Category talk:Chess Pieces: Difference between revisions
From the Super Mario Wiki, the Mario encyclopedia
Jump to navigationJump to search
Time Turner (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
m (Text replacement - "([Pp]roposal|[Ss]ettled)(Outcome|TPP)" to "$1 $2") |
||
| (18 intermediate revisions by 12 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
Is this category really necessary? [[User:GreenDisaster|GreenDisaster]] 14:55, 30 March 2012 (EDT) | Is this category really necessary? [[User:GreenDisaster|GreenDisaster]] 14:55, 30 March 2012 (EDT) | ||
| Line 5: | Line 4: | ||
==Delete Category:Chess Pieces== | ==Delete Category:Chess Pieces== | ||
{{TPP}} | {{Settled TPP}} | ||
This category seems pointless in my opinion. One, it's a small category, composed of only 13 articles. Two, it's a category comprising the characters that appear as pieces for a chess game that most of the articles give a single line to, if they even mention it. It seems too insignificant to have | {{Proposal outcome|green|delete 10-0}} | ||
This category seems pointless in my opinion. One, it's a small category, composed of only 13 articles. Two, it's a category comprising the characters that appear as pieces for a chess game that most of the articles give a single line to, if they even mention it. It seems too insignificant to have a category for it. Three, how many people actually use this category? It just doesn't seem that useful. | |||
'''Proposer''': {{User|GreenDisaster}}<br> | '''Proposer''': {{User|GreenDisaster}}<br> | ||
| Line 13: | Line 13: | ||
===Delete=== | ===Delete=== | ||
#{{User|GreenDisaster}} Per proposal. | #{{User|GreenDisaster}} Per proposal. | ||
#{{User|LightningBlue}} Not enough pages and this is a single game. | |||
#{{User|Super-Yoshi}} ''Really'' minuscle category, don't need it. | |||
#{{User|Lindsay151}} Per all. | |||
#{{User|Tails777}} Per what I said above. | |||
#{{User|Mario4Ever}} Per proposal. | |||
#{{User|Walkazo}} - Thirteen isn't ''horrible'' as far as size goes (originally, there were categories for every type of chess piece: now ''that'' was excessive), but when you look at the articles, it's the ugly ducking of the categories: it would be better to just not have it around. | |||
#{{User|Commander Code-8}} This category may as well be called "important characters in the Mario series". Per all | |||
#{{User|Blue CosmicToad}} ''Aughh!! Thirteen is the unlucky number! Begone, foul category!'' '''...Per all.''' | |||
#{{User|Vommack}} This is some kind of cruel joke here, right? | |||
===Keep=== | ===Keep=== | ||
===Comments=== | ===Comments=== | ||
So instead of having a category for the chess pieces, we have a [[Template:MarioChess|template]]. I'm not sure if that's better or worse. [[User:GreenDisaster|GreenDisaster]] ([[User talk:GreenDisaster|talk]]) 20:06, 27 July 2012 (EDT) | |||
:Worse (imho). If a category's unnecessary, a template is overkill. Not to mention how its design breaks the whole colour-coded nav template uniformity scheme we've been aiming for... - {{User:Walkazo/sig}} 20:21, 27 July 2012 (EDT) | |||
Latest revision as of 15:30, May 31, 2024
Is this category really necessary? GreenDisaster 14:55, 30 March 2012 (EDT)
- I agree, I think it should be deleted.
Tails777 Talk to me!
Delete Category:Chess Pieces[edit]
|
This talk page proposal has already been settled. Please do not edit this section or its subsections. If you wish to discuss the article, please do so in a new section below the proposal. |
delete 10-0
This category seems pointless in my opinion. One, it's a small category, composed of only 13 articles. Two, it's a category comprising the characters that appear as pieces for a chess game that most of the articles give a single line to, if they even mention it. It seems too insignificant to have a category for it. Three, how many people actually use this category? It just doesn't seem that useful.
Proposer: GreenDisaster (talk)
Deadline: August 6, 2012, 23:59 GMT
Delete[edit]
- GreenDisaster (talk) Per proposal.
- LightningBlue (talk) Not enough pages and this is a single game.
- Super-Yoshi (talk) Really minuscle category, don't need it.
- Lindsay151 (talk) Per all.
- Tails777 (talk) Per what I said above.
- Mario4Ever (talk) Per proposal.
- Walkazo (talk) - Thirteen isn't horrible as far as size goes (originally, there were categories for every type of chess piece: now that was excessive), but when you look at the articles, it's the ugly ducking of the categories: it would be better to just not have it around.
- Commander Code-8 (talk) This category may as well be called "important characters in the Mario series". Per all
- Blue CosmicToad (talk) Aughh!! Thirteen is the unlucky number! Begone, foul category! ...Per all.
- Vommack (talk) This is some kind of cruel joke here, right?
Keep[edit]
Comments[edit]
So instead of having a category for the chess pieces, we have a template. I'm not sure if that's better or worse. GreenDisaster (talk) 20:06, 27 July 2012 (EDT)
