User talk:9258fahsflkh917fas: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
→Niko Bellic: correction |
→Niko Bellic: Re |
||
| Line 18: | Line 18: | ||
I apologize for coming off as rude in my response, but my comment about notability was only to secondary characters, saying that they should not be deleted just because they are secondary. - [[User:New Age Retro Hippie|The New Age Retro Hippie]] [[User talk:New Age Retro Hippie|used Ruler!]] [[Special:Contributions/New Age Retro Hippie|Now, he can figure out the length of things easily.]] 20:49, 6 January 2010 (UTC) |
I apologize for coming off as rude in my response, but my comment about notability was only to secondary characters, saying that they should not be deleted just because they are secondary. - [[User:New Age Retro Hippie|The New Age Retro Hippie]] [[User talk:New Age Retro Hippie|used Ruler!]] [[Special:Contributions/New Age Retro Hippie|Now, he can figure out the length of things easily.]] 20:49, 6 January 2010 (UTC) |
||
:I thank you for your apology. Please read my post in context. My comment followed <span class="plainlinks">[http://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Niko_Bellic&diff=prev&oldid=336030677 this post]</span> which seems to be saying that if secondary characters have their own articles then Niko Bellic, a primary character, should definitely have his own article. Part of <span class="plainlinks">[http://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Niko_Bellic&diff=next&oldid=336030677 my post]</span> was a reply to this, and was to say that that is not a valid argument. It just goes to show that the articles about secondary characters should themselves be deleted or merged. My opinion was that the article was of poor quality, lacked substance and was not encyclopedic. It had nothing to do with notability, either of Niko Bellic nor secondary characters. <span style="white-space:nowrap;"><small><span style="font-family:Kristen ITC; color:#FF6600;">~~ [[User:Dr Dec|<span style="color:#006600;">Dr Dec</span>]] <span style="color:#009999;">([[User talk:Dr Dec|Talk]])</span> ~~</span></small></span> 20:57, 6 January 2010 (UTC) |
:I thank you for your apology. Please read my post in context. My comment followed <span class="plainlinks">[http://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Niko_Bellic&diff=prev&oldid=336030677 this post]</span> which seems to be saying that if secondary characters have their own articles then Niko Bellic, a primary character, should definitely have his own article. Part of <span class="plainlinks">[http://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Niko_Bellic&diff=next&oldid=336030677 my post]</span> was a reply to this, and was to say that that is not a valid argument. It just goes to show that the articles about secondary characters should themselves be deleted or merged. My opinion was that the article was of poor quality, lacked substance and was not encyclopedic. It had nothing to do with notability, either of Niko Bellic nor secondary characters. <span style="white-space:nowrap;"><small><span style="font-family:Kristen ITC; color:#FF6600;">~~ [[User:Dr Dec|<span style="color:#006600;">Dr Dec</span>]] <span style="color:#009999;">([[User talk:Dr Dec|Talk]])</span> ~~</span></small></span> 20:57, 6 January 2010 (UTC) |
||
::Ah, I see. Well, glad to have that out of the way. - [[User:New Age Retro Hippie|The New Age Retro Hippie]] [[User talk:New Age Retro Hippie|used Ruler!]] [[Special:Contributions/New Age Retro Hippie|Now, he can figure out the length of things easily.]] 03:26, 7 January 2010 (UTC) |
|||
Revision as of 03:26, 7 January 2010
{{/Shortcuts}
 |
|---|
Niko Bellic
I apologize for coming off as rude in my response, but my comment about notability was only to secondary characters, saying that they should not be deleted just because they are secondary. - The New Age Retro Hippie used Ruler! Now, he can figure out the length of things easily. 20:49, 6 January 2010 (UTC)
- I thank you for your apology. Please read my post in context. My comment followed this post which seems to be saying that if secondary characters have their own articles then Niko Bellic, a primary character, should definitely have his own article. Part of my post was a reply to this, and was to say that that is not a valid argument. It just goes to show that the articles about secondary characters should themselves be deleted or merged. My opinion was that the article was of poor quality, lacked substance and was not encyclopedic. It had nothing to do with notability, either of Niko Bellic nor secondary characters. ~~ Dr Dec (Talk) ~~ 20:57, 6 January 2010 (UTC)
- Ah, I see. Well, glad to have that out of the way. - The New Age Retro Hippie used Ruler! Now, he can figure out the length of things easily. 03:26, 7 January 2010 (UTC)