Talk:Pixels: Difference between revisions

Talk:Pixels (edit)

Revision as of 11:50, May 15, 2024

1,547 bytes added , 25 days ago

→‎Re-merge to List of references in film: The deadline has been reached.

BMfan08

1,651

edits

@@ Line 4: / Line 4: @@
 == Re-merge to List of references in film ==
+{{SettledTPP}}
-{{TPP}}
+{{ProposalOutcome|failed|5-12|Do not merge}}
 I previously supported [[MarioWiki:Proposals/Archive 52#Does the movie Pixels warrant guest-appearance coverage?|the proposal splitting this page out in the first place]], but I now realize that it's no longer viable as a standalone article, especially in regards to [[Talk:The Wizard#Merge this article to "List of references in film"|the recent re-merge of ''The Wizard'']]. This article has the same problems as ''The Wizard'' article did anyway. Besides the article's infobox and intro paragraph having little to do with the ''Super Mario'' franchise as a whole, what is indeed relevant to ''Super Mario'' as a whole can easily be summarized into one or two paragraphs in the [[List of references in film]] article. Besides, just like ''The Wizard'' or ''Wreck-it Ralph'', this film is more intent on referencing all manner of classic arcade games than the ''Super Mario'' franchise in general. In light of this, I call for a re-merge.
@@ Line 26: / Line 26: @@
 #{{User|Koopa con Carne}} DK has plot relevance in the movie, similarly to how he's an opponent in Wii Punch-Out
 #{{User|Arend}} Both DK and the ''Donkey Kong'' arcade game are relevant to the plot of this film (although one could argue the latter doesn't necessarily matter since ''Super Mario Bros. 3'' is relevant to the plot of ''The Wizard'', and that got merged to the list; still though, DK the character plays a significant role regardless).
+#{{User|Glowsquid}} per my original proposal. DK is the climax of the movie, that's not just a reference.
+#{{User|TheFlameChomp}} Per all.
+#{{User|Sdman213}} Per all.
+#{{User|Mario}} Article serves its purpose well enough. Rather have this than parse through a giant list. The Wizard isn't substantial enough and its basis is probably too metacontextual, too divorced from the Mario series, but I can also see this one getting its own article just on more practical basis. This movie concerns video game characters with Donkey Kong playing a significant role.
+#{{User|Axis}} Per Hewer
 ===Comments===
@@ Line 36: / Line 41: @@
 :Huh? [[MarioWiki:Coverage]] tells us that "Non-game guest appearances include ''[[Captain N: The Game Master]]'', ''[[Pixels]]'', and ''[[Wario to Saikyō Tag da Fii!]]''" What about non-game guest appearances means we should treat them so differently to game guest appearances? And what "few more" do you think could be split? {{User:Hewer/sig}} 03:19, May 2, 2024 (EDT)
 ::We're gonna be real here, we somehow spaced Captain N existing at all, and we didn't know about the Stafy Manga at all until... right now. For "what about non-game guest appearances", that's... kind of why we brought up our original comment--as it stands, with a few pretty solidly defined exceptions (namely the three items mentioned on the coverage policy) it honestly feels a little arbitrary at the moment what gets its own article and what gets delegated to a list. The Wizard is similar to Pixels in how you can't really ''remove'' the Mario thing from it without ruining the plot, yet it got merged almost unanimously. Meanwhile, you could remove the Donkey Kong paint from that monster truck and it would probably still y'know, do tricks and stuff, and that thing has its own full article with a brief synopsis of each of its drivers.<br>As for potential splits, well, there is the aforementioned The Wizard and Wreck-It Ralph, but honestly, at least for now (we just woke up, we could undoubtedly give better answers if we weren't maybe only partially sentient right now, oops, please take every single word after this sentence with that in mind.), we feel like you could ''maybe'' (strong emphasis on that "maybe", mind) split the Blip Comics back up--while their status of being actually properly licensed is still undetermined, that is also a cameo where, like Pixels or The Wizard, you can't really remove that cameo without ruining the baseline story. Unless the guideline is also "it explicitly must be unambigously licensed by Nintendo or one of their subsidiaries" (which we couldn't find on there, but maybe it's just elsewhere and we're being dim, we've 100% accepted that's a possibility), we can't really think of many reasons to retain an article for Pixels that wouldn't ''also'' split up at least Wreck-it Ralph and The Wizard, and by that token, we don't think a split for the Blip Comics is like... Unfathomably unreasonable, right? Surely unpopular, but we hope it at least makes sense where we're coming from. <small>even if it took us like 500 years to get to that point WOW maybe we shouldn't reply to proposals at the fresh hour of 11 goshdarned AM when we just woke up but, well, sunk cost fallacy</small> {{User:Camwoodstock/sig}} 11:01, May 2, 2024 (EDT)
+:::The coverage policy says that "we cover any "[[Mario]]-related" media product given some sort of official authorization by [[Nintendo]] at some point in time". I guess the list of references pages are exceptions to the generally understood rule of official stuff only (e.g. we're only allowed to talk about memes on [[list of references on the Internet]] and nowhere else), hence Blip getting put there. But honestly, I don't think splits for The Wizard and Wreck-It Ralph are that unreasonable a prospect. Most of the [[list of references in film|references in film]] are one-liners, those two stick out quite a bit. And to be clear, the coverage policy is supposed to treat non-game guest appearances the same as game guest appearances, the list of the former just happens to be shorter, which I guess makes sense given Mario's primarily a video game franchise. {{User:Hewer/sig}} 12:15, May 2, 2024 (EDT)