Talk:Characters of the Punch-Out!! series

Untitled

Why does Aran Ryan have a page but not Little Mac? I think Little Mac would be the only one worthy of an article, really. And even he is pushing it — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:306:CE6D:6FB0:683B:6241:73C:328A (talk) 02:39, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on List of Punch-Out!! characters. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20101125200631/http://bitmob.com/articles/racial-stereotypes-in-video-games-how-do-we-change-them to http://www.bitmob.com/articles/racial-stereotypes-in-video-games-how-do-we-change-them

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

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

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

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:36, 19 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on List of Punch-Out!! characters. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110708210354/http://www.crispygamer.com/gamereviews/2009-05-18/punch-out-wii.aspx to http://www.crispygamer.com/gamereviews/2009-05-18/punch-out-wii.aspx
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110708210354/http://www.crispygamer.com/gamereviews/2009-05-18/punch-out-wii.aspx to http://www.crispygamer.com/gamereviews/2009-05-18/punch-out-wii.aspx
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110708210354/http://www.crispygamer.com/gamereviews/2009-05-18/punch-out-wii.aspx to http://www.crispygamer.com/gamereviews/2009-05-18/punch-out-wii.aspx

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

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

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

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:11, 27 December 2017 (UTC)

Proposed merge of Stereotypes in Punch-Out!! into List of Punch-Out!! characters

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

There was an initial unanimous consensus at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Video games#New Articles (June 26 to July 2) that this article is has a significant WP:OVERLAP with the character article and should be merged. Pretty much all of the information would be better off in context rather than as a separate article. It's essentially a "Criticism of..." article under an alternate name. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 07:40, 6 July 2023 (UTC)

I disagree with the merge proposal, I think there are enough sources that focus on Punch-Out!!'s stereotyping in particular for the stereotypes to have their own article.

It's essentially a "Criticism of..." article

I understand this take, but my goal with this article was to focus mainly on the stereotypes themselves in accordance with the sources, and not just the criticism of them. Further, one of the two paragraphs in the Reception section details positive reception of the stereotypes. CJ-Moki (talk) 08:46, 6 July 2023 (UTC)

My argument would be that, while there may be positive reactions to the game's comedy, the lion's share of commentary specifically about Punch-Out's stereotypes in reliable sources is controversy and criticism. To avoid having too many POVFORKs, there is a really high bar for a controversy article. I'll leave it to other participants to judge if it meets that bar, but I'd say it does not. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 09:26, 6 July 2023 (UTC)

• Merge per WP:CRITS. This is decently sourced prose but it would be better situated in the character list for reading comprehension purposes. Axem Titanium (talk) 16:48, 11 July 2023 (UTC)
• Merge per nom. It is a WP:CONTROVERSY article in disguise. I think the materials here would make for a very decent critical reception section in the List of Punch-Out!! characters article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by OceanHok (talk • contribs) 12:36, 12 July 2023 (UTC)
• Merge per WP:CSECTION and WP:SIZESPLIT. There's both a series article and a character article for this information to easily fit into. The content is great. It just doesn't need to be split into its own thing when these other articles exist. Sergecross73 msg me 19:03, 14 July 2023 (UTC)
• Merge Decent article on its own, but works better as a section in another article rather than its own article — Preceding unsigned comment added by Uelly (talk • contribs) 13:23, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.