Confused about the wiki's Super Mario (series) page

Legault

Monty Mole
http://www.mariowiki.com/Super_Mario_(series)

According to the above page, the Super Mario games represent "the biggest and most important sub-series of the Mario series." As such, determining which games are a part of the sub-series and which aren't seems fairly important, and I'm not sure I agree with the selection / location of games on that page. In particular:

-Neither Yoshi's Island nor Wario Land are included despite being 2D platformers, made by Nintendo, with the phrase "Super Mario" in their full titles (something which has led the official Wikipedia page to include both on their list of Super Mario titles). Though it could be argued that neither game features Mario as a playable character and that the level design doesn't "feel" like a typical Mario title, the same could be said of the "feeling" games like Sunshine had. Is Mario being the main character a requirement for being a Super Mario game? And if that's the criteria being employed here, then why?

-The absence of the first two Super Mario Land games is very confusing. They're 2D platformers made by Nintendo which star Mario; how are they not Super Mario games? Calling them their own sub-series would be like calling the NES trilogy a sub-series or the NSMB games a sub-series.

-3D Land is included in the main Super Mario series even when the other Land games are not. On the discussion page, someone mentioned that 3D Land is "considered" a part of the main series, but provided no references or argumentation. This makes little sense to me.

-The G&W Super Mario Bros. is neither a port nor a remake, but rather an entirely new game. Why isn't it treated as such?

I'm sure these have been talked about before, but I couldn't find anything. If someone could help me understand these decisions, that'd be great!

EDIT: A formal proposal has finally been put up. You can find and discuss it here: http://www.mariowiki.com/MarioWiki:Proposals#Comments
 

Knife

Searching for adventure
Retired Wiki Staff
I always thought the Super Mario series was a bucket term. In my opinion, everything that includes "Super Mario..." is part of the the Super Mario series. I don't think it matters whether Mario is the main character or not. But essentially, "Super Mario series" is a fan term, which has not been fully expanded on by Nintendo.

By the way, Wikipedia isn't any more official than us.
 

Legault

Monty Mole
Even if Super Mario is a bucket term, I'd like to see some consistency. Why is 3D Land included, but not Land 1 or 2? Why is SMBG&W placed in the Ports/Remakes section when it clearly isn't? Super Mario is my favorite series, so I was just hoping to understand the reasoning behind some of these decisions (as well as maybe make adjustments if necessary).

Oh, and I put "official" in italics because it was tongue-in-cheek. ;D
 

GalacticPetey

Donkey Kong
Legault said:
Even if Super Mario is a bucket term, I'd like to see some consistency. Why is 3D Land included, but not Land 1 or 2? Why is SMBG&W placed in the Ports/Remakes section when it clearly isn't? Super Mario is my favorite series, so I was just hoping to understand the reasoning behind some of these decisions (as well as maybe make adjustments if necessary).

Oh, and I put "official" in italics because it was tongue-in-cheek. ;D
Because 3D Land is vastly different from SML 1&2. Super Mario Land is it's own ting.
 

Legault

Monty Mole
The Dark Knight said:
Legault said:
Even if Super Mario is a bucket term, I'd like to see some consistency. Why is 3D Land included, but not Land 1 or 2? Why is SMBG&W placed in the Ports/Remakes section when it clearly isn't? Super Mario is my favorite series, so I was just hoping to understand the reasoning behind some of these decisions (as well as maybe make adjustments if necessary).

Oh, and I put "official" in italics because it was tongue-in-cheek. ;D
Because 3D Land is vastly different from SML 1&2. Super Mario Land is it's own ting.
3D Land is vastly different from Super Mario Bros. 3. Super Mario World is vastly different from Super Mario 64, which is vastly different from Super Mario Sunshine. Innovation has been common in this series, yet it shouldn't prevent them from being grouped together. Similarities between Land 1 / 2 and 3D Land:

-platformers
-made by Nintendo
-Mario is the main character
-"Super Mario" in the title
 

Glowsquid

Shine Sprite
Forum Moderator
Wiki Bureaucrat
Core 'Shroom Staff
-3D Land is included in the main Super Mario series even when the other Land games are not. On the discussion page, someone mentioned that 3D Land is "considered" a part of the main series, but provided no references or argumentation. This makes little sense to me.
The first two Land games were done by a different team (Shigeru Miyamoto and Takashi Tezuka have nothing to do with either, for one) and have a different aesthetic to them (different cast of character/enemies, music, world archetypes etc). 3D Land, while mostly done by new hires and very different from the previous 3D games, sticks closer to the rest of the series and has more supervision from veteran of the series. I guess that's why it's not lumped with the other two, though I don't know why the first two Land games are left out of the page, either.

Why is SMBG&W placed in the Ports/Remakes section when it clearly isn't?
I'd chalk it up to the obscurity of the game and the wiki's hive mind generally poor grasp of what is a remake or a port. For ex, the GBA ports of the DKC series are frequently called "remakes" on wiki pages, and I really don't understand why.

anyway, I moved SMBG&W's place on the page.
 

Legault

Monty Mole
Glowsquid said:
The first two Land games were done by a different team (Shigeru Miyamoto and Takashi Tezuka have nothing to do with either, for one) and have a different aesthetic to them (different cast of character/enemies, music, world archetypes etc). 3D Land, while mostly done by new hires and very different from the previous 3D games, sticks closer to the rest of the series and has more supervision from veteran of the series.
Imagine the next non-"New" Mario comes out for the WiiU in 2013. Imagine it is, like Sunshine and Galaxy, a departure from traditional 3D Mario gaming. Imagine Miyamoto is merely overseeing the project and isn't directly involved. Are we really going to argue it's not a "Super Mario" game? Of course not, yet according to the presumed standards that keep the Land games off the main page, it won't be a Super Mario game. That's a little hard to swallow. Miyamoto was the father of the series, but there's no reason why other directors can't lead Super Mario projects.

(Incidentally, the NSMB games also didn't involve Miyamoto, yet they're included.)

anyway, I moved SMBG&W's place on the page.
Great! Although since the list is chronological, shouldn't it be above SMB2?
 

Glowsquid

Shine Sprite
Forum Moderator
Wiki Bureaucrat
Core 'Shroom Staff
I'm not trying to justify keeping off the Land series (tbh, I don't agree with that either), merely speculating as to why the list is organized the way it currently is.

Great! Although since the list is chronological, shouldn't it be above SMB2?
My bad, corrected it.
 

Toad85

MarioKartRPG
Legault said:
http://www.mariowiki.com/Super_Mario_(series)

According to the above page, the Super Mario games represent "the biggest and most important sub-series of the Mario series."
I find that to be a bit subjective myself, but I agree for the most part.
Legault said:
As such, determining which games are a part of the sub-series and which aren't seems fairly important, and I'm not sure I agree with the selection / location of games on that page. In particular:
Yes, it's very important. Let's delve in, shall we?
Legault said:
-Neither Yoshi's Island nor Wario Land are included
I dunno about Wario Land, but Yoshi's Island has been described again and again as the first game in the Yoshi series. As far as I'm concerned, it's not in the Mario series, let alone the more prestigious Super Mario.
Legault said:
despite being 2D platformers, made by Nintendo, with the phrase "Super Mario" in their full titles (something which has led the official Wikipedia page to include both on their list of Super Mario titles).
If we included every game that contained "Super Mario" in its title and was made by Nintendo, pretty much every Mario game ever would be in.

Also don't you dare call Wikipedia official.
Legault said:
Though it could be argued that neither game features Mario as a playable character
And that's the fucking point.

Legault said:
and that the level design doesn't "feel" like a typical Mario title, the same could be said of the "feeling" games like Sunshine had.
One problem with your analogy: Mario's fucking playable in that game.

Legault said:
Is Mario being the main character a requirement for being a Super Mario game?
Yes.
Legault said:
And if that's the criteria being employed here, then why?
The reason should be obvious, Legault. If you're going to have a game in the Super Mario series, then it should be about fucking Super Mario.

Legault said:
-The absence of the first two Super Mario Land games is very confusing.
Actually, no. They're included. Or they should be. Someone goofed.

Legault said:
They're 2D platformers made by Nintendo which star Mario; how are they not Super Mario games? Calling them their own sub-series would be like calling the NES trilogy a sub-series or the NSMB games a sub-series.
Actually, I do consider the first four console games and NSMB to be separate sub-series, engulfed within the Mario series. Here's how I see it:

Mario Series
Super Mario Series
Classic Series:
SMB1
SMB:LL
SMB2, etc.

NSMB Series:
NSMB
NSMBW etc.

SML Series:
SML
SML2 etc.

3D Games:
64
Sunshine
Galaxies 1 and 2
SMB3DL

Yoshi Series:
YI
Y's S

And you probably get the idea.

I consider the Land games to be part of the Super Mario series, but within its own series subset.

Legault said:
-3D Land is included in the main Super Mario series even when the other Land games are not. On the discussion page, someone mentioned that 3D Land is "considered" a part of the main series, but provided no references or argumentation. This makes little sense to me.
That's because 3D Land has absolutely nothing to do with the Land games other than sharing the name. It belongs in the 3D subcategory, not the Land subcategory.

Legault said:
-The G&W Super Mario Bros. is neither a port nor a remake, but rather an entirely new game. Why isn't it treated as such?
Because it isn't such. It's an entirely separate game that happens to share the name.

Legault said:
I'm sure these have been talked about before, but I couldn't find anything.
That's because no one has had a problem with it 'til now.

Legault said:
If someone could help me understand these decisions, that'd be great!
You're welcome.
 

Knife

Searching for adventure
Retired Wiki Staff
Toad85 said:
Legault said:
http://www.mariowiki.com/Super_Mario_(series)

According to the above page, the Super Mario games represent "the biggest and most important sub-series of the Mario series."
I find that to be a bit subjective myself, but I agree for the most part.
Legault said:
As such, determining which games are a part of the sub-series and which aren't seems fairly important, and I'm not sure I agree with the selection / location of games on that page. In particular:
Yes, it's very important. Let's delve in, shall we?
Legault said:
-Neither Yoshi's Island nor Wario Land are included
I dunno about Wario Land, but Yoshi's Island has been described again and again as the first game in the Yoshi series. As far as I'm concerned, it's not in the Mario series, let alone the more prestigious Super Mario.
Legault said:
despite being 2D platformers, made by Nintendo, with the phrase "Super Mario" in their full titles (something which has led the official Wikipedia page to include both on their list of Super Mario titles).
If we included every game that contained "Super Mario" in its title and was made by Nintendo, pretty much every Mario game ever would be in.

Also don't you dare call Wikipedia official.
Legault said:
Though it could be argued that neither game features Mario as a playable character
And that's the fucking point.

Legault said:
and that the level design doesn't "feel" like a typical Mario title, the same could be said of the "feeling" games like Sunshine had.
One problem with your analogy: Mario's fucking playable in that game.

Legault said:
Is Mario being the main character a requirement for being a Super Mario game?
Yes.
Legault said:
And if that's the criteria being employed here, then why?
The reason should be obvious, Legault. If you're going to have a game in the Super Mario series, then it should be about fucking Super Mario.

Legault said:
-The absence of the first two Super Mario Land games is very confusing.
Actually, no. They're included. Or they should be. Someone goofed.

Legault said:
They're 2D platformers made by Nintendo which star Mario; how are they not Super Mario games? Calling them their own sub-series would be like calling the NES trilogy a sub-series or the NSMB games a sub-series.
Actually, I do consider the first four console games and NSMB to be separate sub-series, engulfed within the Mario series. Here's how I see it:

Mario Series
Super Mario Series
Classic Series:
SMB1
SMB:LL
SMB2, etc.

NSMB Series:
NSMB
NSMBW etc.

SML Series:
SML
SML2 etc.

3D Games:
64
Sunshine
Galaxies 1 and 2
SMB3DL

Yoshi Series:
YI
Y's S

And you probably get the idea.

I consider the Land games to be part of the Super Mario series, but within its own series subset.

Legault said:
-3D Land is included in the main Super Mario series even when the other Land games are not. On the discussion page, someone mentioned that 3D Land is "considered" a part of the main series, but provided no references or argumentation. This makes little sense to me.
That's because 3D Land has absolutely nothing to do with the Land games other than sharing the name. It belongs in the 3D subcategory, not the Land subcategory.

Legault said:
-The G&W Super Mario Bros. is neither a port nor a remake, but rather an entirely new game. Why isn't it treated as such?
Because it isn't such. It's an entirely separate game that happens to share the name.

Legault said:
I'm sure these have been talked about before, but I couldn't find anything.
That's because no one has had a problem with it 'til now.

Legault said:
If someone could help me understand these decisions, that'd be great!
You're welcome.
But where are all these criteria defined? Is it just the overall fan opinion or has Nintendo stated what criteria have to be met in order to be considered a Super Mario game? Of course what I suggested (about all games with Super Mario in the title being part of the series) is also just based on my opinion. I think we could probably just do without a "Super Mario series" pages and stick to the more concrete sub-series such as the Super Mario Bros. series, Super Mario Land series, New Super Mario Bros. series, etc.. Where would that put one off games like Super Mario Sunshine and Super Mario 3D Land? Well, not everything has to belong to a sub-series.

As for YI, I sort of consider that as both Mario and Yoshi series just because of the game's central focus on both main characters.
 

Legault

Monty Mole
Quite the quotefest we've got going on here. I hope you don't mind me cutting the response down a bit to make its length more manageable.

Legault said:
-Neither Yoshi's Island nor Wario Land are included
I dunno about Wario Land, but Yoshi's Island has been described again and again as the first game in the Yoshi series. As far as I'm concerned, it's not in the Mario series, let alone the more prestigious Super Mario.
[...]
If we included every game that contained "Super Mario" in its title and was made by Nintendo, pretty much every Mario game ever would be in.
1) Simply reaffirming that YI isn't part of the Super Mario series doesn't justify its placement as a separate game. Seeing as its title clearly indicates it's a Super Mario game (more on that in a bit), I don't see why it can't be both a SM title and the beginning of an offshoot. That sort of thing happens all the time, in VGs and in other forms of media (film, etc.).
2) Since you mention "prestige," I hope you're not implying that YI lacks the quality necessary to be included. Especially with games like SMB2j on the list.
3) The definition I had in mind involved three things: a) a platformer; b) made by Nintendo; c) has the phrase "Super Mario" on the title. That would only add the Land games, YI, and Wario Land to the list.

Legault said:
Though it could be argued that neither game features Mario as a playable character
And that's the *bleep*ing point.
[...]
One problem with your analogy: Mario's *bleep*ing playable in that game.
[...]
The reason should be obvious, Legault. If you're going to have a game in the Super Mario series, then it should be about *bleep*ing Super Mario.
1) Why is having a playable Mario necessary? I understand many people make this argument, and if that's the consensus (one I'd disagree with; see point #2), then it'd still demand including the Land games. I think everyone would appreciate some consistency here. [Although apparently, the Land games should be on there, which would explain a lot!]

2) Just because Mario isn't playable doesn't mean he's not the focal point of the game. Take YI as an example: the entire game is an effort to chronicles Mario's origins; the goal of the game is to keep Mario safe and reunite him with his brother; and as the Yoshis change with each given stage, Mario is a constant. Not playing as him seems less important than the fact that a) the title clearly says "Super Mario," b) the game is a 2D platformer, c) the game is of remarkable quality, and d) the game is intimately linked with the Mario story.

That's because no one has had a problem with it 'til now.
Please. If you were to take a poll about whether or not games like YI and WL were "Super Mario" games, I can guarantee there'd be a complete lack of consensus. You could go either way with this; my only concern is a lack of consistency, which, if your point about the Land games being wrongfully taken off is true, might not be such a problem after all.
 

GutsehMan

Ladies and gentlemen, my name is Paul Heyman.
hey i'm steppin in with a good argument

Legault said:
If we included every game that contained "Super Mario" in its title and was made by Nintendo, pretty much every Mario game ever would be in.
1) Simply reaffirming that YI isn't part of the Super Mario series doesn't justify its placement as a separate game. Seeing as its title clearly indicates it's a Super Mario game (more on that in a bit), I don't see why it can't be both a SM title and the beginning of an offshoot. That sort of thing happens all the time, in VGs and in other forms of media (film, etc.).
2) Since you mention "prestige," I hope you're not implying that YI lacks the quality necessary to be included. Especially with games like SMB2j on the list.
3) The definition I had in mind involved three things: a) a platformer; b) made by Nintendo; c) has the phrase "Super Mario" on the title. That would only add the Land games, YI, and Wario Land to the list.
Alright, let me tell you: Yoshi's Island wasn't billed as a sequel to Mario World over in Japan, signifing it's place as a brand new series.

2. He's saying that Super Mario and Mario are two separate series...in a sense.
It's your opinion that SMB2J was bad, I found it, while hard, to still be quite enjoyable.

3. 3D Land is a HOMAGE title according to Shigeru Miyamoto, as the game is supposed to be a throwback to the old-school platformers, specifically Mario 3.

Legault said:
Though it could be argued that neither game features Mario as a playable character
And that's the *bleep*ing point.
[...]
One problem with your analogy: Mario's *bleep*ing playable in that game.
[...]
The reason should be obvious, Legault. If you're going to have a game in the Super Mario series, then it should be about *bleep*ing Super Mario.
1) Why is having a playable Mario necessary? I understand many people make this argument, and if that's the consensus (one I'd disagree with; see point #2), then it'd still demand including the Land games. I think everyone would appreciate some consistency here. [Although apparently, the Land games should be on there, which would explain a lot!]

2) Just because Mario isn't playable doesn't mean he's not the focal point of the game. Take YI as an example: the entire game is an effort to chronicles Mario's origins; the goal of the game is to keep Mario safe and reunite him with his brother; and as the Yoshis change with each given stage, Mario is a constant. Not playing as him seems less important than the fact that a) the title clearly says "Super Mario," b) the game is a 2D platformer, c) the game is of remarkable quality, and d) the game is intimately linked with the Mario story.
1. The game should focus on Mario. The Land games are a separate series, Nintendo has stated that. They do have some important parts like introducing Daisy, and Wario, but other than that, they are not main series "Super Mario" games, they're just "Mario" games.

2. Oh. Oh, sure. So tell me, that since Mario is playable in SSB, SSBM, and SSBB, that he's the main point of the game. That the Subspace Emissary is just another platformer with other Nintendo characters and fighting involved. Just because a game says Super Mario, doesn't mean it's exactly a "Super Mario" game. Those go to main series titles. Like I said, YI wasn't even billed a sequel to Mario World in Japan. If it's a 2D platformer, that doesn't mean anything, it's still not a sequel (in a sense). Just because a game has quality, doesn't mean it's a "Super Mario" game.
I mean, look at Dr. Mario, that game has quality in my eyes, so how come IT'S not a part of the "Super Mario" series? It is linked, but it just isn't a "Super Mario" game.

That's because no one has had a problem with it 'til now.

Please. If you were to take a poll about whether or not games like YI and WL were "Super Mario" games, I can guarantee there'd be a complete lack of consensus. You could go either way with this; my only concern is a lack of consistency, which, if your point about the Land games being wrongfully taken off is true, might not be such a problem after all.
....you really think that everyone who roams the wiki is a mario super-fan who just goes around saying "HEY THIS GAME IS WRONG IN THE ORDER BLAGGFHHRGOH9FGHER"

Most people who come on the wiki, just go on it to roam it.
 

Legault

Monty Mole
Stone Cold Steve Austin said:
Alright, let me tell you: Yoshi's Island wasn't billed as a sequel to Mario World over in Japan, signifing it's place as a brand new series.

2. He's saying that Super Mario and Mario are two separate series...in a sense.
It's your opinion that SMB2J was bad, I found it, while hard, to still be quite enjoyable.

3. 3D Land is a HOMAGE title according to Shigeru Miyamoto, as the game is supposed to be a throwback to the old-school platformers, specifically Mario 3.
1) Yoshi's Island still retained the Super Mario moniker in Japan; it just lost the whole "World 2" bit.
2) I enjoy SMB2j, but I doubt anyone would say YI isn't "good enough" to be in a series that also includes it.
3) I'm not sure what this has to do with anything.

1. The game should focus on Mario. The Land games are a separate series, Nintendo has stated that. They do have some important parts like introducing Daisy, and Wario, but other than that, they are not main series "Super Mario" games, they're just "Mario" games.
Please show me where Nintendo stated this.

2. Oh. Oh, sure. So tell me, that since Mario is playable in SSB, SSBM, and SSBB, that he's the main point of the game.
[...]
I mean, look at Dr. Mario, that game has quality in my eyes, so how come IT'S not a part of the "Super Mario" series? It is linked, but it just isn't a "Super Mario" game.
There's the whole "none of the games you mentioned are referred to as Super Mario" thing that you skipped over.

....you really think that everyone who roams the wiki is a mario super-fan who just goes around saying "HEY THIS GAME IS WRONG IN THE ORDER BLAGGFHHRGOH9FGHER"

Most people who come on the wiki, just go on it to roam it.
People vocally expressing sharp criticism with the list =/= people disagreeing with the list. In my experience, the decision whether or not to include YI in the Super Mario series proper is split. That was my only point there.
 

GutsehMan

Ladies and gentlemen, my name is Paul Heyman.
Listen to me. Just because it says "Super Mario", is a platformer, and has good quality (which can be argued by some people), DOESN'T MEAN IT'S A "SUPER MARIO" GAME.

What it is, is a Mario game. I mean, why did Yoshi get an egg for his symbol in SSBB?

To signify he's from a completely different series.

I don't really care if it says "Super Mario" or not. What you said was it has to have Mario as the main character.
 

Legault

Monty Mole
Have you been ignoring my posts in this topic or something, Austin? I've been very clear that what defines a "Super Mario" title is ultimately a judgment call. Is it a game that stars Mario? Is it a game with the Super Mario moniker? Either way works fine, but there should be a reason behind your definition, as well as consistency. If the Wiki community decides not to include YI because you don't play as Mario, then fine; at least include the Land games.
 

GutsehMan

Ladies and gentlemen, my name is Paul Heyman.
The Land Games are a SEPARATE SERIES. It's very obvious. They do nothing to advance any plot, Bowser is in neither of them, and the only notable things are Daisy and Wario.
 

Legault

Monty Mole
Honestly, I'm just waiting for you to provide a definition of what constitutes a Super Mario game, because you're tripping over contradictions and double standards at this point. So is plot what defines a Super Mario game now? Does Bowser have to be the main villain? (Because that would make SMB2 "not a real Super Mario game" either.) Give us some clarity.
 

GutsehMan

Ladies and gentlemen, my name is Paul Heyman.
A Super Mario Game:

"A game where Mario is playable in some form, shape, or way. These include games made specifically for the home consoles, and two handheld consoles, in the form of New Super Mario Bros, Super Mario 3D Land, and New Super Mario Bros 2."

A Mario Game:

"A game where Mario doesn't have to be playable, but references, or includes him in some way. This includes the spinoff titles, the "Super Mario Land" series (This does not include Super Mario 3D Land)'', the "Mario Kart" and "Mario Party" games."
'
 

Legault

Monty Mole
Stone Cold Steve Austin said:
A Super Mario Game:

"A game where Mario is playable in some form, shape, or way. These include games made specifically for the home consoles, and two handheld consoles, in the form of New Super Mario Bros, Super Mario 3D Land, and New Super Mario Bros 2."
So Super Smash Bros. is a Super Mario game? Mario Party is a Super Mario game? Game & Watch Gallery is a Super Mario game? Wonderful definition you've got there.
 

GutsehMan

Ladies and gentlemen, my name is Paul Heyman.
...okay well

i mean

why can't you just create a wiki account edit it yourself
 

Legault

Monty Mole
Because a random person randomly editing a Wiki without consulting other, more frequent members would both be inappropriate and would probably get changed back rather quickly, since the changes would seem arbitrary. The way I look at it, we're all agreeing with three qualities that define a Super Mario game and are of mixed opinion about a fourth, those being:

1) A platforming game, either 2D or 3D.
2) A game made by Nintendo.
3) A game with the "Super Mario" moniker in the title.
[4) A game where Mario is playable.]

If you just go by those first three, YI and all three Land games should be on the list. If you go by all four, the first two Land games should be on the list. If there's some other definition people are using / want to use, I'd love to hear it.
 

GutsehMan

Ladies and gentlemen, my name is Paul Heyman.
dude

we've had at least 20 something vandals this year alone

IT'S PERFECTLY FINE
 

Legault

Monty Mole
Why be the 21st vandal when I could actually bring attention to a contradiction in standards on the Wiki? What I'm saying is hardly unreasonable, no?
 

Glowsquid

Shine Sprite
Forum Moderator
Wiki Bureaucrat
Core 'Shroom Staff
actually, what Legault is doing is the smart thing™ to do. New users barging in and making large, sudden changes or removal without prior discussion is never seen in a good light and almost invariably results in edit wars and loads of easily-avoided headaches. And even if you're an established member of the wiki, it's best to discuss this kind of change beforehand, anyway.

@Legault: If you ever consider registering a wiki account, it's possible to organise votes on the relevant talkpages for potentially controversial (which, as this thread shows, would be the case for adding the Mario Land series to the page or w/e) changes and such. The process for setting up one is explained here.
 

Walkazo

Thou liest!
Wiki Bureaucrat
Yeah, discussing it is always better than trying to come out of nowhere and steamroll over a page. However, doing anything to the "Super Mario" series page would have repercussions on almost every single History section across the wiki, so a Talk Page Proposal would not be a good move. It would be better to do it with a real Proposal, or continue the discussion here until some of the points of conflict can be resolved and then making a more focused Proposal later.



And now I shall make a long post about how I view the "Super Mario" organization and why. But first, I shall include a preemptive tl:dnr (there's also a chart at the bottom showing how I do the History sections):

- Don't split up the "Super Mario" sub-series. - It'll screw up History sections and Nintendo has officially acknowledged this grouping of games in its official "Super Mario History" booklet.
- SM3DL is a unique entry in the "Super Mario" sub-series. - It's nothing like the old SML games, and while it's 3D, it's structured more like the 2D NSMB games than SM64 et al.
- The SML games aren't part of the "Super Mario" sub-series. - The first one is SMB-ish, but SML2 is totally different and the series morphs into the Wario Land series before long, plus. Nintendo left the games out of the "Super Mario History" booklet.
- SMW2:YI is not part of the "Super Mario" sub-series. - It's totally different than the other "Super Mario" games, it has the Yoshi egg in its title like all other "Yoshi" games, including two released before SMW2:YI, and it wasn't included in the "Super Mario History" booklet.
- The G&W SMB is a remake and should not be listed as a "Main game" in the "Super Mario (series)" page, nor given separate sections in article Histories - It has new levels, but the plot is the same, and the same goes for the various other SMB remakes.



Anyway, as I explained here (Talk:Main_Page#New_Super_Mario_Bros._series), I really don't think splitting up the "Super Mario" series is a good idea. These games are the backbone of the overall Mario series (i.e. all the games that aren't crossovers, Yoshi, Wario or Donkey Kong games), and even Nintendo recognized them with the timeline included in the SMASLE "Super Mario History" booklet (which included SMB1-3 and LL; SMAS; SMA1, 2 & 4; SM64 and -DS; SMS; SMG1 & 2; SMB Deluxe; NSMB and -Wii; and "Classic NES Series: SMB"). Splitting the series up will just send the more recent groupings of games down to the bottom of History sections, far away from the classic SMB games and buried below all the random games and sub-series. No, they should be kept together and left at the tops of the Histories.

What's more, it's not actually a clean break between the different breeds of "Super Mario" games. Calling things "classic" is speculative, but putting SMW in an "SMB" grouping would look weird, and while it's not a "NSMB" title, SM3DL has way more in common with them than the actual 3D sidescrollers, so lumping it in with either group would be wrong. (It would also be wrong to add it to the Super Mario Land series, because it has nothing in common with those games: as was mentioned earlier, the name is a homage, nothing more.) But we don't want either of these titles as stand-alones, because they're not: they're "Super Mario" titles, and classifying them and all the "Super Mario X" titles is the most efficient and logical thing to do.

That being said, not everything with "Super Mario" in the name should go in this central series. Random things like Super Mario Bros. & Friends: When I Grow Up, Super Mario Bros. Print World and Super Mario Sweater (I Am a Teacher: Super Mario Sweater ) have nothing in common with the sidescrollers, nor do the [wiki=Super Mario Fushigi no Janjan Land]Super Mario Fushigi games[/wiki], Super Mario Strikers or Super Mario Kart. So... What about Super Mario Land? Nintendo doesn't count is as part of the Super Mario series, seeing as it wasn't in the aforementioned SMASLE booklet. As for whether we should think outside the box and include it or not... Well, the original SML was admittedly similar to the classic SMB games of the era: it was effectively the Game Boy counterpart to the NES games. But it did have different characters, enemies, setting and even a unique power up, SML2 totally went of in its own unique direction, and by the time we got to SML3, the sub-series had morphed into Wario Land and was the start of a whole new series. With all this in mind, I generally view the SML games as branching off from the core Super Mario series, with that branch turning into the Wario series (rather than that being a new branching point off the SML sub-series, although for organization's sake, the WL titles get their own grouping separate from their SML ancestors).

As for the SMW2:YI, as was mentioned earlier, the connection with SMW wasn't there in the original Japanese (which also gave SMW a "SMB4" subtitle), so that weakens the connection. And, like the SML series, neither SMW2:YI or YI:SMA3 were included in the SMASLE "Super Mario History" booklet. But what seals the deal for me is that every single "Yoshi" game has a Yoshi egg instead of the "O" in their titles, which links them all together (the exception being Yoshi's Safari, which I don't consider a Yoshi series game anyway, given its thoroughly unique premise and gameplay). Plus, the first game to do this egg logo thing was [wiki=Yoshi (game)]The game Yoshi[/wiki], and both it and the similarly egg-emblazoned Yoshi's Cookie were released before SMW2:YI. So, Yoshi's Island isn't technically the first "Yoshi" series game, and between that, the egg logo, the omission from the SMASLE booklet, and the fact that the story and gameplay are completely different than the regular "Super Mario" games, I think there's more than enough solid evidence to say, no, this game is not part of the Super Mario series.

And finally, there's the issue of the G&W SMB game. It's not a port, because of the differences in level design, but I'll argue that it's still a remake because the plot is the same. Same with Vs. Super Mario Bros. and even Super Mario Bros. Special, which even changes up the gameplay physics and adds new enemies, as well as All Night Nippon Super Mario Bros, which makes lots of superficial changes yet leaves the gameplay and levels intact. If the G&W game gets promoted to the main roster, at the very least VSMB and SMBS need to be as well, but that's getting excessive: after all, none of these remakes need their own headers in the History sections, not when they're all just SMB again, only with a few little changes.



I use this chart (User:Walkazo/Essays#Timeline) to help me put Histories in the correct order (I'm hoping to use it in a Writing Guideline about how to organize articles, assuming I can find the time to write the draft before school starts); the groupings for the "Super Mario", "SML", "Wario Land" and "Yoshi" sub-series in particular are listed below. Brackets indicate "notable" remakes, ports and compilations (i.e. SM64DS, the "Advance" games and SMAS are included, but not things that don't really change at all from version to version, like 2-in-1 SMB/Duck Hunt, the SMB demo in SSBB, or straight ports, like to the Virtual Console); these usually wouldn't get their own History sections, except for some things that are drastically different from the original (mostly SM64DS and sometimes SMA stuff), or instances where something only appeared in the later version.

Super Mario series
Super Mario Bros. - Sept. 13, 1985
(Super Mario Bros. Special) - 1986
(Vs. Super Mario Bros.) - 1986
(All Night Nippon Super Mario Bros.) - 1986
(Super Mario Bros. (G&W game)) - Aug. 19, 1987
(Super Mario Bros. Deluxe) - May, 1999
Super Mario Bros.: The Lost Levels - June 3, 1986
Super Mario Bros. 2 - Sept. 1, 1988
(Super Mario Advance) - March 21, 2001
Super Mario Bros. 3 - Oct. 23, 1988
(Super Mario Advance 4: Super Mario Bros. 3) - July 11, 2003
Super Mario World - Nov. 21, 1990
(Super Mario World: Super Mario Advance 2) - Dec. 2001
(Super Mario All-Stars) - July 14, 1993
(Super Mario All-Stars Limited Edition) - Oct. 21, 2010
BS Super Mario USA - March 31, 1996 (ends April 21, 1996)
Super Mario 64 - June 23, 1996
(Super Mario 64 DS) - Nov. 21, 2004
Super Mario Sunshine - July 19, 2002
New Super Mario Bros. - May 15, 2006
Super Mario Galaxy - Nov. 1, 2007
New Super Mario Bros. Wii - Nov. 12, 2009
Super Mario Galaxy 2 - May 23, 2010
Super Mario 3D Land - Nov. 3, 2011
New Super Mario Bros. 2 - July 28, 2012
New Super Mario Bros. U - TBA (Nov/Dec 2012) (UPCOMING)
Super Mario Land series
Super Mario Land - April 21, 1989
Super Mario Land 2: 6 Golden Coins - Oct. 21, 1992
Wario Land series
Wario Land: Super Mario Land 3 - Jan. 21, 1994
Virtual Boy Wario Land - Nov. 1995
Wario Land II - March 28, 1998
Wario Land 3 - March 21, 2000
Wario Land 4 - Aug. 21, 2001
Wario Land: Shake It! - July 24, 2008
Yoshi series
Yoshi - Dec. 4, 1991
Yoshi's Cookie - Nov. 21, 1992
Yoshi no Cookie: Kuruppon Oven de Cookie - 1994
Super Mario World 2: Yoshi's Island - Aug. 15, 1995
(Yoshi's Island: Super Mario Advance 3) - Sept. 20, 2002
Yoshi's Story - Dec. 21, 1997
Yoshi Topsy-Turvy - Dec. 9, 2004
Yoshi Touch & Go - Jan. 27, 2005
Yoshi's Island DS - Nov. 13, 2006
Yoshi's Safari - July 14, 1993
 
Top