Talk:Super Leaf

Requested move 19 June 2026

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: not moved. Fairly clear consensus here, and apologies for the close not happening sooner; it appears it just fell through the cracks, in part because of me it seems, as I relisted it despite that not needing to happen; likely a result of me going too fast and not noticing one opposition didn't have a bolded "oppose" and another having the bolded "oppose" in the middle of a reply to someone else. Whoops. (closed by non-admin page mover) –Maltazarian ^{ᚾparley$\lor$investigateᛅ} 15:53, 6 July 2026 (UTC)

---

Super Leaf → Raccoon MarioRaccoon Mario – While the Super Leaf transforms Mario into Raccoon Mario, it's otherwise not the notable thing here. The gameplay possible while Mario is in raccoon/tanooki form is what sources talk about. While there is the other "Raccoon Suit"/"Tanooki Suit" transformation, that can still be lumped under "Raccoon Mario" for the purposes of the article. While this might induce an overlap with Mario#Abilities, I'm primarily concerned with accuracy, so if someone feels it should be merged at that point, they're free to nominate it - I have no real opinion on that front. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 17:01, 19 June 2026 (UTC) — Relisting. ⹃Maltazarian ^{ᚾparley$\lor$investigateᛅ} 22:07, 26 June 2026 (UTC)

Oppose Super Leaf is an acceptable title for it, being the most accurate main subject, since the Super Leaf has actually been used for both Raccoon Mario and Tanooki Mario. It's also not limited to Mario, as it discusses other characters who are powered up by the Super Leaf. Cukie Gherkin (talk) 18:29, 19 June 2026 (UTC)

This is ridiculous. Keep the title as it was. The article focuses on the power-up, not the transformation itself. — Ultimate Ultimatum (talk) 23:08, 19 June 2026 (UTC)

If you think it's "ridiculous" then feel free to present an argument why, but keep the ad hominem attack to yourself. It's not helping anyone, since I obviously don't or I wouldn't have made the nomination.

It's also quite obvious that the article currently focuses on the powerup, but I believe the scope can be changed without a massive amount of modification. While there are also transformations like Kitsune Luigi, it's simply not notable and more of a side fact that can be mentioned. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 04:42, 20 June 2026 (UTC)

What I would consider the strongest source, , does actually go into strong depth on the power-up itself. For example, it discusses how 3D Land incorporates the Super Leaf as a power-up for enemies, how they introduced Kitsune Luigi as a variant, how the power-up has changed from one game to another, the mythological roots of using a leaf, and how Animal Crossing also uses leaves to connect to tanuki. The Super Leaf serves as an umbrella that covers all these details, but Raccoon Mario/Tanooki Mario do not as simply create an umbrella. - Cukie Gherkin (talk) 11:54, 20 June 2026 (UTC)

Just leave it as it is. This whole thing is stupid. The article should focus on the power-up. — Ultimate Ultimatum (talk) 12:56, 20 June 2026 (UTC)

Besides, the Super Leaf can also transform Mario into a tanuki. — Ultimate Ultimatum (talk) 12:57, 20 June 2026 (UTC)

@UltimateUltimatum: Please stay civil in move discussions. Calling things stupid will not help anyone. ―Howard • 🌽³³ 14:49, 20 June 2026 (UTC)

I apologize for being dumb, but the Super Leaf can also transform Mario into a tanuki, so just calling the article Raccoon Mario isn't enough. But, the article should remain named Super Leaf, not Raccoon/Tanooki Mario. If the other powerups had their own articles, they would be named after the power-up itself, such as Super Mushroom or Fire Flower. So, this move is unneccesary. Please understand. — Ultimate Ultimatum (talk) 15:26, 20 June 2026 (UTC)

If you read below, you would see that I already agree with you in not moving the page. The issue is not with your rationale but your conduct. ―Howard • 🌽³³ 15:48, 20 June 2026 (UTC)

I did see you agreeing, and I agree too. I do apologize for how I acted back there. I thought it was crazy someone would try changing the title to Raccoon Mario. — Ultimate Ultimatum (talk) 15:54, 20 June 2026 (UTC)

I think this discussion was for no reason because the power-up does yield to two different transformations, and the title should be the power-up name anyway. — Ultimate Ultimatum (talk) 15:59, 20 June 2026 (UTC)

This discussion shpuld be closed as soon as possible, if necessary. — Ultimate Ultimatum (talk) 15:59, 20 June 2026 (UTC)

Keep calling people "crazy" and you will get blocked in short order per WP:NPA. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 16:05, 20 June 2026 (UTC)

I'm not calling people crazy. I'm calling the move crazy. — Ultimate Ultimatum (talk) 17:18, 20 June 2026 (UTC)

Maybe I overreacted. I shouldn't have called it crazy, but there is no reason to move the article. — Ultimate Ultimatum (talk) 17:47, 20 June 2026 (UTC)

If you don't understnd, I should leave this discussion. — Ultimate Ultimatum (talk) 17:19, 20 June 2026 (UTC)

Saying "this nomination is crazy" means precisely the same thing as saying "you're crazy for making this nomination". Therefore, less inflammatory language must be used. Even saying "I think this is egregiously wrong" is still fine, though hopefully with evidence of why. Hopefully you will take that into account in the future. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 19:54, 20 June 2026 (UTC)

OK. — Ultimate Ultimatum (talk) 22:26, 20 June 2026 (UTC)

I'm sorry for my actions. — Ultimate Ultimatum (talk) 22:27, 20 June 2026 (UTC)

Are you sure that's a WP:RS? It would potentially run afoul of WP:BLOG. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 16:07, 20 June 2026 (UTC)

TTOOVG is listed on WP:VG/RS, having a translator and copyeditor, well above what a blog typically produces. Cukie Gherkin (talk) 21:54, 20 June 2026 (UTC)

Ok, got it. At the same time, after reading the blog post, I am still convinced it talks about Raccoon Mario etc. more than it does the Super Leaf itself. The article title is talking about tanukis, not leaves. This may be an "agree to disagree" situation. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 22:05, 20 June 2026 (UTC)

Oppose per Cukie Gherkin. ―Howard • 🌽³³ 11:17, 20 June 2026 (UTC)

Neutral - I believe the point is moot, as I don't believe it needs its own article in the first place. Would be a viable search term for a redirect though. Sergecross73 msg me 20:11, 21 June 2026 (UTC)

I strongly agree. We should make it a redirect. Don't forget Tanooki Mario, by the way. — Ultimate Ultimatum (talk) 21:25, 21 June 2026 (UTC)

I'm not certain what standard you're applying for "need". The Super Leaf is pretty obviously a topic that has received an abundance of significant coverage, both in terms of development and concept info and in terms of reception and legacy. I would say it has a stronger basis than many other video game articles. Cukie Gherkin (talk) 21:38, 21 June 2026 (UTC)

Basic WP:MERGEREASON. There's nothing here that couldn't easily fit in countless existing Mario articles. Sergecross73 msg me 23:15, 21 June 2026 (UTC)

I mean, I would disagree with that pretty vehemently. The article is quite sizeable and lacks a sensible merge target for everything; the significant coverage covers 3D Land, Mario, Super Mario Bros. 3, and the Super Mario series in general. Multiple authors go into pretty significant detail on the item, and it's clear from how much coverage it got that its notability goes beyond its relation to Mario but also its game mechanics and mythology. Cukie Gherkin (talk) 23:28, 21 June 2026 (UTC)

I don't understand how it's any different from countless articles you've advocated for merging in the past. There's nothing showing independent notability outside of the games. I don't think it'd survive a merge discussion with an actual valid rationale. Sergecross73 msg me 23:36, 21 June 2026 (UTC)

"Notability outside of the games" is a pretty high standard that is honestly often not fulfilled even with articles that people pretty universally accept are notable, but I'd say that it's pretty obvious that it has. For example, this article discusses the history of the Super Leaf, doing so not out of routine coverage but an inspiration due to it being featured in 3D Land. Furthermore, it straight up says "It endures because, most importantly, it became a pop culture icon", which is certainly fulfilling notability outside of the games to say that the Super Leaf transformation is pop culturally significant. Meanwhile, this article posits that the transformation informed people's perception of the mythology of tanuki. I think that the idea that there is no legacy or significance to the real world is discounted just by virtue of there being so many writers devoting significant coverage to it, but also based on these two sources suggesting pretty explicit real-world impact. Cukie Gherkin (talk) 01:40, 22 June 2026 (UTC)

I similarly concur with Cukie on the matter as the subject definitely is independently notable due to the articles mentioned above but also on the matter of journalistic opinions made outlets such as Inverse and Game Informer. Even Super Tanooki Skin 2D, which more mentioned in the PETA satirical browser games, does have some notable commentary on the Super Leaf itself. I also agree with Cukie's stance on that the article wouldn't have a well suited target for redirecting as the Super Leaf has a notable prominence to multiple works. CaptainGalaxy 23:36, 22 June 2026 (UTC)

Also I guess since on the topic of the original subject matter, I oppose the renaming. CaptainGalaxy 23:37, 22 June 2026 (UTC)

Wait, this discussion is still open? — Ultimate Ultimatum (talk) 01:03, 1 July 2026 (UTC)

Can someone close this? — Ultimate Ultimatum (talk) 15:46, 6 July 2026 (UTC)

Note: WikiProject Video games/Nintendo has been notified of this discussion. ⹃Maltazarian ^{ᚾparley$\lor$investigateᛅ} 22:08, 26 June 2026 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.