Talk:Podley

Ever refer to him as Beanish? Max2 (talk)

nice eye! They never say he is beanish,he doesnt even talk about. Full Metal Moogle

He looks exactly like one though, bean-shaped head, green skin... -- Sir Grodus

We should put a noe the it's inferred. Max2 (talk)

It isnt said that he is a bean bean. That information should NOT and i repeat NOT be on there if it isnt true- nvm maby in the trivia section- BUT THATS ALL Full Metal Moogle

We don't know if he's Beanish or not since Beanish people don't have an official name. But he is so obviously Beanish or came from the Beanbean Kingdom., especially with that reference to Chuckola Cola.
I am Confused 16:31, 21 April 2007 (EDT)

He LOOKS Beanish. Max2 (talk) It doesn't mention it, so it's not confirmed.

For that matter, how do we know Queen Bean is beanish? Some things you need to actually make an inference.
I am Confused 16:50, 21 April 2007 (EDT)

Are you serious with "For that matter, how do we know Queen Bean is beanish?"?!? COME ON. Full Metal Moogle

Exactly, that was my point. Queen Bean is never confirmed to be Beanish, yet we list her as one. This guy is obviously Beanish, but we don't list him as one? That's just wrong. Then what is he? A sub-species of Beanish people?
I am Confused 16:54, 21 April 2007 (EDT)

Queen Bean lives in the beanbean kingdom. She rules over all beans. Podley, on the other hand, lives in rougeport. He rules over nothingness.

Full Metal Moogle

Isn't it possible that Queen Bean rules over another species? Peach is a human, so are all people under her rule human? No, they're Toads.
I am Confused 17:07, 21 April 2007 (EDT)

Peach dosent have a say in the matter, now does she? Full Metal Moogle

What do you mean Peach has no say in the matter?
I am Confused 17:11, 21 April 2007 (EDT)

Peach isnt ruled by queen bean bean. So, why would she matter? Full Metal Moogle (I'm not trying to start a fight, just proving you wrong :P)

I wasn't saying that. I was just saying that it is possible to rule a kingdom with citizens who are completely different species from the ruler.
I am Confused 17:18, 21 April 2007 (EDT)

Beanish Designation

I can see there's been some editing back and forth over whether or not he's Beanish. Either way, he was recently added to Category:Legumes, which I don't think is a point of debate. Naturally, it reminded me of my Talk:Grifty#Classify_as_a_Little_Mouser proposal. I think its much more obvious that Podley, and Podler for that matter, is meant to be Beanish than it is that Grifty is meant to be a Little Mouser, and I can remember that was once listed as his species on that page. His talk page doesn't have any reference to it and I can't find an archived proposal about it, but maybe I'm missing something or searching for it incorrectly. Either way, it might be helpful to have a section to discuss that designation on this page since it seems to consistently be a point of contention, evidenced by the debate above this way back in 2007. There's been several edits back and forth about him being Beanish over the years, so do we want to do a proposal over it? Given the rejection of the Grifty proposal, I don't want to create proposals if there's an obvious consensus without one, but, unlike Grifty, it seems like this has been more controversial over the years. With or without a proposal, hopefully this more recent discussion on the talk page can help guide anyone in future who wants to list him as a Beanish. Dr. Baskerville 18:05, June 12, 2024 (EDT)

Right now, the lede says "He greatly resembles a member of the Beanish, and it is heavily implied he is a member of the species, though this is not explicitly confirmed." I don't know what in the game "heavily implies" he's Beanish other than his appearance, and it seems strange to have that speculation in the lede; I think we should either definitely say he is Beanish, or just add Trivia to say he looks like one. Dr. Baskerville 18:11, June 12, 2024 (EDT)

I think the "heavily implied" part might be referring to the Chuckola Cola he serves? I probably wouldn't count that, seeing as the connection wasn't present in The Thousand-Year Door's original Japanese script due to the beverage being called "Vintage Red" there. SolemnStormcloud (talk) 18:50, June 12, 2024 (EDT)

That could explain it, but I think the language, ironically, is a little heavy. Nevertheless, what do you think about a proposal versus just adding that to Trivia? Dr. Baskerville 18:54, June 12, 2024 (EDT)

I think this should settled in a proposal. SolemnStormcloud (talk) 19:00, June 12, 2024 (EDT)

From my edit summery: "TTYD and Superstar Saga were developed by different studios. This does not mean a species that debuted in one couldn't show up in another (I wouldn't be surprised if Intelligent Systems' staff played Superstar Saga), but it's not super common, and there are a few original characters in TTYD that are "Toad-like body with weird animal/plant head", so for this case, I think it's better to be a little cautious." - Nintendo101 (talk) 22:30, June 12, 2024 (EDT)

Thank you for that. Would you recommend a proposal to settle the matter, do you to think that is unnecessary? Personally, even though it is ambiguous, I would be comfortable with classifying him as a Beanish (especially since I think there's more evidence for this than Grifty), but I don't want to create unnecessary proposals. The difference I see here is that there is more debate, based on the article's edit history, over whether or not he is Beanish. Dr. Baskerville 22:35, June 12, 2024 (EDT)

What Nintendo101 said. It's never explicitly stated, and the "implication" would have been because of his bean-like appearance and the Chuckola Cola, but the latter wasn't a connection made in the original Japanese version like SolemnStormcloud mentioned, and I don't think his appearance alone is enough to go on.

But if you think it's debatable, go ahead with a proposal. It may catch the attention of supporters, and even if it's heavily opposed, so be it, but at least you'd know where everyone stands. Mario JC 00:18, June 13, 2024 (EDT)

I'll move forward with a proposal then. I have a question, though. Since whatever we do with Podley should also be done with Podler, can we have a proposal that also changes Podler's race on Podley's page, does it have to be replicated on Podler's page, or does it have to be posted on MarioWiki:Proposals? Maybe we have it on Talk:Beanish? I think the easiest option is to have the debate on this page and then apply whatever the result is to Podler's page as well, especially since there's already conversation about it here. Dr. Baskerville 01:30, June 13, 2024 (EDT)

Just one here is fine; it's only two related articles. Mario JC 03:11, June 13, 2024 (EDT)

Consider Podley / Podler Beanish

This talk page proposal has already been settled. Please do not edit any of the sections in the proposal. If you wish to discuss the article, do so in a new header below the proposal.

do not classify 6-1-9

• 

  Average Beanish

• 

  Podley / Podler

• 

  Fava, the Beanish that most resembles Podley / Podler

For years, this page has gone back and forth on classifying Podley as Beanish. This talk page has one of the earliest discussions, from 2007, but edits have been made as recently as this year over whether or not he (and Podler for that matter) should be designated by the wiki as Beanish. Personally, I think it is obvious that Podley and Podler are meant to Beanish based on their character design and Podley's connection with Chuckola Cola, an item that originated in Mario & Luigi: Superstar Saga, the origin game for Beanish. I know there's passionate debate over Chuckola's name in English given a discrepancy in naming with the original Japanese text, but if Nintendo of America signed off on the translation, I think we can consider that being a green light from Nintendo to consider Podley to have a connection to the Bean Bean Kingdom, which I think also means we can infer he is Beanish.

Furthermore, there are striking similarities between Podley / Podler and Fava. They both have white / grayish mustaches, they both wear the same kind of glasses, and they both have the same single strands of black / gray hair on the head. I think Fava's model in Mario & Luigi: Superstar Saga + Bowser's Minions even more closely ties Podley's appearance to the Beanish. Whether you think he's Beanish or not, having this proposal will help guide future editors who have, for over a decade, been debating this point. Option #1 will classify Podley / Podler as Beanish.

If we don't consider him Beanish, I think its strange to reference his similarities to Beanish in the lede rather than as Trivia. Option #2 will move the similarities to Beanish to the Trivia rather than the lede.

Note that whatever the results of this proposal are will likewise be implemented for Podler as well since they use the same character model.

Proposer: DrBaskerville (talk)
Deadline: June 27, 2024, 23:59 GMT

Option #1: classify Podley and Podler as Beanish

1. DrBaskerville (talk) Per proposal
2. Pseudo (talk) I support recognizing Podley as a Beanish, but less so for the Chuckola Cola reference or specific resemblance to Fava and moreso because his Japanese name is Master Bean and his design similarity. This seems fairly clear-cut to me in a similar capacity to Rowf and Rhuff being considered Doogans (though in reverse order).
3. Camwoodstock (talk) This feels rather unambiguous, given they mention Chuckola Cola already and the Beanish are already rather varied in their depictions compared to the Little Mousers.
4. SolemnStormcloud (talk) While the Chuckola Cola connection isn't valid by itself for reasons mentioned above, them being anthropomorphic beans associated with beverages is a similarity to consider.
5. Scrooge200 (talk) Per all. And I think it's worth noting that both Podley and Podler's names are bean puns, just like a lot of existing Beanish (Lady Lima, Prince Peasley, Fava, etc.).
6. ReeceeYT (talk) Per all.

Option #2: leave ambiguous but move Beanish reference to Trivia

1. DrBaskerville (talk) Second choice

Option #3: Do nothing (leave ambiguous and leave Beanish reference in lede

1. Hewer (talk) He could also just be meant to look like a Beanish without being one, or maybe have no connection to them at all. If it's unconfirmed, that's enough reason for me to oppose. This is speculation by definition, and we're better off leaving the reader to make or not make such inferences (just as the game itself does) rather than insisting our unconfirmed fan theory is the correct one. I'm also not really sure why you split the oppose option into two based on a minor matter of organisation, but adding trivia when we don't need to is discouraged.
2. Nintendo101 (talk) I think the odds of these characters being canonically Beanish is a little less likely than the the idea that Intelligent Systems and AlphaDream developed bean-like characters independently from one another. There are a few original NPCs in The Thousand Year-Door that are essentially "Toad-adjacent, but with with a weird object or animal for a head", and these two would fit into that. I would have expected stronger, more explicit ties in a game like this to Mario & Luigi: Superstar Saga if these character were suppose to be unambiguously Beanish, like allusions to them being from the Beanbean Kingdom or something. In lieu of explicit confirmation, I'd rather remain on the side of caution in this case. Primary-literature from Nintendo, or a developer interview or something of that ilk from Intelligent Systems confirming these two as Beanish would change my vote.
3. Mario jc (talk) Per all (and also disagree on moving it to trivia, it fits just fine as it is now).
4. Sdman213 (talk) Per all.
5. SmokedChili (talk) Per all, still standing by my reasons for keeping them removed, if it's not even hinted in some manner then it shouldn't be considered.
6. FanOfYoshi (talk) Per all. It is too speculative to say for sure.
7. Blinker (talk) Per all. I will add that while there are various Beanish characters named after beans (Lady Lima, Prince Peasley, Fava), their Japanese names (Mamebā, Mamekku, Mamedi) are generally based on the Japanese word「マメ」(mame, bean), while Podley and Podler's Japanese names are instead based on the English words "beans" and "peas":
8. Mario (talk) The current method is not denying the striking resemblance between this character and Beanish people, and the wiki doesn't take a direct stance on it. I think this is the best course of action when presented with ambiguous evidence.
9. MegaBowser64 (talk) Better safe than sorry. Per all.

Comments

Some discussion was recently held in the above section on this page, which is what led to the proposal. Dr. Baskerville 14:35, June 13, 2024 (EDT)

I started a similar proposal on Talk:Grifty, though I think there's stronger evidence here for Podley to be considered Beanish than for Grifty to be considered a Little Mouser, chiefly the visual similarities between Podley and the average Beanish (whereas there's more disparities between Grifty and Little Mousers) and Podley's connection to an item from SMRPG, a connection that doesn't exist in a similar way between Grifty and Little Mousers. Dr. Baskerville 14:35, June 13, 2024 (EDT)

I think you misread Fava's sprite, due to the wiki's white background. His hair in the remake is about the same as in the original, it's just not as visible here due to lacking an outline. Blinker (talk) 14:42, June 13, 2024 (EDT)

I have to really squint to see it, but I can see it now. Thank you for pointing that out. Dr. Baskerville 14:52, June 13, 2024 (EDT)

I'm waiting for others to present their opinions before I cast a vote (or maybe abstain), but I like to correct an error you made: the Beanish and Chuckola Cola originated in Mario & Luigi: Superstar Saga, not Super Mario RPG: Legend of the Seven Stars. SolemnStormcloud (talk) 14:44, June 13, 2024 (EDT)

This did cause me significant confusion in the proposal text, because yeah this is correct @DrBaskerville; you should probably fix the proposal text. Pseudo (talk) (contributions) 14:49, June 13, 2024 (EDT)

Thank you for pointing that out. I have that edited. Dr. Baskerville 14:52, June 13, 2024 (EDT)

Abstaining for now because I don't have an opinion on this, but why would you move the Beanish references to a trivia section? I think it's perfectly suited for the lede, and adding to trivia is discouraged. Dive Rocket Launcher 15:05, June 13, 2024 (EDT)

To me, it feels unresolved to have a reference to Beanish in the lede but not classify him as a Beanish when there's nothing that definitively says he is or is not Beanish. It adds to confusion over his species; whereas adding it to trivia would make note that he might or might not be Beanish as a trivial fact. I just personally find it confusing to dangle the possibility of him being Beanish in the lede, but maybe I'm the only one. While I agree not every page needs a trivia section, I think there is room for one here. For that matter, the reference to the Club 64 bartender should likely be added to trivia as well since it doesn't really have anything to do with Podley himself. The lede should focus predominately on the subject, not everything he remotely looks like. For example, the reference to The Three Sisters is in the Three Shadows' trivia; a reference to the Three Shadows is missing on The Three Sisters' page, but, if it was added to that, I think it should go in a trivia section since they don't really have anything directly to do with one another, just as the Club 64 bartender don't have anything directly to do with Podley. I know that's expanding your question to include the 64 bartender when you were just explicitly asking about Beanish, but combining those two references into something like "Podley bears a resemblance to Beanish and the Club 64 bartender." would keep the information on the page but not in the lede, which I personally think is the better approach so that the lede is more concise. Dr. Baskerville 15:23, June 13, 2024 (EDT)

By all means, it should feel unresolved, because it is. We don't know whether he's Beanish, I don't see the problem with saying that. And while I could maybe agree with your argument about not putting it in the lead if it was a bigger article (though even then trivia should be the last resort), the "lead" in this case is basically the whole article save for the tattle and names in other languages, so it's where all the other information is. Splitting some of that into a trivia section in order to artificially give it less weight isn't helpful, it's clunky and awkward. Hewer (talk · contributions · edit count) 15:49, June 13, 2024 (EDT)