Talk:Princess Daisy

Princess Daisy Discussion Archives
	Archive 1;

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Princess Daisy article. It is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. Questions such as "Who is your favorite character/team/area in this game?" are not allowed and will be removed on sight. Please use the Mario Boards or our Discord server to talk about Princess Daisy.

When editing on this talk page, please remember to sign your edits with [[User:Your user name|Your user name]], {{user|Your user name}}, ~~~~, or ~~~.

More Like De-Organizing

I'm aware this page doesn't dit the same format as all other character pages, but it's not like the other characte rpages aren't messe dup. This isn't messed up so mutch as it is different. Which makes sense considering the character doesn't appear in that many main story games. I thought there was some specific in place that allowed the page to be different becaus eof her vast spin-off appearances. Same with Waluigi and so on. Also, if any pages need re-organizing someone should fix the more important pages like Mario and Peaches first. Aaand, this whole site sitll needs overhall, bluntly. Panchito

We have a policy regarding this, see here. Please don't undo edits that follow this policy. If you don't like it, you should discuss the policy itself. But the point is, each of Daisy's appearances is just as valid as the game appearances, so they all belong in the History section. Time Questions 14:35, 19 November 2009 (EST)

Time Q, as far as I remember the Daisy page was given special reason to stay like this, which DID have a lot to do with her appearances. Also, you didn't even reorganize it well. And, why are you even editing Daisy's page? You should know that I have this page covered. Another question as to why you are editing her page, uhm Peach's page is a ridiculous pile of mess. This just feels like you got your way by reverting my proposal and now you're ruining the only page I care about, which has been in this format for months, regardless of that link. You're basically trying to thwart anything I do. Is there a reason you're editing Daisy's page and not anyone else's? Because it's not in the right format? No, because neither are other pages which seem like they should be more relevance to you. This is ridiculous. FD09

Hm, honestly..Princess Daisy's page was one of the few pages that was absolutely fine. Maybe you should spend your efforts fixing pages that are actually in need of fixing, like Mario's for instance. Your changes were quite useless and just made everything jumbled together. Toadine

So pretty much I'm going to change it back soon. If TimeQ cares he would show up before I revert the page to talk about it here, if not it's obvious he was just waiting for someone to edit the page again. I have already contacted multiple others about his actions. It is clear this isn't about the format of her page so much as it is getting his own way when other pages are in far more need than Daisy's. Also, like I said, he didn't even do it correctly. So I will give it more time but I think others can see what's going on here. I can help make the page right, but that's only going to happen when we have the right standards (not atm) and other pages are fixed first, per walkazo.FD09

To clarify a few things. 1) NOTHING of what I do is to upset you, so please stop thinking I have anything against you. 2) The reason I edited this page is that I searched for "Appearances in Other Media" in the searchbox. Articles with those sections are not organized according to our policy, because we don't separate appearances in "games" and "other media". Daisy was one of the first pages that showed up in the search, so I edited it. I also edited Beanstalk, so please don't think I chose this one to upset you. 3) Obviously it is me who is in the right in this matter, because I think I did organize everything correct according to our policies. 4) What did I do wrong in your opinion? 5) Who said there was a "special reason" for Daisy to stay in the incorrect form? Time Questions 15:50, 19 November 2009 (EST)

Two more things: You have no right to be the only person to cover this article. If you want this, make your own wiki and protect the article from all other editors. Super Mario Wiki is community work, and if you publish something, you agree that it may be edited by others. And secondly, I have no time to edit each and every article here. The reason I chose this one is that it was already organized in great parts, I just needed to incorporate a few more sections into the History section. Time Questions 15:58, 19 November 2009 (EST)

Clearly you can see how it's noticeable that regardless of the excuses you seem to have come up with, you appear to be attacking my personal preferences and actions. As it is true the wiki's standard was not being followed, I find it interesting that you just happened to run into the problems on this page instead of the other pages like mentioned. I didn't mean to imply I was the only one who could edit this page, but I did mean to imply that your edits were unneeded. Still, one day I will get this format to change, and I WILL have my way. Nothing personal. Oh, and also, I'm going to show you exactly what you did wrong. You'll see, or you won't. Just leave me be and be happy with the fact you're basically still getting your way. I hope you're happy. FD09

Also, maybe you should check the contribution. I would say by logic I could be the only person allowed to edit this page, but that's irrelevant to the point. FD09

This is really getting personal here and I think we should continue this discussion on our user talk pages. But let me assure you that I do NOT intend to attack your personal preferences and actions. I'm sorry if I seem to be, and I admit that it looks like it from your point of view. First the proposal, now this, of course it looks to you like I am attacking you. But believe me, when I edited this article, I didn't even think about you. I already explained how I came to edit this article rather than Mario's or some other. So much for the personal issue. As a matter of fact, I'm in the right here. I followed the wiki policies, while the article's form you're defending does not. So the question can't be whether I had the "right" to edit the article; of course I had. The question is if it was something personal against you, and only I know that, and I assure you that it was not. Of course I can't prove that, I can just ask you to believe me.

Completely apart from that, I don't like you're attitude towards the wiki. No, you're NOT the only person allowed to edit this page, and you're NOT the only one to decide over the fate of the wiki. Time Questions 16:31, 19 November 2009 (EST)

Maybe you should read more carefully. I said I COULD be the only person allowed to, not that I should or even at all that I am. Also, maybe you should go fix Luigi's or Toad's pages. They have other media sections but I checked recently and you haven't done anything there. Also, I don't like YOUR attitude to this wiki. Regardless of the fact a page might be better in a format that breaks the standard ( A BROKEN STANDARD ), you want it to follow that broken standard. FD09

All the time you failed to explain why you think the standard is broken. It's obvious that you don't like it, but what are your reasons? You should read more carefully too, I already explained why I haven't fixed Luigi's or Toad's pages. And I know you said you COULD be the only person allowed to edit the page, but assuming that is ridiculous enough. This is community work. Time Questions 17:06, 19 November 2009 (EST)

Failed to explain to you why the standard is broken? For starters that was largely covered in the proposal you seemed to think you know so much about. If you recall the reason the proposal was taken away was because of the BROKEN STANDARD. How can you even act like the standard is not broken? Just go to my talk page and see what walkazo said. There's your explanation. Ridiculous huh? Regardless of the fact this is a community wiki and a group effort, "I" "ME" "FOREVERDAISY09" am largely and "majorly" responsible for this page and many others relating to it in many manners of speaking. I have hundreds more contributions to this article than even the next user.

AND, the idea that you don't understand why this standard is broken is literally laughable. I'm done discussing this with you, as long as we're pretty clear on our differences, and of course, the things you don't understand. FD09

I think both of you need to calm down, I mean seriously. It's quite obvious that you two have some type of personal conflict or whatever and if this edit that mashed all of the information into a complete pile of mess was just out of spite then, TimeQ, you really need to grow up (If your feud is in fact the cause). Anyway, I will agree with FD09 that your changes to follow such an unorganised standard of character page layouts was an extremely poor decision, especially considering Princess Daisy's page was laid out in an extremely well-structured manner prior to today's edit. FD09, I think your sense of ownership over this page is causing you to overreact somewhat so maybe you should just cool off for a while..? I mean, you don't really own this page. The wiki community has every right to edit it.

To wrap things up, this entire Wiki in general is a mess and I think, TimeQ, that you and the other Admins/Mods/whatever you are need to really come up with a good, and organised method of arranging these pages. FD09's proposal was a great idea and I don't know why it was revoked but this place needs to change. I am willing to offer my complete assistance if it's ever needed for restructuring if there is ever a decision to change the format. Toadine

As far as I recall the Proposal was nullified not because the idea was bad, but because we already had many structure-changing proposals over the time, which causes the wiki to follow four different organisation methods. The editors' concerns should be to uniformate all articles to one standard, rather than adding a fifth organisation pattern into the mess. If I remember this correctly, then that was what caused the proposal's reversion. -

Gabumon^(talk) 17:23, 19 November 2009 (EST)

If you need your memory jotted, go to my talk page and walkazo's talk page and look at the discussion about it. I'm literally right now trying to tell walkazo that we need to make a new standard that does make everything work. That's what I've BEEN saying. I easily agreed to work on it, and that it could be done. FD09

I will not continue this discussion here. It has nothing to do with this specific article anymore. We should move it to the forums or our talk pages. Time Questions 17:19, 19 November 2009 (EST)

Wait a minute. Since when did the Manual of Style become an enforced policy?--Knife (talk) 18:14, 19 November 2009 (EST)

~~If the Manual of Style is not an enforced policy, what is it then?~~ Anyway, what is written in the Manual of Style was decided through a proposal, so basically it is an enforced policy. (Edit: Now I see what you meant. Still, the proposal still counts, so it's policy.) Time Questions 18:17, 19 November 2009 (EST)

Shouldn't we create separate page for organization, since that part is enforced?--Knife (talk) 18:49, 19 November 2009 (EST)

Hm, I think so... or just make the Manual of Style an enforced policy. I was surprised to read that it wasn't already enforced. Time Questions 19:00, 19 November 2009 (EST)

Cultural impact

I see that section incomplete with a under-construction label on it. It has passed a long time for somebody to help us with this and if we cannot fill that section then, I-ma afraid I gonna to unfeature the article by having a single section empty! D: ¢oincoll€ctor

Pft, what? You'd have to unfeature it for having a single section that's incomplete? Regardless, it would be pretty stupid, no offense, to unfeature the article rather than temporarily remove the section. I'm just taking my time is all. There'll be some stuff there soon. FD09

Stupid? not sir, A featured article MUST not include any improvement label on it like rewrite, stubs, picture-needed or under-construction, meaning that the article is incomplete of sort. We have enough time to complete that info, but leaving it long enough, it is likely I have to unfeature the article for a single but significant defect.

¢oincoll€ctor

Okay, you clearly don't get it. It would be silly to remove her article from featured status, temporarily even, just because one section is presently flawed. The point isn't even that though, the point is you could simply remove this section temporarily so as to solve this minor issue. Yet you seem to think going as far as removing the article from featured status is the answer. Do you get it? Look, just contact me if you plan to do something "brash" and make sure I get back to you on it first, because I'll remove it myself for the time being if that's what it takes to satisfy your reasoning. FD09

What about this issue now? The discussion has died, yet the problem remains. - Gabumon^(talk) 10:22, 5 February 2010 (EST)

Well now the section is finished so. ForeverDaisy09 03:24, 16 March 2010 (EDT)

Quotes section for Daisy's article

I've been checking through this section of the article, and with all due respect - I find it to be overly long. Before I attempt to do maintenance on this, aren't a majority of those same quotes on other "List of Quotes" articles for the Mario game articles themselves here? --M. C. - "Mario Gals" Fan! User Page | Talk Page 14:32, 11 December 2009 (EST)

I wouldn't really know consideirng those articles "suck" and last time I checked them they didn't have Daisy's quotes. lol Explain this to me though, since when did you figure there was a limit to the size of the quotes section? User:ForeverDaisy09

I didn't say there was a limit; I was hoping to keep the "more memorable" ones in regards to Daisy's persona. And there are a few that need to be spared, obviously. Right now, it's like a HUGE database of every single quote that Daisy has said in the game installments, the majority being something that just about any character in the Mario series would say. --M. C. - "Mario Gals" Fan! User Page | Talk Page 21:30, 11 December 2009 (EST)

Alright, as long as the articles actually have the quotes you remove and you keep the good ones I don't see an issue. User:ForeverDaisy09

Remark

I'd like a remark made that, despite being a regular character in spinoffs, Daisy has not been in a regular Mario game since Super Mario Land. WarioLand 17:55, 19 January 2010 (EST)

No duh, what's your point? She's doing a lot more in the spin-offs than she would be if she randomly appeared as an NPC in a mainstream game. FD09

I've got to disagree, she's pretty regular. If she didn't appear in a spinoff, there would be some question of why, since she's been a playable character in some many for awhile now. That's what we mean when we say 'regular'. If you want her to get kidnapped again, if that's what you mean, then no, she's not regular, but we're refering to the spinoffs. Daisyisbetter

Stronger than Mario

I was playing Mario Party 3 and I noticed somthing.Before you enter a duel with Daisy,Bowser appears to steal the stamps.But then,Daisy takes Bowser by the tail with one hand and throw him far away.But,in SM64,Mario has to take him by the tail with two hands to throw him.Does that mean Daisy is stronger than Mario? Count Bonsula I need blood...

It's variable. Daisy is stronger than Mario depending on the sport, and same with Mario. It's not something you can just say Daisy is stronger than Mario though. Unlike with Mario and Luigi Daisy hasn't been stated to be stronger than Mario and vice versa. So it's as of now for the player to form an opinion on. ForeverDaisy09 08:05, 28 March 2010 (EDT)

Yeah, plus Daisy hasn't been kidnapped since Super Mario Land and we don't know why that is (my theory is she keeps sports equipment in her closet), and she also only appears in Mario spin-offs so we don't know if she does any training. J-Yoshi64 (talk)

I Weigh How Much?

So this has bothered me for a while. I have seen places say that in Mario Kart DS Daisy is a medium as well as places that say she is a light. This is confusing because when I checked the stats of her cars they were qualifiable to the lightweight category, and they might have been lighter than Peach's if I remember correctly. But why is it even on unofficial Japanese translations it has been said she was in the medium class. Facts people? ForeverDaisy09 07:51, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

Nintendo can't make their mind up.--Launchballer 07:59, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

Well, her acceleration, speed, and weight are around the same stats if you look in the game. I checked, and she wasn't exceptionally well at anything except for drifting. Two of her kart's stats in acceleration, speed, and weight are in about the same area. Her stats seem to be a little bit lower than Mario and Luigi's but she has high drifting.

Also, the reason I said speed, acceleration, and weight is because those stats differentiate between classes majorly, but not drifting and items. I'm not sure about handling, but I think Lightweights get the better handling.

Ray Trace^(T|C)

She is a middleweight character. I saw via MKDS japanese website...

¢oincoll€ctor Light characters has a light color tone, medium a medium tone, and heavy a strong tone.

I assume you're referring to Nintendo Japan's website for Mario Kart DS? Because I surely overlooked that part. --M. C. - "Mario Gals" Fan! User Page | Talk Page 16:59, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

In GameFAQs, I saw at least two FAQs that stated that Daisy is a middle-weight character. Usually, the person who writes the FAQ is correct. It's me, Mario! (Talk / Stalk) 22:08, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

Actually those faq tend to make mistakes, but people have already explained an official source listed her as medium so no one really needs reply anymore. ForeverDaisy09 03:09, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

Movie

I cant edit this page for some reasons but I just want to point out there is no section about her movie appearance. She plays quite a large part in the Super Mario Bros. Movie I'm surprised its not here especially when characters like Yoshi have sections on it Don Lark Kiin 21:49, 4 July 2010 (UTC)

The article has been protected so that only autoconfirmed users (users some number of days old) can edit it. And as to the section, it is located at Princess Daisy (film) - there was a proposal to split it. Marioguy1 (talk)

Maybe a small section using the main article template should be added because I think this page is where people would go if they wanted information on the character (god knows why anyone would though) Don Lark Kiin 13:29, 5 July 2010 (UTC)

A bit late but I wanted to point out that the film's Princess Daisy is the counterpart to the video game Princess Toadstool. Having spoken with the actual writer for the film I can confirm this. So a small section would do well on Princess Peach's article, but I don't think a mention is merited here. Redstar 23:30, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

Problem is that said info would be under "Other Media" -- and the Princess Peach article is mainly to target Peach's involvement in the main Mario series itself. However, I don't think it would hurt to place it in the movie article if it hasn't been mentioned already. --M. C. - "Mario Gals" Fan! User Page | Talk Page 01:36, 7 November 2010 (UTC)

I don't think it would hurt to write about her appearance in the movie; she still has the same name and in the movie her and Luigi are in love like in the regular games (although more Luigi than her) so it's not entirely pointless.

Mario Sports Mix (Princess Daisy's involvement)

Okay, so we know that Mario Sports Mix just got released in Japan; I just made changes to existing info so that it can reflect this release in regards to Daisy. However, is anyone on the case of getting the Japan version so that we can get the rest of the facts so that we can add the respective section about Daisy's participation in Mario Sports Mix itself? Let's get to it! --M. C. - "Mario Gals" Fan! User Page | Talk Page 19:41, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

Mario Hoops 3-on-3 alternate outfit

Shouldn't we add something abourt Daisy's alternate outfit from Mario Hoops 3-on-3 under the clothing section?

Tails777

I don't think we should; it's best to stick with the main outfits she wears in sports installments. It's fine as it is. --M. C. - "Mario Gals" Fan! User Page | Talk Page 21:18, 3 February 2011 (EST)

Actually, I meant kinda merge it into her sports outfit rather than a new section. I know that it would be useless to make a whole new section on an outfit she only wore once. So what I'm saying is to put a little info about it under the sports outfit. Scince it also appears in Mario Sports Mix, I think we should add it under the sports outfit section.

Tails777 (talk)

Hm, I THOUGHT this outfit was described on her page. The mention must've gotten removed somewhere between updating her outfit info. I'll add info about it. UhHuhAlrightDaisy 14:38, 17 February 2011 (EST)

Daisy's Trivia

The Birthstone on the Trivia, are you sure about that? I was born in April myself and I'm pretty sure the gem is Diamond. Sapphire is for September, and well, sapphire is incredibly blue. The emblem's like blue-green (turqoise w/e).
The preceding unsigned comment was added by Lavender (talk).

Well it said it was talking about the earlier games, where it wasn't green but blue, but you're right it's a diamond for April. UhHuhAlrightDaisy 00:09, 16 February 2011 (EST)

Tomboy

I'm not sure she can be described as a tomboy. She does have a lot of energy, but she is much more girly then boyish.
The preceding unsigned comment was added by John Galt (talk).

No. First of all that is your personal opinion. Secondly it has been a stated fact since her debut that she is a tomboy. UhHuhAlrightDaisy 04:57, 16 May 2011 (EDT)

Statues

Should we add to the "Luigi" section of "Relationships with Other Characters" that there is a statue of Daisy and Luigi dancing, as well as another with their baby counterparts? As the course is owned by Daisy, it proves that not only does Luigi show feelings for Daisy, she does the same for him. Seems quite notable to me. YL 03:55, 2 July 2011 (EDT)

Not really. It's implied that Daisy is to Luigi but is not 100% confirmed. The statue features Daisy and Luigi dancing but apparently not in love, the same with Baby Daisy with Baby Luigi, but this doesn't go to the case because we're talking about adult Daisy here.

¢oincoll€ctor

Shouldn't be changed that Daisy is the sister or cousin of Peach, because it does say on the offical Nintendo Mario Kart Wii guide that Daisy is the sister of Peach. Also I do agree with YL that Daisy and Luigi do have a strong relationship it's exactly like Mario and Peach's relationship. It doesn't really work for their baby counterparts. Why won't Nintendo admit that; they should really stop hateing on Luigi.

User:NintendoLuigiGuy 00:24, 21 September 2011 (EDT)

It does not say she is the sister. It says she is her cousin though. Which I thought I saw a mention of? Tomba 15:09, 16 July 2012 (EDT)

Mario is Missing!

Media:Example.ogv in the game, there is an unknown women who resembles Daisy quite a bit so that might be worth writting about. Daisy%20in%20mario%20missing.jpg
The preceding unsigned comment was added by Supergoomba (talk).

First off, why did you post Media:Example.ogv?

64Fan (Discussion)

Lol I didn't mean to, it just appeared there so just forget about it, I don't even know what it is.

I think it might be best to write it down in the trivia section along with the provided image. While the woman strongly resembles Daisy, we have no proof as to saying whether it actually is her (for all we know it can be just be an incorrectly coloured Peach). Her similarity to the character is best worth noting down in the trivia (even with no provided evidence). Propeller Toad (talk) 13:30, 13 November 2011 (EDT)

well i want to add it to trivia, but the page doesn't allow editing >:o

I added the information into the trivia along with a proper uploaded version of the image. Propeller Toad (talk) 17:37, 13 November 2011 (EDT)

It is possible that it is Daisy. I've played the game and I saw another information girl that looked like Princess Peach. Tails777 Talk to me!

Lol, well yeah it might be her. That's kinda what we were just talking about. I've heard about the Peach thing too and saw a picture of her.

Man, there is QUITE a resemblance isn't there? I think that maybe we should list it as a cameo, and put the picture in her gallery? Makes sense to me since it's CLEARLY a Daisy cameo!

-- Girls rule, for pink is a manly color! Pichi-Hime6! (talk · edits) 11:09, 19 November 2011 (EST)

I believe this specific screen was edited. I think the original had the woman in a blue dress. However, that does match the coloration Daisy was limited to in NES Open Tournament Golf. Tomba 15:08, 16 July 2012 (EDT)

It looks a lot like Daisy. Hmmmmmmm......Try going to Mario is Missing! and see what clues are there..

- DaisyLuigi (Talk to me!)

We've got a "Latest Game Appearance" problem here...

Okay, heads-up to all of us who are supporters of Daisy for this article -- we've got a conflict. In Japan, we've got two installments that have been released at the same time for Peach, appearance wise -- Mario Kart 7 and Fortune Street. Question is, do we put in MK7, Fortune Street, or both? Let discuss this so that we can figure out what to do in regards to the Latest Game Appearance change for our lead Mario girl here. Thanks! --M. C. - "Mario Gals" Fan! User Page | Talk Page 22:10, 30 November 2011 (EST)

Could we put both appearances there?

Tails777 Talk to me!

That's what I'm leaning toward, but let wait for more input from other Daisy supporters of this article before I proceed with the change (if not tonight, then during the course of tomorrow). --M. C. - "Mario Gals" Fan! User Page | Talk Page 22:13, 30 November 2011 (EST)

All right, the change has now been done; just snagged the time to do this. Issue now closed. --M. C. - "Mario Gals" Fan! User Page | Talk Page 11:11, 1 December 2011 (EST)

Retro Crown Color

Other than we know that Daisy now wears a golden crown like Peach as of Mario Party 4 when they had a major redesign (though Peach's major redesign was first in Super Mario Sunshine, but without the sleeves in that game), when we're talking about her retro design before Mario Party 4, saying that her crown was red......well since crowns are metallic and of crystalline substances, I think it makes better sense to say that her crown in her retro design was ruby, which we know is metallic/crystalline red color or tone. --PrincessDaisyFanatic3883 02:26, 29 February 2012 (EST)

Well, we really have no evidence that her crown was made out of ruby. So it is better to just say it was red. Besides, I don't think it matters what the crown was made of. it's color is red, so we say it's red.

-- Girls rule, for pink is a manly color! Pichi-Hime6! (talk · edits) 18:31, 2 March 2012 (EST)

Per this, plus I don't think is really is that important to have that difference mentioned in the article itself, even though the details mentioned are possibly valid based on images of Daisy I've seen. --M. C. - "Mario Gals" Fan! User Page | Talk Page 22:05, 2 March 2012 (EST)

Daisy power in Mario Golf Toadstool Tour

It is stated in the article that in her star form, Daisy has a distance of 275 yards, but actually it is 270. Cirdec (talk) 09:24, 26 August 2012 (EDT)

Wrong Chinese name

The Chinese company attached to Nintendo, iQue gave the Chinese traslation "菊花公主" (Jú Huā Gōng Zhǔ)， not 公主雏菊 Gōng Zhǔ Chú Jú Youquzhiji (talk)

I want to discuss it out

I got my edit undone by MeritC and Marshall Dan Troop because it seemed awkwardly placed and should go on Baby Daisy's page. I want to know why it was awkward. --APA TKB 17:29, 12 July 2013 (EDT)

Voice Actor

in her voice actor sextion it says deanna mustard voiced her after mario golf toadstool tour. this is wrong, deanna mustard did not voice her in Mario Party 5 which came after toadstool tour.
The preceding unsigned comment was added by 99.90.61.135 (talk).

Daisy in Mario Kart 8

If you go to the Mario Kart 8 page gallery, you can see her in the background in some pictures.
The preceding unsigned comment was added by 74.190.239.18 (talk).

She's confirmed ever since Mario Kart 8 is unveiled.

It's me, Mario! (Talk / Stalk) 15:00, 6 January 2014 (EST)

Another Cameo???!!!??

Listen guys, I found this picture of what is believed to be Rosalina and Princess Daisy in the animated film, Wreck it Ralph. Anyone see anything familiar??

I dunno. It might just be a rumor.

- DaisyLuigi (Talk to me!)

Well, they don't look alike. They probably made those character's up for the movie. Does anyone know if those "princesses" are real video game character's?--CastleResearch (talk) 11:39, 4 March 2014 (EST)

By the way, you could upload better image of that screenshot like say in HD quality to know for sure who those characters are since this one is not very good as you can barely see their faces. Just a thought...--CastleResearch (talk) 15:44, 4 March 2014 (EST)

Clothing

It says that her crown's jewels in the back and front are red. Doesn't her crown have her motifs in the front and back while in the sideways have two rubies(or red, whatever...)
The preceding unsigned comment was added by CastleResearch (talk).

Yep, you are right. What is the section stating the crown?I can fix it Ashley(and Red)

The clothing section, please.--CastleResearch (talk) 14:29, 6 March 2014 (EST)

Please remove the code box. it stretches the page and is uneccessary.

also, put in trivia dihso was in nintendo's mario golf world tour video BY HERSELF

What code box?

Are you Michaeloll from GameFAQs????

Ray Trace^(T|C) 14:38, 13 March 2014 (EDT)

Daisy's Talking

"A unique trait she retains is using slang and speaking with various accents. She has repeatedly used one-liners like, "yeah-hoo," said in dixie accent, and even, "yo," in an urban accent. She also has a sassy side and tends to stand idle with arms-akimbo. She is prone to air-kisses coupled with uttering, "mwah," during victory celebrations, and in the past has shown-off to get her way."

I don't agree that these sentences should stay because it's really over-analyzing. "Dixie" accent? "Urban" accent? These don't sound like accents; they sound like just little noises Daisy makes, and assuming that Daisy speaks with several accents just because of those little interjections is thinking too much. "Arms-akimbo"? That doesn't say anything about her personality, although gestures such as crossing-arms, hands clutched and behind the body, can tell about the feelings, but it still doesn't show personality anyhow. Again, I don't think this information should stay. It's me, Mario! (Talk / Stalk) 22:26, 4 April 2014 (EDT)

If it stays, it'll need much better wording. Lord G. matters. 01:32, 5 April 2014 (EDT)

I'm trying to not engage in an edit war here, but I don't like it in its current state.

It's me, Mario! (Talk / Stalk) 02:41, 5 April 2014 (EDT)

See this is the thing that I mentioned before, though. She doesn't just do this in the form of interjections. The thing was, though, that just because you don't know of the situations that display these traits, doesn't mean it isn't so. And the problem is, the small points used are all this wiki appropriately allows for. The one-liners DO contribute to this because of the fact there are more detailed ways she has done it that can't be drawn out in the description because that would be over-explaining and putting too much detail into it. I could show you this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=89Q-YTY7H9c In this video you can see her displaying the Urban slang "Uh-huh, alright, DAISY" while brushing off her shoulders, acting sassy, "Hot stuff!" she feels the heat of herself and exclaims "yyeah!" And how she stands and gestures has A LOT to do with her personality, because her demeanor is all about what her personality reads and how she evokes that. She is common to have her hands on her hips, to gesture a certain way that shows off all the aspects of her personality even in a still artwork as used in the section. But to over-explain it like I'm doing now in the article itself is just inappropriate for the wiki, so instead it's written as a concise, short list of minor examples because it's not there to prove a point or to convince you of anything. It shouldn't have to because it's only there to state something based on these facts, not restate and reverify them for you personally. On one hand you say it's over-analyzing, on the other there isn't enough reasoning there for you to consider it valid. You are contradicting yourself, so it just seems like you have a problem with the very idea the article gets to say she has a personality or something. "bite me if you dare?" Go bite yourself. UhHuhAlrightDaisy (talk) 15:17, 24 May 2014 (EDT)

Bringing this up again, this statement is problematic: "A unique trait she retains is using various American English accents and slang. She has repeatedly used one-liners said in a Dixie accent, Valleyspeak, and even Ebonics." This qualifies as confusing jargon, which is generally discouraged (even though it's not specifically outlined in MarioWiki:Good writing, but I'd still say it's flirting with "reading between the lines"). The most we can conclude from her interjections alone is that she's excitable and loud, that's really all there is to her speech. There's no need to add that she has an American accent because Peach probably has one too and same thing for anyone who is in the Mario cartoons. It's me, Mario! (Talk / Stalk) 16:21, 20 August 2015 (EDT)

Update: It's been removed.

It's me, Mario! (Talk / Stalk) 21:53, 20 August 2015 (EDT)

Re-feature?

So we've edited most of the details, pictures, sections, breaks, and flowery fluff that was needed for Daisy's requirements. She was recently unfeatured. I know we just changed it, but can we re-feature this article?

The article cannot be improved because that would be straying into the precious, exclusive property of one particular user.

It's me, Mario! (Talk / Stalk) 03:18, 16 May 2014 (EDT)

So who was the numb skull who decided to revert Daisy's main picture as that derpy af old looking one?

AT LEAST put back up the mario party 8 artwork or even the mario kart 7 portrait of her!

Or even a DIHSO instead of her in that old dress.

long storybook short [rosalina's sucks], daisys picture should be more modern than this eye-sore ancient piece of crap image
The preceding unsigned comment was added by 128.120.191.43 (talk).

Boo-hoo. And what the f*ck is a "DIHSO"?

It's me, Mario! (Talk / Stalk) 03:18, 16 May 2014 (EDT)

I think it stands for "Daisy In Her Sports Outfit"... LinkTheLefty (talk) 08:16, 16 May 2014 (EDT)

Give me a break.

It's me, Mario! (Talk / Stalk) 19:03, 16 May 2014 (EDT)

If you want it changed, create a ---ing account and get it autoconfirmed and discuss it because bitching and moaning about minor changes like this won't get you anywhere.

Ray Trace^(T|C) 20:08, 16 May 2014 (EDT)

It don't matter because the edits are going to be reverted anyway.

It's me, Mario! (Talk / Stalk) 20:09, 16 May 2014 (EDT)

Why Daisy's Main Page artwork is still Outdated?

Daisy's artwork was updated way back in 2011 (Mario Kart 7) to Match the current Renders of the rest of the characters. This artwork has a solo version (Without the car) that has been used in tons of promotionals and most recently , in MP10 that was released just yesterday. So Why Daisy's artwork is still MP8'S While , Mario , Luigi , Peach and even Toadette have their MP10 Artwork now?--Swiftie Luma (talk) 13:36, 12 March 2015 (EDT)--Swiftie Luma (talk) 13:36, 12 March 2015 (EDT)

Princess Daisy was NEVER voiced by Kate Flemming with proof

It was actually Jessica Chisum who originally voiced Daisy She was credited for her. Sources http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0276320/?ref_=nm_knf_i1

http://toposwopetalent.com/talent/7604/jessica-chisum/
The preceding unsigned comment was added by WaluigiWarrior (talk).

It was corrected in the List of Mario Tennis (Nintendo 64) staff page, like two years ago. Good thing that you updated this in the "Portrayals" section recently. - Infinite8 03:46, 9 June 2017 (EDT)

MKA:GP DX

The section for Daisy in Mario Kart Arcade GP DX is missing. Can someone add it? B ron 3000 22:22, 6 August 2017 (EDT)

Hey i found a grammar error and Daisy doesn't deserve that can someone please edit it

see it should say "where there is" not "where is" please edit this daisy deserves proper grammar on her page

14:16, 17 October 2017 (EDT)Celastrina (talk) 14:16, 17 October 2017 (EDT)celastrina

Fixed it. --

TheFlameChomp (talk) 14:18, 17 October 2017 (EDT)

With all due respect, there was nothing stopping you from editing it yourself. That's what wikis are for...anyone can edit. You could have fixed it yourself, just so you know. Also, with further respect, is saying things like "deserves proper grammar" even necessary? It doesn't seem to achieve anything. CrashBash (talk) 15:36, 17 October 2017 (EDT)

The page is protected against non-autoconfirmed users. Hello, I'm Time Turner. 15:39, 17 October 2017 (EDT)

Oh, OK. Still doesn't explain the "deserves proper grammar" part. CrashBash (talk) 10:17, 18 October 2017 (EDT)

Don't all the pages on the wiki deserve proper grammar? They're clearly a Daisy fan. Nothin' wrong with that. UhHuhAlrightDaisy (talk) 10:37, 18 October 2017 (EDT)

Where did this came from?

In the personality section, it says "Daisy is portrayed as willing to put friendships and other interests aside when it comes to sports and competitions; she also hates losing and trains hard to win. She likes to go shopping and dine at fine restaurants but gladly passes up such enjoyments to train, instead."

Althought I know for sure the first part is partially true (various of her losing animations in sports games shows her angry at losing), I cant remember where the rest of the info came from. I dont remember any in-game statement of she liking to dine at restaurants and even less of giving up on it for training. User:Ashley anEoTselkie/sig 08:20, 26 January 2018 (EST)

One of the Olympic games. From the official profiles sub-page:

Flag Description (Wii U version)

Daisy

The peppy princess of Sarasaland is having a blast at the Olympic Games! In her downtime, she plans to chow down at fine restaurants and maybe get a little shopping in with Peach.

And there you have it. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 08:42, 26 January 2018 (EST)

Oh, thanks for the info! Didnt know that.User:Ashley anEoTselkie/sig

information We Don't have.

There's some Offical info on a Different Which has info about Princess Daisy's Relationships (Mainly about Luigi) That We Don't have. am i allowed To Put The Wiki's Link Here or is that only For Wikis that are Related To this one Like Donkey Kong Wiki and SmashWiki? LUIGIRULES71 (talk) 23:57, 3 February 2018 (EST)

What's the link?

Mario JC 00:45, 4 February 2018 (EST)

To The Wiki? LUIGIRULES71 (talk) 04:35, 4 February 2018 (EST)

Unless you're referring to a different link, yes.

Mario JC 07:06, 4 February 2018 (EST)

Here. http://we-are-daisy.wikia.com/wiki/Daisy%27s_Relationships LUIGIRULES71 (talk) 07:49, 4 February 2018 (EST)

That is a fan wiki and is not a reliable source of information, though much of it is derived from in-game content and descriptions, and any information like that can simply be added to the article, so linking/referencing this is unnecessary anyway.

And you don't need to sign your name three times.

Mario JC 08:29, 4 February 2018 (EST)

Oh Really? i Thought it Was interesting Because it had information about The Nintendo World Store in 2013 Where Luigi Was asked about Daisy. {{|LUIGIRULES71}} LUIGIRULES71 (talk) 19:59, 5 February 2018 (EST)

How many games Daisy has appeared in doesn't matter

Statements such as "With the frequent release of Mario installments, Daisy has been in over 60 video games so far, the most of any female character besides Princess Peach." in the intro are meaningless without any further context. Daisy having the second most appearances in video games for a female character is not an important statement to make, since this statement ultimately conflates that her playable character roster role in many small subseries has any sort of meaningful legacy and impact as video games as a whole-this statement in the intro does make a comparison with other female characters in the video games in the first place-when arguably Daisy's appearances as part of a character roster in a Mario spin-off does not. The only reason Peach has this statement is because she's an iconic, recognizable video game icon who has the history behind her to justify statements of her appearances in video game titles. You can essentially make the same statement with Donkey Kong is the most playable gorilla, Yoshi is the most playable dinosaur, etc; all which are technically accurate, but nothing noteworthy in an article. Ray Trace^(T|C) 15:00, 16 March 2018 (EDT)

I think it's worth mentioning, because Daisy has not just appeared in just a lot of games, she has appeared in a variety of them. This includes being playable in large blockbuster titles such as Smash Bros and Mario Kart and Mario Party etc. for years, and she complements Peach like Luigi does Mario, offering a different personality. --Memoryman3 (talk) 10:59, 14 February 2019 (EST)

Remove the Peach is Daisy's cousin part in the wiki

A lot of controversy has happened regarding Peach and Daisy due to Prima's misinformation of Daisy being Peach's cousin being in their books. Oddly, this information has been stuck on the wiki without ever being verified, but I have took time to purchase one of these books. The page number is 29 from the Double Dash strategy book, BUT... the first page of this strategy guide says as follows "The first page has a disclaimer: "the publisher makes no warranty, either expressed or implied, as to the *ACCURACY*, effectiveness, or completeness of the material in THIS book; nor ... assume liability for damages, ..., that may result from using information this book." Basically, they're saying that misinformation can appear in the book and they will not be held accountable for them. So I think it's best if the misinformation would be removed to prevent further confusion.

If you need picture proof, you can find it here: https://twitter.com/taddlelegacy/status/1011749866509295616 Ilovecrt (talk) 19:22, 26 June 2018 (EDT)

While true they got it wrong, we still make a note of it...because they got it wrong. Wiki article even says that this hasn't been confirmed, but should still be noted regardless. Thanks for providing a reference for this, though, it was asking for one! 19:27, 26 June 2018 (EDT)

Anyways, Nintendo Power has proven worse in this sort of regard anyways (NSMB guide, anyone?), so don't act like Prima's the ultimate evil or whatever. I am sick of people doing that. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 19:34, 26 June 2018 (EDT)

What's wrong with the NSMB guide? 19:39, 26 June 2018 (EDT)

No idea I didn't see this until now, but it started a long string of misnaming "Sledge Bro" as "Sumo Bro" among other stupid mistakes. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 06:02, 8 March 2019 (EST)

Regarding the Princess Daisy promo picture for Super Mario Party

Yeah, I think that we are in a predicament here in terms of the newest promo artwork picture that just surfaced involving Daisy for Super Mario Party. Although the wiki's policy says that we aren't to change the infobox picture to the latest "standard" picture of said character until the game is released, would an exception be placed here (because in this one, Daisy is also winking; and in my honest opinion, the one for Mario Party 10 is still worth having active in the infobox because both of her eyes are open). Other than that, I still do believe this qualifies to be placed in the main article itself when the time comes, especially in the Personality section, perhaps. --M. C. - Profile | Talk Page 12:45, 14 September 2018 (EDT)

No need to change it right now. New picture can remain in the Gallery for the time being. Though, tbh, the Mario Party section could probably be reworked. 15:24, 14 September 2018 (EDT)

Uh, I was referring to when the Super Mario Party game itself gets released early next month; that's when we have to decide on if the current infobox picture still stays, or if the majority opinion says it needs to be changed. --M. C. - Profile | Talk Page 12:35, 15 September 2018 (EDT)

I don't see how a wink negates it being good new main art when the previous one is from 2011. It's way too old, so when the game comes out, we should really replace it with this new one. UhHuhAlrightDaisy (talk) 18:06, 14 September 2018 (EDT)

The thing is that the one we've got now it still a great "standard picture" in terms of representing Daisy herself, so I still think an exception should be made in this case in terms of having that be kept on the article. If anything, though, when the time comes after Super Mario Party gets released, the respective art for Daisy needs to be put someone on the article page itself (I'm still thinking it definitely qualifies for the "Gallery" preview section here). --M. C. - Profile | Talk Page 18:26, 3 October 2018 (EDT)

I don't see why this is a problem. It's a wink. If anything, it shows her character more. 18:32, 3 October 2018 (EDT)

@Alex95 and UhHuhAlrightDaisy - I rest my case; upon closer inspection it seems that this said picture is way better than her other "standard" one for the infobox. And I see that someone has just changed it already, infobox wise. But I still think the other picture still qualifies for the gallery preview section; will check into that momentarily. --M. C. - Profile | Talk Page 21:21, 4 October 2018 (EDT)

Smash Bros Ultimate

Since Smash Bros. came out, I think the Powers and Abilities section probably needs revising - since we have confirmation that the powers she displayed needed to be approved from the Mario IP team. Daisy was shown to float using her dress in that game. Also, can we remove the hurt-box altering thing? It's so trivial and negligible that it doesn't affect how she plays at all. --Memoryman3 (talk) 15:16, 13 February 2019 (EST)

Mario IP team? And the differing hurtboxes should stay, as it's one of the few differences she had between her and Peach. 15:18, 13 February 2019 (EST)

Yes. There's an IP team that oversees the character handling and more, for all games a character appears in. It has been mentioned in several interviews, from the Mario and Rabbids team, to Alphadream's lack of original characters in some Mario games, to Camelot talking about how they weren't free to portray Waluigi in any way they like, and even the Smash Bros team. As for the hurtbox thing, it's so trivial that it doesn't affect gameplay 99.9% of the time. It's just a result of the differing animations which I already covered in my last revision. --Memoryman3 (talk) 10:54, 14 February 2019 (EST)

Luigi's Mansion 3

Hello, I was just seeing this page about Daisy and when I scrolled to the list of appearances I saw something very strange, it says that Daisy appear as an artwork for Luigi's Mansion 3 and I was like "WHAT?" I never heard anything about Daisy been referenced in any way in Luigi's Mansion 3. I search this on google and I found nothing, I also went in the gallery and this artwork wasnt there, that makes me think that this might be fake because why this was just labeled in this list in the end of the page, instead of doing a proper paragraph? Princess Daisy is underappreciated character that I personally like very much, if she was referenced in Luigi's Mansion 3 this would be a major thing that needs to be written in this page, so anyone can check about this?
The preceding unsigned comment was added by 201.95.221.72 (talk).

If anything, the artwork would be in the Paranormal Productions area, where there's references to other series like Punch-Out and Metroid. But I'm not sure. 13:56, July 17, 2020 (EDT)

From the source that I found for the Daisy appearance (https://mobile.twitter.com/MarioBrothBlog/status/1229877802729660417/photo/1) this is as much of an appearance for Daisy as it is for Wario, Waluigi and Donkey Kong... I really don't think it should count. Exodecai

We don't have this artwork on the wiki, is it directly pulled from Strikers Charged or is it new artwork created as a reference to the game? If it's the latter then it should probably be noted for all of them as they intentionally were included. --

Too Bad! Waluigi Time! 11:47, August 3, 2021 (EDT)

Changing the current Daisy artwork used on the Mario Wiki

Let me explain:

So basically i didn't really like the MPSS artwork being used as the main Daisy article image, so i wanted to change it to another artwork from MPSS (specifically the one where she happily jumps) but since you can't edit Daisy's article page i can't do that... So if anyone can, could you change the artwork for me? Please? Thank you. Shadic 34 (talk) 12:31, January 19, 2022 (EST)

It chalks down to personal preference but I still think Super Mario Party art generally wins out (I'm not fond of the posing of the current one). If you want to change the art, I think you have to first try to get a talk page consensus. If that doesn't settle it, we usually do talk page proposal, such as here or here. I think one reason we're not using the jumping one is that her eyes are closed and the posing a little too dynamic, probably why Bowser Jr. doesn't use his handstanding art.

It's me, Mario! (Talk / Stalk) 19:46, January 19, 2022 (EST)

Mario Party Superstars appearance?

The section for her appearances in the Mario Party series still list her latest appearance as Super Mario Party, even though Mario Party Superstars is listed in her appearances by date. Should this be fixed? KRcanondorf (talk) 14:55, March 24, 2022 (EDT)

Absoloutely.

Nightwicked Bowser

15:12, March 24, 2022 (EDT)

Looks like this still hasn't been updated, I'd make the change myself but I don't have edit permissions for the page. KRcanondorf (talk) 16:00, April 19, 2022 (EDT)

I'm not sure what you're referring to. The "Mario Party series" and "List of appearances by date" sections and the infobox all mention Superstars' appearance.

Mario JC 07:23, April 20, 2022 (EDT)

I asked this on April 19th, the 'Mario Party' section was updated on April 20th. It's resolved now so ignore my previous comment :) KRcanondorf (talk) 00:40, April 24, 2022 (EDT)

Oh I didn't even see Tails777's edit, ignore mine too then.

Mario JC 01:12, April 24, 2022 (EDT)

GBA Appearances

Does she have any appearances in the Game Boy Advance platform? I couldn't find any specific information about her appearance in the GBA. Mario Tennis GBC had her, but Power Tour didn't. Windy (talk) 07:37, May 1, 2022 (EDT)

Only games with GBA in a cartridge are listed. Windy (talk) 05:46, May 25, 2022 (EDT)

If you can't find mentions of her appearance in cartridge GBA games (which excludes Mario Party-e) in any capacity, it means she hasn't made an appearance in GBA games any capacity. It sure makes for a fun fact though! Try it with your fellow Mario fans!

It's me, Mario! (Talk / Stalk) 21:10, May 25, 2022 (EDT)

After all, she never physically appeared in cartridge GBA games. She didn't appear as a playable character on a handheld console until NDS. In addition, she was nothing different than a spin-off only character until 2015. Windy (talk) 22:48, May 25, 2022 (EDT)

aniwotawiki said GBA has no appearance. Windy (talk) 17:27, June 4, 2022 (EDT)

New artwork for Daisy’s profile?

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.

vetoed by the administrators
This is not something that requires a proposal. The artwork will definitely be used, but the rule is that the infobox isn't updated until the related game is released.
Hello! Since we have a brand new artwork for Daisy from the upcoming game Super Mario Bros. Wonder, I think it quite fits for her as her profile artwork for the following reasons: 1. it’s from a mainline game, 2. it’s more recent, 3. it is (or,it will be) higher quality than her MPS artwork. What do you think?

Mario Party Superstars, current profile
Super Mario Bros. Wonder artwork

Proposer: Wallowigi (talk)
Deadline: July 6, 2023, 23:59 GMT

Support

Oppose

Swallow (talk) Per Template:Character infobox, the artwork can only be updated after the game's release.

Comments

Regarding Daisy's physical appearance

Not wanting to be rude, but that section of Daisy's page has so much mess going on. Other members of the wiki explicitly stated to not fill the princesses' pages with fan-worship cruft and have trimmed their physical appearance sections (I did it as well), yet some editors here continue doing so. I recommend protecting Daisy's page, or making a disclaimer about it, as I do not want to make edit wars by undoing other users' edits to watch them be brought back. Honestly, seeing every small detail of Daisy's appearance and highlighting how tan her skin is when it's actually really inconsistent from game to game and even between artworks of the same game (she has always ranged from very pale to being just as "tan" as the male characters) is all but encyclopedic. Please stay actually true to sources and avoid POV. Wallowigi (talk) 13:00, October 13, 2023 (EDT)

other appearances

I wanted to discuss about it since it's a major change, but this section feels a little messy. Shouldn't the Arcade GP 1/2 section go under Mario kart instead of being here? The Mario Movie reference is very minor and feels like it belongs there more than the previous one does. PrincessDaisyForever

Move to "Daisy"

This talk page section contains an unresolved talk page proposal. Please try to help and resolve the issue by voting or leaving a comment.

Current time: Sunday, November 24, 2024, 01:10 GMT

This is a big one.

The Super Mario Wiki's naming policy suggests that an article should use the most common English name for a subject, with in-game names having priority over all other names. Somewhat recently, a proposal that I wrote was passed to move "Baby Donkey Kong" to "Baby DK", on the grounds that using a common in-game name takes priority over using the "full name".

This same idea, I believe, is also relevant with Princess Daisy. While "Princess Daisy" is her full title, and it appears somewhat often in paratext and in in-game dialogue, to my knowledge, there has never been a game where Daisy is called "Princess Daisy" in-game as her primary name. The use of the title "Princess Daisy" is about on par with how often Bowser is called variations of "King Bowser".

For the sake of completeness, here is every game I'm aware of where Daisy is called "Princess Daisy" in-game (and not just in associated paratext):

Super Mario Bros. Print World, which also uses "Daisy" to refer to one image of Princess Peach
Mario Superstar Baseball and Mario Super Sluggers, where "Daisy" is used as her primary name but she's called both "Daisy" and "Princess Daisy" in dialogue, depending on who's referring to her
Fortune Street, in the same situation as the baseball games
Super Mario Run, where "Daisy" is her primary name but both "Daisy" and "Princess Daisy" are used in different in-game descriptions of Remix 10
Super Smash Bros. Ultimate, where she's called "Daisy" except once during Palutena's Guidance

While I doubt this is truly a comprehensive list, I spent the past few hours checking this for every single game Daisy has ever appeared in, and I can confirm that "Daisy" is and always has been her most commonly used in-game English name, ever since Super Mario Land's "Oh! Daisy".

A very similar argument could theoretically be made for Princess Peach, but I believe that the case for moving "Princess Daisy" to "Daisy" is much stronger. The full title "Princess Peach" is prominently featured in some games in a way that "Princess Daisy" seemingly never has been, and since Peach's official English name has changed over time anyway it's not as simple to check what version of her name has been used more often. As such, this proposal only concerns Daisy, and additional research would be necessary to determine if it would make sense to suggest the same thing for Peach or not.

Proposer: JanMisali (talk)
Deadline: July 14, 2024, 23:59 GMT

Move to "Daisy"

JanMisali (talk) As proposer.
LinkTheLefty (talk) It's been a long time coming.
Cadrega86 (talk) per proposal
Hewer (talk) This is long overdue, per all.
Super Mario RPG (talk) Per all.
Camwoodstock (talk) At first, we were honestly kinda skeptical, but after reading the proposal... Wow, they really avoid using "Princess Daisy", huh? We don't see any particular reason not to go with this. Per proposal.
Tails777 (talk) Oh believe me, this has been on my mind for ages. And you even have the whole King Bowser comparison that's ALSO been on my mind when thinking about this. Per proposal!
SolemnStormcloud (talk) Per all.
Pseudo (talk) Per all – seems really similar to King Bowser.
Jazama (talk) Per all
Koopa con Carne (talk) Per proposal. Peach and Daisy are different characters and the way one is treated should have no bearing on the other.
Shy Guy on Wheels (talk) Per proposal. This page being titled 'Princess Daisy' feels like something from years ago that people haven't questioned because it seems like it makes sense, but this proposal shows that her name just being "Daisy" is very a intentional and consistent choice.
Blinker (talk) I think the "keep names short" explanation stops making sense when the same games that use stuff like "Daisy" and "Larry" also have names like "Mr. Game & Watch" and "Light-blue Shy Guy (Explorer)". Per all.

Keep as "Princess Daisy"

DrBaskerville (talk) While the proposal makes a compelling argument and isn't wrong in any of its assertions, Peach and Daisy share so many similarities in so many different regards that unless we're changing the name of Peach's page, which I don't think we should and which you acknowledge would be a harder case to sell, then I think both should include "Princess" in their page names. I consider "Princess" as much a part of Daisy's name as "Prince" is to Prince Mush, Princess Shroob, Queen Bean, Princess Lipid, King Bob-omb, King K. Rool, Queen Bee, Queen Nimbus, King Nimbus, or King Boo, etc. (and believe me the list goes on), not just a title that is oftentimes associated with her, like referenced in the "King Bowser" example in the comments. While the naming policy discourages titles in article names, we can hardly rename King Boo's article to "Boo", King Bob-omb to "Bob-omb", Queen Bean to "Bean", Queen Shroob to "Shroob", etc. There are sometimes when exceptions need to be made, including in cases wherein the titles essentially become their "main" names, which I think includes the cases of Daisy and Peach.
PrincessPeachFan (talk): Shall we move all the other articles to not use royalty titles.
TheUndescribableGhost (talk) The princess name is still pretty common. I mean sure, Daisy is pretty unprincess-like, but it's not like that title is as rare as Princess Rosalina is. It's like if the SpongeBob wiki went to change Patrick Star's name to Patrick, because it's more common to call him by his first name. I mean, it's not like I don't don't that on Lumpypedia where where Russell the Pirate and Splendid the Flying Squirrel use shorthand names, but that was because of how quickly they were retired while Princess still has enough. It reminds me of the Koopaling situation.
Nintendo101 (talk) I think the arguments raised about other characters are a little dishonest - Daisy is a way more ubiquitous character in the franchise than King Boo or Queen Bee, and the point of this proposal is just that "Daisy" is more commonly used in isolation. That is never done with any of these other characters, and it is silly to suggest that this proposal would lead to all characters with royal monikers being truncated. However, I would not be comfortable with a rename like this unless one was also raised for Princess Peach. If this proposal was adjusted to allow for that as options, I may change my vote.
Ahemtoday (talk) The inconsistency between Peach and Daisy's articles would just bug me. Frankly, I feel like they should both get the "Princess" lopped off.
Technetium (talk) Per Nintendo101 and Ahemtoday’s comments.
Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) - She's only really called "Daisy" in the games where Peach is just called "Peach," which appears to be mainly an attempt to keep the names short (like how many of those same games call Donkey Kong "DK"). The only difference here is that that makes up most of Daisy's appearances, but it's still used otherwise. Granted, I can see it going either way, but reminder that the proposal to move the Koopalings to their more common short names failed.
FanOfYoshi (talk) Per all.
Sdman213 (talk) Per all.
Wallowigi (talk) Her title is central to her identity, especially since all of her game profiles point out that her character conflicts with the (inconfutable) fact she is a princess. Bowser and Rosalina are bad comparison; the former is seldom called a king (and is generally portrayed as the leader of a population, rather than the ruler of a physical place; he does not even wear a crown, thus he’ll be almost always called just Bowser, as if he was just an army general), while Rosalina’s nobility status is ambiguous. It has always been implied she is royalty (why would she wear a crown after all?) but has never been called a princess in-game, while Daisy has, and multiple times at that.
SeanWheeler (talk) Per all.
Shoey (talk) Per all.
MCD (talk) - Per all.
SmokedChili (talk) Per all. Like with the Koopalings' full names, "Princess Daisy" as an article title has innate disambiguation in case an object or another character named "Daisy" appears and gets coverage on this wiki, so I see keeping this as it is as a long-term failsafe.

Comments

Even official material outside of games may prefer using "Daisy" without "princess". Take this puzzle activity on play.nintendo.com, where Daisy is very specifically called just that in the activity's description and the completion message (even though the former also mentions her ruling Sarasaland), whereas Peach is consistently referred to with her full title. -- KOOPA CON CARNE 17:13, June 30, 2024 (EDT)

Would we move "Princess Peach" to "Peach" at some point? Because I'm fairly certain that name sees greater use than the full "Princess Peach" across her game appearances. - Nintendo101 (talk) 22:23, June 30, 2024 (EDT)

@Nintendo101 I wouldn't be opposed to such a move. I generally don't like characters' full names in page titles, since that's basically duplicating the intent behind the full_name parameter in the character infobox. Perhaps the Koopalings can be renamed too. Super Mario RPG (talk) 22:29, June 30, 2024 (EDT)

FWIW I'd support renaming the Koopalings, not so sure about Peach though.--Cadrega86 (talk) 17:53, July 1, 2024 (EDT)

Seconded. The last attempt to rename the Koopalings failed, but given there's now more precedent (and that the last proposal's failure was due in part to a strange division of the support option), it might be worth another shot. Hewer (talk · contributions · edit count) 18:58, July 1, 2024 (EDT)

@DrBaskerville: I don't believe the naming policy "discourages titles", it's just a matter of using the most common name for the character, which in this case (and not in the other cases you mention) is inarguably just Daisy. Peach is Princess Peach far more often than Daisy is Princess Daisy, hence we should handle these case-by-case. If it's a precedent you want though, there's Princess Rosalina. Hewer (talk · contributions · edit count) 03:33, July 1, 2024 (EDT)

I agree that it should be evaluated on a case-by-case basis, and thank you for the clarification on the naming policy. As I said in my response by acknowledging the validity of the proposal, I don't disagree that Daisy is more commonly used; I do, however, think that "Princess Daisy" remains the best title for the page given how closely tied she is to Princess Peach. Rosalina was a good counterexample. You have me there, but, again, case-by-case basis.

Dr. Baskerville

04:10, July 1, 2024 (EDT)

So, shall we do things like move King Boo to just Boo or King Bob-Omb to just Bob-omb? PrincessPeachFan (talk) 12:47, July 1, 2024 (EDT)

No. This proposal is not that we shouldn't use royal titles in general. The question is about the primary name of the subject, and to my knowledge there has never been a game where "Princess Daisy" is used as Daisy's primary name. We don't call Princess Rosalina or King Bowser by their royal titles in their article names either. jan Misali (talk · contributions) 12:50, July 1, 2024 (EDT)

I guess if I can keep expanding on my arguments, we also have cases such as Eric Cartman, where the character's name is typically Cartman. The other South Park boys are called by their first names typically, Stan Marsh, Kyle Broflovski, and Kenny McCormick. Sure, wikis don't use Eric Theodore Cartman, but they at least use Eric Cartman, because that is occasionally said. Kenny also has a full name, but it just uses these two names. It's also noteworthy, because Daisy isn't the only fictional character named Daisy. Heck, we have another character in the series named Daisy! And of course, the Crazee Dayzees. This isn't really the Princess Rosalina situation. TheUndescribableGhost (talk) 20:46, July 1, 2024 (EDT)

...What? We aren't a South Park wiki or a SpongeBob wiki or anything else, we're a Mario wiki. It doesn't matter if other wikis would handle this differently, they're entirely separate wikis with their own policies. This kinda is the Princess Rosalina situation - it's a full name that's occasionally but not regularly used. And what do other characters named Daisy have to with anything? "Daisy" on its own is already a redirect to the princess. I'm struggling to make sense of your argument. Hewer (talk · contributions · edit count) 06:05, July 2, 2024 (EDT)

I agree with Hewer that the policies of other wikis don't generally advise Mario's Wiki's policies, so I would recommend against using other wikis as examples. My favorite part of your argument is reference to similarly named characters, like Crazee Dayzee and Creeper Launcher Daisy. Will we have to add a disambiguation to the renamed Daisy page to be "Daisy (Princess)"? That would defeat the whole purpose of the proposal in the first place. We can be fairly assured Nintendo won't release another character named "Princess Daisy", but, as seen with CLD, they're apparently not opposed to using the "Daisy" name altogether. I think that's just another reason to leave things as they currently are.

Dr. Baskerville

13:56, July 2, 2024 (EDT)

We do not need to use an identifier because people who look up "Daisy" are so very overwhelmingly more likely to be looking for the princess than the ghost. In fact, click this Daisy link and see where it takes you. Hewer (talk · contributions · edit count) 16:14, July 2, 2024 (EDT)

@Nintendo101 and Ahemtoday: As pointed out in the proposal (and Koopa con Carne's comment above), "Princess Peach" is used more often than "Princess Daisy", so they aren't in the same situation snd should thus be viewed as two separate cases. "Inconsistencies" like these aren't unprecedented - there's Donkey Kong but Baby DK, Mini-Mario and Jimmy P. (with punctuation) but Mini Luigi and Jimmy T (without), and we already don't use "Princess Rosalina". Hewer (talk · contributions · edit count) 05:30, July 4, 2024 (EDT)

"Princess Peach" is used, but it is worth scrutinizing if "Peach" in isolation sees greater use.

I have never personally felt convinced about the "Princess Rosalina" argument because it is a much more subdued element of that character, to the point that, growing up, I only learned she was occasionally referred to as "Princess Rosalina" through the references cited on this wiki. Her being a princess is essentially trivial. That is not the case for Peach and Daisy, who in nearly every in-game and paratextual bio are conveyed as rulers of a named land and look the part (from a Western pop culture perspective). The concept of them as true princesses is much more opaque than it ever was with Rosalina. - Nintendo101 (talk) 23:54, July 4, 2024 (EDT)

Sure Peach's name is worth scrutinizing, but that's still a separate discussion that I don't think has much reason to be linked to Daisy, where the long name is more obviously less common than the shortened one. Hewer (talk · contributions · edit count) 01:57, July 5, 2024 (EDT)

A few people have brought this up now so I should elaborate on this point. I agree that it could also make sense to move "Princess Peach" to "Peach". However, that is not part of this proposal; it would be a separate proposal. Even though the arguments for moving the two articles are similar, the main point I have for why "Daisy" is a better name for this article than "Princess Daisy" ("Princess Daisy" has never been her primary in-game name) does not apply to Peach, so even if these two things were combined into one proposal, they would still functionally be two independent proposals that people would have to develop opinions on separately regardless. I do not consider "I agree that the thing this proposal suggests should happen, but I also think a different thing that isn't part of this proposal should happen too" to be a sensible reason to vote against this proposal. jan Misali (talk · contributions) 10:35, July 5, 2024 (EDT)

I understand your reasoning. I personally remain unsupportive of a name-change proposal that only addresses Daisy and not Peach. The inconsistency would bother me if only one was changed, in the same way a name-change proposal for Luigi that would also be potentially applicable to Mario would bother me. I would only support a proposal of this nature if it addressed both of them. Sorry. - Nintendo101 (talk) 15:54, July 5, 2024 (EDT)

To ask this question in zero uncertain terms, out of our own morbid curiosity: if someone made a proposal to do the same to Peach mid-this proposal, regardless of who made it, would the existence of that proposal--and only the existence of that proposal, this is ignoring how the Peach proposal would actually go--change your vote here? ~Camwoodstock (talk) 19:18, July 5, 2024 (EDT)

Maybe? Depends on what this other proposal looks like. I personally think it'd be healthier to make one proposal discussing the merits of both and delineating the options as "Remove 'Princess' from the titles for Peach and Daisy", "Only move Princess Peach to Peach", "Only move Princess Daisy to Daisy", "Leave them as is." That's what I would've done at least. - Nintendo101 (talk) 14:14, July 6, 2024 (EDT)

What is the functional difference between that and two separate proposals? The only thing I can think of is that it would be harder for a joint proposal covering two independent changes to reach a majority vote than two separate proposals, but I'm sure that can't be the reason you'd prefer the two princesses to be covered by the same proposal. jan Misali (talk · contributions) 16:48, July 6, 2024 (EDT)

Quite a few of the arguments for one are applicable to both, and more importantly (for me at least), if the proposal passes, it means they would be changed at the same time so there is no prolonged period of time where one is called "Princess Peach" while the other is just called "Daisy". - Nintendo101 (talk) 17:42, July 6, 2024 (EDT)

As pointed out by Koopa con Carne at the top of this comment section, official sources aren't averse to doing exactly that. And again, I raise Jimmy T vs P., Mini-Mario vs Mini Luigi, and Donkey Kong vs Baby DK - why so much concern about consistency between two separate characters with separate appearances and separate names? Hewer (talk · contributions · edit count) 18:08, July 6, 2024 (EDT)

It just bothers me. Do I need a deeper reason? Others are welcomed to disagree. - Nintendo101 (talk) 19:53, July 6, 2024 (EDT)

MarioWiki:Proposals suggests that a user "must have a strong reason" for their vote, and that other users can "call for the outright removal of the vote if it lacks sufficient reasoning". jan Misali (talk · contributions) 13:15, July 7, 2024 (EDT)

I thought my vote would be received as understandable and innocuous, not as controversial or unsubstantiated. Perhaps that was naïve of me. Allow me to further substantiate my vote.

In the language (citing this article on film for context on what I am referring to – I do not mean literal written text) of nearly all of the games in which they both appear, Peach and Daisy are intended to mirror each other, and it has been that case for multiple decades and as recently as the latest mainline game entry in 2023. The relationship between these two as presented is comparable to that of Mario and Luigi, and I think to suggest that is unreasonable or subjective is not substantiated by the games they appear in together.

Consequently, I think to change the name of one character (Daisy) while leaving the other the same (Princess Peach), not only looks imbalanced, but also artificially trivializes their long-standing relationship by passively suggesting that Daisy is a wholistically different (and potentially even lesser) character to Peach. We as users may understand that to not be the case, but I uncritically felt that would be part of the impression to readers with a change for one without the other, in the same way a change of a name proposal affecting Luigi without Mario would be similarly received. Maybe that doesn’t matter to other users, and that’s fine. But it bothers me.

Why is this different from characters like Baby DK or Jimmy P. and their respective counterparts? It is readily obvious. It is because these characters are far less significant. Peach and Daisy are among the most prolific and recurring characters in the entire media franchise. I think Baby DK has appeared in two games. The name discrepancy between him and the adult Donkey Kong is fundamentally unimportant with regards to how they are perceived, and it is silly to suggest it is an analogous situation. - Nintendo101 (talk) 19:39, July 7, 2024 (EDT)

A proposal covering multiple articles at the same time doesn't mean the articles will be changed simultaneously. Goomba (film species) was merged about two months after Snifit (film species) even though they were decided by the same proposal, because those changes involved different amounts of work and were done by different editors. Changing "Princess Peach" to "Peach" site-wide would probably happen a little while after changing "Princess Daisy" to "Daisy" even if the two changes were approved simultaneously. jan Misali (talk · contributions) 18:35, July 6, 2024 (EDT)

People keep bringing up Rosalina, but has she ever been treated as a "princess" in-game at any time? From what I've seen, she's usually treated as more of a queen, but it seems to be deliberately left vague. Much unlike Daisy. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 15:38, July 6, 2024 (EDT)

To my knowledge, Rosalina has never been directly called a princess in-game (only in paratext), but I'm also unaware of anything outside of paratext saying directly that she's royalty of any kind, and I don't know what "usually treated as more of a queen" is supposed to be referring to. Regardless, the example I used in the proposal itself ("King Bowser") is a better comparison, I think. Daisy is almost never called Princess Daisy, but it's not a strictly paratext-exclusive title like "Princess Rosalina". jan Misali (talk · contributions) 16:41, July 6, 2024 (EDT)

Well, from what I can gather, it's sometimes unclear what kind of leader Bowser is anyway. In a lot of the more recent games, his minions (including the Koopalings) address him as Lord Bowser. I'm pretty sure "lord" is not the same thing as "king". Yet, Super Mario Party Jamboree has King Bowser's Keep as a board?
As for Rosalina, confusion about the Princess title existed before the game came out too. Apparently, back when the article was created on July 19 2007 under the name "Princess Rosetta", it was stated that the name came from a GoNintendo article around the time. They got the "Rosetta" name from a Famitsu article which they also posted; however, said Famitsu article never referred Rosetta as a princess, instead calling her a "mysterious woman" (謎の女性); the "princess" part came from GoNintendo, as they initially assumed Rosalina to be Peach before they found out the other princess's name is Rosetta, then wondered if Mario would be meeting other princesses in Galaxy. The only other official material I can find is the Prima Guide, which has "Not much is known about Rosalina, the lonely princess who wanders the cosmos in the Comet Observatory [...]" in her cast description. Buuuut Prima tends to get things wrong: the very same guide claims that Koopas like Bowser and Bowser Jr. are based on the kappa.
If you're asking me, people outside of Nintendo simply assumed Rosalina is a princess, just because she looks a lot like Peach, who is a princess; but these assumptions were never confirmed to be true by Nintendo. That's very different from Daisy, who has been officially confirmed a princess on several occasions as early as the Super Mario Land manual and box art.

rend (talk) (edits) 17:49, July 6, 2024 (EDT)

"Lord" is probably just being used in a non-technical sense to show Bowser's minions' deference to him, and the other three sources for "princess" in the infobox on Rosalina's article come straight from Nintendo. Either way though, I think we're losing track a bit of the point of this proposal - we aren't debating whether Daisy is a princess, we're debating whether she should be referred to by the name "Princess Daisy" or the name "Daisy", and the latter name is more common regardless of her royal status. Hewer (talk · contributions · edit count) 18:02, July 6, 2024 (EDT)

Rosalina's thing makes me think more of Disney's "Princess" brand, wherein most are not actually princesses, and many aren't even royalty. My point is that Rosalina's a bad example. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 18:39, July 6, 2024 (EDT)

@Doc von Schmeltwick: One of the proposal's main points is that there has never been a game in which she's primarily called "Princess Daisy". This isn't just "most of Daisy's appearances", it's all of Daisy's appearances. The "other" cases where "Princess Daisy" is used are in the minority. The Koopalings proposal may have failed, but as I brought up above, it's now contrasted with several successful name shortening proposals, and honestly the Koopalings should be next in line. And do you have an example of the DK thing? Because I've played my share of Mario spin-offs and can't think of one where the primary names for these characters weren't "Peach", "Daisy", and "Donkey Kong". Hewer (talk · contributions · edit count) 17:44, July 6, 2024 (EDT)

Every N64-era spinoff just called him "DK" on the select screen and often elsewhere. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 18:39, July 6, 2024 (EDT)

Well, it's not the N64 era anymore. He's been "Donkey Kong" in every Mario Kart game since Double Dash, every Mario Tennis game except the first one, every Mario Golf game since Toadstool Tour, every Baseball, Strikers, and Party game, every Mario & Sonic game... and in all of these games, Daisy is just Daisy. Hewer (talk · contributions · edit count) 19:23, July 6, 2024 (EDT)

@Wallowigi This proposal is not suggesting that the wiki should stop referring to Daisy as a princess. It is suggesting that the wiki should not use "Princess Daisy" as the name of this article. Regardless of what royal titles Bowser may or may not hold, he is called "King Bowser" (or other similar things) about as often as Daisy is called "Princess Daisy". jan Misali (talk · contributions) 16:15, July 7, 2024 (EDT)

I know. The problem here is that Princess Daisy is indeed an official name that reflects Daisy's princess status; the fact that she is called just "Daisy" more often does not go against that "Princess Daisy" is her full "name". If anything, I'd bring the outfit matter as comparison: Daisy has worn her sports outfit in more games than she has her dress as of now, but her picture is (rightfully) portraying a render of her with a dress. I think both this and the name matter make clear that she is a princess first and foremost, with her “casualness” being a secondary trait. Going by the logic of the proposal, that values the number of occurrences rather than their importance, Daisy's profile picture should be changed to one in her sports outfit. Of course, that's not my only reason to oppose the proposal; I think I should have added a “per all, but also” at the start. My actual main concern is the discrepancy with Peach's article title, since it can lead to misconceptions for both new wiki users and newbies with the Mario series- they'd understand that the character is just a casual girl who so happens to be a princess, despite her having been created as a stand-in for Peach itself, thus as the princess of her kingdom, which is the setting of the game itself. The Mario fandom is already chock full of misconceptions (terminally online fans like me know), and the thought of Daisy as being this casual tomboy who is probably not even a princess is already widespread. Changing only Daisy's title and not Peach's despite the two having been created for the same purpose would only bring these misconceptions further. If anything, I would only be in favor of moving "Princess Daisy" to "Daisy" if "Princess Peach" is also moved to "Peach".Wallowigi (talk)

No need to list every single trait that makes Daisy royalty, we know she is royalty. The proposal isn't about discounting Daisy's overall status as a princess, it's about dropping the "Princess" qualifier in the title of her article. "Princess Daisy" may be an official title, as the proposal points out, but the short version "Daisy" is used infinitely more across the franchise, even as far back as her debut appearance. Professor E. Gadd's page isn't called "Professor Elvin Gadd" for a very similar reason: his full name may be Elvin Gadd, but the shortened form sees much more use. -- KOOPA CON CARNE 17:46, July 7, 2024 (EDT)

The problem is that I don't think how changing the title of the article just for the number of occurrences of "Daisy" compared to "Princess Daisy" is a benefit for the wiki and/or the fandom in any way. Just re-read what I've said about her outfit. I've been a bit on the long side with words, but basically what I meant to say is "she’s Princess Daisy who occasionally wears sports clothes and is called just Daisy, not the contrary despite the effective number of occurrences of her titled name (and dress) are actually less". Calling the article "Daisy", or swapping her picture from her dress to her sports outfit just because of the number of appearances, would imply the character's royalty status is just an occasional persona of her. Wallowigi (talk)

Her outfit is completely irrelevant to the proposal and what it seeks to accomplish. You're the first one to bring up her physical appearance.
"Calling the article 'Daisy' [...] would imply the character's royalty status is just an occasional persona of her." Then again, we can't tell that Mario is a hero or plumber, that Rosalina is the protector of the cosmos, or that Donkey Kong is the leader of the Kong family from their page titles alone. -- KOOPA CON CARNE 18:15, July 7, 2024 (EDT)

I'm a bit confused by your dismissal of how much the name is used, and your earlier allusion to "importance" of appearances being a factor. What's an "important" appearance? And more importantly, how does that matter, considering that none of Daisy's appearances have primarily called her "Princess Daisy"? Hewer (talk · contributions · edit count) 19:02, July 7, 2024 (EDT)

@Koopa con Carne the outfit thing is to make a comparison, with the priority to number of appearances and all. If the title of a page should reflect the most used name for a character, why shouldn't the profile picture reflect the most common physical appearance of them? That's why the proposal seems flawed to me. Also I'm pretty sure Peach has been also called just Peach in more games than she has Princess Peach, so I really don't understand why change Daisy and not her as well (or, for the matter, add "King" to Bowser's page title). @Hewer none? :/ Not even Super Mario Land, where she is called "Daisy Princess" (a misnomer, but still “princess Daisy” backwards)? My "dismissal" of the number of appearances of a name, I've pointed out that just above with the case of Peach. Wallowigi (talk)

She isn't called "Daisy Princess" or "Princess Daisy" in SML, she's just called "Daisy". What you're referring to is the game's manual, which is a tier lower than the game itself according to the source priority policy. "If the title of a page should reflect the most used name for a character, why shouldn't the profile picture reflect the most common physical appearance of them?" Because the infobox picture and the article's title are two completely distinct aspects of this character and one of them had never once been mentioned in the proposal or the ensuing 30-comment discussion until you did. -- KOOPA CON CARNE 19:24, July 7, 2024 (EDT)

The game manual is still an acceptable source, as it has not been made by Prima. It's official Nintendo material. Also, given the canonicity policy, the name "Princess Daisy" is just as canon as Daisy is. It is not obsolete (see "Toadstool" for Peach, which has never been in use since the latter's confirmation), nor it has ever been retconned (heck, they still refer to her as Princess Daisy and mention Sarasaland when it could have been retconned a long time ago). In regards of the infobox, I don't see what is so different when the policies for the title to give an article and for the picture to be put in it are pretty much the same ([element] that is used the most/being judged the most representative of a character). Plus, do you really have to be so heated over a comment I haven't even made, but answered? AND reply to the point I've given in response to Hewer? We're not having a fight or a trial here. There's no "wrong" and "right", and you should expect opposition. After all, if you really put it in teams (which is petty and childish if you ask me), we're 13 to 13, so this proposal might even fail. Don't hold your hopes that much high for something that is not even that serious. Wallowigi (talk)

"Canon" isn't in question here. As the proposal acknowledges, Princess Daisy is her full title. This is about the naming policy, which recommends using the most common in-game English name for a subject, and in this case that's "Daisy". jan Misali (talk · contributions) 19:55, July 7, 2024 (EDT)

If you're sure you're trying to adhere to a policy that reportedly states what you've said, why make a proposal, then? :/ If you've made a proposal, you should expect at least some disagreement, as I've said before. I'm also not the only lone contrarian to disagree with your proposal, as there are other 12 people who have their own reasons to (as I've said, we're not "teams", nor do I consider them my "allies" since it’s not war), but they still are a considerable number of people. You could have just changed the article name to have your "victory" (at least before somebody would have probably reverted it back).Wallowigi (talk)

What point are you trying to make? Who are you replying to with the "we're not teams" thing? Nobody before you framed it in that way. I'm not trying to win an argument; I'm trying to correct what appear to be misunderstandings of what this proposal is suggesting and the reasons it has for suggesting it. Part of the responsibility of making a proposal is to clear up things like that when they happen. jan Misali (talk · contributions) 20:27, July 7, 2024 (EDT)

No one except you ever said that they expected no opposition, that you are a "lone contrarian", that we're "teams" in a "war", or that we're trying to achieve "victory". You appear to have made up all that pretence for the sake of your strawman argument. (Also, in response to what you said earlier, people can respond to each other's points in a conversation without implying a division of "teams" or a "wrong and right", I'm not really sure what you're trying to get at here.) Hewer (talk · contributions · edit count) 05:31, July 8, 2024 (EDT)

I'm not heated at all. Methinks you're doing a wee bit of projection lol -- KOOPA CON CARNE 02:29, July 8, 2024 (EDT)