Talk:Mario Party DS

Untitled

Mario Party DS has been offically annouced at the e3.

There's a video of the game here. The release date is set for November 19 2007. JesseMeza 21:36, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Diddy Kong

This picture essentially confirms Diddy, under what circumstance I'm not sure but I think that it should be included in here somewhere that he's in. 58.168.80.160 08:36, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

http://go-gurt.nintendo.com/content/downloads/gogurt_wall01_800x600.jpg

I saw on a go-gurt box it said "Mario Party DS now available for nintendo DS!" today FrogTape 02:47, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

More pictures from in the game 58.165.37.107 02:35, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

http://img35.picoodle.com/img/img35/5/11/8/f_19178087516m_49bfa0e.jpg http://img35.picoodle.com/img/img35/5/11/8/f_19186402684m_469ee89.jpg

Wi-Fi.

It has not been confirmed or even mentioned whether this will be online. So I am removing it.

is this game actualy coming outI<s><s>Strike-through text</s><br />^{Superscript text}</s>nsert non-formatted text here

This game does not have Wi-Fi. I have the game and there is only download play. If you want a reference, use the official Japanese website.--69.242.175.18 03:44, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Did Toadette show up in the E3 video?

If you go to mariopartyds.com (where the petition was) you'll only see 8 characters. MKDSluvr —Preceding unsigned comment added by MKDSluvr (talk • contribs) 04:45, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

Sources

This article is desperately lacking sources. YoshiLimbo? That is (according to the references) a forum. I'm deleting that. FrogTape 22:04, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

Would you mind going back to mariopartyds.com?

I saw Toadette's logo. You might have to unlock her. —Preceding unsigned comment added by MKDSluvr (talk • contribs) 19:51, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

But MarioPartyDS.com is blacklisted... See~ [1] for more information. UU (talk) 11:48, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

Toadette as a board owner

The official site seems to suggest that Toadette will not be playable. -MKDSluvr —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.247.187.46 (talk) 20:16, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

There's a 6th puzzle mode game.

MKDSluvr (talk) 00:53, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

Image

{{editprotected}} Please choose a different mini-game image. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Besuto (talk • contribs) 10:18, 21 February 2008

This article is not protected. —Remember the dot ^(talk) 17:48, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

{{editprotected}} I know, but that template is the only way I can draw users here and have them change that image. Besuto (talk) 23:57, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Please don't mislead people like that. —Wknight94 (talk) 12:45, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

What's wrong with the screenshot we have now? - ~VNinja~ 21:12, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

I'll tell you what's wrong. It's a screenshot of a boss mini-game. It makes more sense to include an image of a normal mini-game. 125.162.175.181 (talk) 06:15, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Oh really? Well, the way I see it, seeing as how every Mario Party Game includes regular mini-games and Mario Party DS includes regular and boss minigames, why don't we include the special version instead, to show the viewers of this article the specialness of this new game.

Oh, and also, it really doesn't matter what type of mini-game it is, seeing as how it makes sense to have any picture of a mini-game in the mini-game section. - ~VNinja~ 19:22, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

Plot Paragraph

I have moved the "Plot" paragraph before the gameplay paragraph because I think the story/plot should be talked about first. Do you think this is a good change? You may change it back of you like. BIONICLE233 (talk) 21:34, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Mario Party DS. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071212235512/http://www.marioparty-ds.com:80/ to http://marioparty-ds.com

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:27, 12 January 2017 (UTC)

Anti-piracy screen hoax

Recently, I've seen a fake anti-piracy screen for this game. Do you think it's worth mentioning? 2600:1702:1490:5370:1D60:1698:2951:75EE (talk) 04:52, 25 December 2020 (UTC)

Yes. It's also pretty funny. Spongemoore (talk) 04:41, 1 January 2021 (UTC)

I don't think so. After all, it's only a hoax, and not actually in the game. RteeeeKed (talk) 00:21, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Mario Party DS/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Vrxces (talk · contribs) 00:33, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a. (prose, spelling, and grammar):

   b. (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a. (reference section):

   b. (citations to reliable sources):

   c. (OR):

   d. (copyvio and plagiarism):

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a. (major aspects):

   b. (focused):

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

6. It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.

   a. (images are tagged and non-free content have non-free use rationales):

   b. (appropriate use with suitable captions):

7. Overall:

   Pass/fail:

(Criteria marked are unassessed)

Comments

General

• Thanks for your work on this article. Unfortunately, I think this document is not in a GA state. In short, whilst there is some good sourcing, the article lacks reliable citations, and several sections fall short of the content necessary to support information about the game, particularly in the development and legacy section. I understand this can be disappointing, but that doesn't mean the work you've done hasn't been substantial. Some of the comments below hopefully can point you in the direction of where I think this article falls short. Always happy to discuss if you have any questions.

Headline

• ..like most... - this phrase is used repeatedly to start several paragraphs. You may want to cut it to avoid repetition. It is clear the game resembles other Mario Party titles.
• though criticism - this is awkward wording, suggest replacing with 'and criticism'.

Gameplay

• The section has sourcing issues. The 'Gameplay' section is reliant on the description under the GameSpot review, which does in fact provide an independent and accurate summary of the game. However, the source for the 'Game Modes', VGChartz, is not reliable (see WP:VG/S) and is clearly sourced from a promotional or press release about the game. With this in mind, all the information about the gameplay is coming from one person's review of the game. It's probably far more helpful to see if you can find a more accurate and direct primary source that describes the gameplay to support the section.
• The section slightly relies on the assumption the reader is familiar with other Mario Party games when a more direct and informative tone could be used. I think the removal of some of the padding to the statements (i.e. there is also a minigame mode, in addition to a free play mode, there are other games) with larger, more focused paragraphs oriented by descriptions of the board game, game modes and minigames could be more helpful. You may want to look at how GA articles Mario Party 4 and Mario Party 5 have approached this.
• ..as well as the last game in the series... - this is a confusing statement. If it means that the gameplay style in DS was not found in a handheld Mario Party game until the Switch title Super Mario Party, this is a pedantic observation. Wouldn't the succeeding Mario Party: Island Tour count?
• It looks like most Mario Party articles do not go into the detail of referencing specific minigames. This may be as whilst they can offer examples of the gameplay, it may be more helpful to keep things high level, i.e. by mentioning what type of

Plot

• ...includes a single-player story mode with the following storyline. - this statement is redundant and can be omitted. The Gameplay section makes it clear there is a story mode.

Development

• The section contains no actual development information and could probably be removed. The source provides very limited information about the announcement of the game and its release date at E3. That Nintendo did not announce anything other than the release date is not very helpful content. You may want to look on the Internet Archive or news updates from websites like IGN and GameSpot to see if there's any information about it.

Reception

• Good form in game reception sections is to organise reviews thematically and use signpost statements to connect reviews with similar observations (see WP:VG/REC). At a minimum, you've done this by combining some negative reviews, but it is still quite unstructured and you may wish to connect together the reviews more cohesively in terms of reflections on graphics, gameplay etc.
• ...continuing the trend of Mario Party titles receiving generally mixed reviews. This statement is unsourced and reads as a subjective assessment of the reception of the franchise.
• The 'Sales' section is well sourced and from reliable sources, which is really great to see.

Legacy

• Comments about the 'Mario Party DS Anti-Piracy Screen' lacks sufficient relevance and sources to justify its length of detail in the article. The only source provided is Know Your Meme, which is not a reliable source (see WP:KNOWYOURMEME). Good practice is generally that articles are not an indiscriminate collection of information about a topic (WP:INDISCRIMINATE). I think where we talk about interesting cultural asides, there should be some independent and reliable coverage that establishes that this is something worth associating with primary information about the game.

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Mario Party DS/GA2. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Bilorv (talk · contribs) 11:28, 24 August 2023 (UTC)

I'll take this one. — Bilorv (talk) 11:28, 24 August 2023 (UTC)

First things first: since the GA review in July, the article has been massively revamped, so I think I can look at this afresh. I've got 99,999 Mario Party Points (DK's Stone Statue is overpowered) and the only game I could never beat Expert computers at is Get the Lead Out, so I think I can call myself something of a subject expert.

Referencing

WP:VG/S approves of many of the sources that I'm not familiar with (and WP:RSP approves of Common Sense Media). Game Revolution isn't on the list but looking at its website, it seems reliable, and the author of this piece Nicholas Tan seemed to be an Editor-in-Chief at the time, so this is a professional reviewer rather than a user review.

The issue is YouTube: as RSP comments, most videos are self-published, making them only as reliable as the person publishing them. In the case of the Nintendo Life video, that's fine, but the others need removing—along with the associated sentences. Mario Party Legacy appears to be a fan channel and bdrumerdrums' trailer is possibly a copyright violation so shouldn't be linked on Wikipedia at all.

If the trailer was published by an official Nintendo-owned channel then that link could be swapped out. As for the gameplay, edge cases like ties don't need to be covered if no reliable source mentions them.

Spotchecks (numbering as of Special:Permalink/1171573395): #2, #6, #24, #25, 28. Just a couple of nitpicks mentioned below, but generally good verifiability.

Copyediting

Gameplay

• "the traditional gameplay style present in the home console games" – I'm not sure what this means. That the gameplay is similar to previous Mario Party games?
• "between one to 10 spaces" – I think it has to be "between one and 10" or "from one to 10"
• You can remove a few phrases that don't add more information: "to choose from" and "for every game board" and "all of" (in "all of their opponents")
• "Every minigame is a short event with a certain objective for each player to complete. Coins are typically rewarded to the player who completes said objective faster or to a better extent than all of their rivals" – Too obvious and wordy. I think this could be: "Minigames are short and reward players with coins"
• "these spaces are only available during the last five rounds of a game" – Already covered above
• "all of which feature the characters competing in comparatively larger environments" – I think an example could be more illustrative than this passage. Something like what Nintendo World Report says: props integrate common household items such as clothing hangers, a bathroom sink, and tin cans.
• "any of the game's give board games" – "give(n)" is a typo but I think this would be better anyway as "any of the game's boards"
• Unlink the second Nintendo DS (per MOS:DUPLINK)

Development

• (See also my comments about the lead.) Without losing focus (criterion 3(b)), I would like to see a couple of sentences of context about the Mario Party series for broadness (3(a)). Something like when the first, previous and next installments were, or the devices that the game was previously released on. It could mention when the DS was released and maybe even what other Mario games were released on DS before Mario Party.

Reception

• See MOS:LQ: the period and quote mark need to swap in ... cumbersome." and game starring Mario to have."
• "gave it a score of two nines, one eight, and one seven for a total of 33 out of 40" – This doesn't mean anything if you don't know Famitsu. Can you adjust to "In Japan, four critics from Famitsu gave it a score ..."?
• "generally subjected to praise" – Just "generally praised" is clearer
• "which allows up to four players to play with only one game cartridge" – Already mentioned above, so can be cut
• "the board game setup in Mario Party DS (specifically, the winner of a game normally being determined solely by Star amounts)" – You can convey the same information with fewer words e.g. "the win condition involving Stars only"
• The Sales paragraph engages in false precision: measurement error will mean that these numbers are not accurate to the nearest integer. I'd suggesting rounding to 230,000 and 1,700,000.
• "experienced strong sales" is not what the source says, but you could say "was the most-sold game".
• "has since sold a total of over 9 million units" – This sentence lacks a reliable source (and also makes it sound like it sold 9 million more than the initial 8 million, which I'm guessing is not right). There's a reference at List of best-selling Nintendo DS video games (under #11).
• Japan doesn't need to be linked under "Sales" (see MOS:OVERLINK)

Lead and other

• After the first sentence, none of the first paragraph is mentioned in the body. I think it belongs under "Development", where it will need reliable sources. The same applies to the Mario Party 9 sentence.
• "received mostly mixed reviews" – Just "received mixed reviews" will work
• "Known in Japan as Mario Party DS" – This isn't different to the English title, so just the Japanese could be given
• Party game from the infobox needs a source, and Nintendo World Report could be this source.
• The free use rationale for File:MarioPArtyDS.jpg needs work. "Purpose of use" needs to explain why this particular image is used and how that relates to the referenced text of the article (e.g. as an example of the game's graphics, minigame structure, characters' small size). "Replaceable?" needs to explain why the image is not replaceable by a freely licensed image (all screenshots of the game are non-free).

Overall

Thanks for your work on the article! Hopefully these comments will help improve it. I think the major areas of weakness are wordiness, and YouTube sources and unsourced sentences. The article's structure is good and the sorting of reviewer comments by topic (e.g. single-player mode) is excellent. With a bit more work this can definitely reach GA quality!

I'm putting this formally on hold for 7 days, but if progress is still being made I may be able to extend this limit. — Bilorv (talk) 13:13, 24 August 2023 (UTC)

Hi The Green Star Collector and thanks for the reply here. A few points remained unaddressed that I have fixed myself here and here. With this I think the article now meets the GA criteria so it's a pass for GA. — Bilorv (talk) 11:11, 26 August 2023 (UTC)

Did you know nomination

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by AirshipJungleman29 talk 02:09, 14 December 2023 (UTC)

(

• Comment or view
• Article history

)

• ... that Mario Party DS was the last game in the series to be developed by Hudson Soft, as all subsequent titles have been developed by NDcube? Source: https://www.nintendolife.com/games/browse?title=series%3Amario-party
  • Reviewed:
  • Comment: This article was promoted to GA status on 8/28/2023. I can shorten this hook or make any other revisions if needed.

Improved to Good Article status by The Green Star Collector (talk). Self-nominated at 00:43, 31 August 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Mario Party DS; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.

General: Article is new enough and long enough
New enough: Long enough:

Policy compliance:

• Adequate sourcing: - n
• Neutral:
• Free of copyright violations, plagiarism, and close paraphrasing:

Hook eligibility:

• Cited: - n
• Interesting:

QPQ: None required.

Overall: @The Green Star Collector: Good article, but

• "Mario Party DS was succeeded by Mario Party 9 for the Wii in 2012. The game was rereleased on the Virtual Console for the Wii U in 2016."

and

• "By September 2015, Mario Party DS had sold over 9 million units worldwide, making it the eleventh best-selling game for the Nintendo DS."

Don't seem to be verified by their citations. I also can't find what verifies the hook nor what verifies what citation 19 cites but maybe that's just me being dumb. Onegreatjoke (talk) 03:17, 31 August 2023 (UTC)

Was planning to review this so I'll just leave this as a comment. I have to disagree with OGJ here that the original hook is interesting. Well, it probably is to video game fans like myself who may be familiar with Hudson Soft, but for people not into video games, it's not really that interesting. Are there any other possible options here? Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 13:17, 31 August 2023 (UTC)

• @The Green Star Collector and Onegreatjoke: What's the current status of this nomination? Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 02:25, 8 October 2023 (UTC)

I would say there's no point in continuing this nomination, as it has now been over a month since the article was promoted to good article status. ★ The Green Star Collector ★ (talk) 02:58, 11 October 2023 (UTC)

That's not how it works though. As long as the nomination was made within seven days of promotion to GA status, the nomination can continue even if the review takes longer. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 09:07, 11 October 2023 (UTC)

I see. The citation is supposed to indicate that every installment after Mario Party DS is developed by NDcube rather than Hudson Soft or simply "Hudson". Whether the hook is interesting or not is more of a subjective issue, and I'm not sure how it would be improved. ★ The Green Star Collector ★ (talk) 15:24, 11 October 2023 (UTC)

Perhaps a different hook, like something unusual or eyecatching regarding game mechanics, may work? Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 01:35, 14 October 2023 (UTC)

@The Green Star Collector: Would you like to propose a couple of different hooks? This allows reviewers to indicate which one(s) they think are the best ones. Z1720 (talk) 16:58, 21 October 2023 (UTC)

@Z1720: That's a good idea. I actually just thought of another hook viewers might find interesting: that all of the minigames feature the characters competing at a much smaller size, coinciding with the events of the game's story mode. However, I'm not sure what would be the best/most interesting way to praise this. ★ The Green Star Collector ★ (talk) 23:22, 21 October 2023 (UTC)

Drive by intervention but, here's some formalised version of ★ The Green Star Collector ★'s above suggestion:

ALT1: ...that Mario Party DS's minigames feature the characters competing at a much smaller size? Source: https://www.giantbomb.com/mario-party-ds/3030-21186/

ALT2: ...that Mario Party DS's minigames feature "minimized" characters? Source: https://www.giantbomb.com/mario-party-ds/3030-21186/

-Bogger (talk) 20:49, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

@Bogger: I really like the second option; it sounds interesting, and it's technically true, as the characters are shrunk with a device called the Minimizer. ★ The Green Star Collector ★ (talk) 21:55, 4 November 2023 (UTC)

Pinging Onegreatjoke and User:Narutolovehinata5, in the hopes that one of them can weigh in on the proposed ALT hooks and perhaps complete the review. Thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 06:20, 11 November 2023 (UTC)

• New reviewer needed to weigh in on proposed ALT hooks and complete the review; no response to previous request in over a week. Many thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 02:41, 21 November 2023 (UTC)

• Approve ALT2 The article was nominated within a week of receiving Good article status, so is new enough. Obviously length is not in question for such articles. The article is clearly properly sourced and I see no copyvio issues. The ALT2 hook is interesting and cited inline, so no problems there. No images to deal with and, as this is the nominator's first DYK entry, no QPQ is needed just yet. Looks good to go! Silverseren^C 20:39, 3 December 2023 (UTC)