Talk:John: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
|||
| Line 20: | Line 20: | ||
Wouldn't we be better off going with "No Johns" as the article name instead of "John"? That's how it's usually used. [[User:Shade487z|<font color="red">Shade</font>]][[User talk:Shade487z|<font color="black">487</font>]][[Special:Contributions/Shade487z|<font color="yellow">z</font>]] 04:30, 12 May 2009 (UTC) | Wouldn't we be better off going with "No Johns" as the article name instead of "John"? That's how it's usually used. [[User:Shade487z|<font color="red">Shade</font>]][[User talk:Shade487z|<font color="black">487</font>]][[Special:Contributions/Shade487z|<font color="yellow">z</font>]] 04:30, 12 May 2009 (UTC) | ||
:By "John", they're giving the definition of the noun. "No Johns" could be a redirect though. <span style="border:2px outset #ff66ff;background-color: #66ff99;-moz-border-radius:3px">'''[[User:Blue Ninjakoopa|<span style="color:#9900ff;">Blue</span>]] [[User talk:Blue Ninjakoopa|<span style="color:#9900ff">Ninjakoopa</span>]]'''</span> 15:46, 12 May 2009 (UTC) | :By "John", they're giving the definition of the noun. "No Johns" could be a redirect though. <span style="border:2px outset #ff66ff;background-color: #66ff99;-moz-border-radius:3px">'''[[User:Blue Ninjakoopa|<span style="color:#9900ff;">Blue</span>]] [[User talk:Blue Ninjakoopa|<span style="color:#9900ff">Ninjakoopa</span>]]'''</span> 15:46, 12 May 2009 (UTC) | ||
== Is this page even necessary? == | |||
Honestly, I dont think that the meme 'No Johns' is necessary here, leave that for the urban dictionary or other meme related wikis. This meme is pretty lame and stupid just like the term 'n00b'. It shouldn't get mixed up with Brawl.--[[User:JezzaRuIes|JezzaRuIes]] ([[User talk:JezzaRuIes|talk]]) 02:17, 1 June 2009 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 22:17, May 31, 2009
All of these johns are from this thread. Anyway, I think it would be better if we just had an explanation of what johns are and not an entire list. We don't really need dozens of examples, only a few. --YodaMasterZ 21:11, December 29, 2007 (EST)
Mild Delete: Is this page even necessary in the first place? --Posted by Pikamander2 (Talk) at 20:39, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
- It is absolutely necessary. But it needs some serious clarification and expansion and should probably be moved to johns, as it is rarely used singularly. Maybe even to "no johns", or at least a mention of the phrase and its widespread use throughout competitive smash. --RJM Talk 03:12, 18 June 2008 (UTC)
I'm also leaining towards delete or a merge to some kind of article with smashing phrases. Kperfekt722 (talk) 23:58, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
Well...
Where I come from, there was a player called, "Jeff", who spammed Sonic's B move and never won, but often lied saying he did. He constantly gave excuses for losing, like his arm was broken, or he was eating something. One time he said that he couldn't play very well because his leg hurt. So, instead of "Jhons", we call them "Jeffs". —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cafinator (talk • contribs)
Where I'M from, it's just called bein' a baby who lost. I think the creator of this just wants some term he made up to be known. Delete please. Mike Tha Hero (talk) 22:16, 23 December 2008 (UTC)
- Yeah, but majority of Smashers involved in places like SWF and AiB know it as johns. Whether or not you've heard of the term is irrelevant. Shade487z 17:45, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
Honestly...
Wouldn't we be better off going with "No Johns" as the article name instead of "John"? That's how it's usually used. Shade487z 04:30, 12 May 2009 (UTC)
- By "John", they're giving the definition of the noun. "No Johns" could be a redirect though. Blue Ninjakoopa 15:46, 12 May 2009 (UTC)
Is this page even necessary?
Honestly, I dont think that the meme 'No Johns' is necessary here, leave that for the urban dictionary or other meme related wikis. This meme is pretty lame and stupid just like the term 'n00b'. It shouldn't get mixed up with Brawl.--JezzaRuIes (talk) 02:17, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
