View source for Template talk:Character infobox

==(First topic)==
We should start using this. {{User:Plumber/sig}}

It depends if people want to use it.{{User:Knife/sig}} 16:47, 23 June 2007 (EDT)

<nowiki>*embarrased*</nowiki> I completely forgot about this. I'll recruit some people in the chat soon. {{User:Wayoshi/sig}} 15:28, 20 July 2007 (EDT)
:This should only be used on major characters. I don't think characters like the Paper Mario series partners or the Smash Bros. characters deserve the infobox. - {{User:Cobold/sig}} 14:19, 22 July 2007 (EDT)

== Define Appearances ==
Do cameos or mentions count as an appearance? For example, the PM partners had cameo appearances on Catch Cards, but does that mean we add that as their latest appearance?{{User:Knife/sig}} 15:58, 27 July 2007 (EDT)

I don't think so. {{User:Plumber/Pignature}} 15:59, 27 July 2007 (EDT)
:Someone like Geno, who only had two appearances, I could see you doing that.  Not so much for a major character, though. {{User:Stumpers/sig}} 21:27, 13 December 2007 (EST)

== Minor? Major? What? ==
Should we remove the Importance area of the template, since it seems a bit opinionated? For example, Waluigi is one of the most recurring characters in the Marioverse, yet he isn't one bit important to Mario main adventures. And people like Parakarry (who unfortunately isn't as recurring) is a pretty important character (Mario couldn't clear the rest of the game without his infamous carry ability). So should we perhaps remove the section, to be fair?{{User:Knife/sig}} 14:25, 2 August 2007 (EDT)
:I think so. {{User:Xzelion/Signature}}

== Origin ==

I can't seem to get origin to appear on the articles... check out [[Village Leader]] and [[MC Ballyhoo]] for examples of my problem.  {{User:Stumpers/sig}} 10:31, 15 August 2007 (EDT)
:[[Goombario]] also uses it. It seems to be the place where the character can be found. {{User:A gossip-loving Toad/sig}}  03:54, 22 June 2016 (EDT)

== Affiliation ==

What does this mean? Characters the character is allied with (i.e. Bowser with the Koopa Troop, Mario with Luigi) or characters they're ''affiliated'' with, as in, you think Waluigi, you instantly think Luigi and Wario. -- [[User: Sir Grodus|Sir Grodus]]

== Template ==

Should we use these template on generic enemies such as blooper?{{User:Fg/sig}}
:It's about characters, not species. It doesn't fit, species don't have a full name and don't have a, well, species. - {{User:Cobold/sig}} 14:25, 25 August 2007 (EDT)

I'm not going to start a flame war but they are a species like for instance goomba is referred to fungus and blooper is referred to squid.{{User:Fg/sig}}
:That are comparisons to the [[Real World]], not the species' "species". - {{User:Cobold/sig}} 14:28, 25 August 2007 (EDT)

I think a species infobox would be a good idea though. I would create it but I have no technical expertise.{{User:SpikeKnifeNeedleSword/sig}} 14:29, 25 August 2007 (EDT)

I agree with Knife.{{User:fg/sig}}
:That would be neat, but I've got my locations infobox, so I can't complain. (ty again, Wayoshi!) {{User:Stumpers/sig}} 21:28, 13 December 2007 (EST)

== Roles? ==

Can someone add a new section in this infobox? Mario and Luigi got over way to many heroric roles in this Universe.([[User:Super F22 Pilot|Super F22 Pilot]] 19:12, 18 December 2007 (EST))

== Other Series Characters ==

I think we need to make a decision on how we're going to list characters from other series' first appearances. Some give their official first appearance, while others list both that and their first ''Mario'' appearance.

I saw a nice-looking setup on the [[Entei]] article, and I think we should use that. Anybody else? {{User|Dodoman}}

== Policy ==

Since this page contains a policy/guideline for template usage (esp. the image parameter), should the page at least be categorized as [[:Category:Writing guidelines]] or [[:Category:Policies]]? Just a thought.

{{User:YoshiKong/sig}} 04:02, 21 December 2012 (EST)
:Apparently the syntax of the image parameter is not consistent on the wiki -- {{tem|location infobox}} only wants the file name and specifies a default width (250px) that can be overriden. --{{User:A gossip-loving Toad/sig}} 00:28, 25 December 2016 (EST)

== New parameter ==

It could be interesting to add a parameter for alternative names and/or alteregos. On the top of my head, there's [[Mario]]/Jumpman/Mr. Video/Ossan/[[Dr. Mario]]/Paper Mario, [[Luigi]]/[[Dr. Luigi]]/[[Mr. L]], [[Peach]]/Toadstool/Nurse Peach, [[Wario]]/[[Wario-Man]], [[Zelda]]/[[Sheik]], [[Link]]/[[Young Link]]/[[Toon Link]], [[Bowser]]/King Koopa, [[Bowser Jr.]]/[[Shadow Mario]], not to mention all the babies. And maybe that whole Donkey Kong/Cranky Kong thing if that's still canon.

Maybe some of these only belong in the introduction paragraph ("previously known as..." is fine and it wouldn't be very interesting to add it to the infobox). But when alteregos have their own articles and own biographies, it might be interesting to have a place to link them together. I'm thinking of the Paper versions, the babies, Mr. L, etc.

{{User:Banon/sig}} 17:34, 28 December 2015 (EST)

== Gender ==

I Checked many other NIWA Wikis and they had the Gender Stat on them,why this Wiki doesn't use it as well? --{{User:Red Yoshi 1.5 & Squid Sisters/sig}}
:It could be initial oversight, but I'm not sure if we need to go through the trouble of adding in another detail. On the other hand, this wiki does not even have categories on gender either. I think we can benefit from an additional parameter, but it seems kind of trivial overall. {{User:Bazooka Mario/sig}} 17:03, 4 April 2016 (EDT)

== "Full name" ==
This parameter is painfully overused. The '''''vast''''' majority of characters in this franchise have no need for it, yet I constantly see it uselessly slapped on character infoboxes despite serving absolutely no purpose. What's the use of informing the reader that [[Toad]]'s full name is "Toad", [[Wario]]'s full name is "Wario", [[Donkey Kong]]'s full name is "Donkey Kong", etc.? It's redundant and pointless. Honestly, do we really need this parameter? Most Mario characters either do not have distinct full names, or their full name is already the title of the article (e.g. [[Professor Elvin Gadd]]). This parameter either needs to go or get a massive cleanup. {{User:7feetunder/sig}} 20:10, 19 August 2018 (EDT)
:Is this an optional parameter? If it isn't, then change it to that. It's completely redundant as we have a big title of the article page, the name being in bold in the first sentence, ''and'' there's the name in the infobox header as well as (optionally) an caption that states the character's name. {{User:Bazooka Mario/sig}} 20:31, 19 August 2018 (EDT)
::It's already an optional parameter. The problem is that many editors seem to have a bad habit of manually adding it to character infoboxes regardless of whether or not it's actually necessary (and it rarely is). {{User:7feetunder/sig}} 20:38, 19 August 2018 (EDT)
:::It works for characters like [[Princess Peach]], but can be removed otherwise. There's no harm here regardless, though. {{User:Alex95/sig}} 20:40, 19 August 2018 (EDT)
Is there a way to program the parameter so that if it's the same as the article title or "title" parameter, it doesn't appear? Or maybe just have a bot remove them? {{User:7feetunder/sig}} 20:36, 26 August 2018 (EDT)
:Another example I found is [[Jessica]]. "title" is meant to remove the identifier in an infobox, and "full name" is meant to show the full name of the character. Two different parameters meant for two different things, though if they aren't being used correctly, they should definitely be adjusted/removed on the page. {{User:Alex95/sig}} 20:46, 26 August 2018 (EDT)
::That doesn't answer my question at all. The problem is that this issue is ''so widespread'' that fixing this manually will take forever, and I don't even know of a way to generate a list of pages that use the parameter. {{User:7feetunder/sig}} 20:53, 26 August 2018 (EDT)
:::[https://www.mariowiki.com/index.php?title=Special:Search&limit=500&offset=0&profile=default&search=%7Cfull_name%3D There are a lot]. I don't think it's possible for a bot to accurately remove the unnecessary ones, nor is there a way to tell it what's necessary and what isn't. I can't think of a way to make it disappear when "title" is used, as I said, they are two parameters used for two different things. Correcting everything will definitely take a while, but I disagree that the parameter is outright unnecessary. {{User:Alex95/sig}} 22:20, 26 August 2018 (EDT)
::::I've ''finally'' weeded them all out. For whatever reason, I found a lot of instances of this parameter in ''species'' infoboxes. {{User:7feetunder/sig}} 03:16, 11 February 2019 (EST)

== Mario-related media ==
Before I enact the changes from [[MarioWiki:Proposals/Archive/54#Clean up latest appearances for crossover characters|my proposal]], I'd like to get some input on including "''Mario''-related media" in these cases. I think it should be removed when it's the only game in the latest appearance section, because while it's technically accurate, it seems like an unnecessary distinction. I'm also worried that it could confuse users who might think we're just ignoring their latest appearance outside of Mario media altogether. Thoughts? --{{User:Waluigi Time/sig}} 12:51, November 16, 2019 (EST)
:I think the "''Mario''-related media" identifier shouldn't be included if it's the only one in the section, because it would technically be redundant if it's the character's latest appearance overall. {{User:Obsessive Mario Fan/sig}} 15:11, December 4, 2019 (EST)
::Yeah, if the game is just their latest appearance altogether, "Mario-related media" is unnecessary. {{User:Alex95/sig}} 15:13, December 4, 2019 (EST)
:::I agree with the other two. Like they said, if it's just their latest appearence in general, it's unnecessary. {{User:WeirdDave13/sig}}
::::Per everyone else. {{User:TheDarkStar/sig}} 17:49, December 4, 2019 (EST)
:::::Alright, seems like we have a consensus here, thanks everyone! I'll get started. --{{User:Waluigi Time/sig}} 18:30, December 4, 2019 (EST)

== Variant parameters? ==
Sorry if this is too bold a suggestion, but I was thinking it might make sense to add the "variant of" and "variants" parameters to the character infobox? These are some examples where I think that might prove helpful. Hypothetically, at least.
* Dry Bowser as variant of Bowser
* Pewee Piranha as variant of Dino Piranha (possibly treating Dino Piranha as a character like King Kaliente, rather than a species)
* Big Bungee Piranha as variant of Naval Piranha (possibly treating Naval Piranha as a recurring character, rather than a species)
* Tap-Tap the Golden as variant of Tap-Tap the Red Nose
* Torkdrift as variant of Spindrift (possible example of a character being a variant of a species, rather than a member)
Thoughts? [[User:Blinker|Blinker]] ([[User talk:Blinker|talk]]) 14:53, November 4, 2023 (EDT)
:What would qualify as variants or not? I don't want to go into speculative territory where editors are arguing about, say, Bowser Jr. is a variant of Baby Bowser? Koopa Kid a variant of Baby Bowser? Can you think of more instances where is potential debate or was actual debate on what qualifies as variants or not? How were those settled if that's the case? {{User:Mario/sig}} 15:15, November 4, 2023 (EDT)
::I'm not sure how to formally describe it, but basically cases where a character is created using another character as a basis. I recognize that both Bowser Jr. and Koopa Kid probably take inspiration from Baby Bowser, but I wouldn't consider those as variants. I guess a general rule of thumb would be, if you can describe one as the other, but insert-adjective-here, it counts. So Bowser, but skeleton, Dino Piranha, but junior (not sure what this says about Bowser Jr., I will admit I didn't think that far ahead), Naval Piranha, but bungee, etc. Eh, I don't know, sorry, but it's not that clear cut when it comes to species either. As for the last two questions, I'm not sure what you mean. [[User:Blinker|Blinker]] ([[User talk:Blinker|talk]]) 15:36, November 4, 2023 (EDT)
:::I'm just asking you to anticipate what discussions have been involved related to this. Like your examples might not invite debate, but you or others may have been involved in debates in MarioWiki on the relationships of some characters and species. I just think it's important to be aware of any potential relevant discussions in MarioWiki and see how they're resolved or may remain contentious. I'm not necessarily challenging your position, I just want us to think this very through before we make a bold change. {{User:Mario/sig}} 15:40, November 4, 2023 (EDT)
::::Honestly I'm going to oppose this idea, your second comment looks like this could get very messy and debatable. {{User:Swallow/sig}} 15:42, November 4, 2023 (EDT)

== Add gender parameter ==

{{Settled TPP}}
{{Proposal outcome|failed|1-15|Do not add}}
This proposal aims to add a gender parameter to the character infobox. As stated in an above section, several other NIWA wikis have a gender parameter in their infobox, and I also wondered why this wiki doesn't do the same. I don't know if there's much of a case to make for adding a gender parameter, because several characters have a gender (just like how characters are each a different species), so it would make sense to add that characteristic into an infobox.

Okay, so a bit of digression, but I think this can help with unverifiable uses of pronouns in the article. For example, I see [[Bleak]] being called a "he." Is there any source to back that claim? If so, would we rather do it within the article text or his listed gender in the infobox? I'm leaning toward the latter.

Another question: if this passes, how would we handle this on articles of ambiguously characters like [[Birdo]] or [[Vivian]]? Should most articles require a citation for a character's gender in the infobox, including for each one for ambiguously gendered characters? An exception to this would be if it's widely known, such as how everyone knows that [[Luigi]] is a male.

'''Proposer''': {{User|Super Game Gear}}<br>
'''Deadline''': January 19, 2024, 23:59 GMT

===Support===
#{{user|Super Game Gear}}: As proposer

===Oppose===
#{{User|Swallow}} Pretty sure this should be obvious for any character without needing to state it. We also don't need to do everything that other NIWA wikis do.
#{{User|SolemnStormcloud}} Per Swallow.
#{{User|PnnyCrygr}} The character's gender is already stated in the intro paragraph of their article as a pronoun. No need for a parameter then!
#{{user|Doc von Schmeltwick}} - Irrelevant padding, might as well do one for eye color. Per all.
#{{User|Mushroom Head}} Per all.
#{{User|Mario}} Such information should be easily gleaned from the opening paragraph.
#{{User|YoYo}} it's something that is automatically worded into each article, there's no need at all to add it to the infobox.
#{{User|Camwoodstock}} Not only is this stated in the article's opening by default, but we fear like at ''best'' this is just kind of unnecessary; at worst, however, it's just stapling a prime target for vandalism to articles. Especially in the case of [[Birdo|canonically-transgender]] [[Vivian|characters]]; we feel like adding this is a hot ticket to getting those articles even more protected than they already are.
#{{User|Blinker}} Per all.
#{{User|LinkTheLefty}} Considering my very first edit was on Birdo back in 2007 (whoa), if you asked me then, I'd probably say, "yeah, and let's get more gender categories too, etc." (maybe I would've been on board with pronoun citation if it was a widespread idea back then.) But wanting to do something and actually seeing it in practice are different things. Views change <small>- one of my first edits was also a treatise on canon policy, and after seeing where that line of thought can lead to, I have a ''very'' different viewpoint on it now -</small> my current view on this one is that these aren't -really- vital characteristics that need addressing in parameters and references. I see others put it in practice, I think it can tend to look cumbersome, and like Camwoodstock says, it invites bad-faith ridicule. Plus, this doesn't account for inconsistencies with subjects like Cloud N. Candy and Bonetail. For that Bleak example? Masculine pronouns are present in supplemental material like the Player's Guide, and as far as I know, there's no contradicting material, so that's that. If there's confusion, simply clarify on the talk page or an edit summary. What I can agree to as a general default is using "it" for gender-ambiguous creatures and "they" for gender-ambiguous characters, but we can probably use our heads if a character doesn't have explicit pronouns but they're generally modeled after depictions of other male or female characters of the species.
#{{User|Sdman213}} Per all.
#{{User|Mister Wu}} Especially considering [https://iwataasks.nintendo.com/interviews/3ds/zelda-ocarina-of-time/4/2/ Miyamoto’s stance on the matter], this information is more likely to cause disagreement and conflicting edits, since quite a few times there’s not even a definite answer to what is supposed to be the gender of a character, at least in the original Japanese material. I’d say it’s better to rely on gendered pronouns or to explain the matter more in detail, when needed.
#{{User|ThePowerPlayer}} Per all.
#{{User|FanOfRosalina2007}} Per all.
#{{User|EvieMaybe}} gender was invented by big gender to sell more bathroom door signs. per all

===Comments===
Swallow, wanted to say that a character's gender is not always obvious at a glance. I've cited Birdo as an example, as looking at Birdo and Vivian does not immediately tell the reader about the gender controversy surrounding those two characters. [[User:Super Game Gear|Super Game Gear]] ([[User talk:Super Game Gear|talk]]) 17:06, January 5, 2024 (EST)
:The opening paragraphs of both articles do mention that they are transgender and have another section going into more detail about it. I think that's good enough. {{User:Swallow/sig}} 17:09, January 5, 2024 (EST)
::Looking at Birdo and Vivian tells you they're probably female, which they are, regardless of whether they're transgender or not. I don't see how a gender field would help there. [[User:Blinker|Blinker]] ([[User talk:Blinker|talk]]) 17:57, January 5, 2024 (EST)

== Caption parameter? ==

{{talk}}
I am here to talk about the caption placed below the images. We have "Artwork from ''Mario vs. Donkey Kong'' for the Nintendo Switch" for the page of [[Mario]] However, other character infoboxes such as [[Captain Syrup]] have "''Wario Land: Shake It!'' artwork for Captain Syrup", which is redundant, because the character's name is already above the image. The standard caption for such images is "Artwork/Screenshot from (Game)." I'm wondering about the addition of a caption parameter, which can have:
*Media - Artwork, Screenshot
*Game - Anything under the sun
Which could generate "(Artwork/Screenshot) from (Game). I'm sorry that I cannot code a sample, and this is simply not a proposal, either.

Here's a sample mark-up.
 <nowiki>{{character infobox
|image=[[File:WLSSyrup.png|200px]]
|imagetype=artwork
|imagesource=''[[Wario Land: Shake It!]]''
|first_appearance=''[[Wario Land: Super Mario Land 3]]'' ([[List of games by date#1994|1994]])
|species=Human
|latest_appearance=''[[Super Smash Bros. Ultimate]]'' ([[Spirit (Super Smash Bros. Ultimate)|spirit]] cameo) ([[List of games by date#2018|2018]])
|latest_portrayal=[[Hitomi Hirose]] ([[List of games by date#2008|2008]])
}}
</nowiki>

This could create something like "Artwork from ''[[Wario Land: Shake It!]]''".

{{User:PnnyCrygr/sig}} 22:39, March 2, 2024 (EST)

== Japanese first-person pronoun parameter ==

{{Talk}}

Is this a good idea? It makes sense why English ''third''-person pronouns aren't in the infobox (that information is more naturally conveyed in the article itself, which is written in English about the subject in the third person), but in Japanese media a lot about a character's identity and self-expression is conveyed through what ''first''-person pronouns they use to refer to themself. This would be useful information to document somewhere, and I think the infobox is the ideal place for that information to go. {{User:JanMisali/sig}} 11:07, June 8, 2024 (EDT)
:This is getting nitty-gritty, and there's cases like Kamek where even this is inconsistent. [[User:Doc von Schmeltwick|Doc von Schmeltwick]] ([[User talk:Doc von Schmeltwick|talk]]) 11:20, June 8, 2024 (EDT)
:I think it should definitely be mentioned somewhere, but I'm not sure about it being in the infobox. [[User:DesaMatt|DesaMatt]] ([[User talk:DesaMatt|talk]]) 21:13, June 10, 2024 (EDT)

== "Ongoing serialized comics are not included here" ==

What's the reason behind this? I've added this a few times, mainly for one-off characters, and I don't know why it should be the sole exception. Super Mario-kun is the only one left and that's been reduced to one volume per year for a while now, so it's not like they're coming out super often. The only reason I can think of is that it's hard for our userbase to get a hold of them, but if we know about an appearance, then we should add it. --{{User:Waluigi Time/sig}} 22:20, July 9, 2024 (EDT)
:Yeah I agree, that doesn't make any sense. Sure, maybe for the major characters like Mario who are always in it, but most one-off characters are just there for their arc and then don't come back. [[User:Technetium|Technetium]] ([[User talk:Technetium|talk]]) 14:07, September 5, 2024 (EDT)
:Yeah, I don't see why we shouldn't include them. I think it might have been implemented because it would've needed to be updated for every volume, but there are updates for games that come out more often now (and we usually just add the first update where they make an appearance anyway, not for every new update/volume if they've already appeared in the game/publication). {{User:Mario jc/sig}} 20:33, November 8, 2024 (EST)
::One of my first "mistakes" on this wiki was putting volume 60 of Super Mario-kun as the latest appearances of Elephant Mario and Prince Florian. But they were reverted very quickly. What was even more confusing was that some of the characters and enemies from Super Mario Land had their latest appearance being a compilation issue of Super Mario-kun, so I see no reason why this rule is enforced. I say we start a proposal about this. {{User:Rykitu/sig}}

== Family ==

Somewhere in this talk page there’s a part that says that “we don’t have to do what the other NIWA wikis do”, but this time we should do it. There should be a parameter with the characters’ relatives (like in Starfy Wiki and Lylat Wiki). [[User:Weegie baby|Weegie baby]] ([[User talk:Weegie baby|talk]]) 16:46, November 8, 2024 (EST)

== Count ongoing serialized comics for latest appearances ==
{{Settled TPP}}
{{Proposal outcome|passed|5-10-0-2|list both latest overall appearance and latest game appearance}}
For some reason, there is a rule enforced on this template that doesn't count "ongoing serialized comics" to be placed as a characters latest appearance. The only ongoing comic in the [[Super Mario (franchise)|Super Mario franchise]] is ''[[Super Mario-kun]]'', which only gets one new volume every year. My guess as to why this rule is being enforced is because of how frequent these comics used to be published. But since they are slowing down and games are becoming more common than for one of these volumes to release, there is no reason for this rule to be enforced.

Edit: After some discussion in the comments I will give out another option. Having both latest game appearance and latest overall appearance.

Edit 2: Another option has been added if people want to see the characters first appearance outside of video games.

'''Proposer''': {{User|Rykitu}}<br>
'''Deadline''': March 2, 2025, 23:59 GMT

====List only latest overall appearance====
#{{User|Rykitu}} Per proposal.
#{{User|Technetium}} Per proposal.
#{{User|Waluigi Time}} Per all.
#{{user|Mario jc}} It's important enough to be the only one listed IMO. I think the only time two should be listed is if the later one is a non-''Mario'' appearance.
#{{User|Hewer}} Why are comics worthy of special treatment compared to any other appearance? I don't agree with the "because our readers wouldn't expect comics" argument, we should be presenting what the facts actually are rather than what readers were expecting them to be (and characters such as Mario never go very long without a new latest appearance anyway).

====List both latest overall appearance and latest game appearance====
#{{User|Rykitu}} Preferred option to be honest.
#{{User|Mario}} vote
#{{User|Nightwicked Bowser}} Per my previous oppose vote.
#{{User|Nintendo101}} I understand this is broad franchise, but it is at its core one about video games. It would be systemically helpful for the public and editors to not lose track of that info.
#{{User|Jdtendo}} Per Nintendo101.
#{{User|Waluigi Time}} I'm fine with this too.
#{{User|EvieMaybe}} per N101
#{{User|Technetium}} Gonna use this as a second choice vote I think.
#{{User|ThePowerPlayer}} Per Nintendo101.
#{{User|Killer Moth}} Per Nintendo101

====List first and latest game appearance and first and latest appearance outside video games====

====Keep the same====
#{{User|Ahemtoday}} SMK releases monthly, making "latest appearances" much more difficult to upkeep — and counting only the tankobon releases as "appearances" is extremely arbitrary and doesn't really make any sense. I also feel pretty strongly that we shouldn't establish the precedent of having multiple "latest" appearances per character — I know in this case it would be an exception with logic behind it, but so ''many'' characters would fall under the exception that it starts to become a rule.
#{{User|Platform}} This proposal is built on the misinformed notion that SMK is released only as complete volumes. I would agree to it if we have editors in Japan that are subscribers to CoroCoro Comic and are committed to updating this wiki on a monthly basis after the release of each new chapter.

<s>{{User|Nightwicked Bowser}} This might be a personal thing, but I think when readers look at the latest appearance they may be more expecting to see which was the latest game they appeared in and instead see an ongoing manga which Mario for example would always appear in. I'd probably only support this proposal if it doesn't completely ommit the latest game appearance or even on-screen appearance in the case of the Super Mario Bros. Movie.</s>

====Comments====
For clarification, if the character appeared in a previous volume then appears in a new volume, would that mean we would still have that new volume as the latest appearance if this proposal passes? {{User:Nightwicked Bowser/sig}} 11:02, February 16, 2025 (EST)
:Yes. It would count. {{User:Rykitu/sig}}

Would this also include republished versions of old comics, such as [[Super Mario Adventures]] from 2016? {{User:Mario/sig}} 15:49, February 16, 2025 (EST)
:I think so. One thing I noticed before starting this proposal was some enemies and characters who for the most part only appeared in [[Super Mario Land]] (such as [[Tatanga]]) had their latest appearance set to [[Super Mario-kun Special Selection]] which is a compilation of some moments from the series, so if thats okay, the same can be said for other rereleases of publications. {{User:Rykitu/sig}}

{{@|Nightwicked Bowser}} I can understand that. Some infoboxes on character pages (such as [[Mushroom King]]) have two different pieces of media labeled where the character is mentioned and when the character actually first appeared. So maybe I can add another option which can show their latest appearance in a game and their latest appearance in any piece of media. Is that a good idea? {{User:Rykitu/sig}}
:That is an option I'd be more willing to support. {{User:Nightwicked Bowser/sig}} 17:49, February 16, 2025 (EST)
::Feels like if you're going to extend to comics, you should also look into other narrative works. I mean don't we already used to list the movie? Anyhow what if there's a new TV show for Mario in the upcoming years? {{User:Mario/sig}} 18:01, February 16, 2025 (EST)
:::Same logic applies to TV Shows and movies. I am drawing the line at albums, merchandise, advertisements, etc. {{User:Rykitu/sig}}
::::Makes sense! I like this option, lemme vote. {{User:Mario/sig}} 18:14, February 16, 2025 (EST)

{{@|Hewer}} Can't I let out my own disagreement reasoning without it being called a "bad argument" for once? {{User:Nightwicked Bowser/sig}} 11:37, February 17, 2025 (EST)
:When I call something "a bad argument imo" I'm just saying I personally disagree with it. {{User:Hewer/sig}} 20:08, February 17, 2025 (EST)
::You could at least be less blunt about it though. {{User:Nightwicked Bowser/sig}} 20:25, February 17, 2025 (EST)
:::I wouldn't have thought it would be taken as blunt. I apologise and have reworded my vote. {{User:Hewer/sig}} 21:18, February 17, 2025 (EST)

Worth looking into to update those list of appearance sections too. {{User:Mario/sig}} 22:29, February 17, 2025 (EST)

Barring brief hiatuses, the ''Super Mario-kun'' manga is serialized monthly in CoroCoro Comic. Why the special treatment for the {{wp|tankobon}} while ignoring the individual chapters coming out in the middle of each month?--[[User:Platform|Platform]] ([[User talk:Platform|talk]]) 04:14, February 18, 2025 (EST)
:I had no idea each chapter got released every month. I think we are going to have to skip those because that would make the rule this proposal is trying to oppose actually sound reasonable. {{User:Rykitu/sig}}
::Are the chapters released before or after the full volume? --{{User:Waluigi Time/sig}} 15:15, February 18, 2025 (EST)
:::Before. Here's how the process goes. Author writes a chapter. It gets published in the monthly anthology. After enough chapters have been released, they get collected in a tankobon to be released months later. This allows the author to have a monthly paycheck and reduce the risk of a disastrous loss if their tankobon fails.--[[User:Platform|Platform]] ([[User talk:Platform|talk]]) 20:39, February 19, 2025 (EST)

Would the second option work the same for characters not originally from games? It's rare for non-game characters to later appear in games, but [[Bowser's mother|it has happened]] (and also technically applies to some crossover characters, like [[Kazooie]] and [[Mega Man]]). Would the "first appearance" parameter also have both first game and first non-game appearances listed? {{User:Hewer/sig}} 10:50, February 18, 2025 (EST)
:I'm not sure about that. I'll add another voting option to see if that's what people want. {{User:Rykitu/sig}}

There's an issue with the "keep the same" option: there's quite a few characters who already have things like -kun as their latest appearance for some reason. For example, [[Francis]]. Or would "keep the same" remove these instances as well? We might need another status quo option then, not sure... [[User:Technetium|Technetium]] ([[User talk:Technetium|talk]]) 19:01, February 18, 2025 (EST)
:I pointed out earlier in these comments that some of the enemies and characters from [[Super Mario Land]] have their latest appearance set to a -kun issue, such as [[Tatanga]], [[King Totomesu]] and [[Hiyoihoi]]. So Francis is far from the only one that breaks the current rule. {{User:Rykitu/sig}}

@Platform: I mean, lacking access to information may mean we can't document it, but it doesn't mean that we shouldn't document it. Why should our difficulties with keeping the information up to date mean we need a rule against even trying to do so? Then if someone does get ahold of it, they could just add it without another proposal. {{User:Hewer/sig}} 14:21, February 23, 2025 (EST)
:I mean. It seems established that if this proposal passes, it'll be based on the tankobon releases and not the actual releases. The monthly releases seem to have been disregarded by the proposer. [[User:Ahemtoday|Ahemtoday]] ([[User talk:Ahemtoday|talk]]) 16:58, February 23, 2025 (EST)