Talk:Super Mario RPG/Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

Frequently asked questions

These following questions have been addressed repeatedly:

Was this the last game Square Soft made for the SNES?

According to The Ultimate History of Video Games (2001) by Steven L. Kent and published by Prima Games, Super Mario RPG: Legend of the Seven Stars was the final game developed by Square Soft for the SNES. Note, however, that this is only true for North America. In Japan, the last game developed by Square Soft for the SNES was Treasure Hunter G, which did not see release outside of that region.
(See Archive 1 § Last game square made for Nintendo?.)

Is it a platformer?

No, things such as bottomless pits over which the player must jump, etc. do not characterize this game.
(See Archive 1 § "Not a platformer" means....)

Are the Seven Stars from the Bible?

Revelations chapter 1 verse 20 (King James Version) states

“ The mystery of the seven stars which thou sawest in my right hand, and the seven golden candlesticks. The seven stars are the angels of the seven churches: and the seven candlesticks which thou sawest are the seven churches. ”

We regard this as mere coincidence.

(See Archive 1 § Biblical occurance.)

Why isn't there a PAL version?

We have no verifiable information why this game has no PAL version.
(See Archive 1 § Why wasn't this game released in Europe? and Archive 1 § A question.)

Where are cultural references?

As per Wikipedia guidelines, trivia, including cultural references, should be integrated into the body of the article, and we have done that by moving the information to the appropriate articles and sections.
(See Archive 1 § Cultural references: a "trick" and Archive 1 § Cultural references in Development?.)

Where is [your favorite character, place, etc.]?

We have created two new articles.

• World of Super Mario RPG: Legend of the Seven Stars
• List of characters in Super Mario RPG: Legend of the Seven Stars
  

(See Archive 1 § Smithy screenshot, Archive 1 § Who are the other two?, Archive 1 § Character names, Archive 1 § Geno-Pinnochio?, Archive 1 § Jonathon Jones edit war, Archive 1 § Link screenshot?, Archive 1 § Silent protagonist , and Archive 1 § Why Does Boshi Redirect Here?.)

Yes, but at least the list of characters is still included on the same page as the main game's article. So what happened to the separate character pages? 70.110.40.109 03:15, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

The page is restored now. Taric25 23:33, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

Where are the debug and glitches stuff?

Again, as per Wikipedia guidelines, trivia should be integrated into the body of the article. If you have such information, and you can verify it, then add it to the appropriate section.
(See Archive 1 § More Debug Stuff and Archive 1 § Glitch section.)

Where's the soundtrack?

We have created a new article. See Super Mario RPG: Original Sound Version.
(See Archive 1 § Soundtrack relevance.)

Wasn't there a song from Final Fantasy?

When Mario and his allies battle Culex, the boss battle theme of Final Fantasy IV, “Fight Against Culex”, plays, and when Culex loses, the traditional pre-Final Fantasy VII victory theme, “Victory Over Culex”, plays. After the battle, the Final Fantasy prelude, “Conversation With Culex”, plays.
(See Archive 1 § Final Fantasy boss: Culex.)

“Royal Palace” (王家の宮殿, Ōke no Kyūden) that plays while in Walse Castle has a token similarity to “Hello, Happy Kingdom ” that plays while in the Mushroom Kingdom.
(See Archive 1 § Final Fantasy V music reference and Archive 1 § Same music as Final Fantasy?.)

Setting

People, we really need to expand these sections if we're every going to get this article to FA. Taric25 04:00, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

Engine

The engine used by Super Mario RPG is NOT SA-1. The SA-1 is a co-processor chip, something quite different of a game engine. I've removed the "Engine" entry and the SA-1 is added to "Media" entry. --Lashiec 12:31, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Handheld

Chocobo Land: A Game of Dice is a handheld game, not a console game. Taric25 04:34, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

Fan SMRPG Sites

Why are they being taken down? Nothing is sited or sourced about the game in the article, it's there as external links. There's no rule for having detailed fan sites on Wiki is there? SMRPG legacy and SMRPG Secrets should be added, along with any other major/detialed fan sites. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.10.83.192 (talk • contribs) 03:04, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Per Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not § Wikipedia is not a mirror or a repository of links, images, or media files,

“ Wikipedia articles are not:

1. Mere collections of external links or Internet directories. There is nothing wrong with adding one or more useful content-relevant links to an article; however, excessive lists can dwarf articles and detract from the purpose of Wikipedia. See Wikipedia:External links for some guidelines.

”

If you think that your link might be useful, do not add it, but put it here first or submit your link to "Top: Games: Video Games: Platform: Mario Games: Super Mario RPG Series: Super Mario RPG - Legend of the Seven Stars" at the Open Directory Project and that category will link back here, because we use the {{dmoz}} template.

Alternatively, if you find information in this article that needs citation from the World Wide Web, you may cite it with {{Cite web}}. Taric25 00:30, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

Per, Wikipedia:External links#Links to be considered, “Long lists of links are not appropriate: Wikipedia is not a mirror or a repository of links. If you find a long list of links in an article, you can tag the "External links" section with the {{External links}} template. Where editors have not reached consensus on an appropriate list of links, a link to a well chosen web directory category could be used until such consensus can be reached. The Open Directory Project is often a neutral candidate, and may be added using the {{dmoz}} template.” {{dmoz|Games/Video_Games/Platform/Mario_Games/Super_Mario_RPG_Series/Super_Mario_RPG_-_Legend_of_the_Seven_Stars/|Super Mario RPG: Legend of the Seven Stars}} already has Super Mario RPG Legacy - Everything Mario RPG's, and anyone can easily find it by simply clicking “Super Mario RPG Series”. Thus, we do not need to directly link to it in the external links section of our article. Alternatively, if you find information in this article that needs citation from the World Wide Web, you may cite it with {{Cite web}}. If you have any questions, please feel free visit my talk page and leave a message. Cheers! Taric25 (talk) 02:49, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

Massive Editing in progress

I'm going to be doing some massive editing if any of you don't mind. I plan on revising the intro, and the gameplay portion and the reception. I hope you guys will approve of it. Keiji Dragon 21:41, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

I approve of your editing, but reference stripping, however, is considered destructive behavior and that has received extreme penalties from the ArbCom. The cite web tag has included an access date just for that reason. Greg Jones II (Sjones23) 16:59, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

The references were stripped because: 1) I didn't believe they were considered useful or necessary 2) With so many references, it was a editing nightmare because there were so much "information" there. [(http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Super_Mario_RPG%3A_Legend_of_the_Seven_Stars&diff=139340849&oldid=139077466#_ref-Title_Screen-Japanese_0] I couldn't even figure my way through all that, so I removed them. But if its considered a violation, then I'll re-reference them. How am I gonna do that with so many though? Thank you for informing me. Keiji Dragon 21:18, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

Removing crappy references is perfectly fine. TTN 21:21, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

I frankly agree with that. I believe its a neccesity to reference work and quotes for accuracy. But if it means adding a few KBs a code as well as adding a few ridiculously long lines of said code in the editing process, it will comes out a needless mess for editors. That's why I simplified it. However, I just learned on how to edit references just now so I'll see what I can do. Keiji Dragon 21:48, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

I agree with User:Sjones23, and I have added some the references. User:Dragon DASH, if you have difficulty with long lines of code, then you may consider using the vertical format, in order to break up the lines, making it easier on the eyes when editing. In addition, if you need any help with the code while making your edits, please don't hesitate to contact a user who is actively contributing to this topic for help with questions about verification and sources. I myself list my username at near the top of this talk page as such a user, so please feel free to leave a message on my talk page if you have any questions, comments, concerns, complaints, suggestions. Thank you! ☺ Taric25 (talk) 03:36, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Are these real?

http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y91/abarna01/smrpg_techdemo.png http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y91/abarna01/SMRPG_DS01.png http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y91/abarna01/SMRPG_DS02.png

I've only seen these on Gamefaqs, but they look real. Are they? Xihix 20:24, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

I strongly doubt it. It seams strange that none of the major video game websites have not mentioned a word on it if it was in fact real. --69.156.206.213 18:21, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

Update. I saw the threasd of Gamefaqs in question and the person up put the pictures up admitted that they were fake. --69.156.206.213 18:36, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, I saw. I hate it when I get my hopes up and it turns out to be fake :( Xihix 00:13, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

List of locations in Super Mario RPG: Legend of the Seven Stars

Why was that article redirected instead of merged? It had a great development and reception section. --Mika1h 16:26, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

The development provides nothing useful. It is just full of fluff that cannot be salvaged. The reception section takes any sort of review it can get and just throws it in there. It would take a complete rewrite to actually be worth including, and really, it would be better to start from scratch. TTN 16:34, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

Before doing so, you should have discussed it on the talk page. I've restored the page and the admin who deleted the orphaned images has undeleted them. Taric25 23:37, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

Track Lists

I like the way it has been formatted, but does that negate any of the policies relating to these lists? Should this article really have that there? Thank you. Ashnard _Talk ^Contribs 10:13, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

The album was judged too unnotable as a standalone article, so it was integrated in this main article where it has more notability. Tracklists are necessary per WP:Albums guidelines (I think it was agreed at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Albums/Archive 19#Tracklist table guideline, although maybe it was a "no consensus"/"do what you want, we can't decide" rather than a clearcut decision). Kariteh 10:18, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Okay. Thanks for clearing that up. Ashnard _Talk ^Contribs 10:40, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

GA considerations

Mostly, the article is well written, and in most sections well-sourced. However, there are some issues.

• All images need additional fair use rationale for the article. See the pictures of Iridion 3D, Halo 2 or such articles for examples.
• Why is nothing in the Characters or Plot really sourced? There appears to be only one line, but if you are going to reference that bit, why not the rest?
• Reception: could this be expanded? What did the reviewers find positive? What aspects were looked on badly? Stuff like that.

--David Fuchs ^(talk) 16:19, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Some other issues... right now the plot section is waaay too long. Try and cut down it a bit; also, if possible, illustrate the section with pictures and wikilink to break up the wall of text. Anyhow, when you feel confident the article is ready, or when the seven days elapses, PM me or I'll come by and review it again. David Fuchs ^(talk) 16:38, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Developed by Square and Published by Nintendo

No ifs, ands or buts. http://www.nintendo.com/gamemini?gameid=m-Game-0000-570 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nintendonly (talk • contribs) 17:22, August 29, 2007 (UTC)

OK. How about a "What?"? Keiji Dragon 03:02, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Good Article review

Here are my notes from the review:

• It seems slightly silly to declare that 'RPG' is 'Ārupījī' in Japanese. Please consider changing to 'Sūpā Mario RPG'.
• The ISSN-based ZDB links appear to be consistently broken, possibly due to a format change. Please consider replacing; however, these do not appear to be essential to the article and may also be safely remove.
• The link [1] (reference named "Name") is broken.
• The N-dash in "adventure–console role-playing game" is inappropriate. Please change to slash. M-dash can be considered as an alternative.
• In the second paragraph, Legend of the Seven Stars should be emphasised for clarity.
• The N-dash in "re–release" is inappropriate. Please change to hyphen.
• The sentence "Square's Final Fantasy series was the model for the battle sequences while the tradition of Super Mario Bros. games demanded a lot of action and introducing Nintendo's longtime Mario fans to an easy-to-play RPG starring Mario." should be rephrased for clarity.
• The sentence "Mario's enemies are visible in the field; a battle ensues only if he comes in contact with one, allowing the player to evade unnecessary battles, although some fights are necessary to advance the plot." is too long. Consider splitting in three, for example by using "... with one. This allows ... unnecessary battles. It should be noted that some fights ...".
• The reference to "its" in "Unlike many role-playing games before and after its release ..." is ambiguous. Please replace with an explicit reference or provide context so "its" can be interpreted clearly.
• The sentence "In the field, the game plays much like an isometric platformer, with many traditional Mario features as well as many new ones (such as magic spells) playing a key role." has uneven structure. Please rephrase, and consider splitting it into two.
• In the following list of playable characters, it would be useful to link to the corresponding sections in List of characters in Super Mario RPG: Legend of the Seven Stars.
• In the sentence "Mario is the main character, who plays the role of the silent protagonist, and hero who often saves the world.", the first comma is superfluous and there should be the article 'the' before "hero".
• The grammatical structure of "On his way to find and rescue Princess Toadstool as he has in the preview Mario games, ..." is uneven. Please rephrase, for example, to "On his way to find and rescue Princess Toadstool — a common objective from preview Mario games —, ...".

• Furthermore, check that it needs to be "preview" and not, say, "previous".

• The sentence "However, Frogfucius doesn't know what the star is and urges Mallow to aid Mario in his quest." is unclear, as there is no context provided for "the star". Please fix by rephrasing or adding appropriate context. (It might have gotten lost in editing, as the ifnormation about the first Star Piece appears to be missing, although circumstantially implicit, too.)

• Depending on the way this is fixed, "... get a second Star Piece." may need to be changed by replacing the article 'a' with 'the'.

• In "... trapped two kids that were exploring inside.", an incorrect tense form is used. Please fix. The correct form appears to be "... had been exploring inside.".
• There's a reference to "Moleville". From context, it should apparently refer to Molesville instead.
• In "... where the party discovers a fourth Star Piece.", the article should be 'the', not 'a'.
• In "However, she also claims to have found the lost prince, who takes over for the ill king; ...", the comma before "who" is superfluous.
• In "Mallow learns from the royal sculptor, that he is the real prince.", the comma before "that" is superfluous.
• The sentence "Seeing the real prince, Valentina and Dodo, the impostor prince, flee." is ambiguous. Please fix.
• The structure of "They get the key and rescue Mallow's parents, the perfectly healthy king and queen." is weird. I recommend "They get the key and rescue Mallow's parents, the king and queen. Both are unharmed and perfectly healthy.".
• In "After battling through many of Smithy's elite forces, they battle Exor. After defeating him, Exor transports them to a dark and lifeless factory, the center of Smithy's operations.", "they" and "them" is ambiguous as insufficient context is provided. Please add the context or replace "they" with a more explicit reference.
• In "With Smithy gone, and the final Star Piece in hand, Geno thanks the party, and returns to the Star Road to repair it.", the commas before the two "and"s are unnecessary.
• In "The microprocessor allows ...", the "The" is unclear. Please replace with "This".

• Furthermore, the whole sentence is comparative, but it is not stated what the SA-1 is compared against. Please fix by stating the baseline explicitly.

• "... based off of 3D models." is uneven. Please consider changing to "... based on 3D models.".
• "Yoko Shimomura ... composed the music for this game. She arranged music by Koji Kondo ..." can be seen as contradictionary. Please consider changing to "... She incorporated arrangements of music by Koji Kondo ...".
• The clauses in "Many songs are popular with the communities of gamers and musicians, including OverClocked ReMix." are not ordered properly. A better way would be "Many songs, such as the OverClocked ReMix, are popular ...".
• In "... the game employed the SPC700. The sound chip's built-in function ...", consider replacing "The" with "This", as above.
• In "Japanese audiences also received Super Mario RPG well with 1.47 million copies sold, also making it the third best selling game in Japan in 1996.", one of the two "also"s is superfluous.
• In "The game was often praised for it's graphics, ...", it should be "its", not "it's".
• In "... move on from their Super Nintendo, which had been released for over six years at the time ...", clauses are joined incorrectly. Please consider changing to "... which was more than six years old at the time ..." or "... which had been released for over six years earlier ...".
• The sentence "Some of the original team members (including some from Square) that worked on the original worked on the Mario & Luigi series as well, including directors Yoshihiko Maekawa and Chihiro Fujioka and music composer Yoko Shimomura, albeit providing very different or similar styles and mechanics in those games from the original." is too long. Please reword so it can be split into several smaller sentences.
• In "These games also took the non-RPG concepts from the original and expanded upon it, ...", singular and plural are combined inappropriately. Please change to " ... and expanded upon them, ..." or "... improved on them, ..."
• Using "ground pound" as a verb phrase is surprising. Unless this is an official name of the technique, consider fixing. A simple solution appears to be changing to "pound ground".
• Explicit clausing in "Geno was featured in Mario & Luigi: Superstar Saga, albeit in doll form." may be misleading as to the significance. Pelase consider if "Geno was in doll form featured ..." would be more appropriate.
• The references use hyphens when referring to page ranges. Please change to N-dashes.
• In "PC Games - Video Games - Cheats 1", the hyphens should be replaced by M-dashes.
• In "Bytes - Music" and "Bytes - Sound", the hyphens should be replaced by M-dashes.
• In "Game Rankings - Video Game Reviews, Release Dates, Cheat Codes 1.", the hyphen should be replaced by an M-dash.
• The meaning of "“AVERAGE RATIO: 88.4% - (88.3%)”" is unclear. Please fix.
• In "GameFAQs - Fall 2005: 10-Year Anniversary Contest - The 10 Best Games Ever.", the first and last hyphen should be replaced by M-dashes.
• In "Video Game Cheats - Video Game Reviews - Video Game Codes - Video Game Web Site - GameFAQs 1.", the hyphens should be replaced by M-dashes.
• In "Legend of the Seven Stars - SNES", the hyphen should be replaced by an M-dash.
• The citation "“Japan Platinum Game Chart (Games sold over Million Copies)Platform… SFC Developer… Nintendo… Game Title… Super Mario RPG Units Sold (in millions)… 1.47”" is too cropped to be useful. Please assess relevance and fix or, if applicable, remove.

The structure of the article is well-considered and when the above-listed minor problems get fixed, I'll be glad to pass this article as a Good Article. Digwuren 01:19, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

 Done I've fixed all these issues. The correct name is actually Moleville instead of Molesville, and I've precised that OverClockedRemix is an example of musician community website. Kariteh 10:10, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

There were a few minor linking issues which I fixed. Everything else appears to be in order now, so I will pass the article. Digwuren 14:06, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

I believe I have done all the steps to complete the passing. If I have missed anything, please let me know, as this is my first GA review. I could have made mistakes. Digwuren 14:22, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

Smithy Gang split

Taric25 believes that the article can stand on its own, so he would like it to come back. It has been redirected for months, and it was part of the large Mario enemy merge discussion. There is no way for it to actually pass the guidelines, so that's about it. TTN 23:13, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

I would not be opposed to merge it into List of characters in Super Mario RPG: Legend of the Seven Stars. I do have a problem with redirecting the article and not placing any of its content anywhere else. Taric25 00:07, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

I partly agree with Taric25 myself that the characters from this game can be put in a single page, and after reviewing it myself, I can say that in addition to this the character summaries can be trimmed down to remove excessive plot detail and game strategy related info (because Wikipedia is not GameFAQs). My personal opinion is that while I find merging pages and removing all the details is rather rude and sparks conflict (Not including individual episode page merges), I do find that the merge is a great idea and the profiles can be trimmed to remove unnecessary detailing. I do have a good idea at the moment about what to work with first in trimming material after observing this page. -Adv193 20:52, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

I agree with Adv193. I think we should start my moving all the character information to the list of characters and the information about the factory itself to the list of locations. A lot of the references are duplicate, so we should take care to make sure we don't use the exact same reference twice without a name tag. In other words, if we use the same reference twice when we merge the articles, we should use <ref name="Website">[http://www.somewebsite.com]</ref> and if used again later in the article <ref name="Website"/> rather than <ref>[http://www.somewebsite.com]</ref> and <ref>[http://www.somewebsite.com]</ref> later in the article. Taric25 21:27, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

I just merged Smithy Gang#Factory to List of locations in Super Mario RPG: Legend of the Seven Stars#Factory. See Talk:Super Mario RPG: Legend of the Seven Stars#Smithy Gang split. I had to be very careful with the references, since "ET" was used twice already and I had to name one "2 worlds" so I could use it more than once. I then had to reorder them within the languages section, so they would be correctly ordered numerically. I left the information in Smithy Gang#Factory alone, so we may preserve the article until we're finished merging. Taric25 05:42, 28 September 2007 (UTC)
 Done I've finished the merge and all the pages that link to Smithy Gang and their sections now redirect correctly. Taric25 18:42, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

List merging

The two lists are not independent topics. They have no potential to actually do anything, and they're currently fluff and junk. If someone wants to dig through the locations article, some of the references may be salvageable. Please remember that this is not a vote. Just because one side doesn't have the numbers or something will not mean "no consensus", as we already have the fiction guidelines to back this. TTN 23:21, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

Agreed, there is currently no evidence, AKA, references, that show that those two lists are anything but plot recitation and should be merged/redirected/deleted, whichever people prefer. Judgesurreal777 00:17, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

Contrary to your statement, there are 13 references in the list of characters and 54 references in the list of locations. That's even more than the main article, which has 24 references. In addition, many of the references do not recite the plot and instead increase their notability by showing how these specific elements in this game either reappeared in other games, or are cameos from other games. Taric25 00:34, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

The first thing we need to do is rename List of locations in Super Mario RPG: Legend of the Seven Stars to something along the lines of World of Super Mario RPG: Legend of the Seven Stars, World of Super Mario RPG, or Mushroom Kingdom (Super Mario RPG) (I agree most with the last one, since Mushroom Kingdom currently uses Image:Super Mario RPG world map.png as the picture in its introduction section.) and merge List of characters in Super Mario RPG: Legend of the Seven Stars with Characters of Super Mario RPG or rename it Characters of Super Mario RPG:Legend of the Seven Stars. Then, we can focus on making each from a list into a full article. For the list of locations, we must first rewrite the Grography section into prose. For the list of characters, we should organize the list into Main Characters, Friendly Characters, Enemies, and Cameos, since too many of the cameos are misorganized, and a cameo section is valid, per Wikipedia:Trivia sections and Wikipedia:Handling trivia that uses Alex Trebek#Cameos as a good example. Taric25 00:34, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

As explained by myself and others, the information is not real information. Much of it is just pure fluff and junk. The rest are scrapings from the bottom of the barrel to assert a false notability (going with quantity over quality). The lists don't present anything that cannot be covered here perfectly fine (also remember that this is not Final Fantasy, it is a mildly popular game), and they have nothing that can possibly require the need for an article. Honestly, this obsession with them got old long ago.

As a compromise, how about you just willingly let those articles go, and focus on bringing this to a true GA status (the current state is far from GA material) and eventually FA status? After a while, if we cannot possibly cover the topics within the article, we can split them out again, hopefully after a discussion. TTN 00:44, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

If you do not consider the information "real information", then I suppose those 54 references are, what? Unreliable sources? Part of the notability of the article is its influence from other games and elements that appeared later in other games. If you believe it is a "mildly popular game", then please verify that with a reliable source, such as sales figures.

This article is already at GA status. If you wish to contest the decision, then you need to present an argument to have it removed from GA status on the WikiProject pages. Otherwise, I wish to work on the articles. For now, let's concentrate on converting the Geography section of the locations article to prose and spliting the list of characters article into Main Characters, Friendly Characters, Enemies, and Cameos. I think putting a picture of each of the regional maps the adventures use when traveling from one to another in the Geography section of the list of locations would be a good idea, just as they have done with Gaia (Final Fantasy VII)#Geography. Also, we can list cameos seperately like Alex Trebek#Cameos, per Wikipedia:Trivia sections and Wikipedia:Handling trivia, also increasing the notability of the article showing what influence it had from other games. Taric25 01:48, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

The references are either trivial, out of context, or they belong elsewhere (this article). Again, you're going with quantity over quality. Just the amount of references has no place in deciding if the article is good or not. It's all about quality, and there is very little. The fact that it isn't a game recognized like any of the Final Fantasy games shows that, while sort of a cult hit, it is nowhere near their level. That is to emphasize what you're doing here. You're mismanaging content when it belongs in a much smaller place (as with most other single games).

If you want to fix these up, the best place would be in a sandbox. When you do find that they actually work out, bring it up here. And just for reference, will you accept a discussion consensus (the real thing) or will we need to go with the ever so special "I've got more people on my side. Ha ha, I win" consensus? TTN 02:01, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

LOL, sorry, that last line made me laugh. "'I've got more people on my side. Ha ha, I win' consensus". ☺

Phew, ok back to the issue. If you believe the references are either trivial, out of context, or they belong in the main article, then please list them, and I will be happy to go over them with you. If it's quantity over quality, there's no reason not to use the same references in more than one article. I feel I have selected very high quality references such a books and magazines. Again, if you believe that Super Mario RPG: Legend of the Seven Stars isn't a game recognized like any of the Final Fantasy games and is nowhere near their level, then please verfiy that with a reliable source. If a video game has no prequels or sequels, does not reference any other media (such as films, TV, music, other video games, etc.), nor influences any other media, then I could see such a game would only deserve a single article. Super Mario RPG: Legend of the Seven Stars is not that game. It has predecesor elements, locations, and characters from other media, such as other video games, music, TV, etc. and elements from the game appear in other games. Thus, it is far more notable.

I do not believe the best place for me to fix these articles is a sandbox, because that does not effectively allow other Wikipedians to also edit the articles. We may feel free to discuss it and develop a consensus based on something on which we can both agree rather than a supermajority, because Wikipedia is not a democracy. Taric25 02:44, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

We have been over this ten times already. That is why I have asked the above question about consensus. While I don't believe its intentional, you seem to just pass off everything and go right back to your own drawing board. It's taken you this long to think that the list needs to become prose. Various people, including myself, have gone over why most of the references are not good in the context of the articles, why many of your conclusions are OR (In A+B=C, you source point A and point B, but you leave C as a given), and various other things. Please read over the locations talk page, and you'll find plenty of reasons.

Again, the point about popularity is to apply some context to what you're doing. I'm not trying to base the need for these articles on popularity. You are vastly (and I really mean vastly) overestimating this game's impact and need for information. If you want the articles to stick, you have to provide a reason for their inclusion. In their current states, and in their proposed states, they are nothing. That is why either using the sandbox or actually showing that this article cannot hold the information are the best ways to do that. TTN 03:00, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

I took a Wikibreak after doing the majority of the article, and I was focusing on the Metaphysics section of the list of locations, since another editor asked about it. Although the Grography section had been on my mind, I was focusing on something else, until demands in my real life took precident, and I left the Wikipedia for a while. I'm sorry I didn't announce in on my userpage, but if you look at my contibutions, you'll see I had no activity between 15:52, 30 June 2007 and 04:08, 26 August 2007. Speaking of real life, when I asked you, "Could you look in the back of the Player's Guide and tell me what “types” of … Magic? I forgot what they call it in the game … well, anyways, what types of Special Attack or whatever it is (actually, could you find out what it's called?) there are? I remember some vaguely when I owned the guide like “Fire”, “Jump”, “Electricity?”, etc. Could you provide a citation, like the page number with a quote in context?" you said you were going "get to it" (User talk:TTN/Archive 5#List of locations in Super Mario RPG: Legend of the Seven Stars). Well, that never happened, so I was unable to finish my work, because I can neither find a library or a friend that has it nor can I find it on the internet. (Although I did find Qeomash's website mentions its inconsistencies.) I became frustrated and took a Wikibreak. If you believe some of my conclusions are original research, then please list them, and I will be happy to go over them with you.

Per Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions#Fame in x, the game's fame or "popularity" has no weight when it comes to deletion, so please provide an argument for deletion on the basis of actual policies and/or guidelines rather than the use of a somewhat subjective term. If you believe that the citations do not verify the game's notability, then you are free to tag them with {{verify source}}. If the citation does not verify the statement, then you may tag it with {{failed verification}}. Otherwise, the sources are the reason for the articles' inclusion. Per Wikipedia:Article size, since the list of locations is already 82 kilobytes long, the main article cannot hold the information. Taric25 04:24, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

I really don't know if it's just you or if it's my wording, but you seem to completely miss my points. Anyways, forget discussing the locations for now. I'm going to chop the OR (most of the language section), the repeated info (the entire "Metaphysics" section retells the plot), and the junk (replace the list with one or two paragraphs for now) eventually, and we can take it from there.

Now with the characters, you need to actually present a reason to cover the characters of one game without any real world information (that means information, not just implementing sources). There is also the fact that it doesn't fall under any sort of "necessary split" argument, as none of the characters really need more than a mention to be understood. TTN 17:16, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

I'd actually like to request a favor. First, can you get me that citation from your player's guide about the Special Attack types about which you said you'd get to in May? Second, I really don't mind if you chop anything, as long as isn't referenced, meaning it doesn't have a citation, or if it doesn't allude to outside media. The problem is, the entire languages and metaphysics section is referenced, so if you wanna' start chopping, would you please start with the Geography section? I really don't mind if you chop anything there, as long as it doesn't have a citation and doesn't allude to other media.

Like I've already said about the characters, the first thing we need to do is organize the list into Main Characters, Friendly Characters, Enemies, and Cameos. The reason to cover the cameos is because they offer real world information, since they allude to other media. Once we've organized the list, then we can remove material that is not notable. Taric25 18:57, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

(Unindent) I'll grab it if the article stays, otherwise its pointless to dig it out (it's at the bottom of a box that's behind at least five others in a cramped space). Having a citation is not the key to keeping information. The citation must be both accurate and relevant to the article. The languages contains a lot of OR, and the rest belongs in the main article if it belongs anywhere at all. As I said above, the metaphysics is a reiteration of the plot. You can sum it up in two sentences about Star Road, which can fit in the geography section. Then there is the removal of trivial information from the creation and reception.

Before you organize it, you have to show that it needs to exist. As of right now, it has no reason due to a lack of real world information pertaining to the overall characters. Without that, the character and plot sections here cover them. TTN 19:09, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

Instead of arguing, can you just do it? Taric25 22:58, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

I'm waiting to make sure that you're not going to revert me on every turn. And there is still the discussion over characters anyways. TTN 23:04, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

Like I already said, we need to split the list of characters into Main Characters, Friendly Characters, Enemies, and Cameos. The Cameos offer real world information, since they allude to other media. If we organize the list first, then we can cut down on a lot of the unreferenced content. I really want to work with you here, so I have come up with this plan. If you have a better plan, not just an idea, then please present it, and I will be happy to go over it with you. Otherwise, I suggest we proceed so we can cut down the article to a reasonable size. Taric25 00:22, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

Cameos are not "real world" as in how we define real world. Real world deals with development, reception, and all that stuff. People talking about two minor cameos and a reference to Final Fantasy is hardly that (though they will help back the real stuff up). Even if we do define the appearances as real world, it still is not enough to form an article. If they need mention, they can fit in the main article. You would need at least two paragraphs each of development and reception to warrant an article. You aren't going to do that without scraping from the bottom of the barrel. TTN 00:36, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

I haven't even written the development and reception sections for the article yet. (Although, from my sources, reviewers critisized the characters much more harshly than the world.) I could write those sections now, and it would take me, what, weeks? It took me two weeks to write the development and reception sections for the list of locations, and that was only because I had a lot of pressure from you and I had free time in my real life, since my trip to St. Louis was canceled. Yes, I have reliable sources about the development of the characters that is not what is in the list of locations. No, I don't feel like writing those sections right now.

I do have a plan B. If you don't wanna' reorganize the lists right now. We can rename the articles first, by following the steps at Wikipedia:Requested moves#Requesting potentially controversial moves. If you like neither plan A nor plan B, then please present a plan C, and I will be happy to go over it with you. Just please make up your mind on what you want to do first. Taric25 00:55, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

As I said, you'll be scrapping the bottom of the barrel. I'll be removing most of the stuff from the list of location's development and reception because of that. If I am wrong, just post a couple online ones, and we'll check them out. TTN 00:59, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

I'm sorry. I don't understand. Can you please rephrase that? Taric25 01:03, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

To make development and reception sections for the character list, you'll have to gather up the minor quotes from minor reviews, which is scrapping the bottom of the barrel. Because you did that with the list of locations, most of the information in the sections there needs to be cut. If I am wrong about the character list sections, post a couple of the reviews that you plan on using, so we can check them out. TTN 01:10, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

Oh, ok, now I see what you're saying. Well, typical with games that were released in this era, the internet was still in its infancy to gaming, compared to what it is now. (America Online had just come to Canada.) So, I only have one online resource for the development of the game's characters: Mario RPG Breaks New Ground. Everything else I have for the development of the game's characters is in print. As for the reception of the game's characters, I have some reliable sources in print and online. I haven't really done my homework on the reception of the characters, but here are some off the top of my head: Super Mario RPG Review, Super Mario RPG, & Review. Taric25 01:47, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

(Unindent) Now the locations list is cut down to what ever can be considered "good". If you just imagine two or three more paragraphs in geography, you have the maximum possible article without readding any of the stuff that doesn't belong. TTN 01:32, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

That was not what we talked about at all! If you want to cut the article down, fine, but only cut what does not have a citation and does not allude to other media.

Ok, here are three choices. Please pick one.

1. We rename the articles by following the steps at Wikipedia:Requested moves#Requesting potentially controversial moves. (Prefered)
2. We reorganize the list of characters. (Adequate)
3. We cut down the geography section list of locations by cutting it into the regional maps the adventures use when traveling from one to another. I get pictures and write the fair use rationals, and you can cut down the text that has no citation and does not allude to other media. (Difficult) Taric25 01:47, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

See, this is the problem. You have ignored everything else that I have said, and you're right on your own path. You still stick with quantity over quality. Just because you have a little number at the end of a sentence does not mean that you have a good sentence. Honestly, this is rather ridiculous; how can you defend this information?

Let's start off with languages as a test case. The first paragraph describes localization of the game. This happens with 95% of games, so that's gone. The second paragraph is just trivial filler. The third is half OR (unless you have some sort of backing, insinuating that they would speak anything other than the main language is original research) and trivial OR (many, many characters throughout games have speech quirks). The fourth belongs with the description of Geno or Star Road. The fifth is OR, and you can see my point about Bowyer's speech. How do you defend that? TTN 01:57, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

I defend that because per Wikipedia:No original research, I neither publish original thought, nor my own point of view. I verify all the material by citations to reliable sources. If you believe otherwise, then you are free to tag them with {{verify source}}. If the citation does not verify the statement, then you may tag it with {{failed verification}}. Otherwise, the sources are reliable and verify the information. I am not going to continue this discussion of how you think the other sections are trivia, because that is not the compromise that I have offered you. Per Wikipedia:Consensus#Consensus can change, I am offering you a reasonable, temporary compromise that might integrate my idea with yours. I understand that you want to work on all the sections in the article, but that is not what I am offering you. I am offering you three choices, so please pick one, and we will work on the other two at a later time. Eventually, we will work on the rest of the sections, such as metaphysics, languages, concept & creation and development for the list of characters, but that is not what I am offering you right now. I am offering you a temporary compromise so we can reach a consensus and work together. Now, which one of those three choices do you want? If you don't want any of them, fine, but at least say that so we can at least establish that we have no consensus. Taric25 02:28, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

After analyzing this further I can say that the first move I can do is to trim down details that are too game-related and trim down plot segments that are too detailed. If neccessary I will attempt to handle this myself. Anyway TTN, I do agree that adding in Cameo details is a waste of page space and that the characters who are do make cameo appearances should only have those details on their pages only and Taric25, I know that you mean well but some sacrifice must be made since I will not let this page go down but I will have to make some changes to help settle this dispute. -Adv193 02:45, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

I understand that you would like me to make some sacrifice, but since Culex is not from any specific Final Fantasy game, where would we put him? I already tried integrating him into Final Fantasy, and the Wikipedians of that article rejected it. I believe a cameo section is valid, per Wikipedia:Trivia sections and Wikipedia:Handling trivia that uses Alex Trebek#Cameos as a good example. In addition, Luigi is also not part of the plot, but you left him in the article. Can you please explain? Thank you. Taric25 03:07, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

First I was thinking of removing Mario, Peach, and Bowsers profiles, but keep the link to their personal pages, as those pages can the details in this game and next to put similar species like Toads and Goombas in a single profile and reference many of the characters in very minor details. I can probobly do some test work with Microsoft Word on this but two major goals to handle this page are to trim out material by cutting out any characters that are too minor which had already done with characters and avoid using too much plot detail in addition to remove any game-strategy informaiton. -Adv193 03:17, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for replying, but I didn't see from your answer how we're supposed to keep Culex and Luigi and not Link and Samus, so … I made a partial revert. I'm so sorry; I'm just not ready to concede to that yet, but I do have some ideas. Let's go over this list and see which characters we want to keep. Here's what I think.

1. Mario - Yes - main character, need image, link and paragraph about him
2. Mallow - Yes - same as Mario
3. Geno - Yes - same as Mario
4. Bowser - Yes - same as Mario
5. Princess Toadstool - Yes - same as Mario
6. Toad - Yes - He's a main character and appears in other games
7. Mushroom Chancellor - Yes - He's mentioned in other articles
8. Princess Toadstool's Grandmother - Maybe - Main character's family
9. Raz and Raini - Maybe - Part of the plot, they are semi-important
10. Frogfucius - Yes - He's mentioned in other articles
11. Toadofsky - Maybe - If we keep Frogfuciou's student
12. Gaz - Yes - He's mentioned in other articles
13. Gaz's Mother - No - We should merge her into Gaz
14. Gardener - No - Only part of a sidequest, does not appear in other games
15. Yoshi - Yes - Appears in other games
16. Boshi - Yes - Mentioned in other articles
17. Ma' Mole - No - Unless merged with Pa' Mole, Dyna & Mite
18. Pa' Mole - No - Same as Ma
19. Miner Toad - No - Same as Gardener
20. Dyna and Mite - No - Same as Ma
21. Frogfucius' Student - Maybe - Only if merged with Frogfucious
22. Johnny Jones - Yes - Important character, signigicant to plot
23. Seaside Town Elder - Yes - Mentioned in other articles
24. Rat Funk - No - Same as Gardener
25. Goomba - Maybe - Mentioned in other games
26. Goomba Triplets - No - Same as Gardener
27. Three Musty Fears No - Same as Gardener
28. Jagger - Maybe - Only if merged with Jinx
29. Jinx - Maybe - Somewhat important character
30. Magikoopa - Maybe - Same as Goomba
31. Monstermama - No - Same as Gadener
32. Sergeant Flutter - No - Same as Gadener
33. Garro - Yes - Important character, signigicant to plot
34. King and Queen Nimbus - Yes - Important characters, signigicant to plot
35. Hinopio - Maybe - Somewhat important character
36. Smithy Gang - Yes - Same as Mario
37. Hammer Brothers - Maybe - Same as Goomba
38. Croco - Yes - Important character, signigicant to plot
39. Booster - Yes - Important character, signigicant to plot
40. Pandorite - No - same as Gardener
41. Belome - Yes - Mentioned in other articles
42. Punchinello - Yes - Important character, signigicant to plot
43. Bundt/Raspberry - Yes - Important character, signigicant to plot
44. King Calamari - Yes - Important character, signigicant to plot
45. Hidon - No - Same as Gardener
46. Formless/Mokura - No - Same as Gardener
47. Shy Away - No - Same as Gardener
48. Valentina and Dodo - Yes - Important character, signigicant to plot

Also, we can Merge the rest of Smithy Gang now if you want. Taric25 04:07, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

I think the main problem with the locations list is the references. They are so cluttered and overloaded with information. I also think the concept and creation and reception sections are too large, and the geography section should be like the one in Gaia (Final Fantasy VII)#Geography. It should only contain the main locations. The Prince of Darkness 12:12, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

(←) Independent opinion here, but right now, both your character and your geography page are overkill (you in the general "all editors of this page sense, not to the above comment). Remember, every article on WP needs to strive for verifiability, which includes notability defined in the Wikipedia sense, which means it has received significant coverage in reliable secondary sources. Notability (per WP) should not be confused with "popularity", "importance" or "fame". Super Mario RPG the game has such notability; this page should exist, no question on that. However, outside of the usual Mario crew, there is no demonstration of notability of the secondary characters or the specific locations within the game. Citing the game, manuals, and fan sites are not secondary sources; the first two are primary, the third should never be used.

The Location article is very weird: you have great development and reception leads that belong in the main article, and if you're keeping these here to make the geography article notable... it just doesn't make sense. Please look at the Final Fantasy VIII articles, specifically World of Final Fantasy VIII. I think you may want to consider this approach which, as you may notice, does not specifically list out every single location in the game, but gives enough of an overview with secondary sources to describe how that world came to be. You may be able to pull some common-raced characters here too in the same fashion, but I'm not so sure (having never played the game).

Remember, when describing a fictional work, you do not want to reiterate the plot. I suggest retelling the plot from a higher level on this page (it's too much blow-by-blow, consider what the overarching menace is in the story and hit any necessary twists as required), and that'll help identify how to group the characters. I think you'll likely be able to get away with one single character page if you group named characters of low-importance to the game into single prose sections instead of the long lists (for example, grouping the Toads together).

Now if you can find secondary sources to support additional elements, great. I wouldn't necessary claim these are hard to find due to time; those that worked on Final Fantasy VII (1997) seemed to find a good deal to make their individual pages notable. However, I think very few people would disagree that in general, FF7 is much more notable than Super Mario RPG; again, its not that SMRPG is non-notable to have a page, just that there's a difference in the weight between the two that allows the FF games to have well-rounded, notable secondary pages while most other games do not.

I think if you seriously consider shortening/merging of what you have now, the SMRPG article is not that far away from being a Good ArticleFeatured Article. You do need to trim a good deal, but you actually have a fair amount of detail to make this all work in one, maaaybe two really-tight, awesome pages. Any attempt to make more is going to go in the wrong direction. --Masem 13:15, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

Well I was thinking of removing all overdetailed plot material by shortening it and anything that looked like game related like I removed Geno's special attack information yesterday as well as all special data on the partly member's special attacks as a sample of what I have in mind to control information. -Adv193 15:46, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

I agree. What do you think we should work on first?

1. Merge Smithy Gang characters into the list of characters (Merged by Taric25 18:42, 29 September 2007 [UTC])
2. Go over the list I just posted above so we can delete non–notable characters
3. Rename the articles by following the steps at Wikipedia:Requested moves#Requesting potentially controversial moves.
4. Cut down the geography section list of locations by cutting it into the regional maps the adventures use when traveling from one to another. I can get pictures and write the fair use rationals, and someone can cut down the text that has no citation and does not allude to other media.
5. Write the concept and creation and reception sections for the list of characters
6. Write the concept and creation section for the main article Taric25 17:26, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

Before you do anything, can you please actually defend the information in the location article? Saying, "it's good" an leaving it at that doesn't help your case. Using my example of the languages section would be preferable. TTN 17:35, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

Per Wikipedia:Consensus#Consensus can change, I am offering you a reasonable, temporary compromise that might integrate my idea with yours. I understand that you want me to defend the information in the location article, but that is not what I am offering you. I am offering you six five choices, so please pick one, and we will work on the other five four at a later time. Eventually, we will work on the notabiliy of the information in the article, such as the languages section, but that is not what I am offering you right now. I am offering you a temporary compromise so we can reach a consensus and work together. Now, which one of those six five choices do you want? If you don't want any of them, fine, but at least say that so we can at least establish that we have no consensus. Taric25 20:20, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

This is a merge discussion. The point of a merge discussion is to see if an article or articles should be merged or not. If the articles are not merged, and are improved afterwards, that's fine, but that is not what we're doing right now. If you feel that improving the articles will help show notability and such fine, but again, that is not the point of this discussion. Is it really that hard to just write a five point response anyways? TTN 20:25, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

Per Wikipedia:Consensus#Consensus can change, I am offering you a reasonable, temporary compromise that might integrate my idea with yours. I understand that you want me to defend the information in the location article, but that is not what I am offering you. I am offering you six five choices, so please pick one, and we will work on the other five four at a later time. Eventually, we will work on the notabiliy of the information in the article, such as the languages section, but that is not what I am offering you right now. I am offering you a temporary compromise so we can reach a consensus and work together. Now, which one of those six five choices do you want? If you don't want any of them, fine, but at least say that so we can at least establish that we have no consensus. Taric25 20:20, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

This is a merge discussion. The point of a merge discussion is to see if an article or articles should be merged or not. If the articles are not merged, and are improved afterwards, that's fine, but that is not what we're doing right now. If you feel that improving the articles will help show notability and such fine, but again, that is not the point of this discussion. Is it really that hard to just write a five point response anyways? TTN 20:25, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

If you believe that the articles do not show notability as they are right now, then that is not a valid argument for merger/deletion per Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions#I don't like it and Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not#Wikipedia is not a crystal ball. Taric25 22:10, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

I don't think they have or will ever assert notability. I have explained that many, many times on the locations talk page. The way to start off is to discuss the articles. As you have frequently stated that you think everything in the articles is just peachy, we now need to do a section by section discussion. I'm starting with languages, but feel free to bring up a rational for any of them (physics: reiteration, D&R: Too much info specific only to the main game). TTN 22:15, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not a crystal ball, so if you don't think the articles will ever assert notability, we cannot yet know this, per Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions#I don't like it. I will not go over a section-by-section review of the article in its current state, because that is neither a vaid reason for deletion/merger nor the reasonable, temporary compromise that I have offered you to integrate my idea with yours, per Wikipedia:Consensus#Consensus can change. Either select one of the five options above, or if you don't want any of them, say that so we can at least establish that we have no consensus. Taric25 22:28, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

Honestly, do you even consider the possibility of these becoming redirects? Instead of circling around the discussion, actually discuss. By cutting the article down through discussion, we can better analyze future development of the sections that are kept. Your "compromise" only does one thing: keep the articles. That is not a compromise. It is a plan for improvement, which is good on its own, but not for this discussion. Please just go along with this path for a little while, and if it doesn't bring about results, we can do something else. Otherwise, I guess we can go for a number consensus. TTN 22:33, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

I have considered the possibility of these becoming redirects, and that is not currenly possible per Wikipedia:Article size. If you believe we can cut down the articles, and then merge them, then I am open to that. If you like, we easily start by going over the character list I posted above and discussing which characters to delete. Taric25 22:44, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

Article size only comes into play if the content is from a valid split. Nothing has shown that this content is necessary. It is not just a card you can randomly play. I want to go over the locations article, as that is the only one currently asserting notability. After that one is redirected, we can move on to the characters. TTN 22:49, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

Alright, if you want to cut down on the list of locations, I really don't mind if you cut down the geography section by cutting it into the regional maps the adventures use when traveling from one to another. I can get pictures and write the fair use rationals, and you can cut down the text that has no citation and does not allude to other media. Is that ok? Taric25 23:12, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

I am not interested in working on the article in regards to improving it. I want to remove unnecessary details, so we can get past this "having sources automatically means that this information is good" mentality. OK, tomorrow, I'm just going to work on getting more people from the video game project to chime in on this (I left a message there), so we may be able to get a number consensus going. TTN 23:19, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

ATTENTION: (btw, the all caps is for attention, not because im mad.) I THINK THINK THAT THE CHARACTER LIST AND THE WORLD OF SMRPG SHOULD BE MERGED INTO ITS OWN ARTICLE, NOT INTO THE SMRPG ONE. THE TITLE COULD BE "World and List of characters of Super Mario RPG"Igglybuff63 (talk) 13:50, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Semi-arbitrary break

This is in preparation for more people than just Taric and TTN going back in forth. Anyway, I think that before blindly merging/redirecting those two large articles, they should be pruned to remove non-notable information (like the pointless characters and really small locations). If, after that, they are short enough, then they can be merged here. It seems that there is enough out-of-universe information to sustain separate articles if they are too long to merge. "I am not interested in working on the article in regards to improving it". I think this is a dangerous attitude because it means you are not committing the time needed to actually do a good job. Axem Titanium 02:04, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

With the locations, the out of universe information pertains only to the main game in most cases. The development section has little that directly talks about the development of the world; it's more that the information is written to seem like it. The reception section contains three reviews that talk about the world. The rest just talk about the graphics and the characters, though not in relation to the world. The rest of the article is just rather bloated with unnecessary details that don't do a thing.

With the characters, the only out of universe information is some OR about the name of a boss. For those reasons, and the fact that this is one single game being overblown by so much (very few of the characters need more than one sentence descriptions for example), that is why I have no interest in actually working on them. There is just no potential, and it's ridiculous that this has gone on this long. TTN 02:31, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

TTN, I agree with Axem Titanium that if you don't want to even try to prune the unreferenced inuniverse information, that we will not be able to merge it. You have to at least give it a chance. Taric25 04:40, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

I am just here to put forward my support for TTN's position. I have known his standards to be quite close to mine in this area. This whole discussion seems to be reiterating the endless debate between those who like lists, <oneof(trivia/useful information)> and the like, and those who do not. Wikipedia policy favours the latter, but many people's common sense the former. Before I will try and get a more in-depth grasp of the list articles, please shorten the table of contents. A good way to do this is by not giving every trivial part its own section, but by ordering per group - see List of characters in Fire Emblem: Path of Radiance, a recently written article very close to Featured List, with a similar aim as the lists under discussion here. There, one can also see that lists of characters are indeed valid encyclopaedic articles, and are not excluded by definition.

As a final remark, I completely detest the way Taric25 seemingly cross-posted his plea for help on multiple user's talk pages (from his contributions, as many as thirty pages), including mine. See WP:CANVAS. The proper channels for this are WP:3O and WP:RFC. With me, perhaps the goal was achieved - I am participating in this discussion until it is finished now. User:Krator (t c) 14:14, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

I just saw that you were involved with related topics and gave you what I considered a friendly notice per Wikipedia:Canvassing. If you believe that I should have looked at WP:3O or WP:RFC instead, then I apologize for my error in judgement.

On the subject, I agree with you that we not give each location its own section and order it by the regional maps the adventures use when traveling from one to another. In fact, I did offer to do that by writing “Cut down the geography section list of locations by cutting it into the regional maps the adventures use when traveling from one to another. I can get pictures and write the fair use rationals, and someone can cut down the text that has no citation and does not allude to other media.” and TTN wrote, “I am not interested in working on the article in regards to improving it.” I want to improve the article to get it up to par as a World article instead a non-notable list, per your suggestions. Taric25 17:50, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

...I must agree with Krator about your messaging, Taric. Firstly, if the locations section does remain, then it should be moved as an article as it has separate information separate from the actual locations, which makes it an article. The same goes for the characters, but only if the conception and creation and reception section can be added. As for whether it should be merged, I'm not keen on having a videogaming article devoted to geographical locations. The "reception" section comments on the game as a whole—not the location. If this were to be merged with the main article, it could make a decent section since the citations are already there. So I'd advocate a merge with comments on the notability of the geography in general in the main article.

For the characters, I'd group the characters by factions/locations etc. The information needs to be condensed so it only mentions their role in the game. Really insignificant characters should be omitted altogether. If you can't develop the conception or reception sections, then it should remain as a list. So, in a nutshell, locations: merge (well), characters: keep, but tidy up. By the way, for ToC, use {{ToClimit|limit=2}}. Oh yeah, thanks to Axem Titanium, who suggested grouping for List of characters in Fire Emblem: Path of Radiance. Thanks. Ashnard _Talk ^Contribs 15:38, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

Please notice that two of the compromises I offered were "Go over the list I just posted above so we can delete non–notable characters" and "Write the concept and creation and reception sections for the list of characters". I also do not support an article devoted to geographical locations, and that is why I have added comments in the Reception section relevant only to the game's landscapes, graphics, physics, etc. I feel I have not included comments that are not relevant to it, such as music, for example. TTN has pointed out that only three of the citations refer to the actual world of the game, so I would like TTN to point out which ones TTN feels those are. I believe that we can work on that together to improve the reception section, so what we can both agree that it is more relevant. We can kill two birds with one stone by moving what citations we don't use to the main article. Taric25 17:50, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

Echoing Krator's sentiments. I also like the "Look at all this stuff about which TTN lied! But I'm not questioning his honesty." approach. Akin to a politician saying "I'm not going to bring up my opponent's troubled past of drugs and lawbreaking because I'm better than that." Pagrashtak 16:00, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

I did not say that TTN lied. I said that I was shocked that TTN didn't recognize a scan of a page from Nintendo Power magazine was not from from the player's guide TTN claims to own, and I said that because I was trying to show that I am continuing to assume good faith per Wikipedia policy. I did not do so to posion people into beliving TTN is a liar, so if you feel that way, then let me make it perfectly clear in no uncertain terms that is not the case. I do not think TTN is a lair just because he hasn't given a citation from a player's guide. I was meaning to show that TTN is unfamilair with the one of the sources we use, Nintendo Power. I am showing that I am assuming good faith, because I believe it is very possible that TTN simply did not recognize the page, because it has been a while since TTN even looked at the player's guide. That's all.

I believe that it is important to be familiar with the articles' sources before calling them trivial, don't you? If TTN calls my sources trivial and cannot properly identify them, then what does that mean? I belive I may defend a magazine by Nintendo covering a game published by Nintendo and designed with Nintendo's Mario creator, Shigeru Miyamoto, as a relaible source. In addition, I have also provided another source, Next Generation Magazine, to back up the statement that the game's radically new perspective is reminicent of Equinox. Furthermore, the dates of my citations are from October and December, well before the release of the game in May of the following year, meaning they are a preview and not part of the game's reception. Taric25 17:50, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

I have read this list, but I need some advice on how to improve it. The articles look fine IMHO, but I need some help merging them or anything I want. Any comments here shall be appreciated. Greg Jones II 19:14, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

We can go over the ideas I have about cutting down the pages. For example, we can go over the list of characters I posted above to delete non-notable characters. Please feel free to let me know of any ideas you have. Thanks! Taric25 05:22, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

I'm against the merging, because I think the characters are notable enough to get their own article. I mean, EarthBound has their own list of characters, why can't Super Mario RPG? - Smashman202 (talk) 03:14, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

I am also against the merging. If you like, you can help us work on the lost of locations, since that is the current focus of WikiProject Video games Cleanup department. Taric25 (talk) 17:57, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

I'm absolutely against merging the articles. There is already far to much info on the main article to have more sections added. Its just fine the way it is. Keiji Dragon (talk) 09:04, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Graphics

If you believe, "We don't detail graphics like that. You explain anything about movement in the gameplay section. We don't need to detail the Nintendo SA-1 here, as it already has an article", then why didn't you add the information I just added to the gameplay section? Taric25 22:08, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

I don't feel that the information is really necessary. The part about moving eight directions will be added eventually, but the rest is just a few unneeded parallels and comparisons. If it's comparable to Equinox and if it's that big of a leap, source it and place it in development. If the graphics are some of the best, add it to the reception section. TTN 22:18, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

If you click the number at the end of that paragraph, you'll see I already did give the source. In fact, it's even available online. Please feel free to take a look for yourself. [2]. Taric25 22:38, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

Those are the opinions of the Nintendo Power player's guide writers, so those would go into the reception section instead of the development section. Whatever the case, we don't detail graphics in that manner, so I'm removing it again. If you want to incorporate your edits into those sections, that's fine, but please don't bring it back. TTN 22:45, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

First of all, that is from the writers of the Nintendo Power magazine, not the player's guide. Second, it is a relaiable source. Third, I can back it up with the writers of Next Generation Magazine who said the same thing, and if you like, go to User talk:Taric25#Magazine request and click preview to verify it. Fourth, they are from previews of the game in October and December, and the game came out it May, meaning it is a preview— not a review— of the game and thus not part of its reception. Therefore, I should not incorportate it into the wrong secion, and I am bringing it back, because that's where it belongs. Taric25 23:05, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

Again, we do not cover graphics in that manner. How many times will I have to say it? Incorporate it into gameplay and development then or just leave it out. TTN 23:09, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

Either we work on the geography section of list of locations first, or we write the development secion of the main article first. Which one do you want? Taric25 23:14, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

Wii VC 2007?

In the "Popularity" subsection, the article states "it will eventually be released sometime in 2007". I honestly doubt it will be rereleased in 2007. Is there a valid source to this, or is it just lazy speculation? --Evildevil 00:18, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

I added the sources. Taric25 21:58, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

Where did the dates from? If it is in fact released this Monday, that's great, but I've no real reason to believe this will be the case. Who put those there, and are they just making up dates? User:Justinholmes 19:28, 30 Nov. 2007

User:Masky added that Nintendo will release the game on the Virtual Console on December 7th, which is this Friday. I left a message on that user's talk page. User:65.113.74.34 was the one who changed it to this December 3rd, this Monday, however, that user has multiple warnings for vandalizing pages. Neither user provided a source. Taric25 18:28, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

It's now well passed this date, and there's nothing to be seen as far as Virtual Console... we shouldn't say it's availible on Virtual Console if it's not. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.165.54.26 (talk) 00:31, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

"Popularity" Renamed and Split.

I decided that "Popularity" needs to be changed because it didn't actually discuss the sales numbers of any other relevant information concerning the game. Instead "Virtual Console" and "Song Remixes" seemed more appropriate. Otherwise, readers (like myself) would misinterpret the section title to mean its effect on the marketplace during the game's release. —Preceding unsigned comment added by EliotAndrews (talk • contribs) 02:05, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Rumored sequel

[3] It probably doesn't warrant a mention yet, but it's something to keep an eye on. 153.42.168.174 (talk) 03:32, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

Final Fantasy character

User:Judgesurreal777, you asked, “what character from final fantasy were in the game?” First, this is a direct quote. If we quote people or organizations who are in error, we may point out the error, as long as we can cite a published, reliable source, but we should not change what they said. Second, Culex is a Final Fantasy-style character, and although he is not from any specific Final Fantasy game, reliable sources such as Nintendo Power points out that he is indeed from the Final Fantasy universe. (Specifically, he’s from a place called “Vanda”.) I hope that helps. ☺ Thank you! Taric25 (talk) 03:28, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

Well thanks for clearing that up! :) Judgesurreal777 (talk) 04:45, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

And as just an onlooker, thanks for your conduct in giving a prompt, exhaustive and in particular polite answer. --Kizor _{is in a constant state of flux} 13:45, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

You both are very welcome! Taric25 (talk) 18:17, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

"Another" mass-edit to be made

As I said in "Talk:World of Super Mario RPG: Legend of the Seven Stars". I'm gonna be coming out swingin'. Let's kick it. Keiji Dragon (talk) 08:21, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

OK I created the Super Mario RPG Original Sound Version article, and I merged "Concept & Design" (as "Game Development") and "Reception" to this article. I will be finishing it up soon.Keiji Dragon (talk) 10:40, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

These mass edits were done because the sections "Reception" and "Concept and Creation" in the "World of Super Mario RPG: Legend of the Seven Stars" article had no relevance to the article because those discuss the commercial and development aspects of the game which are inappropriate for an article that describes the scenario of a game, therefore, I merge them to to the main article Super Mario RPG. I also made a separate page for Super Mario RPG Original Sound Version because it had too much information that could have been used as a separate article instead. At the same time, there are needless amounts of useless references that I've removed because some of them are common knowledge, and some were "filler", if you will. If I recall correctly, I got approval for removing said references not too long ago. I hope that my edits were justified and acceptable. Keiji Dragon (talk) 08:34, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

References

What's the deal with references 25 and 26? Are they even real? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.43.253.181 (talk) 14:44, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

I'm on it. ;) Keiji Dragon (talk) 22:54, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

X-Play

Did anyone else want to smack Adam Sessler over the head when he called the game Super Mario RPG: Land of the Seven Stars?: LOL. Anyway, he did confirm Paper Mario is its spiritual sequel, so I added the reference. Taric25 (talk) 21:17, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

Japan VC Release Date

It's 24 June: http://www.nintendo.co.jp/wii/vc/vc_smr/index.html

I tried adding it to the article but botched the reference, so if someone could fix that, go for it. 86.133.162.109 (talk) 14:28, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

Merge

The characters are pretty much all set, so little, if anything, would actually be merged from that. It would mainly just be a redirect to remove unnecessary weight. If the glob of junk is removed from the music article, the rest should fit here nicely. TTN (talk) 20:55, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

Totally support, it would bolster this article, eliminate a permanent stub, and help us get this article to Featured Status. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 21:56, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

Translations

It should be mentioned in this article that for the translations of each versions, although the game originally wasn't released in PAL regions during the 90s, the game was exclusively in Japanese (for the Japanese version) and in English (for the NTSC version) at that time, but when there came to a PAL release in 2008, it should be mentioned that in non-English and non-Japanese speaking territories, the new languages including French, German, Italian, etc. was the major change. --PJ Pete December 21, 2008 1:53

Why? What you're proposing, if I understand correctly, is that we should mention that because it was released only in Japan and North America, that it was only released in the languages spoken by those two regions, and it was translated into the languages of Europe when it was released in Europe. If you want to put it in, I won't argue, but it just seems like an overly obvious thing to say. Larrythefunkyferret (talk) 06:07, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

Archive 1

Archive 2