Talk:Burgeoning Spiderwort mold

It's called a growth in the booklet.--

File:Images.ijpg

the master --MewFan128 01:48, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

I think that's just a term, not really a name for it. I don't think there is any name, so just call it by how it looks - like a mold. Anyway, it would be annoying to change every instance of 'mold' on the wiki, and 'mold' is probably more obvious to people than 'growth'. GP

Doh.--File:Images.ijpg the master --MewFan128 13:05, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

Can Pikmin Die in mold(or mud) ?

Um...no. It just stops Burgeoning Spiderworts from growing; Pikmin can attack it. GP

Move to "Mold-like growth"

First, note that there's a move button on articles. Second, what makes this any less of an 'official' title than what it was previously? There is no official name, and this seems like a weird thing for the title of a page. I think just 'mold' would be best, but the extra description in 'Burgeoning Spiderwort mold' is nice. GP

Agreed. This is the very reason the Conjectural Title template exists. I would personally vote for just "Mold," but I could swing either way depending on what everyone else thinks. —Jimbo Jambo 21:09, June 8, 2010 (UTC)

Whatever these things are, they closely resemble puffballs, types of fungi. I think that name is more suiting for the article. Or, if Burgeoning Spiderwort mold is the official name (I recall Olimar calling it that), why don't we use that?? BNK ^[E|T|C] 00:32, June 9, 2010 (UTC)

I agree, mold-like growths sounds a little too iffy. We could move this to Burgeoning Spiderwort mold, and make the article "Mold" redirect there.--FREAK ~Game Freak~OUT!

I don't understand why the move to a singular title was necessary when we're changing the name anyway.... I'm just going to change it back to what it was before. No, it is not actually an official name, and Olimar never says anything about it, but there was no reason to change it in the first place, so unless someone else also wants to change it to "Mold," the consensus seems to be just to revert it. —Jimbo Jambo 22:36, June 9, 2010 (UTC)

That's what the ship calls it in the game, and that's also what its called in the game guide, and even if that's not an official name, I think its a little better than the current title. We don't even have proof that it is even a mold. Vol (Talk)

Yes, but it's pretty clear they only say that because they don't know what they are, and are just describing them. Our article titles aren't meant to be descriptions of their subject, but clear as to what exactly they appear to be in-game. They need to reflect what people are likely to call them if they don't have an official name, to reduce confusion. GP

That isn't very logical, to be perfectly honest... BNK ^[E|T|C] 02:39, June 13, 2010 (UTC)

Naming articles based on names people actually use isn't logical? Don't disagree for the sake of disagreeing, state your reasoning. —Jimbo Jambo 05:59, June 13, 2010 (UTC)

It actually makes a lot more sense to call an item or thing [that is otherwise unnamed officially] by the name given to the item or thing in-game. In all cases, this is greater than names given by the community of an encyclopedia. We should only resort to naming something based off of consensus when there is no actual record of the name being said anywhere, be it in the game, or in the strategy guide. BNK ^[E|T|C] 07:27, June 13, 2010 (UTC)