Talk:Neologisms

From Homestar Runner Wiki

(Difference between revisions)
Jump to: navigation, search
(Wha? I would've sworn I signed it...)
(it already has four; keep it)
Line 7: Line 7:
::(1) Neologisms might include fake product names. (2) This is just the type of thing TBC will continue to do. (3) Calling it stupid is insulting and we should not tolerate that on the wiki. In summary, running gags require 3 instances, but nothing else does, so with but 2 instances, there's no reason to deny a current and bourgening area of H*R comedy a page. '''Keep.''' {{User:Qermaq/sig}} 03:37, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
::(1) Neologisms might include fake product names. (2) This is just the type of thing TBC will continue to do. (3) Calling it stupid is insulting and we should not tolerate that on the wiki. In summary, running gags require 3 instances, but nothing else does, so with but 2 instances, there's no reason to deny a current and bourgening area of H*R comedy a page. '''Keep.''' {{User:Qermaq/sig}} 03:37, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
:::I'm not trying to be insulting, it's just my opinion.  Good point though on keeping it... but I still lean towards deletion. --{{User:Theyellowdart/sig}}
:::I'm not trying to be insulting, it's just my opinion.  Good point though on keeping it... but I still lean towards deletion. --{{User:Theyellowdart/sig}}
 +
::::This article has definite potential, and it's already up to four entries. Keep it. — [[User:It's dot com|It's dot com]] 18:45, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

Revision as of 18:45, 29 December 2006

It has been suggested that the content of the page this talk page accompanies should not be a separate article on the wiki.

  • Please discuss below whether the content of the page should have its own article. Remember to consider ways the content could be brought up to the wiki's standards before making this determination.

If it is decided that the content should not have its own article, then the following additional issues need to be addressed:

  • Whether to merge the content with another page or remove it entirely.
  • Whether to redirect the leftover page or delete it outright.
 


Delortion

Hmm...This article seems to have only two "examples", one of which is a product name, and probably not a neologism. I dunno, I just don't think this article has much potential... Bluebry 20:56, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

I say delete it. It's not that helpful and it's stupid. --TheYellowDart—(t/c)
(1) Neologisms might include fake product names. (2) This is just the type of thing TBC will continue to do. (3) Calling it stupid is insulting and we should not tolerate that on the wiki. In summary, running gags require 3 instances, but nothing else does, so with but 2 instances, there's no reason to deny a current and bourgening area of H*R comedy a page. Keep. - Qermaq - (T/C) Image:Qermaqsigpic.png 03:37, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
I'm not trying to be insulting, it's just my opinion. Good point though on keeping it... but I still lean towards deletion. --TheYellowDart—(t/c)
This article has definite potential, and it's already up to four entries. Keep it. — It's dot com 18:45, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
Retrieved from "http://hrwiki.org/wiki/Talk:Neologisms"
Personal tools