Talk:Stinkoman and 1-Up's Relationship

From Homestar Runner Wiki

(Difference between revisions)
Jump to: navigation, search
(→Your James Over: comment about relatioship articles)
(→Your James Over: this is actually directed to everybody.)
Line 8: Line 8:
::::And aside from the blanket rule thing, the relationship isn't all that interesting.  The salient parts could be (and probably are already) on their respective character pages. -[[Special:Contributions/132.183.138.86|132.183.138.86]] 15:28, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
::::And aside from the blanket rule thing, the relationship isn't all that interesting.  The salient parts could be (and probably are already) on their respective character pages. -[[Special:Contributions/132.183.138.86|132.183.138.86]] 15:28, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
:::::If we keep this article, it's just going to open the floodgates and there'd be a muddle. The relationships between minor characters should be discussed on their respective articles, not on character-type articles. '''Delete.''' {{User:The Chort/sig}} 18:01, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
:::::If we keep this article, it's just going to open the floodgates and there'd be a muddle. The relationships between minor characters should be discussed on their respective articles, not on character-type articles. '''Delete.''' {{User:The Chort/sig}} 18:01, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
-
::::::I haven't decided yet if this article is worth keeping, but from where exactly did you get the notion that relationship articles are only for the Main 12? I oppose this, and I would gladly support a good article the explores a relationship between a main and a minor character, or even two minor characters. What floodgates are you talking about? Those of some new interesting articles? Those of a few deletion discussions? We do this regularly anyways. {{User:E.L. Cool/sig}} 04:45, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
+
I haven't decided yet if this article is worth keeping, but from where exactly did you get the notion that relationship articles are only for the Main 12? I oppose this, and I would gladly support a good article the explores a relationship between a main and a minor character, or even two minor characters. What floodgates are you talking about? Those of some new interesting articles? Those of a few deletion discussions? We do this regularly anyways. {{User:E.L. Cool/sig}} 04:45, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

Revision as of 04:46, 4 July 2009

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.
 


Your James Over

No. No. The Character Relationship articles are only for the main 12 and only then when there is something significant about it. Delete wbwolf (t | ed) 13:44, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

I don't even think there needs to be a discussion. We don't keep relationship pages about any but the main characters. — Defender1031*Talk 18:44, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
I think this should be deleted because of the rule that you can only do the main 12. Honestly, this page is very poorly written and while that can be fixed, I have no idea how. — MichaelXX2 mail_icon.gif link_icon.gif 15:19, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
I agree with you XX2, relationship pages should only be between the 12 main characters and the page is poor written. My vote: Delete.--'Record307 Talk/Contribs 15:22, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
And aside from the blanket rule thing, the relationship isn't all that interesting. The salient parts could be (and probably are already) on their respective character pages. -132.183.138.86 15:28, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
If we keep this article, it's just going to open the floodgates and there'd be a muddle. The relationships between minor characters should be discussed on their respective articles, not on character-type articles. Delete. – The Chort 18:01, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

I haven't decided yet if this article is worth keeping, but from where exactly did you get the notion that relationship articles are only for the Main 12? I oppose this, and I would gladly support a good article the explores a relationship between a main and a minor character, or even two minor characters. What floodgates are you talking about? Those of some new interesting articles? Those of a few deletion discussions? We do this regularly anyways. — Elcool (talk)(contribs) 04:45, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://www.hrwiki.org/wiki/Talk:Stinkoman_and_1-Up%27s_Relationship"
Personal tools