Talk:Bell Kritter: Difference between revisions
mNo edit summary |
Coooool123 (talk | contribs) (→Comments?: To Kelton2) |
||
| Line 19: | Line 19: | ||
====Comments?==== | ====Comments?==== | ||
@Kelton2: Tell me about it. Plus, everyone seems to want to split all the articles of different sizes (eg Mega/Mini versions of the same thing). It's so pointless. | |||
Revision as of 16:26, October 10, 2012
Is there anything that separates these Kritters from other Kritters? Hello, I'm Time Turner.
They seem to be characters, but extremely minor characters. I agree, this article probably shouldn't stand alone.--Knife (talk) 04:44, 20 August 2010 (UTC)
Merge this article with Kritter#Donkey Kong 64
|
This talk page section contains an unresolved talk page proposal. Please try to help and resolve the issue by voting or leaving a comment. |
Current time: Sunday, November 3, 2024, 21:28 GMT
As discussed above, this article concerns a minor subject which is subordinated from a greater species. I stand by the policy at MarioWiki:Minor NPCs, which describes that conjectural-named, minor characters should be merged with their relevant species.
Proposer: YoshiKong (talk)
Deadline: October 17 2012, 23:59 GMT
Support
- YoshiKong (talk) Per policy.
- Coooool123 (talk) Per Yoshikong. Plus, do we really need yet another tiny article, wasting space? MERGE POWER!!!
- BabyLuigiOnFire (talk) Why does this even have an article in the first place when it can be easily merged into Kritter?
- Kelton2 (talk) Of course. What is with all these small articles that should be merged?
Oppose
Comments?
@Kelton2: Tell me about it. Plus, everyone seems to want to split all the articles of different sizes (eg Mega/Mini versions of the same thing). It's so pointless.
