Talk:Super Mario Bros./Archive 1

message: This part doesn't make sense: "In addition, the elevator-style lifts are about 60% their original size throughout, as opposed to the original size until world 5-3 and 60% after." Just so you all know--74.69.54.30 23:25, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Doesn't make sense 

message: Is there a way to ban IP's? Some guy keeps making it say "Super Garret brothers". Shortly after I reverted it, he did it again on, apperantly, a different computer. Then someone esle reverted it. His first Ip was 67.183.11.197  71.114.26.29 12:47, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vandalism 

message: I'm pretty sure that Super Mario Bros. didn't come out in Europe in 1997. Is that supposed to say 1987? Could someone who has a reliable source (GameFAQs ain't it) fix this?
In the meantime, I've commented the Europe release date out. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 06:11, 22 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Released in Europe in 1997? 

message: I reverse engineered the Minus World bug about 8 years ago...  The article is correct that the Minus World is 36-1.
The reason the world loops forever is the format of the level data.  The enemy data for a level contains embedded "set pipe target" commands.  These commands say, "if (world == X) pipe_target = Y;", and the pipe system uses the current value of pipe_target to select the destination level.  However, because there are only such entries in the data for worlds 2 and 7 (they share this same data on 2-2 and 7-2), this variable never gets set.  Its previous value is the last level loaded - the one you're on.
The fact that the middle pipe is 5 is more interesting.  It's actually the result of an optimization - SMB1 has many crazy size optimizations in it.  Remember, the game has exactly 3 bytes of free space in its CPU ROM, and even uses the PPU ROM for the title screen layout because the CPU ROM was out of space.  One of the optimizations is that there is only one type of warp zone.  The "underground" warp zone of 4-2 has only a single pipe to world 5.  Despite this, it is not a separate type of warp zone.  It is actually a 3-pipe warp zone like the other two.  In the table of warp zone worlds, it is implemented as 3 warps - worlds 36, 5, and 36.  The pipes for the outer warps are omitted from the level data to prevent you from using them.  The reason they use 36 for the outer two warps is so that when you see "WELCOME TO WARP ZONE" you don't see extra floating numbers above nothing - the "36" tiles are blank.  The sole effect of this bug is to load a different warp zone than the one intended.  Thus, the fact that such an illegal world is the Minus World is not really a coincidence.
The Famicom Disk System version of the game is basically the same program re-"org"ed at a different address.  ROM on a 32k direct-mapped cartridge is from 0x8000 to 0xFFFF.  On the Famicom Disk System, there is an 8k ROM for the disk system at 0xE000-0xFFFF.  Games run in 32k of RAM from 0x6000 to 0xDFFF.  It is the change of the base address that causes the FDS version of the game to have a different Minus World.  The game decides which level to load based on the world number by looking in a table.  Obviously, loading world 36 overshoots this table.  The game happens to end up loading a byte from another table that contains the high byte of data addresses.  Since the address layout is different, this table is different, so the FDS version loads a different level number than its cartridge counterpart.
I didn't put this on the main article because it's clearly original research. -- Myria 06:46, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Submit your information to a ROM hacking site (a reputable one) and then cite that as a source :) - furrykef (Talk at me) 04:44, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

text: Although not helpful for getting rid of the "citation needed" notice, I can vouch for this, as I too have done extensive hacking of the game both through Game Genie and through messing with some reverse-engineered assembly code. The phenomenon that creates the Minus World can be duplicated and extended by playing with the Game Genie warp code YSAOPE + YEAOZA + ??APY?, replacing the first ? with one of APZLGITY, the second ? with one of EOXUKSVN, and the last ? with either A or E. The code which takes you to world -1 for the US cartridge version of the game happens to be LXAPYA, and it is the 36th such code (Game Genie codes are simply encoded memory address/value pairs). The effect of these codes is indeed caused by indexing the level table out-of-bounds. The value it ends up with determines what kind of level you will get. Usually this will be one of the existing levels with some of its attributes mixed up (such as level 4-4's layout, but with an underwater level's palette, music, and swimming enabled). A few of these codes will take you to weird and wonderous areas that are not a part of the real game, but are other data being interpreted as level data. These can get really weird and will often crash the game. Discussion of their details would be out of scope here though. Anyway, as interesting as this stuff is, it probably won't help with the article.--QuasarTE 07:03, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Minus World 

message: Why was Super Mario Bros. turned into a dab page? Do we really need one? In any event, this article should be "Super Mario Bros. (video game)" if it had to be moved. --Pagrashtak 04:33, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Someone moved Nintendo Entertainment System too earlier today; someone needs to learn that you need to discuss before moving. --Ntg 08:12, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree. Someone is going to pay... --Optichan 20:06, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  dab page? 

message: Talk:Super Mario Bros. (original game) - Super Mario Bros. (original game) → Super Mario Bros. - user Nintendude moved the page without discussion and created a disambig which many feel is unnecessary. --Ntg 03:51, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Add *Support or *Oppose followed by an optional one-sentence explanation, then sign your vote with ~~~~
*Support - don't see why not. It IS the most common usage of "Super Mario Bros."; if they meant any OTHER game, it'd have the appropriate number after it. --Shadow Hog 14:27, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requested move 

message: :Add *Support or *Oppose followed by an optional one-sentence explanation, then sign your vote with ~~~~
*Support - don't see why not. It IS the most common usage of "Super Mario Bros."; if they meant any OTHER game, it'd have the appropriate number after it. --Shadow Hog 14:27, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Voting

message: Query - This article says that SMB features the first "cheat code" or "easter egg" in video games - however I know for a fact that there were codes programmed into Intellivision games that would let individuals "cheat" or find hidden features.  Thus this claim should be removed, n'est-ce pas? 71.124.16.93 21:22, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Cheat Code" 

message: It sounds a little strange, but some believe this game contains subliminal communist refrences. Should that be noted in the article?
:I don't think you'll be able to find any reliable sources to that effect.  - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 03:44, 22 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: - 71.31.159.119 00:11, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You might want to read WP:RS before calling that a reliable source. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 22:25, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I was just joking.  I would never consider that a reliable source. - 71.31.144.61 00:42, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well... I mean, I have heard of this "rumor" in real life. It isn't like there is no precedent for people reinterpreting neutral elements of a popular culture item in a way unintended by the creators. Peyo is mute on the musings of Smurfs as communists. It might be useful to create a seperate article explaining the meme; what it is, and what it is not...
No? Yes? Maybe?--ttogreh 13:40, 30 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Communist propaganda 

message: Why isn't 10+ lives mentioned?
please elaborate66.97.203.24 13:57, 1 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It's a bug in the game. When you have anywhere between 10 to 19 lives (inclusive), the tens digit is a crown, and the ones digit is normal.  When you have from 20 to 45 lives, the tens digit remains a crown, and the ones digit is a letter.  For example, if you have 20 lives, the life count will display a crown followed by an A. If you have 46 or more lives, the ones digit turns into garbled symbols.  TanookiMario257 05:52, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Crown Lives 

message: It seems that the origianl version of Super Mario Bros. is no longer available for download on ROM sites. Was is taken off everywhere by force? 21:51, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I find that very doubtful... - furrykef (Talk at me) 05:57, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  ROM 

message: I have book of world records (1999) sitting on my lap currently. The wiki site claims Super mario bros has sold 50,000,000 copies according to this book, which is false. Guinness book of world records (1999) clearly states that the Super Mario bros 3 is the best selling game of all time with 18.6 million copies sold. If you do not believe me, i can take a photo of the mentioned article in the book of world records.
:Check the link. SMB3 is the best-selling standalone game; SMB is the bestseller when copies bundled with NESes are taken into account. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 19:53, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Record information stated is false 

message: Why do show a screenshot of a world end scene?
--Diego 12:51, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Because by now, everyone knows what the world endings look like in that game.  Even for people who didn't, it wouldn't take them long to finish the first world and see it themselves.  Plus, is there really anything to spoil in this game? -Unknownwarrior33 02:06, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Spoilers 

message: I wonder why you guys never mention the trick in the stage of
4-3 or 4-4 (i forgot but sure) to gain 100 lives or more by manipulating two flying ducks which descended on the stairs just below the flags?
also as information, this trick is not for greedy people because if you manage to gain more than a certain limit of lives, then you will be 'cursed' by the bugs that send you directly to game over and title screen with just one single death (buried by too much lives would be a joke explanation of this bug). 
Also i would like to see the tricks involving bowser fire, the golden axe at the end of the bridge, and big mario to invoke big but small mario (the small mario if damaged turned to big, and vice versa, so the small mario can shoot fire).
Tasfan 09:30, 11 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tricks to gain 100 lives and Big but Small cheat 

message: Wasn't this game released as an arcade console before or simultaneously with the NES release? Brutannica 21:11, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: After, actually, as Vs. Super Mario Bros. Vs. Unisystem games were based on already-released NES games. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 21:13, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Arcade version? 

message: This game IS on animal crossing for gamecube. shouldn't it count as a port?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.110.245.187 (talk) 21:12, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Animal crossing port 

message: Why does the article say that this game is the bestselling as of 1999? Isn't it still? I would update to 2008, but I'm not registered and it's protected...  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 152.3.81.158 (talk) 23:53, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: . I found a page on the Guinness World Records website that affirms SMB as the best-selling video game.  And next time, please put new threads at the bottom of the page. Xenon54 00:16, 30 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Best Selling Game of All Time? 

message: Super Mario World is also a direct sequel to SMB (in the same way SMB2/SMB USA is; i.e. it was acknowledged as a direct sequel only in certain regions) as it was titled Super Mario Bros. 4 in Japan. Actually, I would argue the 'canon' chronology goes SMB-Lost Levels-SMB3-SMW (this may be mentionable), but I understand why SMB2/SMB USA is still technically on the list.
Oh, and Yoshi's Island was not titled SMB5 in any region (there is no SMB5).
— Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.225.10.54 (talk) 06:53, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Four not three direct sequels 

message: Guys. I've never met anyone who has seen this. At my local grocery store I saw a Super Mario Bros. game (in cabinet) that was like a mod of everything. It had a skateboarder instead of mario. The coins were coke cans. Bowser was a football player who threw footballs. The man-eating plants were scissors. The cabinet had the exact same cabinet as a normal Super Mario Bros. The music was the same. Has anyone ever seen this bootleg?
Amulekii (talk) 23:59, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Must have been done by some dedicated homebrew group. There are probably hundreds of edited SMB games like that, why bother? - Up and over for a six! (talk) 02:15, 17 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Some Crazy Bootleg 

message: This was also released on the GBA as part of Nintendo's NES Classics series.
:That's already mentioned in the article but it's under Classic NES series, which I think was the American name for the series. Corbo 19:40, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  NES Classics Version 

message: I think that reference is totally useless. There are billions of Mario Parodies around the Internet. Why is a Jerry Jackson reference here? I remember that two submissions were blammed in Newgrounds. But the moderators allowed them in the very end! Not only that, but Jerry Jackson make movies totally pointless, without any kind of sense. They are poorly drawn, with a emotionless voice, not sound at all, and they even manage to appear in the Frontpage and here in the Wikipedia.
I'm going to delete that reference right now.
Please, be fair.
— Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.8.161.79 (talk) 21:40, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Jerry Jackson reference...? 

message: :The player begins with only two lives rather than the standard three, and 256 coins are required to earn an extra life, as opposed to 100 in all other versions.
I removed this because this obviously depends on switch settings. Both the number of lives and how many coins are needed for a 1-up are configurable settings. - furrykef (Talk at me) 22:10, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vs. Super Mario Bros. statement removed 

message: Note: This article has a very small number of in-line citations for an article of its size and currently would not pass criteria 2b.
Members of the Wikipedia:WikiProject Good articles are in the process of doing a re-review of current Good Article listings to ensure compliance with the standards of the Good Article Criteria. (Discussion of the changes and re-review can be found here). A significant change to the GA criteria is the mandatory use of some sort of in-line citation (In accordance to WP:CITE) to be used in order for an article to pass the verification and reference criteria. It is recommended that the article's editors take a look at the inclusion of in-line citations as well as how the article stacks up against the rest of the Good Article criteria. GA reviewers will give you at least a week's time from the date of this notice to work on the in-line citations before doing a full re-review and deciding if the article still merits being considered a Good Article or would need to be de-listed. If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact us on the Good Article project talk page or you may contact me personally. On behalf of the Good Articles Project, I want to thank you for all the time and effort that you have put into working on this article and improving the overall quality of the Wikipedia project. Agne 21:57, 25 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  GA Re-Review and In-line citations 

message: There’s no mention of Great Giana Sisters, a 8-bit era computer only clone of Super Mario Bros that had to be removed from the shelves due to legal issues. ~ IICATSII punch the keys 13:58, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It's already linked off the main page for the Mario Series in general. Babrook 9:56, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Great Giana Sisters 

message: The article ought to touch upon the music of the game.--Xtreambar 02:04, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree. Evan1109 16:37, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Music 

message: The article said "the glitch remains in the Virtual Console version, but not in the form it is remembered." I did it in the original way as soon as I got the game, so for one, that's totally wrong. And for another thing, whoever said that didn't elaborate on this "difference". I changed it for now--but if this isn't a flat-out lie then please elaborate on the differences. Evan1109 16:40, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Minus World in the Virtual Console 

message: "Note the backwards fireball" What?
:I think this is referring to if you are a big Mario and jump on the axe at the same time as touching King Koopa, there is a glitch where the size effect of mushrooms is reversed.    So, Mario is  big, but he eats a mushroom and Mario shrinks, then he eats a flower and gets fire power.  Growing up, we called this "Little Guy Fire Power".  Once 4he dies, the size thing resets.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.88.170.32 (talk) 17:55, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Backwards fireball 

message: :Image:Bowser (smb1).png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 18:12, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fair use rationale for Image:Bowser (smb1).png 

message: SMB for GameCube (in Animal Crossing) is the original ROM. A full emulation; no modifications. So I moved the information about it to where the information about the Classic NES Series and Virtual Console versions are. Mega Man 5 02:16, 30 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Super Mario Bros. for GameCube 

message: There is a story that ID Software approached Nintendo with the idea for a PC port of Super Mario Bros (and an accompanying demo), but were turned down, which led to the creation of Commander Keen instead. If anyone would like to research this and integrate it into the main article (trivia section?), that would be great.
— Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.152.70.12 (talk) 13:48, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  ID Software's PC port of Super Mario Bros? 

message: This article does not currently meet GA standards. Images lack fair use rationales (which is a quick-fail criteria), it's terribly under-referenced, the random wikification of stand-alone years needs to be corrected. References also need to be consistently formatted. Currently, there are extra characters at the end of one reference. Not sure what it is, I assume accidental. I'll wait a few days before checking back. If these issues haven't been addressed, I'm going to delist the article from GA. Know, however, that it can always be renominated at a later time. LaraLove 17:06, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Fair use rationales are now in every image. However, the relatively few references won't meet GA criteria. I can't find a single reference in the gameplay section, which is long enough that it deserves references. I'm now delisting this article as GA until the standards are met again. OhanaUnitedTalk page 14:48, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[WP:GA|GA]] 

message: Someone added this under Bugs/Glitches.  There's no citation, plus it appears as though it just applies to emulated versions, whereas this article is talking about the actual NES Cartridge game.  Instead of removing the section, I thought I'd see what others thought, if it should stay or go. 
Poor Poor Pitiful Me 03:32, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  "World 0" 

message: Is that not notable enough to be mentioned under bugs/glitches?
I believe that this bug was exploited in the 1990 Nintendo World Championship... 164.236.0.10 16:24, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  1up spot in 2-2? 

message: I've renominated this as a Good article canidate. The two main concerns for delisting were no sources and no fair use rationales for the images. Both have been fixed by me (though for the 2nd one, I just added the article name to all of the fair use templates), so I've gone ahead and relisted. NF24(radio me!Editor review) 21:41, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  GA Renom 

message: The footnotes must go after the punctuation mark—not before. I'd fix this myself... but I can't be bothered. Ashnard Talk Contribs 07:18, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: - Looks like I need to go back over the MoS. Completely my fault. NF24(radio me!Editor review) 11:01, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  MoS issue 

message: :GA review (see here for criteria)
#It is reasonably well written.
#:a (prose):  b (MoS): 
#It is factually accurate and verifiable.
#:a (references):  b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR): 
#It is broad in its coverage.
#:a (major aspects):  b (focused): 
#It follows the neutral point of view policy.
#:Fair representation without bias: 
#It is stable.
#:No edit wars etc.: 
#It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
#:a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales):  b (appropriate use with suitable captions): 
#Overall: 
#:Pass/Fail: 
Ah, a classic. Some comments:
#The caption for the image in the infobox is an interesting pastiche of OR and POV. "As was typical of NES games in America at the time the cover shows a scene from gameplay in 1985." Such a statement, even if made in the body of the article, would be highly suspect and require a citation. It needs to be changed to something very factual about the picture. It's not even really a scene from gameplay, but more of a hodgepodge of game elements. On the opposite side of the coin, "a gameplay screen shot" is not a very descriptive caption.Caption removed until I can think of something to write without stating the obvious NF24(radio me!Editor review) 11:01, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Okay, I'll give it a look and strike out things I'm done with. NF24(radio me!Editor review) 10:41, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The references need to be formatted also. Pagrashtak 16:34, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, I'm a little concerned about the refs overall. There are a lot of refs to TMK. I wouldn't have a problem with a few, but when there are this many it may cause the reliability of the article to be questioned. I think part of the solution is to remove some unneeded refs. Stating that Mario primarily attacks by jumping on the enemy is so basic it doesn't need a citation. At the least, this could probably be switched over to an instruction manual cite. I have the instruction manual at home; I can look to see what can be switched over to that when I get home if you need me to. Pagrashtak 16:43, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I just chose TMK because it has been and always will be very reliable. I can go ahead and remove the unnecessary refs, but unfortunately I don't have the manual. NF24(radio me!Editor review) 19:41, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Okay, I've removed the unnecessary refs (the article now has 26 refs instead of 38; wow!) and have fixed the rest to use . NF24(radio me!Editor review) 21:24, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

text: See, this is the problem I have with GA. I can make suggestions to improve the article all i want, but the nominator will always allow your comments to trump mine because you're the "actual reviewer"—whether I'm right or wrong. So I'll just list my major concerns with the article here, and let CP line-item veto and tell you which ones you should actually bother with. As stated before, gameplay has many superfluous references, often to websites with possible reliability issues. Sentences like "Super Mario Bros. was scored by Koji Kondo, and its themes are easily the most widely recognized of any video game score to date." are what need refs. The gameplay section is too detailed. No respectable video game FA would allow such an in-depth discussion of the mechanics as this snake of a sentence: "King Koopa may be defeated in one of two ways: either by touching the axe at the edge of the bridge (thereby dropping King Koopa into the lava) or, as Fire Mario or Luigi, throwing fireballs at him to defeat him directly, revealing what enemy is in disguise; this is the only method one can use to receive points for Koopa's defeat." There's also a lot of glitch discussion. I will agree that the Minus World should be in the article, but small fiery Mario and jumping the flagpole is not notable. See Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games/Article guidelines for more on this. Remove the flags from the infobox. WikiProject VG convention is to use  or similar, but no images. Pagrashtak 14:43, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: You're taking this far too personally. I didn't say that your comments were right or wrong, I just said that's silly for someone fixing up an article to mix up two sets of suggestions. I have a method for reviewing articles that allows me to keep track of changes so that I can make sure that everything is in tip-top shape. The problem was not your suggestions, it was that the person editing this article took them up at the same time as they took up my suggestions and, in doing so, made it nearly impossible to track changes because now the article has changed substantially from the version that I reviewed. The concerns you brought up were legitimate, quite possibly even things I wouldn't have noticed on my own. But the editor implemented them intertwined with my suggestions, and I can't tell what's what. I likely will ask the editor implement many of the things that you suggested, but this is a very high-profile article and a structured approach to this review is the only way that it will be able to maintain Good Article status if it is implemented. Please assume good faith and don't take it as a personal attack, as more suggestions for improvement can only help. I asked the editor to restore the citations not because I thought that they were wrong, but so that I could track the changes. Anyhow, I will take a look at the article again later today and say what else needs to be done, likely incorporating User:Pagrashtak's commentary. Cheers, CP 16:25, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not taking this personally at all. My problem is not with you, but the way GA is structured. Although, if I can identify ref problems now, I don't see why they can't be fixed now, even though you're not looking at them yet. Pagrashtak 16:31, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Just for the continuity of my review really; the only way I can manage these is to be a bit of a control freak. I don't mind input, especially from someone who obviously knows what they're doing, such as yourself, it's just frustrating to be presented with an article that had many of references missing. Anyhow, no hard feelings, I do appreciate some of the concerns you raised. Now, on to the changes!
#The lead still needs some work per WP:LEAD. For example, I personally think that the first paragraph is still somewhat POV, although perhaps I'm wrong. Also, given how large the game play section is, it's highly underrepresented in the lead.Fixed POV; added more information about gameplay. NF24(radio me!Editor review) 22:43, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

text: That should be good enough for now. Tell me when this is all done. Cheers, CP 03:51, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I have a long weekend coming up (Election Day in the US), so I'll work on it then. NF24(radio me!Editor review) 10:42, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I finally switched any gameplay references I could over to the instruction booklet. It still seems a little over-cited, but now that it's using what is definitely a reliable source for the bulk of it, it's a very minor problem if you ask me. Pagrashtak 05:33, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

text: One last little thing now: now there's a small issue on the other side of WP:LEAD. In the lead you state "Super Mario Bros. was one of the first games to feature a storyline..." a fact that is not in the body of the article. Given that it's potentially challengeable too, you should probably provide a citation for wherever you put it in the body of the article. Cheers, CP 22:58, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  GA Review 

message: Wow, it was really silly to remove all those references without checking with me (the actual reviewer of this article) first, because  now an article that was fairly well-cited before is now just missing many citations. TMK was reliable for much (perhaps not all) of the things that it was citing (such as game play) and now that you've removed them and I can't tell where it would have been alright to use TMK or not. Until the citation issues are addressed (all potentially contestable issues and the gameplay) section, I will not be re-reviewing the article for other things. I said before that I would be checking the references in my second review, which I do because it's better to toy around with those once everything else is ducky (except, of course, when there are references that are flat out missing). I would have checked, as I said, for reference quality and workability after everything else is complete. To re-review again would be the equivalent of re-reviewing the article in its entirety. Please re-add the citations as they were, and I will let you know where more reliable sources are required in a second review. Cheers, CP 22:42, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: See, this is the problem I have with GA. I can make suggestions to improve the article all i want, but the nominator will always allow your comments to trump mine because you're the "actual reviewer"—whether I'm right or wrong. So I'll just list my major concerns with the article here, and let CP line-item veto and tell you which ones you should actually bother with. As stated before, gameplay has many superfluous references, often to websites with possible reliability issues. Sentences like "Super Mario Bros. was scored by Koji Kondo, and its themes are easily the most widely recognized of any video game score to date." are what need refs. The gameplay section is too detailed. No respectable video game FA would allow such an in-depth discussion of the mechanics as this snake of a sentence: "King Koopa may be defeated in one of two ways: either by touching the axe at the edge of the bridge (thereby dropping King Koopa into the lava) or, as Fire Mario or Luigi, throwing fireballs at him to defeat him directly, revealing what enemy is in disguise; this is the only method one can use to receive points for Koopa's defeat." There's also a lot of glitch discussion. I will agree that the Minus World should be in the article, but small fiery Mario and jumping the flagpole is not notable. See Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games/Article guidelines for more on this. Remove the flags from the infobox. WikiProject VG convention is to use  or similar, but no images. Pagrashtak 14:43, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: You're taking this far too personally. I didn't say that your comments were right or wrong, I just said that's silly for someone fixing up an article to mix up two sets of suggestions. I have a method for reviewing articles that allows me to keep track of changes so that I can make sure that everything is in tip-top shape. The problem was not your suggestions, it was that the person editing this article took them up at the same time as they took up my suggestions and, in doing so, made it nearly impossible to track changes because now the article has changed substantially from the version that I reviewed. The concerns you brought up were legitimate, quite possibly even things I wouldn't have noticed on my own. But the editor implemented them intertwined with my suggestions, and I can't tell what's what. I likely will ask the editor implement many of the things that you suggested, but this is a very high-profile article and a structured approach to this review is the only way that it will be able to maintain Good Article status if it is implemented. Please assume good faith and don't take it as a personal attack, as more suggestions for improvement can only help. I asked the editor to restore the citations not because I thought that they were wrong, but so that I could track the changes. Anyhow, I will take a look at the article again later today and say what else needs to be done, likely incorporating User:Pagrashtak's commentary. Cheers, CP 16:25, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not taking this personally at all. My problem is not with you, but the way GA is structured. Although, if I can identify ref problems now, I don't see why they can't be fixed now, even though you're not looking at them yet. Pagrashtak 16:31, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Just for the continuity of my review really; the only way I can manage these is to be a bit of a control freak. I don't mind input, especially from someone who obviously knows what they're doing, such as yourself, it's just frustrating to be presented with an article that had many of references missing. Anyhow, no hard feelings, I do appreciate some of the concerns you raised. Now, on to the changes!
#The lead still needs some work per WP:LEAD. For example, I personally think that the first paragraph is still somewhat POV, although perhaps I'm wrong. Also, given how large the game play section is, it's highly underrepresented in the lead.Fixed POV; added more information about gameplay. NF24(radio me!Editor review) 22:43, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

text: That should be good enough for now. Tell me when this is all done. Cheers, CP 03:51, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I have a long weekend coming up (Election Day in the US), so I'll work on it then. NF24(radio me!Editor review) 10:42, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I finally switched any gameplay references I could over to the instruction booklet. It still seems a little over-cited, but now that it's using what is definitely a reliable source for the bulk of it, it's a very minor problem if you ask me. Pagrashtak 05:33, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: GA Review Part 2

message: Great work thus far! I just have two more concerns:
#I still don't feel the lead completely summarizes the article. There's a large weight placed on game play, but there's still no discussion on what Mario and Luigi actually do in the game, what their mission is and how they accomplish it etc. etc. There are many references in the lead to game play elements (King Koopa, Starman, Goomba etc. etc.), but these are completely outside of the context of the game itself. Right now, if you read just the summary, you'd know all about the re-releases, the impact it had, some random elements, the music etc. etc. but you'd still have no idea what the game itself is about.Also, I feel that you haven't really summarize the "alternate versions" section either, although all this would require would be something like "The game spawn many alternate versions as well" and then maybe a "such as..." afterwards if it wouldn't make the lead too detailed. Done. NF24(radio me!Editor review) 21:39, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: One last little thing now: now there's a small issue on the other side of WP:LEAD. In the lead you state "Super Mario Bros. was one of the first games to feature a storyline..." a fact that is not in the body of the article. Given that it's potentially challengeable too, you should probably provide a citation for wherever you put it in the body of the article. Cheers, CP 22:58, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Last two things (hopefully)

message: The cover depicted in the article shows the US version. I'm wondering if Japan's box art was different?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.17.45.119 (talk) 09:49, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Box Art... 

message: NF24(radio me!) 00:19, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: *Looking at it now. Livitup (talk) 18:48, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: *First pass through the whole article is done.  Please check the source for hidden comments prefaced with "NOTE FROM COPYEDIT"  I'll come back to review any comments you have after a couple days.  The 'Alternate Versions' section especially needs some clarifications.  Overall a good article! Livitup (talk) 20:28, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I've gone through the comments and made come changes. I removed the last paragraph in the All Night Nippon SMB section (BTW, the show and the game were popular), the source I cited earlier in that section says that most levels are similar to those of Vs. SMB, with some directly imported from The Lost Levels. Xenon54 22:24, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: That section looks MUCH better.  Your edit was a little deeper than I was willing to cut, since I'm not an expert on the game, but the way you modified it makes it read much better.  I had added a  to "The Mario series is one of the most popular and enduring series of all time." in 'Reception and legacy' but now that I reread the section I see the next few setnances back up the statement, so I think it's OK.  I'll move this to proofread status at LOCE, but I think you're in pretty good shape from a CE standpoint.  :)  Livitup (talk) 15:09, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Copyedit request 

message: It is untrue that attaining the fire-flower upgrade ALSO increases your hit-tolerance.  You are still subject to one hit even as fire-Mario before returning to his infant stage (i.e., smallest Mario),Insert footnote text here as opposed to the implication by this part of the Gameplay section that it somehow increases your hit-tolerance as well (up to 2, before returning to infant-state).  That would be great, but it is unfortunately (and disappointingly) untrue.
1. Insert the cartridge into your NES and play for yourself.
:The first mention of the fire flower is:
:If Mario or Luigi gets a mushroom, they will be able to take two hits before losing a life; collecting a fire flower grants the ability to throw fireballs, as well as the increased number of hits.
:Secondly, there's also this sentence:
:If he takes a hit from an enemy as Super Mario/Luigi or Fire Mario/Luigi, he simply reverts to regular Mario/Luigi and the game continues.
:I don't see how that's untrue; the first says "as well as the increased number of hits" (referring to the 2 hits) and the second equates Fire and Mushroom. NF24(radio me!) 11:41, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mario/Luigi's life-cycle 

message: Why no mention of the history of the Mario Bros?  Namely Mario's first appearance in Donkey Kong, and the game Mario Bros?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.84.98.75 (talk) 22:14, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: We've got separate articles for Mario, Mario Bros., and Donkey Kong. This article is about the game Super Mario Bros., and going into the history of Mario in general would be way off topic. Xenon54 01:04, 11 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  History of Mario & Luigi 

message: According to this link-checking tool, there are two dead links on the page. They are current numbers 23 (Games FAQ: Super Mario All-Stars) and 30 (Screenshots V). Please fix them. I would myself, but I don't know what sites can source this, since the game came out so long ago. Giants2008 (talk) 18:32, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dead links 

message: There is a statement in this article- "It is the first console original in this genre to feature smooth-scrolling levels, which made it a landmark in home video-gaming" that is untrue. The first game that featured that was Snokie. This platformer featured jumping on platforms, jumping over hazards, AND smooth scrolling. This video of Snokie's gameplay clearly shows all of the above, and establishes that Snokie in 1983, not Super Mario Brothers, was the first platforming game to feature smooth-scrolling levels. I can't add it myself, so that's why I'm posting it here. 76.28.138.83 (talk) 02:39, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  The first? I don't think so 

message: This was bundled with the NES, no? In Japan too? There's no mention of it.  MahangaTalk 16:22, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bundled game 

message: The article states "The music, especially the Overworld theme, has also become one of the most recognizable pieces of music in the world." Well, that seems a bit odd. The theme to Super Mario Brothers, though popular, can't possibly come close to being called that. This statement has no citation, and is just overall pretty random.
JasonAdama (talk) 04:23, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Welcome to Wikipedia (you don't have an own userpage yet, I assume you're new)! You are absolutely correct. In fact, such statements can be deleted without hesitation. You can delete them right away!. --Soetermans | is listening | what he'd do now? 12:31, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Music - Most recognized? 

message: After completing one sub-world, sometimes explosions occur in sky from one to six times. Does anybody know how do they happen? Some old friend of mine does and but I have no idea how he figured it out. If anyone here knows, please add it to the article. 124.106.200.31 (talk) 08:53, 11 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: This is an example of what not to add to the article. Wikipedia is not a game guide. No cheats, hints, tips, or other things that belong at GameFAQs. (For the record, if the last digit of the timer is 1, 3, or 6 when you finish the level, you get that many 500-point fireworks.) Xenon54 10:06, 11 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Explosions after completing a round 

message: Why was the page for Super Mario Bros. DX removed? Major games like that should have their own pages... Up and over for a six! (talk) 02:17, 17 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  SMB Deluxe 

message: For what reason is the tag there?LedRush (talk) 02:29, 17 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I have no idea, and unless anyone objects, I'm going to remove the neutrality tag. Fumoses (talk) 16:19, 24 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Neutrality Disputed? 

message: Please read http://videogames.yahoo.com/feature/wii-sports-is-best-selling-game-ever/1276855 to find out that, based on cumulative worldwide sales figures ending the week of December 27, 2008, Wii Sports is now the best-selling video game ever. Somone should fix this article as well as the Wii Sports article.
:Interesting.  I know that VGCharts (upon which the yahoo article is based) is not a reliable source here, but yahoo is.  Quite honestly, I feel that this is clearly true and so we should make the edit to correct it, but I assume some here would rather point to the underlying "non-reliability" of the yahoo article's numbers (VGCharts) and say to wait.LedRush (talk) 17:17, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: An unreliable number is still unreliable even if a reliable source quotes it. I have explained on several pages why reliable sources sometimes quote VG Chartz (one reason being that reliable NPD numbers require a subscription, which is $15,000-$20,000 per month). TJ Spyke 16:33, 22 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Looks like it was pretty darn reliable.LedRush (talk) 05:07, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

text: Why, because their guess was close? The Wii sales are easy to predict since they are consistent. If you want an example of how incorrect they are, they said the Wii sold 2.985 million systems in December. The ACTUAL amount was 2.15 million. What happened after the real amount was announced (an amount supported by Nintendo themselves)? They made up some BS story about NPD under-tracking and how they methods are flawed. So their Wii numbers were off by 830K, their DS numbers were off by under by 214K, Xbox 360 over by 76K, PSP under by 135K, PS2 over by 50K, PS3 under by 19K. Yeah, really reliable ::rollseyes::. TJ Spyke 05:42, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  SMB no longer best-selling game of all time 

message: I read over the article, and I believe it's worth an FA nomination. Thoughts? NintendoNerd777 (talk) 01:41, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I have removed your FAC nomination. Please read the FAC instructions at WP:FAC and notify the significant nominators before nominating. Thank you. Dabomb87 (talk) 02:00, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Featured Article Assesment 

message: There should be no doubled periods in this article; it is incorrect grammar, according to [] and many other sources:
"5. Do not use a period to end a sentence which ends with an abbreviation which itself ends with a period. Typical abbreviations which end with a period are: Mr., Mrs., Ms., St. (street or Saint), Mt. (mountain), Dr., Jr., Fri., Feb., a.m. and p.m. (Note: Do not abbreviate professor to Prof. in academic writing). 
After a career in the army, she went on to work for Time Warner Inc. (no extra period)"
Mario777Zelda (talk) 02:47, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  No Doubled Periods 

message: Given the evidence Marty has presented and my own interpretation of my books I read this morning, here's the conclusion I've come to. It is very unlikely that Super Mario Bros. was released in the 1985. Every source I've seen that states October 1985 or just 1985 either simply lists the date like IGN and GameSpot, or mentions it in passing. The passing mentions are also often ambiguously written in my opinion. Save for Kent's Ultimate History, every detailed account I've read about the NES's release in the US omits the game. The less commercially successful R.O.B. is covered in greater detail than SMB, which was already a best seller in Japan at the time. The most logical solution in my mind is that the omission of such a big seller in marketing materials and descriptions of the system's release point to SMB not being released during that time period. I assume it was going through localization at the time, I don't know.
Here's the "but" though. I think WP:V should still be applied to an extent. My reasoning is that though there's a strong argument for a 1986 release date, the argument is at best mild synthesis and at worst original research. I think the prudent thing to do is to list 1985 for now, but with a section of text in the article about the differing information. Something like, "Many gaming websites list the game's US release date in 1985 along side the NES, however, Steven Kent and [INSERT NAME] stated that the game was not available until 1986."
Marty- Given your job and contacts, you're probably the one in the best position to pursue this further. And by pursuing further, I mean contacting Nintendo of America with some of the information we've dug up here and possible post an article at GameSpy. That's the only idea that comes to mind in order to get to the bottom of this. Because as long as numerous reliable publications are using the 1985 date, technically we're bound to use verifiable information. The only other possible alternative is to start a discussion at WT:VG and get a wide consensus to ignore the rules in favor of a logical argument. I've always been wary of the WP:IAR policy and don't think it should be cited it in such a small forum like this talk page. Wish I had better ideas, but this one is a real tough one. :-\ (Guyinblack25 talk 16:26, 27 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I would say in the meantime to have a compromoise listing something like "85/86" in the release date in the info box with sources to both until it can be cleared up further. As you said, all the evidence points to '86 and the data entries at reliable gaming sites are usually just regurgitating each other. The 10/18 date is completey impossible (it was based on the incorrect assumption that it came bundled with it) as has been discussed here, but I'm willing to go with the more general '85 along with '86 until it's cleared up. If you want, since you're the most neutral, go ahead and add the section of text you were talking about as well. It should include everything though, including it not being a pack-in (as is shown on the boxes), not covered in any marketing material by Nintendo, and first showing up in the press in June of '86 and in Nintendo's commercial for the Deluxe set that year as well. I'm looking as well for print ads, and the earliest I can find any mentioning SMB is from March 13th - which again would be in line with Kent's information that it took several months to develop after the Christmass season. As far as localization, yes, it was going through a buildup of market in Japan first before it came here, hence Kent's text. Also if you want in the meantime, start it up at WT:VG to get wider consensus on WP:IAR and reference people to the discussion here to get the history. In the meantime, I'm also going to use my contacts as well to try and track down some of the former NOA people of the time to see what they can shed light on, because I trust those sources more than modern PR. For example, it's commonly told that it jumped from the AVS to the boxed NES which is supposed to have debuted at the June '85 Summer CES (and this is alluded to at Nintendo's museum display in NY). This is wrong - there was another in between NES that looked like the AVS model with wired controllers, with Nintendo Entertainment System printed on it. How do I know? I happen to have the actual folder sized brochure given out at the show. --Marty Goldberg (talk) 16:42, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

text: Sounds like a typical canned PR response they send out in regards to current product info - I could probably ask a question about the validity of information anywhere else on their site and get almost the same response. This had nothing to do with most of what's addressed there, i.e. "Nintendo news and information" websites she's referring to. She's most likely reporting back what she's been told, i.e. the same issues I mentioned before. The statement about being publicly traded so needing to have correct information has more to do with advertised game content, pricing, etc. vs. a correct release date. They have to provide the products as described or face legal issues. I work in the industry, that's what "modern PR" people do - they have a prescribed script and official "PR" info they go by, which is why I never go to them for serious reasearch. And in fact I worked with some of their PR during the '05 anniversary providing PR resources of promo materials they no longer have. Even then they were trying to incorrectly state SMB as a pack-in, when all you had to do was look at the original box (as shown here) to see it was not.  Always go directly to the people involved with the subject at the time, not modern PR. Either way, we'll proceed as discussed above. --Marty Goldberg (talk) 17:37, 27 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Ok, talking to several people at NOA right now, Andi doesn't work in PR. She's one of several people in tech support that responds back to general questions through the website, and gets her information from the same place everyone else in tech does - a generic databse. I had them check in to it further, and the information in their canned database is generic with regards to this - there is no background info or anything else regarding the US release, just a date. Nothing for them to state "this is why". The people I talked to were very honest about that, to their credit. I'm going to keep working on the contacts inside to try and talk to any of the older staff that are still around, but as we joked with each other, most of them are retired. --Marty Goldberg (talk) 18:38, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

text: See reply at WT:VG. (Guyinblack25 talk 21:39, 27 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Arbitrary section break