Talk:Super Mario Galaxy 2: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 16:59, 23 May 2021

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Super Mario Galaxy 2 article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find video game sources: "Super Mario Galaxy 2" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · TWL · NYT · WP reference · VG/RS · VG/RL · WPVG/Talk

Super Mario Galaxy 2 has been listed as one of the Video games good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
January 4, 2011	Good article nominee	Not listed
August 5, 2011	Good article nominee	Listed
October 10, 2011	Peer review	Reviewed
A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on June 10, 2009. The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that Super Mario Galaxy 2 will mark the first time a second Mario franchise title has been made for a single Nintendo system?
Current status: Good article

This article has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Video games: Nintendo GA‑class Mid‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Video games, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of video games on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Video gamesWikipedia:WikiProject Video gamesTemplate:WikiProject Video gamesvideo game articles

GA

This article has been rated as GA-class on the project's quality scale.

Mid

This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

This article is supported by the Nintendo task force.

Summary of Video games WikiProject open tasks:

Summary of Video games WikiProject open tasks

AfDs

Merge discussions

Other discussions

No major discussions

Engine

I have changed the engine details. No solid information has arisen yet. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Olifromsolly (talk • contribs) 21:59, 23 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No confirmation yet. Digitelle (talk) 19:11, 4 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What makes a source "reliable"?

This could apply to ANY article really, but as the subject says, what makes a source reliable, or rather, what is a reliable source? GameStop, Amazon, GAME, EB Games etc, are not reliable, but GameSpot, or GameFAQs is. Now, the online stores obviously are unreliable, but what exactly makes GameFAQs or GameSpot reliable, for example? —Preceding unsigned comment added by The Ultimate Koopa (talk • contribs) 01:22, 25 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The general question is tough to answer; I guess a source is reliable if it has a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy. Going by this, I'd say that GameFAQs might not be a reliable source. GameSpot, however, along with other trusted sites, is listed on the list of reliable video game sources at Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games/Sources. Mario777Zelda (talk) 01:42, 25 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reliable_sources, Wikipedia articles[2] should rely primarily on reliable, third-party, published sources (although reliable self-published sources are allowable in some situations – see below). Reliable sources are credible published materials with a reliable publication process; their authors are generally regarded as trustworthy or authoritative in relation to the subject at hand. How reliable a source is depends on context. As a rule of thumb, the more people engaged in checking facts, analyzing legal issues, and scrutinizing the writing, the more reliable the publication. Geoff B (talk) 01:43, 25 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Iwata Asks

[1] - The New Age Retro Hippie used Ruler! Now, he can figure out the length of things easily. 17:31, 21 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Nintendo Power quote?

Since Nintendo Power is a very renowned and popular critic of Nintendo games (hence the name), is there any link to what the magazine have said review wise and not just what is on Metacritic? Perhaps use a similar view to Worth Playing's as they were quoted mostly "for the time being" as there were little reviews at the time of writing. Stabby Joe (talk) 17:54, 31 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sold less than expected?

In the last paragraph of "Reception", it said that SMG2 sold "less than expected" on it's first day in Japan. The source for this statement is a blog, which just links to another blog, who compares the sales to NSMB Wii. Nowhere is it stated that there was some sort of industry-wide or expert analyst expectation for SMG2 sales that was not met by the actuals. I've removed that portion of the sentence. Puddleglum411 (talk) 17:40, 5 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. Since the sales were better than first, the developers would take that as a positive. Stabby Joe (talk) 17:30, 10 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Soundtrack

Should the soundtrack be mentioned in the article? It certainly is a major part of the game, and most critics have praised it. Plus, there's an actual CD that has the music (its only available on the Japanese Club Nintendo Catalouge). Anyways I think the soundtrack is noteworthy enough to get it's own section or at least a mention in the article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.60.243.144 (talk) 13:22, 26 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Luigi "speed runs"

To quote the article:

"Clearing levels with Luigi unlocks a Ghost Luigi representing a developer speed run that players can race against for completion time"

I literally just finished the game, so this is still very fresh in my mind, and the Luigi ghosts were mostly (if not all) about revealing secrets, like a pipe under a snowy tree or a hidden 1-Up. (Once he's reached his goal, he just sits down and does nothing else.) I can't claim to have seen all the ghosts, but I don't think any of them even came close to the finish line, and I don't think they really count as "speed runs." 76.174.153.192 (talk) 20:52, 28 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, This needs to be changed. I finished the game 2 months ago and I never saw a single ghost that you had to "race" - they were all about showing secrets, (comet medals, etc.) Yellow1996 (talk) 17:28, 23 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Track Listings

It's fantastic that someone added the track listings, but it might be an idea if we put it all in a table, similar to the Super Mario Galaxy article to neaten things up. —Preceding unsigned comment added by LostOverThere (talk • contribs) 02:11, 9 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

With the English titles, too, not just the English translation of the Japanese terms (i.e. PeeWee Piranha instead of Dino Pakkun Jr.). 174.23.145.149 (talk) 22:56, 1 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Stuff to archive

WhisperToMe (talk) 02:20, 28 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Super Mario Galaxy 2/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Miyagawa (talk) 22:12, 16 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'll give the article a read through now and leave comments below. Miyagawa (talk) 22:12, 16 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Setting and level design: Second paragraph needs to be cited towards the end.
Plot: Second paragraph needs to be cited.
Music:The end of the first and third paragraphs need to be cited.
Reception: "making it among the most critically acclaimed video games of all time" - bit fluffy, would be better if there was some sort of quote you could use to that effect or to make it more neutral.
Fourth paragraph is completely uncited, needs cites for each of those scores.
"new best game on Wii" - needs a direct reference for the quote, and also needs to be in speech marks in order to be in the same format as the other quotes. Game Informer "frustrating" quote needs a reference too.
Nintendo Power is missing a cite in the scores table.
Awards: Needs citations for each of those magazines.
References: All the references need to be formatted the same way. 24, 25, 26, 43, 46 and 61 are bare urls. 50 and 60 are only the titles. They need to be gone through very thoroughly as quite a lot of the minimum expected information is missing. In addition reference 12 is a deadlink.

Given that it's quite a lot of work, I'm going to fail this for now. Once the work has been completed, please feel free to resubmit at GAN. Miyagawa (talk) 22:33, 16 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Retcon

Who said Super Mario Galaxy 2 is a retcon ? Isn't it just a sequel ? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.76.5.75 (talk) 12:26, 26 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Its somewhat obvious. Super Mario Galaxy 2 doesn't act like a sequel, but a retelling of the story. _Blake ^{(Talk·Edits)} 14:35, 26 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Super Mario Galaxy 2 behaves like nothing in the original game ever happened. First off, both games open with the "Star Festival," which was established to take place every 100 years. It's unlikely that SMG2 takes place 100 years after the original.--ThomasO1989 (talk) 14:58, 26 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not going to go around accusing anyone of Original research, but claiming that the game is a retcon of its predecessor is a pretty hefty accusation to throw without a reliable source. I think what has happened here is that editors are reading too heavily into story details in a Mario game. Wouldn't referring to the game simply as a sequel be sufficient? --TheHande (talk) 14:56, 24 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Agree. Unless a source (primary source in this case?) specifically calls it a retcon we must presume it to be a "sequel" by simple virtue of it having a 2 at the end of the name. Rehevkor ✉ 16:31, 24 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Just to add to the comment. No, the primary source (the game itself) makes no mention of it being a retelling, nor is this retcon stuff referred to anywhere else in the article except the lead. As for the Star Festival being held once a century-bit, what I believe happened at the end of SMG was that the Universe was destroyed and reborn instantly. But that's just my interpretation. It's not somewhat or even at all obvious what really happened at the end of SMG and what it has to do with SMG2. Once again, I think the whole assumption of a retcon having happened seems to me like someone or some people were overthinking the story of the game. --TheHande (talk) 18:34, 24 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No-one seems to have anything new to add so I'm just going to remove the whole retcon bit. --TheHande (talk) 13:34, 30 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Super Mario Galaxy 2/GA2. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: TheLoverofLove (talk) 13:36, 26 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've played quite some Mario games since i was 4-5, but i haven't played this game yet. Anyway this is my first time reviewing an article nominated as a good article. So lets get to it. Note: This is my first time reviewing an Article, so i may make a few mistakes.

I was impressed with the spelling and grammar. I didn't see any original research, and there were reliable sources. No swearing or any other weasel words. Everything looks well-done. But this is my first time reviewing, so i'll put it on Hold. I'd like someone with more experience to look over my review and see if I got everything. (TheLoverofLove (talk) 13:36, 26 July 2011 (UTC))[reply]

I"M BAACK! I did some research with the references, and they look reliable. Ref names have improved. No Link rots, looks fine to me. I think this meets a Good Article Criteria, so i'll Pass the article for now. But i'll still nes someone to see if i'm correct. Enjoy the pass, anyway. :) (TheLoverofLove (talk) 19:33, 30 July 2011 (UTC))[reply]

The above review, while enthusiastic, doesn't seem to be particularly comprehensive. I recommend getting a second reviewer, as suggested above. Christopher Connor (talk) 19:22, 5 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. The above review only covered references and none of the content. --ThomasO1989 (talk) 02:55, 6 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. I think someone should put this forth for a Good Article Reassessment. The reviewer should have put it on hold for a second opinion. If someone can do it that would be great, as I have no experience with doing such. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Good_article_reassessment

Mordecairule 14:49, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Super Mario Galaxy 2. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 06:27, 28 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Co-op mod

Is this notable enough to merit a mention?

~ TheJoebro64 (talk) 19:55, 14 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 9 external links on Super Mario Galaxy 2. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:33, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Editors

I find this to be one of my favorite articles and one of my favorite games. Please can someone upgrade this article to be a featured? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Caustic3 (talk • contribs) 05:25, 23 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Upgrade

This article is a current featured article candidate. A featured article should exemplify Wikipedia's best work, and is therefore expected to meet the criteria.
Please feel free to leave comments.
After one of the FAC coordinators promotes the article or archives the nomination, a bot will update the nomination page and article talk page. Do not manually update the {{Article history}} template when the FAC closes.

@@ Line 147: / Line 147: @@
 I find this to be one of my favorite articles and one of my favorite games. Please can someone upgrade this article to be a featured?  <!-- Template:Unsigned --><span class="autosigned" style="font-size:85%;">—&nbsp;Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Caustic3|Caustic3]] ([[User talk:Caustic3#top|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Caustic3|contribs]]) 05:25, 23 February 2021 (UTC)</span> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
+== Upgrade  ==
+{{featured article candidates|Super Mario Galaxy 2/archive1}}