39,611
edits
Talk:Goomba (balloon): Difference between revisions
→Super Mario Encyclopedia
No edit summary |
|||
| Line 11: | Line 11: | ||
:::Doomhiker, i was going to tell him first, but i was searching, so i was late. Anyways, @Doomhiker, have you any idea why they used "passed" instead of "red"? I'd allow part of the book to be cited though. --{{User:FanOfYoshi/sig}} 12:38, 24 December 2018 (EST) | :::Doomhiker, i was going to tell him first, but i was searching, so i was late. Anyways, @Doomhiker, have you any idea why they used "passed" instead of "red"? I'd allow part of the book to be cited though. --{{User:FanOfYoshi/sig}} 12:38, 24 December 2018 (EST) | ||
::::@FanOfYoshi they probably used ''passed'' instead of red because the winning option was the one that the creator of the proposer, Time Turner voted for. Also, you would need to launch a counter-proposal if you wanted part of the book to be cited. {{User:Doomhiker/sig}} 12: 43 24 December (EST) | ::::@FanOfYoshi they probably used ''passed'' instead of red because the winning option was the one that the creator of the proposer, Time Turner voted for. Also, you would need to launch a counter-proposal if you wanted part of the book to be cited. {{User:Doomhiker/sig}} 12: 43 24 December (EST) | ||
:::::Because of the nature of the proposal, there was no oppose option, it could only pass one way or another. I wouldn't recommend starting another proposal on the Encyclopedia, unless you want to shake up the wiki again. It likely wouldn't change anything anyway, given the amount of evidence there is for the plagiarism. | |||
:::::Anyway, if someone has the Japanese Encyclopedia and it gives a name, I'm for using that. {{User:Alex95/sig}} 12:49, 24 December 2018 (EST) | |||