Talk:Predictions

From Homestar Runner Wiki

(Difference between revisions)
Jump to: navigation, search
(delete also possible)
(nonsense)
Line 7: Line 7:
:::::I kinda thing the history according to strong bad article is really poorly written, actually.  I'd avoid redirecting there if at all possible.. -[[Special:Contributions/128.103.10.17|128.103.10.17]] 15:15, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
:::::I kinda thing the history according to strong bad article is really poorly written, actually.  I'd avoid redirecting there if at all possible.. -[[Special:Contributions/128.103.10.17|128.103.10.17]] 15:15, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
::::::Well, I still feel that History according to Strong Bad is better written than this article, which covers the same ground. We could always just delete it instead. {{User:The Chort/sig}} 19:36, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
::::::Well, I still feel that History according to Strong Bad is better written than this article, which covers the same ground. We could always just delete it instead. {{User:The Chort/sig}} 19:36, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
 +
::::How is this a rehash of the history according to Strong Bad? [[Predictions]] includes two predictions that Strong Bad did not make - for example the one about the paper.{{User:Loafing/sig}} 21:41, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

Revision as of 21:41, 6 February 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.
 

I'm thinking this is a spoon. Everyone makes predictions. It's a natural part of living. And categorizing every time a prediction has made on the site would be practically impossible. Plus, it's orphaned. —Guard Duck talk 05:54, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

I think the concept is quite similar to History According to Strong Bad. BBG 05:59, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
Though more in a "The Future According to Strong Bad" sense. --DorianGray 06:04, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
If it weren't for the paper prediction, this list would indeed not be very interesting. However, one of the predictions has come true, and so I believe it's worthwhile keeping the article. Loafing 10:16, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
This article is just a rehash of History according to Strong Bad, except not as well written. A redirect seems appropiate here. – The Chort 15:05, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
I kinda thing the history according to strong bad article is really poorly written, actually. I'd avoid redirecting there if at all possible.. -128.103.10.17 15:15, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
Well, I still feel that History according to Strong Bad is better written than this article, which covers the same ground. We could always just delete it instead. – The Chort 19:36, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
How is this a rehash of the history according to Strong Bad? Predictions includes two predictions that Strong Bad did not make - for example the one about the paper. Loafing 21:41, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
Retrieved from "http://www.hrwiki.org/wiki/Talk:Predictions"
Personal tools