Talk:Petey Piranha

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Bosu Pakkun translates to 'Boss Pakkun', not King Piranha >_>

uh-oh, someone's gonna have to get to the bottom of this!

Contents 1 Criticism Section Removed 2 Added short part of Pinball 3 Galaxy 4 Merge

[edit] Criticism Section Removed

Too POV, seems more like an anonymous complaint (and not a very good one either). It doesn't really fit either.--Signor 05:18, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Added short part of Pinball

I noted in the article about how the Petey in Pinball Land is drastically different in appearence, because it is. Feel free to keep it on there or take it off, (I don't mind either way.) ~~balladofwindfishes

[edit] Galaxy

Petey Piranna was not shown in the galaxy trailer it was a different creature entirely. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Widkid85 (talk • contribs) 00:39, 19 March 2007 (UTC).

[edit] Merge

This article is a duplicate of the Petey Piranha section in List of Mario series characters. I see no reason why it can't be merged. Pagrashtak 18:48, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

If people put time and effort into this article, like I am trying to do, then it would be acceptable. I'm just about to add aa appearances section. That will help. Henchman 2000 08:06, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

Petey Piranha is as much his own character as Bowser or Mario themselves. He's not like generic bosses such as Big Bob-Omb and Goomboss because he hasn't faded into the past. Just like other Mario characters, he deserves his own page for it. 195.195.15.250 08:17, 23 May 2007 (UTC) Mojanboss

But does he satisfy Wikipedia:Notability (fiction)? Add some encyclopedic information to the article, such as concept and creation, and you might have a case for an article. As it stands now, there's nothing to justify it. Pagrashtak 18:58, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

He does satisfy your policy, as he is a major character with multiple roles in many games. It would be different if he was just a boss character, but he isn't. The article is entirely justifiable as it is, an encyclopedic content, of which there is already some, would make it even better. Henchman 2000 08:06, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

Please stop ignoring Wikipedia:Notability (fiction). If you take even thirty seconds to read it, you'll see that you're wrong. "If an encyclopedic treatment of such a character causes the article on the work itself to become long, then that character can be given a separate article." Please note the bolded words; that is a link to Wikipedia:Manual of Style (writing about fiction), another guideline that you choose to ignore. It states various times that out of universe information is needed, and as the article stands, it has no out of universe information. Your definition of encyclopedic may be this, but your opinion doesn't matter very much when compared to the guidelines. TTN 10:14, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

It's not "my" policy, Henchman, it's Wikipedia's policy. The policy does not say "major characters with multiple roles in many games should be given a separate article", as you seem to claim. With no real-world context or sourced analysis, there is nothing to justify this article. Pagrashtak 14:42, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

Fine, I'll find some. I already have and will put it on, probably tomorrow so DON'T revert it. Henchman 2000 17:58, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

Where is this magical information coming from? It's not like it's just in the back of the drawer, waiting to be found. If it were, we would already have it. I see no reason not to revert right now (besides the whole edit warring thing). TTN 18:07, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

Keep Give the article some time. He's been in over 10 games that have major appearences. --Rat235478683 AKA Aipom, MarioWiki patroller--

I think three years is a good amount of time. The number of games has no effect if nothing can be written about them. TTN 22:43, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

Things can be written about them, if people would bother to do it. I will write about the appearances in games I have and that's as much as I can do. A little help would be much appreciated. Henchman 2000 13:08, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

You have still found nothing. Please actually find something of substance soon (not a trvial fan site or some random toy). TTN 14:59, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

He is the first, and currently only, playable plant, he has been given a personality and traits, has appeared CONSTANTLY in multiplayer games, has appeared in main series games, I could go on. Vilerocks 23:57, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

As explained to you in the other discussion, in-game notability means nothing. Only out of universe information matters. Please understand this already. TTN 23:59, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

OOU info is not required for an article, many articles don't have it. Henchman 2000 08:06, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Please read Writing about fiction. EVERY article that talks about a fictional character, setting, etc must be written in out-of-universe tone, and contain real world context. The fact that other articles are wrong doesn't negate this article from being just as wrong. They will need to be corrected as well. There are 1.8 million articles on the english Wikipedia, and I'm sure plenty of them are not structured, or written correctly. That's the price we pay for allowing anyone to edit. It's a gift and a curse, and the more people that learn about the proper way to develop and article then the less articles that will be incorrect.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 13:33, 4 June 2007 (UTC)