Talk:Snifit Patrol

Line 118:

:Per LinkTheLefty: it's following policy to use the latest and/or most common names. I feel a lot of the resistance is in response to the fear of this leading to a Snufit-Snifit merge (a merge which I am also opposed to), but as seen with the "[[Winged Goomba]]", and two "[[Para-Goomba (Mario Clash)|Para]]-[[Para-Goomba (Super Mario World)|Goomba]]" pages bearing those names despite the fact that they're actually winged or parachute-bearing [[Galoomba]]s, it's okay to have a mis-match in titles when that's all the canon we have to go with. Official names beat speculation in the Galoomba case, and in this case, the verified "Snifit Patrol" name should also beat the dubious "Snufit Police", regardless of whether it's made up of Snufits or Snifits (which is hard to tell for certain either way). And as was also mentioned in the last proposal, Snufits are a type of Snifit anyway, so like how we have Hammer Bros. and Lakitu in the Koopa Troop, so too does it still make sense if supposed Snufits are in a Snifit Patrol. - {{User:Walkazo/sig}} 14:28, 20 April 2015 (EDT)

:If it's policy to use the newest English name, and their most recent English name is "Snifit Patrol", couldn't you just do the move? [[User:Binarystep|Binarystep]] ([[User talk:Binarystep|talk]]) 15:34, 20 April 2015 (EDT)

::If it's policy to use the newest English name, and their most recent English name is "Snifit Patrol", couldn't you just do the move? [[User:Binarystep|Binarystep]] ([[User talk:Binarystep|talk]]) 15:34, 20 April 2015 (EDT)

:::This is more of an fyi than a request. If it wasn't already mostly a done deal, there'd be a new "move to Snifit Patrol" TPP, but given how it's been such a divisive issue with multiple TPPs and info slowly dripping in and being buried in walls of text and cross-talk, it's still better to make a last statement summarizing the facts. That makes it clear, when people look back on the talk page, why there was a move without a successful consensus, and it gives any dissenters a chance to (hopefully) come back and see the facts we now have and agree that the move is necessary - rather than just springing it on them in spite of the TPP outcomes. - {{User:Walkazo/sig}} 16:16, 20 April 2015 (EDT)

Talk:Snifit Patrol: Difference between revisions

Navigation menu

Page actions

Page actions

Personal tools

Browse

Search

Navigation

Community

Tools

@@ Line 118: / Line 118: @@
 :Per LinkTheLefty: it's following policy to use the latest and/or most common names. I feel a lot of the resistance is in response to the fear of this leading to a Snufit-Snifit merge (a merge which I am also opposed to), but as seen with the "[[Winged Goomba]]", and two "[[Para-Goomba (Mario Clash)|Para]]-[[Para-Goomba (Super Mario World)|Goomba]]" pages bearing those names despite the fact that they're actually winged or parachute-bearing [[Galoomba]]s, it's okay to have a mis-match in titles when that's all the canon we have to go with. Official names beat speculation in the Galoomba case, and in this case, the verified "Snifit Patrol" name should also beat the dubious "Snufit Police", regardless of whether it's made up of Snufits or Snifits (which is hard to tell for certain either way). And as was also mentioned in the last proposal, Snufits are a type of Snifit anyway, so like how we have Hammer Bros. and Lakitu in the Koopa Troop, so too does it still make sense if supposed Snufits are in a Snifit Patrol. - {{User:Walkazo/sig}} 14:28, 20 April 2015 (EDT)
-:If it's policy to use the newest English name, and their most recent English name is "Snifit Patrol", couldn't you just do the move? [[User:Binarystep|Binarystep]] ([[User talk:Binarystep|talk]]) 15:34, 20 April 2015 (EDT)
+::If it's policy to use the newest English name, and their most recent English name is "Snifit Patrol", couldn't you just do the move? [[User:Binarystep|Binarystep]] ([[User talk:Binarystep|talk]]) 15:34, 20 April 2015 (EDT)
+:::This is more of an fyi than a request. If it wasn't already mostly a done deal, there'd be a new "move to Snifit Patrol" TPP, but given how it's been such a divisive issue with multiple TPPs and info slowly dripping in and being buried in walls of text and cross-talk, it's still better to make a last statement summarizing the facts. That makes it clear, when people look back on the talk page, why there was a move without a successful consensus, and it gives any dissenters a chance to (hopefully) come back and see the facts we now have and agree that the move is necessary - rather than just springing it on them in spite of the TPP outcomes. - {{User:Walkazo/sig}} 16:16, 20 April 2015 (EDT)