Talk:Bathroom Privileges

From Homestar Runner Wiki

(Difference between revisions)
Jump to: navigation, search
(→privileges?: Willing to keep anyways.)
(→privileges?: yo ho yo ho)
Line 5: Line 5:
:I admit, this is a case where I personally wish we could be slightly more flexible with the requirement of three: revocation of bathroom privileges is, to my mind, unusual (and funny!) enough that even with only two appearances, the article doesn't look half bad to me (other than needing a better intro). Maybe TBC could help us and put some reference to bathroom privileges in the next update? Please? {{User:Heimstern Läufer/sig}} 01:45, 12 October 2008 (UTC)
:I admit, this is a case where I personally wish we could be slightly more flexible with the requirement of three: revocation of bathroom privileges is, to my mind, unusual (and funny!) enough that even with only two appearances, the article doesn't look half bad to me (other than needing a better intro). Maybe TBC could help us and put some reference to bathroom privileges in the next update? Please? {{User:Heimstern Läufer/sig}} 01:45, 12 October 2008 (UTC)
::Personally, I'd agree with that. I know if we make an exception to the "three appearances limit" here, it'll eventually get cited as precedence on future discussions, but I'd be willing to live with that. And, while I'm thinking about it, I'm pretty sure there's one other gag article with only two appearances... It's not coming to me now, but I'm almost certain it exists. Anyways, the point is, despite falling under the legal limit, I'd be willing to keep this page. --[[User:DorianGray|DorianGray]] 01:58, 12 October 2008 (UTC)
::Personally, I'd agree with that. I know if we make an exception to the "three appearances limit" here, it'll eventually get cited as precedence on future discussions, but I'd be willing to live with that. And, while I'm thinking about it, I'm pretty sure there's one other gag article with only two appearances... It's not coming to me now, but I'm almost certain it exists. Anyways, the point is, despite falling under the legal limit, I'd be willing to keep this page. --[[User:DorianGray|DorianGray]] 01:58, 12 October 2008 (UTC)
 +
:::First, it's a cute gag so we must delete nothing. And secondly, you must be a bad article to get deleted and you're not. And thirdly, the inclusion thingy is more what you'd call "guidelines" than actual rules. Welcome aboard the HRWiki, Miss Bathroom Privileges. (Ten points if anyone knows what i'm parodying). {{User:DeFender1031/sig}} 02:11, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

Revision as of 02:11, 12 October 2008

It has been suggested that the content of the page this talk page accompanies should not be a separate article on the wiki.

  • Please discuss below whether the content of the page should have its own article. Remember to consider ways the content could be brought up to the wiki's standards before making this determination.

If it is decided that the content should not have its own article, then the following additional issues need to be addressed:

  • Whether to merge the content with another page or remove it entirely.
  • Whether to redirect the leftover page or delete it outright.
 

privileges?

While it does seem like a fun gag, it would seem to be below the threshold of three appearance to constitute a running gag. And with only two time, it's not exactly common is it? wbwolf (t | ed) 19:55, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

I admit, this is a case where I personally wish we could be slightly more flexible with the requirement of three: revocation of bathroom privileges is, to my mind, unusual (and funny!) enough that even with only two appearances, the article doesn't look half bad to me (other than needing a better intro). Maybe TBC could help us and put some reference to bathroom privileges in the next update? Please? Heimstern Läufer 01:45, 12 October 2008 (UTC)
Personally, I'd agree with that. I know if we make an exception to the "three appearances limit" here, it'll eventually get cited as precedence on future discussions, but I'd be willing to live with that. And, while I'm thinking about it, I'm pretty sure there's one other gag article with only two appearances... It's not coming to me now, but I'm almost certain it exists. Anyways, the point is, despite falling under the legal limit, I'd be willing to keep this page. --DorianGray 01:58, 12 October 2008 (UTC)
First, it's a cute gag so we must delete nothing. And secondly, you must be a bad article to get deleted and you're not. And thirdly, the inclusion thingy is more what you'd call "guidelines" than actual rules. Welcome aboard the HRWiki, Miss Bathroom Privileges. (Ten points if anyone knows what i'm parodying). — Defender1031*Talk 02:11, 12 October 2008 (UTC)
Retrieved from "http://www.hrwiki.org/wiki/Talk:Bathroom_Privileges"
Personal tools