| Site Notice |
|---|
|
We have a limited coverage policy. Please check our coverage page to see which articles are allowed. |
Difference between revisions of "Talk:Kirby series"
(→name change?: new section) |
(→name change?) |
||
| Line 21: | Line 21: | ||
| − | === Option 3: No case basis | + | === Option 3: No case basis === |
''Change nothing'' | ''Change nothing'' | ||
=== Additional Comments === | === Additional Comments === | ||
Revision as of 20:49, 12 January 2012
Contents
(series)?
Is the "(series)" disambiguation really needed? What is this being disambiguated from? As far as I can tell, individual characters don't fall under the wiki's coverage according to policy, so there wouldn't be anything else (more notable than this) named "Kirby" (there's the unfinished GameCube game, but it would probably work better to only disambiguate the game from this, e.g. "Kirby (game)").--Vellidragon 02:29, 10 January 2012 (UTC)
- The "series" isn't meant to distinguish from any specific "Kirby"-related media/pages/etc. It is currently the standard of all of the series pages on the wiki, as to distinguish The Legend of Zelda series from The Legend of Zelda game. The parenthesis/brackets aren't important in and of themselves; just if we change them for kirby, then we need to do so for series pages, along with many series templates. Tacopill (Talk) 21:43, 10 January 2012 (UTC).
- I don't currently see why it would need to be changed for other series as well. It would be logical to only use it where it is needed and not use it where it's not needed, but meh. "If we change it for X, we must change it for Y" is an argument that tends to come up a lot, but why can things not be handled on a case-by-case basis to judge what makes the most sense in individual cases?--Vellidragon 22:01, 10 January 2012 (UTC)
- Because, as I said, it is the standard. Similar to how bulbapedia has "(Pokémon)" on every Pokémon article, regardless of if other articles of that Pokémon exist. Tacopill (Talk) 00:30, 12 January 2012 (UTC).
- The fact it's "the standard" doesn't need to mean it's a good thing.--Vellidragon 00:32, 12 January 2012 (UTC)
- Because, as I said, it is the standard. Similar to how bulbapedia has "(Pokémon)" on every Pokémon article, regardless of if other articles of that Pokémon exist. Tacopill (Talk) 00:30, 12 January 2012 (UTC).
- I don't currently see why it would need to be changed for other series as well. It would be logical to only use it where it is needed and not use it where it's not needed, but meh. "If we change it for X, we must change it for Y" is an argument that tends to come up a lot, but why can things not be handled on a case-by-case basis to judge what makes the most sense in individual cases?--Vellidragon 22:01, 10 January 2012 (UTC)
name change?
Please vote here depending on what you support following this method:
- # [optional comment] ~~~~
Option 1: All case basis
Change all series pages (along with any related templates) to "X series" pages.
Option 2: Case-by-case basis
Change just this page to "Kirby series"
Option 3: No case basis
Change nothing
