Talk:Pyramid

(First topic)

I think some of these informations aren't necessary. The Mario Party Advance, Super Mario Bros. 3, Super Mario 64, Super Mario Galaxy are OK, but from the comics, cartoons, Mario Pinball Land, Pyramid Park and New Super Mario Bros., they're there but aren't important. So, I think those I said must be deleted. Bro Hammer (Talk • Cont) 13:27, 27 October 2011 (EDT)

Delete this page

This talk page proposal has already been settled. Please do not edit this section or its subsections. If you wish to discuss the article, please do so in a new section below the proposal.

delete 9-0
I don't see the particular benefit of pointing out "Hey, there's a pyramid in this game! And that game! And that game!" over and over. The pyramids are either background elements, in which case they definitely don't deserve articles, or they're structures that are present in levels, in which case the pyramid would be covered as a natural consequence of covering the levels, making this page wholly, truly redundant. There's no way around it: any attempts to expand this article would involve repeating information that's already and more obviously present in other articles. No, Mario's Picross is not enough to substantiate the entire article, as we don't make a point of lumping every generic jungle or lake into a single article, and personally, the Picross pyramid isn't particularly prominent. Any pyramid with an official name or substantial individualization already has its own article (see: Pyramid (Mario Party Advance)), or should have its own article (see: Pyramid Land). Maybe something can be said for giving the Picross pyramid its own article, but at the very least, the article in its current state has nothing to justify its place on the wiki.

For absolute clarification, this proposal will not prohibit any text from ever appearing on this page again. It can easily be made into a disambiguation page afterwards.

Proposer: Time Turner (talk)
Deadline: February 18, 2018, 23:59 GMT

Support

1. Time Turner (talk) Per proposal.
2. Waluigi Time (talk) Per proposal.
3. LuigiMaster123 (talk) Per proposal.
4. Yoshi the SSM (talk) Per proposal.
5. TheFlameChomp (talk) Per proposal.
6. Toadette the Achiever (talk) While I agree that this should be made a disambiguation page, I don't quite agree with Doc's oppose vote. Per all.
7. YoshiFlutterJump (talk) Per proposal.
8. 7feetunder (talk) Per proposal.
9. Camwood777 (talk) - Sort of support, sort of oppose? I'd say just make it a disambiguation page for the ones that matter.

Oppose

Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) It should not be deleted, but made a disambiguation page. And not that just plain tragic thing that happened with Desert (disambiguation). People aren't going to know the exact names of everything, so they'll search a generic term they can remember.

Comments

The proposal to delete Parrot passed, and it too was turned into a disambiguation page. This proposal will not forever restrict any kind of writing on this page. Hello, I'm Time Turner. 21:26, 4 February 2018 (EST)

Still ought be made clear. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 21:50, 4 February 2018 (EST)

Still a tad unsure about this, as some people seem to have a bad habit of removing all examples of things from disambiguation pages that aren't explicitly named the exact same thing as it, which for general subjects is bad... Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 22:01, 4 February 2018 (EST)

That has nothing to do with this page, though. Hello, I'm Time Turner. 22:01, 4 February 2018 (EST)

How does it not? This seems to be quite the similar situation. Only difference is we don't have a pyramids category, which could appear at any point.... Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 00:34, 6 February 2018 (EST)

The potential issues with the future disambiguation page has nothing to do with whether or not this page should be kept. Hello, I'm Time Turner. 12:02, 6 February 2018 (EST)

I fail to follow that line of thinking; from my perception, it has everything to do with the fate of this page. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 13:26, 6 February 2018 (EST)

As I've explained, everything in this page is either covered in another page or is too generic to be covered in the first place. That's why it should be deleted. Disambiguation pages have nothing to do with this. Hello, I'm Time Turner. 13:54, 6 February 2018 (EST)

Restore this page

This talk page proposal has already been settled. Please do not edit this section or its subsections. If you wish to discuss the article, please do so in a new section below the proposal.

Restore 8-0
In the time since the last proposal was passed, we have started giving more coverage to recurring distinct environmental objects that do not function as "standard" video game objects, but are primarily for world-building or stage design. To put it bluntly, we now have a page for volcano and similar subjects, and if it's fine for volcanoes to get a shared page, surely it's fine for pyramids to have one as well in my opinion.

Proposer: Doc von Schmeltwick (talk)
Deadline: May 16, 2025, 23:59 GMT Closed early on May 9, 2025, 23:59 GMT

Support through four sides

1. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) - Per
2. Tails777 (talk) Volcanoes sell me on this one, especially since there are many pyramids or pyramid themed areas.
3. Rykitu (talk) Per-imid all.
4. Camwoodstock (talk) If a magma and lava triangle gets a page, surely a sand and limestone triangle can get one. Per proposal.
5. EvieMaybe (talk) i'll need to brush up on my Art History
6. Sorbetti (talk) Per proposer.
7. 𓈖𓅂𓃭𓋴𓅱𓈖𓇋𓎢 (talk) Per proposal.
8. Nintendo101 (talk) Substantive and fun.

Comments on the wall of hieroglyphs

If you've seen me in talk pages, you know I generally support articles about generic subjects so long as they have some substantial purpose in the series. Even if there is no direct, intentional connection between individual appearances of a generic subject, in my view it's still useful and interesting to convey the history of that thing in the Mario series using one article. Camel and T-Rex do that.

That said, I think such an article should be sustained by appearances that can work separately from another subject, such as a level. That's why I find the comparison to volcano to be tricky. I feel like the sole reason that article exists is due to its (relatively occasional) role as a game mechanic rather than as a stage setpiece. Had it not been for its consistent depictions as an originator of lava balls in games like New Super Mario Bros. and Mario Kart, I don't think the volcano article should've existed solely to discuss volcanoes as traversable sections of a level; those are often easily coverable on that level's article. With that put forth, I have some questions:

1. Do non-specific pyramids ever play an individual role at all in the series? Is there any instance where they have more than just a background or aesthetic presence? Do they present a niche that other articles do not/cannot cover? You wouldn't elaborate on the mechanics behind Goombas and ? Blocks in the article for World 1-1, as those are functionally distinct parts of World 1-1; but the pyramid of Shifting Sand Land is such an integral part of that level's layout that it can primarily be covered in that level's page. Same with the Super Mario Bros. 3 pyramid (covered at World 2-Pyramid), the pyramid in Super Mario Pinball (Shifting Sands Stage), and the ones in the Mario Super Show (Pyramid Land).
2. Is the Mario Party Advance instance a pyramid called "Pyramid" (proper noun), or does it just go by a descriptor? If it's the former, I think that still justifies an individual article regardless if there's a general article for pyramids.

Failing either of the two points above, I think a list of specific, named pyramids throughout the series is better handled by a category. A problem I have with the invoked volcano article is that it kinda suffers from the "everything but the kitchen sink" syndrome. Coverage of generic, unidentified volcanos on that page is a-ok and I support it, but it feels redundant to also give separate sections to individually-defined areas and setpieces, such as Mt. Lava Lava, that already have their own articles. Those can just be linked to from the infobox or a "See also" section. The Goomba article doesn't go in-depth on derivatives of it. Having a Pyramid article entirely made up of sections that essentially serve to send you to other pages for more info (e.g. "In Super Mario Odyssey, Mario visits an Inverted Pyramid.") is kinda pointless. -- KOOPA CON CARNE 18:00, May 2, 2025 (EDT), edited 18:27, May 2, 2025 (EDT)

Generic pyramids are often interactible level structures. For instance, in SMB3's World 2-3, there are pyramids throughout made of semisolid platforms and later Brick Blocks. The pyramid in Shifting Sand Land gets a halfhearted section on that course's page, and it leaves out the several large pyramids seen and visited in games like SMB2 and the Galaxy games. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 18:07, May 2, 2025 (EDT)

Those pyramids you named are all parts of a level's layout. The ones made of individual game tiles in SMB3 are even handily mentioned at the page you linked to. I don't find that section on the Shifting Sand Land page to be half-hearted, and even if it was, that would have been entirely that page's failing.
Regardless, once again, I'm not opposed to a Pyramid article that has these specific instances covered (it's supposed to be complete Mario encyclopedia after all), but are there instances that work as distinct, self-contained, game- or plot-affecting entities? I know this may seem like I'm just trying to split hairs, but I truthfully find that aspect essential in justifying of a page on a generic concept. The above-mentioned T-Rex, camel, and volcano examples all have this common thread. -- KOOPA CON CARNE 18:24, May 2, 2025 (EDT)

Pyramids are narrative resources in games; sometimes they're used as decorations or levels, just as volcanoes are. I don't know what you're trying to specify here, but I think it's fine. Since they're a narrative resource, their role will always be constantly changing. Sorbetti (talk) 18:35, May 2, 2025 (EDT)

What's a "narrative resource"? -- KOOPA CON CARNE 18:40, May 2, 2025 (EDT)

A resource that is used in the narrative, depending on what the narrative needs, it will change its role or function, as is the case with pyramids. Sorbetti (talk) 19:09, May 2, 2025 (EDT)

I don't follow. What narrative do we typically speak of in a Mario game that pyramids act as a "resource" for? What relevance does your statement have to what I wrote above? -- KOOPA CON CARNE 19:33, May 2, 2025 (EDT)

Narration doesn't always go hand in hand with very complex stories. Mario goes to the desert. What do you personally think exists in a desert? MMMM cactus, sand, palm trees, and PYRAMIDS. In each game narrative, they want to use the pyramids in a different way. For example, there are times when the narrative of Mario going through the desert wants to have them as decorations for the environment, or other times, they use them as levels since they also represent the concept of deserts very well due to their relationship with Egyptian culture. So the pyramids will change roles depending on the narrative or, in this case, depending how the game requires it, but they are still pyramids. Sorbetti (talk) 20:04, May 2, 2025 (EDT)

Would it not be more useful to have information in one place available for someone who is interested in how they are used in the franchise to read? It'd be awkward to have a category for pyramids that includes locations that merely feature pyramids rather than are pyramids themselves. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 18:49, May 2, 2025 (EDT)

Not really any more useful than one article about every time a ship, a house, or a mountain is used in a level's geometry. Again, I'm not entirely opposed to the idea--I didn't vote in the proposal--I'm just trying to argue that such an article should be first and foremost predicated on an appearance that isn't highly particular to another subject. Other, more specific but still generic instances ought to be covered on that article on a secondary, "might as well" basis. The volcanos that shoot debris appear in multiple places across the series and the current volcano page exists first and foremost to document that; the pyramid in Shifting Sand Land appears only once where it is simply a part of the stage layout already described in another article. I don't suppose we'd have dedicated a page to President Koopa's Tyrannosaurus transformation had it not been for the already-existent T-Rex page (it's otherwise perfectly coverable on President Koopa's/Bowser's page), and the ambient frogs in Yoshi's Island are too minor ever to have had page if it weren't for the convenient Frog article discussing other, more important instances of frogs. I just view the pyramid situation in a similar fashion. -- KOOPA CON CARNE 19:33, May 2, 2025 (EDT), edited 19:41, May 2, 2025 (EDT)
Full disclosure: I'm the person who added the Koopa transformation and ambient frogs to their respective articles at different points in time, but so far nobody objected to the degree of removing them, so I sort of took it as a tacit endorsement. -- KOOPA CON CARNE 19:44, May 2, 2025 (EDT)

@Koopa con Carne have you checked out the volcano article recently? What do you think of it? I overlooked that you brought up volcano earlier because I was just skimming the document. So never mind that! - Nintendo101 (talk) 23:00, May 2, 2025 (EDT)

The Mario Party Advance one that this page is currently about would stay as a separate article, right? Hewer (talk · contributions · edit count) 04:46, May 3, 2025 (EDT)

I suppose? 🤷♀️ I personally don't care either way given it's treated as a generic pyramid in all languages, and we have character locations merged to their base articles. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 09:31, May 3, 2025 (EDT)