Talk:Kirby Super Star Ultra

Edit war...

SO. Has anybody decided to give ARGUMENTS why this page should exist or not? It's getting boring, sincerely. I personally think the article SHOULD exist. I mean, Kirby: Nightmare in Dream Land HAS ITS OWN article, am I right? So WHY KSSU shouldn't have its own? The game has more new features than KNDL had to KA... SSBMboss (talk) 04:31, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

...

Can anyone help me create this page! I'm new to Wikipedia, so... AlexanderLD (talk) 13:44, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

This page seems like it should redirect to Kirby Super Star and add a section there about it. Zig (talk) 15:00, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

Unblanking the page

I believe there is in fact enough new content to justify a page to its self. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Drkirby (talk • contribs) 21:12, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

Thank you guys for finally realising this game needed an article of its own.

--76.173.139.63 (talk) 16:20, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

What the?!.....

.....Tell me a good reason why this should be a redirect to the article of the original game!--76.173.139.63 (talk) 21:01, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

• By the way, Kirby: Nightmare in Dreamland has its own article. Why doesn't this game have it's own article then? It has more content than the original Super Star than Nightmare in Dreamland did with Adventure.--76.173.139.63 (talk) 21:03, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Hello?--76.173.139.63 (talk) 21:21, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
    • Because this is an unreleased enhanced port, and that's a released, built-from-the-ground-up video game that sold more than two million copies? - A Link to the Past (talk) 02:29, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
      • Do you think that when this game is released, we should re-build it's article?--76.173.139.63 (talk) 15:52, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
        • Do you?--76.173.139.63 (talk) 16:45, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
          • If it proves to have enough content to warrant it, yes. - A Link to the Past (talk) 01:51, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
            • Ok. But KSSU has five new sub-games, and shouldn't we have some kind of page that has descriptions for them? Plus, what if some changes were added to the original sub-games (Like how Gourmet Race now has multiplayer?)--76.173.139.63 (talk) 15:32, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
              • The details of multiplayer only warrant a sentence's mention. - A Link to the Past (talk) 18:18, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
                • Huh?--76.173.139.63 (talk) 21:54, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
                  • If merged into KSS, all that has to be done is to add to Gourmet Race "The Nintendo DS version adds a multiplayer mode". - A Link to the Past (talk) 21:58, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
                    • Ok. But what about the descriptions for the new sub-games?--76.173.139.63 (talk) 22:26, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
                      • Even if the number of sub-games is double that of KSS, it wouldn't be too big. Most of the sub-games in KSS are discussed in one paragraph. - A Link to the Past (talk) 22:34, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
• I still think that this page should become an article.--76.173.139.63 (talk) 15:29, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Hello?--76.173.139.63 (talk) 18:45, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Reasons it should not be merged

<quote>

I believe that Kirby Super Star Ultra has enough new content to warrant its own new article, so I am starting this survey on behalf of myself and other who wish to discuss opinions on this and why or why not it should or shouldn't get its own article

Please clearly state your position for the separating of the articles *Support to give Kirby Super Star Ultra its own article, or *Oppose to keep it combined, then sign your comment.

Because polling is no substitute for talking about it, please explain your reasons.

• Support With the 2 new sub games added (Along with 3 new mini games) updated graphics, added functionality added to the old sub games, such as bottom screen support and two player multiplayer added to Gourmet Race, are ground enough to justify the game to get its own article. In not merely a straight port, and saying that there is not enough new content to have its own article is comparable to saying Kirby's Adventure and Kirby: Nightmare in dreamland doesn't deserve to be separate (It adds updated Graphics, 1 new mode, and 3 new mini games, less then Kirby Super Star Ultra adds), or FE3 should be merged with the FF1 article, since all it does is update the graphics and adds a new chapter to the story.

Also, the large amount of content is lost between merging and making its own article, as exampled below.

• Kirby Super Star Ultra's article before remergeing: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Kirby_Super_Star_Ultra&oldid=229721124
• Kirby Super Star Ultra's section after the merge: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Kirby_Super_Star&oldid=229653176#Remake

--Drkirby (talk) 17:42, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

• Support I support a separate article. Like the SNES article, they explain the story of each sub-game, so with new games added, we put the stories for the "Revenge Of The King" and "Meta Knight Ultra" in the article.GENERALZERO (talk) 18:16, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

• Support I support the existence of the Kirby Super Star Ultra article 100%. Here's one reason why: Kirby: Nightmare in Dreamland has its own article. Why doesn't this game have it's own article then? It has more content than the original Super Star than Nightmare in Dreamland did with Adventure.--76.173.139.63 (talk) 21:35, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
  • By the way, how the heck do we get the Kirby Star Star Ultra page back to a full article? The page is virtually being... well... destroyed by some people...--76.173.139.63 (talk) 22:15, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
• Support. I'm pretty sure I started this whole thing by saying that Nightmare in Dream Land, which is also a remake, warrants a separate article. I propose that Super Star Ultra should get the same treatment. Teamrocketspy621 (talk) 01:12, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

• Support - I noticed the a while ago, and thought the remake was notable enough for its own article. It doesn't seem to be a barebones port, like Super Mario Advance, so I'm all for separating it. Fin©™ 11:11, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

• Support' - It is real. It's annoying how the article keeps getting merged, it deserves it's own page.

• Total support - This remake totally deserves its own article. It's so obvious it's making my wiki-eyes bleed of hexadecimal Red color. The KNDL example makes it SO CLEAR. (now I'm wondering if somebody will think something like "Oh, let's make a "this article should be merged in to K's Adv, lol"", this would be pretty retarded) Seriously, the article was just fine as it was, information box, the superb, new, and colorful box art, well, just, let that article live. SSBMboss (talk) 08:27, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

</quote>

--76.173.139.63 (talk) 14:54, 16 August 2008

Kirby Super Star split

There was a lot of Super Star Ultra content in the original Super Star article, so I decided to split them into two and expand Ultra's article. In both talk pages people seemed to support the two being two separate articles, so I did the legwork and now they are. I hope that's okay. Kettleonwater (talk) 00:13, 2 August 2022 (UTC)

• You restored content removed by two editors--content that was excessive and unverified. Drmies (talk) 22:38, 5 August 2022 (UTC)
  • I've now added references to all of the modes. The problem is that there's not a non-redundant way to talk about each mode's gameplay and plot in different sections for this game, since the game was advertised (and viewed in development) as 11 smaller games in one package. The main problem I have with reverting my edits is that these were previously direct from the Kirby Super Star page, where the user consensus on the article structure has been solid since 2010. My other reasons I gave below. Kettleonwater (talk) 23:25, 5 August 2022 (UTC)
    • The main problem I have is that we are an encyclopedia, not a database for gameplay and other trivia. That such material has been on Wikipedia for a decade or more is not surprising given the demographics of its editors, but that doesn't mean it's OK. So now you've doubled the size of the article, "verifying" content by giving links to the manual (!) and to the makers. I mean, WTF is "HAL Laboratory (22 September 2008). Kirby Super Star Ultra (DS). "Spring Breeze: All of the food in peaceful Dream Land has been stolen! This must be the work of King Dedede!""? What kind of citation is that? Do you understand how citations work, and that material really should be verified to secondary sources? User:Pppery, what do you make of this? Drmies (talk) 15:27, 6 August 2022 (UTC)
      • I decided that, when my edit (and a largely identical edit I made to the base game page) were reverted, that it wasn't worth starting a discussion over. Since I'm here, however, I agree that the sources Kettleonwater added are primary and not suitable, and the section is still fancruft. For what it's worth, I had never heard of this game until a few days ago when I came across this article while new page patrolling * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 16:01, 6 August 2022 (UTC)
        • Thanks Pppery. Drmies (talk) 17:41, 6 August 2022 (UTC)
          • Those citations are from in-game text, since most of the game's cutscenes do not feature dialogue. They support each of the scenario's plot written about in the gameplay section, and it is acceptable to use under WP:VG/S ("It is very hard to find proper sources for sections about the plot or setting of a video game without using the game itself. In many of these sections, the game itself is used as a source, but make sure that it is not the only source."). I took this method from the article for Cave Story, a featured article, which uses it extensively in the citations. Kettleonwater (talk) 00:05, 9 August 2022 (UTC)

Gameplay section

I don't know why all of a sudden the gameplay section is being removed solely on this article after it has already been C-class reviewed and has remained on the original Kirby Super Star article page ever since its creation, but I feel there are a lot of reasons to retain it, such as the plot scenarios of the different games, the different gameplay features and genres (Spring Breeze is a platformer. Gourmet Race is a racing game. The Great Cave Offensive is a Metroidvania-lite. They need differentiation.), the new features added to each mode by the remake, and giving context to the screenshot present on the page which otherwise a new reader would think is completely unrelated ("what is Milky Way Wishes?"). Since this is happening on this article you must realise it goes both ways and your reasoning means it has to be removed on the original page, right? It really doesn't make sense to. - Kettleonwater (talk) 22:40, 5 August 2022 (UTC)