Talk:Twice

From Homestar Runner Wiki

(Difference between revisions)
Jump to: navigation, search
(→Enough Notable References?)
Line 10: Line 10:
::::: Well, my opinions are: there is certainly enough for this to stay. It's just that 51 and erweenga didn't have enough references on the site to be okay to stay. I vote we keep this. It's enough information to stay an article. {{User:Crab Attack1999/sig}} 18:26, 6 December 2009 (UTC)
::::: Well, my opinions are: there is certainly enough for this to stay. It's just that 51 and erweenga didn't have enough references on the site to be okay to stay. I vote we keep this. It's enough information to stay an article. {{User:Crab Attack1999/sig}} 18:26, 6 December 2009 (UTC)
::::::I never thought I would say this,but this article just might be good enough.It is used unusually,it is a running gag, and it's been used on several occasions. When I first saw this article, I immediately wanted to delete it, but as I read the article, I realized that this is a perfect article and should be kept {{User:Wasd98/sig}} 23:15 27 December, 2009 (UTC)
::::::I never thought I would say this,but this article just might be good enough.It is used unusually,it is a running gag, and it's been used on several occasions. When I first saw this article, I immediately wanted to delete it, but as I read the article, I realized that this is a perfect article and should be kept {{User:Wasd98/sig}} 23:15 27 December, 2009 (UTC)
-
I htink we should '''keep''' this. Maybe remove the more gereric examples though. [[User:Guybrush20X6|Guybrush20X6]] 23:33, 5 May 2010 (UTC)
+
I think we should '''keep''' this. Maybe remove the more gereric examples though. [[User:Guybrush20X6|Guybrush20X6]] 23:33, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

Revision as of 23:33, 5 May 2010

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.
 


Enough Notable References?

I don't think this article has enough notable references, and I can't recall very many uses of this word in this particular context. — MichaelXX2 mail_icon.gif link_icon.gif 21:28, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

Okay guys, before this conversation starts, I just want you to know that there are a lot more appearences, but the search engine wasn't working right for me and that the appearences that were on here were deemed "unnotable", which I will not argue that they definitely aren't. I just want you to know that I think they are notable, and we need to find the other examples. --Jellote wuz here 21:31, 2 November 2009 (UTC)
I personally don't find MediaWiki's search engine any help. Just google site:www.hrwiki.org (terms) as an alternative. —Soiled Bargains (talk|ctrb) 23:01, 2 November 2009 (UTC)
If there are more, let's please find them. The most prominent use I can think of is Homsar's (well, technically Strong Bad as Homsar) "I think I can twice", but in this context, it may simply mean "two times", so it's maybe not that good for this article. Heimstern Läufer 00:58, 3 November 2009 (UTC)
Oh, and just for the record and because it annoys me: There's no such word as "unnotable". It's "non-notable". Heimstern Läufer 01:01, 3 November 2009 (UTC)
given the new evidence I have found, it seems that there was more than expected. What are your opinions now?--Jellote wuz here 16:07, 6 December 2009 (UTC)
Well, my opinions are: there is certainly enough for this to stay. It's just that 51 and erweenga didn't have enough references on the site to be okay to stay. I vote we keep this. It's enough information to stay an article. CrabAttack1999 18:26, 6 December 2009 (UTC)
I never thought I would say this,but this article just might be good enough.It is used unusually,it is a running gag, and it's been used on several occasions. When I first saw this article, I immediately wanted to delete it, but as I read the article, I realized that this is a perfect article and should be kept Rondleman! Stuff I did.Talk. 23:15 27 December, 2009 (UTC)

I think we should keep this. Maybe remove the more gereric examples though. Guybrush20X6 23:33, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://www.hrwiki.org/wiki/Talk:Twice"
Personal tools