Talk:Super Mario/Archive 1

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Mario Series

The name of the article should be Mario series, not Super Mario Bros. Series. This is because the Super Mario Bros. Series is the Super Mario Bros. 1, 2, and 3, which we should be talking about all the Mario games.--Mr.Mario 192 04:37, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

Isn't that just original research? These are all part of the same series. Unless you could get a reliable link that says what your saying, this is just your opinion. →041744 07:15, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

Well, you don't see "Super Mario Bros." on every title game. Ask anybody outside that knows Mario, they would all call it Mario series. Super Mario Bros. Series was just a series of side-scrollong games with the title "Super Mario Bros." in all of them. --Mr.Mario 192 02:13, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

I still disagree with you but Be Bold (just not stupid).→041744 12:18, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

Oh, yeah?? Then, I have something to show you... Go to the Mario article. You will see that there's a section titled "Super Mario Bros. Series", which is composed of the games: Super Mario Bros. 1, 2, 3, Deluxe, and New Super Mario Bros., to just list some games. So it's better you check every article to check any circumstances involving you having the page of just one sub-series that includes other games that are not from the sub-series, such SM64 and Galaxy. --Mr.Mario 192 14:29, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Have you not read the WP:Be Bold article? it states "The Wikipedia community encourages users to be bold when updating articles. ". I see your point, but I still stand by mine, so go ahead an move the page, you wont catch me doing it.→041744 13:05, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Smbtitle.png

File:Smbtitle.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 19:01, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

New Article/Section?

Maybe we should have an article (or at least a section) about the series' powerups and items. I'm just saying. ChromeWulf ZX (talk) 22:25, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

No, most of these links are declared unworthy of articles, most of whish are item articles. Also there was once a article for that but it got deleted like Zelda items and Metriod items.→041744 23:19, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Question block merger

Has so little notability, it would make a two sentence mention here, but it really shouldn't be its own article. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 01:29, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Merger of Mushroom Kingdom and Bowsers castle

Lets be honest, neither of those articles has any references, and as popular as Mario is, they are not notable in and of themselves. They are notable as part of the Mario franchise, and so they should have trimmed down mentions in this article. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 20:57, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

This article has plenty of refrences, but mushroom kingdom not so much, so i see your point. I'll merge it, if there are no objections, trim it seriously down.→041744 04:34, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

if mario come out 1985/2008 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 4.225.80.160 (talk) 22:43, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

what if we just merge them into an article entitled Locations in the Mario series or something? and i could include all of the main settings from the mario games. each game would be a section and they would be listed by release order.76.27.215.219 (talk) 19:03, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

The merger was already done, and that was ruled out because there are zero references, not even a few, so a locations article would also be totally unreferenced. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 19:12, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Inconsistencies

Quote: "A Fire Flower, introduced in Super Mario Bros., transforms Mario into Fire Mario. Fire Mario has the ability to throw bouncing fireballs at enemies, defeating most enemies. Fire Mario's distinction is his white hat and overalls in many of the Mario games, in all 2-D Fire Mario no height difference from Mario with a Mushroom. Super Mario Galaxy was the first 3-D game to include this power-up."

I think this needs to be rewritten, I would rewrite it but its confusing the hell out of me as to what its actually trying to say =( —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.219.225.186 (talk) 16:09, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Confusing comments and false information

Recurring gameplay elements, third paragraph: "Similarly in 3-D along with stationary 1-up Mushrooms, as well as mushrooms that will only appear if Mario walks over a certain spot." Is this just a typo, or is there supposed to be more to that sentence?

Games, paragraph four: "[SMB2(US) and SMB3] introduced new gamplay elements such as [...] backtracking." The Lost Levels had mechanics that included something you can consider "backtracking," such as pipes that take you to previous sectors. I'm not sure if the first one did too or not. Also, shouldn't SMB2US and SMB3 be separate paragraphs? There's probably more than enough to mention about each. SMB2US has more characters, character traits, storyline. SMB3 had very memorable costumes, a map screen, minigames, auto-scrolling levels, conveyor belts, ducking into the background layer... it's arguably the biggest step in Mario platforming evolution, if you consider all the steps back SM64 took (basically dropped all the items, and yoshi got demoted to a post-game cameo).

Games, paragraph six: "[Super Mario World] was the first game in the series to have levels with multiple exits, an element that would later become important in 3-dimensional Mario games." Perhaps the author intended it to mean the levels leading to bonus levels and the like, but Super Mario Bros. for the NES had multiple exits on several levels (as did SMB2J, SMB2US, and SMB3). —Preceding unsigned comment added by JaggerG (talk • contribs) 08:11, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

Awnsering these one at a time:

• 1-Yes i wil make easier to undestand, thank you for pointing that out
• 2-Perhaps the 'backtracking' shoud just be removed, it is aftera a trivia aspect of gameplay. And yes sbm2 and SMB3 shoud seprate, as for 64, that is an opinion, which i disagree with.
• 3-The difrence between SMW two exits and SMB and SMB2 is that SMB has shortcuts, skipping levels while in SMW creates a fork in the road, where 2 eves result from one level, not a shorcut. One exit leads one way and the other another way. And in SMB3 also only has one exit, however after the level is competed the player can chose two paths, but the level itsef only has one exit (or atleast only one that exits to another level).→041744 18:31, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:GB Super Mario Land 2.png

The image File:GB Super Mario Land 2.png is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

• That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
• That this article is linked to from the image description page.

The following images also have this problem:

• File:Mario.jpg

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --22:05, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

No Doubled Periods

There should be no doubled periods in this article; it is incorrect grammar, according to //www.whitesmoke.com/punctuation-period-sentences.html and many other sources:

"5. Do not use a period to end a sentence which ends with an abbreviation which itself ends with a period. Typical abbreviations which end with a period are: Mr., Mrs., Ms., St. (street or Saint), Mt. (mountain), Dr., Jr., Fri., Feb., a.m. and p.m. (Note: Do not abbreviate professor to Prof. in academic writing). After a career in the army, she went on to work for Time Warner Inc. (no extra period)" Mario777Zelda (talk) 02:51, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

Why skip over DK Jr.?

It's absolutely a part of the series as much as the original DK. Mario is the antagonist of the game rather than protagonist, but it's still at least worth a mention and place on the timeline. Yet the article seems to skip from the first DK right to Mario Bros. Obviously, DK3 doesn't belong, as Mario's not even in it (alas poor Stanley the bugman, we barely knew you) but DK Jr. seems odd to omit.76.226.215.43 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 07:18, 3 March 2009 (UTC).

Most peope ffeel thos games (DK 2, 3 ect.) are more appart of the DK series than Mario. Not that they aren't related, but stil they should be separated to their respective articles.→041744 14:09, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Super Mario 64 DS

Mario bros. and New Super Mario Bros. is on the list

Super Mario 64 is on the main series list. But why not Super Mario 64 DS?

It seems only right and logical. I'd also like to note that Pokémon FireRed and Pokémon LeafGreen, enhanced remakes of two other games in the pokemon series, are considered to be inthe main series as well. Just thought i'd mention that as it seems like a very similar situation.

Also i think its worth mentioning, why not Super Mario Bros. Deluxe? Sold a good 2.8million

IAmTheCoinMan (talk) 15:47, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

New Super Mario Bros. is an orginal game in it's own right. Despite the name it is not an updated version of Mario Bros. or Super Mario Bros.

As for FireRed and LeafGreen, it seems that diffrent rules apply there, seeing as all games bearing the brand name are represented there (like in List of Mario games by system) including Pokemon Dash, Pokémon Snap and My Pokémon Ranch. Also note that that is in list form and not what this page features, a short paragraph for each main game.

And finally it is worthy of mention (look in the remakes section), but just not under the 'Main series' section as it is an enhanced remake, but a remake none the less.→041744 07:59, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

But remake or not, just because a game is a remake doesn't mean that its not in the main series. How can some of you simply decide that you dont want to put the game in there on the weak idea that a remake doesn't make a game part of the main series. Whats your reasoning for this? IAmTheCoinMan (talk) 01:14, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

Additionally, this page is about the mario series, the pokemon page is every pokemon game in the series, so, this page should be every game in the mario series. Or, we could change this article to mean every platform game in the series, which would include remakes and some edits to the article. Beacause atm its sorta assorted games. Which one is it gonna be? It has to be one, not just games that wiki editors should be in the game.IAmTheCoinMan (talk) 05:46, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

There are 3 pages for every game Mario has appeared in (List of Mario games by year, List of Mario games by system and List of Mario games by genre), this page is for the platform games, the introduction to this page states: "The Mario series is a series of highly popular and acclaimed[1] platform games by Nintendo...". And under Gameplay it says "The Mario games are platformers."

Additionally in the case against remakes, the New Super Mario Bros article states: "...and it is the first game to be a part of the main Mario series of video games since Super Mario Sunshine in 2002." NSMB was released in 2006, and Super Mario 64 DS in 2004. Which means that Super Mario 64 DS is not generally percevied as a main game in series.

When looking at other video game series that have a trend of remaking games (such as Dragon Quest, Final Fantasy and Resident Evil) the remakes are listed under the original game they are based off. Perhaps this could be implemented here, with SM64 DS, the GBA remakes and Deluxe mentioned under the respective original game they are based on in the main series section.→041744 21:42, 22 March 2009 (UTC)'

The final fantasy article you mentioned looks pretty good. We should try to do that with this article. Although that has no reception or anything, so we keep our reception and in other media bits. But change our main series and spinoff etc bits. List of Final Fantasy media#Spin-offs looks really good, and it's in that area we're we can properly have Mario Kart etc. You happy if thats done? just will be so much easier to read if we do thisIAmTheCoinMan (talk) 01:48, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

In response to "this page is for the platform games", how exactly is this the case? The article clearly covers the entire series, not just the platformers, and it'll take a lot of work to redefine the subject. I've changed it, anyway, for clarity. Haipa Doragon (talk • contributions) 21:11, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

Alright, i'll try to refine that statement; While this article clearly does cover the major platform games, it also covers spin-offs and other media that said series has spawned, similar to other 'series' pages. So while this article does rightfully cover other games and media that surround the main series, i think it's main focus is on the platformers, seeing as each one is expressed in such detail compared to the sections of this article and that the reception and gameplay sections shows only said games.→041744 21:52, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

That because it's been written in relation to what games are listed above. A lot of your arguments rely on falsity. It's like saying the bible is true because on pg 154 it says it is.

Quote: "Additionally in the case against remakes, the New Super Mario Bros article states: "...and it is the first game to be a part of the main Mario series of video games since Super Mario Sunshine in 2002." NSMB was released in 2006, and Super Mario 64 DS in 2004. Which means that Super Mario 64 DS is not generally percevied as a main game in series." That's because this article lists the 'main series' of games, and they simply could have just looked at this and bam, it's in the other article.

If this article is only for the platform games, then another article needs to be created for the mario series of video games (Ie, depth and information, reception, about all the games in the series), and all the platform nonsence needs to be moved to Mario (Platform series) or something like that. This article should look at the mario as a franchise, which is what the spin offs and the good sections in this article look at. Mention of recurring elements in all the games and whatnot. Because atm this article is just not linear.IAmTheCoinMan (talk) 06:48, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

I agree, this article should take a broader look at the franchise, but still focus on the main series; reorganize, expand the spin off section, ect. I think this article could be modeled after The Legend of Zelda (series), with all the spin offs, media and related games one section and more detail from out of game (music, history, cultural influences and so on). I think the article should get a revamp, seeing as this arguement has proven it's purpose is not self explanatory.→041744 22:21, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, so you have like the idno, a section about games from the series, and then in there you have a subsection about the main series, then aswell as spinoffish series such as mario kart etc. different sport games(sport games as itself isnt a series) -

but overall, be broader, and look as the mario video game franchise as a whole. You wanna start doing this?IAmTheCoinMan (talk) 13:06, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

Mabey not sections for each spin off, more like paragraghs and the such. I'll start reorganizing the article.→041744 17:31, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

Super Mario World 2 and Super Mario Land 3

...are missing in the article. Megata Sanshiro (talk) 11:00, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

SMW2 yes, SML3 no. SML3 only has the most vague connection, while SMW2 is practically playing as Mario. - The New Age Retro Hippie used Ruler! Now, he can figure out the length of things easily. 17:55, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

So why is it(Super mario world 2) not included? Can it be included? Ottawa4ever (talk) 14:52, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

Requested Move/Split

The following is a closed discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was inconclusive: this discussion has been open for over a month. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 04:19, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

• Mario (series) → Mario (franchise) — I request that this article either be split into Mario (series) and Mario (franchise) or moved to Mario (franchise). The article takes a look on the whole franchise,(tv shows, films, games, other series,) not just the Mario series of video games. Hence, it is inappropriate for the page to be placed here. IAmTheCoinMan (talk) 20:59, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
• Is there even a difference between the two words? I thought "franchise" and "series" were synonymous. Anyway, I don't see much point in this. All the non-video game stuff in this article is mostly summarising what's in various other articles already, and having both an article for the entire series/franchise and the video game series just seems redundant. Haipa Doragon (talk • contributions) 15:14, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Aggregate review scores table

Our current table of aggregate review scores includes 5 games in a row that have no such score, and almost certainly never will. Since we already have a timeline earlier in the article, there doesn't seem to be any particular reason to have all games in the series listed. So here is what I propose: <div style="font-size: 90%;float:left;border-left:1em solid white;"

Aggregate review scores (current version)

Game	Game Rankings	Metacritic
Donkey Kong	-	-
Mario Bros.	-	-
Super Mario Bros.	-	-
Super Mario Bros.: The Lost Levels	-	-
Super Mario Bros. 2	-	-
Super Mario Land	74.17%	-
Super Mario Bros. 3	-	-
Super Mario World	96.70%	-
Super Mario Land 2: 6 Golden Coins	74.90%	-
Super Mario 64	95.90%	94
Super Mario Sunshine	91.65%	92
New Super Mario Bros.	89.42%	89
Super Mario Galaxy	97.28%	97

Aggregate review scores (proposed version)

Game	Game Rankings	Metacritic
Note: No aggregate scores available before Super Mario Land
Super Mario Land	74.17%	-
Super Mario Bros. 3	-	-
Super Mario World	96.70%	-
Super Mario Land 2: 6 Golden Coins	74.90%	-
Super Mario 64	95.90%	94
Super Mario Sunshine	91.65%	92
New Super Mario Bros.	89.42%	89
Super Mario Galaxy	97.28%	97

It's generally a better use of space than the original, but since it's a relatively big change, I wanted to get other opinions just in case we actually have a good reason for keeping the first five games in the table, or (since I'm not that familiar with tables) in case there's an obviously better way to get the note in there. tktktk (talk) 02:43, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

Since there are no objections, I guess I'll go ahead with it. tktktk (talk) 00:45, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

Name change

The famous platformer series of Mario games is the Super Mario series, not the Mario series. Mario is a franchcise, not a series, so the name should definitely be changed. FMasic (talk) 20:10, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

Oh, and regarding the spin-offs, they should be merged with the franchise article. FMasic (talk) 20:11, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

Music section

I removed the following section from the article, since it seems to consist of either unsourced, poorly sourced, or obvious information (yes, there was a soundtrack for Super Mario World 2: Yoshi's Island). I'm just explaining my reasoning for the creator(s) of the section.

 ===Music compilations===

• Super Mario Compact Disco- http://www.mariowiki.com/Super_Mario_Compact_Disco
• White Knuckle Scorin'- by MCA records, includes the song "Ignorance is Bliss" and had a Mario comic book. http://www.mariowiki.com/White_Knuckle_Scorin%27
• The Donkey Kong Album
• Mario & Zelda Big Band Live
• Mario Kart 64 on Club Circuit
• Pac-Man Fever- features "Do the Donkey Kong" by Buckner & Garcia
• Super Mario Bros. 3 ~ Akihabara Electric Circus
• Super Smash Bros. Melee: Smashing...Live!
• Nintendo Sound Selection Vol.1: Healing Music
• Nintendo Power Play it Loud! Volume 1- consists of Yoshi's Island tracks http://www.gamersgraveyard.com/repository/snes/history/playitloud.html
• Nintendo Sound Selection Vol.2: Loud Music
• Nintendo Sound Selection Vol.3: B-Side Music
• Nintendo Super Famicom Game Music
• Happy! Mario 20th – Super Mario Sound Collection
• Super Mario World
• Diddy Kong Racing Original Soundtrack
• Mario Basketball 3on3 Original Soundtrack
• Mario Kart 64 songs
• Mario Party 3 Original Soundtrack
• Mario Tennis 64 Original Soundtrack
• Nintendo All-Star! Dairantou Smash Brothers OST
• Paper Mario OST
• Paper Mario songs
• Super Mario 64 Original Soundtrack
• Super Mario Galaxy: Original Soundtrack
• Super Mario Land Original Soundtrack
• Super Mario RPG songs
• Super Mario World 2: Yoshi's Island songs
• Donkey Konga: The Hottest Hits
• Mario Kart 64: Greatest Hits Soundtrack
• Super Mario World 2: Yoshi's Island
• Yoshi's Story Game Soundtrack

Mario777Zelda (talk) 00:02, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

Merge of Mario Builder here

A user removed the PROD on Mario Builder and suggested a merge to here as a separate section here. What do people think about such a merge? Is that sufficient with what we currently have on the Mario Builder article to have it here? –MuZemike 21:27, 29 August 2010 (UTC)

Delete it. It's non-notable and poorly written. If the author of the article can't be bothered to find out the software developer's actual name or find multiple reliable sources for the content or even use correct grammar, there's no need to merge, in my opinion. Mario777Zelda (talk) 23:02, 29 August 2010 (UTC)

Super Mario RPG: Legend of the Seven Stars was Mairo's 3D debit, not Mario 64

Even though it was on the Super Nintendo, Super Mario RPG had complete 3D graphics from beginning to the end.121.91.67.198 (talk) 08:09, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

I believe 3D game means that the game uses 3D models and not sprites, which Mario RPG uses. —Ost (talk) 20:00, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

That is correct. Mario RPG isn't a 3D game, it is a 2D Isometric platformer-RPG. Isometric titles have been around forever, since at least Q-Bert. 75.165.121.160 (talk) 11:48, 9 September 2010 (UTC)

Gameplay Section (There were games before Super Mario World with multiple Exits)

I was just going to edit this section and correct the content, but it is a little more difficult than that. It says that "Super mario world was the first to introduce multiple exits." However this is incorrect. Super mario brothers 3 had alternate exits that allowed you to get a whisle or other items. AND, to make this statement even more false, Super Mario Bros. 1 had alternate exits that allowed you to skip levels.

I sugest someone more colloquial than myself rewrite this entire section and give credit to each game for alternate exits, and then put special emphasis on the improvements that Super Mario World made to the "multiple exit" scheme. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lordneeko (talk • contribs) 16:46, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

Origins

It might be worth mentioning that Mario & Luigi may have inspired Terry Gilliam for his depiction of the plumbers in his 1985 film Brazil. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 160.33.66.122 (talk) 16:42, 28 December 2010 (UTC)

More games

I'm currently working on the article adding more games to the timeline to complete the Mario series. Care to join me? StormContent (talk) 18:27, 2 September 2011 (UTC)

There's already an article that does that. The timeline in this article more or less reflects the release of the major, or most important games. Remakes, spin-offs and the such would make the timeline cluttered. --ThomasO1989 (talk) 18:31, 2 September 2011 (UTC)

That's right. Didn't know there was an article that has game like those. But the article here needs some work. StormContent (talk) 22:49, 2 September 2011 (UTC)

Given that the maintenance notice states that the article is too long, adding more to it is not going to help. --ThomasO1989 (talk) 13:56, 3 September 2011 (UTC)

Mario Forever (Unofficial)

What about adding information about the Unofficial version for Mario – Softendo Mario Forever? Galzigler (talk) 12:39, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

This list is not about fan-made games. Salvidrim (talk) 15:13, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

Move to Super Mario (series)?

ArtistScientist (talk · contribs) moved this article to Super Mario (series) and changed its scope with the comment: "This article's content focuses on the Mario games whose gameplay elements were introduced in Super Mario Bros., all of which have since included "Super Mario" in their name. Additionally, "series" implies linear progression; this only fits the Super Mario". I think that this sort of change really should be discussed before being implemented. Is this something that should be done? ArtistScientist, can you provide some additional rationale? Reach Out to the Truth 03:54, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

I suggest doing a full RM to generate discussion. Personally I can definitely see the reasons behind it, and I'm not necessarily disagreeing, but I'll think about it a bit more in depth before supporting. --Salvidrim! ^T·_C 03:59, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

Footnote 6 on page 2 of this Nintendo.com article http://iwataasks.nintendo.com/interviews/#/3ds/super-mario-3d-land/0/1 calls the series the "Super Mario series". The scope of this article already is focused on the Super Mario games rather than the broader Mario franchise, such as its description of the gameplay elements. I have only changed the name of the article to more accurately reflect its content. ArtistScientist (talk) 04:02, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

Indeed, the article does not discuss games such as Paper Mario or Mario Kart 64, clearly sticking to the "main" (platforming) Super Mario series and its origins, hence my initial approval of the move. However I clearly think broader consensus should be sought. --Salvidrim! ^T·_C 04:06, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

Iwata Asks isn't particularly consistent in regards to Mario/Super Mario. http://iwataasks.nintendo.com/interviews/#/wii/supermariogalaxy2/0/0 has "Super Mario 64: The first 3D action game in the Mario series. Released simultaneously with the Nintendo 64 system in June 1996.". It probably depends on who's translating it.

This article is, I think, intended to discuss the series as a whole, but some of the content has been split off to other articles. If we focus specifically on the Super Mario platforming games, we'd probably have to drop the "Other genres and spin-offs" and "Mario in other media" sections, as they'd no longer be within the scope of this article. We'd be looking at more than just a simple page move then. Reach Out to the Truth 04:24, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

The article doesn't individually list the games from non-platforming genres because it is focused on the platformers. That's why the article calls them "other" genres in the first place. ArtistScientist (talk) 04:33, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

Requested Move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: page moved. I did not change the redirects. So if someone creates stubs at any articles that need creating, then they will point to the correct places. Do remember that the bot will change these shortly. For similar reasons, I did not adjust the template links. Vegaswikian (talk) 18:34, 30 November 2011 (UTC)

---

Mario (series) → Super Mario (series) – Proposed by: ArtistScientist (talk · contribs)
Reason: "This article's content focuses on the Mario games whose gameplay elements were introduced in Super Mario Bros., all of which have since included "Super Mario" in their name. Additionally, "series" implies linear progression; this only fits the Super Mario."
--Salvidrim! ^T·_C 04:44, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

Comment I think the Super Mario platform series should be in the same style as the articles about the Mario Kart or Mario Party series. Perhaps the large section about the characters' appearances in other media should be placed in a separate article about the franchise as a whole. ArtistScientist (talk) 04:58, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

Comment I think this article should be kept as the "Mario (franchise)" article, and you could make a separate "Super Mario (series)" article solely about the Mario main platforming series. How about that? --Salvidrim! ^T·_C 05:01, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

I think this article is already about the Super Mario series to a greater extent than the franchise as a whole. It currently has elements that are specific to the platform series, such as the timeline of games. However the other media section doesn't pertain to the specific platform series and I think it should form the new article. ArtistScientist (talk) 05:25, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

On the other hand, I think that since this article has the media section, "other games", and all, it would be preferable to make this the "franchise" article, and take some/most of the "meat" (timeline, etc.) of the big section to make a separate Super Mario (series) article that focused solely on the main series. But to be quite honest, whether this is turned into the Franchise article and a Super Mario one is made or the other way around, the result is the same -- two articles, one global to the franchise and the other only about the Super Mario (series). --Salvidrim! ^T·_C 05:30, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

The result is the same, yes. I just think since most of this article (Gameplay, Recurring gameplay elements, Mushroom Kingdom, Main series, Remakes and rereleases, Reception and Sales) is about the Super Mario series, it would be simpler to convert this article to focus on the platform games, and incorporate the lesser amount of "Mario in other media" and "Games developed by other companies" into a broader Mario franchise article. ArtistScientist (talk) 05:44, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

• Comment what about the first Mario game? Mario Bros. which is NOT "SUPER". 70.24.248.23 (talk) 07:26, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

It is the origin of the whole Mario franchise, but not part per se of the main platforming/adventure Super Mario series, and as such should be in a franchise article but not one about "Super Mario (series)", as is discussed. --Salvidrim! ^T·_C 07:34, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

It is integrated into Super Mario 3, as one of the challenge stages when Luigi and Mario challenge each other for a position, thus is part of this series. 70.24.248.23 (talk) 13:29, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

It's original form was separate, and, as it's a game in its own right, it should be kept separate from a "Super Mario" article (as the main gameplay elements within a game or series define it). FMasic (talk) 22:33, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

• Supporting reason I just discovered that a Mario franchise article already exists: List of Mario media. The other media and spinoff sections in this article would be easily integrated into it. Then this article could focus on the Super Mario series instead of confusing itself with the broader Mario franchise. ArtistScientist (talk) 09:13, 23 November 2011 (UTC)
• Support The move and makeover of this article as a Super Mario (series), focusing on the main platforming/adventure series, and keep the List of Mario media as the franchise-wide article, with the merge of the List of Mario video games (merger result from List of Mario video games by year, List of Mario video games by console and List of Mario video games by genre, which I am currently working on in userspace) staying as an easily viewable, sortable, no details, complete list of all games (as opposed to major media, from List of Mario media).

That sounds good. ArtistScientist (talk) 09:29, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

• Rename and Split into new article, we should change this article to "Super Mario (series)" as recommended, and in addition I would recommend starting a "Mario (franchise)" article on the spin off games, media appearances, etc, and would recommend moving the sections here entitled "Other genres and spin-offs" and "Mario in other media" into said article. Right now the List of Mario media is just a list, and trying to transform it into a half-list-half-text article could be messy, I think it would be cleaner and simpler just to start a new Mario (franchise) article starting with the text from here and other sections.AerobicFox (talk) 17:37, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

Since the merge of the many List of Mario video games is on the verge of being rolled out (I was at it all night! :D), once that is done, I will suggest turning List of Mario media into a purely... well, media-oriented list (with links to the Games list), to focus on Books, TV, Films, magazines, etc. In that regard, a prose article talking about the Mario (franchise), its origins, impact, etc. would certainly be beneficial, but that would be something else. --Salvidrim! ^T·_C 17:43, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

I've started working on a Mario (franchise) article. As it would be impossible to cover the 200+ Mario games in prose form, I've focused on the most central titles. Salvidrim!'s article can serve as the complete list. User:ArtistScientist/Mario (franchise) ArtistScientist (talk) 07:13, 24 November 2011 (UTC)

Looking really, really good! I'm thinking the List of Mario media will be a tad redundant after that, so could simply be merged into it. Also, if you want to see the list of video games as it is now, see here. --Salvidrim! ^T·_C 08:42, 24 November 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. I'll probably wait until you create your article before I merge mine with List of Mario media, since your list is more comprehensive than List of Mario media and eliminates the need for it. ArtistScientist (talk) 09:47, 24 November 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for being WP:BOLD. Mind if I do some work also on your page?AerobicFox (talk) 08:22, 25 November 2011 (UTC)

Not at all. ArtistScientist (talk) 11:16, 25 November 2011 (UTC)

Alright, feel free tor evert or change anything then. To start I am going to organize some of these into sections, for example a Mario Sports section for Mario Golf, Mario Tennis, Mario Strikers, etc, a section for Mario RPG's, etc.AerobicFox (talk) 20:41, 26 November 2011 (UTC)

• Support as per consensus. I agree on the need for:

- A Mario (franchise) article serving as a basis and dealing with the concept of Mario, the extent of the franchise, the impact, popularity, and very notability of Mario.

- A Super Mario (series) article made from this article to describe the series of platforming Super Mario games starting with Super Mario Bros., which is where the revolution started in terms of gaming. This would take a gamer's perspective and analyse the impact on gaming as opposed to popular culture, as well as details applicable only to the series such as sales.

- A comprehensive list article for Mario video-games and other media (either together or separately), to serve as a database.

I'll be around to aid the organisation of this if I can. FMasic (talk) 22:33, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

"Gameplay Elements" clean up

So, I know a few months back the scope of the article was changed to focus on specifically the Super Mario series of games. And I fully support that. But I was reading the "recurring gameplay elements" section, and there's all sorts of references to Super Smash Brothers, Mario Kart, Mario Party. My first reaction was "Hey, these aren't part of Super Mario series, I'm going to remove them". But then I noticed how frequent they are, so I wanted to make sure that I was in the right in doing this first.

Was this something that no one noticed/bothered to change when the scope of the article was changed? Or was it kept like this on purpose? Sergecross73 msg me 13:56, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

I belive recurrent gameplay elements are meant to be in the Mario (franchise) article. Salvidrim! 17:53, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

Well, the information is largely relevent to the Super Mario series, it just keeps on veering off topic, so frequently that I wondered if may it was I who wasn't doing things right. I'm quick to remove all the useless trivia that always is being crammed into Sonic-related articles, but wanted to make sure I wasn't missing something here on the Mario ones... Sergecross73 msg me 21:20, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

The best place for that information would be the Super Mario section of Mario (franchise), which could be used to mention the impact of the Super Mario games on other series in the franchise. ArtistScientist (talk) 23:12, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

Super Mario Land series and SMW 2 not official?

Nintendo made a limited-edition re-release of Super Mario All-Stars in 2010 for the 25th anniversary of Super Mario Bros. Included in the package was a booklet entitled "Super Mario History: 1985-2010" with a timeline detailing all of the "Super Mario" game releases starting in 1985 with Super Mario Bros and ending in 2010 with Super Mario Galaxy 2. Contrary to this article's timeline, Super Mario Land 1-3 and Super Mario World 2 were not included in the timeline ("The Lost Levels" also wasn't included, but that's because that game was only released in Japan and the booklet is only concerned with western releases). What's also notable is that Super Mario All-Stars (the original 1993 version) is included in the timeline. Super Mario 3D Land, NSMB2, and NSMBU obviously didn't appear, since the timeline was made in 2010. The booklet is an official Nintendo release, so their list probably holds greater legitimacy than Wikipedia's. If anyone wants to cite the booklet, I have it with me, but I'm not quite sure how it should be cited. There's no author and it doesn't mark any page numbers. I will, however, type their game timeline for reference.

1985: Super Mario Bros. [NES]

1988: Super Mario Bros. 2 [NES]

1990: Super Mario Bros. 3 [NES]

1991: Super Mario World [SNES]

1993: Super Mario All-Stars [SNES] (Note: commentary in the booklet pays primary attention to the game's inclusion of Super Mario Bros.: The Lost Levels.)

1996: Super Mario 64 [N64]

2002: Super Mario Sunshine [GCN]

2006: New Super Mario Bros. [NDS]

2007: Super Mario Galaxy [Wii]

2009: New Super Mario Bros. Wii [Wii]

2010: Super Mario Galaxy 2 [Wii] — Preceding unsigned comment added by Papa Mama (talk • contribs) 06:11, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

This has been addressed before if you look on this page. I have this book as well, but the Super Mario branding is used in the titles of the games themselves. You can't get a more direct source than that. We can not justify excluding games that have Super Mario in the title from the article about Super Mario games. ArtistScientist (talk) 06:37, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

Well if that's the criteria, then why not add games like Super Mario Kart or Super Mario Strikers? Either you're not being fair or your logic is flawed. Papa Mama (talk) 22:56, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

I am having a hard time believing you reasonably believe Super Mario Kart or Super Mario Strikers to be platformers. Salvidrim! 23:20, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

I'm kind of having a hard time believing the criteria for this list is any game with "Super Mario" in the title that is a platformer. I've said this before above:

• I have to bring this back up per the recent reverts. Here's an RS for you: Nintendo Power doesn't consider SML3 and SMW2 official Mario games as they don't feature Mario prominently (SMW2 only has you control Mario when a Star is obtained, SML3 only has him as a cameo). I completely disagree with the addition of either game to the article. --Nathan2055^{talk – contribs} 03:26, 20 July 2012 (UTC)
• We're not talking about "Mario games". We're talking about the Super Mario series, which includes Super Mario Land 3 and Super Mario World 2. You'll have to seek consensus before reinstating your changes. ArtistScientist (talk) 03:34, 20 July 2012 (UTC)
• I do not understand how someone can rationally claim that games officially published by the creators with Super Mario in the title are somehow not part of the Super Mario games. Do you imply to know the intent of the games' publisher better than they did? Salvidrim! 03:37, 20 July 2012 (UTC)
• I disagree with this notion as well. It seems like the game's official title, from the creator's themselves, would trump any sort of third party classification. Unless you get word from the Dev team, or there's some sort of re-release that title's them differently, I feel they belong. Sergecross73 msg me 12:42, 20 July 2012 (UTC)
• It isn't the titling that I'm talking about. SML3 is considered the first game in the Wario Land series, which is long-running. SMW2 is the first game in the shorter Yoshi's Island series. As I said above, Nintendo Power (a magazine and reliable source) stated that they don't officially consider either game part of the Super Mario series and canon. And, ArtistScientist, please read the bold, revert, discuss essay. One is to be bold, wait until someone such as myself reverts it, and then have a discussion. I sort of would like to know why a change that reached consensus a year ago was only implemented yesterday. --Nathan2055^{talk – contribs} 18:48, 20 July 2012 (UTC)
• I checked the rest of the discussion, and Byll mentioned above another list bundled in the 25 Anniversary Super Mario All-Stars pack (which I actually own a copy of, so I can prove this) that the developers state the same thing. --Nathan2055^{talk – contribs} 18:51, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

So what I would like to know is what are the requirements for a game to be a "Super Mario" game? Thanks, Nathan2055^{talk – contribs} 22:08, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

Having Super Mario in the title. Being a platformer. THE END. Of all the arguments regarding classification of video games or music on Wikipedia, this really seems like one of the more simple ones... Sergecross73 msg me 22:46, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

Okay. The problem I state is why does Nintendo use a different standard than us? --Nathan2055^{talk – contribs} 01:16, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

Who is to say they have? Have they outright, literally said Super Mario Land is not part of the Super Mario series? Sergecross73 msg me 02:09, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

No, but I wasn't the one who brought up SML. I'm mainly talking about Super Mario Land 3: Wario Land and Super Mario World 2: Yoshi's Island. The latter was even mentioned in a letter in the editorials section of Nintendo Power discussing why they didn't consider it a "Super Mario" game. Super Mario Land is 100% considered a Super Mario game, no argument there. --Nathan2055^{talk – contribs} 20:11, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

Oops, I wrote the wrong title. I meant SMW2YI and SML3. Sergecross73 msg me 20:16, 5 September 2012 (UTC)