Talk:Ridley

wait, whoops, never mind. wrong move. damned vandals :p – MaskedMarth ^{(t c)} 20:46, November 19, 2007 (EST)

Too much mixing of smash games?

Seriously, we mention him in Melee before smash 64. We should go through Ridley's appearances from smash game to smash games, agreed???... -Johnknight1 23:55, February 22, 2008 (EST)

Meta Ridley

Just wondering where we stand on this: are they two separate bosses that need separate articles, or should this article talk about both? Either way, there's a Meta Ridley picture[1] that needs to be used for it. FyreNWater - (Talk • Contributions ) 05:43, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

I say put them together, they are essentially the same fight other than the time limit and a few attack patterns. - Gargomon251 10:38, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

Nintendo Power article

hey guys, it's SMASH-Antimatter. can't log in, don't have the time, but feel like mentioning something i noticed in the newest nintendo power.

exerpt from nintendo power interview with Masashiro Sakurai, creator of Kirby and Smash Bros.

NP: There was a rumor at one point about Ridley being playable. Was that ever a consideration? S: I think that would probably be impossible.[laughs] If we had put our best efforts into it, we may have been able to do it. But he might have been a little slow. Would that have been all right? [laughs]

98.209.79.169 19:51, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

wow

he is that smart? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.241.247.30 (talk • contribs) 17:14, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Ridley...an Assist Trophy?

So, as we all know, the game's files have been dumped for easy viewing, yes? Well, looking through it, I noticed a listing (under the assist trophy section) for a Ridley assist. Maybe it should be mentioned that at one point he was going to be an assist? (Mario66 21:00, 21 April 2008 (UTC))

Wait a sec...

Since when was Ridley able to talk?! 24.144.54.204 17:38, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

Sorry to answer so late but Ridley talked only in the Manga, which isn't canon to the series.Drakkon64 (talk) 13:11, 25 November 2011 (EST)

Picture of RIDLEY

I have a pic of RIDLEY on ssb 64

Poll

"On the official Japanese polls Ridley was voted for 4 times to be playable. The highest vote was for King Dedede with 5" What polls does this refer to? Oni Dark Link 17:22, May 19, 2010 (UTC)

How

Tell me exactly how Jiggs can OHKO Ridley. King KirbyD 16:21, 25 April 2012 (EDT)

Where did you get that idea from? I don't see it in the article anywhere. Toomai Glittershine The Breegull 16:46, 25 April 2012 (EDT)

Jigglypuff is the only character that Ridley can 1 hit-KO - You've got it the wrong way round. Toast ltimatum 17:08, 25 April 2012 (EDT)

If Ridley is playable

Will this page be split into Ridley (Boss) and Ridley (SSB4)? Not something we have to worry aobut yet but I just get curious 86.151.82.105 08:38, 25 August 2013 (EDT)

No, the boss information would be at Ridley and the fighter information would be at Ridley (SSB4). Awesome Cardinal 2000 10:52, 25 August 2013 (EDT)

"Speculation"

None of my edit was at all "speculative":

"However, the nature in which Sakurai has ambiguously alluded to Ridley"

This is fact, the whole handling of Ridley is the exact definition of ambiguous.

Definition of ambiguous: Open to multiple interpretations; vague and unclear. This applies to the situation with Ridley, this is fact.

"without outright confirming his role as he does with other popularly-requested non-playable characters"

This is fact, other NPCs are flatout shown with their role stated or clearly shown. This is not the case for Ridley.

"nor even referring to him by name directly"

You show me one instance where Sakurai referred to Ridley by name, as he does willy-nilly with NPCs, while routinely evades with unrevealed playable characters. This is fact.

"and the suspicious nature of the shadow itself (which has been observed with jerky and sudden movement similar to that of a playable character, instead of the smooth and telegraphed animations of a boss character)"

Actually look at how the shadow moves, look at what other people observed about it, and then compare it to how all the other bosses move. This is fact.

"leaves it highly unclear if Ridley is actually a stage boss of Pyrosphere, or if this has been teasing of Ridley as a playable character in a vein similar to Palutena's teasing."

Ridley has not been confirmed as anything, and the whole handling of it is the exact definition of ambiguous. This is fact. And the comparison to Palutena is factual, as she was a character that has been repeatedly teased in much the same way as Ridley. In fact, just look at Pic of the day quote when Palutena's Temple was revealed:

"Pic of the day. You can find this statue of the Goddess of Light in one of the stages. She's watching over the arena."

Compared to the Pyrosphere reveal:

"Pic of the day. Out of the blue, here's a new stage--the Pyrosphere from Metroid: Other M! An enemy from Samus's past may appear at any second…"

Pretty damn similar, don't you think? While down to evading saying their names. And this is something that is being discussed to death within the Smash community, just look at Ridley's thread on Smashboards and how massive it is. This is a highly discussed and contentious matter that is clearly notable and should be recognised.

My edit as such was not "speculation", it states the facts of the whole ambiguous handling of Ridley throughout Smash 4, which is completely unusual from the typical handling of non-playable characters, and recognising a significant point of contention within the Smash community. Now don't be dumb Miles, this is legitimate information, explaining the whole ambiguous handling of Ridley, which as clearly shown, is a big point of discussion within the Smash community. Omega Tyrant 00:03, 19 June 2014 (EDT)

Are you really going to make me do the wall-of-text back at you?

""However, the nature in which Sakurai has ambiguously alluded to Ridley"

Nothing is ambiguous about a section of the Smash Direct titled "Yellow Devil" which strictly serves to clarify and explain the new concept of a stage boss. There isn't any room for alternate interpretation.

"without outright confirming his role as he does with other popularly-requested non-playable characters"

"Popularly-requested" is subjective.

"nor even referring to him by name directly"

So? Are you going to claim this kind of nonsense for every other character not explicitly name-dropped?

"and the suspicious nature of the shadow itself (which has been observed with jerky and sudden movement similar to that of a playable character, instead of the smooth and telegraphed animations of a boss character)"

Subjective nature of what is "jerky and sudden" aside, Ridley had rather erratic motions as a boss in Brawl; it's hardly out of place for that sort of behavior to return.

"leaves it highly unclear if Ridley is actually a stage boss of Pyrosphere, or if this has been teasing of Ridley as a playable character in a vein similar to Palutena's teasing."

"Highly" is subjective, and you have zero conclusive evidence that Ridley is playable or being "teased" as such.

I understand the subject is a big deal to fans, but so what? We have to report the facts, not what people want or what they throw together to try and keep open a loophole for a 99+% deconfirmed character. Miles (talk) 00:16, 19 June 2014 (EDT)

(proceeds to make popcorn) This should be interesting. --EpicWendigo (talk) 00:20, 19 June 2014 (EDT)

In all seriousness, I find that Omega has some points to make. Ridley was handled in an ambiguous fashion. However, it's still speculation concerning Ridley's role in the game, so if you're going to add anything, add the ambiguity part, but nothing too speculative. --EpicWendigo (talk) 00:44, 19 June 2014 (EDT)

I think saying something like "many fans believe that Sakurai is intentionally avoiding a direct confirmation of Ridley's status to drive up anticipation of revealing him to be playable" would be okay; the initial edit that lead to this discussion I think was a bit much. Toomai Glittershine The Victorious 00:45, 19 June 2014 (EDT)

Why explicitly add speculatory content like that when we can convey that there's still a small bit of ambiguity with the current wording, though? Miles (talk) 00:55, 19 June 2014 (EDT)

Well it's like PM: at some point, all the noise from the dumb fans becomes too much to ignore. I'm not sure if this is the point right now, but personally I'd be okay with adding something. Toomai Glittershine The Chronicler 00:59, 19 June 2014 (EDT)

It's one thing to use fan terms for techniques or to give details on a professionally-played mod, but content for the new games should remain strictly factual and limited to what we know. Miles (talk) 01:05, 19 June 2014 (EDT)

"Are you really going to make me do the wall-of-text back at you?"

Are you really going to continue to be a haughty idiot that reverts any edit he personally doesn't like regardless of its validity?

"Nothing is ambiguous about a section of the Smash Direct titled "Yellow Devil" which strictly serves to clarify and explain the new concept of a stage boss. There isn't any room for alternate interpretation."

You're just that dense, are you? Did you not read a damn thing I said?

"Vague and unclear" - Doesn't refer to Ridley by name, doesn't outright show Ridley, evades showing us anything of this supposed "stage boss" nearly a year after Pyrosphere been shown (to the point that Pyrosphere wasn't even in any of the E3 demos), and doesn't confirm a damn thing about it. That's "vague and unclear". And it's clearly open to "alternate interpretation", when Ridley wasn't confirmed as anything, and the whole handling of Ridley this whole time has been vague and unclear (plus again, look at the massive Ridley thread on Smashboards, there's a bunch of people interpreting it in different ways, that wouldn't be happening if there "wasn't any room for alternate interpretation"). Drop the damn arrogance, this is not in any way a clear cut matter.

""Popularly-requested" is subjective."

Man, all those character request polls and stuff are just made-up, huh? Nope, the numbers lie, definitely "subjective".

"So? Are you going to claim this kind of nonsense for every other character not explicitly name-dropped?"

If this was a clearly cut manner with absolutely no room for alternative interpretation, Ridley would be getting name-dropped like every other NPC instead of being completely evaded like other unrevealed playable characters (e.g. Palutena). Also, your "example" isn't even applicable; "Wonderful 100" is a name-drop, and you know, Wonder Red's model is actually explicitly shown right there, unlike a certain contentious purple space dragon.

"Subjective nature of what is "jerky and sudden" aside, Ridley had rather erratic motions as a boss in Brawl; it's hardly out of place for that sort of behavior to return."

Have you even fought the bosses in Brawl? "Ridley had rather erratic motions as a boss in Brawl" is just laughable and clearly shows you have no idea what the fuck you're talking about (yet again, seriously Miles, why do you always insist butting yourself into things you clearly do not have proper experience in and making yourself look like an absolute idiot?).

""Highly" is subjective, and you have zero conclusive evidence that Ridley is playable or being "teased" as such."

You have just as much "conclusive evidence" that Ridley is definitely a boss with absolute no room for alternative interpretation (e.g. none, you got no actual confirmation, just vague statements that can mean a bunch of different things). And you're really going to say there's no possibility for teasing, when the whole Ridley situation is a perfect parallel of the Palutena situation before her reveal? Did you seriously not look at the pic of the day quotes I shown you?

"I understand the subject is a big deal to fans, but so what?"

You are an absolute terrible wiki admin, you know that? Big deal to fans = notable, i.e. something the wiki covers, not completely ignores. That's elementary, I shouldn't have to explain that to an admin.

"We have to report the facts"

Nope, what I stated was certainly not facts at all. Sakurai certainly name-drops Ridley, certainly shown us Ridley in his boss hazard glory, certainly told us "Rids def a boss, not playable", has not at all been unusually vague about what should supposedly just be a stage hazard, those parallels to Palutena's pre-reveal handling do not exist, and there are definitely not a large group of people discussing the whole situation. I just made all that shit up, huh?

Seriously, you go at me with "reporting the facts", when that is exactly what I did?

"a 99+% deconfirmed character."

Oh cool, you're a gullible idiot who takes everything at face value. Palutena just a statue guize, not playable at all! Oh wait... Phosphora is definitely just a trophy! Nothing more! Oh nevermind... Toon Link just a background character, he has been cut! Uhhhh.....

So yeah, not only has there already been documented cases in Smash 4 of Sakurai fucking around with character's statuses, the whole Ridley situation is the exact definition of "ambiguous", and it's one of the biggest points of discussion within the Smash community. Nevermind that what I wrote it completely factual, reporting on the facts of the matter. You want to think Ridley is most definitely a stage hazard and nothing more, with absolutely no chance of any alternative? Cool, stay off this page, and let the wiki do its job of reporting the facts in a balanced view point (i.e. explaining the whole ambiguous nature of Ridley's handling instead of just going "he's a boss, nothing more to see!"). Omega Tyrant 01:18, 19 June 2014 (EDT)

Does anyone remember that other enemy in Pyrosphere? Anthony used it to save himself from falling into lava, and it was a fightable alien in Other M. This should add some small support for Omega. --EpicWendigo (talk) 01:42, 19 June 2014 (EDT)

There are three bosses that could be on Pyrosphere; Vorash, Goyagma, and Rhedogian.

But anyway, my point isn't that "Rids def playable, Sakurai trolling you all", it's that there's a ton of ambiguity around Ridley's situation, where it can realistically go either way (we already got prior precedent of Sakurai doing something differently than implied), with it being highly discussed in the community, and thus it should be covered in full here instead of just foolishly going "Rids a boss, nothing more". Omega Tyrant 01:52, 19 June 2014 (EDT)

While I disagree with OT on a few points here (I don't think jittery shadows are notable in an obviously incomplete build of the game), and I agree more with Toomai than anyone on this matter (namely that OT's edit was justified, but somewhat wordy), Miles, you're being kind of ridiculous. Whether or not you agree with OT's assesement of Sakurai's intentions, he clearly never explicitly confirmed Ridley to be a stage hazard/boss, but rather hinted at in multiple vague manners. To suggest otherwise is silly, and to require concrete evidence to support mentioning the lack of concrete evidence is... rather confusing. In addition, OT pointing out the consistencies of Sakurai's methods is informative, not speculative, so it shouldn't be an issue. ♡FirstaLasto♥ 06:11, 19 June 2014 (EDT)

Since Miles asked for other people's opinions, I agree with Omega Tyrant that information should be added about how many people in the Smash community think Ridley will be a playable character, due to reasons originally written in the article. Awesome Cardinal 2000 16:08, 20 June 2014 (EDT)

Would a brief cross-link to a new section on the "List of rumors" page be an acceptable compromise? Miles (talk) 21:20, 20 June 2014 (EDT)

That is making things needlessly more convoluted, especially for something that is fully relevant here, is not just a "rumor" (get over yourself already, Ridley's status is not clearly definite as anything yet), and can be explained in less than 500 characters.

@Toomai: It's not saying I "won", the main opposer has been fully on and active on the wiki during that whole time, and has shown they're not going to respond back, which is essentially a concession of their stand (and if they're not willing to debate back, then they shouldn't be listened to), while no other user has commented in opposition. If there's a problem with the exact wording, then do some revision of it, don't revert the entire thing. Omega Tyrant 23:00, 20 June 2014 (EDT)

The possibility of Ridley being a playable character should certainly be covered. I have a lot of experience in the YouTube Smash speculation crowd, and I can tell you that the Ridley debate is probably the most talked-about and controversial topic at the moment, and it has been since the Smash Direct. Whether or not some of you think the evidence is crap, it's still widely believed by a lot of people, particularly the "but isn't that the Final Destination version of Pyrosphere?" line. The Gematsu leak is practically confirmed by this point, and we STILL strive to be neutral on it, so we should be doing the same thing with Ridley. Toast ltimatum 08:20, 21 June 2014 (EDT)

Inaccuracy

Seems his page is protected so I can't fix it even after finally making an account, but this has been bothering me for a while now: "In the Subspace Emissary, Ridley seemed to take heavy damage when struck by Pikachu's Thunder, but in early Metroid games, electric attacks did minor damage, only giving a little hitstun. This resistance was dropped in the Metroid Prime series, but it returned for Metroid: Other M. Ridley was "Meta Ridley" and "Omega Ridley" in the Prime series however." The Prime games are the only time in the series that Samus even HAS elemental attacks outside of the Ice Beam, and her only "electric" attack in Prime 3 can't even hurt Ridley, so not one bit of that makes sense. Can someone remove this claim? Dazuro (talk) 14:50, 14 September 2014 (EDT)

The Wave Beam exists in Metroid 1 and Super Metroid. Miles (talk) 14:52, 14 September 2014 (EDT)

They're non-elemental. All they do is pass through walls and have a bigger hitbox, and possibly slightly more damage. Elemental weaknesses and resistances were added for Prime. Dazuro (talk) 14:58, 14 September 2014 (EDT)

What he means is the Wave Beam is electrical only in Metroid Prime. In its 2D and Other M appearances it's just a beam that penetrates walls and objects. Samus doesn't get the electrical Wave Beam in Corruption, she gets the Grapple Voltage, which is not an offensive weapon. RoyboyX Talk 22:06, 15 September 2014 (EDT)

I've already removed the trivia point in question. Miles (talk) 22:08, 15 September 2014 (EDT)

Discuss

This page is messy, and I think that this page needs to be split. It feels kinda weird to see all this info about previous games, and this humongous bit of boss info in the middle. He's a stage hazard in Smash 4 too, so once we get more info, the page will be expanded even further.

So I think we should create a separate page for his longest section: His boss appearance in Brawl. I want to call it Ridley (boss) and put the {{redirect}} template to link to his stage boss appearance, which some people may be looking for. If you've got a better name, say it.

Opinions? Qwerty (talk) 22:57, 16 September 2014 (EDT)

I could get behind this split, but we may want to wait until we know what he's up to in SSB4-U for 100% sure. Toomai Glittershine The Aurum 00:18, 17 September 2014 (EDT)

Support His Brawl section could stand on its own. Also, with his role in Smash Wii U confirmed, judging by how much could be added when the game launches, that could split off too. Berrenta (talk) 10:05, 24 October 2014 (EDT)

Split - Two important appearances of Ridley in SSB. The boss page will take up less space. Especially since we now know what his role will be in SSB4U. RoyboyX Talk 15:56, 26 October 2014 (EDT)

This should be getting discussed. If you want my opinion, it's at the top of the section.

Never mind, I didn't see that the page got split. Qwerty (talk) 01:37, 2 November 2014 (EDT)

Brawl Mod

Somebody made a working playable Ridley for Super Smash Bros. Brawl. Should we bring this up on the main page? --Luigifan18 (talk) 10:41, 16 June 2015 (EDT)

Nope. Doesn't even come close to being relevant to this page. Miles (talk) 10:44, 16 June 2015 (EDT)

Agreed. Absolutely unnecessary. Aidan, Master of Speed and Aura 10:46, 16 June 2015 (EDT)

Should we...

...add these artworks to Ridley and Yellow Devil's pages? They're unused in game, but so are Master Core's and they're listed. There's also one for Metal Face, but it shows so little of his body I think it's unnecessary. ---Preceding unsigned comment added by you. Or maybe Nutta. 07:23, 22 July 2015 (EDT)

I don't see why not Serpent King (talk) 07:45, 22 July 2015 (EDT)

I agree with adding the latter, but part of Ridley's foot seems to be cropped off in the former, so I'm a bit hesitant to add it. Nyargleblargle (Talk) 09:31, 22 July 2015 (EDT)

I say add them. Wouldn't hurt. Aidan, Master of Speed and Aura 11:32, 22 July 2015 (EDT)

It just seems odd to have cropped artwork. I suppose it could work as a thumbnail or a gallery image, it just doesn't feel complete enough to have it in the infobox. Nyargleblargle (Talk) 11:46, 22 July 2015 (EDT)

Gallery image mentioning its unused status is the right choice IMO, and similarly for the other stage bosses. Miles (talk) 12:32, 22 July 2015 (EDT)

Meta Ridley

Should Meta Ridley be included in Ridley's infobox?

1. They are the same character
2. Mario, Pikachu, and Yoshi have their alts in their character pages as well. (They only do as their alts have Spirits of them)

Although, "Pikachu Libre" is technically a different character, that is apparently fine due to #2. The Meta Ridley page covers the said version's appearance as a boss, much like Giga Bowser's. Should Meta Ridley be included in Ridley's infobox, or should some of the pages of the other characters be altered? Wolff (talk) 18:11, July 5, 2019 (EDT)

Did you read the edit summary in response to you? Not only does Meta Ridley have his own page, but Alph's artwork is on his page, and the Koopalings have their individual artworks on their singular page as well. There's no reason to mention Meta Ridley here when he's already covered elsewhere. Aidan, the Rurouni 18:14, July 5, 2019 (EDT)

Then why does Mario, Pikachu, and Yoshi have their alts in their character pages? I only added Meta Ridley because of that. Does this mean we can remove the alts from their pages as well, or is only Meta Ridley a acceptable due to being a boss? (To be honest, I'd rather have them removed) Wolff (talk) 18:20, July 5, 2019 (EDT)

In other words, can we remove the alts from the other characters' character pages? Wolff (talk) 18:22, July 5, 2019 (EDT)

This isn't even a reasonable argument to make. Alph, the Koopalings, and Meta Ridley are alternate characters that have individual pages covering their separate selves from the main characters they're alts for - in the case of Meta Ridley, his page also covers the differences between him as a boss and Ridley as a boss, since they were bosses before becoming playable. The alts for Mario, Pikachu, and Yoshi are cosmetic changes that keep the character the same (Pikachu Libre also isn't a separate character, Pokkén just made it one, and that's not even a mainline Pokémon game). While, yes, Ridley's name doesn't change to "Meta Ridley", only because, for all intents and purposes, Meta Ridley is Ridley reborn, he's still a separate being from Ridley. Aidan, the Rurouni 18:27, July 5, 2019 (EDT)

(I was writing this while the above edits occurred):

Some points to consider in opposition:

1. Builder Mario, Wedding Mario, Pikachu Libre, Spiky-eared Pichu, and Crafted Yoshi do not have separate articles, which is why they are included in their respective infoboxes.
2. Alph and Koopalings have separate articles from Captain Olimar and Bowser Jr. and therefore are not included in their infoboxes.
3. Young Link and Link (in 64 and Melee), Sheik and Zelda (in Melee), Ganondorf and Ganon, Samus Aran and Zero Suit Samus, etc. show that there are other examples of multiple separate articles existing for a single character, and the different versions of said character do not need to be covered on a single page. The opposite is also true: multiple characters (or incarnations of a character) are covered by the pages for Hero, Pikachu, Pichu, Link, and Zelda.

This shows that "being the same character" does not necessarily equate to requiring the shared use of an infobox.

Therefore, while Ridley and Meta Ridley are indeed the same character, they currently have separate articles (just like Alph and Koopalings), so there is no need to cover Meta Ridley in Ridley's infobox even though Meta Ridley is an alternate costume for Ridley. --PeabodySam (talk) 18:30, July 5, 2019 (EDT)

I would assume Meta Ridley was not under the same instance as the Zelda characters or Dr. Mario, Zero Suit Samus, and Giga Bowser due to not being a separate playable character, but I guess I can see them like Alph and Koopalings despite no name change. I never mentioned "Spiky-eared Pichu" because it is not on Pichu's character page. I understand having Builder Mario, Wedding Mario, Pikachu Libre, Crafted Yoshi, and even Meta Ridley on the Ultimate Fighter pages, I never found that it made sense to also have them on the Character pages. Mentioned, yes, but not included in the info boxes. Wolff (talk) 18:51, July 5, 2019 (EDT)

Spiky-eared Pichu does not have a tab because she doesn’t have a spirit. Pikachu Libre, Crafted Yoshi, and the Mario costumes do have spirits. When my and Cookies and Creme’s tabber proposal passed, I based which ones were added to the tabs based on whether they had spirits, whether they had different poses for their character artwork, whether they took up half of a character’s costumes, or whether their design changed between games. If you’re suggesting removing them from fighter pages, that’s not a good idea in my opinion, because they have spirits that make them “major”. If you’re suggesting removing them from the character pages because those are actual costumes and are only one costume, then that’s for others to decide. Lou Cena (talk) 19:00, July 5, 2019 (EDT)

What I said before is that I don't see how it makes sense to have them on the Character pages. Mentioned, yes, but not included in the info boxes. Wolff (talk) 19:13, July 5, 2019 (EDT)

If the tabber is supposed to show the different appearances of the character (ones that appear as costumes for the same character), then it's perfectly legitimate to include them in the infobox. I fail to see what the problem is. Aidan, the Rurouni 19:44, July 5, 2019 (EDT)

I think Wolff’s problem is that Pikachu Libre is in the infobox, but not Spiky-eared Pichu. The thing is, Spiky-eared Pichu isn’t in the infobox for the fighter page because the only Pichu spirit is the regular one. But that’s one tiny setback when it works so well with everything else (fighter pages having the costumes that take up half of the set, costumes that change characters, costumes that change poses, different designs across the series for character pages, its use for stages and some moves, etc.) Lou Cena (talk) 19:50, July 5, 2019 (EDT)

As I said before, I did not mention Spiky-eared Pichu because there was no problem with her. "If the tabber is supposed to show the different appearances of the character (ones that appear as costumes for the same character), then it's perfectly legitimate to include them in the infobox", and if that is the case, I wouldn't think there would be a problem of including Meta Ridley on Ridley's character page under the same logic, despite having its own page. Wolff (talk) 20:08, July 5, 2019 (EDT)

I fail to see your logic of "include pictures of a character we already have a page with the same images on on a page for another character altogether". Aidan, the Rurouni 21:02, July 5, 2019 (EDT)

It sounds like to me that Wolff is referring fact that Meta Ridley appears as one of Ridley’s alternative costumes in Ultimate and that it doesn’t use a separate name, implying that it’s the same character. Which appears to be why the other characters have theirs. I could be wrong though. 47.199.39.81 21:09, July 5, 2019 (EDT)

Aidan, you said that if the appearance of said character was used as an alt, they can be added into said character's info box on their character page. Meta Ridey is still Ridley. Yes, Sheik and Tetra are still Zelda, but Sheik is a separate playable character (same goes for the Links) while Tetra is a Smash Tour Item, and both are not alternate costumes. Meta Ridley, though a boss in Brawl, is also an alternate costume in Ultimate. With you, Aidan, having said; "If the tabber is supposed to show the different appearances of the character (ones that appear as costumes for the same character), then it's perfectly legitimate to include them in the infobox", I fail to see how being a boss (even when having its own page) exempts Meta Ridley from being in the info box on Ridley's character page. (Transformations don't count due to Pokemon Trainer) Meta Ridley still falls under the same idea/rule as Builder Mario, Wedding Mario, Pikachu Libre, and Crafted World Yoshi when looking at their Fighter Spirits. And Lou Cena, please stop mentioning Spiky-eared Pichu. I never included her in my statements related to this topic because I already knew that she didn't/doesn't have a Spirit and therefor didn't relate to this topic, unlike the other alts. I just would like to know how Ridley can't be like the others when the original base for it is that they count as Fighter Spirits of the same character. (Dr. Mario, Young Link, and Toon Link's are diffrent as they are separate playable characters, and Alph and the Koopalings are different as the game specifies as such) (Spiky-eared Pichu doesn't have a Spirit, I already knew that she doesn't count to this topic which I why I wasn't the one to bring her up, PeabodySam did) Wolff (talk) 00:05, July 6, 2019 (EDT)

You contradict yourself. (Though I'll be the first to admit that I do as well, which is why I'm about to explain things.) Zero Suit Samus is a separate playable character, so she has a separate page covering her. However, she is still Samus Aran, which means ZSS gets a mention on Samus's page, while not being present in the infobox. The Links, while not technically being the same character, are still multiple incarnations of the same individual (the Hero of Time, the Hero of Twilight, the Hero of the Wild, the Hero of Winds, and the Hero of...Time). As the same "Link" character has been in the Smash series since the beginning, he has one page covering himself, and his multiple incarnations (within the same character - as in, specifically (older) Time, Twilight, and Wild); the other, separate Links (Winds and (younger) Time) get their own pages, as they are separate characters from them.
In regards to merely alternate costumes, characters who specifically are individualized from the character they are an alternate costume for - namely, Alph and the Koopalings - get their own coverage, and their own individual pages (or, in the case of the Koopalings, a page covering them as a group, since, like the Hero, it's more of a one and done kind of deal). Ridley is a bit of an odd case, I'll admit - his alternate costume is specifically Meta Ridley, but the announcer doesn't change to "Meta Ridley". However, Meta Ridley still has an individual page from Ridley, because of his differences as a boss and character than Ridley. We already have had multiple cases, as PeabodySam said, of characters being the same individual, but having multiple pages. Meta Ridley, due to his individualized nature (in both Smash and the Metroid series), has an individual page from Ridley himself. Therefore, and this was my point all along, it would be majorly redundant for us to include a character in an infobox for a page when we already have a perfectly usable page to cover the character. There is absolutely no reason to put something as major as that here when it's already elsewhere. Aidan, the Rurouni 02:03, July 6, 2019 (EDT)

It's probably already been said, but the reason Ridley, Olimar, and Bowser Jr. don't have their alts on their pages is because Meta Ridley, Alph, and the Koopalings have perfectly usable pages to put the artwork on, whereas all the others don't. Awesomelink234, the Super Cool Gamer Leave a message if needed 11:05, July 6, 2019 (EDT)

It just seemed inconsistent to not included Meta Ridley's art. Especially since there's nothing preventing it from being able to do so. Ridley and Meta Ridley have never been in the same place at the same time in Smash and been implied to be the same, but I guess it's fine. Giga Bowser is still Boswer and we aren't including them together after all. Sorry for the inconvenience, it just looked inconsistent before. Wolff (talk) 18:45, July 6, 2019 (EDT)

Blank bullet points in Trivia.

[2]

I'm seeing a couple blank *s in trivia, and I can't figure out what's causing them. Can someone please help me fix this? ¿¡Unowninator?! (talk) 14:45, October 24, 2019 (EDT)

Infobox Species

Hey, I noticed there was a little bit of debate about this in the edit summaries, and my name was even brought up! So I figured I'd try to shed a little light on this.

The question being: should Ridley's species be listed as "Space Pirate" in the infobox?

To answer that question, we must first answer two other questions: "is Space Pirate a species?" and "if so, is Ridley a member of that species?"

The answer to that first question is... honestly, rather hazy. It has been suggested that the bulk of the Space Pirates' ranks are comprised of a single alien species. This is most heavily supported by the first Metroid Prime game, in which concept artist Andrew Jones deliberately designed the different Space Pirates (Flying, Trooper, Elite, Shadow, etc.) to conceivably belong to one single race despite having variability in appearance. And indeed, within any one Metroid game, the generic Space Pirates look similar enough to one another that they could believably be a single species. The problem is when we start looking at the Metroid series as a whole, because that's when the Space Pirates start looking very different from one another - crustaceans in Super and Zero Mission, reptiles in Prime, insectoids in Echoes and Federation Force, avians in Fusion and Other M, etc. - to the point where it's easier to swallow that the Space Pirates are a faction comprised of multiple species rather than just one species. Adding weight to this "faction of multiple species" interpretation is the Kihunters, which are explicitly referred to as Space Pirates in the Super Metroid manual despite being clearly depicted as a separate species from the Zebesian Space Pirates. There is some evidence in canon that Space Pirates willingly undergo genetic and biomechanical augmentations, which could explain the significant discrepancies in appearance... but again, it seems easier to accept this as an "intra-game" explanation rather than an "inter-game" explanation.

But, on top of that, even if we were to say that all "generic" Space Pirates were the same species, it's probably too big of a stretch to say Ridley is also a member of that species. The biggest piece of evidence for this is Other M, which showcases a natural lifecycle that is unique to Ridley, which goes even beyond the differences in morphology and appearance with other Space Pirates. With the scientists aboard the BOTTLE SHIP having also cloned the Zebesian Space Pirates and Kihunters (the latter with their own specific lifecycle), one would think that they would have been able to determine that "Little Birdie" is genetically an infant member of the same species instead of mistakenly assuming it to be a harmless furby.

For whatever it's worth, Wikitroid (which, while probably less "professional" than its NIWA counterpart Metroid Wiki, is considerably more comprehensive and up-to-date with its information and content) unofficially uses the term "Space Dragon" (which does have a little bit of official basis in the Super Smash Bros. series) to refer to Ridley's species, specifically its expanded role in non-canonical media such as Racklas in Captain N or Greed in Samus & Joey. Captain N has Mother Brain noting that Ridley and Racklas's "entire race looks alike", which obviously would conflict with them being part of an incredibly diverse species of Space Pirates (though, keeping in mind that this non-canon comic predates even the Zebesians and Kihunters in the games, Space Pirates at the time were either depicted as a wide variety of sapient Zebes species or as shadowy humanoid figures that didn't resemble Ridley at all). Samus & Joey has Greed claiming his race "reigned as leaders of the Space Pirates", which would indicate that the "Space Dragons" are a separate race from the Space Pirates themselves. Again, this is likely non-canonical, but it does show that official Metroid media typically doesn't regard Ridley as the same species as other Space Pirates.

TL;DR version: No, I don't think we should list "Space Pirate" as Ridley's species in the infobox. --PeabodySam (talk) 12:54, December 13, 2020 (EST)

Death Trivia

I previously removed it on the basis of inter-generational series (such as Zelda, Fire Emblem, and Castlevania) having characters who are canonically deceased in chronologically later entries. Although it's been restored with a note barring "time skips", I'm still not entirely sure Ridley and Dark Samus are the only two "canonically killed on-screen" characters.

• This one is a little wishy-washy, but if someone is playing Ocarina of Time and Link (the Hero of Time, the 64/Melee Link) dies in the battle against Ganon, I guess that's technically a "canonical" on-screen depiction of a character's death?
• Bowser dies in New Super Mario Bros., becoming the undead Dry Bowser and then being magically resurrected by Bowser Jr.
• Ganondorf is commonly accepted as dying in The Wind Waker and Twilight Princess (with the latter being the Brawl/SSB4 Ganondorf). Any later appearances are reincarnations.
• All of the Lumas sacrifice themselves in Super Mario Galaxy.
• By virtue of being generic "mob" enemies, the Piranha Plant, Zombie, and Enderman can be killed in their respective games. Similarly, the Duck Hunt duck gets shot by a hunter (i.e. the player) as the goal of the game.

I feel like having to include these or justify them as exceptions would end up making this trivia point too complicated to be notable. --PeabodySam (talk) 19:18, January 20, 2021 (EST)