For a name of "The Return of King Whomp", you'd expect him to remember Mario. He doesn't. Hell, not even the Bob-omb buddies seem to either.
You literally just listed the two key pieces of evidence without actually talking about their significance at all, while also making a false comparison to 1-1 references. 1-1's original stage has no dialogue whatsoever and no reference to it ever says "oh you're back" or "hmm have i seen you somewhere before?"
cameos are like some of the most frequently used evidence in these mario threads but here when we have actual physical characters as well as an omniscient third person party labelling a mission featuring a character as a "return" apparently that's too questionable?
Which is you re-wording it to make the feat different. "Oh those paintings? They were never there, Bowser simply displayed them." You say prior that these paintings were from the castle but now they're Bowser's possessions?
I don't know if you are just skimming now or what, but here's the deal: A conqueror or a thief who takes your possessions and claims them as their own now owns your possessions.
Because these aren't English translations from another manual, it's original text that Nintendo makes. There's nothing too translate there. It's a secondary source, we've used manuals/guides for several verses.
Still wondering if you are just skimming, because I asked why you are using ANY english sources when we are questioning the reliability of english sources in the first place. Something which no one who wanted to upgrade the verse based on ridiculous starry sky feats had to do, by the way.
No idea how you misread that. The theory itself was what will Bowser do with the paintings, not if he made them or not.
because there isn't a single thing in the first page you linked that supports your point beyond some fringe connections, probably
Because we DO know Bowser made them, you do everything because of them. For further evidence that Bowser can create original worlds, the paintings of Mario, Luigi, and Wario, support this. Since it's only a pportrait of their face and not resembling any location, Bowser clearly made his own worlds to hide away the keys.
non-sequitur, premises do not follow to the conclusion at all, what even is this
You absolutely have to prove it's fake, it's not just about proving the positive, but because to say everything in the game you interact with and specifically the stars only can't be real is blatant cherrpicking. If there's nothing suggesting it's fake, then don't argue it is.
So in the same message you try to dismiss BBH by saying it is different but now you are going back to this. So yes, it is special pleading I guess, cool.
Just like with the Sunshine argument, you are arguing that a main course level has different properties than the other ones do without evidence, which is special pleading. Though funnily enough the "walls" and "paintings" thing likely seems to be inclusive of secret stages judging by Peach's quote
here, and judging by the quotes you see if you hit ctrl+f walls or ctrl+f castle walls, it seems like its referring to everything within the castle walls which, yes, refers to every single stage, secret or otherwise. Way more reasonable than some being arbitrarily excluded.
Are you telling me realistic cities aren't a thing in Mario?
Alright now I know you are skimming. Here is what I said:
"This book is an english source that claims Mario is from Brooklyn, ironically after Yoshi's Island is released."
Here is apparently what you read:
"Brooklyn"
I am saying this guide is about as accurate as Mega Man defending Monsteropolis in Mega Man 1 or whatever, Ristar meeting up with his father in his game, or Sonic rescuing Sally Acorn in Sonic CD, all of which are inventions from english manuals.
