Talk:Super Mario 64

Subscribe CreeperGuy

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: promoted by Theleekycauldron (talk) 00:36, 9 January 2022 (UTC)

(

• Comment or view
• Article history

)

• ... that Super Mario 64 has been the subject of medical literature showing a correlation between habitual playing of 3D platformers and increased grey matter in the brain? Source: Playing Super Mario 64 increases hippocampal grey matter in older adults "In the current study, we tested the impact of 3D-platform video game training (i.e., Super Mario 64) on grey matter in the hippocampus, cerebellum, and the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) of older adults."
  • Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/WQFX (AM)‎

Improved to Good Article status by Coolperson177 (talk). Self-nominated at 23:48, 27 December 2021 (UTC).

• (suspended for now, see talk page) — Coolperson177 (t|c) 16:58, 28 December 2021 (UTC)

• Ready for a new review now that the article has passed GA again. feminist (talk) 07:46, 2 January 2022 (UTC)

• Article has achieved Good Article status. No issues of copyvio or plagiarism. All sources appear reliable. Hook is interesting and sourced. QPQ is done. Looks ready to go. Congratulations on this excellent article! Thriley (talk) 22:11, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

To T:DYK/P2

Game Director

Shouldn't only Miyamoto be credited as director on the infobox? Koizumi and Tezuka were only assistany directors, not game directors. Honestly, I'd just add Yoichi Yamada as Co-Director as he was course director. Aalji (talk) 23:17, 18 March 2022 (UTC)

I think Koizumi is worthy of it though honestly checking the development Aalji (talk) 23:21, 18 March 2022 (UTC)

From what I've heard, who is listed as director in the infobox isn't all the clear with the documentation, sometimes making it seem like Co-directors have priority over head directors. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 23:25, 18 March 2022 (UTC)

I looked at the documentation for the infobox, and it says "do not list other types of directors in [the director] field". I'm not sure if assistant directors fall under "other types of directors", but I believe that "course director" does, so I don't think we can include Yoichi Yamada under the director field. — Coolperson177 (t|c) 23:57, 18 March 2022 (UTC)

Course directors would more appropriately be listed as designers. For reference, the infobox for Super Mario World lists Katsuya Eguchi and Hideki Konno as designers, as the credits sequence lists them under "Map Director" and "Area Director", respectively. Condontdoit296 (talk) 21:51, 23 March 2022 (UTC)

It's not clear to readers looking for basic information on the article that the other people are credited as "course director" and there is no source discussing that the game was "really directed by ______" Miyamoto should really be the only one there. Andrzejbanas (talk) 22:10, 23 March 2022 (UTC)

I thought of a solution, and maybe we can use tooltips to describe their specific roles? That's what I just did on the course directors and the assistant directors. — Coolperson177 (t|c) 01:58, 24 March 2022 (UTC)

There's no real point in doing that as it just is an extra text to say "well they aren't really directors". The purpose of the infobox is to supplement information within the article, not give new ones. If Miyamoto is the only director, we don't just add other people with different credits to shove them in. See WP:INFOBOXPURPOSE. Andrzejbanas (talk) 19:12, 24 March 2022 (UTC)

Yeah, I mean This director and this director is kind of too much Aalji (talk) 20:32, 24 March 2022 (UTC)

I wasn't aware of that MoS guideline, I removed those other tooltips just now.. — Coolperson177 (t|c) 21:09, 24 March 2022 (UTC)

"Antagonist"

MOS:FILMCAST says: Interpretations in the form of labels (e.g. protagonist, antagonist, villain, main character) should be avoided. does this guideline also apply to video games? Elizium23 (talk) 20:06, 28 September 2022 (UTC)

@Elizium23: I can't provide a definitive answer for that, but I did find this green sentence in MOS:VG which includes the word "protagonist". — Coolperson177 (t|c) 21:50, 28 September 2022 (UTC)

IMO, terms like "protagonist" or "antagonist" should be used sparingly and are often overused to the point where they are meaningless. If you look at Characters in the Mario franchise, it refers to any literally enemy character as an antagonist. Even if it's just a one-off character who acts as an obstacle at best and doesn't have a major role, they're automatically an antagonist. In the context of this article, "Bowser, one of the main antagonists of the Super Mario franchise" makes sense because Bowser is the big bad and beating him is the main goal of the story. --ThomasO1989 (talk) 22:22, 28 September 2022 (UTC)

You're right. From our article on antagonists: An antagonist is a character in a story who is presented as the chief foe of the protagonist. [emphasis added] — Coolperson177 (t|c) 22:42, 28 September 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 29 September 2022

My request is to add how super Mario 64 was rereleased on Nintendo switch through 3d all stars and the n64 emulator. I noticed the re-release portion lacked this information. ConcernedGamer (talk) 19:23, 29 September 2022 (UTC)

ConcernedGamer, are you talking about this? If so, 3D All-Stars is already in the article. — Coolperson177 (t|c) 19:28, 29 September 2022 (UTC)