Talk:Mario Kart 8 Deluxe

Did you know nomination

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)

(

• Comment or view
• Article history

)

• ... that Nintendo removed a gesture in Mario Kart 8 Deluxe that was likened to the bras d'honneur? Source: Eurogamer
  • ALT1: ... that Nintendo removed a gesture in Mario Kart 8 Deluxe that is taken to mean "up your ass" or "fuck you"? Source: Kotaku Australia
  • ALT2: ... that Mario Kart 8 Deluxe removed a controversial technique? Source: Kotaku
  • Reviewed: N/A
  • Comment: This is only my fourth DYK nomination ({{1}}, {{2}}, {{3}}), so a QPQ shouldn't be needed

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

• Article appears new enough and long enough. Hook is interesting and cited. QPQ is unnecessary, as stated. Seems good to go! I'd go with the top hook, Alt1 may be unnecessarily vulgar for front page and Alt2 is a tad too vague for my liking. Krisgabwoosh (talk) 04:30, 15 November 2022 (UTC)
• pulled from prep to account for an ongoing merge discussion. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 21:51, 18 November 2022 (UTC)
• @Krisgabwoosh: merge discussion has closed; article remains, with new article merged into it. New review needed to account for new article content. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 20:08, 29 December 2022 (UTC)
  • It appears that the merge hasn't opened any serious citation issues and the hook claim remains in the article, so I'd still support ALT1. Krisgabwoosh (talk) 22:11, 29 December 2022 (UTC)

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)

"Mario Kart DX" listed at Redirects for discussion

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)

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

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)

• Oppose: (Disclaimer: article creator). The Booster Course Pass has its own reviews, marketing, and content. Even disregarding any inherited notablity from the base 8 Deluxe, all of this coverage (reviews also qualify as WP:SIGCOV) makes it satisfy WP:GNG. DecafPotato (talk) 16:49, 15 November 2022 (UTC)

  For the record, I strongly oppose merging all three articles together. DecafPotato (talk) 17:34, 18 November 2022 (UTC)

• Oppose: Looking at the reference section, there are a total of 30 sources, most of them being reliable. Most of the sources are also verifiable. It also seems like there are enough reviews in this article too. These points combined makes the DLC notable. I now switch my vote to Neutral per below. Now that I have successfully merged the three articles together in the draft below, I vote to merge all three article per below and the merged article look organized. Pizzaplayer219^Talk_Contribs 18:34, 18 November 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose: Per DecafPotato's rationale. Just like they mentioned, most of the sources in this article are from reputable game outlets specifically talking about this DLC. Sparkl^talk 21:44, 15 November 2022 (UTC)

  To be clear; my argument is not that the DLC is non-notable; far from it. It is instead WP:OVERLAP. The DLC page is redundant when there is an article on the game's deluxe edition. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 05:34, 17 November 2022 (UTC)

  Okay, but the deluxe edition is not solely notable due to the Booster Course Pass, due to Mario Kart 8 Deluxe having multiple reviews prior to launch, the content original to the game, the other post-launch additions, and its ludicrous sales figures. In fact, only 12 of the 92 sources on Mario Kart 8 Deluxe are about the pass. A DLC (or rerelease) can have a standalone article if sources allow for it, even if that game has no major plot differences (or none at all) from the base game. (Oinkers42) (talk) 06:08, 17 November 2022 (UTC)

  Yeah, and that's the rationale behind me making both articles. 1 out of 92 (0.011%) of the sources in Mario Kart 8 Deluxe are related to the base Mario Kart 8, and likewise, zero of the sources in Mario Kart 8 Deluxe – Booster Course Pass are related to the base 8 Deluxe. And yet, both articles are comprehensive and cover all necessary information on the subject, showing how both articles have notability on their own, and have enough length to justify their own articles. Covering all information in the Booster Course Pass article in the 8 Deluxe article, however, would cause undue weight problems, and thus, they should be separate, with a summary of the BCP in the base 8 Deluxe article, using {{main}} to navigate them. DecafPotato (talk) 22:48, 17 November 2022 (UTC)

• Just in case it was not made clear, I Oppose a merge of any of these three. (Oinkers42) (talk) 15:16, 18 November 2022 (UTC)

• Oppose: The DLC has had its own share of media coverage and content separate from the main game, five years after the original game's release, fairly similar to how "The Sims 4 expansion packs" (2015-present) is a separate article from "The Sims 4" (2014). Theknine2 (talk) 11:42, 17 November 2022 (UTC)

• Support some sort of merging - 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)

  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)

  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)

  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)

  Can we please keep it WP:CIVIL and not throw around blame? (Oinkers42) (talk) 19:11, 18 November 2022 (UTC)

  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)

  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)

  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)

  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)

  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)

  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)

  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)

• 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)
• @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)
• 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)
• 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)

  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)

  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)

  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)

  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)

  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)

  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)

  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)

  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)

  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)

• 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)

  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)

  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)

  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)

• 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)

  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)

  I should have clarified. Merge per nom, and the rest is just some extra thought. – Pbrks ^(t • c) 23:16, 18 November 2022 (UTC)

• 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)
• 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)

  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)

  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)

  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)

  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)

  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)

  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)

  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)

  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)

  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)

  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)

  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)

  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)

  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)

• 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)

Comments

• Comment I have made a Draft of the merged content. Feel free to edit it. Pizzaplayer219^Talk_Contribs 17:46, 18 November 2022 (UTC)

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)

They would likely be separated into different sections of the article. Pizzaplayer219^Talk_Contribs 18:06, 18 November 2022 (UTC)

Can someone please fix some of the references in the draft. Pizzaplayer219^Talk_Contribs 21:33, 18 November 2022 (UTC)

I think I’ve done enough for now. Pizzaplayer219^Talk_Contribs 22:12, 18 November 2022 (UTC)

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)

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)

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)

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)

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)

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)

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)

(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)