Jump to content

Talk:Mario Kart 8 Deluxe

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Did you know nomination

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: rejected by Theleekycauldron (talk) 03:15, 4 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

(
)

Moved to mainspace by DecafPotato (talk). Self-nominated at 23:58, 14 November 2022 (UTC).[reply]

The article has now been merged into Mario Kart 8 so Mario Kart 8 Deluxe is at present a redirect. - Aoidh (talk) 03:08, 4 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

"Mario Kart DX" listed at Redirects for discussion

[edit]

An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Mario Kart DX and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 November 15#Mario Kart DX until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. Steel1943 (talk) 02:11, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed merge of Mario Kart 8 Deluxe – Booster Course Pass and Mario Kart 8 Deluxe into Mario Kart 8

[edit]
The following discussion is an archived record of a request for comment. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this discussion. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.
Consensus to merge Booster Course Pass into Mario Kart 8 Deluxe, borderline WP:SNOW. There is a clear consensus to merge the Booster Course Pass article into Mario Kart 8 Deluxe (8DX). The central argument is that the Booster Pass is just an extension/DLC/content pack of Mario Kart 8 Deluxe, which itself serves no separate substantial notability justifying its own article. Almost all editors who opposed merging MK8 and MK8DX together did support merging the Booster pass into 8DX.

No consensus to re-merge Mario Kart 8 and Mario Kart 8 Deluxe into a Single Article. It is worth noting that according to some editors, 8DX was split off in violation of consensus. However, as already noted in the discussion, consensus can change, and there is no undeniable agreement to remerge. Supporters of re-merging MK8 and 8DX note the original consensus-violating split, MK8's article size being on the smaller end of the size scale, and with some additions and tweaks, the two games are carbon copies of each other. Opponents of re-merging MK8 and 8DX note the difference between the articles, the gameplay overhaul of the battle mode in particular, and by extension of the immediately prior, the independent notability of 8DX. While a draft was started, it has not been maintained for just under 30 days as of writing. The participants in the draft section of the discussion seem willing to work constructively, but disagreements on the nature remain; given that consensus should be general agreement while ignoring unproductive opinions, there is no general agreement to merge 8 and 8DX. Additional work to the drafts started below, or if necessary, starting the drafts from scratch, should be completed before reopening a merger discussion of 8 and 8 Deluxe. InvadingInvader (userpage, talk) 06:40, 29 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

What is the status quo of Mario Kart 8 and Mario Kart 8 Deluxe's merger? While one can make the argument that the unilateral split was tolerated for a month or two, such time frame is insufficient. Six months of inaction would be a lot more justifiable to consider this the status quo. Additionally taking into account the RFC was first started around a week after the split, I'll make the call to say that Mario Kart 8 and Mario Kart 8 Deluxe should be re-merged for now. InvadingInvader (userpage, talk) 20:39, 1 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

As I brought up in the article's DYK nomination, the Booster Course Pass is better off as a part of an article on Mario Kart 8 Deluxe, assuming the Deluxe Edition is notable. It is in fact Deluxe-only DLC and is better off discussed as a section of the article than on its own, especially since it has no major plot elements that might differentiate it from the rest of the game. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 13:16, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose, but merge 'Booster Course Pass' and 'Deluxe' together: The DLC has had its own share of media coverage and content separate from the main game, five years after the 'Deluxe' game's release (and eight years after the original Wii U game), fairly similar to how "The Sims 4 expansion packs" (2015-present) is a separate article from "The Sims 4" (2014). The 'Booster Course Pass' should be kept as part of the 'Deluxe' article, and the "original" article for the Wii U game as separate. Theknine2 (talk) 11:42, 17 November 2022 (UTC) (additional comments added: Theknine2 (talk) 08:12, 27 November 2022 (UTC))[reply]
  • Support some sort of merging all - It looks like the current set up is Mario Kart 8, Mario Kart 8 Deluxe, and Mario Kart 8 Deluxe? There's no way we need 3 separate articles for a single game and some DLC race courses. Prior consensus was against splitting out into a second article, let alone a third one. This is getting ridiculous. Sergecross73 msg me 04:54, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Consensus can change, that initial article was half-baked and lacked necessary information, so a merge was the right choice then. DecafPotato (talk) 17:25, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Additionally points brought up in the initial RM included things like "Also it's only a reception section. No development or gameplay section"; which plainly is not an issue here. DecafPotato (talk) 17:28, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    It most certainly can change. But you should have held a discussion first to determine that it had changed. Especially considering the last discussion was unanimously against it, held as recently this year, and done by many editors who currently and actively maintain the parent article. You made an exceedingly bad judgment call here that you only have yourself to blame for. Sergecross73 msg me 18:08, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Can we please keep it WP:CIVIL and not throw around blame? (Oinkers42) (talk) 19:11, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    What in the world are you talking about? There's absolutely nothing uncivil about explaining someone improper application of WP:CCC. They went against an active consensus from a recent discussion in creating these article splits, full stop. Sergecross73 msg me 19:48, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Then say "this is an improper application of WP:CCC". Calling it "an exceedingly bad judgement call" is pointless, and saying "you only have yourself to blame" is a strange escalation. I never blamed this on anyone else, so pointing the blame on me isn't justified at all. You made this unnecessarily personal. Wikipedia is not about winning, and I have nothing to blame anyone for. Even if we merge these all into one, I didn't lose anything here. I wrote an article, and it got merged. Adding blame at all is uncivil. DecafPotato (talk) 20:04, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    You said consensus can change. I said it can, but that you were in the wrong when you chose to edit against consensus rather than change the consensus first. There is no misconduct on my part in this. Sergecross73 msg me 21:00, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    I'm saying that you should disregard my "exceedingly bad judgement call that I only have myself to blame for" and focus on the potential merge of the Mario Kart articles. The circumstances behind the article creation is completely irrelevant. DecafPotato (talk) 21:36, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    With all due respect, I think Serge is giving voice to the frustration that we're revisiting this topic again so soon. Frequently rehashing discussions on topics that the community believes are settled can be seen as disruptive to the act of improving mainspace articles, which we're all ostensibly here to do, by taking time away from actually doing that. I understand that you're relatively new here, so you're probably not familiar with all the best practices yet. You might feel like your article is going to be so manifestly awesome and well-written that the norms will make an exception for you, but that doesn't consider the feelings of the dozen or so editors whose consensus you disregarded to get here. Wikipedia is built on consensus and no editor is an island. Within topic areas (for example, video games), you'll frequently find yourself interacting with the same editors time and time again, so it pays to treat hard-won consensuses with respect. Axem Titanium (talk) 23:45, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    I do not believe that would work. The Mario Kart 8 Deluxe article created by me addresses all points brought up in the initial merge discussion. Saying "hey guys what if I made an article that fixed all issues in the RM" would be biased to the previous discussion. As unique sources were an issue in the article that was initially merged, proving that issue is fixed requires finding all of those sources. Proving that "there's going to be more than reception, there will be gameplay and marketing and release" requires writing those sections. Proving that "the argument in the RM that the reception was identical to the base game isn't true" requires writing a reception section with sources. And at that point, the article might as well be written. As seen in this discussion, the consensus did change. It is no longer a unanimous decision, but an actual discussion. And finally, "you made an exceedingly bad judgement call here that you only have yourself to blame for" is unnecessarily, for lack of a better term, mean. DecafPotato (talk) 19:37, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    And at that point, the article might as well be written
    Sorry, this is a bad phrasing. What I meant is, if proving that the article should exist requires writing the article, then the article should be written. In its most basic sense, bold-revert-discuss. DecafPotato (talk) 19:39, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support merging all. There was a unanimous consensus to merge Deluxe into the main article less than a year ago. And now somehow there's not only a new article on Deluxe, but a separate one for its DLC too?? Splitting this information into three articles has gutted the main MK8 article and made it far more difficult to understand the topic as a whole, with a heaping helping of redundancy across the articles to boot. Please seek consensus before splitting articles again like this in the future. Axem Titanium (talk) 08:57, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    • To the closer, please note the "status quo" before this discussion was a single article at Mario Kart 8, based on the unanimous consensus here. Mario Kart 8 Deluxe was split out without discussion. Deluxe may be notable but that is not the only consideration for when a topic warrants an independent article. Per WP:SIZESPLIT and WP:MERGEREASON, the current Mario Kart 8 article is the proper length to cover all three topics without the significant redundancy or overlap of separate articles. The current article has improved significantly over the course of this discussion and addresses concerns that the resultant article would be too long, disjointed, or difficult to read. I think the resultant article is greater than the sum of its parts and it would harm readers' comprehension if it were chopped up again. Axem Titanium (talk) 21:59, 25 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Blaze Wolf, DocFreeman24, Ferret, Pbrks, Sultan the Sultan, Panini!, and Nomader: pinging members of the previous discussion. Axem Titanium (talk) 08:57, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge 'em. Looks to me like everything can be covered neatly in a single article. The main point of differentiation appears to be in the Reception section, but that alone isn't grounds for splitting. In fact, as reviews for Deluxe focused on what differentiates Deluxe from MK8, that's easier to cover in one place. Popcornfud (talk) 12:01, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge notability isn't the only metric to consider here. I frankly think anyone who looks at those articles apart and says "yep this is clearly a good and comprehensive article" needs a recalibration; Mario Kart 8 is all of 10KB prose size—there was nothing demanding a split on that matter alone. I can see the argument that with a rerelease separated by years, the Deluxe should have its own article; we often have questions whether remakes, rereleases, etc. should get their own articles. But I cannot see that with the Booster Course Pass at all. It's under 8KB of prose, it doesn't have a real development section, the marketing section is a bunch of poorly-organized factoids, and the reception section seems to be really stretching to pad out what is all and all a pretty slight critical response (because it's just DLC that's a bunch of tracks, not even story-based.) Given that there was already consensus not to spin these out, DecafPotato should have attained consensus before splitting. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs talk 12:58, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Agree with all of this. And even with these sizes, the current bloat present is ridiculous. Mario Kart 8 Deluxe#Gameplay is crazy overkill. Deluxe plays virtually the same to the base game. We could summarize the differences concisely in a couple of sentences. These rambling paragraphs are poorly written and entirely unnecessary. This is like the prose version of WP:REFBOMBing. Sergecross73 msg me 15:48, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    8 Deluxe should explain its gameplay, without the need for the reader to read the article on Mario Kart 8 first. DecafPotato (talk) 17:25, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Not when 95% of the gameplay is redundant to the base game. I don't know where you're getting this from. Even when we had articles for things like Wind Waker HD, we still didn't have 10+ rambling paragraphs about all the minor gameplay tweaks. Sergecross73 msg me 18:11, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    We reflect the sources. When basically all pre-release sources/reviews discuss the changes, we do as well. Wind Waker HD did not have many sources discussing the changes, so it wasn't in that article. DecafPotato (talk) 19:18, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    8 Deluxe should explain its gameplay, without the need for the reader to read the article on Mario Kart 8 first. It wouldn't need to, if they were integrated into one article where that information is placed right next to each other. It reduces redundancy and informs the reader better because it's all in one place in the proper context with each other. Axem Titanium (talk) 22:10, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    It was a comment surrounding the current bloating of the article. I was defending the length of the article. Obviously info doesn't need to be repeated in the case of a merge, but that's not what I was talking about. DecafPotato (talk) 23:21, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    It's worth noting that the Booster Course Pass is not fully released, content will more than double in size by the time the DLC finishes. Whether that is an argument for or against a merge is up to interpretation, just thought that it's something that should be specified. DecafPotato (talk) 17:32, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    We already know what that content is going to be though. It'll be more courses from older games, maybe a tiny handful of new courses. We're not listing the names of all the courses anyway so that's not going to significantly change the size of the article. Nintendo also doesn't seem interested in releasing development info for this DLC either. I don't think there's more blood to squeeze from this stone. Axem Titanium (talk) 22:10, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    We are 1/3rd through the DLC. The marketing and release, as well as the reception, will triple AT THE LEAST by the time the DLC is done. The gameplay may expand a bit, things like half-pipes we know are being added. The development may, who knows. Nintendo does frequent 'ask the developer' interviews to promote upcoming things, which the Booster Course Pass is. DecafPotato (talk) 23:23, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge There is no reason to have 3 articles covering a single game, It is extremely rare for a single DLC to have its own article, and this should not be an exception. The DLC while recieving publications, is not any more notable than the original game itself. There is no article for the Champions Ballad in Breath of the Wild, and even though WP:OTHERSTUFF, I still dont see any reason to have 3 whole articles. PerryPerryD Talk To Me 15:29, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Vote changed, see below. PerryPerryD Talk To Me 15:28, 22 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • DLC having its own article is actually fairly common. DLC tends to be treated as its own game, having an article if it surpasses notability requirements while completely disregarding the game in which it was released for, which I believe the Booster Course Pass does. DecafPotato (talk) 17:43, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Actually, it's exceedingly uncommon. Category:Video game downloadable content only has 30 pages, out of hundreds of games in Category:Video games with downloadable content. Category:Video game expansion packs is generally for boxed products you can find in a store, not bits you download from the internet. Axem Titanium (talk) 22:10, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    I'm sorry if this comes off as rude, I swear I am trying to say this as nice as possible: Please provide me a video game expansion pass more notable than the Booster Course Pass that does not have its ow article. DecafPotato (talk) 23:33, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Breath of the Wild: Champions Ballad PerryPerryD Talk To Me 05:21, 19 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge - Mario Kart 8 isn't even particularly a long article. This can be all organized into one. We don't need multiple articles for the sake of having multiple articles. – Pbrks (t • c) 16:22, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    There is also little reason to merge them into a single article. You cannot use a "why not merge them" as a reason in a discussion. (Oinkers42) (talk) 19:15, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    I should have clarified. Merge per nom, and the rest is just some extra thought. – Pbrks (t • c) 23:16, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge Restore single article, merge these back. There's not much more I can say that hasn't already been said, these are pointless splits that can all be covered in one place. -- ferret (talk) 16:47, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge for the Booster Course Pass, but per DecafPotato's comments I'm unsure of how well this subsection-inside-of-section layout would work where Mario Kart 8 has a section on 8 Deluxe, and then the section on 8DX has a section on the BCP. The unanimous consensus to merge 8DX into MK8 was before the BCP was announced and got tons of media coverage, and while I agree that the BCP doesn't warrant its own article yet, I think it's made 8DX notable on its own enough to where it should stay separate. Sincerely, the awesome[citation needed] IceKey8297. 18:09, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    It should be pretty straightforward. They can really all be laid out as a single collective thing - that's all it really is. We've got a base game, a "deluxe" version that largely added more courses and a pretty simple battle mode, and the a bunch of DLC that's just some more drip-fed new race courses. It's not like the Deluxe version transformed it into a gritty first person shooter or something. Sergecross73 msg me 18:50, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    By that logic, many remakes and the like would be merged. It's not like the Link's Awakening remake is all to different from the original. DecafPotato (talk) 18:55, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Recent discussions lead to Wind Waker HD pretty effortlessly being merged into Wind Waker. Same with Skyward Sword HD into Skyward Sword. So, uh...yes, I agree? Sergecross73 msg me 19:01, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    This "single collective thing" could look pretty bloated if we include the separate receptions, unique controversies, etc. that both 8DX and the BCP have garnered all their own (again, they have received very extensive media coverage completely independent of the Wii U original). That being said, since it can all be traced back to the original game, I'm not completely opposed to a three-way merge if and only if we can get things to look neat. Because in my head, all I can see is something akin to a run-on sentence: "Mario Kart 8 is a 2014 Wii U game. An expanded port, Mario Kart 8 Deluxe, was released for the Nintendo Switch in 2017. 8 Deluxe received a season pass of downloadable content, the Booster Course Pass, in 2022." Sincerely, the awesome[citation needed] IceKey8297. 19:14, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Why does drastic differences even matter, they have separate receptions and defining features, they both pass WP:GNG on their own, why merge them? This really sounds like WP:IDONTLIKEIT. (Oinkers42) (talk) 19:17, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Please familiarize yourself with WP:MERGEREASON, as I feel like I have to keep explaining to you across multiple discussions that the GNG is not the only factor in deciding whether or not articles be merged. Things like "redundancy" and "overlap" are a major factors as well. They absolutely do not have "separate defining features". We're talking about a base game, a re-release with some new courses packaged in, and some waves of extra DLC courses. Yes, some people criticize the DLC courses or point out that Deluxe sold better. But these are not complex, detailed things that need to be extrapolated greatly on. They're very basic things that can be covered concisely in one article. For example, the DLC reception section. There is not 4 paragraphs of good content here. Its long drawn out prose and quote that all coalesce into the same two messages - reviewers were either happy for more courses or upset about the drop in graphical quality. There's way more efficient ways of going about that. Sergecross73 msg me 19:39, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Uhh, yeah I agree with the point about the DLC reception. That reception section isn't good, and has a lot of repetition. One point is that the reception is plainly unfinished, reviewers will likely not release full thoughts until the release of Wave 6 (if you want to consider that CRYSTALBALL, sure, we should focus on what's there/possible to write now), but yeah, I see where you're coming from. However, that point does not apply to Mario Kart 8 Deluxe's reception, which is six paragraphs representing the opinions of several critics on many aspects of the game. DecafPotato (talk) 19:50, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Yes, Deluxe's reception is fine, but conversely Mario Kart 8's reception section is a mere single short paragraph, so that's not much of an argument for there needing to be a split. And even if it were expanded, we'd be back at these redundancy issues, as 8 and Deluxe did not receive notably different receptions. Sergecross73 msg me 20:01, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Mario Kart 8's reception needs expansion. I'm not disputing that. But given the amount of reviews, it could easily be expanded. And do you have any evidence for the claim of "the games have very similar reception", besides just saying it? DecafPotato (talk) 20:08, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    I just meant, it wasn't like an original Final Fantasy XIV and Final Fantasy XIV: A Realm Reborn type situation with very different responses from critics. Or something like how people felt Sonic Adventure 2: Battle hadn't aged well by the time it hit Gamecube and PC. 8 and Deluxe were both pretty similarly received. Their Metacritic scores are just a few points different, etc. For the record, you have added some good content in a general sense. It just would have been better applied as beefing up the general Mario Kart 8 article than spreading it so thin across 3 relatively weak articles. Sergecross73 msg me 20:26, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    The Metacritic scores being different shouldn't mean alot, as critics said more than just "its Mario Kart 8, which I like!". Many reviewers discussed things like the battle mode, the effect of things like the item change, and the push for accesibility, whereas in the base 8, they praised the game's visuals and soundtrack and sound design, while critiquing the battle mode. DecafPotato (talk) 20:51, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    My point is that I doubt there is much potential for writing two meaningfully different reception sections when the games are so similar in concept and received such similar reviews from critics. Sergecross73 msg me 21:06, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    I'll need to look into this. It's an interesting point, but hard to judge when the base 8's reception isn't fleshed out at all. DecafPotato (talk) 21:18, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    I don't know what differences you can realistically expect here... Sergecross73 msg me 01:25, 20 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Irrelevant. I should check either way. DecafPotato (talk) 16:56, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge - Per above. Even though there's tons of references on just Deluxe and the DLC, there is a lot of repetition here. As Serge pointed out, almost all reception to the DLC can be distilled down to "more courses good, graphics bad" and we don't need five paragraphs to say that. For the Deluxe article, the differences in game play are quite minor side from the battle mode, but even that can be condensed without going into great detail. More sales doesn't mean there should be more coverage, that's just a consequence of a popular franchise game on a very popular system. --ThomasO1989 (talk) 20:11, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge Just because the DLC has its own reception doesn't mean it should have been split out; having that all in MK8D makes the overall article far more comprehensive, and there's still room to add once some of the duplicative parts are dropped in a merge. --Masem (t) 16:51, 19 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Can you clarify how much merging should happen here, Masem? I assumed you meant merge it all into one, but some think you may have meant merging it into 2 articles. Sergecross73 msg me 22:50, 19 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Deluxe probably should remain a separate article from the original MK8. Merge the DLC into Deluxe. Masem (t) 01:14, 20 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Seriously? After so many barebones remasters being merged back in these days?? Sergecross73 msg me 01:19, 20 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Two articles. 8 and 8 Deluxe. These two games have built different reputations for themselves and I feel they have enough unique content to warrant to separate articles. Not to mention they are on two different consoles that have completely different ways of playing them, meaning that each section of 8 and 8 Deluxe (gameplay, development, reception), are going to be unique no matter how you slice or dice it. 8 Deluxe cannot be summarized in a little paragraph within the context of 8 only. Support merging 8 Deluxe and Booster DLC, because there's nothing there that can't be summarized within the context of 8 Deluxe. The criticism is interesting to note, but this is just additional maps, not anything "new". It's already summarize well as is in 8 Deluxe, so all that's missing now is an additional paragraph to hit the new map controversy. Panini! • 🥪 14:21, 20 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge all three articles per Sergecross73 and David Fuchs. There is no reason to have three separate articles about one single game. If content about 8 Deluxe and the DLC is substantial, include it here in the main article. Split only when it is necessary. OceanHok (talk) 15:31, 20 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge all three articles. It's the same game, plain and simple. There's absolutely no need for two articles on it, let alone three. JOEBRO64 22:27, 20 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge all of the articles together per Sergecross73 and David Fuchs. My rationale for this still holds from the previous !vote last year, and I think the minuscule development and reception here could easily be put back into the main article. Nomader (talk) 14:44, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Neutral, I'm still unsure as to how well this would work despite being shown a Draft. The Draft feels a little long in sections but I don't think MK8DX is independently notable on it's own. However there's also the DLC which should definitely be merged into MK8DX, however if MK8DX is merged into MK8 then I Feel that the DLC may end up making the MK8 article feel unnecessarily long. I'm unable to form any strong opinions as to whether we should merge all 3 or just the DLC into MK8DX because of this. ― Blaze WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#6545 17:33, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per above, but we could merge the page about the Booster Course Pass. Both MK8 pages have significant differences from each other. Davidng913 (talk) 19:07, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep the Mario Kart 8 article as it is but merge the Booster Course Pass with the Deluxe version as they belong to different consoles. The battle mode between both games are different to each other and the availability of 200cc in Time Trials exists on Deluxe only. I agree that three separate articles is not needed. Iggy (Swan) (Contribs) 09:35, 25 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge all three. There isn't enough substance in the review sources added to justify separate articles. The differences between the releases can be neatly summarized for a general audience (remove the in-universe trivia) and covered within a section of the main article. The question should only be what sources are being used to justify a summary style split from the main article. As for now, I don't see them. czar 07:17, 28 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Would you mind pointing out the 'in-universe trivia', as well as why the article's current sources do not justify a split, I'm willing to fix those issues. DecafPotato (talk) 01:31, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Not OP, but I had mentioned similar-ish concerns in my comment below but it seems it was mostly ignored. Circling back, the first thing that comes to mind are these two sentences in particular: An additional change made in Deluxe is that players can hold two items at once, similar to Mario Kart: Double Dash However, unlike Double Dash, the player can not freely switch between both of their items. We don't need to say that "it's like Double Dash but not EXACTLY like Double Dash", this is not valuable to the general reader-- just only say that the player can now hold up to two items at once. Also, IMO the "fire-hopping glitch" isn't that important a mention either in the gameplay section as a key difference. --ThomasO1989 (talk) 01:42, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    @ThomasO1989 done. DecafPotato (talk) 20:50, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    @Czar – should ping you as well. DecafPotato (talk) 21:33, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Great work! It looks a lot slimmer than before. However, the second paragraph still has a lot of details there that are better suited to the base MK8 article:
    • Several courses in Deluxe make use of anti-gravity, which allows players to drive on walls and other surfaces, as well as the underwater driving and air gliding features from Mario Kart 7. Given that the game is a superset of MK8, this seems redundant. It also implies that Deluxe has these features while MK8 did not.
    • We don't need to list off the speed classes here. Those should be moved to the MK8 article.
    • I already said this, but we probably don't need to make the comparison to Double Dash for the two items functionality. I admittedly am stepping into WP:OR territory, but plenty of the MK games allowed to hold two items at once by way of dragging one behind the kart. You couldn't swap between that one and the one in reserve. So I don't think the note that you can't switch between them is really needed to differentiate this one from any other MK.
    ThomasO1989 (talk) 21:48, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    • It also implies that Deluxe has these features while MK8 did not – made it clear that these are returning from MK8
    • We don't need to list off the speed classes here – removed the listing of the speed classes, though kept the mention of them; it's worth mentioning that they are here, but you're right that the specific details should only be in MK8
    • We probably don't need to make the comparison to Double Dash for the two items functionality – removed the comparison; I was initially hesitant to do so, because many sources compare the two, but you're right that the implementations are different enough to the point that the comparison isn't a huge help
    If you have any other changes that would make MK8D a better stand-alone article, please continue to either tell them to me or implement them yourself. DecafPotato (talk) 23:57, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Discussion of Draft Proposals

Important note: As of 02:39, 30 November 2022 (UTC), the draft proposals themselves are outdated. The Mario Kart 8 article includes information from 8, Deluxe, and the Booster Course Pass, and the Mario Kart 8 Deluxe article includes information from both Deluxe and the Booster Course Pass

I believe that the fact that all of this would potentially be a single section is a large argument for the split. DecafPotato (talk) 17:55, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
They would likely be separated into different sections of the article. Pizzaplayer219TalkContribs 18:06, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Can someone please fix some of the references in the draft. Pizzaplayer219TalkContribs 21:33, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I think I’ve done enough for now. Pizzaplayer219TalkContribs 22:12, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I've made quite a few substantial changes myself. I did not think it was necessary to go into minute detail on the battle submodes, and there is simply a lot of information that's repeated throughout the article, and a lot of information that purports to have been added in Deluxe is really part of the base game or its DLC. --ThomasO1989 (talk) 22:25, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for that. The draft is a good start, and that sort of trimming is exactly what's needed. Sergecross73 msg me 22:49, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The current state of this, in my opinion, shows a fundamental flaw with the merge of all three. Why are none of 8 Deluxe's modes mentioned, given how much media coverage they got, and how core they are to the game? Why are the gameplay changes in the Booster Course Pass, especially when many reviews directly mention and comment on them? I thought the argument here was not that those things aren't notable, but that they could all be described in one place. That I could at least understand, but this is cutting content for no reason. Why are the controllers of Mario Kart 8 described, yet the Switch version controllers are not? 8 Deluxe, as a game, has more media coverage and sources than the original. Why is the Booster Course Pass's section only its marketing and release? Why not anything else about it? Why is the base 8 given priority over 8 Deluxe? Like, how are the base 8's speed classes mentioned, but 8 Deluxe's Battle Modes, a central part of the game that was very well-sourced, ignored? Wouldn't not having this information compromise the reception section? DecafPotato (talk) 23:12, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Additionally, these section headers are messy. If the development requires going four sub-headings deep, you should reconsider it. Additionally, where's the release sections? How are sales part of reception? The fact that they get forced there because you're trying to incorporate a stand-alone article into a single section should give an opportunity for reconsideration. I could get merging the Booster Course Pass into 8 Deluxe. But merging both of these articles into one fundamentally cannot work while still keeping encyclopedic coverage of everything. Going back to 8 Deluxe's battle mode, why was it removed? Why is it not necessary to provide that information? Given the amount of coverage, it does not cause undue weight problems, especially with how core it is to the game and its reviews. DecafPotato (talk) 23:18, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
It's a work-in-progress. It doesn't have to be indicative of the final combined product. They're clearly still trying to find something that works. Why not help it out yourself? Sincerely, the awesome[citation needed] IceKey8297. 23:21, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I'm saying that this proposal fundamentally cannot work without ignoring a significant amount of the roughly 100 sources surrounding 8 Deluxe, or without causing some issues with article length. It's hard to help it out without appearing unconstructive. I disagree so much about this merge. Do I restore the gameplay of 8 Deluxe and the Booster Course Pass to match the level of detail done for the base game, or do I just cut down the base game to match the DLC and the Booster Course Pass? And besides, a work-in-progress doesn't excuse a bad solution. It can excuse an unfinished one, but refusing to respond to any of my concerns and instead just saying "why don't you do it" isn't helpful. I would like my concerns to be responded to, and I am willing to compromise on certain things.
Hence, I would like to restore the intial proposal of this merge discussion:
Merge the article on the Booster Course Pass into the article on 8 Deluxe, and then keep the article on 8 Deluxe separate from the base 8. There are so many sources specific to 8, and the reasoning of "its a port" doesn't take into account the amount of sources specifically talking about those differences. The receptions aren't the same just because "critics like both games", each game had different points of praise and different flaws. Hell, the Booster Course Pass and the Battle Mode are significant content that received media attention, that are not in the base 8 game. DecafPotato (talk) 23:32, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Additionally, @Zxcvbnm (pinging so you can correct me here if I'm wrong), said that the merge rationale was "WP:OVERLAP. The DLC page is redundant when there is an article on the game's deluxe edition". If the Booster Course Pass, 8 Deluxe, and 8 are all one article, the Booster Course Pass has no article to overlap with. DecafPotato (talk) 23:36, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I think your familiarity and closeness with the material may be warping your perspective on what is and isn't crucial to cover, and to what level of detail. It's a video game. No one's going to die if they don't know exactly how every single Battle Mode works (and we probably shouldn't cover it at that level of detail to begin with). Pizzaplayer's draft is a work in progress. I'm planning to give it a pass this weekend when people aren't making huge changes all the time. It's not the end of the world. Axem Titanium (talk) 23:53, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
No one's going to die if these three articles are all deleted forever, with no merge, just deletion.
As for the NOTGAMEGUIDE issue, you're kind of correct. I just removed some unneeded info from Mario Kart 8 Deluxe's battle mode section. I considered removing the fire-hopping thing, but it recieved alot of coverage.
I want time to think. I think my judgement is being impaired not because of my familiarity with the source material, but because i feel like i'm scrambling to not have my work be deleted on grounds i don't believe apply. I'm going quickly, and I want to slow down. I've been on this talk page for, like, six hours. I just want to play pokemon. this isn't me conceding, but I'm going to ask this.
Don't close the discussion yet, I need time to assemble my thoughts and form a proper defense. I need to work on proposals for ideas and compromises. Give me some time.
DecafPotato (talk) 00:07, 19 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
DONT MERGE YET: we still have lots of work left on the draft such as fixing references and trimming. Pizzaplayer219TalkContribs 00:12, 19 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Having stuff you wrote get deleted (or merely removed and preserved in edit history) is just how it goes sometimes in a collaborative setting like Wikipedia. I've had over 2000 edits of mine get deleted over the years, representing probably hundreds of hours of work. It's fine. I'm confident that the articles were better for it in the end. Remember that no one WP:OWNs an article. It's the product of many editors over time. It's normal to feel protective of your work but you need to get a little zen about these kinds of things if you don't want to burn yourself out in constant conflict with other editors "messing with" your work. Axem Titanium (talk) 05:06, 19 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oh yeah, for sure. I probably would've done this in this situation with any article I felt was being deleted/merged unjustifiably. My point is I feel like I'm running back and forth across the thread trying to respond to so many points. DecafPotato (talk) 17:06, 19 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
If I was in your shoes, instead of going on and on and on about hypotheticals, I would jump at the opportunity to demonstrate just how poorly a merged article would work by fixing the draft yourself. It's a win regardless of how it goes - either you prove to yourself that it can work, or you prove to us that it can't. Try to help us prove you wrong, and hopefully in the process you'll prove us wrong. That's really what I was trying to say. Sincerely, the awesome[citation needed] IceKey8297. 23:56, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
that's what i'm doing :) DecafPotato (talk) 00:01, 19 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
We should probably change some of the names of the headings. redirects often redirect to different headings and redirects can get confused if there are two headings of the same name. Pizzaplayer219TalkContribs 00:10, 19 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, that needs to happen, but I can't think of a good way around it. DecafPotato (talk) 00:11, 19 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, I hadn't noticed when I posted that message. Looking forward to seeing how this ends up! Sincerely, the awesome[citation needed] IceKey8297. 00:18, 19 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict)If you look critically at the Gameplay section for Mario Kart 8 Deluxe alone, as it exists now, there's a lot there that does not need to be. It's already established that the game is a superset of Mario Kart 8, yet itr describes every facet of the game as if it was all introduced in Deluxe. For example, we detail the crossover with Zelda/Animal Crossing/F-Zero, the customizable vehicles, the 4 or 5 different speed cups, anti-gravity, flying, and underwater driving, but none of this is unique to Deluxe. If we say that "all characters, courses, etc and DLC in the base game are in Deluxe" then we shouldn't repeat this again later on saying "there are 48 courses, including the 16 DLC ones." These points are kind of all over the place too. The most important parts of the gameplay, like the anti-gravity, are further down the section, proceeding the quality-of-life updates. The fine detail on each individual battle mode is not necessary. They are quite similar to each other and I think that my suggested edit that "they have different goals and rules such as collecting the most coins or one team pursues another" to more to the point. If we do keep the Deluxe article separate, then I think that the gameplay section for New Super Luigi U is the kind of level of detail we should go for. It communicates quite clearly it's identical to the base game and it covers only the changes. Right now, as the section is written, it feels like it's trying too hard to justify itself as a separate article and is artifically bloating itself. --ThomasO1989 (talk) 23:46, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I know we’re talking about trimming and stuff but we still need to fix the references. I’m not that good at fixing references. Pizzaplayer219TalkContribs 23:49, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think was an intentional edit conflict. I just think it just kept getting removed while I was editing but my edit restored it without me noticing, and the cycle continued. DecafPotato (talk) 00:12, 19 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Additionally, I've created a draft for an alternative proposal of just 8 Deluxe and the Booster Course Pass, though I will still be helping the three-in-one proposal, to see if it can come to a state i think is sufficient for the all-in-one merge. DecafPotato (talk) 00:37, 19 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
To respond to the previous statement where I was pinged, I witheld judgement on whether the Deluxe article was itself unnecessary. My argument was simply that the DLC almost certainly was not. The community consensus to merge all was not unexpected. I probably would have been fine with an article on the Deluxe edition existing, but the view of the majority of editors is rather clear to merge all. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 15:20, 19 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I wish to merge all as well, I just said "some sort of merging" in case that was needed to arrive at a consensus, because going from 3 to 2 articles was better than staying at 3. Sergecross73 msg me 15:50, 19 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Do we really need the future section? It just seems like speculation and Nintendo has never confirmed a sequel to Mario Kart 8. It also seems very unlikely for a sequel to come out next year because the Booster Course Pass is still releasing. Pizzaplayer219TalkContribs 16:29, 19 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Probably not. It kinda goes without saying that there will be a sequel and that fans speculate about new aspects of it. That's pretty much every half ways popular video game. It could also go in the series article somewhere too, if people are dead set on including it somewhere. Sergecross73 msg me 16:50, 19 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
That usually happens for games, and MK9 got alot of media coverage, even if the rumor turned out to be wrong. DecafPotato (talk) 17:01, 19 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Please try to remember that sources are merely the minimum requirement for inclusion. We are not compelled to include everything that gets coverage. I could go dig up an old Kotaku article about Sonic the Hedgehog brand bedsheets and underwear, but that doesn't mean we need to cram that into the series article. We similarly don't need to include every time a sources report on the fandom hoping Tom Nook gets into the next Mario Kart or whatever. Sergecross73 msg me 17:32, 19 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Those aren't nearly comparable. A quick search for "Mario Kart 9" in WPVG's reliable sources engine reveals tons of results, much more than an example of something that would clearly have barely any coverage. DecafPotato (talk) 22:22, 19 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
You're missing the point entirely, which was that sources are a requirement for adding info, but we aren't necessarily required to add everything we can source. And as I mentioned, "Future" stuff can easily be tacked onto series articles. See Xenoblade#Future, for example. Sergecross73 msg me 23:08, 19 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, putting it on the series article sounds good. DecafPotato (talk) 17:10, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Arbitrary break

[edit]

I spent a few hours today cleaning up the "merge all 3" version of the draft with an eye toward minimizing redundancy, eliminating WP:PROSELINE and game guide-y material, and copyediting where I could (old version diff). Post-cleanup, the article is ~24kb of prose and I haven't touched most of the Reception section yet, which could use a bit of trimming as well (it includes too many reviews to be coherent, IMO, work in progress). I invite the people who were on the fence about the "merge all 3" option to take a look at the current draft, Draft:Mario Kart 8 Deluxe Merge Content, and see if that sways your position. @Masem, Panini!, Davidng913, IceKey8297, Zxcvbnm, David Fuchs, Sparkl, and Blaze Wolf: Axem Titanium (talk) 01:32, 22 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I have finished my rewrite of the Reception section. The article is now at ~20kb, which is far below the threshold for WP:SIZESPLIT. Axem Titanium (talk) 02:36, 25 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Colour me swayed. Personally I still think Deluxe has enough going for it for its own article, but I see now that a single article for everything is totally doable, and as such you have my support. Sincerely, the awesome[citation needed] IceKey8297. 01:54, 22 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Incredible work. I was right about to give you thanks on your talk page until I saw you say this here. Seriously, thank you. Sergecross73 msg me 02:11, 22 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Definitely impressive, although I am still more on the side of 8 Deluxe and the Booster Course Pass being merged (yes, I am officially changing my vote). I am not as strongly opposed to this now. (Oinkers42) (talk) 02:55, 22 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Appreciate it, IceKey, Serge, and Oinkers. Axem Titanium (talk) 04:52, 22 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I'm still on the fence about it. My main issue is the reception section which feels massive compared to the rest of the article. ― Blaze WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#6545 03:13, 22 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I agree. I didn't have time to get to Reception today. I want to trim about 60% and add some more to base MK8 reception so it's more balanced between the two. Axem Titanium (talk) 04:52, 22 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I've tried trimming 8 Deluxe's reception, and my main problem is that there isn't a lot of things to further trim. It would be disingenuous to ignore opinions contrary to the norm, but given they are contrary, they need to have intext attribution. I think we just need to focus on expanding the reception for the base 8. DecafPotato (talk) 05:27, 22 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I think it looks great to me. I fully support all 3 articles being merged now, don't have any qualms with the triple merged draft. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 09:52, 22 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Your work here is definitely something to revere, but I still oppose merging 8 and 8 Deluxe. Especially since every section has multiple paragraphs to say about 8 Deluxe exclusively, it seems like it's holding 8 Deluxe back merely because it's defined as a re-release despite it begging to be split. Every section talks about 8 and then sends you off to read about 8 Deluxe, a game that came out years later and that makes it harder to follow along with. Of course, there seems to be a majority ruling, so I'm not going to fight this to the grave, but I still support two articles: 8, and 8 Deluxe + Booster Pack. Panini! • 🥪 16:14, 22 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Fully agree with everything that you said. DecafPotato (talk) 18:49, 22 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
To expand, the work done by Axem and some revisions by me have convinced me that a three-way merge can work, though the article still feels like two articles shoved together rather than a singular one; per Panini, the fact that each section essentially covers both games separately is a sign that 8 and 8 Deluxe should be covered in separate articles, and like Panini said, Deluxe feels like it is "begging" for a split, and is only being forced into the base 8 because the games share the same title. Especially when things like Deluxe's reception can not be further shortened without compromising its coverage significantly, and thus, it would be better in its own article, and also solve the issue of the article's reception section being too large of a portion of the article (once 8's reception is expanded, of course). As for the Booster Course Pass, I've rewritten its reception to fit neatly into a single paragraph. While the coverage of the Booster Course Pass as a whole will inevitably expand as the pass continues, for now, I think it's fine merged into either 8 or 8 Deluxe, and we can reevaluate when the DLC concludes to see how it stands once all the information is present. However, IceKey and Zxcvbnm moving to the "merge all three" side does cement a majority in favor of the three-way merge, and thus, I think we can go ahead and merge the articles. After the combined article develops and the 8 Deluxe-exclusive information inevitably continues to grow, I hope you are all open to reconsider a split when the time comes.
One final thing: I developed the 8 Deluxe article with the hopes of improving it to GA status, but given it seems as though it will be merged into the base 8 article, and all three articles were rated as B-Class, would anyone be willing to improve the three-way 8 to GA status with me? The article is already fairly close, it just needs to fix the sources and 8's reception section.
TL;DR: I believe the three-way merge can work, though it feels like two articles pushed together, and the fact that each section covers both games separately is a sign that they should be split, even if they can be merged. The Booster Course Pass's info can neatly fit into either 8 or 8 Deluxe, we can reevaluate when the pass concludes. With IceKey and Zxcvbnm changing their position, it cements a majority in favor of merging all three, and thus, we should continue with that, and we should reconsider after the all-in-one article develops and 8 Deluxe-exclusive information inevitably grows. And also, does anyone want to help me get the all-in-one Mario Kart 8 article to GA status? DecafPotato (talk) 19:19, 22 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Panini, I appreciate your perspective on this. I don't find this to be a flow issue since it keeps relevant comparisons close in physical proximity to each other, especially because base MK8 is no longer widely available. But of course, this is a matter of opinion.
DecafPotato, I'm happy to help with th GA nomination process. The draft is in good shape, except for the Reception section which still needs work. I think a good way to rethink the Reception section is instead of two sections, one for each release, it could be rearranged to discuss a feature from MK8 and then how it improved/stayed the same/got worse in MK8DX. That would save space and improve coherence overall, IMO. Axem Titanium (talk) 21:05, 22 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I think that would be a good idea. For example, we could juxtapose the reception to 8's battle mode with the reception to 8 Deluxe's, which makes the article flow better and is something split articles cannot do as well–a legitimate, even if small, reason why the merge would make the coverage of the games better. We can discuss further on whatever talk page the content ends up on. DecafPotato (talk) 22:35, 22 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
You can definitely merge the MK8DX and BCP pages together. However, I believe the original 8 and 8DX are still different from each other to be merged together. However, considering that the three pages were already combined in the first place, I’m perfectly fine with merging all three if that is the preferred option in the very end. Davidng913 (talk) 21:26, 22 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Incredibly sorry for being late to the party. I have been busy with personal life and such. I just spent the evening reading throught this entire section. I don't want to say too much, but long story short, I struck my "Oppose" stance in favor of just "Merging" BCP to Mario Kart 8 Deluxe and nothing else. I feel like saying that the Deluxe version of the game is not notable or redudant to the original is really underestimating the remakes impact, especially on a different console. Like Panini and Masem, the game has recieved countless coverage across the majority of popular gaming publications. As also being the best-selling Switch game of all-time, I'm actually surprised this game hasn't gotten an article already. I thank DecafPotato's contributions and passion towards improving the coverage of MK8. Sparkltalk 01:30, 23 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
With you and PerryPerryD putting yourselves in the "merge only 8 Deluxe and the Booster Course Pass", that means we don't have a cemented majority like I said above, because it's never that easy 🙃. DecafPotato (talk) 02:40, 23 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
To be clear, conversely, at least 2 editors above said they were swayed by Axem's draft.. Sergecross73 msg me 02:45, 23 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah. But it does change things a bit, numbers went as follows:
Don't merge 8 Deluxe (left) – Merge 8 Deluxe (right)
7 — 11
-1 – +2
6 – 13 (2/3rds consensus)
+2 – -1
8 – 10 (pretty much where we started)
+2 – +0 (added in an edit at 23:49, 24 November 2022 (UTC))
10 – 10 (dead even)
*not a WP:VOTE, but useful nonetheless
In any case, I'm ready for this discussion to end, I just wish there was a clear answer one way or another. DecafPotato (talk) 04:02, 23 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
To be fair, you can also put me on this list (for merging only 8 Deluxe and the Booster Course Pass) as well. (Oinkers42) (talk) 02:48, 23 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
If it matters at all at this point, I believe in merging the dlc to the deluxe article. If it doesn't matter, well at least I tried. CaptainGalaxy 16:22, 24 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
What about merging the MK8DX article into the MK8 article? Pizzaplayer219TalkContribs 21:22, 24 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think we should merge the Deluxe version into the original Wii U version. I think keep those two seperate. CaptainGalaxy 23:43, 24 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Merge BCP to Deluxe, but keep Deluxe separate from 8. I agree with Panini here; while a three-way merge can work, that each section has its own sub-section for Deluxe says, to me, that there is enough about Deluxe that it warrants its own article. This is especially true of the Reception section, where there is much more said about Deluxe than vanilla. Plus, the existence of the BCP (which is only available for Deluxe) also points to Deluxe having a notability separate from and exceeding the base game. — Kawnhr (talk) 22:52, 24 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Well now it seems to be an even split. @Pizzaplayer219, @Sergecross73, @IceKey8297 @Panini!, I think we go ahead and merge the Booster Course Pass now, that's an incredibly clear consensus, though I think we have to wait to merge Deluxe with 8. right when I thought this discussion was wrapping up DecafPotato (talk) 23:46, 24 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
What's the actual breakdown exactly? Sergecross73 msg me 00:43, 25 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I finished my rewrite of the Reception section, which integrates MK8 and DX together so it's easy to see how criticism evolved from 8 to DX. I personally don't think there's any better way to do it---separated sections or separate articles would be demonstrably worse for comprehension. This addresses Panini's issue that the article is too cleanly separable between 8 and DX. With respect to the current Mario Kart 8 article, the draft is already so obviously superior to the current article that I'm going to push it live right now. As for merging Deluxe, I think the combined efforts of Pizzaplayer, DecafPotato, IceKey, ThomasO, and myself have demonstrated that the merge 3 article is viable and most of the recent opinions post-arbitrary break acknowledge this version as an acceptable option to them even if they prefer Deluxe separate as a first choice. The article is currently 20kb of readable prose, which is below the recommendation for WP:SIZESPLIT. Axem Titanium (talk) 02:33, 25 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not super sure about pushing it live right now—the article is certainly of a much higher quality than the base Mario Kart 8 article, though it's the result of a decision which, as it stands, doesn't have consensus; it describes Deluxe and the Booster Course Pass as if they don't have their own article. That's not the fault of the writing, of course, but currently, it doesn't really fit in the mainspace unless Deluxe is merged. DecafPotato (talk) 06:56, 25 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I will say though, independent of whether I think it's ready for the mainspace, this does rectify many issues, it is leagues better than the version of the Mario Kart 8 article prior to the initial split, which basically completely ignored the existence of Deluxe and just shoved it all into one section. I still think having 8 and 8 Deluxe separated is certainly the better choice, but at least the new three-way-merge treats 8 and Deluxe as the same game—which is the primary reason for the merge, rather than treating them as completely separate games, which, while I think they certainly are different, I'm happy the primary opinion of the merge rationale is reflected in the merge proposal. DecafPotato (talk) 07:16, 25 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
At this point, further comments are reaching diminishing returns and no one's brought any new arguments to the table in a while. I think the live MK8 article is in GA shape, particularly with respect to criterion 3b. I think it's down to us to make the final call. If I can move you to accept the one article version, then I think that would settle it. As I said, I'd be happy to help with the GA nomination process. Axem Titanium (talk) 10:38, 25 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Like, 18–2 in favor of merging the Booster Course Pass, though 10–10 to merge 8 Deluxe (see above) DecafPotato (talk) 06:49, 25 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
To be clear, in situations of WP:NOCONSENSUS, the change isn't done. But in this case, where you never had a consensus to split to begin with, and there was already a 2022 consensus against splitting, that still leads us back to the default of one article. Sergecross73 msg me 13:36, 25 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, but I presume we would take the 3 articles as a base in this circumstance, as the split was already done. This leads to only the Booster Course Pass article being merged. Also, that 2022 consensus is out of date anyway, considering the original consensus was pre-Booster Couse Pass. So only one merge should be done, not two. (Oinkers42) (talk) 16:48, 25 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Even discarding the "outdated" discussion, there was still no consensus to split it 3 ways. When there's no consensus, your default back to the original state. The original state was one article. Sergecross73 msg me 16:58, 25 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The split happened regardless, the best option is to merge, and there is no consensus to merge back into a single article. The original state was three articles, since one merge got consensus, that is what will happen. One merge will happen. (Oinkers42) (talk) 17:13, 25 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
How do you reconcile this stance of yours with WP:NOCONSENSUS? Or even WP:BRD? The split draft for Deluxe was published November 14th, and the merge discussion started November 15th. At no point was the split at some sort of resting consensus or something. Sergecross73 msg me 17:24, 25 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion started as a merge discussion between 8 Deluxe and the Booster Course Pass, a merge from 8 Deluxe to 8 did not get mentioned until 3 days later on the 18th. The draft for the Booster Course Pass was also moved over on October 7 (just to clear up the record). (Oinkers42) (talk) 17:35, 25 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
None of that moves the needle - these are all relatively short periods of time. Sergecross73 msg me 17:37, 25 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
It is also not like new content was not added to the draft, as the draft was written from scratch and did not copy the original article that was merged. Also, a month is a "relatively short period of time"?(Oinkers42) (talk) 17:38, 25 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
At no point was there a "last stable version" to go back to. It's been in a constant state of flux ever since these splits happened. This conversation has come full circle it seems, as I again find myself saying "this is what happens when you make radical changes without taking the time change the consensus to your favor on the front end", which is what should have been done. If these discussions had taken place when they should have, before the splits were done, perhaps NOCONSENSUS would make more sense to you? Sergecross73 msg me 17:51, 25 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I honestly don't have anything to say, besides, "the previous thing in this case was three articles", though merging 8 Deluxe with the Booster Course Pass has clear and undisputable consensus. But yeah, if there was consensus to merge 8 Deluxe with Mario Kart 8, we would see it in this discussion, which we have not.
I will point out, though. I think all of us have stopped trying to sway consensus, and are now just arguing about what is the proper course of action in a case of NOCONSENSUS. I think we just pull an outsider to settle this (to be extra clear, 'this' refers not to whether the articles should be merged, but how NOCONSENSUS applies here), and be done with it. DecafPotato (talk) 18:56, 25 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I've already dropped a request for closure at WT:VG and the request for closure board. It's just a matter of waiting now. Sergecross73 msg me 19:08, 25 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that a "no consensus" result would be completely uninterpretable. What is clear right now is that we have one article in GA shape (MK8), one article that has consensus to merge (BCP), and one article that is text-wise a subset of MK8, but with weaker prose (DX). In terms of contributors to the live article, that's Pizzaplayer, DecafPotato, IceKey, ThomasO, and myself. In terms of main contributors to this discussion, it's those people plus Sergecross, Oinkers, and Blaze Wolf. Of this shortlist of "engaged, relevant" participants who will likely be involved with the stewardship of the article in the future, only DecafPotato and Oinkers are opposed to the full merge, although you've both said you're less opposed and more amenable to it than before, having seen the current state of the article. If I can convince one or both of you to be fine with the full merge, I think that's enough of a positive consensus to move forward. That would clear the way for a Good Article nomination (criterion 5 is stability). We've already collectively spilled almost 100kb of digital ink on this discussion. I think it's time to wind this down. We can always revisit when BCP is fully released at the end of 2023. Axem Titanium (talk) 19:09, 25 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I think we just wait for the request for closure, and we can revisit in about a year, depending on the result. :) DecafPotato (talk) 21:07, 25 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
A GA is currently not the scope of this discussion in my opinion. We should visit the consideration of nominating the article for a GA after the merge discussion is closed. To remind you guys about my current vote, I currently think we should fully merge all three articles together due to MK8D currently not being notable enough for being a separate article. MK8D is too much of the same to actually be a separate article. Pizzaplayer219TalkContribs 21:19, 25 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
To be fair, things like Pokémon Yellow are articles, and Deluxe alone is plenty notable based on the references, this merge in the first place was never about notability and instead things like overlap. Look at us, going full circle like this; I think we're all better off admitting that we aren't going to find consensus here, so just wait for the formal closure on what to do about that. DecafPotato (talk) 21:23, 25 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
P.S.: It is hilariously ironic that this discussion is longer than the result of all three options in this discussion. DecafPotato (talk) 21:24, 25 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I could be wrong, but this discussion has all the hallmarks of one that closers wouldn't want to touch with a 10-foot pole. It's super duper long (100kb+), a "no consensus" result is off the table, and it's only been 10 days so there's lots of unclosed discussions ahead of us that have been waiting for longer. I bet we're going to be waiting for a while. I would hate to be stuck in article improvement limbo while this case winds its way through the courts. Let's keep an open mind. I don't want to be stuck here any more than you do. Axem Titanium (talk) 21:27, 25 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
i agree. we might be waiting a while. but i don't see any better way to handle this. DecafPotato (talk) 22:01, 25 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
You could always assent to the merge so we can move on with improving the article. Achieving GA would even make it eligible for DYK again. We can always revisit after BCP is finished releasing. Axem Titanium (talk) 22:25, 25 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, absolutely, but I am cautious surrounding doing something I don't agree with just because I'm tired of the discussion and want to move on. There's no deadline, and I don't want to rush the decision, it's over a year until the BCP is scheduled to finish, after all. DecafPotato (talk) 22:52, 25 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Given there's very strong consensus and I'm itching to get something done from this discussion, even if possibly temporary, I've initiated the merge of the Booster Course Pass into 8 Deluxe. Cleanup help is appreciated. DecafPotato (talk) 00:48, 26 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The reason why Pokémon Yellow has an article is because it has significant changes in both gameplay and plot. The most significant change in Pokémon Yellow is that the starter Pokémon is only a Pikachu. The game also replaces some of the gym leader's Pokémon and replaces some of the Team Rocket Grunts with Jessie and James. Pizzaplayer219TalkContribs 21:28, 25 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
It also has been out for a lot longer than MK8D. The most significant change in MK8D is a reworked Battle Mode. Pizzaplayer219TalkContribs 21:31, 25 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
and a whole-ass Booster Course Pass. I struggle to see how Yellow's differences are any less significant than Deluxe's. Like, swapping certain characters and team members and a starter Pokemon aren't nearly as big as 56 courses and five modes. DecafPotato (talk) 21:59, 25 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Please refrain from falling down WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS arguments. There are endless similarities and differences to make hay out of. Axem Titanium (talk) 22:25, 25 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Fair point, though the fact that the existence of separate articles for re-releases with not enormous changes has precedent is important to note. DecafPotato (talk) 00:36, 26 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I read Axem's comment as "Please refrain from falling down WP:STAIRS." Panini! • 🥪 01:18, 26 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Well Pokémon Yellow has technically gotten a rerelease on the 3DS and a remake on the Nintendo Switch. The game was released in 1998 in Japan which means tons of reliable sources and history have appeared to make it distinguishable enough with the Pokémon Red and Blue article. Pizzaplayer219TalkContribs 01:40, 26 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Again, WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. ― Blaze WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#6545 01:57, 26 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Talk:Pokémon Red and Blue#Proposed merge of Pokémon Yellow into Pokémon Red and Blue czar 07:11, 28 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Wrote it there, but I'll summarize here (along with the disclaimer that this is just me thinking out loud), but it feels as though this is a WP:CANVAS violation – this discussion is hardly related to that one. DecafPotato (talk) 01:33, 29 November 2022 (UTC) Retracted. I was thinking out loud; it seems to be fine. DecafPotato (talk) 21:36, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I'll respond here as well. It is not. It is a direct response to the topic you brought up. Axem Titanium (talk) 02:26, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Come on, man, you're literally the one who first introduced Pokémon Yellow into these discussions. And Czar linked it here without context or comment. Not canvassing. These discussions are convoluted enough as it is, please don't make it worse. Sergecross73 msg me 03:38, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Comments to closer on Status Quo

[edit]

These comments were made to me by Axem Titanium subsequent to the No Consensus decision ultimately. These comments sufficiently explain the reasoning for re-merging MK8 and MK8 Deluxe. InvadingInvader (userpage, talk) 22:09, 1 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

In your close, you stated While a draft was started, it has not been maintained for just under 30 days as of writing. The participants in the draft section of the discussion seem willing to work constructively, but disagreements on the nature remain; given that consensus should be general agreement while ignoring unproductive opinions, there is no general agreement to merge 8 and 8DX. Additional work to the drafts started below, or if necessary, starting the drafts from scratch, should be completed before reopening a merger discussion of 8 and 8 Deluxe. The draft in question was in fact already written, revised, proofread, and pushed live to the main Mario Kart 8 page on November 25 since it was agreed that the draft was far superior to the preexisting page regardless of the merge discussion. Given the timeline of events (article unilaterally split by a single editor on Nov 7, a discussion to undo the unilateral split was started just 1 week later when the article was noticed by more veteran editors), a "no consensus" result should properly default to the status quo before the action that caused the discussion in the first place, i.e. before the split. Axem Titanium (talk) 18:22, 31 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for providing me these details and helping me follow this drama…I feel like I’m on reality television sometimes with these things. What was difficult to determine was whether the unilateral split should be considered as part of or as before the consensus. Given that it was a proposal to re-emerge and the level of entanglement the booster course pass created, and for the stability of the project, I decided to only go as far back as the original proposition’s time. However, I am not opposed to undoing the unilateral split. InvadingInvader (userpage, talk) 20:42, 31 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
If it helps to think about, consider it this way. Before Nov 7, the status quo was a single article that covers both topics. This status quo was based on a unanimous discussion from January. On Nov 7, a single editor unilaterally decided to WP:BOLDly split out MK8DX into a separate article (again), and began stripping out DX content from the main MK8 article. From Nov 7 to Nov 15, this editor was the only person in favor of this new article state, and thus did not change the status quo, they merely suggested a new state with their edits. When the discussion started on Nov 15, the status quo still did not change because the discussion itself was about what the new status quo should be. The preexisting status quo does not change for the duration of the entire discussion. From WP:NOCONSENSUS, a lack of consensus commonly results in retaining the version of the article as it was prior to the proposal or bold edit (emphasis mine). I'm happy to handle all the edits in article space to clean this up. All you need to do is clarify your clarify your closing comment to make clear that your No Consensus decision should return the article to its preexisting status quo. Axem Titanium (talk) 06:18, 1 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Mario_Kart_8_Deluxe&oldid=1203891735"