Category talk:Nintendo people: Difference between revisions
From SmashWiki, the Super Smash Bros. wiki
Jump to navigationJump to search
m (→Oppose) |
Serpent King (talk | contribs) |
||
| Line 15: | Line 15: | ||
I know I'm a new user, but I wanted to point out that Wikipedia also uses the category "[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Nintendo_people Nintendo people]". If it's good for Wikipedia, why wouldn't it be okay here? [[User:Queen Junko|Queen Junko]] ([[User talk:Queen Junko|talk]]) 21:46, 4 June 2017 (EDT) | I know I'm a new user, but I wanted to point out that Wikipedia also uses the category "[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Nintendo_people Nintendo people]". If it's good for Wikipedia, why wouldn't it be okay here? [[User:Queen Junko|Queen Junko]] ([[User talk:Queen Junko|talk]]) 21:46, 4 June 2017 (EDT) | ||
:Because we're not Wikipedia? [[File:AidanzapunkSig1.png|20px]][[User:Aidanzapunk|<span style="color: blue;">'''Aidan'''</span>]], [[User talk:Aidanzapunk|<span style="color: blue;">'''the Wandering Dragon Warrior'''</span>]][[File:AidanzapunkSig2.png|20px]] 21:47, 4 June 2017 (EDT) | :Because we're not Wikipedia? [[File:AidanzapunkSig1.png|20px]][[User:Aidanzapunk|<span style="color: blue;">'''Aidan'''</span>]], [[User talk:Aidanzapunk|<span style="color: blue;">'''the Wandering Dragon Warrior'''</span>]][[File:AidanzapunkSig2.png|20px]] 21:47, 4 June 2017 (EDT) | ||
:Whyyy do you guys ALWAYS point out what Wikipedia is doing? We don't mimic them. We are a completely different wiki with a completely different scope and a completely different userbase set to accomplish a completely different goal. There is no reason that we should follow suit with them. <span style="font-family:Monotype Corsiva;font-size:12pt">'''[[User:Serpent King|<span style="color:#083;text-shadow:0px 0px 3px #0b7">Serpent</span>]] [[File:SKSig.png|16px|link=]] [[User talk:Serpent King|<span style="color:#ed0;text-shadow:0px 0px 3px #fd0">King</span>]]'''</span> 21:49, 4 June 2017 (EDT) | |||
Revision as of 21:49, June 4, 2017
Move to Category:Nintendo associates
Support
- YES. "Nintendo people" is almost comically vague.
Nyargleblargle (Contribs) 21:39, 4 June 2017 (EDT) - Support. I don't see why not, since asocciates sounds much more profesional. --
Beep (talk) 21:42, 4 June 2017 (EDT) - Support because formalities are nice. BaconMaster
21:43, 4 June 2017 (EDT) - Support the name sounds so weird as-is ---Preceding unsigned comment added by you. Or maybe DatNuttyKid. 21:47, 4 June 2017 (EDT)
Oppose
- "Associates" implies things on the same tier as Nintendo itself, so I would assume companies from the phrase "Nintendo associates" and go in expecting to see Game Freak, Monolith Soft, etc. What's not clear or unprofessional about "people"? Miles (talk) 21:49, 4 June 2017 (EDT)
Neutral
Aidan, the Wandering Dragon Warrior
21:47, 4 June 2017 (EDT)
Comments
I know I'm a new user, but I wanted to point out that Wikipedia also uses the category "Nintendo people". If it's good for Wikipedia, why wouldn't it be okay here? Queen Junko (talk) 21:46, 4 June 2017 (EDT)
- Because we're not Wikipedia? Aidan, the Wandering Dragon Warrior 21:47, 4 June 2017 (EDT)
- Whyyy do you guys ALWAYS point out what Wikipedia is doing? We don't mimic them. We are a completely different wiki with a completely different scope and a completely different userbase set to accomplish a completely different goal. There is no reason that we should follow suit with them. Serpent
King 21:49, 4 June 2017 (EDT)
