# Talk:Super Paper Mario

{{spoiler}}In the Reception section, the article states that there is no Dash button. A dashing feature actually can be unlocked, by completing the Flipside Pit of 100 Trials and receiving a Pixl named Dashell. (Note: This Pixl is optional and not necessary for any part of the game.) Dashell, when used, enables Mario to run at about twice his normal speed.
Eric55673{{endspoiler}}

It seems like that is something that reviewers were criticizing, whether the Pixl existed or not; perhaps they didn't play the game long enough to get Dashell.  --Brandon Dilbeck 23:02, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

Everything before Dash feature has been archived.  --myselfalso 01:04, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

Since there was already a list of characters in SPM, I commented out the large block of character details as this is unnecessarily duplicating information.  I think some of those details can be worked into the List page which is why I didn't just delete the text. --Masem 20:22, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Frequent criticisms include [...] the very large amount of dialogue between characters, especially compared to any other platforming game.
It's an RPG, what would you expect... 194.120.158.162 23:10, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

Actually, it's not an RPG. It's a platformer with SOME minor RPG elements (previous Paper Mario games were regular RPGs). TJ Spyke 23:24, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
You're splitting hairs. --Thaddius 15:09, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
I know this is old but I just got here, why shouldn't these criticisms be mentioned?  I mean, if it really is frequent and from renowned gaming critics, it should be mentioned.  You can even say "though large amounts of dialogue is common in RPGs" or whatever if it makes you feel better, but you can't deny the complaint was made.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Internet Mage (talk • contribs) 02:25, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
Paper Mario: The Thousand-Year Door was also criticized for its lengthy dialogues, and it was an RPG. The dialogues went on for perhaps the same amount of time that SPM's did. So lengthy cut-scenes that cannot be skipped are criticized in general. --ThomasO1989 (talk) 03:57, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Just so eveybody knows, I put a link to http://faqs.ign.com/articles/784/784008p1.html, A webpage that tells you what you need to do when you really need to get to the next level of Super Paper Mario.

Corbin Davenport 00:01, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Why was the whole Super Paper Mario characters article deleted? Both the PM: Thousand Year Door and Super Paper Mario character pages were scrapped, but what for? That was a lot of useful information? Unknown Dragon 02:53, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

WP:USEFUL and WP:INTERESTING --Lucid 02:59, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
So why WAS the character pages deleted? 75.185.101.79 14:10, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
It looks as though ALL the Paper Mario character sections have been deleted...What's going on here?  There's no reason for that. MsDevin92 19:54, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
Can we redirect "Count Bleck" and "Super Paper Mario characters" to "List of Paper Mario series characters"? 75.185.101.79 02:50, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

Shouldn't there be some kind of spoiler warning? zanzer7 11:31, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

According to Wikipedia policies, spoiler warnings should not be used. -- ReyBrujo 17:16, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
I've never heard of a Wikipedia policy on that.  I think that {{spoiler}} should be used.  --Leon Byford 18:10, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

I added the other way of getting round the glitch - it does work, as that is how I got round it.--03crichardson 16:43, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
I object to the glitch section being removed. It is a major fault with a large quantity (if not all) PAL disks. It is not a trivial "he can walk on air for a little while" glitch, it freezes the whole wii - only fixed by pulling the power out. For any PAL players this is a serious issue. --03crichardson 17:46, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
I also object to the glitch section being removed. If it's serious enough for NOE to put out a replacement disk, then it's serious enough to be mentioned in a wiki article about the game. Dunnymeister 08:15, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

I agree Muzzamo 08:53, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
Perhaps before restoring the section, sources should be found, and it should be rewritten?  Just a thought.  Geoff B 09:49, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
Well, yeah, but if a source can't be found then does that meen that PAL Gamers should be left SOL? Concidering the game had a rather long translation period, it's rather silly to not mention it.Conan-san 17:11, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
The section I removed said nothing about a replacement disc, which would be the most important part of the section for this article. All it contained was a description of the glitch and how to avoid it, which is not interesting at all for the non-gamer reader. Pagrashtak 15:25, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
The things I could remove from say, the Heros page because they're not intresting at all to someone who doesn't watch Heros and yet would hide important infomation about Heros from those who want to know. I say to hell with common man. Conan-san 17:11, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
That sentiment will not produce a very useful encyclopedia. If you wish to improve other articles by removing unencyclopedic material, please feel free. Pagrashtak 19:25, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
So hiding facts, particulary ones that users of the article will concider useful = encyclopdic? Does hiding things that are of note "useful"? I'd rather a "Useless" encyclopida that told me things rather than a "useful" encyclopedia that short changed things. I'm sorry, I'm reversing the removal of the PAL Glitch section.Conan-san 09:02, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
It will only get removed again for the same reasons. Why not try and find a source? Geoff B 09:13, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
I was under the impresion it got removed even with a source Conan-san 09:15, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
Nope, last time it was removed it was unsourced, and the edit summary stated so. Geoff B 09:20, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
Okay, the only sources I have are from forums, and could have been written by any one of us. Although, I was playing the game, it froze for ME, and I got around it. Hows that for proof? If this sint useful information, then what is? --03crichardson 17:33, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
Oriognal Research, which Wikipedia looks down on with it's bushy look down opon eyebrows.Conan-san 10:05, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
Here is the official statement from Nintendo regarding the bug
http://www.nintendo-europe.com/NOE/en/GB/news/article.do?elementId=5PEzUvTf6HbPNJBeSVY69gEW_UolQbT8
145.253.3.223  —Preceding comment was added at 11:52, 18 October 2007 (UTC) 
As a PAL gamer who uses wikipedia for info I strongly support this being here. In fact, I only learned about the glitch because I read about it here (however it was unfortunately too late as I had returned the game first). -161.73.45.173 (talk) 01:49, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

Why is there no section on characters, or even a list? Zman42 16:33 15 December 2007  —Preceding comment was added at 21:30, 15 December 2007 (UTC) 

There is an article on characters in the entire Paper Mario series: List of Paper Mario series characters (although it's currently protected due to an edit war on the page). TJ Spyke 03:52, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
Oh, OKZman42 (talk) 15:04, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
Also, lists are generally discouraged for a particular game article if that game is a part of a series.  --Son (talk) 00:27, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
Perhaps this list should be more easily found from the main article, I doubt it is just me that ended up blundering through multiple redirects to the same page trying to find it... 81.108.161.111 (talk) 17:26, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
Infact, never mind the above comment. After reading the character list page, it ends up redirecting all the way back to this article anyway without having a character list... Quite a confusion. 81.108.161.111 (talk) 17:28, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

{{spoiler}} I think something about Dimentio should be added to the Plot section, and maybe also something about Blumiere and Timpani as well, if someone could do that. Because the game's not quite like some of the other Mario games, and has what appears to be the main antagonist to actually be the good guy in the end...or something like that. 203.87.8.127 (talk) 02:39, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

I'll try to rewrite the plot section to include those details but doesn't become long and excessive, like a previous attempt as this. --ThomasO1989 (talk) 03:03, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
It's done. I think an appropriate screenshot should be added, given that there is one. --ThomasO1989 (talk) 03:55, 27 March 2008 (UTC)i can make one... if i had the game

A Huge Gap is in the Reception section. More Info is needed abut what reviewers think about the game.--Chykka207 (talk) 15:26, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

Okay. I added a review from Plugged in (I hope it helps....). - Mkalv  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.237.46.58 (talk) 23:49, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
The review information was removed, I put it back. Just because there's no review summary from IGN or GameSpot doesn't mean other lesser sites can't be added (IMO). Rather than remove such a summary, perhaps a short quip from IGN or GameSpot should be provided in addition? --Thunderbird8 (talk) 07:32, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

This is likely dead (seeing as though it was stated in October 2007), but I think it's still noteworthy...
See [1] and [2]
76.175.116.65 (talk) 21:48, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

Probably not; there's nothing raised in those two sources about any real possibility of a movie being made. One is little more than "I would really like to do it" and the other, which doesn't even state anything about Paper Mario, pretty much denies such a thing. There's no real information we can divulge out of these two unrelated sources other than two people's desires for such a film to be made, which is quite trivial. Haipa Doragon (talk • contributions) 22:44, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

While digging through the online print archive, I located the following print reviews for this game:

Game Informer review
Play Magazine review
Hope these are helpful. JimmyBlackwing (talk) 04:16, 28 October 2010 (UTC)

I think it should be mentioned that this game has been discontinued by Nintendo. 71.218.190.224 (talk) 05:15, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

Why, we mostly do not do that for other games on Wikipedia. Why should we do it with this one? NathanWubs (talk) 18:52, 17 June 2014 (UTC)
Do you have a source? --ThomasO1989 (talk) 19:40, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

It's been a long time since I played the game, but I don't remember ever seeing anything about a forced marriage, as it says in the beginning of the Plot section, much less it being the cause of the void. I think we should confirm whether that's actually true, since it kind of sounds like a troll to me. I may be extremely wrong, however, and be embarrassed after making this statement, but I think we should verify it. Philmonte101 😊😄😞 (talk) 22:21, 5 April 2016 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Super Paper Mario. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.gameinformer.com/Games/Review/200706/R07.0411.1202.25242.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 11:32, 23 June 2016 (UTC)

@Le Panini and Smuckola: To find a citation for the Nintendo Power awards and nominations, I contacted a Wikipedian who owns the relevant issues. The next time you need something from a magazine, search for it in the Reference library. This library has a subpage for Nintendo Power. Unfortunately, the two people who own the relevant issues are no longer very active on Wikipedia. —Dexxor (talk) 14:05, 25 December 2020 (UTC)

Dexxor, I've been looking around to see if I could find any source talking about it, but had no luck. I have no access to the magazines, either, which is why I removed it. Le Panini [🥪] 21:41, 25 December 2020 (UTC)

This review is transcluded from Talk:Super Paper Mario/GA2. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: Jaguar (talk · contribs) 22:08, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

I'll tackle this. ♦ jaguar 22:08, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

Lead
I feel the artwork caption is a tad superfluous - I'd remove the word 'packaging'
 Done.
"Critics praised its gameplay, mainly its dimension-flipping mechanic, originality, and story" - remove this to improve flow, and link game mechanics
 Done.
"critics have since regarded as one of the best" - missing 'it'
 Done.
" Paper Mario: Sticker Star followed in 2012." - was this a sequel?
It seems as if every video game article has something like this, but I've improved the writing.  Done.
Gameplay
"overcoming linear platforming in theme of standard games in the Mario franchise" - would read better as overcoming linear platforming in like those of other games in the Mario franchise
 Done.
Development
"which never materialized but was never officially canceled" - repetition, replace with 'not'
 Done.
Reception
"The review aggregator website Metacritic reported that Super Paper Mario received "generally favorable reviews"" - this shouldn't be in past tense: According to the  review aggregator website Metacritic, Super Paper Mario received "generally favorable reviews" with a score of 85 out of 100...
 Done
"calling it "slightly weaker" than most Mario platformers" - perhaps feeling it was "slightly weaker"
 Done.
I think that's about it. This article is solid and GA-worthy - once all of the above nitpicks are out of the way then by all means this should be good to go.  ♦ jaguar 22:35, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

Jaguar, Well, that was easy. Concerns have been addressed. Thanks for picking this up, considering you just reviewed an article of mine. Panini🥪 23:25, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
It's fine, this was is good shape anyway. With all that out of the way - let's promote this.  ♦ jaguar 11:24, 2 March 2021 (UTC)

Hello! Ballou123 made an edit to this article (which I reverted seeing their edit in absolute good faith mainly because I wanted to discuss it with them a little) change most (if not every) instance of "universe" to "multi-verse" because "the game is literally about travelling between universes and dimensions and saving them from destruction espacially [sic] when merlon in the beginning of the game said the void will destroy all dimensions, all worlds and all existence, the contextual defintion of universe means multiverse but there are people who aren't aware of that so the word multiverse is more fitting to avoid misleading people and so they don't think it's just a singular universe" (taken from their edit summary). Wikitionary's definition of universe (that best fits how it is used in the article) is "an imaginary collection of worlds" and (for reference) the definition of dimension "a universe or plane of existence". So since the game uses (from what I understand I haven't played the game myself) dimension (and possibly universe), I'm here to ask if referring to them with the word "universe" or "multi-verse" would be better. ― Blaze WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#6545 21:57, 28 January 2022 (UTC)

While I admit I'm stepping into WP:OR territory, the game makes it clear that there's only one "universe" in several instances. An item that is used to return to the game's hub world is accompanied with "With this, you will be able to return [...] from anywhere in the universe!" Given that it can be used in any of the game's worlds, we can assume it's all the same universe. Plus, the term "world" is often used in the context of games to denote a specific area or collection of levels, whether than something like a separate planet or something (like SMB3's worlds, for instance). It's much easier to say that the objective is to prevent the universe from being destroyed, not the multi-verse, rather than going deeper than that. --ThomasO1989 (talk) 22:33, 28 January 2022 (UTC)
@ThomasO1989: Thanks for clarifying that! Like I said I haven't played the game myself so I wouldn't know what the game says. ― Blaze WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#6545 22:45, 28 January 2022 (UTC)
@Thomas01989 first, there are a few instances of authors not using the word "multiverse" because it's a useless word (such as Star vs the forces of evil and digimon). Universe by definition already means "everything", so having a different word for that same thing isn't a necessity. Even calling something a "Smaller Something" sometimes is more about how to place it in the larger cosmology rather than saying it's small
Also don't use the term world from other games, because it varies from game to game, in galaxy world refers to a galaxies cluster
You do realize that world 4 which is stated to he another dimension is also called universe in Japanese? And mario's home dimension is also called world and universe, let's bring up more
Dreams in Mario become reality do you know what they call him in Mario party 5 and dream team? Universes and dimensions
Also did you ignore that fiction treat dimension as a universe? We must judge the information not by words but by context, there are many words that their meaning change by context, Every context needs to be Analyzed on is own and be used to understand what is the meaning behind the work If the usage of universe is more in line what people think a multiverse is, that is exactly what it's because again the usage and context matters more than a "word" Ballou123 (talk) 06:45, 29 January 2022 (UTC)

@ThomasO1989: Pinging ― Blaze WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#6545 15:33, 29 January 2022 (UTC)
@Ballou123: Like I was warning about in my own explanation, this is falling into WP:OR and WP:SYNTHESIS territory. I brought up the concept of "worlds" to illustrate the general usage in video games, not to make my own analysis of the term. "Also did you ignore that fiction treat dimension as a universe?" What does it matter? You've already shown that one fiction's treatment of a term doesn't mean all others treat it the same way. In the end, the general reader doesn't care about semantics. The simplest answer is that Super Paper Mario states every clearly that it's "the universe" and thus we should treat it as such. --ThomasO1989 (talk) 19:50, 29 January 2022 (UTC)