hewer (talk · contributions · edit count) 15:57, October 4, 2024 (EDT)

They should, and I've just added them to the list! Starluxe 21:40, October 4, 2024 (GMT)

Would perhaps Super Mario Stadium Baseball work better? All these words are in the Japanese titles (Superstar Baseball's JP name is Super Mario Stadium Miracle Baseball, and that of Super Sluggers is Super Mario Stadium Family Baseball), and it makes it clearer that these are the baseball titles. rend (talk) (edits) 18:34, October 4, 2024 (EDT)