Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2007-06-26 List of Mario series enemies

Who are the involved parties?
,, , , , ,
 * All I did was suggest that you take the discussion here or to RFC. I want to be off the list of involved parties. Fun  Pika  21:52, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
 * I did so myself. Fun  Pika  11:54, 30 June 2007 (UTC)
 * I want to be off the list as well. I'm not really interested. I just happen to think Blooper should get his own article, and I have already stated my case on that, in the earlier discussion. I really don't have the interest or desire to go further than that.Giantdevilfish 02:33, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

What is the involved article(s)?
Birdo, Bowser Jr., Kamek, King Boo, Koopaling, Petey Piranha, Blooper (Mario), Bob-omb, Monty Mole, Lakitu, Koopa Troopa, Goomba, Chomp (Mario), Shroob, Piranha Plant, Bullet Bill, Boo (Nintendo), Shy Guy, Dry Bones (Mario), and List of Mario series enemies

What's going on?
There is currently a disagreement over the notability of the characters in the above articles. This disagreement also deals with the proposed merger of the character pages with List of Mario series enemies.

A discussion is currently taking place on this matter.

What would you like to change about that?
Some sort of agreement needs to be reached

Mediator response
Well, I know quite a bit on Mario enemies, so if everyone is okay with it, Then I'll be the mediator. I'm relatively new on mediating, but if you guys are fine with it, then let me know and we'll begin. Wizardman 02:07, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
 * The parties appear to have agreed with my compromise, so case closed. Wizardman  15:57, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Administrative notes
We'll need more information on the nature of the dispute, or a link to previous discussion on the topic, before we can really do anything with this request. --Moralis (talk) 02:38, 26 June 2007 (UTC)


 * To summarise: TTN believes that the notability of any enemy in the Super Mario series of video games is in question if there aren't outside sources quoted in each article. He believes that the fiction in question is not sufficient to provide a notable entry, which is fitting with a number of Wikipedia rules on fictional characters. Several other members are of the opinion that the fiction is sufficient. I will happily say I sit somewhere in the middle - I do not think that minor enemies in the Mario series are deserving of pages to themselves - but I also think that one ridiculously long list of inconsistently written former-articles is a worse option, and may lead to the entirety of the information being erased.
 * Personally, I am taken with the Japanese Wikipedia which, while still imperfect in its ways, covers major enemies as articles, off-shoots within those articles, and minor enemies in enemy lists on game pages. (Fryguy64 23:29, 27 June 2007 (UTC))
 * I agree 100% with everything Fryguy64 has said thus far. The minor enemies were good enough to have been merged, but the characters with fairly larger roles (Birdo and Petey Piranha spring to mind, as well as the merged Waluigi article) were just unnecessary choices, IMO. However, TTN is convinced that he was doing the right thing without discussing it with anyone else (until recently, anyway): "[The edits] will stick whether people like it or not." A forewarning about the massive merge would have been nice. Hardcore gamer 48 07:13, 28 June 2007 (UTC)