Talk:Empty Block

Is this even considered official? :| RAP... That name sounds pretty unofficial to the wiki... :|

No. That's why I put the "conjecture" template on it. I was gonna request a deletion, but... — Stooben Rooben 21:57, 13 May 2008 (EDT)

I for one feel this page is unnecessary. Any other opinions? Phoenix Rider 03:58, 17 August 2009 (EDT)

I think it's fine. Those Blocks are common gameplay elements in the Mario series. Time Questions 07:15, 17 August 2009 (EDT)

Refill

Anyway, does used block is refillable?
The preceding unsigned comment was added by FayyazMurmur (talk).

Has Nintendo ever addressed the issue? If not, then we need not worry about reporting it on the article. · SMB (Talk) · 23:54, 15 May 2010 (EDT)

Another Name

"Used Block" is fine, but I think "Empty Block" would be better, since say that the block is empty is more understandable than say that it is used.

Bro Hammer (Talk • Cont)

12:16, 14 March 2012 (EDT)

I can see what you are saying here, actually. Since not all Used Blocks have been 'used' by Mario/Luigi before getting to this phrase, 'Empty Block' makes more sense in context. Don't rename it yet, though, because some people may disagree with you. RandomYoshi^{(Talk • PMs • C)} 12:58, 14 March 2012 (EDT)

These types of article names are on a first come first serve basis Raven Effect (talk)

I see. Thanks for telling me so that I won't make the mistake of making a similar comment next time I see something similar. RandomYoshi^{(Talk • PMs • C)} 13:07, 14 March 2012 (EDT)

I didn't understand.

Bro Hammer (Talk • Cont) 19:39, 15 March 2012 (EDT)

I think what Raven Effect said was that once there is one article name, it should stay like that (I don't necessarily agree with that statement.) It's me, Mario! (Talk / Stalk) 19:42, 15 March 2012 (EDT)

Thanks :) (But I still think Empty Block sounds better).

And I can't even do a proposal, right?

Bro Hammer (Talk • Cont) 17:07, 24 March 2012 (EDT)

It's generally frowned upon since neither name is official Raven Effect (talk)