Talk: Purple liquid

This is the talk page for Purple liquid. Here, you may discuss improving the article.
Please sign and date your posts by typing four tildes (`~~~~`). Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.	Be polite Assume good faith Do not insult other people

Prima guide doesn't name this. ChozoBoy _[ADMIN] (Talk/Contribs) 17:22, June 20, 2010 (UTC)

Rename[]

I think our only solution is to give the page the name "Dangerous Liquid" as that is the only name that it has been given. --Royboy X_{ADMIN} 00:50, June 29, 2010 (UTC)

Umm, that is more like a description than a name. Metroid101 01:01, June 29, 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, I figured someone would say that. But we gave ULF 21 the name Vermin because AU 242 called it that in her announcement. --Royboy X_{ADMIN} 01:06, June 29, 2010 (UTC)

SRX lava[]

Didn't the PERFECT replica of SR388's environment, SRX (Sector 1), had two rooms which contained lava? I think that's the true identity of the dangerous liquid found on SR388 at the very least (any mention of SR388 should be removed from this article). As for the green liquid found on Zero Mission and Fusion, thats the main deal of this article. (Latinlingo 01:32, June 29, 2010 (UTC))

Yeah but we need proof from Nintendo that the substance in M2 is Lava (the lava in SRX only suggests it is lava). The page's content is based entirely on theories as to the purpose of the substance, hypothesized by Armantula513 on Talk:SR388. --Royboy X_{ADMIN} 01:45, June 29, 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, you know what, the stuff on SR has to be lava, due to its presence in Sector 1. --Royboy X_{ADMIN} 20:07, August 14, 2010 (UTC)

I have now decided that the presence of lava in Sector 1 confirms the identity of the substance on SR388. Thus, this page shall now focus on the substance in the other part of Sector 1 as well as in Tourian, and the US 4 article shall be deleted. --Royboy X_{ADMIN} 19:21, August 15, 2010 (UTC)

Christ, I can't do anything without being given 5 minutes to revert it. Sorry everyone. --Royboy X_{ADMIN} 19:49, August 15, 2010 (UTC)

Is the US 4 page actually there? Because the link is red on the template on this page, but on others it works fine and leads right to it..... confusing.--AdmiralSakai 20:57, August 15, 2010 (UTC)

Yeah i noticed that too. I think a simple edit on the template should fix that. Not sure though.(Latinlingo 21:06, August 15, 2010 (UTC))

Anyway, if the SR388 liquid part is taken out then maybe we can change this to focus on the liquid that US 4 talks about, and the US 4 page can just be deleted. --Royboy X_{ADMIN} 21:38, August 15, 2010 (UTC)

I'd agree with that, but i think that'd be opposed by a few people. From what i can tell, some really like the idea of this substance being made from Metroid residue or whatnot. To not cause problems, we should make this page talk only about the SR388 substance, but have US 4 talk about the liquid found in both the MZM Tourian and the Tourian-like area in the BSL Station. However, i'd still prefer RoyboyX's idea.(Latinlingo 21:49, August 15, 2010 (UTC))

So who agrees that the dangerous liquid really is lava? Sector 1 pretty much states it. --Royboy X_{ADMIN} 21:54, August 15, 2010 (UTC)

Lava is the most likely candidate. But I would not say anything with certainty.--AdmiralSakai 21:58, August 15, 2010 (UTC)

I guess you should change it now and later on, people who oppose this might start posting in the talk page and we'll be able to discuss with them. (Latinlingo 22:01, August 15, 2010 (UTC))

I did the above earlier but Piratehunter threatened to revoke my admin rights if I didn't revert it, because he didn't like the idea. I'm not saying we'll write that the substance is in fact lava, we'll bring up that Sector 1 implies it as lava. --Royboy X_{ADMIN} 22:03, August 15, 2010 (UTC)

From what i can tell, the evidence that supports the Metroid excrement thing is the fact that this substance is always found near Metroids. If the SR388 substance is the same green one found in Fusion and MZM, than that further supports the excrement idea cause the restricted Lab (containing metroids) was near sector 1's Tourian-like area, and Tourian from MZM also had Metroids. So what we could do, is have US 1 talk only about SR388's substance, and make a SMALL mention that this substance may be related to the one seen in the other 2 games because of the presence of Metroids near them. US 4 should only talk about the Tourian and Tourian-like's green liquid. It honestly doesnt make sense that US 1 talks alot about US 4. Im gonna try to make the change right now in a manner that pleases everyone, and i'll see if someone still opposes this.(Latinlingo 22:31, August 15, 2010 (UTC))

Nobody opposes taking out the waste thing. I'm still with the idea of merging it with lava. --Royboy X_{ADMIN} 22:42, August 15, 2010 (UTC)

The way I did the two articles basically just split the section that dealt with Tourain goo and the section that dealt with dangerous liquid into the new articles. Then I started seeing different content on the articles depending on how I got to them, and now I don't know what the status quo is.--AdmiralSakai 22:47, August 15, 2010 (UTC)

Just take the Tourian stuff off US 1 again. It's quite obviously not SR388's liquid. Besides, I would redirect the latter to lava, but I might just end up being revoked. --Royboy X_{ADMIN} 22:53, August 15, 2010 (UTC)

My $.02, for whoever cares/so that it isn't just the same 2-3 people talking over and over again: The SRX/SR388 substance is definitely the same. There's no lava in any other part of BSL that isn't meant to reflect a volcanic/fiery atmosphere, as far as I know. The substance would have absolutely no place there if it wasn't on SR388, whereas the green substance is found in multiple places. So the orange liquid would either be US1 or lava, whereas the green liquid would be US4, with no crossover between them. Dazuro 22:58, August 15, 2010 (UTC)

SRX doesn't only contain things from SR388. It also contains a couple of Scisers from Zebes. And this isn't even in the lower level. The MarioGalaxy2433g5 {talk/contribs/Logs} 00:02, August 16, 2010 (UTC)

We already know that the X tend to transplant species into the wrong environments. Hence tropical desgeegas and fire-dwelling sidehoppers. The X would have a tougher time moving pools of lava. Dazuro 00:05, August 16, 2010 (UTC)

Yeah. I could have sworn something said it was lava. Instruction manual? The MarioGalaxy2433g5 {talk/contribs/Logs} 00:10, August 16, 2010 (UTC)

Actually Dazuro, MarioGalaxy2433g5 is right about the scisers thing. There are uninfected Scisers in some locations of SRX. However, there's always the possibility that some uninfected creatures started venturing around in different areas after all the destruction and breaches caused by the X parasites. And also, doesnt this article mention that the super game boy something guide refered to the dangerous liquid as lava? (Latinlingo 00:13, August 16, 2010 (UTC))

Yeah, the breaches could have allowed for that. Either way I think a mobile species is a much less compelling piece of evidence than a pool of liquid. Dazuro 00:20, August 16, 2010 (UTC)

Besides, I never thought those things are uninfected Scisers- they look completely different to me....--AdmiralSakai 00:23, August 16, 2010 (UTC)

This is about a liquid, not a crustaceon! --Royboy X_{ADMIN} 00:28, August 16, 2010 (UTC)

But if you'd actually read the discussion, it's quite relevant. If SRX has influence from other areas, such as those Scizors, we can't trust that the lava is necessarily SR388 native. If the scisors got here by X means or simply because of hull breaches, however, then SRX's replica integrity is intact. Dazuro 00:34, August 16, 2010 (UTC)

Bad news: I looked at the Sector 1 map, and the room with the lava in it also contains a passage leading directly into Sector 3, which has lava galore. So unfortunately it is not as easy to determine that the lava is SR388-native as I had hoped..--00:39, August 16, 2010 (UTC)AdmiralSakai

That passageway leads to the desert part. Lava is actually much further down from that point. The Exterminator _{ADMIN} (talk • e-mail • contribs • count • logs) 14:13, August 16, 2010 (UTC)

So? I still think it is. It isn't as easy, but there shouldn't be any doubt. --Royboy X_{ADMIN} 00:41, August 16, 2010 (UTC)

There is always doubt... Nothing is true, everything is permitted. :| Piratehunter_{ADMIN} (Talk•Contribs•Logs) - Wanna see something really scary? ^{(New Forums!)} 01:06, August 16, 2010 (UTC)

[1] I think this screenshot allays most if not all doubt. Furthermore, does US4 ever appear in the rocky/cavernous areas of SRX? I thought it was only found in the mechanical Tourian-esque areas. Dazuro 01:41, August 16, 2010 (UTC)

Yes that's all well and good. But you see my point is that, what you're all doing, looking for traces that it looks like lava, and that logic suggests that it is lava, no matter how extremely proving it is, it's nothing more than an implication. the only thing that is going to get this article renamed to, or merged with lava, is something mentioning the liquid on SR388 as being lava. Not the liquid in SRX. You need something that actually names it as something: Lava-like substance, acidic substance, acid, lava, magma-like substance, whatever. You have to understand that no matter how much digging you do to find proof, it's till an implication, unlessit is literally named. And you cant name articles based on implications. That's why we have the Unknown Name system. --Piratehunter_{ADMIN} (Talk•Contribs•Logs) - Wanna see something really scary? ^{(New Forums!)} 02:36, August 16, 2010 (UTC)

Look, if the green substance only appears in the Tourian areas, then there is only one damaging liquid found on SR388 and only one damaging liquid found in SRX, which is a perfect recreation of SR388. Whether it gets merged with lava or stays as a US1, it has nothing to do with US4, which seems to be one of the main arguments here. Dazuro 02:39, August 16, 2010 (UTC)

Well, whatever. My main beef is US 1. Carry on then :P Piratehunter_{ADMIN} (Talk•Contribs•Logs) - Wanna see something really scary? ^{(New Forums!)} 03:44, August 16, 2010 (UTC)

Here's the real question, I'd say. Why does its level lower when the Metroids are killed? How does that make any sense? Killing organisms triggers an earthquake that causes vast pools of liquid to vanish into thin air. What the hell? >_> Has there ever been any sort of explanation for this? Dazuro 03:51, August 16, 2010 (UTC)

That's the developer's doing. They're just making sure that you don't leave an area without killing all the Metroids. The Exterminator _{ADMIN} (talk • e-mail • contribs • count • logs) 14:13, August 16, 2010 (UTC)

So, can I do something with this or no? --Royboy X_{ADMIN} 01:00, August 21, 2010 (UTC)

I really can't say, since I have no idea what you intend to do.--AdmiralSakai 01:04, August 21, 2010 (UTC)

Redirect it to lava due to Sector 1. --Royboy X_{ADMIN}

There's a problem with that RoyboyX. The super game boy player's guide mentions the existence of both acid and lava on planet SR388....meaning US1 could easily be one of those two. Also, the harmless liquid seen in a few areas is water, just thought you should know. (Latinlingo 05:00, August 21, 2010 (UTC))

I think that they were referring to the liquid in this picture, which I believe to be acid. It is harmless, though. And I know the harmless stuff is water (had trouble getting out of the pool in Phase 9). Oh, and you don't have to refer to me by my full name all the time. Call me RBX. :P --Royboy X_{ADMIN} 17:51, August 21, 2010 (UTC)

I'll look into every official nintendo source and clear up this mysterious liquid. (Latinlingo 18:02, August 21, 2010 (UTC))

Okay people, i have potential confirmation with the following sentence from the Super Game Boy Player's Guide (1994, Nintendo): As soon as Samus destroys the parasite (first Alpha Metroid), the nearby hole begins to shake, and the deadly liquid seeps into lower areas. Her mission -- seeking and destroying the remaining parasites -- now begins. The dangerous acid leaks into the underground caverns as Samus moves on to the inner depths of SR388.

I should have read this carefully long ago, the answer has been there all this time... So, does this clear up the mystery of US 1? (Latinlingo 06:02, August 22, 2010 (UTC))

Probably, but I don't know if the SGB guide is really all that canon. I'm still leaning towards lava. --Royboy X_{ADMIN} 11:32, August 22, 2010 (UTC)

If it's the official guide published by Nintendo, then I think the prevailing opinion is that it is canon.--AdmiralSakai 13:33, August 22, 2010 (UTC)

Maybe. So, acid or lava? --Royboy X_{ADMIN} 13:36, August 22, 2010 (UTC)

Acid. The Exterminator _{ADMIN} (talk • e-mail • contribs • count • logs) 13:39, August 22, 2010 (UTC)

So, shall we merge it? --Royboy X_{ADMIN} 13:45, August 22, 2010 (UTC)

Acid. By all means.--AdmiralSakai 13:46, August 22, 2010 (UTC)

Okay then. But I am still leaning towards lava. Metroid has been retconned quite often, you know. --Royboy X_{ADMIN} 13:48, August 22, 2010 (UTC)

If only Nintendo would hurry up and make a remake. When that day comes, it will hopefully confirm the substance as lava. I also would rather have the US 1 to be lava, but right now, there is no choice but to merge it with acid. (Latinlingo 17:00, August 22, 2010 (UTC))

Not necessarily the only option... we could always create another page and title it Acid (SR388), then rename the original acid to Acid (Zebes), if you think the two substances are dissimilar enough.--AdmiralSakai 17:08, August 22, 2010 (UTC)

lol nope. --Royboy X_{ADMIN} 17:09, August 22, 2010 (UTC)

I'd just like to point out that the commercial shows "US1"-dwelling creatures emerging from a blue liquid, and the "US1" liquid turns blue when put in the SGB. Seems to me this IS meant to be a blue liquid, acid or otherwise. Which does indicate to me that it should probably not be merged but rather made as a second article, or at least a subsection showing that the substance is quite different. But hey, he gave us the brilliant and well-explained "lol nope," so clearly we can't debate that. Infallible logic. Dazuro 18:23, August 22, 2010 (UTC)

"Knowing the dates" Look, it'd either be lava (I think it is, because it DRAINS from the location.) or US 4. Either way, the Varia Suit gets damaged from it. In several places there is a liquid I think is acid that doesn't hurt the Power Suit, because it's so thick. US 4 is a liquid that is in an area where normal Metroids run amok. Just sayin'. 24.94.89.214 06:19, December 15, 2011 (UTC)

Name was changed?[]

PirateHunter, may I ask why you renamed the article to US 1? We had found a guide that officially named this as Acid. (Latinlingo 23:34, November 3, 2010 (UTC))

That's the thing: it's a guide. Those never seem to get the names for these things right. You've noticed how often they change their mind, haven't you? And we know they are liscensed by Nintendo, but that's just for distribution. They were never meant to be used as a source for names, just for how to get through the game. The Exterminator _{ADMIN} (talk • e-mail • contribs • count • logs) 23:48, November 3, 2010 (UTC)

I see what you mean. But I still can't help but say that its the only source we have. There are numerous articles in the wikia in which names are taken from sources such as soundtrack covers, or even inside the game's engine because of a lack of any other source. And Nintendo player's guide has long served as a good source for such things, despite being wrong here and there. If i'm not mistaken, most of the enemies encountered in Other M had their names taken from the game's guide. That's why I believe it should be named as Acid (SR388). Though I would like to hear other people's views on this matter. (Latinlingo 23:58, November 3, 2010 (UTC))

Nintendo just can't name all their goddamn things. Makes us debate for hours on end over what the hell some things are. We're only lucky to have gotten Pow, Zuru and Wadge. --Royboy X 00:02, November 4, 2010 (UTC)

Nintendo-official guides have been considered a canonical source for information for longer than I've been to the site. If a load of people want them to be removed from that status, so be it, but I would contest. Loudly. Keep this as Acid(SR388) unless a higher-value source names it something different.--AdmiralSakai 00:15, November 4, 2010 (UTC)

First off, the attempt-at-a-logical-reason, posted above, only strengthens and further proves positively the reason(s) already stated as to why Player/Strategy Guides are horrible sources for naming and otherwise equivalently specific information. In a nutshell, you're all being stupid. To set numerous things straight, that little Nintendo trademark you may see on your Player's Guides and such is apparently illustrating to everyone (the ones being idiots) that these are official, not only because they have OFFICIAL printed in bold letters on their cover(s), but because you are living under that rock-of-an-illusion you call your perception. These Guides are NOT published by Nintendo (give it a moment to sink in...). It is called "endorsement", people. It's when a mother/father company such as Nintendo, stamps their name and/or trademark on some sort of object/merchandise with the hopes that loyal company fans, in this case Nintendo fans, will be swayed to purchase and otherwise give money to that company, and in turn give money to Nintendo, as those smaller companies must actually purchase the endorsement of Nintendo. These Guides are not endorsed by Nintendo because they are factually accurate, they are endorsed because A.) They paid Nintendo enough money, or B.) Nintendo saw them as a good way to make money. Sure, them being accurate would give Nintendo a better name, and don't take me wrong, they do actually strive for that, but that doesn't mean they get it. Why? Because they don't pay to get it, they pay to make money (but what about piggy-banks?), that's it. At the risk of repeating myself, the majority of the people debating this subject are being stupid. Need I go blunter...? --Piratehunter _{ADMIN} (Talk•Contribs•Logs) 00:23, November 4, 2010 (UTC)

And there will be a RfC, don't even worry about that. --Piratehunter _{ADMIN} (Talk•Contribs•Logs) 00:26, November 4, 2010 (UTC)

Until said RFC, guide names are considered to be official. That is they way the have been treated since I came to the site, and this name is no more dubious than any other game from a guide, including most of the Other M names. If you want to remove this, you had best get ready to deal with all the others. Making a big deal about just this one is rather inconsistant.--AdmiralSakai 00:58, November 4, 2010 (UTC)

You apparently lack the knowledge to actually know what bureaucracy is, I can see. My job is to eliminate and otherwise alleviate inconsistencies as well as irrational illogical finalizations much like this one. That is my personal prime directive. Ask around I've chomped at FL for making such swiss-cheesy policies. Don't lecture me about inconsistencies, it's what I do best, comrade. --Piratehunter _{ADMIN} (Talk•Contribs•Logs) 01:17, November 4, 2010 (UTC)

Isn't the name of this article an inconsistency? Seeing as all other topics that have names from guides have not been touched, why are you protecting this one? How are we (or rather you) judging that the source is mediocre compared to the others? The fact that it is official, no matter what you may personally think about the source, means it is much better than a Unidentified name. We should probably make a system for "officialness" of names, going something like this:

game
website
advertising
interviews
guide
soundtrack
if none of the above, Unknown naming system

Just realised that I should probably propose this in suggested RfC. HellKaiserryo12_[ADMIN] (Talk•Contribs) 23:52, November 6, 2010 (UTC)

That would solve so many problems.--AdmiralSakai 02:15, November 7, 2010 (UTC)

Unprotect[]

Could an admin remove Piratehunter's protection of this article? It is missing an Unknown Name template at the bottom, does not have it's origin game's name in the title, and is also missing the Unidentified template at the top. I'll look over the discussion here in a bit to see if I can understand the issue, but the article does need those things. ChozoBoy (Talk/Contribs) 17:29, June 21, 2012 (UTC)

It was protected for stupid reasons. By the way, isn't one of the definitions of bureaucracy an administration that is completely inefficient? The MarioGalaxy2433g5 {talk/contribs} 03:10, June 23, 2012 (UTC)