Talk:Mario

Reference In Assasin's Creed 2

This only seems to be a small reference, but in Assasin's Creed II, there is a character named Mario, and when is met for the first time he says, It's (a) me! Mario!, in the same way the character says it, is it notable? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Irishdude75 (talk • contribs) 18:17, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

I would say "No" but...what do you think? compared to other references?...I'm still thinking No(. (talk) 16:17, 15 April 2010 (UTC))

I don't think it's noteworthy in this article, no. It's more of an AC2-worthy thing. 130.184.55.152 (talk) 16:14, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

Popular culture

Should anything at all be mentioned about the enormous amount of Mario-inspired artwork (paintings, music, films) that exists out there? Some examples: [1] [2] [3] (by PBF) Esn (talk) 20:55, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Hm. Yeah, I'd say that's notable enough. Of the sites you provided, I recommend this one as the source, as it contains the most variety. Cheers. -sesuPRIME ^{talk • contribs} 21:10, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Ok, I've added it in. However, I've included the Newgrounds link as well because there really is a huge stylistic variety of films there as well, many of which have been viewed hundreds of thousands of times - seems notable enough to me... Esn (talk) 07:28, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

Good call. I've moved the sentence to just before the onslaught of soccer Marios, and reformatted the references to use Template:Cite web. Cheers. -sesuPRIME ^{talk • contribs} 12:37, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

"Classic" Mario

I've been mulling it over for awhile...but in all honesty the Super Mario Galaxy render of Mario doesn't represent the short little plumber worth a tinker's damn. Would anyone object if I replaced it with either a better render of the character or a 2D one, at least something with Mario on his feet.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 21:34, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

I'd say it's a perfectly acceptable image and clearly depicts the subject; his legs are clearly displayed and it doesn't take much to imagine what he'd look like if he were on his feet, so why do you think such a stance is so instrumental in depicting the subject? Haipa Doragon (talk • contributions) 00:27, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

More because it depicts the entire character from head to toe. Not to mention Mario does not actually "fly" normally like the image could be taken to apply.

It's not a terrible image for what it is, but it just doesn't feel like it's the best one for depicting Mario.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 00:49, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

Mm, true, although I'd say its recency adds something. What do you think of this and this, though? I'm pretty sure at least the first one has been frequently used by Nintendo in promotions, etc.. Haipa Doragon (talk • contributions) 01:49, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

The first one is SM64 artwork (I think) and the second is from New SMB, so the second is more recent. I like either one, though. -sesuPRIME ^{talk • contribs} 02:17, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

Well..... Are one of you two going to replace the image or should I? -sesuPRIME ^{talk • contribs} 18:54, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

Oh, sorry, forgot about this. I'm preferring the second of those two now, as his cap's less out of the way than the first, but what should be done about the IGN logo? Is it acceptable to remove that? Haipa Doragon (talk • contributions) 23:36, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

I don't know. It might be best to ask at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. -sesuPRIME ^{talk • contribs} 01:06, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

I agree with your statement except you should be mindful of profanity I've already had to edit this work but it still did not detract from your point of view. From this moment forward be warned!Fakecatholic (talk) 21:11, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

Appearances

It shows in the main article that Mario has made appearances in a couple Zelda games however there is no mention of Mario being displayed on a mask on the backpack of the mask guy in The legend of Zelda Majoras Mask. (Bryan1388 (talk) 16:56, 20 February 2010 (UTC))

I think a great way to help this article would be to clean up the appearances section. It is a mess. If I wanted to find Mario's role in Super Mario Galaxy, I wouldnt know where to look. There is junk all over that section, and a million links. I would try and model it after Link (The Legend of Zelda)'s appearance section. It is very clean, and has the name of the game at the beginning of the pharagraph, with Link's role in the game following it. I know Mario is in alot of games, but it is currently a C article, while Link is a FA. --Blake (talk) 14:38, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

I am currently rewriting it at User:Bws2cool/Mario where it is more like Link, where it tells about the character's role in the games. Not how popular the game was, or any of that stuff. This should focus on the character. --Blake (talk) 15:17, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

Done. Now can I get a concensus to swich it over? --Blake (talk) 17:55, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

That seems way too long and could use some referencing...can you condense it a little any way and add refs?--Kung Fu Man (talk) 18:01, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

It is smaller then Link. lol. Any smaller and it would be a small jumbled mess like it was before. Also, what would the references be for? I got everything on the page from the games pages themselves. I removed alot of the references though cause they referenced things like "the game" or "the manual" --Blake (talk) 18:07, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

Looks fine, though the images need to focus more on Mario's different physical appearances, a la the Link article. DBZROCKSIts over 9000!!! 18:13, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

I'd be wary of using Link as a guide: I've seen more than a few editors over the years have noted the article needs work, and its seen FAR twice. Referencing the games and manuals moreso is fine because it gives verifiability to your statements (even box art works as a citation in many cases), which is very important for GA nominations and so forth.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 18:16, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

I will find references, but I think the content and length are fine. Maybe you can change that after its in the article. --Blake (talk) 18:31, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

To be completely honest, a structure like Jason Voorhees's article would probably would better to give it a solid flow. Your changes would end up making a lot of work in the process of restructuring as they are now.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 18:46, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

I dont see how they are different, other then providing a date for the film directly after the link. Anyways, I finished putting references on the article. There are a few games that have very little references on their pages. So can this be replaced now? It would still be a great improvment. The appearences section shouldnt show the reception for each game. Also the current article doesnt even mention any of the main-series games after Super Mario Bros. 3. --Blake (talk) 19:51, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

Hello? I would like to update this, so I can maybe start working on the article some more to be at least B-class. --Blake (talk) 00:41, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Would it be possible for someone to please add a table showing all of Mario's games and their respective platforms? I find it very difficult to get an overview from this article, and I don't know enough about Mario to do it myself. Thank you! Jammycaketin (talk) 11:12, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Usually there is a timeline of appearances for characters (See Yoshi under the infobox), but Mario has had so many appearances it would take up the whole page. This is why at the top of this section it says "Main Article: List of Mario games by year" --Blake (talk) 12:58, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Grammar and Spelling

In the first paragraph, there should be fixes made. I'm sorry, but the semi-restriction keeps me from editing. Iloveyummyfood (talk) 23:45, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

Could you point out anything in particular? I'm not really seeing how it's particularly badly-written. Haipa Doragon (talk • contributions) 00:29, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

Mr. Nintendo

Note: This argument is targeted towards Kungfu man, and possibly MuZemike if he supports him.

Mario has been referred to as Mr. Nintendo, ever since he became famous. Therefore, I say that this article should be allowed to say that Mario has been referred to as Mr. Nintendo.

Actually, other sources I have found say that Shigeru Miyamoto is sometimes referred to as "Mr. Nintendo". See this news report here. MuZemike 00:06, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

Also, others have referred to "Mr. Nintendo" as the console in the context of the latest fad of exergames (see [4] for example). MuZemike 00:09, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

I cannot find any reliable sources out there that show that Mario is called as such. We cannot go off "hunches" or what "other people say" as that constitutes original research, which is not allowed. If it's out there, then please show where instead of demanding that others do so. That is part of Wikipedia's Verifiability policy, that the burden of evidence lies with the editor who adds said information. I hope that clarifies things better. MuZemike 00:24, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

Exactly, I have heard of Miyamoto being called Mr. Nintendo. I have never ever ever heard of Mario being called Mr. Nintendo. If you provide us with a link to a reliable source calling him that then that would be acceptable. --Blake (talk) 01:23, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

I remember Mario's trophy in Super Smash Bros. Melee says something about him being known worldwide as "Mr. Nintendo". -sesuPRIME 01:32, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

You would be correct. Reading the trophy description of Mario on SSBM (which I had to dig out of my closet):

Known worldwide as Mr. Nintendo, Mario uses his incredible jumping ability to thwart the evil Bowser time after time.

So Nintendo says this. That leaves two other questions: does the rest of the world refer to Mario as such, and should it be mentioned in the article's opening sentence? MuZemike 02:11, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

I didn't see anything in that news report MuZemike. And Sesu Prime, thx for the support.

I have found a link. Here it is, with a little, as George Lopez would say, "WHAPAA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"--Red Slayer 02:22, 19 July 2009 (UTC) http://www.freewebs.com/marioandluigi4eva/historyofml.htm

BTW: It's at the top.

To clarify my stance: I don't think it belongs in the first sentence as he's not widely known as such (that fansite doesn't prove that instances of him being called "Mr. Nintendo" are widespread). -sesuPRIME 02:35, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

So much for your support.............--Red Slayer 02:54, 19 July 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Valkyrie Red (talk • contribs)

The titles that the reporters give are what you should be looking at. Futhermore, reliable secondary sources are not the same as self-published sources, which is what you have listed above; you should have learned that from Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Runescape Riots. Your taunt above is uncivil at the least, and I advise against making such comments in the future if you wish to continue editing here. Such further incivility may lead to you being blocked, which none of us want to see happen. This is not YouTube, 4chan, or MySpace. We treat fellow editors here with respect. Thank you, MuZemike 07:03, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

MuZemike...."You know, you remind me of my father. I hated him!!!!!!" Lol, jk. Quote from The Joker in The Dark Knight. Anyway, I didn't mean for that quote to be offensive, rather more as a disappointed statement. It won't happen again.

Now, since my link didn't seem to be of much help, I'm going to continue on what Sesu Prime said above, about the SSBM trophy. If the whole Mr. Nintendo thing was put on a trophy by Nintendo, then that's a way of saying that Nintendo itself is saying that Mario is indeed Mr. Nintendo--Red Slayer 19:14, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

So we should appeal to authority and take it as true? MuZemike 20:58, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

Well, seeing your stance in all of this I doubt you'd agree to it, but yes. If the shoe fits--Red Slayer 23:52, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

BTW: MuZemike I read your comment on Kung Fu Man's talk page. Do you support me in this argument?--Red Slayer 23:52, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

I'm wary as hell as saying "he's also called Mr. Nintendo" when we only have one passing reference in a video game trophy for a character of this importance (added to that can we confirm the japanese version has it too?).--Kung Fu Man (talk) 00:01, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

I can tell you that "ミスター•ニンテンドー" (Misutā Nintendō, lit. "Mister Nintendo") appears in the first sentence of Mario's trophy in the English version of Melee when the language is set to Japanese. My Japanese language skills are very limited, so that's all the help I can offer. -sesuPRIME 01:01, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

The Mr. Nintendo comment could just be a very fancy way of saying he is Mario's flagship character. Like what was mentioned, I doubt Melee as the absolute evidence, not only because it is merely a passing reference and no other official source agrees, but also that the trophy descriptions in that game are often loaded with errors. Even if Mario is confirmed to be labeled as "Mr. Nintendo," I don't think it's appropriate to be in the first sentence. Maybe in the "Impact" section, but definitely not in the opening sentence. --ThomasO1989 (talk) 12:33, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

No, it was put there because Nintendo wanted it put there as a way of telling its audience that Mario is the leader of Nintendo, one of the biggest successes for Nintendo. It wasn't an error or fancy way of saying he is Mario's flagship character (whatever that means)--Red Slayer 13:37, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

As for the first sentence argument, I beg to differ. It should be in the first sentence because I've seen other articles that put the aka thing in the first sentence (example the A-Rod nickname in Alex Rodriguez's page). And even if you don't want it, what's 6 words (often referred to as Mr. Nintendo) really going to do to the article? It certainly won't mess up all of the valuable information in it--Red Slayer 13:37, 20 July 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Valkyrie Red (talk • contribs)

I meant Nintendo's flagship character, that was an oversight, and it's no reason to start taunting people. There's a difference between Alexander Rodriguez and Mario. It is widely known his nickname is A-Rod (he is referred as such by the media and people in general), but how many people actually call Mario "Mr. Nintendo"? Therefore it's not appropriate to refer to a character by an obscure label in the first sentence; simply saying that he is Nintendo's mascot (which is already there) delivers the same message. --ThomasO1989 (talk) 14:30, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

But Mario has been referred to Mr. Nintendo, by Nintendo themselves. Therefore it wouldn't matter on popularity because the creators themselves have called him it. Therefore it should be mentioned in the first sentence. Oh and I didn't know I was taunting you; sorry about that--Red Slayer 18:24, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

BTW- What is a flagship character--Red Slayer 18:24, 20 July 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Valkyrie Red (talk • contribs)

Hence, my "appeal to authority" argument (which is a logical fallacy, by the way, if I didn't mention that earlier). Just because the "man in the white coat" (in this case, Nintendo) says something about Mario being "Mr. Nintendo", does mean that it must be universally-accepted fact. In fact, from all the other sources that I have seen, reporters refer to "Mr. Nintendo" as to either Miyamoto or a Nintendo console. I have still yet to see in a single reliable secondary source that Mario is referred to as such (keep in mind that online forums and most blogs are self-published sources and hence are not reliable). MuZemike 18:49, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

The argument that you're proposing is similar to this scenario. If Jimbo Wales was to say that he helped found Wikipedia you wouldn't believe him unless he made a website and posted that on it, or someone made a biography of him. Either way, it would lead to the same conclusion. The same goes here--Red Slayer 20:49, 20 July 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Valkyrie Red (talk • contribs)

That's exactly what Wikipedia DOESN'T do. Anybody can post on some blog that they founded Wikipedia, but that doesn't automatically make them trustworthy just because it's on the Internet. It has to be a source that is reliable and notable, like a CNN news website or a website written by an expert in the field of interest.

BTW, a flagship character is a staple character of a company, like Sonic is to Sega, Mickey Mouse to Disney, and Bugs Bunny to Warner Bros. Mario is a staple character and the mascot of Nintendo, so it's understandable that the writers referred to Mario as "Mr. Nintendo" in the SSBM trophy to summarize this quality. But such a passing reference is so small and obscure that it may confuse people who already understand "Mr. Nintendo" as someone or something else, so that only if several notable websites explicitly refer to Mario as "Mr. Nintendo" that it can be added. For now, it is already mentioned (and widely known) that Mario is Nintendo's mascot, so the "Mr. Nintendo" reference is unneeded. --ThomasO1989 (talk) 21:30, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

I think that I have a solution to this argument that will end it once and for all. You know how the nickname A-Rod is on both Alex Rodriguez's page and Andy Roddick's page? It's because they are both referred to that nickname. So, if I/We were to put the Mr. Nintendo nickname on both Mario's and Shigeru Myamoto's page. That way, the name would appeal to both and thus favor all of us. How does that sound?--Red Slayer 01:26, 21 July 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Valkyrie Red (talk • contribs)

It sounds like you're missing the point to be honest. One reference is not going to cut it.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 02:03, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

My point is to please everyone, and since everyone argues that Mario is not the only Mr. Nintendo, my solution is to put the Mr. Nintendo nickname on the pages that also deserve this nickname. What's the point that you're proposing, cause, and I say this to not insult you, it sounds like you're just trying to create another argument to support your previous one--Red Slayer 02:49, 21 July 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Valkyrie Red (talk • contribs)

Well, I've been waiting for about 2 days now and so far no one has argued with my solution, therefore, I am going through with it. If you have any problem with it, please, do contact me on my talk page. Now, don't say that I didn't warn you that I was going through with it.--Red Slayer 20:17, 21 July 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Valkyrie Red (talk • contribs)

Okay are you seriously missing the point, and seemed to ignore ThomasO1989 also stated this wasn't necessary. Look up a few lines and you'll see it.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 20:46, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

I noticed that the user in question recently created Mr Nintendo as a redirect to this page. I retargted it to Shigeru Miyamoto since one of his older redirects Mr. Nintendo was handeled the same way. Someone may want to keep an eye on them though since I would not be surpsised if they try to change it back.--76.66.180.51 (talk) 02:59, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

Super Mario Galaxy Powerups

In the Power-ups section, part of the text reads: "Super Mario Galaxy set the record for most power-ups available in a Mario platformer. Although this included the revival of old power-ups such as the Fire Flower, it also introduced a number of new items. One, for example, is the Bee Mushroom, which naturally turned him into a bee, and therefore allowing him to float briefly and walk on special "hive" surfaces." I added a citation needed tag after the first sentence (Galaxy setting the record for power-ups available); this quote seems to rely entirely on [5], and I'm not sure if it's reliable. If so, I'll cite it. What does the community think? Mario777Zelda (talk) 17:04, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

Obviously every main Mario game has more powerups than the one before it. No need to add this. Nevermind, just realized that's not true (mario 64 had less powerups than Super mario world, I believe). add away! Also, change the name of the article to "Mario Mario"

Mario Mario

Mario's full name is "Mario Mario", hence the name of the game "Super Mario BROTHERS", with the brothers being Mario Mario and Luigi Mario (this was always referenced in the Super Mario Super Show, along with much other Mario media. This should, of course, be added to the opening sentence of the article, and probably the title should be changed too. I'd do it myself, but the lackwit admins who run this site have locked the page for some dumb reason.

Just in case somebody actually tries to claim that his name ISN'T Mario Mario, I give you the following common-sense example: Orville and Wilbur Wright, the famous brothers who invented the airplane. Do we call them the "Orville brothers"? No, we certainly do not; we call them the "Wright brothers". Consider two hypothetical men, brothers, named Tom and Dick Smith. Would you refer to them as "The Tom brothers"? Maybe you would if you were some kind of lunatic, but the rest of us would be calling them the Smith brothers.

Now, consider two MORE men, brothers, named Mario Mario and Luigi Mario, and... You get the point. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.60.157.218 (talk) 12:07, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

• Quote form the article "Nintendo has never revealed Mario's full name, stating only that it was not "Mario Mario" despite the implication of the Mario Bros. series' title, and its use in the film." I sincerely doubt anyone at Nintendo actually said this, and the very dubious "reference" has no link or anything, just a claim of "Inside Edition". Line should be stricken. Again, I'd do it myself, but page is locked.

The TV show I dont think is really considered Cannon. Even if it was, we aren't going to rename the article and make it sound stupid. _Blake ^{(Talk·Edits)} 13:56, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

Listen, kid, the article's name ALREADY sounds stupid, because it's wrong. Is the Mickey Mouse article just called "Mickey"? No, it isn't, because the character's full name is Mickey Mouse. Is the Barack Obama article just called "Obama"? No, it isn't, because the character's full name is Barack Obama. Wikipedia will continue to be a laughing stock as long as inaccuracies like this remain uncorrected. Rename the article, admins.

As I already said, the TV show isn't cannon, or actually giving the right information. Its not officially Nintendo. _Blake ^{(Talk·Edits)} 13:29, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

Yes, you did already say that. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.60.157.218 (talk) 16:38, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

• Your argument for the name change falls under WP:OR and thus is not good enough a reason to change the title. You would need verifiable sources referring to Mario as Mario Mario in order for the change to be done. Also, please remember to keep WP:CIVIL on your replies. Veritiel (talk) 18:02, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

First of all, there is no verifiable source that says his name ISN'T "Mario Mario" (current source in article is dubious and unverifiable, see above)

Second of all, look at this link (for one) http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0108255/. Bob Hoskins is credited as playing "Mario Mario"! Some person of little intellect and no consequence will undoubtedly claim that the movie is "not canon". It must be nice and convenient to be able to disregard proof by deciding what fictional works are and are not "canon". My IMDB source is much more verifiable than the ""Inside Super Mario Bros". Reporter: Joel Loy. Inside Edition. CBS Television Distribution. 1989" which has no link or details. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.60.157.218 (talk) 00:01, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

the ridiculous claim that my first argument is "Original Research" is absurd. My position isn't based on my own "research", but rather a combination of COMMON SENSE and THE FACTS. By the way, why is it "original research" if I do it, but not "original research" if some hack journalist does it? Do you really think journalists don't just use web searches like the rest of us for their "research"?

Textbook definition of original research. Unless you can find sources inside of games and relevant texts besides the movie, which has an extremely debatable status of canon. ♣ Klptyzm ^{Chat wit' me § Contributions} ♣ 05:50, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

• Common Sense as you call it is defined as Original Research, since your common sense might tell you something, but mine tells me another thing. You have no authority over me, as in, what you say about Mario has no more value than what I can say because we have no effect on him, we are not authorities on the subject. The purpose behind a verifiable source is that you are backing up your statement by someone who does have authority, thus, no one can counter your claims, no one can say that your statement is not true, or in any case, more true than their version. It's a matter of preventing people from stating anything they can come up with as truth. If something is true, then there should be no problem in proving it.

Regarding what a journalist does, he/she has a name and a face, has a respectable company (a newspaper or an web site with good standing and editorial review which checks the truth behind his statements) backing him/her up and saying that whatever he/she says has been thoroughly researched and verified and is accurate enough as to risk a lawsuit. That is why they are considered verifiable. We (you, me, everyone here) are just nicknames, no-faces with no way to prove expertise on any field or authority or any kind on anything, thus, what you, or I, or anyone else in wikipedia can state as truth, no matter how true it might be, has no real weight here because no one can verify your claims, unless you provide a good, verifiable, good standing source.

I'm not sure if IMDB is considered a good source by wikipedia, I think I read somewhere that it isn't since anyone can modify it, so that is why it wouldn't work here as a source. Also, Nintendo has said that the movie is not cannon. In any case, what people are saying is simply that if you can find a verifiable source, with authority on the subject (be it Nintendo, Miyamoto or someone else who works with the Mario character) who states in an interview or somewhere that Mario's surname is Mario, then please, go ahead and change the article. It shouldn't be hard if it is the truth. However, if there is no source we cannot state something that is not verifiable, a.k.a. the "truth", or else anyone could just claim whatever claiming it to be common sense. Veritiel (talk) 12:02, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

• Now, check this link http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yGFRi_ueq-M, right in minute 2:09. Bill White, Advertising/Promotion for Nintendo of America states that Mario and Luigi have no last names. That would be a verifiable source since he has authority in the matter. Veritiel (talk) 12:14, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

• Even if you did get a good source that says his name in the series is Mario Mario, we wont change the main page name. That would be the stupidest thing anybody has ever done. It will most likely be put in as: "Mario, sometimes known as Mario Mario," _Blake ^{(Talk·Edits)} 13:28, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

And your Mickey Mouse argument is the weakest thing I've ever seen. Just curious, why would you suggest we not use the very common "Mickey Mouse" name, when it's used more than simply "Mickey"? In fact though, Mickey vs. Mickey Mouse is a closer "fight" to which would be his name than Mario and Mario Mario, because Mario is by far the most common name for the character. - The New Age Retro Hippie used Ruler! Now, he can figure out the length of things easily. 19:03, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

Yahoo feature about Mario's development

Yahoo! posted a feature about how Mario was developed: videogames.yahoo.com/events/playback/playback-93/1378336 WhisperToMe (talk) 08:50, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

I suggest the video be used to replace ref 11 from the MiyamotoShine, which probably won't pass a quality review. Unless the original Mario Mania Player's Guide can be found of course. (Guyinblack25 ^talk 17:55, 7 December 2009 (UTC))

This has been done. Mario777Zelda (talk) 17:39, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

Mario Bros Movie

Wasnt sure where to put this in disccussion area but this page is missing the infamous mario movie.lol —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.225.24.89 (talk) 00:03, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

• I think that'd be because the movie is not considered canon, which means that anything that happened in it doesn't count towards Mario's official history. Veritiel (talk) 11:25, 11 December 2009 (UTC)
  • But Mario canon isn't the focus of how to set-up the article. For the first video game film, there should be reception of Hoskin's portrayal, any creation info for this version of the character, etc. - The New Age Retro Hippie used Ruler! Now, he can figure out the length of things easily. 10:04, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

Agreed. This isn't a fan site for canon only. It's an encyclopedia. 129.139.1.68 (talk) 12:51, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

Mario and Luigi's caps in the Mario & Luigi series

Did anyone else notice that the "M" and "L" on Mario's and Luigi's hats are black in the Mario & Luigi RPG series? The M and L are red and green (respectively) in all other Mario games and that subseries is the only one that has these letters black. Is it worth noting in the article? Goombass (talk) 01:54, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

I don't think it's notable enough to be included in the article. Mario777Zelda (talk) 03:32, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

Short answer, no. Long answer, No, because it does not help the leyman understand the subject of the article. -Jeremy ^{(v^_^v Stop... at a WHAMMY!!)} 08:27, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

Baby Mario

I could have sworn that in the early 90s, the local video store rented a game called "Baby Mario", I searched for references to it, but found almost none, except for this, http://www.gamespot.com/pages/forums/show_msgs.php?topic_id=26980322, which corresponds with my memory as well, even that the cartridge had a pale blue ribbon for pulling it out of the machine (I think this was some kind of adaptor). —Preceding unsigned comment added by RP. (talk • contribs) 22:59, 18 January 2010 (UTC) RP. (talk) 23:09, 18 January 2010 (UTC)Actually, this looks to be it: Bio Miracle Bokutte Upa

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: Not moved. Ucucha 00:32, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

---

Mario → Mario (character), Mario (disambiguation) → Mario — While the most famous video game character, I don't see why Mario should be in the main namespace rather than Mario (disambiguation). Link from the Legend of Zelda isn't located at the Link article, so why is Mario at the Mario article? What happens when a person named Mario looks up their name, only to find that the most famous example is a cartoon plumber and not the other major historical "Marios"?—_{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 06:24, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

• Support per nom; and also move the category and portal. 70.29.210.242 (talk) 06:40, 15 February 2010 (UTC)
• Strong support. Definitely. It's a pretty basic name, so the primary topic would be difficult to find among the many Marios on Wikipedia. Rennell435 (talk) 13:33, 15 February 2010 (UTC)
• Oppose. Mario is the most notable "Mario" worldwide. There is a ^{For other uses, see Mario (disambiguation).} note, so I don't see the problem. _Blake ^{(Talk·Edits)} 15:46, 15 February 2010 (UTC)
• Support. When typing up about Mario, the article should first be about the name and origins, not a video game character. Magiciandude (talk) 16:13, 15 February 2010 (UTC)
  • Oppose After seeing Reach Out The Truth's point, I change the stance to oppose per Reach Out The Truth. Magiciandude (talk) 15:33, 16 February 2010 (UTC)
• Oppose. Blake makes a good point, and a Google search for "Mario" includes, as far as I can tell, exactly one result on the first page that isn't related to the video game character, and that's another Wikipedia article. Even the suggested searches, videos, and most of the twitter posts are related to Mario. Mario777Zelda (talk) 18:08, 15 February 2010 (UTC)
• Support - there are other Marios. Simply south (talk) 18:21, 15 February 2010 (UTC)
• Oppose I agree there are lots of other Marios but the video game character is the most common. Given he has no family name and is only known as Mario I think there is a fair and legitimate argument to leave things as they are.--Labattblueboy (talk) 05:23, 16 February 2010 (UTC)
• Oppose This Mario is by far the most popular, and the one that most people would think of when they hear the name. In contrast, Link has several meanings that are more well-known than the Nintendo character. There's a hatnote to send people to the disambiguation page, and recent modifications to that disambiguation page does a fine job of pointing out Mario (given name) for anyone who's not looking for this character. Reach Out to the Truth 15:30, 16 February 2010 (UTC)
  • Comment However, "Mario" recieved his name from the name "Mario", which shows a clear conflict in importance. He's a subset of the name, which means that the name is more important regardless.--_{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 07:39, 17 February 2010 (UTC)
    • So you're arguing that any person or character, no matter how famous or historically significant, who was not the first in existence to go by a particular name, is less notable than the name itself. That's insane. Propaniac (talk) 20:20, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
      • Agree with Propaniac. What you're essentially saying now is that there can never be primary topics. There can, and should be primary topics Purplebackpack89 ^{(Notes Taken) (Locker)} 06:00, 22 February 2010 (UTC)
• Oppose This is clearly the primary target (whereas Link could refer to stuff like a link in a chain. If this was a video game wiki, then Link would clearly be for the game character). TJ Spyke 21:16, 16 February 2010 (UTC)
• Support not primary meaning. —innotata (Talk • Contribs) 22:07, 17 February 2010 (UTC)
• Oppose The character is by far the most likely topic to be referred to as simply "Mario." Propaniac (talk) 20:20, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
• Strongly Oppose Move: The plumber is clear primary topic. We can have primary topics. Purplebackpack89 ^{(Notes Taken) (Locker)} 04:15, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. 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.

Luigi involved with Daisy proof?

"Mario rescued Princess Daisy in Super Mario Land, but Luigi seems to be romantically involved with her." The bit about Luigi seeming to be romantically involved with Daisy has no back up and is completely speculation. I understand that it says 'seems' to be involved, but that's just what people assume. They see Mario and Peach, then Luigi with no one-Oh wait, there's another princess Mario saved, let's assume she's with Luigi. I guess I'm sort of making a big deal out of it, but I don't think it should be on this page if it's just supposed to be informative. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.121.81.41 (talk) 02:10, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

The article goes on to explain the statement:

In Super Smash Bros. Melee, the text explaining Princess Daisy's trophy states that "after her appearance in Mario Golf, gossips portrayed her as Luigi's answer to Mario's Peach",[56] and Luigi and Daisy were previously paired as a romantic couple in the live-action Super Mario Bros. film.

This is the (albeit weak) support for that statement; I may rewrite this section soon. Mario777Zelda (talk) 02:20, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

I have another question. Does that really belong here since it seems to have more to do with Lugi and Daisy than Mario?--76.69.167.25 (talk) 19:54, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

The article is explaining Mario's relationships. In this passage, the point is that even though Mario has rescued Daisy, they're not as close as Mario and Peach are. Mario777Zelda (talk) 20:30, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

There is also a statue of both (Baby luigi and Baby Daisy) dancing romanticly in a circuit of mario kart wii http://media.giantbomb.com/uploads/0/495/883445-800px_mkwiibabydaisystatue_super.png —Preceding unsigned comment added by 201.250.107.204 (talk) 19:56, 16 May 2010 (UTC)

Clarification on powerup

The section on powerups mentions that the carrot gives mario the ability to fly in SML2. This is incorrect. It gives him the ability to slow-fall by rapidly pushing the jump button while airborne. He is not able to gain altitude with this ability like he can with the wing cap in SM64 (which is more of a glide ability than a fly ability, but it's close enough). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.184.55.152 (talk) 16:18, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

Disambiguation

Since Mario is also a common name, shouldn't there be something to disambiguate him from the name? An example maybe Mario (character),Mario (Nintendo), or Mario (Mario). Although Mario (Mario) is similar to Mario Mario, which was disagreed on. SeanWheeler (talk) 02:48, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

See #Requested Move above. Reach Out to the Truth 04:17, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

Blegh!

Mario's a beeg nobody! Not like Wario!