Talk:Poop

Why not have Poop as a redirect to here?


 * It seems like a good redirect guys...

Is that thing actually called "Poop" ingame? If yes, make a redirect, if no, don't. Gofer

This is... a wierd article...

....Err I think when O'Chunks says his Chunk words, he is referring to himself. Like if I'm right now punched in the face I would say "I have been Jorged!" or when I'm leaving I would say "JORGE AWAY!" Click here to see the universe. SuperLuigi821 Oh you let the hat out of the bag, Big Top!
 * Ya, should it be moved back?

Uh, I just played WarioWare: Touched!! and I went through the boss stage, like, a thousand times, and didn't see him get any poop. You may want to consider revising it...
 * Probably because you played the Western version where the poop is replaced with something else. --Grandy02 17:57, 26 March 2009 (EDT)

Somebody requested an image for this page!? 18:54, 25 March 2009 (EDT)
 * You're not the only one to have noticed. --Blitzwing 17:41, 26 March 2009 (EDT)
 * Well, why not? --Grandy02 17:57, 26 March 2009 (EDT)
 * I actually came to this page via Ragey's site. 01:16, 27 March 2009 (EDT)

Hmmm....poop.I'm supposing using the curse word 4 it as a redirect will lead to an instant ban?This article is a troll's paradise...

I agree with NY. I think this page should be protected so only autoconfirmed users can edit it due to it's likeliness to be spammed. Yoshario'''

I thought you HAD TO BE A USER to edit any pages.U mean spammer IP users?
 * I think it means all new users can't edit the article (their account has to be a few days old first). I'll protect it now. Also, pertaining to your first question, "shit" is used in Conker's Bad Fur Day, but I'm not sure if that's significant enough to warrant a redirect. Even so, not making it yourself is a smart move, as it might seem sorta shifty. - 18:32, 26 March 2009 (EDT)

I wouldn't use that expletive around the wiki due to the fact that I expect we may very young users browsing this wiki and since a proposal passed that banned swearing. Yoshario'''

"The Giant Poo Monster" (As it's called) in Bad Fur Day is made of "****" but since it's also called "poo", poo should maybe be a redirect.
 * Isn't it actually called The Great Mighty Poo? I don't remember a proposal about banning expletives, (I just remember a huge discussion about the Bob Hoskins article). Swearing at people is wrong, but so is censoring quotations on an encyclopedia. - 18:48, 26 March 2009 (EDT)


 * Exactly, on all points. --

Ur right..I remember on Wikipedia I found a random article about a way "an octopus does sexual activity on a women".I was scarred for life and know what?THERE WAS A PICTURE!!!!Worst random article.Evah.


 * Hmmm...probably related to shunga, or erotic ukiyo-e Japanese woodblock prints. That's the national artistic tradition Mario is coming out of. =P --  P.S. Off-topic, I know.

Uhm...I got an image of the POOP in Made in Wario. <---HERE User:Wolfenpilot687 03:29, 4 May 2009 (EDT)

History
Should this page cover all appearances of poop in a history section? Or would this be like covering random objects such as beds, windows and TV sets in separate articles? --Grandy02 14:09, 17 March 2010 (EDT)
 * No, it shouldn't. We really don't need yet another article that mixes objects from ten different games completely unrelated in their functions. We have enough Elephants already. A different question it would be if it was (collectively) officially named, but that isn't the case, so no. - 16:10, 17 March 2010 (EDT)
 * Are you suggesting that we shouldn't have pages like Elephant? I kind of disagree, but it's an interesting issue. Intuitionally, I'd say that the Elephants page is fine, but I'm not so sure about an article covering all appearances of poop. Don't know how to reason that though. 16:48, 17 March 2010 (EDT)
 * There are already various random references to poop in this article. Should it be trimmed then? On the other hand, would we actually create a separate article on something generic like poop just because it appears in some mini-games? Of course, the gameplay-relevant appearance of "running poop" in Wario: Master of Disguise warrants an article (which was also the reason why the article was made), but the question is if the "normal" poop deserves more than a brief mention. The same can be said about Onigiri. It is a playable character in one game and thus deserves an article, but otherwise rice balls are just common food (in Japan), yet the article also informs about completely unrelated onigiri, such as food in Smash Bros.. --Grandy02 18:01, 17 March 2010 (EDT)
 * Is this name even official?Also, it's just a minor gameplay element, they don't play any special role.
 * So, should this be merged with Arty Wario? The other feces are just generic objects that are not more important than other generic stuff. --Grandy02 10:58, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

I agree.


 * Actually, it plays an important role in WMOD as it is used to defeat a certain boss. I think it was called Barfatronic Lavanator or something like that.--

Paintings were playing important role, I created their article and it was removed. If we create an article about this barfatronic thing it will be very small, so merging it with arty wario is better.


 * Iemember, it was called the Barfatronic Lavachomper. The poop is needed to defeat the boss because it was the only thing small enough to be able to touch its uvila. I think it deserves to stay, and what paintings were you talking about? --

So it's the boss that was named like that...I was talking about the paintings in SM64. I still think it's should be merged with Arty Wario(just the WMOD one) and remove the usless unimportant gameplay elements.

Delete
I say we delete this article because it is not a specific topic, item, ect. If unneeded objects are getting articles then we should have an article on air since that actually plays a role in some games, it allows Mario to be underwater without drowning.

Proposer: Deadline: March 5, 2011, 22:45 GMT

Support

 * 1) I am Zero! Per proposal. Zero signing out.