Talk:Empty Block

Is this even considered official? :| RAP... That name sounds pretty unofficial to the wiki... :|

No. That's why I put the "conjecture" template on it. I was gonna request a deletion, but... — Stooben Rooben 21:57, 13 May 2008 (EDT)

I for one feel this page is unnecessary. Any other opinions? Phoenix Rider 03:58, 17 August 2009 (EDT)

I think it's fine. Those Blocks are common gameplay elements in the Mario series. Time Questions 07:15, 17 August 2009 (EDT)

Refill

Anyway, does used block is refillable?
— The preceding unsigned comment was added by FayyazMurmur (talk).

Has Nintendo ever addressed the issue? If not, then we need not worry about reporting it on the article. · SMB (Talk) · 23:54, 15 May 2010 (EDT)

Another Name

"Used Block" is fine, but I think "Empty Block" would be better, since say that the block is empty is more understandable than say that it is used. Bro Hammer (Talk • Cont) 12:16, 14 March 2012 (EDT)

I can see what you are saying here, actually. Since not all Used Blocks have been 'used' by Mario/Luigi before getting to this phrase, 'Empty Block' makes more sense in context. Don't rename it yet, though, because some people may disagree with you. RandomYoshi^{(Talk • PMs • C)} 12:58, 14 March 2012 (EDT)

These types of article names are on a first come first serve basis Raven Effect (talk)

I see. Thanks for telling me so that I won't make the mistake of making a similar comment next time I see something similar. RandomYoshi^{(Talk • PMs • C)} 13:07, 14 March 2012 (EDT)

I didn't understand. Bro Hammer (Talk • Cont) 19:39, 15 March 2012 (EDT)

I think what Raven Effect said was that once there is one article name, it should stay like that (I don't necessarily agree with that statement.) It's me, Mario! (Talk / Stalk) 19:42, 15 March 2012 (EDT)

Thanks :) (But I still think Empty Block sounds better).

And I can't even do a proposal, right? Bro Hammer (Talk • Cont) 17:07, 24 March 2012 (EDT)

It's generally frowned upon since neither name is official Raven Effect (talk)