Talk:Yoshi/Archive 2

Yoshi Images

Perhaps the image of Yoshi used in the Smash Bros. Dojo!! website should be used as the featured image at the top of the article. Super Smash Bros. Brawl is his latest game, so it would provide a current and accurate depiction of him. If not that one, maybe a very old image of Yoshi could be used to show how he looked when he was first created. (I would still rather use a recent one however.)

Sporlo (talk) 03:57, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

1. His latest game? It's not his game. It's a secondary source's image of him.
2. And not accurate - as we can see, in four out of five of his primary roles (Topsy Turvy, Yoshi's Island, Yoshi's Island DS, and Touch & Go), the creators designed him to be more "animal" - while SSBB has him standing straight up, unable for anyone to ride him, most Yoshi games depict him hunched over ([1]). This establishes that the creators of Yoshi's series had something other than that in mind.
3. Three out of five of Yoshi's games feature Yoshi carrying Baby Mario on his back - this creates a theme for the character, and that the creator considers them practically a "pair". A theme of carrying someone on his back is used in many games, meaning the SSBB image would not cover that.
4. YIDS was his most recent game. An appearance in SSBB does not make it his game. - A Link to the Past (talk) 04:05, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Whoa. Ok. You obviously have way better reasons than me. :D Oh well, it was just a thought, and I don't really know much about this stuff (obviously as you just proved me wrong). I just liked his SSBB picture, but I can see what you mean by having him hunched over would be better. And I just meant a game that he was in, not him as the main character. (I also like how Yoshi was in Super Mario World, but again, I have no supporting reasons besides that's the first game he was in (ok, I AM pretty sure I'm right about THAT. Did I even read that in this same Wikipedia article?), and he's hunched over with Mario on his back in the game. But... I know you'll have some reason why this wouldn't work, so basically all this is is an opinion. Thanks for replying to my comment so fast though! - Sporlo (talk) 23:17, 9 April 2008 (UTC) Ok, I'm stupid, the Yoshi from Super Mario World is extremely low pixeled, and would be terrible anyway to be used in the article. x( (Why do I even try contributing to Wikipedia?) Sporlo (talk) 02:59, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Snapshots

Please consider adding this gallery as a list of relevant photos about Yoshi RyanTMulligan (talk) 19:19, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

Bronze and Silver Yoshi?

In the section "Description," the article mentions that Yoshis come in the colors "blue, red, yellow, brown, orange, pink, purple, azure, turquoise, navy blue, silver, bronze and, more rarely, black and white." But I've seen black and white Yoshis far more often than silver or bronze Yoshis, which I haven't ever seen and can't even locate using Google Image Search. Is this part of the article erroneous? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.21.192.175 (talk) 15:05, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

I have no idea where that is from. Maybe Super Smash Bros. Brawl costumes? Suigetsu 01:48, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Super Mario Sunshine???

I read somewhere that THE Yoshi is not in super mario sunshine. I also read that a green yoshi was in the beta version. Can someone help me with this???Purple Yoshi (talk) 07:29, 13 June 2008 (UTC)Purple Yoshi

Image

The SSBB image is of higher quality and depicts Yoshi only, and as such is preferable to the one with Baby Mario. Please stop changing it back. Stifle (talk) 21:24, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

There's no image guideline that says "he has to be alone". Yoshi is typically seen carrying someone on his back - the only games that don't do this are party, sports, and SSB. SMW, YI, YIDS, Yoshi's Safari, Tetris Attack, Yoshi's Universal Gravitation, Yoshi's Touch & Go, etc. He's most commonly known for providing a ride. And on top of that, this is official art from his game, and just curious, at what point is 3D "better quality"? Yoshi is not typically seen standing upright, he's mostly seen in a form that allows someone to mount him, and his drawn-look is most common, easily. We're not going to use a third party company's depiction of Yoshi over Nintendo's depiction of Yoshi. - A Link to the Past (talk) 01:59, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

Not only is that argument a red herring, SSBB is not a third-party game. Stifle (talk) 16:58, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

I agree with Stifle about the SSBB image. I think it would be the better pic to illustrate the article in its entirety. But that other pic, the one where Baby Mario on Yoshi's back, should still be part of the article nonetheless, just like it was not too long ago. 69.182.5.140 (talk) 18:56, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

I could agree with that. Stifle (talk) 20:14, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

1. Wow, thanks! I'm glad that a company who didn't make SSBB is not third party! I guess the fact that the people who developed the character art for SSBB not being on Nintendo's payroll doesn't matter, and the person who drew that art of Yoshi is is totally irrelevant. So, just curious, why did you ignore the fact that you said that 3D = better quality? There is not one game in the history of Yoshi that uses a 3D depiction, save for maybe Yoshi's Story, which is sketchy. And the rest of his games, he's seen as rideable, as opposed to standing upright with absolutely no ability to carry anyone on his back. Let's ask ourselves - how many articles support this idea? The featured article Link (The Legend of Zelda) uses hand-drawn art from Phantom Hourglass, so what do you suggest defends using a secondary game instead of Yoshi's latest starring role? Link's image has Navi, I guess that's just awful, huh? The idea that Baby Mario being in the image makes it inferior is absurd. Yoshi is typically carrying someone on his back, so how is it bad to use an image that accurately portrays him? - A Link to the Past (talk) 00:16, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
2. And on another note, for the readers, this image is better. Using an image from a game not his own does not show the reader a depiction of Yoshi in his series. It'd be like using Ryu's art from Marvel vs. Capcom 2 - different artists, different series. And on the note of 3D, if being 3D makes it more detailed, wouldn't being live action be even better? - A Link to the Past (talk) 00:19, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

   Sora is a second-party developer. Stifle (talk) 09:34, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

1. Yeah, I'm sure a third party designer, Masahiro Sakurai, made a company for Nintendo instead of for himself? Your point still doesn't matter, since second parties are not Nintendo property, and Sora doesn't have any say in the Yoshi series or his artwork outside of the games it makes. - A Link to the Past (talk) 15:00, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

Second and third-party developers should not matter right now. Like Stifle said, the SSBB image of Yoshi is of Yoshi only. It is the better pic for the article in its entirety. And do we really need 2 of the same YIDS pic in this article? 66.159.146.31 (talk) 18:54, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

The idea of "it being Yoshi only" is not a logic supported by any image guideline. Yoshi is often seen carrying Baby Mario, and the depiction of him in SSBB is not typical, as he's typically depicted as "rideable". - A Link to the Past (talk) 02:18, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

No he isn't. He's been seen other games more than he has in games where he can be ridden. --Coconutfred73 (talk) 02:11, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, Mario Party games and Mario sports games. Yoshi games?

Yoshi's Island - Rideable.

Yoshi's Story - Not.

Yoshi's Island DS - Rideable.

Yoshi Touch & Go - Rideable.

Yoshi's Universal Gravitation - Not.

3 > 2. And Yoshi's Story doesn't even count, since they are Baby Yoshis, and thusly, not rideable for reasons including nothing other than impossibility. Yoshi originated as a rideable creature, and has appeared in several original Mario games as rideable and was intended to be rideable in SM64. Fact of the matter is that in spite of the "number of appearances", you fail to show importance. Luke Skywalker appears more often hand-drawn in official Star Wars merchandise, but that certainly does not mean that he should be in 3D. Similarly, if Luke appeared far more often in non-Star Wars series, we wouldn't use that depiction, because the Star Wars depiction is the official one. The Yoshi series features Yoshi carrying someone on his back more often than not, and in 2D. The depiction of him in SSBB ignores both facets of Yoshi. Just like we don't use side depictions of Luke Skywalker, we do not use side depictions of Yoshi. Being in 3D has as much to do with being better as being live action does. I mean, if more detail means more quality, then I propose we use the SMB Movie's Yoshi. - A Link to the Past (talk) 06:06, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

You're still avoiding the fact that he has appeared in more games than his own series. And most those games weren't made by third parties. Besides, didn't you say yourself that here at wikipedia we use the most primary image? --Coconutfred73 (talk) 15:15, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

*facepalm* It doesn't matter. Yoshi's series is, by default, on a higher level of importance than Mario Party and the Mario sports games. Which are made by third parties. - A Link to the Past (talk) 17:21, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

And to add, I've never advocated the use of the primary image, only the "main primary image". I've never advocated the use of images from the Mario Party, Sports, Smash, or Kart series. - A Link to the Past (talk) 17:25, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

This is getting ridiculous. Yoshi's series on a higher level of importance by default? That's what you think. And "third-party" games? They don't matter right now. You're not seeing (more like you don't want to see) the whole picture, ALttP. There seems to be no one else that agrees with your viewpoints. By using the YIDS image in the article, and using the SSBB image as the primary image, that should be a nice little compromise between you and those who don't favor your viewpoints. So please, quit changing the SSBB image to the YIDS image. It's not worth waging a silly edit war over something like this. 69.0.27.53 (talk) 18:50, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, I guess you're right - I mean, who cares that it's completely illogical to compare a series that he makes a cameo in to HIS SERIES? I guess we should use a drawn version of Luke Skywalker. How many times has Luke appeared in Star Wars material as Mark Hammil? Three times. If you move the image of Luke to be a drawn image, then you can move YOshi's image.

And wow, a bunch of people in this discussion have a poor grasp on image policies and guidelines? The only arguments given are "it's 3D", "Yoshi shouldn't have someone else in his image", and "Yoshi's seen more without someone riding him". About ZERO guidelines or policies ever even imply that 3D is ever ever ever better than 2D. No image guideline or policy says that the character should be alone. And using third-party developed non-primary roles like Mario Party and Mario Sports where his role is practically a cameo as evidence that Yoshi is primarily not rideable is not a good argument at all. Yoshi's series has more weight in this discussion than any series ever made because it's YOSHI'S series. It's the final word in Yoshi-related content. Mario Party cannot, by any logic of reality, be anywhere near the series in importance to determining Yoshi-related content because it's not his series, and isn't even created by the same division of Nintendo, or Hell, it's not even made by Nintendo period. - A Link to the Past (talk) 19:04, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

SSB Brawl is the latest official depiction of Yoshi. Megata Sanshiro (talk) 10:59, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

Made by someone outside of the Yoshi series, outside of the Yoshi series, and outside of Yoshi canon. It's not the image to use. -A Link to the Past (talk) 14:34, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

I disagree. The image is clearly official. Megata Sanshiro (talk) 14:43, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

An image can be official and STILL not be a Yoshi series image or created by Yoshi's artist. It can't be more official than YIDS' Yoshi image because YIDS is a part of the Yoshi series, and created by an artist from the series. The only reason anyone wants to use the SSBB image is "it's 3D", which is not a legitimate argument. - A Link to the Past (talk) 14:54, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

I'm sorry but being "part of the Yoshi series" or created by an artist "from" the series are not legitimate arguments. The picture is official and is the most recent depiction of Yoshi. Therefore it is the one to be used in the encyclopedic article. "Canonicity" and other fan values are not relevant in the context of an encyclopedia; officiality is. Megata Sanshiro (talk) 15:02, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

Faulty logic much? Link (The Legend of Zelda) does not use the Link from Super Smash Bros. Brawl, and Anakin Skywalker does not use the Anakin from Star Wars: The Clone Wars (film). Being the most recent doesn't matter if it's in a different series, and yes, being outside of the Yoshi series is a legitimate argument. We don't use Marvel vs. Capcom art for characters, so why should we use Brawl images? Because they're purdy? - A Link to the Past (talk) 15:44, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

"Trumps" other series? That's what you think. Did you even read my previous message entirely, ALttP? I said that using the SSBB image as the primary image while still including the YIDS image in the article would be a argument-ending compromise. But no. Wake up and smell reality, ALttP. Your stubborness isn't making things any better. You're not listening to anyone. You don't want to see the whole picture. You've made good arguments, but no one seems to agree with you. Sounds like all readers are in favor of using the SSBB image as the primary one. Like I said before, it's not worth waging a silly edit war over something like this. So please, cease this foolishness and just give up and let it go. 69.0.27.53 (talk) 16:44, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

There's been multiple debates on this, and it ended up in the favor of YIDS. I shouldn't have to argue this every single time someone says "omg SSBB is more important to YOshi than his series!" And how is it what "I" think? If you mean "Every sane person on this planet", you'd be right. Yoshi's primary series is the YOSHI series. NOT the Mario Party series, or Mario Kart, or Mario Tennis, or Smash Bros. We don't use the image of Link from SSBB for the Link page, we don't use SSBB's Mario image, we don't use SSBB's Zelda, or SSBB's Kirby, or SSBB's Diddy Kong, or SSBB's Pikachu, or SSBB's Donkey Kong. YIDS is the latest entry in HIS series, and any content from it is, by default, more primary than SSBB's. It's not appropriate any more than using The Clone Wars' version of Anakin. - A Link to the Past (talk) 00:00, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

"It was already determined to use this image instead of Brawl's"? Prove it, cause no one is buying any of this. Stifle disagrees with you, Megata Sanshiro disagrees with you, Coconutfred73 disagrees with you, and I disagree with you. 69.0.27.53 (talk) 11:34, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

It was a consensus on WP:VG that SSB, Mario Party, etc. images need to be replaced by primary images. A secondary image, by definition, can NOT be primary. And that you guys disagree really doesn't matter when you're disagreeing for pretty mediocre reasons. Your argument fails to refute the fact that the image is third party, NOT a Yoshi series image, etc. And why don't you explain why the Anakin from Clone Wars shouldn't be used, but the Yoshi from SSBB should? - A Link to the Past (talk) 15:17, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

Why does it really matter? Yoshi's Island pic would still be in the article, so why should it matter which one is at the top? SSBB Yoshi is the most current picture, so that's the one that should be at the top. YS Yoshi would still be in the article, so everyone wins. --Coconutfred73 (talk) 18:23, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

Your logic demands we use an imaginary image quality guideline. A third party, non-canon image depicting Yoshi differently than his series does does not get to be the primary image because it's the newest. - A Link to the Past (talk) 01:39, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

This is a really lame edit war, guys. Resolve it and you get to have an image again. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 07:53, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Dinosaur vs. Turtle

I'm pretty confident Yoshi is "dinosaur-like" instead of "turtle-like", but I didn't want to edit war over it. Anyone have an opinion on which term is more applicable to Yoshi? Useight (talk) 22:29, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Listen, assholes. Yoshi is NOT a dinosaur. He has a SHELL ON HIS BACK. That makes him a TURTLE! Whoever keeps reverting my edits is a sadly misinformed individual. Who has ever heard of riding a dinosaur?!?!? A dinosaur would eat Mario! A turtle wouldn't! Yoshi is clearly a turtle. Here's a list of reasons he's a turtle: 1) He has a shell 2) He's not vicious (dinosaurs are mean) 3) He has a shell 4) He's not much bigger than Mario. How could he possibly be a dinosaur? 5) Dinosaurs can't fly. In conclusion, Yoshi is clearly a turtle, NOT a dinosaur. User:64.114.144.24 (talk) 22:44, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

I agree that Yoshi is a turtle. How many green dinosaurs do you see every day, especially ones with shells? I think the reasons the poster above me submitted for Yoshi being a turtle are very definitive. Obviously he is a turtle. I don't really see how anyone can argue that. Can anyone cite any examples of the makers of the game calling him anything *but* a turtle? Come on now, guys, he's CLEARLY a turtle. User:ConcernedViewer (talk) 22:48, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

I also agree with the two posters above. While I don't agree with the original pro-turtle posters use of language, I have to say that I think Yoshi is a turtle. The fact that he has a shell is paramount to understanding what kind of an animal he is. Also, like the person directly above me says, he's green! How many green turtles have you seen? It's foolish to argue that Yoshi is anything but 100% turtle. Just my 2c. User:207.192.72.15 (talk) 22:51, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Well, on the other hand, 1) Many dinosaurs had exoskeletons, such as the Edmontonia; 2) Not all dinosaurs were vicious, some were plant-eaters, such as the Sauropodomorpha; 3) This point was the same as the first; 4) You'll note that the mushrooms in the Mario series are also not to scale, they are far too large; 5) Some dinosaurs did fly, such as the Pteradactyl; turtles, on the other hand, do not fly. Yoshi is a dinosaur. Useight (talk) 22:52, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Also, I just located this link to Nintendo.com which calls Yoshi "Mario's dinosaur buddy". That's pretty conclusive evidence. Useight (talk) 22:58, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

I don't see how anyone can say for certain he's a dinosaur. There's no real evidence towards dinosaur. He's tiny and looks identical to a turtle. Why make the unqualified jump of logic from turtle to dinosaur? There's no real evidence. Occam's razor. The simplest solution, given that he has a turtle and is green, is that he's a turtle. End of story. To suggest that Yoshi is a dinosaur is relentless assault on logic and reason. Why do you hate america? I don't think that link you posted is "conclusive" at all. That site is absolutely riddled with factual, grammatical, and logical errors. Also, dinosaurs only flew if they had wings. Yoshi has no wings. In addition, turtles can fly without wings as their shell acts as a parachute of sorts for air/wind. This allows them to traverse the air with ease. justins (talk) 22:58, 11 August 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.111.62.170 (talk)

If you take a look here, you'll see that Yoshi does, indeed, have wings. At least at times. Please refrain from ad hominem attacks on my person, discuss the content, not the editor. Also, please read one of Wikipedia's policies, here: WP:SOCK, regarding using multiple accounts. Useight (talk) 23:09, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Here's another source calling Yoshi a dinosaur: here. Useight (talk) 23:18, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Unless you can provide some conclusive evidence to warrant the change, the article will remain "dinosaur" instead of "turtle". I have sourced the information regarding his "dinosaur-like" appearance. Useight (talk) 23:25, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

It seems that someone here is throwing Occam's razor quite carelessly. Someone could get cut, and that wouldn't be good. Occam's razor says to elimate all assumptions except those that make a difference. While you have eliminated the extra assumptions that don't matter, your interpretation of the matter is not the correct application of Occam's razor. After eliminating the extraneous assumptions, you have to carefully weigh the matter and decide based on the facts. However, to say that it has a shell(I assume you mean shell, not turtle) and is green implies that he is a turtle is to falsely apply Occam's razor. It just means that he is green and has a shell. As has been stated above, certain dinosaurs did have shells and were probably many different shades, of which green seems likely. So, according to Occam's razor, you can't say if he is a turtle or dinosaur. However, as per the examples and reasons given by Useight, the more correct assumption, not using Occam's razor, but rather after using Occam's razor, is that Yoshi is indeed a dinosaur. Be careful how you use Occam's razor. It cuts deeply into the careless hand. Leeboyge (talk) 06:31, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

I always thought that was a sadle... 66.61.37.37 (talk) 20:42, 30 November 2008 (UTC)

This is ludicrous. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.175.50.34 (talk) 11:12, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

Category suggestions

Fictional characters who can fly

Fictional sportspeople

Comments? - A Link to the Past (talk) 18:09, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

I would be opposed to both. Pagrashtak 18:28, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Fictional characters who can fly perhaps, but why sportspeople? Yoshi has been in almost every sports video game featuring Mario, ifnot every sports video game featuring Mario (except for EA sports games). - A Link to the Past (talk) 18:36, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Maybe because he is not "people"? Though I understand if you want to categorize Mario as such (given the article references this of course). But this idea is as obscure as your desire to put Pikachu in the speed cat. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 21:35, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

He is people. "Human" and "person" are two entirely different things, Yoshi is a sentient being in the Mario universe, there are Yoshis who speak English, and on top of that, there are people who consider animals with a higher level of intelligence to technically qualify as a person, so I don't see why being an animal means that having the same abilities as a human means they don't qualify as a person. And regardless of it all, saying he doesn't qualify for the category is semantics. If the category were sportshumans, you'd have a point, but sportspeople does not only refer to humans. - A Link to the Past (talk) 22:04, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Link, human and people have the same meaning so what you're saying is nonsensical. Besides, do you even have a WP:SOURCE that suggests Yoshi is a known "sportsperson"? Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 22:22, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

*face palm* "5: the personality of a human being : self" I think being sentient is a personality of a human being, don't you think? And on top of that, every single sports game in the Mario series is presented as an event where the Mario characters participate in sporting events to a large crowd. The mere fact that these games are sporting events and not just them playing catch establishes that the character is a sportsperson. - A Link to the Past (talk) 22:26, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

In other words no then. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 22:35, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

The source is the games. A male person who engages in sports is a sportsman. Not only does Yoshi engage in a variety of sports, it's to an audience, meaning in the Mario universe, he's a professional sportsman. He can be made team captain of a soccer team in the Strikers series or of a baseball team in the Mario Baseball series. How, on Earth, does someone who engages in sports professionally not qualify as a sportsperson. - A Link to the Past (talk) 23:25, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

While Yoshi may play sports, it isn't really what defines him. Also being sentient doesn't make something human. One definition of sentient is "capacity for basic consciousness" another is "choice-making consciousness". I think that makes all animals sentient, not only people. I'll concur that "a male person who engages in sports is a sportsman", put there's no way Yoshi is a person. Useight (talk) 23:34, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

I've already provided a definition of person that means "the personality of a human being". This definition does not entail that the being be human, it only says "to have the personality of a human", which Yoshi does, and by that definition, it qualifies him as a person. - A Link to the Past (talk) 23:41, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

From Compact Oxford Dictionary, a person is: "A human being regarded as an individual". From Websters' Ninth New Collegiate Dictionary, page 877, a person is: "human being, individual". From Wikipedia, "an individual human being". I'm sorry, but to be a person, one must be a human being, which Yoshi is not. Useight (talk) 23:52, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

From Merriam Webster Dictionary, "The personality of a human being : self". I guess they were just lying, or you're just ignoring this definition. - A Link to the Past (talk) 23:55, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

(outdent) I see where you got that, (here), and it's the 5th definition. The definitions I supplied are the first listed definitions. Just like the first definition from that same page: "human, individual". An obscure definition is not going to overrule several more prominent definitions. Also, please focus only on the content rather than using sarcasm or attacking my character. Useight (talk) 00:28, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

That does not, at any point, mean that it cancels it out. A person being a human is ONE usage of the term. If being the first usage of the term meant it could cancel out all other uses, there would only be ONE meaning. The first definition never once says that "person means human being, and can ONLY mean human being". It is saying "human being, individual". The reason that other definitions exist is CONTEXT. If you're using person to mean a human being, they have it up there as a result. If you're not speaking in that context, it can't be used. All definitions are equally usable, you picked the most common and decided it was the only official one. And on another point, how can you even apply a real-world definition to a fictional universe? The real-world definition was written with the idea that talking dinosaurs didn't exist. If the real-world definition of person applies to the Mario universe, only Mario, Luigi, Wario, and Waluigi can apply to the category, but even those would be iffy, since YI has them going to parents in the Mushroom Kingdom. The Mario universe doesn't HAVE humans in it, it has Toads, Yoshis, Koopas, etc., who have the same level of intelligence as humans. Yoshis are human-like in that they have an equal level of intelligence and capabilities - they can have sentient thoughts, they can form civilizations, and they can play sports, apparently. If Yoshis were replaced by humans, the only thing that would occur is "a change in appearance". They would not gain extra intelligence, the whole concept of the Mario universe is that it has non-human species who have the same intelligence and abilities as humans, so I'm just confused how you can apply a real-world definition to a work of fiction. I mean, let's say that there was a... Koopa farmer, could he not be under "Fictional farmers" because, in the real-world, only a human being can work as a farmer? - A Link to the Past (talk) 00:40, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

You also used a real-world definition in your argument. And yes, if there was a Koopa farmer, he could be, theoretically, under "Fictional farmers", just like Yoshi could, theoretically, fall under "Fictional athletes". My point is that while Yoshi is (sometimes) an athelete, he's not a "sportsperson". Useight (talk) 01:10, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

Except that your definition does not exclude mine. To do so, it demands that you have "ONLY human", not merely the existence of one definition calling person a word that means human. If you can't establish that a person has to be human, Yoshi can be applied as a human. - A Link to the Past (talk) 01:15, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

I already established that a person has to be human, see my previous posts. Yoshi doesn't default to "human", he defaults to "dinosaur". See this, Nintendo.com calls Yoshi a dinosaur there. That's pretty conclusive that Yoshi is a dinosaur, not human. Useight (talk) 01:57, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

You quoted a dictionary entry that said a person is a human. Nowhere did you establish that a person MUST be a human. Will you stop demanding that we use real-world logic OUTSIDE of the real-world? If real-world logic must be followed, Koopa Troopas can't be turtles because turtles can only walk on all fours, can't get out of their shells, can't talk, and are much slower than Koopa Troopas. THAT'S applying real-world logic right there. Yoshis have human intelligence, and at what point do we completely ignore the Mario universe's logic? The Mario universe has sentient beings, and has no human characters. The only characters that could be considered human are Mario and Luigi, but since they came from outside of the Mario universe, they don't qualify as being FROM the Mario universe. In the Mario universe, most every creature has human intelligence. You can't apply the first definition of person to the Mario universe because it CAN'T be applied. There are no humans in the Mario universe, and there are no human equivalents. THIS is why the series' logic overrides real world logic. The real-world logic exists for the real-world, and the Mario world logic exists for the Mario world. In the Mario world, the definition of person being "to be human" does not make sense, because there ARE no humans or even an equivalent of a human. So since Mario world logic has precedence over real-world logic in the Mario world, your definition can't be used, and mine can - that to be human is to have human intelligence. - A Link to the Past (talk) 02:08, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

Leave the dictionary definition alone, then. That aside, Nintendo.com here says Yoshi is a dinosaur. Regardless of any dictionary definitions, any real-word logic, or anything, Nintendo is the definitive source on anything regarding Nintendo's in-world universe. Just because Yoshi exhibits "person-like" traits, does not make him a person. Useight (talk) 02:58, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

Agreed. Yoshi should not be placed within the proposed categories. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 03:02, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

So we're ignoring dictionary definitions, but you can still cite your dictionary definition? What a dinosaur is in real-life is not what dinosaurs are in the Mario universe. In Mario, dinosaurs talk. In real-life, they don't. If the definition of person doesn't apply to Mario, you can NOT say "well, dinosaurs in Mario can't be a person because they're dinosaurs". If the definition doesn't apply, you can't apply it. - A Link to the Past (talk) 03:57, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

Note, that I did not cite a dictionary, I cited Nintendo.com. Mario is a person, Yoshi is not. Find a verifiable, independent source that says Yoshi is a person. Then you'll have something to go off of. Until then, this argument is circular. As of yet, the consensus (3 to 1) is that Yoshi should not be added to the category. Useight (talk) 05:01, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

You HAVE to cite a dictionary for Nintendo.com to be saying "Yoshi is a dinosaur and thus not a person". Give me one good reason why Nintendo.com's statement means that without citing real-world logic. The fact of the matter is that if being a dinosaur = not being a person, being a Mario character = not being a person, because there are not any human characters in the Mario universe. So I'm just curious what your standards are for what's a person in the Mario world. Since there is no one species that is considered the "humans", this means that "intelligent creatures" are people. If Yoshis looked like humans, they would be considered a person because absolutely nothing of what a human can do is impossible for a Yoshi on the logic that the Mario universe does NOT consider them to not be people. If there is no real-world logic applied, then there's no reason to assume that a sentient, intelligent species does not qualify as a person in the Mario world's logic. Like I've already stated, the ONLY way to use Nintendo.com's statement to mean that dinosaurs are not people in the Mario world is to use real-world logic that clearly does not apply to this fictional world. - A Link to the Past (talk) 05:22, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

If there is no real-world logic applied, then there's no reason to assume that a sentient, intelligent species qualifies as a person in the Mario world's logic. You see? There is no "default" species qualification when no logic is permitted. Obviously, there is no "Mario world's logic". If there is, cite it. If there isn't, it's original research. Since we can't find this "Mario world's logic", we'll have to use "regular logic". If you can find some source that says something along the lines of, "In the Mario universe, dinosaurs are considered people", then okay, Yoshi is a person. Until then, Yoshi is a dinosaur, as per the link I already cited above. Useight (talk) 05:35, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

Yoshi

Yoshi's a Yoshi period. Yoshius fictuos animalis —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.203.28.14 (talk) 19:52, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

just defense

let me clear the fog: male Yoshi+whatever = an egg = defense mechanism. female Yoshi+???= live egg (use with care/fragile) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.203.28.14 (talk) 19:57, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Image edit-warring

Seriously, A Link to the Past, the consensus has gone against you, coming back a week later to try and sneak your preferred image in isn't good behaviour. Sesshomaro, II MusLiM HyBRiD II, Coconutfred, Megata Sanshiro, and I are all in favour of the SSBB image. Please accept the facts. Stifle (talk) 10:02, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

It's nice that you want the wrong image "just because". I'm sorry that I'm not a fan of people leaving a discussion to stonewall it into their favor. And just curious, if your side is so strong, why is it that the only thing you cite is the NUMBER of opposition to the proper image, not citing any one argument you've ever provided? 3D isn't a good argument, most recent isn't a good argument, "Yoshi should be by himselflol" isn't a good argument. So, I guess once you provide a single good argument, I'll actually acknowledge your side. So why should Yoshi be one of the only articles on Wikipedia to use a Smash Bros. image as their "common depiction" (which is strange, I'm pretty sure common depiction =/= an image of Yoshi that only appears in one game). The 3D image is unstable, because Yoshi's design has changed in every game in the entire Smash series, while Yoshi has stayed the same in Yoshi's Island, Yoshi's Island DS, Yoshi's Touch & Go, and Yoshi's Universal Gravitation. This image can actually STAY based on the series having consistency in its image, while Smash's has to change. So, just wondering, can you provide an explanation why YOshi's one of the only SSB characters to use their SSB images? - A Link to the Past (talk) 17:37, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

I, too, prefer the SSBB image, it is more crisp and clear than the older image. Link, please accept the consensus as apparently 6-1 for that image and stop throwing back all arguments as no good. Newer, 3D, alone, are all acceptable arguments as to the superiority of this particular image. Useight (talk) 18:26, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

3D and newer are NOT reasons to use an image. Yoshi's series rarely depicts him in 3D, and your argument would only hold up if this image were significantly older. There's no need to replace a two-year old image. - A Link to the Past (talk) 18:39, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

And another user put this well, using a crossover image is not appropriate. But some more points: One, the Smash series image changes with every game. Two, the Smash series image is not an appropriate substitute for the Yoshi series image (it only slightly resembles him). Three, it only shows Yoshi's front, failing to show his back, which has prominent features. Four, the image should tell people of Yoshi's common appearance, which is not an image used in one game - the image that would best show his common appearance is his Yoshi's Island DS image, which remains consistent. It's not helpful to show people what Yoshi looks like in one game in one crossover series. - A Link to the Past (talk) 18:48, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Unfortunately, you're the only person saying this. Wikipedia is based on consensus, not on waiting for everyone else to go away and then reverting back to your preference. I don't think there's anything wrong with having both images, one at the top and one further down. Stifle (talk) 18:56, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Agreed. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 19:01, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

So, just curious, your reason for the image seems to be "everyone wants it!". Considering that you seem to not provide reason why an image from one cross-over, third-party developed video game is better than the most common depiction of Yoshi. - A Link to the Past (talk) 19:02, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

As a side note, I belive HAL Labs is considerd second-party. Useight (talk) 04:04, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

Correct - Hal is 2nd-party. However, Game Arts developed Brawl. -Jéské ^{(v^_^v Call me Mr. Bonaparte!)} 06:57, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

HAL actually wasn't involved directly like they were in SSB and Melee. They had some involvement, but only in related series. The main developer was Sora, which Sakurai was in charge of, as well as Game Arts and Monolith Soft. - A Link to the Past (talk) 04:08, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

← General discussion in WT:VG seems to be leaning toward using primary images of the character in the infobox whenever possible - meaning that the image should represent the character officially in its primary series or be by its creator. While renderings of characters like Yoshi are certain quite good in Brawl, they are not necessarily representative of that character in its own series - Yoshi's primary appearances are almost completely limited to the Super Mario Bros. series.
That said, there is a valid argument for using a Brawl image for a Nintendo character: Brawl is a first-party title, and (in this case) Yoshi is a first-party character owned and created by the same company. So it can be argued that an image from Brawl is properly representative of the character. Furthermore, we need to assess whether the image used is one that represents the most widely recognized form of that character. I'd argue that it doesn't matter too much with Yoshi, since he looks virtually the same in every game he appears in. With other characters, like Pit and Ice Climbers, this isn't such an easy question to answer.
My personal opinion is that, for Nintendo-owned characters, Brawl images are fine so long as consensus agrees that they are easily recognizeable and properly represent the character. I believe this is certainly true for Yoshi. Like I said, it may not be so clear-cut with more obscure characters. But if you consider that Nintendo is in the habit of reviving its old properties in various ways (R.O.B. has been making a lot of appearances lately, and prominently in Brawl), it makes sense to use recent renderings of those characters as representative of those characters, as those represent the most recent versions of those characters that Nintendo itself has released. If we were discussing a cameo appearance of, say, Bowser in a Mortal Kombat game, I would definitely NOT choose that as an infobox image. (Likewise, Solid Snake in Brawl would not be a valid choice of representation, IMO, because Nintendo doesn't own that property. It would be better to use his representation from the latest Metal Gear Solid game.) — KieferSkunk (talk) — 20:49, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

In all intents and purposes though, Sora developers made the Yoshi for SSBB, not Nintendo. - A Link to the Past (talk) 00:59, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

SSBB, however, is a Nintendo game. This argument is wholly inane and is like saying we can't use a model for Ness because APE made it for Mother 2, not Nintendo. This is a very stupid argument, LttP, and since you seem to not be able to leave the consensus-supported image alone, I have once-more fully-protected the article. Please familiarize yourself with Wikipedia:Consensus. There are no hard-and-fast rules regarding this type of stuff. -Jéské ^{(v^_^v Call me Mr. Bonaparte!)} 06:57, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia works on a consensus model, A Link to the Past. We've already provided our reasons why we should use the SSBB image (primarily, that it looks far better). If you have a reason why the consensus should be changed, you've got to convince us. Not the other way around. Stifle (talk) 08:28, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

Okay, everyone, let's get something straight: There is clearly no consensus on this issue yet. Remember that consensus is NOT a majority vote, and that it is only considered established when we have a clear direction going forward and objections are minimized. We're not to that stage yet, so for either side of this discussion to claim it has consensus is misguided and erroneous. Stop trotting out the "You don't know what consensus is" argument when you're both doing it wrong. There is an ongoing discussion about the Brawl vs. series images in WT:VG, and this has wider implications than just this specific article. You are encouraged to come and participate in that discussion as well as here - it may well be that we arrive at a broader consensus there. Thank you. — KieferSkunk (talk) — 15:34, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

To be honest, I disagree with you. There's one user who keeps objecting to the image that has been established and agreed by the editors at this page; he returns to revert to his preferred image every once in a while once he thinks nobody else is watching. We're not trying to steamroll minority opinions, but equally one person cannot be expected to hold a page to hostage when he is not receptive to the fact that nobody else agrees with him. Stifle (talk) 08:28, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

Could you clarify what the existing consensus is/was, then? I didn't see evidence that we really had one. — KieferSkunk (talk) — 16:31, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

Er, lemme clarify my question: Could you explain to me what the history was on there being a consensus for the Brawl image? I don't see evidence that we actually arrived at a consensus for that image - just that more people seemed to favor it and, IMO, had decent arguments for using it. I personally support that image as well, for the myriad of reasons I've already argued here and at WT:VG, but I also believe that some of the arguments given by Sesshomaru and others aren't valid entirely on their own. "This image is in 3D" doesn't really stand on its own in my book, and "this image is better" is too much like WP:ILIKEIT - there's certainly nothing bad about the YIDS image, technically speaking, so discussions about whether an image looks better or not are subjective in nature. That's something we want to try to avoid, because it has more to do with our personal opinions than what's best for the project as a whole. — KieferSkunk (talk) — 16:37, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

I don't know if there was a formal discussion/straw poll/etc., more that ALTTP comes and reverts it to his preferred image every once in a while. WP:ILIKEIT refers to deletion discussions and is irrelevant here. Stifle (talk) 15:44, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

I'm pretty sure that it's every user who opposes it leaves the discussion in the middle of it and doesn't respond to arguments. And that adding the image was the sole action that would actually restart the discussion. - A Link to the Past (talk) 16:27, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

Just for the record, I left the WT:VG discussion because, as I said, it had become embarrassing for me to keep participating in, and because I frankly got really tired of arguing with you about it. You really dug in your heels on it, brought up point after point after point, repeated yourself a LOT, and made it clear there would NOT be an end to the discussion or a consensus on the issue as long as you were involved. Take this as a personal affront or incivility if you want, but if you're going to say that people just leave the discussion in the middle and don't respond to arguments, you really need to start paying more attention to what people are saying to you. People are going to stop wasting their time arguing with you, especially on such minor issues, when it's clear you're not listening to them. In short, please stop misrepresenting people with opposing views. — KieferSkunk (talk) — 17:20, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

The previous discussion was particularly small? I've never misrepresented anyone. The opposition left the discussion, that's not a matter up for debate. Regardless, I'm at a loss as to how you imply that an image of Yoshi's front, showing far fewer features, no defining abilities, or a common style for Yoshi, etc. is preferred. I wouldn't argue it if there was not an appropriate substitute, but the YIDS image accomplishes what the SSBB image does not. There's not a compelling argument to have replaced the YIDS image with an image that tells the reader less about common traits of Yoshi. - A Link to the Past (talk) 17:28, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

I'm still waiting for opponents of the image to clarify what 3D Yoshi accomplishes that tells the reader anything significant about Yoshi that the YIDS image does not do. - A Link to the Past (talk) 17:23, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Im still waiting for you to give a reason as to why you are allowed to go around cunsensus amongst... other things, that, i went through your edits, you took out other things as well, unrelated to the image.--Jakezing (talk) 22:40, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

I'm still waiting for anyone person who agrees with using the Brawl image to explain why showing less defining features of Yoshi is better. - A Link to the Past (talk) 22:44, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

Because your saying that yoshi is always in 2D besides 2nd and 3rd party games... Sunshine mean much? also, those gmaes are 2D for a reason, to make it easier to show somebody riding him and because the gmaes they are based on were 2D--Jakezing (talk) 22:47, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

Jakezing, there's no point in trying to talk sense to this guy. Everyone is in favour of the 3D pic and yet he continues to argue against it. It's a lost cause. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 22:54, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

I continue to argue against it because my point of a lacking of any defining features added with the use of the 3D image and actually a lack of defining features exists in the image is ignored. And for one, Sunshine is not a Yoshi game, Tezuka is largely in charge of the Yoshi series and chooses to remain in 2D. And on the subject of "it's easier", why? They did it fine in Sunshine (excellently in fact), and SM64 worked out just fine with 3D. - A Link to the Past (talk) 01:15, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

(de-indent) I concur with Sesshomaru. People are leaving the argument because you are not receptive to any of the points people are bringing, not anything else. I think I will request unprotection, at which stage if ALttP continues to revert, a block for edit warring against consensus will be in order. Stifle (talk) 13:41, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

I'm guessing that the lack of response from Stifle and Sesshomaru why an image with less defining features is preferred is based on a lack of good reason. - A Link to the Past (talk) 17:33, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

I'm sure Link is aware of the repercussions. Go ahead and get it unprotected Stifle ;) Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 17:38, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Sesshomaru, if you continue to intentionally ignore my statements and conversely create a hostile discussion, I will open an RfC for your conduct. - A Link to the Past (talk) 17:49, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Link, the points were made by Stifle, Sesshomaru and myself, that the discussion has gone stale. We already tried to reason this argument out with you, and as I said in the VGProj talk, you dug in your heels and made it clear that you weren't listening. When that happens, many of us decide we have better things to do than to continue arguing. I personally don't care which image is shown - it doesn't really matter so much, in my opinion. But I do think that this entire discussion points to a larger problem in which we do not have a clear consensus on the issue, partly because of the difficulty in communicating with you. This has happened before on other topics - you have a tendency to present a point and then beat it to death, causing others to do the same. That makes working on this project in general feel more like a chore than something enjoyable. I'd ask you to be mindful of not only what you're communicating, but HOW you do it. In my view, you tend to go beyond just debating toward consensus and putting yourself in the position of trying to dictate it to others, which I'm sure you can understand isn't well-received most of the time. — KieferSkunk (talk) — 21:08, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Um, no? Stifle never once addressed the point of lack of defining features in the SSBB image. I ask for what defining features the SSBB image has, and no one has responded to that at any point. - A Link to the Past (talk) 21:49, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

I think that's partly because I took the mantle of arguing this point with you. And as I said in the WT:VG discussion, if you're looking at a horse, you don't have to see it wearing a saddle and carrying a human passenger (or cargo) to know what it looks like. I never saw you respond to that point either.

We all seem to disagree on what constitutes a defining feature for Yoshi in a picture. The SSBB image does show his saddle, though it's mostly hidden and could be mistaken for just some generic coloring. But aside from that, I think the rest of his defining features are all present in the SSBB image: He's (usually) green, he has a bulbous nose, large, frog-like eyes, a pleasant expression, his head is almost the same size as the rest of his body, he wears boots, he has blunt spikes along his back, and he has small arms.

Actually, I posit that while the YIDS image gives a better view of the saddle and shows Yoshi carrying someone, it deviates a bit from how Yoshi is most commonly presented even in his own series, in that the YIDS image shows a reddish-colored Yoshi rather than the usual green one. It does illustrate that the Yoshi species includes specimens of many different colors, but Yoshi as a singular character (which is more the focus of the article) is almost always green. So if we're going to argue defining features, I'd put more weight on color over art style or pose, personally. — KieferSkunk (talk) — 22:08, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Also, I believe that Yoshi's ability to carry other characters and produce eggs are both demonstrable abilities of the character, not defining features in the same sense as his color, shape, general appearance, etc.. I think that while he does play a prominent role as a means of transportation in most of the canonical games he's in, both of those abilities are things he does, not necessarily requirements for an identification image.

Try thinking of it this way: Does your driver's license photo show you typing at a keyboard? Or does it just show enough of your face for someone to be able to easily identify you at a quick glance? I think the infobox image should serve the same sort of purpose, and frankly, I doubt anyone is going to have difficulty identifying Yoshi in either of those pictures. — KieferSkunk (talk) — 22:18, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

No one is talking about difficulty identifying, it's about which helps identify Yoshi better. And the saddle argument is not strong - it's assumed that a horse often has a saddle, and it being used as transportation is known. Yoshi having that and being able to carry people is not just a "feature", but also a defining aspect of the character. YIDS Yoshi and Smash Yoshi have different postures (YIDS Yoshi designed to be rideable unlike Smash Yoshi), different visual styles (one stable and one not), etc. YIDS Yoshi accomplished everything Smash Yoshi accomplishes, save for 3D obviously. But YIDS also adds extra content. And I'm confused about your position, red Yoshi has been in every game featuring Yoshi save for a few since SMW, which first featured it, and SSBB Yoshi can be red. However, that's irrelevant, as YIDS Yoshi doesn't feature the red Yoshi. - A Link to the Past (talk) 22:25, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

My point on the color is that what Nintendo seems to have presented as the standard, default color for Yoshi is green, and the YIDS image shows a not green Yoshi. It doesn't really matter exactly what color that Yoshi is - just that it's different from the commonly accepted default color. This is evidenced by Yoshi's first appearances in virtually every game he's been in - each time he (or one of his species) first appears, he/it is green. Other-colored Yoshis seem to occur after the green one. (In Yoshi's Island, the opening scene of the game shows a bunch of different-colored Yoshis in a circle, but the first playable level uses a green Yoshi.)

You have a good point about the pose, in that by default Yoshi's structure seems to be more one of pack-animal than humanoid, whereas in Smash, he's more humanoid than pack-animal. However, in my experience, most of the games that feature Yoshi as a main character rather than a sidekick give him more anthropomorphic characteristics as a rule, at least implying that he's not just a pack animal, and IMO making arguments about his pose less relevant. — KieferSkunk (talk) — 22:32, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

I think you're confused - [2]. - A Link to the Past (talk) 22:54, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Oh, whoops. My bad - sorry, for some reason I was remembering him as showing up as a reddish-purple color. :P Okay, I stand corrected, and I apologize - thanks for pointing that out. Color is not an argument in this discussion. — KieferSkunk (talk) — 22:59, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Arbitrary section break

So where does this leave us? I'm going to request unprotection tomorrow unless I see a reason not to. At that stage, all editors should respect the consensus to include the SSBB image as the lead image and the YIDS image further down. Stifle (talk) 09:21, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

Agreee... and if link dosnt agree, we can send a nice admin over to explain to him why he is wrong and that hes a child.--Jakezing (talk) 12:42, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

I wasn't aware that having a reasonable level of common sense that you, Jakezing, seem to lack, was childish. I guess all of those silly intelligent people are such children and need to grow up. - A Link to the Past (talk) 12:59, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

I endorse the unprotection of this article. It's been long enough, and number consensus seem to agree on the Brawl image. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 17:25, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

Jakezing, please keep the discussion civil. That comment was uncalled for. Similarly, Link, please don't keep it going by responding to it in a similarly inappropriate manner - that's just going to make things worse.

I've counted only a small number of active participants in this discussion. Here's how the discussion breaks down, if I'm interpreting people right:

• User:A Link to the Past: Use the YIDS image over the Brawl image because of its status as an official canon image from an in-series game, and because it shows Yoshi's saddle and demonstrates his common role in carrying other characters.
• User:KieferSkunk: Neutral, slight favor toward the Brawl image for reasons of simplicity and quick identification. Acknowledging that the YIDS image is not a bad image to use, and will not continue fighting for the Brawl image. Would rather see this discussion end, personally.
• User:Sesshomaru: Strongly favors the Brawl image. Stated reasons are that it's a 3D rendering and is technically superior to the 2D YIDS image, and previous consensus favored the Brawl image.
• User:Jakezing: Seems to favor the Brawl image. States that not all games that feature Yoshi are 2D, maintains that previous consensus favored the Brawl image.
• User:Stifle: Favors the Brawl image per previous consensus.

While it's true that consensus is not formed by a majority vote, it appears that there are more people in favor of using the Brawl image to identify this character in the infobox. There's certainly nothing saying we can't ALSO use the YIDS image in other parts of the article, but I'm willing to say that the consensus is in favor of the Brawl image in the infobox, and that this should be respected at this point. Link, you made a valiant effort to state your case for using the YIDS image, but it appears that consensus is against you on this matter. — KieferSkunk (talk) — 18:05, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

We could use one from sunshine, its a 3D yoshi, it shows him in a ridable, and if we put mario on, riding position, only problem is geting one--Jakezing (talk) 23:30, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

I've no dog in this ring. The only reason I said what I did above was 'cause I had to reprotect the bloody article 'cause of ALttP's warrin', and I'm frankly getting tired of this completely idiotic edit-war. ALttP, for the love of all that is holy, matey, drop the moly bread inta the drink 'fore you poison the whole crew. -Jéské ^{(vD_^v Shiver me timbers!)} 00:09, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

Good to know that Jeske has too much trouble reading history, in that I reverted Sesshomaru once after he reverted AMiB, and he reverted twice. I guess I'm only focusing on the actual logic of edit warring, but I guess I must be wrong, since you seem to believe edit warring isn't multiple reverts, since you refer to the one who reverted less. So, just curious, are you going to actually explain why my one revert defines the entire string of reverts after the unprotection as "my edit warring"? Or, the more likely scenario, you'll dodge my question/leave the discussion. Since, after all, there's no response that is based in, well, sanity. - A Link to the Past (talk) 00:29, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

Stop the ad-hominem attacks, ALttP. Full-protection shuts everyone up, not just you, no matter what you say. I would have restored the prot if it were AMiB or Sess reverting. No wonder everyone gave up on you - you're simply sticking carrots in your ears. You are going down the wrong road; I suggest you calm down and be civil before you're blocked for disruption. -Jéské ^{(vD_^v Shiver me timbers!)} 03:32, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, if. I must be imagining Sesshomaru reverting an edit RIGHT after it was unprotected. You're either intentionally ignoring Sesshomaru having been constantly involved in edit warring, or haven't read the history, which means you don't belong in a discussion on edit warring. - A Link to the Past (talk) 05:00, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

I missed Sess because I was in the middle of doing a coup d'etat on a forum at the time. Wikipedia isn't my whole life; I also have Internet fora, Diablo 2, and Magic Set Editor. Saying I "ignored" Sess isn't true; when I next looked at my watchlist I had seen another revert and protected. You just happened to be the reverter; I had interpreted the talk page to mean that there was a consensus (that you were against) and thus responded accordingly. Seriously, ALttP, stop enflaming disputes. -Jéské ^{(vD_^v Shiver me timbers!)} 04:36, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

It doesn't take a minute to view the history and figure out all of who was edit warring instead of looking at one revert and deducing that I was edit warring with myself. - A Link to the Past (talk) 05:00, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

One cannot war with himself. -Jéské ^{(vD_^v Shiver me timbers!)} 09:12, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

And there you go. - A Link to the Past (talk) 16:07, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

And there you go. I saw that there was a consensus in place, I unprotected, edit-warring started right back up again, I re-protected. I am not being preferential here, and I suggest you stop beating that horse. -Jéské ^{(v^_^v Kacheek!)} 19:17, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

Yes, but your also imposing your own, single veiw agaisnt the rest of ours. Personnaly, my solution works fine as a compromise, we have a 3D yoshi, and 3D is always good, and he is seen in a ridable position, which is his typical area, and he;'ll look good since, even for its age, SMS looked nice. so, cdo we agree? We put the other two images somewhere eklse, and use the SMS image as it is a good cross between the brawl fighter and the 2d ridable--Jakezing (talk) 02:39, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

Who's right and who's wrong doesn't determine whether or not someone is edit warring.

While your option is far more preferable to SSBB's image because it's made by one of Yoshi's creators, the argument that "3D is always good" is simply not true, it's only good when it's appropriate is all that I say. That is merely to say the point that 3D and better are two completely different situations. I'll concede to SMS Yoshi if only because 3D seems to be very important to depict him. Regardless, SMS Yoshi accomplishes more than SSBB Yoshi does. - A Link to the Past (talk) 02:58, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

Does that mean I have to amend my racial writeup for Yoshi to compel another PC to ride a Yoshi character? I kinda was under the impression that not all Yoshi bore riders (Paper Mario, Yoshi's Story)... -Jéské ^{(vD_^v Shiver me timbers!)} 03:36, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

Not all Yoshis feature someone on his back, but an image of Yoshi with someone on his back doesn't detract from the appearance, but also does add to it. - A Link to the Past (talk) 03:55, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

Unprotection requested, let's not restart an edit war as soon as the request is answered. Stifle (talk) 14:29, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

 Done. Useight (talk) 15:15, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

Speech

regarding this segment of text: "Either he has no voice or he says Yoshi! (e.g. in Super Mario World...), says colors, or simply makes unintelligible noises and says his name, or the word "Nintendo"." I don't recall him doing anything other than a random noise in SMW, so this needs to be either cited or removed.

also: "In the 2008 TV cartoons and the computer animated movies, John David Bennet II makes Yoshi sound like Shawn." ...Shawn who? And what cartoon? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.97.85.50 (talk) 11:31, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

Well, once the article is unprotected, you're welcome to change it. Stifle (talk) 11:43, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

{{editprotected}} Can someone please remove the sentence at the end of the 2nd paragraph of the "speech" section, which says "In the 2008 TV cartoons and the computer animated movies, John David Bennet II makes Yoshi sound like Shawn." Seems to be vandalism. Stifle (talk) 11:44, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

 Done Useight (talk) 15:23, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

On that note, I request that the SSBB image be removed for now, per the fact that an administrator made the decision and the only reason the image remains is that another user reverted his actions and it got protected afterwards. - A Link to the Past (talk) 17:31, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

Everyone else here wants there to be a lead image, and that one is just fine. Why not wait until the discussion at WT:VG finishes? Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 17:34, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

Because an administrator made the decision to remove both images and you should have respected that instead of ignoring it. - A Link to the Past (talk) 17:48, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

I'm an administrator too, and I don't think the images should both be removed. (Or, in the alternative, admintrators do not have special editing rights to overrule people; our abilities are merely technical.) Stifle (talk) 19:22, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

I agree. As it says in the protection template, the page protection is not an endorsement of the current version. Just let it rest until we can get a handle on the issue. — KieferSkunk (talk) — 18:53, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

Yoshi's Appearance in SMG

The Article says that Yoshi's head appeared in Good Egg Galaxy, although it appeared in Space Junk Galaxy. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hailstrawberrypie (talk • contribs) 02:11, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

I've fixed that as a non-controversial factual correction. Any admin who feels the edit was not in order feel free to revert. Stifle (talk) 09:15, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

Image with no rationale

I removed this due to lacking a fair use rationale for this article. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 06:02, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

I've restored it and added a rationale, which is what you should have done. Please try not to unnecessarily provoke users. Stifle (talk) 09:56, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

Like i said above, we should use, itrs a dated image, but the yoshi from SMS, as it's a ridable yoshi, meetin one of links main demands, and its 3D.--Jakezing (talk) 12:43, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

Stifle, please do not accuse me of provoking others. I was just adhering to policy. Also, a similar edit was once done to Justin Chatwin. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 17:00, 22 September 2008 (UTC)