Category talk:Cloned

This page's existence
Um, any particular reason we need to categorize people on abilities they do? It's like categorizing "characters who can breath fire" or "characters who use magic". 14:56, 2 April 2016 (EDT)
 * This is a small throw-away list with little practical purpose, kind of like other poor categories from 2008. I'd say it's around the same level of "Characters who have kissed Mario". I don't think any of us will miss it. 19:31, 2 April 2016 (EDT)
 * I'd hardly complain if this category was ditched, but to an extent, Category:Magicians is a collection of people who can use magic. Next to the actual magicians/witches/witch doctors/genies/magic-based generic enemies, the category also includes characters who merely own magical devices (such as the Koopalings and King Windbag), characters with unexplained abilities (such as Master Hand and Wingo), and Mario and Luigi are also there for some reason. The category has merit, but it's worth retooling that category, imo.
 * We'll probably have to redefine the magician category but that one is worth keeping. This one isn't. As for Mario being there, I guess it has to do with his Super Mario All-Stars appearance or maybe that sprite from Game & Watch Gallery 3. Not sure about Luigi. That's another topic, though. 21:19, 2 April 2016 (EDT)

Category:Clones can replaced this "Cloned" category. I think we should only be categorizing characters who were created to be a clone, not characters who have been cloned sometime the the past.

16:54, 1 August 2016 (EDT)

Delete this category
Per the discussion above. This category only serves as a list of pointless trivia, similar to Category:Characters who have kissed Mario or Category:Hostages. Besides, we already have Category:Clones, which serves an actual purpose.

Proposer: Deadline: August 28, 2017, 23:59 GMT

Support

 * 1) Per proposal.
 * 2) Per the discussion above.
 * 3) A character being cloned does not indicate anything about the character themselves. Per all.
 * 4) Per all.
 * 5) Per all.
 * 6) I did question its existence earlier so I wouldn't mind a destruction of this category.
 * 7) I really don't see the point of this category, per all. It also leaves too many open ended questions as to what counts.

Oppose

 * 1) Clones are those who are clones of someone. This is people who have been cloned or have a clone. They both serve their purpose and are needed.
 * 2) For the record, this category's purpose is more definite than the now deleted Category:Hostages.

Comments
There are a few people who have been cloned or have a clone, but they do not have an article for that cloned person. And, I don't think they are actually necessary. And I am only going to post those actually in this category. So, these would be removed from the cloned category (because they would have to be removed) when this is deleted, and they don't really have a reason why they should be part of the Clones category. 13:18, 14 August 2017 (EDT)
 * Boom Boom
 * Napse (this also includes Airnapse, though they aren't mentioned in the category)
 * Pom Pom
 * Yaridovich
 * The thing is, we don't need a category for this. It's just meaningless trivia in the vein of Category:Hostages. Niiue (talk) 02:22, 15 August 2017 (EDT)