Editing Talk:Card Key
From the Super Mario Wiki, the Mario encyclopedia
Jump to navigationJump to search
The edit can be undone. Please check the comparison below to verify that this is what you want to do, and then publish the changes below to finish undoing the edit.
| Latest revision | Your text | ||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
== Split the Card Keys by game == | == Split the Card Keys by game == | ||
{{ | |||
{{TPP}} | |||
Even if [[Special:Diff/2873277|what I did over a month ago]] wasn't properly agreed upon, the show must go on. | Even if [[Special:Diff/2873277|what I did over a month ago]] wasn't properly agreed upon, the show must go on. | ||
I'm really not sure why these are merged to begin with, especially given that their only similarity is that they're the same type of key. Other than that, they're both used in different games and have different designs. All in all, I think it makes much more sense for these to be split | I'm really not sure why these are merged to begin with, especially given that their only similarity is that they're the same type of key. Other than that, they're both used in different games and have different designs. All in all, I think it makes much more sense for these to be split. | ||
'''Proposer:''' {{User|Toadette the Achiever}}<br> | '''Proposer:''' {{User|Toadette the Achiever}}<br> | ||
| Line 14: | Line 14: | ||
#{{User|Duckfan77}} Per all. | #{{User|Duckfan77}} Per all. | ||
#{{User|FanOfYoshi}} Per all. | #{{User|FanOfYoshi}} Per all. | ||
===Oppose=== | ===Oppose=== | ||
#{{User|Doc von Schmeltwick}} Same name in every language, same general purpose, same generic subject, splitting would inflate article count over what amounts to splitting hairs. I repeat: this is a repeated use of a generic subject, a thing that exists in real life. It's not like these are an especially important plot coupon, we should group based on ''concept''. Otherwise we'd split every differently acting Goomba. | #{{User|Doc von Schmeltwick}} Same name in every language, same general purpose, same generic subject, splitting would inflate article count over what amounts to splitting hairs. I repeat: this is a repeated use of a generic subject, a thing that exists in real life. It's not like these are an especially important plot coupon, we should group based on ''concept''. Otherwise we'd split every differently acting Goomba. | ||
#{{User|Waluigi Time}} Per Doc, I really don't think we need to be splitting keys as much as we have been. | #{{User|Waluigi Time}} Per Doc, I really don't think we need to be splitting keys as much as we have been. | ||
===Comments=== | ===Comments=== | ||
| Line 27: | Line 23: | ||
:No? Then we'd be splitting every instance of [[bee]]s, and we only do that when the origin language has a non-generic name. [[User:Doc von Schmeltwick|Doc von Schmeltwick]] ([[User talk:Doc von Schmeltwick|talk]]) 13:14, May 1, 2020 (EDT) | :No? Then we'd be splitting every instance of [[bee]]s, and we only do that when the origin language has a non-generic name. [[User:Doc von Schmeltwick|Doc von Schmeltwick]] ([[User talk:Doc von Schmeltwick|talk]]) 13:14, May 1, 2020 (EDT) | ||
::That case is a bit more complicated, seeing as how most of the "bees" mentioned in that article more closely resemble real-world honeybees, and there's no straightforward method to split them out. Here, though, the case is simple enough to make the difference straightforward and reasonable enough. {{User:Toadette the Achiever/sig}} 13:22, May 1, 2020 (EDT) | ::That case is a bit more complicated, seeing as how most of the "bees" mentioned in that article more closely resemble real-world honeybees, and there's no straightforward method to split them out. Here, though, the case is simple enough to make the difference straightforward and reasonable enough. {{User:Toadette the Achiever/sig}} 13:22, May 1, 2020 (EDT) | ||
