Talk:Mario

Archives
start of page – March 2006 March 2006 – June 2006 June 2006 – November 2006 November 2006 – September 2007

Fourth Archive

This talk page was 83 kilobytes long, so I created the fourth archive, which contains comments between November '06 and September '07. Useight 22:31, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

Main image

I replaced the main image to his brawl appearence. I know there is an ongoing fight about it, but it is the best image avalible, showing him. It is perfect because its recent, from nintendo, and not fan art. Blumonkeyboy 17:51, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

This image has been changed several times in the last couple of days. Let's not get into a 3RR here and instead have a discussion on which image should be used. I, personally, prefer the traditional image over the Smash Bros. Brawl image because it's cleaner and crisper looking, however this is an open discussion. Useight 18:31, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

I agree about not having a fight, but what do you mean cleaner and crisper? Blumonkeyboy 01:07, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

I was referring to the extra little lines on the image that are out of place. The image is not there now, but I believe they were near his hands and feet. Useight 02:09, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Twins

This article claims that Mario is older than Luigi, but in other places claims they are twins. This is probably the fault of the games, where both have been used, but the article needs to be consistent. So which one should be used? (Animedude 01:11, 6 September 2007 (UTC))

Both, as long as they are referenced. Judgesurreal777 14:52, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

No offence, but you are the only person I have ever heard of that doesn't know that Mario is Luigi's older brother. Zeeco 00:16, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

I know that Mario is older in numerous media, including the cartoon, the movies and many of the games. But in Super Mario World 2: Yoshi Island (and other places), he is refeered to as Luigi's "twin". I just wanted to know which should be used for the article. I never said I didnt know. (Animedude 07:48, 8 September 2007 (UTC))

Judgesurreal is right, use both with reference to sources since Mario has been described as both the older brother and the twin brother of Luigi in offical Nintendo material. Cigraphix 15:32, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

If Mario is referred to as Luigi's twin in Yoshi's Island, then the article must state that he is referred to as Luigi's twin in Yoshi's Island. If he's referred to as the older brother in other materials, then the article must also state that he's referred to as the older bro in other materials. There's no reason to generalize. Kariteh 15:37, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

You know, even with twins, one is older than the other. Theoretically Mario could be the older of the two twins, being a few minutes older than Luigi. However, I don't know if that really is the case. I do know that Mario has always been considered the older brother. Even though he is shorter Useight 20:00, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

i dont know what to do really.Mariofan1000 15:17, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

I think it should all be referenced and be stated in the beginning. Then he should be noted as the older sibling because of todays media. Mario was a Mexican when first introduced but now he's Italian. So why not keep his profile as the older brother.[[User:SxeFluff|--SxeFluff 22:42, 24 September 2007 (UTC)]]5:43, 24 September 2007

I very well know the reason that Mario was the older brother. In Yoshi's Island, Yoshi opened his bag before Kamek opened Luigi's Talio17 11:58, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

In the comics from Nintendo Comics System, in issue 3, page 29, there is a feature called "Mario's Family Album", which depits Luigi as being a few years younger than Mario (I believe this is also the first appearance of Baby versions of either character). 75.129.168.18 07:27, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

I think that they are fraternal twins, as in Brother and... well, Brother in this case. It simply refers to the fact that they are siblings.Sacredfire059 17:18, 7 December 2007

Though there is evidence in the games that Mario and Luigi are twins it is generally accepted that Mario is older than Luigi. This likely stems from Mario first appearing in 1981 and Luigi in 1985 TehSpud (talk) 01:31, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

For the most part, games say that Mario is older then Luigi, but it wouldn't hurt to say "its debatable" —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kperfekt722 (talk • contribs) 18:17, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

Really, it wouldn't hurt to say outright that it's inconsistent. The Mario "canon" contains many inconsistencies due to being written by many different authors who weren't concerned with continuity from one game, cartoon, etc. to another; no need for us to try to make up reasons to gloss over these gaps or try to make the story "believable". D. J. Cartwright (talk) 18:24, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

King of Town as Mario

What happened to that part? --Hpme2dastar123 00:46, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Was it ever in the article? KoT dressing up as Mario for Halloween in a single isn't that signifigant. (For anyone who has no idea what I'm talking about, read Homestar Runner.) — Malcolm (talk) 21:08, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

I don't recall that part ever being in this article. Useight 22:13, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

reseption?

couldnt there a reseption section to his games and him?i mean gt countdown sayed he was the best game charator ever!that has to be included. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mariofan1000 (talk • contribs) 09:09, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

Good old Mario image

I want that good old mario image back in the infobox! you know, the one with mario giving the thumbs up. That image is better! Shadowbean 19:17, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

what one?Mariofan1000 19:44, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

You should make a link to the picture ,if you have it, so we can see and vote on it. [[SxeFluff|--SxeFluff 22:35, 24 September 2007 (UTC)]]

This. It's been deleted because it was a fair use image that was not used in any articles. Really doesn't matter either way, anyway. — Malcolm (talk) 22:44, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

Does he mean this one? This 82.33.160.8 05:23, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

Yes! THAT is the image i am talking about that the User:82.33.160.8 posted. I thought he was giving two thumbs up but i was wrong. lol Why can't we have that one back in the info box? it looks to be more polished and clear then the one we have now. I think it would make the article better. (sorry i did'nt post for a long time-been busy)Shadowbean 00:01, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

Agreed-Talio17 11:54, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

Advertisement tagging

This page was tagged as being written like an advertisement about a month ago by Nofelix (a user with no subsequent edits). Is this tag still considered appropriate for the article? None of it reads like an ad to me, but I'm an admitted Nintendo fanboy. Gtg204y 17:26, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

Coins can be of some importance

I thing they should have included something about Mario getting coins on his adventures for profits as well as his toy company. Talio17 11:55, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

I think so too. MarioPraiser (talk) 22:54, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

NDisagree Coins and the Mario toy company have little to do with Mario as a character. Spud ^Hai/_watidone 16:19, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Mario Segali

Why is it that Mario Segali redirects to this article? He is/was a real man, who Mario was named after. Granted, I doubt there is much relevant information available on him but you'd think he could at least be mentioned somewhere in the Mario article his name redirects to... MatttK 05:42, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

My best guess is that there isn't enough information on him to be significant to wikipedia users. Talio17 12:36, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Mario Segali was the owner of the offices of the first premises of the offices of Nintendo of America. In the time of its residence there, Nintendo of America considered a name for its popular Jumpman, the greater personage of Donkey Kong. Jumpman was a plumber with a red cap, and a great moustache. The creative equipment, proposing new names, was put to compare Jumpman with the owner of that premises. They realized of which Mario Segali and Jumpman looked like. They put the name to him of Mario and thus it was. http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mario_Segali Mylungsarempty (talk) 07:03, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

SMG Image

Since Super Mario Galaxy is out, should the SMG image of Mario be used as the main image in the article? It is from a game that is in the canon of the series, which would actually make it a better candidate for the main image than the current one, which is from NSMB, which part of the canon, but is no longer the most current game in the canon of the series. I also think that the SMG image looks nicer, but that's just my opinion. -KULSHRAX 23:46, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

I'm sure If we could find a one with Mario standing still someone could upload and add the tags and all the other stuff... But I think we'd better stick to this one for a while until the new one is found. Uchiha23 02:16, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

The Wages of Fear

[[|thumb|right|100px| Folco Lulli as Luigi]] in an interesting coincidence, the 1953 movie The Wages of Fear had two main characters name Mario & Luigi. Luigi looked very much like the future character of the same name. --Deflective (talk) 12:48, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Luigi.jpg

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

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

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

BetacommandBot (talk) 17:58, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

luigis manson

luigis manson should not be in the mario main series at the bottom, it has barley anything to do with mario, its about luigi.Vadahata2 (talk) 15:46, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

You obviously haven't played that game all the way through, have you? Who was Luigi trying to save? Mario. Who was trapped in the painting by King Boo? Mario. If you ask me, it's just as much Mario's game as it is Luigi's. Oh, and learn to speak English properly. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.20.70.173 (talk) 07:06, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

Who was saving mario, luigi.Who is on the front off the box, luigi. We wouldn't put all the main mario games as peach's games because mario was trying to save her, and i belive that it was removed from the main series.Vadahata2 00:42, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Luigi's Mansion was a spin-off. face it. just like Wario. Super Princess Peach involved her saving Mario but that one wouldn't count either would it? Madhatter9max (talk) 22:17, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

But if it isn't part of the Mario series, and Luigi doesn't have a series, should it be put by itself? Pezzar (talk) 01:52, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Luigi's Mansion is generally lumped into a group of misc Mario Spinoffs like: Super Princess Peach or DDR Mario Mix. TehSpud (talk) 01:18, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

yeah, once he starts getting more games to himself like Wario though he will have them listed on his page.Madhatter9max (talk) 18:40, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia pageview survey

I am a high school student that is taking part on a survey involving Wikipedia. I want Wikipedians to reply to this post and say what country they are from as well as their age group (youth, teens, 20s, 30s, etc.). This way, I will be able to see what group of people view certain Wikipedia pages. Any replies will help.

I know this is probably not the place to put a survey, but it's better than putting it on the main page. So, maybe you could reply before you delete this? Please?

Thanks, Xnux the Echidna 20:23, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

This has naught to do with Mario. Please keep your posts limited to the subject of the associated article. SpinyMcSpleen (talk) 05:12, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

"Category: Fictional characters with superhuman strength"

Mario does not belong in the "superhuman strength" category. Superhuman strength, in the traditional sense, is more like Hercules, Superman, or Mr Incredible -- I'm assuming that the Wikipedia definition of "superhuman strength" is more the traditional meaning. Do you ever see Mario hefting objects three hundred times his own weight? No, is the answer. SpinyMcSpleen 16:26, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Have you ever played Super Mario 64? In the first level you have to pick up and throw a giant Bob-bomb. I can't say it is 300 times his weight, but it is by all means much heavier than he is. And in all of the Bowser battles he has to throw Bowser. That qualifies as super human to me. sdgjake 17:08, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Superhuman strength is not a defining characteristic of Mario. The argument here is the same reason we don't include Mario in a list of baseball players. He has appeared in a baseball game, but it is not a defining characteristic. You may wish to read Wikipedia:Categorization. Pagrashtak 18:15, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Wait, there's a difference here. Anyone can play baseball, but not actually can anybody have superhuman strength. And you meant not notable, because this is a defining characteristic. Remember also that Mario carried DK, Bowser, and other bosses that were from SNES (sorry, I just can't remember the names right now) lots of times. He also carried the Chain Chomp on the Mario Party series. In other words, it is notable and I think it's better put Mario on the category of Superhuman Strenght. --Mr.Mario 192 (talk) 22:57, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

No, I meant not a defining characteristic. It sounds to me like you're basing this all on original research in any case. Pagrashtak 17:47, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Let us put it this way. Ask yourself, "has Mario ever lifted the palace off its foundation?" If the answer is "no" (which it is), then it is a reasonable assumption that he does not have superhuman strength. SpinyMcSpleen (talk) 19:14, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Here is an excerpt form the header of the category:

This category is for fictional characters in literature, film, television, comics books, and video games who possess 
superhuman strength (that is, strength which exceeds maximum human potential).

So Mario only has to exceed maximum human potential to be part of this category. There have already been several examples of his lifting ability given above(Even if he doesn't lift the palace of its foundation). And if you look at many of the other fictional characters in the category they probably wouldn't live up to SpinyMcSpleen's high standard's either. sdgjake (talk) 20:03, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

He has lifted a palace off of its foundation and thrown it. This is noted after he defeats one of the Koopalings (either Larry or Lemmy, but I'm pretty sure it's Larry's that gets lifted and thrown). Using the game itself, where Mario is from, does not constitute original research. MVillani1985 (talk) 23:42, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

Aside from my other concerns, I have marked this as original research in the article. Pagrashtak 21:33, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

I'm suprised it's disputed that Mario has superhuman strength? Apart from the fact that his name is Super Mario, his most popular characteristic is his ability to smash blocks of bricks with his hands and his ability to jump many times his own height. Couple that with the many times he is shown lifting heavy things as above. I think we should be looking the other way - what evidence is there that Super Mario doesn't have superhuman strength? The KZA (talk) 05:12, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

As Pagrashtak has observed, superhuman strength is not a defining characteristic of Mario. He was designed as a carpenter who can jump high, not a superhero capable of lifting things that weigh hundreds of times more than his own weight. For the sake of clarity, let us just leave Mario (and Luigi) out of the "superhuman strength" category, all right? SpinyMcSpleen (talk) 19:02, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

No. Apart from the fact that Super Mario's defining characteristic is indeed his superhuman strength, your baseball analogy is flawed. That category defines members of an occupation, whereas the superhuman strength category expects those that have a quality. Definition of character or not - the guy has clear and repeated examples of exhibiting superhuman strength. I'll add that the category says nothing about 'superhero' or 'lifting things'; Mario's "jumping" alone exhibits superhuman strength... unless he just has bouncy rubber legs? Slinky feet perhaps? The KZA (talk) 22:32, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

I believe we are discussing superhuman strength, not superhuman jumping ability. SpinyMcSpleen (talk) 08:46, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

Are we? You assume superhuman jumping ability is not related to superhuman strength. Why? Like I said, his superhuman jumping is self-propelled, suggesting it is done by strength. We are discussing strength, not lifting things. The KZA (talk) 01:30, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

Mario lifted Bowser. That is superhuman strength. I mean, come on! Just look at Bowser!Zman42 (talk) 00:30, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

Let me point out that Mario does possess superhuman strength as he requires no supporting equipment to do the things he does *i.e. a bionic exoskeleton*. The fact that Mario is HUMAN is what is causing this argument - if Sonic the Hedgehog was human, there'd be a 2-page discussion on if his speed classified him as superhuman!143.92.1.40 (talk) 05:20, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

I'm sure. However, Sonic is not human, and we are discussing Mario, not Sonic. I shall say this again -- Mario was not designed as a latter-day Superman. He was originally just a carpenter who could jump high. There are people in real life who can jump high enough to clear their own height, yet we do not say they possess superhuman strength. SpinyMcSpleen (talk) 08:46, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

We are not arguing whether Mario is Superman or a Superhero but whether he posesses superhuman strength. It doesn't matter if he's a carpenter or a plumber or a member of the Justice League. He exhibits superhuman strength. Done. The KZA (talk) 01:30, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

"Done"? I hardly think so. As you do not seem to understand what I am trying to get across, let me put this a different way -- has Nintendo ever officially stated that Mario possesses superhuman strength? "No," is the answer. It may fly in the face of common sense to say that Mario is not "superhuman", but Nintendo hasn't said that he is. Baseless inferences around here are called "original research". SpinyMcSpleen (talk) 07:10, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

The answer may not be no, however we do need a source here. I'll return when I find one. The KZA (talk) 01:34, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

How high Mario jumps is not proof of his strength or else his jumps would be closer to Luigi's super high jumps since Luigi is weaker (according to Super Mario 64 DS). Saying it takes superhuman strength to jump high would also mean Peach would need to be considered as having such strength (from her Super Mario Bros 2 USA jumps). And finally, cartoon characters, especially ones appearing in video games, often do things that are extrordinary when thought about their abilities (such as Wile E Coyote lifting the super-sized rock off of his pancake-like body or little 26 lbs Cream the Rabbit lifting both Amy Rose and the 616 lbs Big the Cat at the same time in Sonic Heroes). Basically its just a gameplay element meant to improve the experience without worrying about some sort of cannon. Cigraphix (talk) 16:29, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

That is true, however there is no indication that Mario gets his ability to jump from anywhere but his own superhuman strength. SpinyMcSpleen's arguement was that Mario's superhuman strength wasn't a defining characteristic of his character; I argued that his jumping is a defining characteristic, and from all accounts, is a product of his superhuman strength. The other examples of lifting super heavy things, smashing bricks etc. still stand. The KZA (talk) 01:34, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

So, you couldn't find a source, then? SpinyMcSpleen (talk) 06:16, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

Not as yet, though I hadn't even begun looking when you posted that response. 5 hours? Someone's keen. The KZA (talk) 07:39, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

The way I see this argument, there's a pretty clear consensus that he has superhuman strength. The argument is whether or not it's a defining characteristic, and if not, whether he deserves to be put in the category. Is superhuman strength the first thing we thing of when we think about Mario? Of course not, typically we think of his jumping. Now, Super Mario 64 seems to be a good account of how much strength he has. While he can throw a giant bob-omb no problem, he can only swing Bowser in order to get him off the ground. Is this superhuman strength? Seems like it. Again though, it's not the issue. The secondary issue is whether this can be reliably sourced. This is more difficult because of the fact that it's not a defining characteristic. If someone can find one then it's case closed, but without it then it's going to be subject to debates just like this. I wish I could make a clear case out of this, but this is quite hazy. Still, try and find a source in regards to this. If we don't find one, well, we're back to square one on this debate. Wizardman 03:59, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

As much as i love Mario i have to say that he shouldnt be considered super human. First of all his a game character. Because my character in GTA can survive taking several bullets to the head and is able to push cars by running into them does that make him super human? If that is the case most game characters must be super human. And secondly, how do we know that Mario is so different from other humans in his 'universe'. I doubt he was considered a super human when he lived on Earth. Indeed he does have super human strength compared to normal humans, but i dont think he is super enough to be considered super strong in the gaming world. Otherwise shouldnt Donkey Kong be put into a list of 'smartest gorillas' or should Yoshi be put into a list of 'smartest dinosaurs', no because there video game characters, not an actual dinosaur living in our world who can speak, but one in a game.

• I would like to point out the fact that, in some games, he has eaten mushrooms that cause him to cover the entire screen, breaking everything in his path. If that's not superhuman strength, I don't know what is. [[1]] [[2]]--Is this fact...? 13:08, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

It was said earlier that Mario's abilities are a gameplay element. I infer from this that the argument is that while yes, sometimes Mario does have super strength, it's not a defining element of his character. It's the same as whether he wears a size 10 shoe or a size 11. It's not notable enough, especially considering that his abilities vary from one game to another. He has the ability to stay underwater indefinitely in most of his 2D platformers, but not in his 3D platformers. Does that mean that he can breath underwater? And if so, is it important? It's just a gameplay element. No one is saying that Mario does not have super-strength (From what I understand of Wikipedia, even if he doesn't from an in-universe prospective, that is irrelevant), but that it is not a defining characteristic. The question is, should the category "Characters with super strength" be limited to "Characters who are known for their super strength"? AeroRoy (talk) 23:00, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

For the most part, Mario's superhuman abilities ARE for the sake of gameplay. However, there IS a canonical reference to the fact that Mario possesses Superhuman abilities - in Super Mario RPG he's renowned throughout the world for having "more jump in you than a box of frogs!", and there are cutscenes where he jumps extremely high into the sky that do not play into gameplay. This can be considered to be a story element, and thus a canonical characteristic of Mario. 74.135.94.196 (talk) 11:21, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Mario colours

Anyone else think Marios white, red, and blue were used to appeal to the English? The English flag is red, white and blue. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.129.191.19 (talk • contribs)

If you would take the time to read the article you would find out why.Vadahata2 (talk) 02:58, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

By your logic, anonymous IP, would his red-white-blue colour scheme not also appeal to the Americans, the Russians, the French, and several other countries that have similarly-coloured flags? SpinyMcSpleen (talk) 05:11, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

Mayybe, but England is a huge market. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.129.191.19 (talk • contribs)

Well, it is neither here nor there, as information such as this is pure speculation and, as such, ought not to be mentioned in the article. SpinyMcSpleen (talk) 04:59, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Technically, the English flag is red and white. The flag for Great Britain is red, white and blue. But. Dude. It has nothing to do with the British. New Zealand and Australia have red, white and blue flags too. That is the wildest idea I've heard all day. Your mind intrigues me. The KZA (talk) 05:05, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

It has been suggested that Mario's colors in "Super Mario Bros." (Red, Default; Green, two-player; and white, fire flower power-up) refer to the Italian flag. —Preceding unsigned comment added by WikiFanatic777 (talk • contribs) 06:09, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

Perhaps, but that is also original research. SpinyMcSpleen (talk) 05:01, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

Those are the same colors of the Mexican flag too, just pointing that out. [[User:SxeFluff--70.247.200.80 (talk) 03:09, 6 February 2008 (UTC)]] 21:09, 5 Febuary 2008

Mario's Original Colors were Red (Hat and Overalls), Brown (Shoes, Shirt, Hat, Hair & 'Stache), and Yellow(Skin Color), His color scheme was changed because a)his overalls were changed to blue to make him look more real, as if his overalls were made of denim. b)he got white gloves because he was a plumber, and Nintendo didn't want people thinking he was unsanitary, working without gloves, and c)I don't know why his moustache turned black. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.184.202.131 (talk) 22:23, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

"Category: Fictional characters based on real people"

Mario does not belong in this category, quite simply because he is not based on any real life person. His distinctive appearance comes from technological restraints on computers when he was designed -- a fact which, I believe, is in the article, itself. He was only named for Mario Segali, he was not based on him. There is a significant difference between being named after someone and being based on them. SpinyMcSpleen (talk) 01:19, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

Agreed. Being named after someone doesn't mean they are based on them. The KZA (talk) 01:27, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

Mario Manningham, "Super Mario", and popular culture.

Would an inclusion of football player Mario Manningham's comparisons to Mario be a welcome addition to the popular culture section? MVillani1985 (talk) 23:45, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

No. Something similar to this existed in the article at one time, but was removed for being unnecessary. SpinyMcSpleen (talk) 04:53, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

I think we should leave out references to people, rugby players do get nicknames all the time. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.132.5.194 (talk) 15:43, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

Why isn't it noted that Mario's face is seen on Mount Rushmore from Pilotwings in the article? Pezzar (talk) 01:53, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Surname

I found an old edition of Inside Edition that talked with Bill White who did advertising/promotions with Nintendo. He was interviewed and he confirmed that the both of the "Mario Bros." do not have last names.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yGFRi_ueq-M

Any suggestion on what do do on that paragraph? Pantsman52391 (talk) 01:30, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

As similar information already exists in the article, I'd say leave it out. SpinyMcSpleen (talk) 06:37, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

That video seems a bit out of date to me at the time Mario was not the sirname now it is thanks to the SMB movie. 98.200.49.5 (talk) 03:16, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

Hero of the Year

On Game Informer, Mario won the Hero of the Year award. Should this be noted????? --Mr.Mario 192 (talk) 22:44, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

I would think a little note should be put in there somewhere. (ApostleJoe (talk) 22:49, 3 January 2008 (UTC))

Paragraph for deletion.

In Paper Mario: The Thousand-Year Door, Mario is given the stage name of the "Great Gonzales" during his battles in Glitzville. Before a battle, one of the audience members refers to Mario as "Jumpman," a joke about Mario's first identity. Mario's nickname in Mario Hoops 3-on-3 is "The Jumpman", again making reference to his original name. Mario is currently voiced by Charles Martinet, who also voices Luigi, both their baby counterparts, Wario, Waluigi and other characters such as Toadsworth.[1]

This paragraph seems to be fluff pretending to be elaboration, I suggest it be removed altogether. TehSpud (talk) 01:45, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

Agree I agree; this paragraph is not necessary. RC-0722 ^communicator/_kills 02:33, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

I dont think it should be removed altogether just reworded or made bigger seeing that it is good information.Vadahata2 (talk) 22:10, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

It's a flowbreaker it was established in the previous paragraph that Mario's name was Jumpman. The Paragraph also shifts focus from Jumpman References to Charles Martinet. The information may be nicely placed somewhere else in the paragraph but the section should focus on his creation and development and the paragraph does not do that. As the to-do list says take the focus away from the games in general. TehSpud (talk) 04:37, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

Questionable Reference.

"He is the older (although shorter) brother of Luigi.^[15]"

The link refers to the Super Mario 64 page on IGN, a game that has no Luigi. The page makes no statement to the age relation or size relation between Mario and Luigi. TehSpud (talk) 17:15, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

Games mario appear in section

in the section were it talks about him being in brawl it says thats the second installment when actually its the 3rd installment, and also he has been in all three of the super smash bro games, don't belive me go check it out —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gonzo45 (talk • contribs) 13:50, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Then change it.Vadahata2 (talk) 22:15, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

It's a protected Article. TehSpud (talk) 01:11, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

semi protected you can stiil edit it.Vadahata2 (talk) 12:15, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

Semi protected, ah. Still Gonzo45 and myself are new members and can't edit semi-protected articles yet. TehSpud (talk) 16:47, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

Spelling Errors

The word "transparency" is spelled incorrectly in the passage below, taken from the sixth paragraph under the heading "Mario Series":

"In Super Mario Sunshine, Mario and Peach travel to Isle Delfino for a vacation. However, a Mario doppleganger, having no colour and a slight tranparancy, appears and vandalizes the entire..."

taken care of.Vadahata2 (talk) 21:29, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

By the way, isn't the dopplerganger blue?

Mario.png

I have placed on the image page rational for fair use. I have removed the deletable image tag for Mario.png on this page. If this is a foul up please revert my edit. Spud ^Hai/_watidone 18:29, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

OK. RC-0722 ^communicator/_kills 18:31, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Pac-Man is more recognizable than Mario

I changed this, but someone keeps deleting this. If you know that Mario is more recognizable than Pac-Man, I suggest you give sources. Pac-Man is more recognizable by adults than Mario (2001 US survey). Tomtomtomabc123 (talk) 23:59, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

I would like to say that you should also provide sources proving that Pac-man is the most recognizable character.--Neverquick (talk) 00:00, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Until you provide a source proving otherwise, there is little reason to mention this in the article. Provide a link to this survey, and I'll look into it.--Neverquick (talk) 00:03, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

True. Also please refrain from making personal attacks. And even if you do have a sources; a survey from 2001 isn't going to be very accurate in the year 2008. RC-0722 ^communicator/_kills 00:05, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

So basically you cannotTomtomtomabc123 (talk) 00:12, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Cannot do what? RC-0722 ^communicator/_kills 00:13, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Provide a source. (So stop deleting my changes until you can)Tomtomtomabc123 (talk) 00:15, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

I think he means find a source, but he has yet to provide one either.--Neverquick (talk) 00:14, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

We've covered our bases by saying " arguably the most recognizable videogame character." RC-0722 ^communicator/_kills 00:16, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

I think thats agreeable. everyone has their own opinion on the subject, so pinning it down to a single answer would be difficult.--Neverquick (talk) 00:22, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

That's never stopped me from pinning something down before. LOL. I think we should leave it the way it is. RC-0722 ^communicator/_kills 00:38, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

I meant in general. we could sit here all day yelling about who was more recognizable, and both camps have valid points, but settling on a more versitle phrase that leaves room for personal belief without forcing one on a reader is better. I support argueably.--Neverquick (talk) 00:41, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Agreed. RC-0722 ^communicator/_kills 00:43, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

I dunno.. what would you call a yellow circle with a "slice" missing from it's body, and an eye? Pac-Man. And what would you call an Italian guy with a mustache in a red suit wearing blue overalls(with two yellow buttons), white gloves, and a red hat? A pizza guy? My plumber? Exactly. -Anonymous Kid —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.163.23.130 (talk) 17:55, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Mario's name...

Is Mario Mario. And Luigi's, Luigi Mario. Why is it called the Super Mario Bros? Why not Luigi? Mario is also the last name of our two protagonists. It just has to be. -Anonymous Kid —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.163.23.130 (talk) 17:51, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Why is Super Smash Bros. called Super Smash Bros.? I agree entierly that Mario is in fact the surname but theres not a heck of a lot of hard evidence to prove it. The SMB movie made Mario Mario & Luigi's surname, but thats about it. Spud ^Hai/_watidone 21:33, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

What?

They changed the picture again!--Angel David (talk) 03:34, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

Why did they do that ? The one we had before was ok and the other one dosen't look better at all. --Mr Alex (talk) 13:54, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

...Because the Mario Galaxy version of Mario is the most recent depiction of Mario? - A Link to the Past (talk) 18:21, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

And to add to that, the other image is not appropriate, as it's a secondary image (that is, one that isn't from a primary game such as Mario Galaxy or New SMB). - A Link to the Past (talk) 18:24, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

I understand that, but next Mario games will not necessarily be in the space, this game is exceptional. Most of games from the Mario series are in Mario worlds not in the Galaxy. I replaced it but I did put it somewhere in the article. Is this ok ? --Mr Alex (talk) 21:29, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

It is his current depiction. The next Zelda game may not use cartoony Link, but we still use that image of cartoony Link. The next Pokémon game may not be in 2D, but we still use 2D art for Pikachu. And so, just because it may not be in space next time doesn't change the fact that this game does take place in space. The image given does nothing more than show Mario using the star spin attack from Mario Galaxy - it does not show him in space. There's nothing confusing about the image - it'd be like saying we shouldn't show William H. Macy with a beard if he grew one just recently, because he typically doesn't have one and may shave it off in the future. This is the current Mario, and the article should reflect that.

And to add to this, the image is from the official Nintendo web site, making it a better image, source-wise. - A Link to the Past (talk) 21:38, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

You are completely right.--Mr Alex (talk) 21:45, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

The idea of a Galaxy picture is good, but why not one with a clearer view of his face? Most of Mario's mug is covered by his arm in this one. --Is this fact...? 04:54, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

I have to agree entirely with A Link to the Past. A Super Mario Galaxy image should be used to show Mario in his most current design as is the reason of the purpose of the image in the infobox. But like WhereIsTheCite? said one that has more of Mario visible would be better. Spud ^Hai/_watidone 16:06, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

• Why not this one? It's recent, from Galaxy, and actually shows Mario's face. --Is this fact...? 22:49, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

And no again they changed it!--Angel David (talk) 23:33, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

The Mario image should be represented by a version of Mario from a Wii title. As one editor pointed out in their edit summary as justification for changing it to an older image, Mario's design hasn't changed much throughout his history - however, the Wii version is significantly better in graphical quality, and even a picture of Mario from Brawl is a much better depiction than the current picture from a Gamecube game. 65.33.206.108 (talk) 02:10, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Personally, I think the one from brawl is fine, but I would have used an image from Super Mario Galaxy, if there was one descriptive enough. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kperfekt722 (talk • contribs) 18:14, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

Baby Mario?

Where is the section on Baby Mario? The redirect to it leads to a nonexistent section on this article, so can anybody write a section on Baby Mario (or at least recover the section from the history)? PrestonH 01:17, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

You are perfectly capable of doing it. The Prince (talk) 01:50, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Ok. PrestonH 02:00, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Done. PrestonH 02:30, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Nice that you did it, but the response from The Prince isn't appropriate. People are allowed to point out what they consider to be an error in the article on the talk page. You're not obligated to fix it, and he should've said "thanks for pointing that out." - A Link to the Past (talk) 05:40, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

You're just mad since you didn't get your way in the SMG article. And BTW, you're retired according to your user page. The Prince (talk) 18:13, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

I didn't even recall it was you who I debated on the Mario Galaxy page. It makes sense though - only you could suck that bad.

Prince, if you can't act like someone with the capabilities of even the most basic form of life, stop wasting Wikipedia bandwidth with your mediocrity.

People are allowed to bring up points of the article. Just because you lack the capacity to contribute anything of worth to Wikipedia doesn't mean you can be as disrespectful as you have been to Preston in this discussion.

If your next response is as God awful as what you've added to this talk page, please, do all of us a favor and throw your computer in a river and never, ever use any communication device. The fact that you somehow defend your pitiful actions (acting disrespectful to a user for pointing out a flaw - yeah, pretty horrible of him to have an interest in the article, isn't it?) proves you have no place on Wikipedia. - A Link to the Past (talk) 18:21, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Not to interject, but I'm pretty sure the Prince meant "If you would like a section on Baby Mario, you're as welcome as anyone else to write it," so I don't think that was disrespectful as all, my in opinion. And I think it's well-written too, Preston.--DooplissBro (talk) 19:59, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

That's correct. If the edit is helpful to the article, there is no reason in bringing it up here. Anyone can contribute to the article as long as it's not vandalism. The Prince (talk) 20:04, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Except you basically told him "do it yourself". The very idea of "you're welcome to contribute to this article" doesn't exist in your post, only a snide "so fix it", as if he did something wrong by pointing it out. - A Link to the Past (talk) 21:22, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

He did nothing wrong, so just drop it. The Prince (talk) 21:29, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

So he did nothing wrong, and yet you were rude and disrespectful to him? - A Link to the Past (talk) 21:35, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

I was not rude and disrespectful, it was just you misinterpreting it. Lame discussion ended. The Prince (talk) 21:37, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Lame discussion ended, indeed. Let it be known that The Prince needs to learn how to edit in Wikipedia better. Step one: Treat other users with a pinch of dignity, aight? - A Link to the Past (talk) 21:40, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Resolved

FightingStreet (talk) 21:42, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Link to the past, Stop making personal attacks on people, unless they do the same to you or someone else.You're probably the one who is deleting trivia sections for no good reason.