Talk:Star Marker: Difference between revisions
From the Super Mario Wiki, the Mario encyclopedia
Jump to navigationJump to search
m (Text replacement - "MarioWiki:[ _]?Proposals\/Archive[ _]" to "MarioWiki:Proposals/Archive/") |
|||
| (8 intermediate revisions by 8 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
==Merge with [[Power Star]]?== | ==Merge with [[Power Star]]?== | ||
{{TPP}} | {{Settled TPP}} | ||
{{Proposal outcome|failed|0-5|Don't merge}} | |||
While they may be different things, this article is less than 500 characters long. This is way too short for an article, and should just be mentioned in the ''Super Mario 64'' section on Power Stars. | While they may be different things, this article is less than 500 characters long. This is way too short for an article, and should just be mentioned in the ''Super Mario 64'' section on Power Stars. | ||
'''Proposer''': {{User|Goomba}}<br> | '''Proposer''': {{User|Goomba}}<br> | ||
'''Deadline''': April | '''Deadline''': April 9, 2013, 23:59 GMT | ||
===Support=== | |||
===Oppose=== | |||
#{{User|Marshal Dan Troop}} They are different things so they deserve different articles and imo just because something is short doesn't make it bad. | #{{User|Marshal Dan Troop}} They are different things so they deserve different articles and imo just because something is short doesn't make it bad. | ||
#{{User|Blue CosmicToad}} Per myself in the comments. | #{{User|Blue CosmicToad}} Per myself in the comments. | ||
#{{User|BowserJunior}} Per all. | |||
#{{User|King Pikante}} Per all. | |||
#{{User|Binarystep}} This reminds me of my failed proposal... D: | |||
===Comments=== | |||
Also there is a precedent for short articles about different things having separate articles such as [http://www.mariowiki.com/MarioWiki:Proposals/ | Also there is a precedent for short articles about different things having separate articles such as [http://www.mariowiki.com/MarioWiki:Proposals/Archive/31#Merge_10-Point_Star_and_20-Point_Star_to_Point_Star], [http://www.mariowiki.com/Talk:Kappa_Mountain], [http://www.mariowiki.com/Talk:Carrot], [http://www.mariowiki.com/Intense_Coincentration], and [http://www.mariowiki.com/Talk:Mad_Big_Boo#Merge_Mad_Big_Boo_with_Mad_Boo]. {{User|Marshal Dan Troop}} | ||
I have read, on ''several'' talk page proposals before, that articles are not judged on their length, but on their completeness in detail. Yes, this article is short. Yes, the subject itself may seem minor or unimportant. However, does the article sufficiently cover all information necessary to successfully relay its subject's function? Expansion is always welcome, proving the additions are not redundant or in violation of writing style policy, but merging this fully sufficient article with another seems extraneous. {{User|Blue CosmicToad}} | I have read, on ''several'' talk page proposals before, that articles are not judged on their length, but on their completeness in detail. Yes, this article is short. Yes, the subject itself may seem minor or unimportant. However, does the article sufficiently cover all information necessary to successfully relay its subject's function? Expansion is always welcome, proving the additions are not redundant or in violation of writing style policy, but merging this fully sufficient article with another seems extraneous. {{User|Blue CosmicToad}} | ||
Latest revision as of 18:54, December 7, 2024
Merge with Power Star?
|
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. |
Don't merge 0-5
While they may be different things, this article is less than 500 characters long. This is way too short for an article, and should just be mentioned in the Super Mario 64 section on Power Stars.
Proposer: Goomba (talk)
Deadline: April 9, 2013, 23:59 GMT
Support
Oppose
- Marshal Dan Troop (talk) They are different things so they deserve different articles and imo just because something is short doesn't make it bad.
- Blue CosmicToad (talk) Per myself in the comments.
- BowserJunior (talk) Per all.
- King Pikante (talk) Per all.
- Binarystep (talk) This reminds me of my failed proposal... D:
Comments
Also there is a precedent for short articles about different things having separate articles such as [1], [2], [3], [4], and [5]. Marshal Dan Troop (talk)
I have read, on several talk page proposals before, that articles are not judged on their length, but on their completeness in detail. Yes, this article is short. Yes, the subject itself may seem minor or unimportant. However, does the article sufficiently cover all information necessary to successfully relay its subject's function? Expansion is always welcome, proving the additions are not redundant or in violation of writing style policy, but merging this fully sufficient article with another seems extraneous. Blue CosmicToad (talk)
