Talk:Chomp Keeper: Difference between revisions
Bigboxman8 (talk | contribs) (→Keep) Tag: Mobile edit |
Tags: Mobile edit Advanced mobile edit |
||
| Line 7: | Line 7: | ||
==Necessary?== | ==Necessary?== | ||
{{ | {{SettledTPP}} | ||
{{ProposalOutcome|passed|8-0|Delete page}} | |||
In all honesty, this article does not seem necessary to me. Not only is the name conjectural, the character seems simply too minor to receive her own article. The fact that she simply owns these pets does not seem to be enough to warrant this. | In all honesty, this article does not seem necessary to me. Not only is the name conjectural, the character seems simply too minor to receive her own article. The fact that she simply owns these pets does not seem to be enough to warrant this. | ||
Revision as of 19:20, May 12, 2021
Is there any particular reason for this title to be lowercase? --
™ The 'Shroom 16:44, 28 December 2016 (EST)
- The name in the article is proper, so... nope.
17:16, 28 December 2016 (EST)
Saving this Article
Might think I’m rushing it after learning the difference between NPCs being worthy of their own articles or not, but I am actually doubting the quality of the article - and I mean absolutely no offense to anyone, but the article doesn’t mention anything about where she’s found, whether or not she provides any actual information, actually focusing a lot more on her pets than herself. Any ideas, anything we can add? 
Green Star 14:22, October 26, 2020 (EDT)
Necessary?
Template:SettledTPP Template:ProposalOutcome
In all honesty, this article does not seem necessary to me. Not only is the name conjectural, the character seems simply too minor to receive her own article. The fact that she simply owns these pets does not seem to be enough to warrant this.
When I first saw this article, it focused mainly on her pets and their descriptions. However, they already have their own articles. Even when I fixed this, half of the article still focuses mostly on her pets. Her only real purpose seems to be informing, or at least hinting, toward how to calm them down. The only other things to note would be her appearance and other irrelevant information. I say we delete this article, as the information needed already exists within the Chain Chomplet and Chain Chomp articles respectively.
Even if the article is kept, we should probably change the name, due to it being conjectural anyway.
Proposer: The Mansion (talk)
Deadline: May 10, 2021, 23:59 GMT
Delete
- The Mansion (talk) - Per my reasoning above.
- Somethingone (talk) - She is way too minor to warrant an article, she doesn't even have an official name.
- Keyblade Master (talk) - Per The Mansion
- Ray Trace (talk) Just merge her role with the Pianta species.
- Duckfan77 (talk) Very minor character. per all.
- Power Flotzo (talk) Per everyone else.
- RHG1951 (talk) Per everyone.
- Alex95 (talk) - Per all.
Keep
Comments
Why would the article's name need to be changed if we kept the article? It is conjectural but there's no official alternative as far as I know. Hewer (talk · contributions · edit count) 13:11, May 5, 2021 (EDT)
I would say it should be changed to Chomp keeper, as most conjectural articles have lowercase titles. Green Star 13:42, May 5, 2021 (EDT)
- Not every instance. If the name sounds proper, it can be proper. 16:14, May 6, 2021 (EDT)
