Ambiguous Name: Franchise.Super Mario Bros

I kind of second changing it to Mario Bros. I think just Mario is a bit to ambiguous.

Super Mario could also work since most of the games follow the Super Mario naming convention like Super Mario Sunshine, Super Mario Galaxy, and Super Mario Odyssey

Edit more i think on it, the more I like using Super Mario since that's the usual naming convention of anything but crossover games the Mario/Sonic Olympic games.

edited 18th Jan '18 6:39:30 PM by shoboni

In the trailer of Super Smash Bros. 4, they used Super Mario for Mario, so there's that.

Death is a companion. We should cherish Death as we cherish Life.

I mean, where I stand that pretty cements by vote to use Super Mario as the franchise name.

Since 90% of the mainline titles released post Super Mario Bros have used the Super Mario naming scheme.

I suppose we need a crowner. "Does the franchise page name need to be changed?"

I had a dog-themed avatar before it was cool.

We have a decent number of suggestions plus "do not change", so I'd say this would be a good time to open one.

Why are you only looking at the Videogame Franchise?

Link to TRS threads in project mode here.

...because that's the primary thing and as far as external adaptions all we really have is a couple old cartoons, some random kids books from back in the day and the movie?

This is like Sonic the Hedgehog where we have a shit-ton of other media adaptions that are still ongoing. Mario is still mainly a video game series and hasn't strayed far from that.

edited 21st Jan '18 9:37:01 PM by shoboni

So you don't want a Multimedia Franchise page, then? The only reason why this franchise is allowed to use the Franchise/ namespace is because of "a couple old cartoons, some random kids books from back in the day and the movie". If you restrict the discussion to the videogame franchise, it belongs in the Videogame/ namespace.

Link to TRS threads in project mode here.

I had no idea there was a distinction and assumed franchise was for series and the video game namespace was for just for individual games.

At any rate, the expanded media still uses the Super Mario naming scheme to my knowadge.

If it matters, The Other Wiki uses Mario for the entire multimedia franchise and Super Mario for the video game franchise.

If a tree falls in the forest and nobody remembers it, who else will you have ice cream with?

Calling it Super Mario would free up Super Mario Bros. for the 1985 game.

I had a dog-themed avatar before it was cool.

That's been a common enough problem that we have a thread dedicated to verifying franchise pages. It's why I had linked Namespace earlier in the thread. If I'm reading this correctly, you're saying

• Videogame.Super Mario (Videogame Franchise)
  • Videogame.Super Mario Bros (1985 Videogame)

For the Multimedia Franchise page, I'm still in favour of Franchise.Super Mario Bros because at least half of the alternate mediums use all three words. This is a much higher proportion than the videogame franchise.

Link to TRS threads in project mode here.

Should we have a crowner?

Join the Five-Man Band cleanup project!

Absolutely.

I had a dog-themed avatar before it was cool.

Should the Franchise/ and VideoGame/ pages be on the same crowner?

Join the Five-Man Band cleanup project!

That might help to clarify what pages we are talking about. I certainly see reasonable arguments that the two wouldn't be using the same names.

Link to TRS threads in project mode here.

I'm still not sure what the options on the crowner should be.

Join the Five-Man Band cleanup project!

The How Crowners Work page says we need a single prop to determine whether or not we're going to change the title before we do an alt names crowner, and there's been a few people saying "no change," so we might as well do it by the book first. Here's the single prop for a name change.

Look at all that shiny stuff ain't they pretty

With over 5000 wicks to Franchise.Super Mario Bros, I'm disinclined to vote in favor of a name-change regardless of how "correct" one name is over the other, so long as the name is more or less correct. And from what I understand from the previous discussion in this thread, the name is more or less correct...

Look at all that shiny stuff ain't they pretty

Yeah, too much work for a technicality. It's not creating any notable confusion.

Check out my fanfiction!

Technically this is a single question crowner about the name for two different pages, one of which is currently a redirect to another. I'm not sure that's allowed.

Link to TRS threads in project mode here.

Considering it's in the red, it's probably moot. I don't think it's particularly kosher, though, since it requires at least one more crowner to decide what to change, and what to change it to.

Check out my fanfiction!

The question is, essentially, do we change the names of these pages. The argument in favor seems to be one and the same for both, namely that the current titles are slightly wrong.

The "at least one more crowner" point is moot because that's what the procedure is on How Crowners Work.

edited 30th Jan '18 2:16:28 PM by WaterBlap

Look at all that shiny stuff ain't they pretty

Should the crowner be called? The results seem clear that most users aren't supportive of a change.