Have a question about how the TVTropes wiki works? No one knows this community better than the people in it, so ask away! Ask the Tropers is the page you come to when you have a question burning in your brain and the support pages didn't help.
It's not for everything, though. For a list of all the resources for your questions, click here. You can also go to this Directory thread
for ongoing cleanup projects.
Ask the Tropers is for:
- General questions about the wiki, how it works, and how to do things.
- Reports of problems with wiki articles, or requests for help with wiki articles.
- Reports of misbehavior or abuse by other tropers.
Ask the Tropers is not for:
- Help identifying a trope. See TropeFinder.
- Help identifying a work. See MediaFinder.
- Asking if a trope example is valid. See the Trope Talk forum.
- Proposing new tropes. See TropeLaunchPad.
- Making bug reports. See QueryBugs.
- Asking for new wiki features. See QueryWishlist.
- Chatting with other tropers. See our forums.
- Reporting problems with advertisements. See this forum topic.
- Reporting issues on the forums. Send a Holler instead.
Ask the Tropers:
open Edit to Fate/Stay Night character page constitutes vandalism? Videogame
In this edit
for the character page for Saber from Fate/stay night, user SteelDumpling replaced all instances of "Altria" (the character's official English name as of Fate/Grand Order) with "Artoria" (an alternate localization that is preferred by the fans and has been used in some localizations prior to Type-Moon coming down against it), even in instances where this is inaccurate.
I do not want to start an edit war so I have messaged the person requesting they revert the edit. In the event they do not, should I just do it myself?
Edited by Arawn999openExamples of Tropes Attempted, but Perhaps Failed Videogame
I find myself with a trope that I want to add to a page—but one in which, in my opinion, the trope was attempted but failed at. How should such a thing be approached...?
To be a little more specific:
In the game ShadowCaster, the player has access to a number of forms into which they can shapeshift, each having benefits and drawbacks. One form might be fast and strong, another slow but with ranged attacks, etc.
So, Multiform Balance has been implemented, one might note.
Except... that the forms are, in my opinion, not actually particularly balanced. For example, the above-mentioned "slow-but-ranged" character does have some good ranged abilities... but they rely on and quickly consume a somewhat-hard-(or-slow)-to-recover resource. What's more, that resource is shared between forms, so that one form consuming it means that it's less available for other forms to use. What's more, the form is, as mentioned, slow—painfully slow, I find.
But all of that is, of course, YMMV. Perhaps there are others out there who find the forms well-balanced!
So I'm not sure of how to proceed. My instinct is to note the attempt, and also note that it didn't work. But on the other hand, that's perhaps insufficiently objective for a main-page trope. On the third hand, however, to not mention it might suggest that the forms actually are balanced...
Hence my uncertainty! So: What do you advise?
resolved Bad Sequelitis Entry on YMMV Total War Warhammer III Videogame
A while back, there was an Edit War ATT concerning the Sequelitis entry on Total War: Warhammer III. See here
. I don't disagree that it was Edit Warring, but what got lost in that discussion is that the offending entry is genuinely bad, violates a number of rules and is very outdated compared to the current state of the game. For context here is the current entry as it stands on that page.
- Sequelitis: It was very clear that the team developing this game and the team maintaining the previous game either disagreed heavily or just weren't coordinating as much of the fixes, patches, updates, and design evolutions that made the previous game so popular were not present at the launch of this one. The game shifted back in favor of things that were either patched out of or specifically avoided in the previous game resulting in a launch that many fans agree was a major step backwards.
- "Poorly Optimized" is an understatement when you see the litany of programming errors that caused a lot of vitriol among the players
. It's widely theorized that the core of the game was forked off an older build of the previous game before the big Potion of Speed update and thus never received most of the multitude of fixes, patches, and updates present in that patch and subsequent ones.
- The skill and tech trees for many factions are poorly-executed, with many technologies or skills that range from underwhelming (+1% chance for a plague to spread for Nurgle) to completely useless (Leadership bonuses for an Unbreakable unit). Several skills and technologies also don't do what the description says they do, making it hard to know what bonus you're actually getting. On top of this, some factions have their unique bonuses and unit abilities gated behind technologies (such as Tzeentch's Teleport stance, Kislev's Ice Court mechanic, and the spellcasting abilities of every Greater Daemon, with each spell having its own technology), something that was specifically hated about the Greenskins in the first game and removed from them with a series of reworks in the second. Patch 1.2 focused heavily on beefing up factions' tech trees, mitigating this.
- While they raised the level cap for Heroes and Lords to level 50 they didn't necessarily give them any more skills, meaning some heroes can get more skill points than they can spend; Iridescent Horrors with the Lore of Tzeentch, for example, can only spend 47 due to having mutually-exclusive skills, and even if they didn't would only have 49. This was previously only a problem with mods and those modders had solved the problem early in the first game's lifecycle.
- Many players and reviewers alike agree the game's UI is both less appealing and harder to read due to the overemphasis on the color red compared to the previous game's more vibrant interface. A common source of frustration is that the colors for many different functions are effectively the same, making it impossible to quickly distinguish if a settlement is, for example, building a structure or demolishing it.
- The campaign that launched with the game, Realm of Chaos, doubled down on the elements players hated about the second game's Vortex campaign (particularly the time pressure and the random invasions) without making many improvements, ignoring well-received diversification of faction objectives and stories from the previous game's DLC packs. See Scrappy Mechanic for more details on why the Reign of Chaos campaign mechanics are especially loathed. The reception of this campaign was so bad Creative Assembly had to delay their first planned update and rush out Patch 1.1 specifically to address it.
- The series has long had a reputation for amazing mods that expand and improve on the game in a myriad of ways. This game did not launch with Steam Workshop support and went without for two months until the 1.1 update.
- "Poorly Optimized" is an understatement when you see the litany of programming errors that caused a lot of vitriol among the players
And here is my critique of this entry and its sub-bullets, breaking it down by the elements.
1. For starters this entry really shouldn't be broken down into multiple sub-bullets. They give the appearance of a Wall of Text. A single bullet that's Clear, Concise, Witty is preferable.
2. ""Poorly Optimized" is an understatement" etc.: The video link can stay but the words inside it should be rewritten and the rest of the paragraph should be cut. One half is hyperbolic Word Cruft with unnecessary italics, the other is pure speculation.
3. "The skill and tech trees for many factions" etc.: The points can stand but the bracketed text should be moved into Notes to make the paragraph more concise. Also, the text may need to be put into past tense as the subbullet itself admits CA have been working on this, though I think it should go as I would rather keep that element for last.
4. "While they raised the level cap for Heroes and Lords" etc.: The point is valid, but IMO we can reduce this to a single sentence or even a fragment of one. e.g. CA raised the level cap for Lords and Heroes to 50, but some characters don't have enough room for that many skill points.
5. "Many players and reviewers alike agree the game's UI" etc.: Can delete. The point is valid but they directly addressed it in a later patch which means it should go under Author's Saving Throw. At most a fragment of a sentence like "issues with the game's interface due to poor colour balance and excessive use of bright red".
6. "The campaign that launched with the game" etc.: Valid but needs compression and to remove the reference to Scrappy Mechanic which is considered bad form. A single sentence should do it.
7. "The series has long had a reputation" etc.: Delete. Yes it was frustrating but it's been addessed.
So with all these in mind, a revised version of the entry as I see it would go something like this:
- Sequelitis: At launch, the game was very divisively and even negatively received for feeling like a step backwards after the much-lauded final state of Total War: Warhammer II. Reasons for this include a large host of glitches, bugs and programming errors
that made it feel unpolished, complaints about poor choices for skillnote Ranging from underwhelming (+1% chance for a plague to spread for Nurgle) to completely useless (Leadership bonuses for an Unbreakable unit). and technology treesnote Some factions had their unique bonuses and unit abilities gated behind technologies, such as Tzeentch's Teleport stance, Kislev's Ice Court mechanic, and the spellcasting abilities of every Greater Daemon, with each spell having its own technology. for certain races, CA raising the level cap for Lords and Heroes to 50 but not accounting for characters who didn't have enough skills to accommodate 49 skill points, issues with the game's interface due to poor colour balance and excessive use of bright red, not launching with built-in support for Game Mods like its predecessors did, which might have mitigated some people's complaints about it, and worst of all, a base game campaign that was almost universally derided for loathsome mechanics, an irritating amount of time pressure and homogenising the storylines and campaign goals of the factions featured, making people who hated the how the Vortex campaign in the second game started out before DLC packs brought diversification of faction objectives and stories cry, "Oh, No... Not Again!" Fortunately, CA have since worked hard to address all these issues throught game patches and their first DLC pack, which has led to the game getting a much more positive reception.
Note this is not the final form I would put it in, I just needed to make something for this, but I also wanted to achieve consensus before I posted it. Thoughts?
Edited by MinisterOfSinisteropenVideoGame/{{Diablo}} MagnificentBastard entry Videogame
Baal from the franchise was approved by the thread
. I thought I had forgotten to add him to the YMMV page so I just put him up but later noticed he was deleted here
with the edit reason citing some of the tropes should be going on individual game pages. Noticing my mistake, I've commented out the example but I don't see him being put on any particular game page. To avoid an edit war, does anyone mind pointing me to the proper YMMV page he should be on as I don't know the games myself?
Edit: Changed from a comment out to a deletion of my own addition until this gets resolved just to be on the safe side.
Edited by 43110openNew Work Proposal Videogame
I would like to make a page for Disney's Hide and Sneak, a GameCube title that more or less is a spiritual sequel to Disney's Magical Mirror Starring Mickey Mouse a year prior. But I honestly don't know where to begin. I know a few tropes that'll help create the page itself, but some beginner's tips would be greatly appreciated.
Edited by HarmonyBunny2000openWhere does PlayerTic go? Videogame
This Player Tic example is in YMMV.Devil May Cry.
- Player Tic: Playing Dante in 4 and 5 and just amusing yourself by going into all of his styles one after the other quickly
to listen to Dante rapidly saying the beginnings of his declarations of the style's names is a meme.
Apart from probably needing some simple rewrite (it reads like a run-on sentence to me) or update, the example is indeed a valid Player Tic as it does happen in the fandom.
My only concern is that the lack of any banner on top of the Player Tic page makes it treated like an objective trope (meaning it shouldn't be placed on a YMMV page), so I'm not sure if the example has to remain on the YMMV page. Looking at the related pages, Player Tic is listed under Administrivia.Tropes Needing TRS, but even that Administrivia page sounds confused as to where Player Tic examples should go.
openUndertale tropes minor edits Videogame
Hello! I've found a few minor mistakes in some of the trope pages for Undertale but idk how to fix them myself so (spoiler warning for anyone who hasn't finished Undertale)
-In "Tropes B/Undertale", under "Bizarre taste in food", Napstablook is accidentally referred to using 'he' pronouns -In "Tropes C To F/Undertale", under "Cue the sun", It's added at the end that Asriel's fight took the whole night due to the Asgore fight being during sunset and the sun rising in the True Pacifist Ending. However, in Asgore's battle text, it is described as being twilight, which could be either right before sunrise or right before sunset —Under "Flower Motifs", it says that in the dump, Golden Flowers are 'what Flowey uses to save the player from falling to their death after remembering the first meeting with the Fallen Human in similar circumstances'. However, this isn't ever hinted at in the game (unless I'm forgetting something). We know Flowey can summon vines, but he hasn't canonically been able to grow entirely separate flowers as Flowey. Also, here are plenty of other instances of flashbacks relating to the First Fallen
Is it alright if someone can fix these?
openUndertale tropes minor edits Videogame
Hello! I've found a few minor mistakes in some of the trope pages for Undertale but idk how to fix them myself so (spoiler warning for anyone who hasn't finished Undertale)
-In "Tropes B/Undertale", under "Bizarre taste in food", Napstablook is accidentally referred to using 'he' pronouns -In "Tropes C To F/Undertale", under "Cue the sun", It's added at the end that Asriel's fight took the whole night due to the Asgore fight being during sunset and the sun rising in the True Pacifist Ending. However, in Asgore's battle text, it is described as being twilight, which could be either right before sunrise or right before sunset —Under "Flower Motifs", it says that in the dump, Golden Flowers are 'what Flowey uses to save the player from falling to their death after remembering the first meeting with the Fallen Human in similar circumstances'. However, this isn't ever hinted at in the game (unless I'm forgetting something). We know Flowey can summon vines, but he hasn't canonically been able to grow entirely separate flowers as Flowey. Also, here are plenty of other instances of flashbacks relating to the First Fallen
Is it alright if someone can fix these?
openAbout an Edit Reversion Videogame
I was recently sent a warning about example indentation regarding an entry
in VindicatedByHistory.Video Games. Now, I don't disagree with the warning — I actually did make a mistake regarding what I was supposed to do indenting-wise — but since the entry was deleted wholesale, I'm not sure whether re-editing it while fixing the issues would qualify as edit warring.
The edit reason also mentions that a pothole to Condemned by History was misused, which I don't particularly agree with. At the time of its release, if I'm not mistaken, Super Smash Bros. for Nintendo 3DS and Wii U did have a sizable fanbase (including Tournament Play, albeit never as big of a scene as Melee had), and Brawl (which the entry was about) was forgotten by casual players for a while until the release of Super Smash Bros. Ultimate made for 3DS and Wii U's faults stand out in retrospect, rather than being "reviled from day one" like the edit reason says. Am I misremembering?
PS: I'm sorry for being a serial tweaker. I keep second-guessing myself.
Edited by LendriMujinaopenFive Nights at Freddy's and Inconsistencies Videogame
The pages for the first six games are not consistent with eachother in terms of in-game information. Most have entries that've either been disproven within themselves- both from late-game or hidden information- or the other games. They are also riddled with fandom-based assuptions that have no basis within the given information, often conflicting with what was actually given in-game. I would like to start an effort to clean these pages up, but do I have to pitch a short-term project to do so- and how would I go about that, if yes- because of the scale, or, can I work on it myself in my spare time? I am asking primarily because I am not active frequently.
EDIT: Clean up effort is now live, here: https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/posts.php?discussion=16550680110A22093300&page=1#1
openContested Sequels for The Legend of Zelda? Videogame
The YMMV page for The Legend of Zelda has Contested Sequel with the following argument.
"Between the near-universally agreed-upon golden age of A Link to the Past to Majora's Masknote Excluding the hiatus after Link's Awakening that brought the CD-i games and the renaissance in the eyes of previously disgruntled fans with A Link Between Worlds and Breath of the Wild, many of the games released in the time between those periods became this (at least in the eyes of fans; critics largely consider the series consistently good). By far the most divisive period among fans is the DS/Wii era (Twilight Princess, Phantom Hourglass, Spirit Tracks, Skyward Sword), which has many fans decrying it as the low point of the series due to issues such as increased linearity, overly long intro sections and pre-dungeon quests that drag down the pacing, and decreased difficulty; however, just as many fans find the DS/Wii era on par with the rest of the series, if not the high point, thanks to their more focused gameplay, more substantial main quests, more accessible difficulty with potential for Self-Imposed Challenge. This era's greater focus on storytelling is also divisive, with many fans debating on whether the games' stories work with or make up for the increased linearity or were the cause of its problems with handholding and pacing and/or weren't good enough to make up for the linearity."
Is this entry even valid? Most of the games described in the entry were commercial and critical successes back when they were first released and even when people find flaws in those games in hindsight, they otherwise have positive opinions about this game. I already posted this question in the discussion page
and Is this an example
, just in case.
So, what do you say?
Edited by MasterHeroopenAdding Images Without Replacing Any Images Videogame
In Arknights, a new character Heidi recently became playable. In her character folder in Arknights Supporters A To M, her only image is of her younger self, while her playable self is older and thus has different images. Is it okay to post the new images in the folder without consulting the Image Pickin' forums and place the current image in a note, as I am not replacing any images?
Edited by Excessive-Menaceopen ThatOneBoss and Definition. Videogame
Earlier today, I had removed the below entries on the That One Boss page for Elden Ring.
I removed them for the following reasons:
- First entry is a Wake-Up Call Boss.
- Second boss is a Bonus Boss as part of an optional sidequest, and the entry basically reads as "boss is hard cause it can summon adds. Oh and it hurts a bit", both of which don't stick out as That One Boss material.
- The last two entries are part of the Final Boss, which That One Boss page says don't qualify. I have put spoiler tags over them to be safe. The flavor text above them also isn't really a valid justification to say they are harder then any other past games boss ether.
Currently these are under discussion on the Discussion tab but I wanted opinions from those outside of that, since I don't want to seem too much like I am saying "RULE SAYS THIS" when I could be taking it too literal.
- Margit, the Fell Omen is likely the first major story boss the player will face, as he guards the main route into Stormveil Castle, and he's very tough for how early he can be fought, notorious for giving players a serious wake-up call possibly within the first few hours of their playthrough. His moveset is quite varied, between quick strikes that come when you think he's open and delayed smashes that punish players who panic-roll, and he strings them in combos that in other FromSoftware games would only appear much later. Thankfully, there is a special item that can be bought from the Twin Husk/Patches whose only purpose is to bind Margit for a few seconds so to allow the player some free hits. You can also bypass Margit and Stormveil Castle entirely, but ignoring it will lock you out of certain quests, plus Margit drops a Talisman Pouch when defeated, so ideally you need to come back to him at a later point if this route is chosen.
- Commander Niall fought at the top of Castle Sol starts the battle summoning two spectral Banished Knights to the fight - one with a shield, another with two swords. You've faced those spectral knights on the way up, and alone they're already quite a handful due to the amount of punishment they can take and deal. Niall himself is no slouch either, boasting deadly attacks with a large reach. Take out the Knights and he Turns Red, imbuing himself with lightning and gaining powerful stomps that can cover a large portion of the arena. It will take a fair bit of effort (or some cheese on your part) to take him out and recover the other half of the Haligtree Medallion.
- The final challenge of Elden Ring has you fighting two bosses back to back, and even by the Final Boss standards of most Soulsborne titles, these two are ridiculously powerful and will likely take you several dozen attempts on your first playthrough:
- First up is the almighty Radagon of the Golden Order. Brandishing the hammer that shattered the Elden Ring and that might yet repair it, he is immune to bleed buildup and heavily resistant to holy damage, putting faith and many dexterity or arcane builds at a lofty disadvantage out of the gate. He's ridiculously aggressive and effective, both in close range with his brutal hammer swings and light shockwaves and at a distance with his lightning spears that chunk you for massive damage if you don't roll out of the way or have resistance to holy damage yourself, alongside quick 'fan' lightning shots that he can throw out at a moment's notice. What really makes him frustrating is that once he powers up at about two-thirds of his health gone, alongside the aforementioned AOE ground stomps, he also gains a nasty Teleport Spam habit, sometimes teleporting right on top of you in the middle of your swing, damaging you, pushing you away and following it up with even more nasty melee strikes. Some of his melee attacks can be parried, and he's susceptible to other ailments such as frost buildup, but if you can't get the timing down you're in for a rough round one.
- After defeating Radagon, you have one last opponent to face - the Elden Beast, who is particularly annoying since it not only has a number of difficult-to-avoid attacks, but it just doesn't stay still. The Elden Beast is constantly on the move, sinking into the ground where it is impossible to hit and then relocating to the other side of the massive boss arena. The player has to chase it on foot, and by the time they've reached the Beast they've barely got enough stamina for an extra attack before it starts moving again. While you're in melee range its size and attack animations don't play nice with the lock-on camera, disorienting you when you are about to strike. All the constant chasing can turn what should have been an epic final confrontation into an unbearable slog, especially when you realize it's immune to all status ailments that would otherwise help shorten the fight. As for some of the aforementioned highly-damaging, difficult-to-dodge attacks, one amounts to a platforming challenge where summoned rings have to be jumped over to avoid a large holy explosion, but the most chaotic moment comes when the Elden Beast conjures a miniature sun that shoots out a constant stream of stars as it chases the player. Not only does it last a long time, but it also continues to track you as the Elden Beast attacks independently of its movements, forcing you to choose between constantly getting hit by the stars while avoiding the boss's attacks, or avoiding the stars while getting wrecked by whatever moves the Elden Beast has decided to do in the interim. And yes, as mentioned before, you have to fight both Radagon and the Elden Beast in one go, with no flask refills in-between. If there was ever a game that made you Earn Your Happy Ending, it's Elden Ring.
openWhere do I discuss YMMVs? Videogame
So Self-Imposed Challenge is a YMMV trope, but what I want to add in can't be run through Get Help with English for proofreading.
My point… There's a Naked Run challenge in Stranger of Paradise: Final Fantasy Origin where you strip Jack down to his skivvies and fight bosses on Hard.
Considering I just came from Code Vein, that's like someone running the game with the Pipe of Thralldom.
Edited by kawaiineko333openOdd YMMV point removal Videogame
While browsing around, I found that this point was removed from YMMV.Super Mario Odyssey by The Living Drawing:
- Sacred Cow: Super Mario Odyssey quickly reached this status much like its sister game The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild. The Mario franchise in general is a very strong Sacred Cow for Nintendo, and with Odyssey bringing the series back to artistic greatness and having few to no argued flaws, a vast majority of the Mario and Nintendo fandom holds the game in very high regard.
Now, that wouldn't bother me too much — the Broken Base point on the same page notes that it's gotten a fair amount of criticism and debate over the years regarding whether or not it has too many collectibles. What does grab my attention, however, is the edit summary, which reads "Game is very frequently bashed and seems to be seen as one of the weakest 3D Mario games nowadays." I haven't actually seen any of this myself, both in Nintendo-centric and more layperson-oriented spaces, and from what I could glean, it's still very well-regarded despite the content overabundance debate, which makes me wonder if this is someone mistaking a Vocal Minority for general consensus and/or editing solely based on their personal opinion of the game. Should the point be reinstated, given that, or is there a better way to go about it? Edited by bowserbros
openWhat exactly is the scope of Dueling Games? Videogame
I'm confused on several stuff regarding this "page".
I was just browsing Trivia.Bayonetta 3 and saw these examples:
- Dueling Games:
- With Darksiders III, similar to the dual between the first Bayonetta and Darksiders games. Both are the third entry in their respective series of religious-themed hack n' slash games, with Darksiders III now introducing a female character as its playable lead. There also the fact that Bayonetta's developer PlatinumGames was interested in buying the Darksiders series when it was auctioned off by THQ.
- With Devil May Cry 5, a fellow hack n' slash game that belongs to a series made by the same creator as Bayonetta and is developed by Capcom, a company where many of PlatinumGames' staff previously worked. The same console rivalry with Darksiders III also applies here.
- With No More Heroes III. Both are the third numbered major entry of a hack 'n slash series, released on the Nintendo Switch, with No More Heroes III's developer Grasshopper Manufacture having once helped develop for God Hand, a game created by Clover Studio, a company that PlatinumGames used to be. Also, they have similar Bait-and-Switch opening sequences.
Thing is, Bayonetta 3 is still an upcoming game, so how come is it "dueling" with games that are already released years ago?
Maybe it's a misuse since clicking Dueling Games leads us to DuelingWorks.Games, which says the examples "had just came out around the same time with the same theme", but it doesn't say how many years that "same time" is. The page lists an example between Onechanbara (2004) and Lollipop Chainsaw (2012), which are 8 years apart. Does this mean the Bayo 3 examples above can still be valid in the future if the game eventually gets released?
Lastly, why does Dueling Games redirect to DuelingWorks.Games? The former is listed as a Trivia trope in several video games' Trivia pages, but once you're in DuelingWorks.Games itself, the page also contains tabs for Main, Film, and Headscratchers... which seem to open up two other issues:
- Clicking the "Main" tab redirects you to Game Tropes.
- Clicking the "Film" tab leads you to a film's work page that only has one trope... which is YMMV.
It looks like the redirect for Dueling Games is misplaced.
Edited by DanteVinopenAbout BadassAdorable Videogame
Hey there. I'm sorry if this query has been posted before, but I've been seeing this trope abused a lot lately to the point that it's practically become a vague catch-all term for literally anything and everything that a troper finds admirable/likable about a character. One recent example I deleted was from this character's page: https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Characters/FinalFantasyXIIILightning
Here's what the trope entry said: "A beautiful woman who changed herself into a stronger, more confident person capable of protecting both herself and her little sister."
Like, I know this character, and at best the only traits that could be subjectively seen as "adorable" out of her are those rare moments she goofs up. Most of the time, she's either a rude and edgy type (pre character development) or a serious and caring yet still edgy type (post character development), and doesn't even have the least bit of semblance to how a physically adorable character is supposed to be.
Could it be the way the trope page is written? Is it okay to just have it turn into an ambiguous, loose terminology?

Scorpider77 seems like a good troper in all respects, except one; he seems to have this wonk over Mario and Luigi: Paper Jam 2 and keeps talking about how everyone is clamoring for it and linking to its page.
There's just one problem: the game doesn't exist. While his non Mario edits are fine, anything pertaining to Mario (Bowser Jr.'s Journey, Mario & Luigi: Paper Jam and YMMV.Mario And Luigi Paper Jam, and YMMV.Mario Plus Rabbids Sparks Of Hope, among others) keeps having him throw in references to this nonexistent game, culminating in him making a since-cut page for it on the 11th of this month.
He also DMed me a link to a tweet that allegedly shows the proof of this clamoring (along with saying the game exists and Nintendo hasn't found the time to reveal it, stated with no proof whatsoever), except it's an analytics link - which can only be seen by the person who made the tweet. So he's shilling both himself and a nonexistent game to the detriment of factual information.