Talk:Blaster (disambiguation): Difference between revisions
m (→Wolf's Blaster having its own article: it's standard to keep votes at the same indent.) |
(→Wolf's Blaster having its own article: Support) |
||
| Line 45: | Line 45: | ||
:'''Support'''. [[User:Squishyfrog|<span style="color: lightseagreen;">'''Squishyfrog'''</span>]] [[User talk:Squishyfrog|''<span style="color: lightseagreen;">Chat</span>'']] 23:48, 20 September 2011 (EDT) | :'''Support'''. [[User:Squishyfrog|<span style="color: lightseagreen;">'''Squishyfrog'''</span>]] [[User talk:Squishyfrog|''<span style="color: lightseagreen;">Chat</span>'']] 23:48, 20 September 2011 (EDT) | ||
:'''Support''' Different Japanese name, effect, range hitbox, appearance, effect on competitive metagame and comboing ability. [[User:ToastUltimatum|<font color="darkorange">Toast</font><font color="darkbrown">Ultimatum</font>]] [[File:Transparent Swadloon.png|27px]][[User talk:ToastUltimatum|''<span style="color: silver;">Complaints Box</span>'']] 05:09, 21 September 2011 (EDT) | |||
Revision as of 05:09, September 21, 2011
Did it really need a merge? Nobody even added a category... (Wolf O'Donnell (talk · contributions) 21:44, 13 August 2008 (UTC))
Yep
Sorry but I got sick of seein' Blaster next to parentheses.
- --Blue Ninjakoopa (talk) 21:46, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
- Is that a good reason? Other members did not want it merged, their opinions (as well as mine, I recall saying "no") matter. (Wolf O'Donnell (talk · contributions) 21:49, 13 August 2008 (UTC))
- On another note, opinions of the community do matter. That being said, I shall quote Silverdragon706 regarding Fire Wolf, Fire Fox, etc.
Individual attacks of characters get their own pages. Putting Fox's, Falco's, and Wolf's side-attacks onto one page is just too much. Stuff like Link's bombs and T/Y Link's bombs get their own pages, so these do, too.
(Wolf O'Donnell (talk · contributions) 21:53, 13 August 2008 (UTC))
Well, I don't mind. It doesn't make much of a difference, and there's not much of a negative side to merging them, really. 69.12.204.63 21:55, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
You don't mind. Please, keep in mind, that you are not the only one here. I, for one, do mind. I thought they were fine where they were. As did others, considering the outcome of the "vote". (Wolf O'Donnell (talk · contributions) 21:59, 13 August 2008 (UTC))
When no Sysops are involved...then the users create how the vote should be done.and since we are the users we can choose a democratic system...and by that system the result is un merge no? - Hatake91 (talk) 22:52, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
Finally
We finally put the articles in the format I suggested. MarioGalaxy (talk) 22:53, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
- However, most users didn't want a merge. (Wolf O'Donnell (talk · contributions) 22:53, 13 August 2008 (UTC))
Technically it isn't a merge. I suggested we made an article that puts information under 3 headings:
Blaster (Fox)
Information on Fox's blaster.
Blaster (Falco)
Information on Falco's blaster.
Blaster (Wolf)
Information on Fox's blaster.
The original idea that everyone wanted was to put general information on the blaster, not for each person. MarioGalaxy (talk) 22:57, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
Wolf's Blaster having its own article
I think it may be more appropriate to have Wolf's Blaster in its own article rather than sharing one with Fox and Falco. Fact is, Wolf's Blaster is a completely different move from Fox's and Falco's Blaster, and I believe that is enough to merit its own article, rather than implying it's a "clone move" by grouping it in this article. Omega Tyrant 
23:27, 20 September 2011 (EDT)
- Support. In fact, in Japan, it is called "Claw Blaster". Mr. Anon (talk) 23:39, 20 September 2011 (EDT)
- Support. Squishyfrog Chat 23:48, 20 September 2011 (EDT)
- Support Different Japanese name, effect, range hitbox, appearance, effect on competitive metagame and comboing ability. ToastUltimatum
Complaints Box 05:09, 21 September 2011 (EDT)
