Talk:Mad Big Boo
Merge Mad Big Boo with Mad Boo
|This talk page proposal has already been settled. Please do not edit any of the sections in the proposal. If you wish to discuss the article, do so in a new header below the proposal.|
keep split 1-4
I say we merge them for the only sole reason that both of them are stubs and combineing them wouldn't be a bad idea.
- KS3 (talk) Per LGM's comment, and if we merged Big Boo into Boo then we have to merge all the subspecies into their respective species' articles
- Walkazo (talk) - Per KS3 and LGM. Different species deserve different articles, even if they are stubs.
- Pseudo-dino (talk) - Per all.
- Mr bones (talk) Per all, if we do this, then big boo is boo and goomba is paragoomba ...etc
- I am Zero! Alright, get this straight, I said we merge them because they are both stubs, not because they are the same species. Zero signing out. Zero777 (talk)
- I disagree with LGM. Big Boo is the leader of the Boos in Super Mario 64 in case you didn't know. You see how long the Big Boo Article is on its own? I don't think it should be merged with the regular Boo articles.
- I am Zero! I'm trying to merge the Mad Big Boo article with the Mad Boo article because they are both stubs. Zero signing out.
- BoobyLoonsOspreyFalcon, Big Boo behaves like a big boo in the games. Mad Big Boo behaves like a mad, big boo. I'm not saying that Big Boo should be merged with Boo, but if we merge Mad Boo and Mad Big Boo, then it should make sense to merge Boo and Big Boo for consistency. And besides, merging stubs because they are stubs isn't a very good reason. I don't want stubs either, though. KaBoom! 23:23, 7 July 2010 (UTC)
Big Boo and Boo don't work as an example; the difference is that Mad Boo and Mad Big Boo are one-game enemies. It would behoove the readers to be able to read about Mad Boos in their entirety, instead of having to venture away for the sake of reading one or two lines that are unique. - NARCE 05:52, 10 July 2010 (UTC)