Editing Talk:Bean

==Article?==
The article says that the yellow bean are Hee Beans, but I think it's called Tee Beans? What do you think?{{User:Knife/sig}} 15:38, 11 August 2007 (EDT)

Hee. Official name. {{User:Max2/sig}}

== Map ==

I think we should have a map for every area you can find beans underground. Mainly for [[Mario and Luigi Partners in Time|P.I.T.]] & [[Mario & Luigi: Bowser's Inside Story|B.I.S.]] Because they have maps (I dont think [[Mario and Luigi Superstar Saga|S.S.]] has maps) so we just add an X anywhere a bean is. {{User:Nihaho13/sig}} 18:00, 4 October 2009 (EDT)

Nope, leave that to walkthroughs.--{{User:Knife/sig}} 19:05, 4 October 2009 (EDT)

==The cartoon==

What about the beans that appeared in the cartoon?[[User:Mr bones]]

== Split ==

With the recent proposal in mind to split other RPG items, would anyone complain if I split the Beans into individual articles? {{User:Time Turner/sig}}
:The Superstar Saga and Dream Team ones as far as I know definitely need a split. Partners in Time can stay here. Not sure about the rest, though! {{User:Bazooka Mario/sig}} 15:21, 18 January 2016 (EST)
::If memory serves, Pit's Beans are referred to as just "Beans", so it'd make sense to leave them here. However, I'm willing to split the Bowser's Inside Story Beans: even if they share a sprite, they have different properties, are found in different locations, and have different names, so I'm all for giving them different articles. {{User:Time Turner/sig}}

== How to cover the ''Partners in Time'' info ==
{{SettledTPP}}
{{ProposalOutcome|cancelled}}
I know there was [[MarioWiki:Proposals/Archive 44#Split the Mario & Luigi and Super Mario RPG consumables into separate articles|already a proposal]] to do this a while back, and I wholly support this. However, it has come to my attention that there is some information on the ''Partners in Time'' beans that would potentially not belong in any one split article (such as the beanhole lists), so I think there should be a gentleperson's agreement on this: either we '''split ''M&L:PiT'' Bean into its own article''' or '''do nothing'''. I'm fine with either option.

All other necessary splitting from this page (as in all beans besides those from ''Partners in Time'') won't directly be affected by this proposal.

'''Proposer:''' {{User|Toadette the Achiever}}<br>
'''Deadline:''' October 9, 2019, 23:59 GMT<br>
'''Date withdrawn:''' September 26, 2019, 16:11 GMT

===Split===

===Don't split===
#{{User|Waluigi Time}} I don't think the Partners in Time beans are different enough to be split from the other Mario & Luigi ones.
#{{User|TheDarkStar}} - The PiT beans are beans you dig up. The only difference between the PiT beans and the regular beans is that one is used for currency (in a shop run by ''Fawful'', a ''Beanish'' person, implying that these ''are'' the same beans, just used in a different context), and one is used for stat boosts. Either way, this proposal really needs a rewrite.
#{{User|YoshiFlutterJump}} They're still beans, they're collected in the exact same way, and a clear intended reference.  They're just not different enough to warrant a split...unless we split all the other kinds of beans from other games, which could be a viable option if a tad unnecessary.  I think it's just better if the page remains as-is.

===Comments===
Shouldn't there be an option to do nothing, in line with most multi-option proposals? {{User:TheDarkStar/sig}} 15:32, September 25, 2019 (EDT)
:Yes, there should, especially since I don't even understand what the purpose of this proposal is. The other proposal already passed; those specific kinds of beans should have been split a long time ago. There is no reason whatsoever to split the ''PiT'' beans, since there are no specific kinds in that game and a simple change in purpose (buying badges instead of increasing stats) does not warrant a split. {{User:7feetunder/sig}} 15:34, September 25, 2019 (EDT)
::Option added. {{User:Toadette the Achiever/sig}} 16:57, September 25, 2019 (EDT)
:::I'm still confused as to what this proposal is trying to accomplish. I've already explained why Option 1 is a bad idea, and Option 2's wording is extremely vague. "Remove nearly all information barring M&L:PiT?" What information exactly? Are you just trying to say "split the different kinds of beans?" Because the old proposal already called for that. Also, what do the beanhole lists have to do with this? They're separate articles, they shouldn't affect this in any way. This proposal desperately needs a rewrite.

:::Here's what the options ''should'' be:
:::* Split the beans, including the generic ''PiT'' beans.
:::* Split the beans, but leave the generic ''PiT'' beans on this article.
:::* Leave the article as is (don't split anything).
:::{{User:7feetunder/sig}} 18:39, September 25, 2019 (EDT)
::::Like I said, it's already been decided that the beans in every game besides ''PiT'' get articles. That's a decision I'm not going to touch here. {{User:Toadette the Achiever/sig}} 21:47, September 25, 2019 (EDT)
:::::Then what's the point of the proposal? Is this just to decide whether or not the ''PiT'' beans are split? If so, why is the proposal worded in such an awkward, confusing way? If this only concerns the ''PiT'' beans, it should be "split" or "don't split." There's no reason to make this proposal seem more complicated than it actually is. {{User:7feetunder/sig}} 22:03, September 25, 2019 (EDT)
::::::I'm a bit confused here. It doesn't look like the beans are affected by that proposal at all, it was just discussed in the comments. --{{User:Waluigi Time/sig}} 12:05, September 26, 2019 (EDT)
If we split the ''Partners in Time'' beans, it would be consistent to split all the other variations (Woo Bean, Hoo Bean, Heart Bean, Stache Bean, etc.). I'm not really sure that would be necessary, but we'll see. Even then, the beans from ''PiT'' are even less distinct than the Woo Beans and Heart Beans. They are just called "beans", are yellow instead of green, and are used as currency. {{User:Obsessive Mario Fan/sig}} 18:05, September 25, 2019 (EDT)
:From what i get, they're generic beans? --{{User:FanOfYoshi/sig}} 04:38, September 26, 2019 (EDT)
::They're not generic beans, they're a clear reference to the SSS beans. (As a side note, you don't need to indent comments to the indentation of the string above the comment you're replying to.) {{User:TheDarkStar/sig}} 11:47, September 26, 2019 (EDT)

Alright, you bring up pretty good points. I'm just going to cancel this proposal and start over. {{User:Toadette the Achiever/sig}} 12:11, September 26, 2019 (EDT)

== How to split this article, take 2 ==

{{TPP}}
Since I heavily misunderstood the scope of [[MarioWiki:Proposals/Archive 44#Split the Mario & Luigi and Super Mario RPG consumables into separate articles|a related proposal on this matter]], let's give this another shot:

I know there was already a proposal to re-split certain similar items with different effects a while back, and I wholly support this. However, it has come to my attention that this page still hasn't been split out already, which honestly baffles me. It sounds like an easy mass-splitting of pages at first, but then there's some information on Beans that would potentially not belong in any one split article (such as the beanhole lists), so I think there should be a gentleperson's agreement on this: either we '''split all Beans including the ''M&L:PiT'' Bean into their own articles (option A)''', '''split all Beans except the ''M&L:PiT'' Bean into their own articles and keep the parent article (option B)''', '''split all Beans except the ''M&L:PiT'' Bean into their own articles and remove all info the parent article except ''M&L:PiT'' (option C)''', or '''do nothing (option D)'''.

All other necessary splitting from this page (as in all beans besides those from ''Partners in Time'') won't directly be affected by this proposal.

'''Proposer:''' {{User|Toadette the Achiever}}<br>
'''Deadline:''' October 11, 2019, 23:59 GMT

===Option A===
#{{User|Toadette the Achiever}} Second choice.

===Option B===
#{{User|Toadette the Achiever}} My preferred option.
#[[User:Doc von Schmeltwick|Doc von Schmeltwick]] ([[User talk:Doc von Schmeltwick|talk]]) Makes the most sense to me.
#{{User|Obsessive Mario Fan}} Second choice.

===Option C===
#{{User|Toadette the Achiever}} My other preferred option.

===Option D===
#{{User|Waluigi Time}} I really don't think it would be necessary to split all the beans. That's just going to create a bunch of very short and nearly identical articles. I also don't think it's necessary to make separate catch-all articles for beans in every Mario & Luigi game either. They're all from the same series and similar enough to each other, despite their varied uses. If we can have the healing mushrooms from the RPGs, the mushrooms that make you faster in Mario Kart, and the mushrooms that increase your dice roll in Mario Party [[Mushroom|all on one page]], the beans can share.
#{{User|TheDarkStar}} - Per Waluigi Time.
#{{User|MikhailMCraft}} - Per Waluigi Time. There's no need to create additional articles to maintain when one is fine enough.
#{{User|Obsessive Mario Fan}} Per Waluigi. We can keep all the info here.

===Comments===
Total list of split articles (not counting the ''M&L:PiT'' Bean):
*[[Bros. Bean]]
*[[Bros. Bean DX]]
*[[Chuckle Bean]]
*[[Defense Bean]]
*[[Defense Bean DX]]
*[[Flying EXP Bean S]]
*[[Flying EXP Bean M]]
*[[Flying EXP Bean L]]
*[[Flying EXP Bean DX]]
*[[Heart Bean]]
*[[Heart Bean DX]]
*[[Hee Bean]]
*[[Hoo Bean]]
*[[Melee EXP Bean S]]
*[[Melee EXP Bean M]]
*[[Melee EXP Bean L]]
*[[Melee EXP Bean DX]]
*[[Power Bean]]
*[[Power Bean DX]]
*[[Ranged EXP Bean S]]
*[[Ranged EXP Bean M]]
*[[Ranged EXP Bean L]]
*[[Ranged EXP Bean DX]]
*[[Speed Bean]]
*[[Speed Bean DX]]
*[[Spirit Bean]]
*[[Stache Bean]]
*[[Stache Bean DX]]
*[[Super EXP Bean S]]
*[[Super EXP Bean M]]
*[[Super EXP Bean L]]
*[[Super EXP Bean DX]]
*[[Woo Bean]]
*Any others I might have missed
—{{User:Toadette the Achiever/sig}} 12:44, September 27, 2019 (EDT)
:Do we really need to split all the variants of each bean? They'd do perfectly fine on the regular beans' articles. {{User:TheDarkStar/sig}} 12:47, September 27, 2019 (EDT)
::That goes directly against the spirit of [[MarioWiki:Proposals/Archive 44#Split the Mario & Luigi and Super Mario RPG consumables into separate articles|this proposal]]. If variants of other consumable items are split from their base counterparts, then why should this be an exception? {{User:Toadette the Achiever/sig}} 14:20, September 27, 2019 (EDT)
:::I was talking about the DX, S, M, and L variants. Why split something that acts almost exactly the same as the base? {{User:TheDarkStar/sig}} 14:22, September 27, 2019 (EDT)
::::It's still the exact same scenario, and are also collected after different battles. {{User:Toadette the Achiever/sig}} 14:26, September 27, 2019 (EDT)
:::::Then by this logic, why not create separate pages for, say, a Thwomp from Galaxy vs. Galaxy 2? That is, different pages for each Mario species in a separate game. They're from a different game, and you find them in different places, so why just this if it can be implemented on different pages per your logic? --[[User:MikhailMCraft|MikhailMCraft]] ([[User talk:MikhailMCraft|talk]]) 14:34, September 27, 2019 (EDT)
::::::That's not the same thing '''at all'''. This proposal is about splitting different types of Beans based on already-set precedents, not splitting two different appearances of the same thing. I ask that you use a different argument in this matter. {{User:Toadette the Achiever/sig}} 14:41, September 27, 2019 (EDT)
:::::::Let me rephrase that; read Waluigi Time's reason for selecting Option D. There's a page that lists all the mushrooms from Mario Party and Mario Kart, instead of having separate articles for each one. Why don't we split that too? I don't see the benefit of creating more articles to manage when we'd be perfectly fine having one big article. I see your reasoning, but I feel it's just unnecessary work, and I feel most people would agree. --[[User:MikhailMCraft|MikhailMCraft]] ([[User talk:MikhailMCraft|talk]]) 14:45, September 27, 2019 (EDT)

I concur that the "single letter difference" for the item type you forget to use in the first place seems seems excessive. My vote above cam before that was noted. [[User:Doc von Schmeltwick|Doc von Schmeltwick]] ([[User talk:Doc von Schmeltwick|talk]]) 15:05, September 27, 2019 (EDT)
@@ Line 21: / Line 21: @@
 == How to cover the ''Partners in Time'' info ==
-{{Settled TPP}}
+{{SettledTPP}}
-{{Proposal outcome|cancelled}}
+{{ProposalOutcome|cancelled}}
 I know there was [[MarioWiki:Proposals/Archive 44#Split the Mario & Luigi and Super Mario RPG consumables into separate articles|already a proposal]] to do this a while back, and I wholly support this. However, it has come to my attention that there is some information on the ''Partners in Time'' beans that would potentially not belong in any one split article (such as the beanhole lists), so I think there should be a gentleperson's agreement on this: either we '''split ''M&L:PiT'' Bean into its own article''' or '''do nothing'''. I'm fine with either option.
@@ Line 59: / Line 59: @@
 == How to split this article, take 2 ==
-{{Settled TPP}}
-{{Proposal outcome|canceled}}
+{{TPP}}
 Since I heavily misunderstood the scope of [[MarioWiki:Proposals/Archive 44#Split the Mario & Luigi and Super Mario RPG consumables into separate articles|a related proposal on this matter]], let's give this another shot:
-I know there was already a proposal to re-split certain similar items with different effects a while back, and I wholly support this. However, it has come to my attention that this page still hasn't been split out already, which honestly baffles me. It sounds like an easy mass-splitting of pages at first, but then there's some information on Beans that would potentially not belong in any one split article (such as the beanhole lists), so I think there should be a gentleperson's agreement on this: either we '''split all Beans including the ''M&L:PiT'' Bean into their own articles (option A)''', '''split all Beans except the ''M&L:PiT'' Bean into their own articles and keep the parent article with the ''M&L:PiT'' information (option B)''', '''split all Beans except the ''M&L:PiT'' Bean into their own articles and remove all info the parent article except ''M&L:PiT'' (option C)''', or '''do nothing (option D)'''.
+I know there was already a proposal to re-split certain similar items with different effects a while back, and I wholly support this. However, it has come to my attention that this page still hasn't been split out already, which honestly baffles me. It sounds like an easy mass-splitting of pages at first, but then there's some information on Beans that would potentially not belong in any one split article (such as the beanhole lists), so I think there should be a gentleperson's agreement on this: either we '''split all Beans including the ''M&L:PiT'' Bean into their own articles (option A)''', '''split all Beans except the ''M&L:PiT'' Bean into their own articles and keep the parent article (option B)''', '''split all Beans except the ''M&L:PiT'' Bean into their own articles and remove all info the parent article except ''M&L:PiT'' (option C)''', or '''do nothing (option D)'''.
 All other necessary splitting from this page (as in all beans besides those from ''Partners in Time'') won't directly be affected by this proposal.
@@ Line 75: / Line 75: @@
 ===Option B===
 #{{User|Toadette the Achiever}} My preferred option.
-#{{User|Doc von Schmeltwick}} Makes the most sense to me.
+#[[User:Doc von Schmeltwick|Doc von Schmeltwick]] ([[User talk:Doc von Schmeltwick|talk]]) Makes the most sense to me.
 #{{User|Obsessive Mario Fan}} Second choice.
@@ Line 86: / Line 86: @@
 #{{User|MikhailMCraft}} - Per Waluigi Time. There's no need to create additional articles to maintain when one is fine enough.
 #{{User|Obsessive Mario Fan}} Per Waluigi. We can keep all the info here.
-#{{User|Alex95}} - See comment.
-#{{User|TheFlameChomp}} Per all.
 ===Comments===
@@ Line 133: / Line 131: @@
 ::::::That's not the same thing '''at all'''. This proposal is about splitting different types of Beans based on already-set precedents, not splitting two different appearances of the same thing. I ask that you use a different argument in this matter. {{User:Toadette the Achiever/sig}} 14:41, September 27, 2019 (EDT)
 :::::::Let me rephrase that; read Waluigi Time's reason for selecting Option D. There's a page that lists all the mushrooms from Mario Party and Mario Kart, instead of having separate articles for each one. Why don't we split that too? I don't see the benefit of creating more articles to manage when we'd be perfectly fine having one big article. I see your reasoning, but I feel it's just unnecessary work, and I feel most people would agree. --[[User:MikhailMCraft|MikhailMCraft]] ([[User talk:MikhailMCraft|talk]]) 14:45, September 27, 2019 (EDT)
-::::::::I'd actually like to call Waluigi Time's vote into question as well (and TheDarkStar's "per" vote along with it). How on earth can you classify short, near-identical articles as "unacceptable", especially when they've been accepted by the community in the past? (See [[Double 1-Up Mushroom]], [[Super Cheese]], [[Ultra Cheese]], [[Max Cheese]], [[Miracle Cheese]], and [[Cheesy Drumstick]] as examples.) Additionally, a key part of the argument is flat-out invalid; [[Dash Mushroom]]s are separate, and the RPG Mushroom argument is helplessly vague (if this is about classifying Mushrooms between the ''Paper Mario'' and ''Mario & Luigi'' series, then it's definitely irrelevant). Granted, the ''Mario Kart'' series Mushrooms aren't separate yet; however, there has been some [[Talk:Golden Dash Mushroom|talk about whether to merge them into the existing Dash Mushroom article]] due to obscure yet quintessential similarities. {{User:Toadette the Achiever/sig}} 15:08, September 27, 2019 (EDT)
-::::::::::In some games the 'shrooms and syrups are at least different colors, and the naming system of the honeys and cheeses is pretty much the same. These are pretty much the same item, stored in a different menu, and act different regardless (can't be used in battle, for example). [[User:Doc von Schmeltwick|Doc von Schmeltwick]] ([[User talk:Doc von Schmeltwick|talk]]) 15:15, September 27, 2019 (EDT)
-:::::::::::You clearly didn't read the Mushroom page very in depth, otherwise you would've understood my vote. Yes, Dash Mushroom is split, (a split I disagree with, might I add) but that only talks about the item first appearing in Island Tour. The original Mushroom, which gave you an extra dice roll and appeared between Mario Party 2 and Mario Party 7, which I was referring to, is mentioned on the Mushroom page. Also, I don't see how my mention of the RPG Mushrooms is "helplessly vague". I was showing that the healing Mushrooms that appear in those games, despite a vastly different function, are on the same article as the Kart/Party Mushrooms. Not sure what was so confusing there. And frankly, I'm not entirely convinced those examples you listed should have their own articles either if their only unique aspect is how much of each stat they recover. --{{User:Waluigi Time/sig}} 18:05, September 27, 2019 (EDT)
 I concur that the "single letter difference" for the item type you forget to use in the first place seems seems excessive. My vote above cam before that was noted. [[User:Doc von Schmeltwick|Doc von Schmeltwick]] ([[User talk:Doc von Schmeltwick|talk]]) 15:05, September 27, 2019 (EDT)
-Option A: "Split all Beans into their own articles." This seems excessive, since a lot of them do the exact same thing, so it would just be repeated information, especially when it comes to the beans in ''Superstar Saga''. You might have a point for ''Bowser's Inside Story'', but it would just be a lot of "This bean increases X stat."<br>
-Option B: "Split all Beans, except the Partners in Time one, into their own articles." Then where would the ''Partners in Time'' one go? Will it remain here, in the midst of a glorified disambiguation? This makes less sense to me.<br>
-Option C: "Split all Beans, except the Partners in Time one, into their own articles. Remove any non-PiT beans and keep PiT beans here." Well, that solves the Option B problem, but not the Option A problem.<br>
-Option D: "Do nothing." So far, this makes the most sense to me. You could set a method to split the article into each ''type'' of bean based on the game ("Bean (Mario & Luigi: Superstar Saga), etc.), but I agree with Waluigi Time: Individual articles for each bean would just be excessive and repetitive.<br>
-{{User:Alex95/sig}} 15:54, September 27, 2019 (EDT)
-:Fair reasoning, but would you mind addressing why you believe my base counterargument (''"How on earth can you classify short, near-identical articles as "unacceptable", especially when they've been accepted by the community in the past?"'') is insufficient? {{User:Toadette the Achiever/sig}} 16:13, September 27, 2019 (EDT)
-::The examples you gave "(See [[Double 1-Up Mushroom]], [[Super Cheese]], [[Ultra Cheese]], [[Max Cheese]], [[Miracle Cheese]], and [[Cheesy Drumstick]] as examples.)" are all individual power-ups. Beans are not. They all either do the same thing or are derivatives of each other. They can be power-ups in ''Bowser's Inside Story'' and onward, but them alone in ''Superstar Saga'' are not power-ups (though they can be blended into one) and they aren't power-ups in any way in ''Partners in Time''. In the first two games, they are simply trade items, and all they could possibly change is the type of coffee blend you get back or what badge you can buy.
-::I'll repeat this, though: This may work better if they were split by game rather than name. I'll agree that there is some precedent for splitting, but I don't agree that this proposal is the way to handle it. {{User:Alex95/sig}} 16:35, September 27, 2019 (EDT)
-"All other necessary splitting from this page (as in all beans besides those from Partners in Time) won't directly be affected by this proposal." Why is that line there? It contradicts the whole proposal. {{User:7feetunder/sig}} 21:55, September 27, 2019 (EDT)
-== Regarding the above ==
-Why was this cancelled? I'd have supported it! I'd have supported Option B. And no, i'm not repeatedly questioning proposals. --{{User:FanOfYoshi/sig}} 02:05, September 30, 2019 (EDT)
-:Ask the proposer. --{{User:Lord Grammaticus/sig}} 02:11, September 30, 2019 (EDT)