Talk:Stinkoman and 1-Up's Relationship

From Homestar Runner Wiki

Revision as of 00:23, 6 July 2009

Your James Over

No. No. The Character Relationship articles are only for the main 12 and only then when there is something significant about it. Delete wbwolf (t | ed) 13:44, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

I don't even think there needs to be a discussion. We don't keep relationship pages about any but the main characters. — Defender1031*Talk 18:44, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

I think this should be deleted because of the rule that you can only do the main 12. Honestly, this page is very poorly written and while that can be fixed, I have no idea how. — MichaelXX2 15:19, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

I agree with you XX2, relationship pages should only be between the 12 main characters and the page is poor written. My vote: Delete.--'Record307 ^Talk/_Contribs 15:22, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

And aside from the blanket rule thing, the relationship isn't all that interesting. The salient parts could be (and probably are already) on their respective character pages. -132.183.138.86 15:28, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

If we keep this article, it's just going to open the floodgates and there'd be a muddle. The relationships between minor characters should be discussed on their respective articles, not on character-type articles. Delete. – The Chort 18:01, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

I haven't decided yet if this article is worth keeping, but from where exactly did you get the notion that relationship articles are only for the Main 12? I oppose this, and I would gladly support a good article the explores a relationship between a main and a minor character, or even two minor characters. What floodgates are you talking about? Those of some new interesting articles? Those of a few deletion discussions? We do this regularly anyways. — Elcool ^(talk)_(contribs) 04:45, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

Concur with Elcool. There's absolutely no rule restricting relationship articles to the main 12, nor should there be. If an interesting article can be formed about others, it should stay. This one, as it stands, doesn't have enough info to make it worthwhile, but I think it might be salvageable with some research. Heimstern Läufer 04:52, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

Personally, I say rewrite.. There's alot information missed, and the article itself is of poor quality, but it most certianly can be fixed and made very intersting. -SI. Keep the page because peoples relationships are changing all the time.just think of marshie and Homestars.He hated him then he said nothing on sbcg4ap.-R1998

{Picks up microphone from the table and walks up to the stage} {Touches mike with palm of hand} Testing, testing. Hi. Hello. Aloha. I see that this discussion has went from almost speedy deletion to rewrite. During this discussion, it seems that Character Relationships may no longer be exclusive to the main 12. Now, I can safely say that this could be good in some cases (like maybe Strong Bad and Senor Cardgage's Relationship) but...20X6 Marzipan and El Pardock's Relationship. So, minor character relationships may and will be good on occasions, but it need not overwhelm us. The Character Relationships have never really had much guidelines, and have been sketchy many times. This article, on the other hand, I'm not sure. I guess it could stay, but I want more than just the game in the instances. I'm sure worse ones will come though. But, the lame ones could always get deleted. But for borderline ones like these, it should be important that it gets a full examinations and not just 10 different people yelling out some old Strong Bad quote. I was probably redundant there a few times, but oh well. I think you got my point at least once. {Hops off the stage and puts the mike back, breaking a few props in the process} -free 00:23, 6 July 2009 (UTC)