Mother 3 has been listed as one of the Video games good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.

Mother 3 is part of the Mother series series, a good topic. This is identified as among the best series of articles produced by the Wikipedia community. If you can update or improve it, please do so.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
March 10, 2009	Peer review	Reviewed
August 20, 2009	Good article nominee	Not listed
October 11, 2014	Good article nominee	Listed
January 29, 2015	Good topic candidate	Promoted
April 19, 2021	Featured article candidate	Not promoted
September 13, 2022	Good article reassessment	Kept
A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on October 16, 2014. The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that Mother 3 was in development for over a decade and then translated from Japanese into English by its fans?
Current status: Good article

Video games: Nintendo Mid‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Video games, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of video games on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Video gamesWikipedia:WikiProject Video gamesTemplate:WikiProject Video gamesvideo game articles

Mid

This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

This article is supported by the Nintendo task force.

Summary of Video games WikiProject open tasks:

Summary of Video games WikiProject open tasks

AfDs

Vector Unit (2 participants)
Anton Rayne (9 participants)
Id Tech 2 (disambiguation) (4 participants)
Jeffrey Ventrella (4 participants)
Darkworks (2 participants)
Ayeah Games (2 participants)
Keemokazi (1 participant)
Batboat (14 participants; relisted)

Merge discussions

Other discussions

No major discussions

GA Reassessment[edit]

Mother 3

The following discussion 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.

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch article reassessment page • Most recent review

Result: keep. lettherebedarklight, 晚安, おやすみ, ping me when replying 10:45, 13 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This article gained GA status eight years ago. Since then, the page has changed quite a bit, including the plot section getting completely mangled, which meant I had to replaced it with a clunkily-written plot summary of my own (I am not the best at using words). In addition, there are claims on the talk page that the Development section is now severely outdated now that more sources have been found and translated into English. I'm not entirely sure whether or not it meets the criteria to be delisted from being a good article, but I feel it deserves being looked at again. --Eldomtom2 (talk) 17:45, 4 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I'm inclined to vote Keep as GA. About the Development section, well, the section is a summary of Development of Mother 3, so people interested in seeing more details about the development can read that specific article. A GA needs to "[address] the main aspects of the topic", and this article does, in my understanding. The Plot may not be perfect, but I don't think the GA status should be removed only because of that Skyshifter ^talk 23:07, 4 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

What exactly is the issue regarding the GA criteria? If the plot is a mess, feel free to revert back to what it was during the GA nom. Plot sections are a magnet for cruft across all video game articles (and the linked version was fully sourced!) Any "outdated" claims re: development are a matter for the talk page, not a GA reassessment. czar 19:49, 5 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - I prefer to see the Plot section as referenced as much as feasible, even if using the primary game as the source (i.e. via quotes; game guides can also suffice). The "Legacy" section could be cleaned up prose-wise, and some of the references need to be fixed, namely most of the Nintendo Dream references. I'm not 100% the issues are enough to delist as a GA, but my standards are a little higher than many GA reviewers. --MuZemike 03:13, 20 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I'm leaning towards keeping this as GA as well. The plot section has gotten a little messy, but not anything to demote. Agree that we can always just revert back to the plot version that was promoted, and there is another GA to pull from to improve this further (from Development of Mother 3). Shooterwalker (talk) 16:40, 27 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.

Source issue[edit]

Hi, I noticed that Brownie Brown being the developer overseen by Itoi is not covered by the attached citation. I was gonna find an alternate source, but I couldn't find a source that specifically framed it like this. Is there maybe a source misplaced? - Cukie Gherkin (talk) 22:33, 18 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

"Darker" plot elements in the Nintendo 64 version[edit]

I've edited the "Design" section some time ago to replace "Itoi's Nintendo 64 version of the ending was darker" by "Itoi's Nintendo 64 version of the scenario was darker", based on this excerpt from the (translated) source:

- Before we get into the last battle, let's touch on the scenario... During the N64 version, it's been said that you had written the scenario while you were overseas. 
Itoi: I went to Saipan and wrote it. I was really happy when I finished it.
- How is that compared to the scenario of the Gameboy Advance version?
Itoi: The summary has not changed. But, it has become a lot lighter. The scenario in the N64 version was much, much darker. Compared to how things are now, I think when I wrote the script 10 years ago, as far as dark aspects and sad aspects, I wasn't presented with as many confrontations. I didn't have many options to choose for the game back then, either. And so, I thought I would dig in the direction that would upset people. So the scenario in the N64 version was dirtier than this one.

However, the article has since been edited again under the reasoning that "In the cited interview, Itoi is talking about the final battle, not Hinawa's death scene". Perhaps the original Japanese source conveys a different meaning than the translation I'm basing my judgment upon, but I feel that Itoi is actually talking about the whole storyline of the N64 version of the game, and not a specific plot point (which he goes into later in the quoted interview). What do you think? Hell Pé (talk) 13:39, 27 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]