Talk:Super Mario Bros./Archive 3

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

There needs to be source for the North American release date

• NA: 1985

That doesn't give any source. The full date is October 18, 1985. Benjaminkirsc (talk) 11:46, 15 February 2019 (UTC)

Read the Gamasutra article in the release section which explains that we don't know when exactly the game came out in North America. That October date is often given retroactively but is not accurate. TarkusAB^talk 11:51, 15 February 2019 (UTC)

TarkusAB Mind you that I wasn't born yet when these events happened, but it sounded pretty unambiguous that the release date was October 18, 1985. Reading the article, the author says how the game was, in fact, purchased on the day that the NES was released, that being October 18. The author then questions the day of the week and analyzes this date, which would question the exact date that the NES itself was released. This is generally regarded as October 18 and even referred to by Nintendo to be so. The only valid question is why do people clearly say they could not get Super Mario Bros. for several months? The game was sold with the first reveal of the console in NY to limited supply, but the author is questioning when did it come to the masses? If you missed out on the reveal weekend in New York and you were the Average Joe in the Midwest, when was the first possible day you could say that you could buy Super Mario Bros.? When was the commonman's release date? Now if we find this out, do we go with that date? That would be near impossible to find out, as the author pain-painstakingly went through to tell us. I believe the release date should be considered the first day it came to North America, no matter how small the attendance may have been, that being October 18, 1985. --Bchill53 (talk) 19:54, 15 February 2019 (UTC)

I'm not sure I'm understanding you correctly. Did we read the same article? Although he gets close to narrowing a date, he concludes that he can't settle on a date and it was released in either October or November 1985. Let's WP:STICKTOSOURCE and try not to introduce our own interpretations of his research. TarkusAB^talk 23:30, 15 February 2019 (UTC)

@TarkusAB: In the Gamasutra article you referenced, in the final paragraph before the "The First Sale" section, the author says "At this point, calling Super Mario Bros. a launch game for the NES seems like a safe assumption. But was that launch date October 18, as Nintendo says?" He saw conflicting pieces of evidence that included a different assortment of games, some including Super Mario Bros., some excluding Super Mario Bros. while leaving out a different launch title, etc. and he saw it as interesting enough to dig into.

Looking into it more myself, here are other references that you can check into: https://gamehistory.org/nes-launch-collection-1985/. If you scroll down to the very bottom, there is a link to Google Drive folders with several pictures from the time. Several listings, ads, and setups include Super Mario Bros. in the assortment of games. Let me know your take on this. I know the Gamasutra author would like a paper receipt to definitively prove it, but I can't provide that. As much as I can't prove Gyromite not being listed in an ad didn't come out on release day. I believe the sources within Nintendo and the ads that showed the game to be true as much as I believe my mom which day is my birthday. I could very well be making up my own conclusion, but based on images, several people in the Gamasutra article claiming that Super Mario Bros. was there on launch day, Nintendo acknowledging it themselves as October 18, that's what I believed. I wasn't there, of course, but that is my understanding of the situation. --Bchill53 (talk) 00:47, 16 February 2019 (UTC)

@Bchill53: It's funny you shared that Game History Foundation stuff. Their founder (the guy who wrote that article) is the same guy who wrote the Gamasutra article, Frank Cifaldi.

First, I suggest to you, don't hold blind faith in Nintendo internal data. Unfortunately, they are human and sometimes wrong about their own history. We've discovered cases here on Wikipedia of companies being wrong about release dates or development information on occasion. Cifaldi acknowledges this in his article, saying "Nintendo has been wrong about its own history before.". Yes they are a primary source and in most cases acceptable on their own, but we do prefer secondary sources over primary when available because you have that additional layer of analysis.

Second, the ads are interesting but we can't use this as rock solid evidence to support an October launch. It's quite possible it was intended to go on sale in October and Nintendo wrote it in the books as such, but perhaps they couldn't ship all the games in time and chose to delay some until later. Perhaps there was a chip shortage and they needed to delay manufacturing. Perhaps it did ship on time. The sources disagree so who are we to pick a side?

Here at Wikipedia, it's not our job to do our own research or set the record straight. We simply present what sources say in a fair and neutral manner. If you want to add more background detail from the article that discusses the history of acceptance on different dates, I think that's fine as it's staying true to the source. However, we must stop short of claiming likelihood of any date ourselves. Cifaldi titles his article "We Can't Prove When Super Mario Bros. Came Out" and concludes it saying "We still don't know the release date". He is making it very clear, we don't know, and I don't know of another source that did more thorough research and arrived at a different conclusion. TarkusAB^talk 06:16, 16 February 2019 (UTC)

@TarkusAB: Haha I didn't even notice it was the same person. And first thing Saturday morning, I saw an article in my news feed about an copy of Super Mario Bros. going for over $100,000 that referenced the exact same guy haha. I thought it was very weird timing, but that may be the reason why someone else came to the page and brought up the conversation, I just didn't realize at the time.

Thanks for explaining the thought process. I believe that may be my flaw in trying to help out; I think I do want to set the record straight, as you said. No matter if something is considered probable or not, expert sources are questioning the date, so it would be incorrect to list that on Wikipedia. I am curious to reach out to Frank to see if he's had any updates since that article. It was written over six years ago and maybe others have chimed in. The record doesn't have to be set straight, but it'd sure be nice. :) --Bchill53 (talk) 18:06, 18 February 2019 (UTC)

@Bchill53: I wouldn't call it a flaw so much as you're just learning the ropes of Wikipedia. We generally just compile information in a well-written, well-sourced, and neutral to make it more accessible. We're not supposed to be drawing our own conclusions or publishing original synthesis, although we may sometimes feel compelled to. You can certainly try contacting Frank. I've emailed him before about tracking down magazine scans and he has replied. If his stance has changed, we would need a published article we could source. I just suggest being brief in your message, otherwise he may ignore it. TarkusAB^talk 18:45, 18 February 2019 (UTC)

@TarkusAB: I did hear back from Frank. He elegantly responded, "No[, there haven't been any updates on the confirmed North American release date of Super Mario Bros. for the Nintendo Entertainment System since his article from 2012 about the topic]." Guess we may never know. --Bchill53 (talk) 23:11, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

Nice to hear he responded. TarkusAB^talk 23:20, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

Terrible Idea. Just because one guys anecdotal research says "he" doesn't know the release date doesn't mean other reliable sources cant prove the release date as October 18, 1985. Don't be a wiki dictator.--Fruitloop11 (talk) 10:34, 27 April 2019 (UTC)

The game was released on October 18, 1985, Why doesn't give any source? --SonicClub (talk) 19:52, 13 October 2019 (UTC)

@SonicClub: I get that, but there needs a source. Benjaminkirsc (talk) 23:55, 13 October 2019 (UTC)

@TarkusAB: I don't understand that. Benjaminkirsc (talk) 23:56, 13 October 2019 (UTC)

Minus World section

Hey editors! I was just coming back to this article to look through and make some small fixes, and observed that somebody had moved the "Minus World" section out of "Development" and into a new "Glitches" section. I'm unsure of when this happened, but while I see the reason behind removing such a section from the development section, I also think it seems excessive to effectively create an entire dedicated "Glitches" section for a single section describing a single glitch.

That being said, I wanted to bring this up here and get other people's opinions. The Minus World is definitely noteworthy enough to be documented in the article, but how should we go about including it? My thought was that it could perhaps be nested into the "Legacy" section under a sub-header. If nobody responds to this discussion soon enough then I'll just take the latter initiative myself.~~Tristan ("TheDisneyGamer") 17:24, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

I personally feel like the Minus World might actually be notable enough to be in its own article, as it's had just as much of an impact as MissingNo. Take this GamesRadar+ piece, for example. I can try to draft something up. JOEBRO64 18:49, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

It doesn't have its own article yet?? I'd always been under the assumption that it already had one... Regardless, I guess it depends on whether or not there's enough documentation on it, but that's certainly worth looking into since as you said, it's gained quite a bit of notoriety as far as video game glitches go. I'd love to lend a hand if you get a draft going at some point.~~Tristan ("TheDisneyGamer") 02:05, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

I've already started a draft at User:TheJoebro64/drafts/-. I did a search in the WPVG custom search engine to look for some sources, and from what I came up with there's most certainly enough sources to make a decent-sized article. Miyamoto even commented on it at one point. JOEBRO64 02:11, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

I moved it under the legacy section. As for a standalone article, I kind of doubt there's enough information to expand it into one per WP:SPLIT. ~ Dissident93 ^(talk) 20:29, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 2 June 2020

My request would be to edit out the (Playchoice 10) because that isn't a platform, the best would be to leave it at (Arcade) thankyou :) JackJones100 (talk) 23:40, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Galendalia Talk to me ^{CVU Graduate} 15:59, 5 June 2020 (UTC)

Is it okay we include the Japanese super Mario famicom box art in the Wikipedia page

Excuse me since Megaman 1 and 2 has the Japanese famicom box art https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mega_Man_(video_game) Including Metal gear which has the Japanese MSX box art https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mega_Man_2 including Metal Gear

Is it okay we can include the Japanese Super mario Bros Famicom box art : https://images.nintendolife.com/1ebba7dbe0b7d/jp.original.jpg in this Wikipedia page?

--Belrien12 (talk) 16:07, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

Why? The differences in Mega Man's Japanese and American box art are covered in the actual article text by reliable sources, which is why both are included. Besides, see other stuff exists: Just because another article does it, doesn't mean it's appropriate for other articles. --ThomasO1989 (talk) 23:22, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

Edit Request for NA Release Date

The NA release date is currently listed as Q4 1985. Nintendo lists the NA release date as October 18th, 1985 on their North American website about the history of Mario. https://mario.nintendo.com/history/ Chuck Skoda (talk) 17:02, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

Please read the multiple discussion that exist on this page about why that isn't correct. Namcokid47 ^(Contribs) 17:29, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

Add back October 18 fucking right now.--73.5.92.146 (talk) 00:25, 15 March 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 8 August 2021

Add on reception section: An anonymous buyer paid $2 million for a never-opened copy of Super Mario Bros., according to collectibles site Rally. 90.252.172.138 (talk) 04:56, 8 August 2021 (UTC)

 Done ––𝗙𝗼𝗿𝗺𝗮𝗹𝗗𝘂𝗱𝗲 talk 19:52, 9 August 2021 (UTC)

References

Semi-protected edit request on 24 October 2021 (2)

Junios01348 (talk) 18:01, 24 October 2021 (UTC)Super Mario Bros actually sold more 58 million units . 660,000 units were later sold on Wii Virtual Console, Super Mario Bros. Deluxe version sold 5.07 million units on Game Boy Color, and Classic NES Series port sold 2.27 million units on Game Boy Advance.}}

 Not done: Please clarify the changes you want made, mention the specific changes in a "Please change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Thanks, Heartmusic678 (talk) 12:49, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

References

Possible inclusion of game's speedrunning history in the article

The Super Mario Bros. article does not discuss any speedrunning of the videogame, despite it being one of the most popular speedrunning games of all time. 41618CCEC (talk) 07:01, 11 August 2020 (UTC)

Support: but all information should be reliably sourced. [1] and [2] seem useful. —Dexxor (talk) 08:09, 11 August 2020 (UTC)

Comment Anything more than a single sentence or two would be WP:UNDUE. There used to be an entire section devoted to it here which I removed a while ago. ~ Dissident93 ^(talk) 22:02, 11 August 2020 (UTC)

Comment - Mirroring Dissident93, only a sentence or two is necessary. We certainly don't need anything like a paragraph or an entire section for this. Namcokid47 ^(Contribs) 23:07, 11 August 2020 (UTC)

@Namcokid47: Agreed, although the article should mention speedrunning, it would be unnecessary to write anything over just a few sentences. 41618CCEC (talk) 05:23, 12 August 2020 (UTC)

Oppose - It doesn't really have a place in the article, and there shouldn't be a new section for it. CheeseInTea (talk) 15:00, 17 May 2022 (UTC)

Make the NA date for Super Mario Bros. October 31, 1985

So the debate whether the game was released in October or November 1985 or early or mid-to-late 1986 in NA I founded this website: https://themushroomkingdom.net/smb_release.shtml ik you guys used this website before but it said that the game manual was published on Oct. 31, 1985, which is along with the cartridge in the released date in NA meaning the game is released in NA on October 31, 1985! so please change the NA release date. :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Himyfriends123 (talk • contribs) 02:16, 18 May 2022 (UTC)

TheMushroomKingdom.net is not a reliable source. --ThomasO1989 (talk) 16:12, 18 May 2022 (UTC)

And more importantly, the registration, publication and first use in commerce dates in copyright registrations rarely correspond with the actual release date. Indrian (talk) 18:04, 18 May 2022 (UTC)

ok fine but what about this? https://cocatalog.loc.gov/cgi-bin/Pwebrecon.cgi?v1=50&ti=26,50&Search%5FArg=Super%20Mario%20Bros%2E&Search%5FCode=TALL&CNT=25&PID=LnKN5MkpUiWPoUihX6tZkMUlJsj8&SEQ=20220518150822&SID=19 it actually say the booklet is published 10/31/85 Himyfriends123 (talk) 19:35, 18 May 2022 (UTC)

The booklet's publication date does not imply that the game itself was published or released the same day. --ThomasO1989 (talk) 19:37, 18 May 2022 (UTC)

but don't all version of the NA cartridge have the booklet? Himyfriends123 (talk) 20:10, 18 May 2022 (UTC)

Like Indrian stated, that doesn't matter: "the registration, publication and first use in commerce dates in copyright registrations rarely correspond with the actual release date." Ergo, we cannot use the booklet's date as proof that the game was released the same day. --ThomasO1989 (talk) 20:38, 18 May 2022 (UTC)

Question about the Article

Does this article cover glitches (such as Small Fire Mario)? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2603:8000:EA43:F6B9:C54F:6324:1E23:4790 (talk) 18:56, 13 June 2022 (UTC)

Only those that received signification media attention, such as Minus World. ~ Dissident93 ^(talk) 19:44, 13 June 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 23 September 2022

Change A to B for the purpose of improving readability and clarity:

A: The game was designed by Shigeru Miyamoto and Takashi Tezuka as "a grand culmination" of the Famicom team's three years of game mechanics and programming, drawing from their experiences working on Devil World and the side-scrollers Excitebike and Kung Fu to advance their previous work on platforming "athletic games" such as Donkey Kong and Mario Bros.

B: The game was designed by Shigeru Miyamoto and Takashi Tezuka as "a grand culmination" of the Famicom team's three years of experience in game mechanics and programming. The team drew from their experiences working on Devil World, Excitebike, and Kung Fu to design better platforming games that were improvements upon their previous games in the category including Donkey Kong and Mario Bros.

Rosedaler (talk) 17:31, 23 September 2022 (UTC)

@Rosedaler:  Not done: According to the page's protection level you should be able to edit the page yourself. If you seem to be unable to, please reopen the request with further details. Aidan9382 _(talk) 19:10, 4 October 2022 (UTC)

Ok Rosedaler (talk) 01:02, 5 October 2022 (UTC)