Template talk:Mario series characters

somewhat unorganized

Not that the template isn't great, but I feel like it's too big and somewhat unorganized. For example, having a minor -- though admittedly reoccurring -- characrer like Bob-Omb come first seems silly. Also, I think the template should distinguish between characters from the games and those from the ancilliary comics and TV shows. What does anybody else think? Kidicarus222 00:11, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

Okay, I had an idea what might the template look better, so I switched it up. It's now left-justified and -- in my opinion -- ordered a bit more sensibly. Open to suggestions/criticisms. I got rid of a few items, also, like Unagi, since I didn't think he was a major enough character to include in the template. Kidicarus222 02:21, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

Great job, but I've reorganized it as well to reduce overall size. Also, I believe Unagi and the others should be readded, as (in my opinion) if its notable enough to merit an article, it should be notable enough to be included in this template.--☆TBC☆ 03:09, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

I like it.Kidicarus222 19:41, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

Wha

What happened to this article? Why is it so small now, this is crap, I mean really, Mario series has lots of characters, why shouldn't it be long, I'm reverting it, if you think it should stay like this now, give a good reason.

I agree that there are a lot of characters, but I think the template was too big and awkward. I support the change, though I feel folks like Birdo and Waluigi and others that have been playable in lots of games deserve a place. As for the Wario and Donkey Kong characters, they're a little ancillary to be on the template. And if you include one group, you end up having to include the other, plus minor characters, plus the characters that only appear in TV show versions and comics and such. Way too much. Simplifying is better. Kidicarus222 22:43, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

I didn't find it awkward at all, but if you find Donkey Kong, Wario and Yoshi characters overkill, perhaps we could just remove them from the template, but otherwise keep it the same, I mean, Mario is a flagship with lots of characters, I still say it should be big, the reason it's called the Mario series character is because it should cover all the characters in the Mario series.Buso 00:28, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

Seconded!!! why do people ALWAYS want to make templates too organised that there not at all helpful what so ever!

Rob.John.Mackay (talk) 22:09, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

My Twopence

I feel that characters should be separated between: Main, Major, Minor, and Generic.

Main characters should include the ones on the list right now. I feel that Major characters include Birdo, Bowser Jr., Diddy Kong (even though he barely qualifies), Toadette, Toadsworth, Waluigi, Daisy, Petey Piranha, King Boo, Dr. Mario, Baby Luigi, Baby Mario, and E. Gadd.

Minor should include the one-or-two-time only characters like Cackletta, Bowletta, Fawful, Popple, Tatanga, Captain Syrup, Mouser, Wart, Smithy, Kamek, Kammy Koopa, Baby Bowser, Giga Bowser (debateable), and other characters like that.

Generic could include Goomba, Koopa Troopa, Shy Guy, Boo Diddley, Hammer Bros, Bob-omb, and Lakitu.

Not to make it as big and confusing as it was before, but we need more than just eight characters on there. And, I feel that Yoshi, Wario, and DK characters belong in Yoshi, Wario and DK templates.

I agree, I think it should go Main Characters, Supporting Characters, Minor Characters, and Generic Characters. Maybe even a Villains for all the boss monsters (Mouser, Tryclyde, Kammy Koopa, et al). But having only the eight main characters in the template is ridiculous. Nyssie 23:22, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

I've added back a few of the articles. If anyone objects, feel free to comment.--TBCTaLk?!? 21:00, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

Can we please stop adding minor characters, like the characters who only appear in sports games to fill out the cast and other minor, supporting characters? It makes this template massive, ugly, and much less useful. Do we REALLY need a link to Oogtar and FLUDD in each of three dozen articles? - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 01:04, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

Under Wikipedia guidelines, minor characters shouldn't ever have their own articles (see Wikipedia:Notability (fiction)). Also, the revised template that you reverted was actually much shorter compared to other navigation templates, such as Template:The Simpsons, Template:Family Guy, or Template:Final Fantasy series.--TBCTaLk?!? 01:51, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

Those also are huge and ugly. I'd rather use this as a precedent to change those than the other way around. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 04:05, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

If you do find it "ugly", a show/hide bar can always be added. --TBCTaLk?!? 00:28, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

Alright, I've added a show/hide bar that allows to you to reveal or remove any of the minor characters from the template. Any opinions?--TBCTaLk?!? 00:46, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

It doesn't work in some layouts/browsers/resolutions, and I still don't why we're linking to FLUDD and Oogtar in every single Mario character article. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 04:15, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

If it doesn't deserve to be linked, than does it merit an article at all? Note that, according to guidelines, articles should only be of major character, not of minor characters. Also, though some people may consider it "ugly", the larger template does make navigating through the masses of Mario character related articles easier, thus the benefits outweigh the negative aspects.--TBCTaLk?!? 04:51, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

And why did you revert my recent revision? Though it may not work in all computers, it will help people to navigate in computers that is does works in.--TBCTaLk?!? 04:52, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

If someone wants to sift through all the stubs, we do have Category:Mario characters. I reverted it because it screws up Whatlinkshere, looks awful, and links to a bunch of articles that don't need to be linked to. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 04:56, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

First of all, first-time readers of Wikipedia might not know what a Wikipedian category is or what it does. Also, as I've said before, if the the articles "don't need to be linked to" then do they merit an article at all? Please remember that according to the WP:FICT guideline only main characters should have articles, not minor ones.--TBCTaLk?!? 20:38, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

First-time readers of Wikipedia are just as likely to be put off by a mangled template

That aside, yeah, probably a bunch of these minor characters need to be cleaned up and merged. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 20:48, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

If you dislike large navigational templates, I suggest you discuss it at Wikipedia:Navigational templates instead of here (see WP:POINT).--TBCTaLk?!? 01:27, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

There was a great idea of having it seperated into sections, please just do that, i dont give a crap abour "wikipedia regulations" it makes it alot easier to browse if there are all together, who gives a crap about ugly, its wikipedia, its supose to be the source of almost all knolledge, just have them in the template. seperated so it doesnt look disorganised!!!!!! your sinserly Rob.John.Mackay (talk) 22:09, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

Okay, So We Don't Need Every Single Character, but We Can't Leave it at Just 8

Okay, so what I think is, we have:

Mario, Luigi, DK, Diddy, Dixie, Peach, Daisy, Toad, Toadette, Toadsworth, Yoshi, Birdo, Baby Mario, Baby Luigi, Wario, Waluigi, Petey Piranha, King Boo, Bowser, E. Gadd, Bowser Jr., and Dr. Mario. Everyone else hardly matters, but we need at least these in. There's a whole slew of Mario people in the Marioverse now. We need more than 8 here. Waluigi Freak 99 22:40, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Half of those characters have appeared in only one game, don't have their own articles, or never appeared in a Mario game ever. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 22:44, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

I've checked. Everyone of these has been in more than one game. Diddy was in Mario Kart: DD and Mario Golf: TT. Dixie was in Mario Baseball and will be in Mario Hoops 3 on 3. Petey Piranha and King Boo were in several sports titles. E. Gadd was in Luigi's Mansion, the Mario & Luigi games, Mario Party 6, and more. Even Dr. Mario was in several.

We don't need to put every single character who has made a cameo appearance in a large-cast crossover game in this template. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 22:55, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Note that it's technically not a cameo appearance since all of these characters are from the same series.--TBCTaLk?!? 01:14, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

True. Okay. But E. Gadd, Toadsworth, Waluigi, Daisy, Birdo, Toadette, Bowser Jr., Petey, King Boo certainly belong, right?

No. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 23:20, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Why not? These characters have made appearances in multiple Mario games. Also, if they aren't notable enough for the template, than how can they be notable enough to have their own article?--TBCTaLk?!? 01:18, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

Because none of them are so major as to need to be linked from every single Mario character article. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 01:26, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

This template does not and should not link to every single character that has appeared as a filler character in a party, sports, or racing game. The previous version of this template was horrendous, linking to everything in Category:Mario characters and others beyond. These proposals are nothing but an effort to make this template into a monstrous, useless lump of links to minor characters like E.Gadd (a supporting character in one game, then relegated to background roles), Diddy and Dixie (who have never appeared in anything but a minor unlockable character role in games with unusually large casts), Waluigi (created specifically to be a filler for such games), and goofy additions like Petey Piranha (wasn't he created specifically for Mario Sunshine?).

No, we're not doing that. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 01:33, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

Just because you don't like a character doesn't mean (s)he doesn't belong in the template. Waluigi Freak 99 20:03, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

No to Dr. Mario and the Baby Mario/Luigi characters. The baby characters are already intergrated in the Mario and Luigi articles, respectively, and Dr. Mario isa bout the video game. He should not be given his own article, either - he ought to be mentioned in the main Mario article. Hbdragon88 07:28, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

Template Changed

Okay, people are saying that we shouldn't add characters that were only in Mario sports and party games. Those games make up, like, 80% of the Mario games! We don't need that huge ol' list from before, but we need more than 8 characters. I made the list now holding the main 16 characters in Mario sports games, and they're well on their way to becoming major characters in major Mario platformers.

Characters I added: Daisy, Bowser Jr., Toadette, Waluigi, Birdo, Diddy Kong, King Boo, and Petey Piranha.

Waluigi Freak 99 13:36, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

And, once again, I'm removing every character who hasn't been the protangonist or antagonist of at least two games, for the reasons listed above. Just because you like an obscure character does not mean it needs to be linked from each of a dozen articles. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 01:59, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

As I've said before, according to WP:FICT, "obscure" characters shouldn't even have their own articles! Also, does taking up 2-3 more lines of space really make the template that ugly? Either way, you seem to be against large templates in general, which is an issue that should be discussed at Wikipedia:Navigational templates instead of here, or else you'll be violating WP:POINT.--TBCTaLk?!? 02:34, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

I've just noticed that, of the 5 users that have commented on this discussion, 4 (including me) agree that characters such as Waluigi and Birdo should be added back to the template. This means we already have a consensus on adding back a few characters. However, to be fair, I've started a straw poll:--TBCTaLk?!? 02:45, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

Polls are evil, and I don't participate in random straw polls as a matter of course. We need not to be expanding every single template with every single character in a category. By limiting it to characters who have been the protagonist or antagonist of two games, we don't get everyone's favorite minor villain (people have suggested Mouser and Wart and E. Gadd and all sorts of silly stuff) keeps this template from ballooning as every passing user adds just one more character.

Also, per WP:FICT, most of these character articles need to be merged. No sense encouraging their continued existence. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 02:53, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

Though it is true that Wikipedia is not an experiment in democracy, straw polls are a great way of finding consensus in difficult cases, such as this one which has gone on for around a month. Also, the template that I've been trying to advocate doesn't include Mouser, Wart, or any other antagonist as they are already covered in Template:Mario enemies. As I've noted above, does 2 to 3 more lines really make that much of a difference?--TBCTaLk?!? 06:51, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

It won't be two or three lines. If the only standard is "some passing user thinks the character is important," then we end up with more and more and more and more. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 17:13, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

Stop assuming that people only want characters in the template because they like them. I like Geno but I'm not going to argue he should be in the template (but I would argue that characters like Bowser Jr, Waluigi, & Daisy should be). SNS 17:28, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

Can you make a reasonable standard that includes Bowser Jr. that doesn't include silliness like Para-goombas and shyguys and Dirk Drainhead? Or are you just making a gut call on what you think is important (which is essentially indistinguishable from "I'm adding foo because I like him!")?- A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 18:26, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

The way I see it is if a character appears in many Mario games & isn't just a species of enemy, then they should be included in this template. SNS 22:17, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

How many is "many"? - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 01:08, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

Straw Poll

Revert back to this version

• Support as per my previous arguments.--TBCTaLk?!? 02:45, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

I back reversing, all the way Rob.John.Mackay (talk) 22:13, 26 December 2007 (UTC) When i was a new wikipedia user, i loved the "full" templates, as long as they were organised, they could keep me browsing and procastinating for hours! and thats the point of wikipedia,

Comment

From the top of the page . . .

This article is part of WikiProject Computer and video games, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to video games on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.

Last I checked, 8 people isn't comprehensive and detailed.

My point is, you're saying characters like Daisy and Waluigi don't belong because they only appear in spin-offs. Spin-offs make up, like, at least HALF of the Marioverse. They belong. ;)

Waluigi Freak 99 23:01, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

Oh, and by the way, I vote neither on the straw poll. Mallow, Kid, and FLUDD hardly belong.

Mario, Luigi, Peach, Daisy, DK, Diddy, Dixie, Toad, Toadette, Toadsworth, Yoshi, Birdo, Wario, Waluigi, Petey Piranha, King Boo, E. Gadd, Bowser, Bowser Jr., Goomba, Bob-omb, Lakitu, Koopa, Boo, Dry Bones, Shy Guy, Pianta, Hammer Bros., Magikoopa, Noki, Wiggler, and Monty Mole belong. Waluigi Freak 99 23:20, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

Monty Mole (a minor enemy that appears in three games)? Pianta (which appears in one game and the background of a couple others)? A dozen characters with no dialogue whatsoever? This is just going back to the huge, unwieldy, useless template we had before, the one WP:CVG unanimously agreed was way too big. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 01:08, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

I added Monty Mole because he was playable in Mario Superstar Baseball. If you want him gone, then fine. But Waluigi, Daisy, Birdo, etc. have had dialogue. You're just using the inclusion of Monty Mole as an excuse to get rid of the other ones. Waluigi Freak 99 14:35, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

No, I'm using the fact that none of them are appropriate for this template as they're minor supporting characters. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 01:09, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

Here's what I think. To become a playable character in the Mario universe, the character must have some connection to Mario. So for a start, Diddy Kong and Dixie Kong should be taken off since they are part of the DK Worlds and not the Mario. No-one seems to like them and Diddy should be replaced by DK Jr. Basically the more the better. The list of characters (so far) that should be made playable are as follows: Mario, Luigi, Peach, Daisy, Yoshi, Birdo, Baby Mario, Baby Luigi, Toadsworth, Toad, Toadette, DK, DK Jr., Bowser, Bowser Jr., Wario, Waluigi, Koopa Troopa, Paratroopa, Goomba, Paragoomba, Shy Guy, Fly Guy, Magikoopa, Dry Bones, Monty Mole, Hammer Bro., Fire Bro., Boomerang Bro., Boo, King Boo and the one and only Petey Piranha. For future games, Big Bob-omb and Goomboss should be made as playables. I have also not included the piantas and nokis, simply because there are too many varitions and different colours of them. So these too should be taken off. Nintendo slowly but effectively continue to add more and more playable characters into the Mario games which keeps on getting better and better. (Petey Piranha freak).

Split into four templates

In order to keep each template small, Mario characters are now divided among three templates, Template:Cartoon and comic Mario characters, Template:Mario enemies, Template:Donkey Kong characters and this template. Any comments?--TBCTaLk?!? 02:22, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

I don't like it. I really don't. Why are the other templates mentioned in this one? I think that that should not be. Waluigi Freak 99 14:35, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

Why not? Please give an explanation before reverting next time.--TBCTaLk?!? 18:50, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

Why not link to lists? Linking to templates from articles is bad style, but linking to a hypothetical List of Mario characters or whatnot would be fine. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 20:10, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

No list on cartoon/comic or donkey kong characters currently exist, though I'm willing to create them.--TBCTaLk?!? 20:46, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

Go right ahead. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 20:52, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

Donkey Kong

Why are we linking to a list of Donkey Kong characters? For the most part, they are completely separate from the Mario universe. Only DK himself is directly related to Mario (and in only one game), and if we used that reasoning then we'd have to link to Yoshi and WArio characters as well. The link isn't very strong, and thus I think it ought to be removed. Hbdragon88 05:11, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

Characters used in the template

I know this has been discussed before, but there really should be more characters. Have you ever seen the template for The Simpsons characters? That one has approximately links to approximately 70 characters articles, including a character named Birch Barlow (only appearing in the episode Sideshow Bob Roberts), and no one has really brought that up. If you won't add more charcters like Daisy, Toadette, Waluigi, etc, then at least add these two:

• Bowser Jr.-He had a major antagonist role in both Super Mario Sunshine and New Super Mario Bros.
• Birdo-She was a boss almost in every stage in Super Mario Bros. 2 and she's battled against as a boss in Super Mario RPG and Mario & Luigi: Superstar Saga. 16:49, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

Waluigi, Daisy, etc

It makes no sense that characters like Waluigi and Daisy aren't on this, sure there fillers, but there like the main ones, ever since Waluigi's Debut/Daisy's reappearance, they've been playable in every Mario spin-off/party game to date (heck, they were part of the 8 character cast in Mario Strikers) and considering they have the Mario series character template on there wikipedias (well, Waluigi does, Daisy doesn't have any template) it just doesn't make sense to me.

To be fair, the template was originally used for the "Main 8" (Mario, Luigi, Peach, Toad, Bowser, Yoshi, Wario, DK). While I'd like Waluigi and Daisy to be on the template, I can forsee a big clash involving the whole "But they're FILLERS" argument. I see you've already put Daisy and Waluigi on the template; I'll leave this for now. We'll see how it goes. Also, please in the future sign your comments with ~~~~. Thanks. Hardcore gamer 48 04:59, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

Hm... nobody seems to have removed either Princess Daisy or Waluigi, which is a good sign. Perhaps, if people are willing, more articles could be added (only the main 8's partners; e.g. Birdo for Yoshi, Toadette for Toad (Nintendo), etc.). I won't add them to the template yet, but I will leave it up in the air. If I don't hear a response in about five days, I'll add them for a "trial run". ^_^ Hardcore gamer 48 13:28, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

We have Daisy but not Waluigi.

Now I'm not saying I like either of those characters (because I really don't), though I don't see the knowledge in adding Daisy but not Waluigi. If I had an opinion it would be to only add the big eight. --Bentendo24 18:44, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

Order of the characters.

The order of the characters seems out of place. I think we should order them from when they first appeared, so it would be like this -

Mario-Donkey Kong-Luigi-Peach-Bowser-Toad-Yoshi-Wario

Anyone else agree? --Bentendo24 18:47, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

Shouldn't it be more like:

Donkey Kong - Mario - Luigi - Bowser - Princess Peach - Yoshi - Wario

Donkey Kong appeared in the arcade game before Mario, in the cutscene; Bowser is also encountered before Princess Toadstool. Toad is now redirect. -- Lord Crayak

Toad?

Why is Toad not in the article? He's been a prominent Mario character since the beginning... Nyssie 22:55, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

It's not the fact that he is not prominent. It's the fact that he doesn't warrent his own article for various reasons at this time. Mr. C.C. 08:32, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

Solving The Problem

There have been many debates and well, I even put Waluigi and Daisy back on the template. But they have been since removed. After thinking about and seeing their respective sections in list of Mario series characters, I thought that it wasn't good to have them on there. I came to the conclusion that if they don't have their own article, than they shouldn't be added to the template. Mr. C.C. 08:31, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

I also think this is the best option. If they have a nice article, they deserve a link. Alexanderpas (talk) 13:10, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Waluigi's addition

Not another beg-and-plead. I've got backup. As one person said, they have to be the main protagonist or antagonist of at least two games. Waluigi was the main antagonist of both Mario Party 3 and Dance Dance Revolution: Mario Mix. Therefore, there is no reason Waluigi should not be included. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.218.154.92 (talk) 23:03, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

I think any character that deserves their own (non-stub) article deserves to be in the list!

This means Waluigi isn't added, but Birdo is Alexanderpas (talk) 13:13, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Donkey Kong: Good or Bad?

Just so we can stop changing it every few months. Donkey Kong is an antagonist in Donkey Kong and Mario vs Donkey Kong games. He is a protagonist in what? Sports and Party games? _Blake ^{(Talk·Edits)} 13:44, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

Oh, nevermind. You were moving Diddy Kong. My bad. I just woke up. _Blake ^{(Talk·Edits)} 13:45, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

Diddy Kong

Since its removal from the template obviously is going to require discussion, I'll discuss. Since Diddy Kong's association with the series is only as a guest by proxy of DK, he is a DK character who appears in the Mario series. Is Pac-Man a Mario character because he appears in the Mario Kart arcade games? - The New Age Retro Hippie used Ruler! Now, he can figure out the length of things easily. 19:30, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

I agree. He appears only in the sports and party games. That doesn't make him a Mario character any more then the Square Enix characters appearing in Mario Sports Mix. _Blake ^{(Talk·Edits)} 19:39, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

Prota-/Antagonist, Supporting, Enemies

• Protagonists have starred (top billing) in a game
• Antagonists have been the clear, primary villain in a game
• Supporting are other characters that have a generally positive role
• Enemies are other characters that have a generally negative role.

Salvidrim! 07:32, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

In this edit moving Birdo back to "Supporting" and Toad back to "Protagonist", Androids101 has indicated that he would post here to justify his revert. I've no wish to edit war and would rather follow WP:BRD, thus I'll be waiting for his input before moving Birdo back to "Enemies" and Toad to "Supporting" despite everything. Salvidrim! 07:44, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

Very good idea. There has apparently been a slight misunderstanding; I was referring to the I.P. who was changing stuff around without consensus. But anyway, just some problems:

• Toad has never starred or has been the primary protagonist and there was never a game named after him; besides, it even explicitly states in the article that his roles have been increasingly overtaken by Toadsworth, and thus I believe that he should be supproting? This article is especially confusing as it doesn't even state if it's focus is on the character or the species.

• I suppose you could say Toad starred in Wario's Wood. And it refers to both character and species, but, like Yoshi, the two sort of overlap each other. Toad the species and Toad the character shouldn't be an issue for Wikipedia, but rather the more specific MarioWikis or whatever. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.175.229.40 (talk) 13:01, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

• Following up on this point of view, Rosalina has, apart from Mario, the primary character and thus should be a protagonist (lets face it, no character apart from Mario receives "top billing", his name appears in every single game). Gamasutra and GameSetWatch have even called Super Mario Galaxy a game focused on Rosalina with her backstory told etc. etc (and much more is to be found in the ref section of the page). So, I guess she should be re-classified as a protagonist, maybe? I mean, come on, even Toad and Yoshi have got it, and they're never even the second most important character...
• There's the issue of Waluigi either being supporting or antagonist. I do not have Mario Party 3, so correct me if I'm wrong: but I think he's only one of the list of playable characters here. That only leaves DDRMM, but is that notable enough, being one of the spin-offs that is technically also in the DDR series?

It is the best guideline Thank you for reading, Androids101 | Visit me! | talk | contribs 07:57, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

Oh yeah, and also Birdo is still mainly an enemy; she has not appeared in any main game apart from the spin-offs.Androids101 | Visit me! | talk | contribs 07:59, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

Agreed on Toad as Supporting, Birdo as Enemy, Waluigi as antagonist.

However Rosalina was not the primary playable character (protagonist) in a game. The Super Mario Galaxy series, like every other game in the Super Mario (series), stars Mario as the protagonist. I'm not sure I understand how this can even be a point of question... :/ Salvidrim! 08:08, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

Oh, and it's completely my mistake on the Boo part. Salvidrim! 08:32, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

Toad is as much as a protagonist as Peach and Yoshi are to the series. Toad has starred as a main playable character in SMB2 and NSMB Wii and starred in his own game Wario's Woods as well. Additionally, Toad's classification is that of a protagonist as he's one of the five protagonists in the series (the other four are Mario, Luigi, Peach, and sometimes Yoshi). He plays supporting roles in some games; however, so does Peach and Yoshi as well. Toad is definitely a Mario series protagonist as he has played heroic roles throughout the series. Supporting characters are generally those who do not participate in battle or play active roles associating with the heroic group in various media.

If Toad is classified as a supporting character, then both Peach and Yoshi should also be moved due to their roles. Also about Toadsworth, the lead of Toad's article is rather misleading with that portion. It was suitable at the time of the Gamecube game era where Toadsworth somewhat replaced Toad in some games as Peach's guardian. However, recently Toad has gained back the roles he lost to Toadsworth while the latter character has been fading out of the series slowly. User:GS Sentret 00:51, 6 May 2012

I'm not completely convinced yet. Yoshi was the unambiguous protagonist of Yoshi's Story (and others), Peach was the unambiguous protagonist of Super Princess Peach. Toad was part of an ensemble cast in both SMB2 & NSMB2 (and other Kart/Party games), not the clear, unambiguous primary protagonist as the other two were. As for Wario's Woods... well, Toad was a more of a tool than an actual character (a characterization of what is commonly a "cursor" in tile-matching puzzle games). Can a puzzle game with no plot truly have a "protagonist"? Though it's just what I personally believe; if you all agree on protagonist status for Toad solely based on him being the controlled character in Wario's Woods, then by all means I won't object to the consensus. :) Salvidrim! 05:06, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

Not to begin a fight or anything (I apologize if it sounds like it); however, saying that Toad is simply a cursor in Wario's Woods can easily apply to seeing Yoshi or Peach or even Mario sound like cursors/tools in their own games (which they are as they represent the player). Wario's Woods is not a simple puzzle game with Toad just walking about. The player directly manipulates Toad as Wario's Woods serves as both a puzzle and adventure game (not any generic puzzle game as it plays very differently). Additionally, his abilities are expressed while the player controls him (strength, wall running, etc) as the players don't control the falling objects, but rather Toad himself. The story of the game was that Toad was named as the "Mushroom Kingdom Hero" (see the official instruction booklet as well) who had went out of his way to stop Wario from taking over the Forest that will gain him access to taking over the Mushroom Kingdom. Toad's work allowed him to defeat Wario's minions (bosses), his plans of taking over the Kingdom and save the home of the fairies (known as sprites), and ending the nightmare/curse Wario had put over the woodland creatures he controlled (definitely a protagonist role and not a mere tool).

Also being simply "one of the protagonists" in games like SMB2, NSMB Wii, etc doesn't make him less likely to being a protagonist in the series as he directly serves as a hero either way. Mario comics, movies, and animations have also all featured Toad as one of the primary protagonists as well. This is why I feel that Toad is one of the protagonists and deserves it as much as Peach and Yoshi. If we are going by true protagonists, we may as well have Mario as the only protagonist as all other characters (including Luigi) have played supporting roles in the games in comparison to Mario. User:GS Sentret 01:29, 6 May 2012

Well, I think we can all agree that Mario is "the One Protagonist to rule them all", that's a given. The other characters will always be "supporting" in contrast with the "archprotagonist", Mario. I hadn't consulted the booklet for Wario's Woods (which is a terrible oversight, as back in that era, the entire plot of most games was explained there, and there only), but I'll go with what you say; indeed, it appears Toad was the "unambiguous protagonist" of Wario's Woods. As for the ensemble casts, it depends on which angle you approach it from -- you could say none of the characters is the "unambiguous protagonist", thus none have the status of "protagonist", or you could say that they all are equally protagonists.

In any case, you've made a strong point, and although I may not be as convinced as you are, I do think there is solid reasoning to support the assertion that Toad is a "protagonist" in this series. Salvidrim! 05:54, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

Oh, and don't apologize for voicing your opinion -- as far as I can see, this is exactly how a "dispute" should be properly handled, through polite, intelligent discussion. :) Salvidrim! 05:57, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply and I do hope it clears things up a bit in regards to Toad. It is true that there are two ways to determine if ensemble casts do contain all main characters as protagonists or not. Regardless, I do think Toad deserves to keep the protagonist status from his long time history with the Mario series, hero like status in most Mario media, and as well as a protagonist in Wario's Woods and in consideration of games containing ensemble casts (SMB2 and NSMB Wii probably being the best ones considering Toad could be chosen as a hero in those).

With that being said, is Toad's status still up for debate or would it be possible to move him back to the protagonists section of the template as of now? Just curious. :) User:GS Sentret 03:12, 6 May 2012

As far as I am concerned I am not opposing the outcome, but Androids101 voiced similar concerns earlier in this section, so it might be safer to see if he's still actively opposed the change to avoid having to rediscuss in the future. :) Salvidrim! 07:19, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

Okay, I see no problem with that. He may not be a protagonist nowadays but considering his past roles that is true. Consensus has been reached anyway but still thanks for waiting for me. =) Androids101 | Visit me! | talk | contribs 09:02, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

If that is the case, then I will revert Toad to being back to the protagonists section. If any more concerns are needed, it can be placed here. :) User:GS Sentret 18:47, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

I forgot to leave a note, but I did it earlier today after reading Androids101's comment. :) Salvidrim! 22:59, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

• What of Wario? He's more antihero than true villain, and has starred as the protagonist in many of his own games, including Wario Land: Super Mario Land 3, which I guess is technically the Mario series. He's bad, but he's still a "protagonist". Maybe we should change the subsections to "Heroes" and "Villains" rather than "Protagonists" and "Antagonists", since many characters (including Mario in Donkey Kong Jr.) have been both protagonists or antagonists at some point. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.175.229.40 (talk) 12:55, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

I think while Wario was the protagonist of a game or two, he has still been an overall antagonist in the scope of the Mario series. Similarly, Yoshi isn't really a protagonist except for in his own series of games. In most "Mario" games, he is a supporting character and is just used as a vehicle. _Blake ^{(Talk·Edits)} 15:03, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

I'm reluctant to re-open the discussion on this particular issue since the (mostly agreed upon) merge to Template:Mario (franchise) (see its talk) will solve all of these concerns. :) Salvidrim! 15:05, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

Character ordering

Should we place characters based on their importance, or by alphabetical order (with the exception of Mario and Luigi)? For each it is different right now:

• Waluigi is placed before Wario. This is alphabetical but not by order of importance.
• Donkey Kong is placed before Diddy Kong. This is now by order of importance but not alphabetically.
• Koopalings after Fawful. Alphabetical but not by order of importance.
• Toad after the Kongs. Neither alphabetically nor by order of importance...

So, which format should be used? Androids101 | Visit me! | talk | contribs 08:08, 5 May 2012 (UTC)

Alphabetical. Salvidrim! 05:54, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

Okay, what is going on here?

Why does this template even exist if it's just going to be so consistently garbled? I'm not quite understanding why Fawful, Diddy Kong, or Rosalina are on the list when others like Daisy, Toadette, or Petey Piranha, characters that have played some sort of prominence for a while now, aren't. And I don't get why there's an enemies section with only three enemies. If we're going that route, you'd have to include Cheep-Cheep, Boo, Blooper, Thwomp, etc. But they all have their own page in Recurring enemies in the Mario series (not sure why Lakitu has a separate page to begin with). In conclusion, this template should either have all the characters of the Mario universe or just the major, major ones (top 8-- Mario, Luigi, Peach, Toad, Yoshi, Bowser, Donkey Kong, Wario). None of this "all main characters plus Rosalina." Nyssie (talk) 15:56, 7 May 2012 (UTC)

• This is a NavBox - to ease navigation between articles. It links to all relevant articles. Not all characters or enemies have articles, but those that do are in this template. Salvidrim! 16:24, 7 May 2012 (UTC)
  • Because these are only for the characters with their own pages. And no, those characters don't have their "own pages" only sub-sections. Characters with their own pages must pass WP:N and WP:GNG. Androids101 | Visit me! | talk | contribs 09:17, 8 May 2012 (UTC)