Talk:Submarine: Difference between revisions

From the Super Mario Wiki, the Mario encyclopedia
Jump to navigationJump to search
(→‎Sink it: Edit conflicts....)
Line 17: Line 17:
#{{User|Waluigi Time}} Per all, this article is ridiculous.
#{{User|Waluigi Time}} Per all, this article is ridiculous.
#{{User|TheFlameChomp}} Per proposal.
#{{User|TheFlameChomp}} Per proposal.
#{{User|Doc von Schmeltwick}} Additionally, if you check the initial creation edit, you can see it wasn't really needed ''then'', either. The category's been around since ''2007''. The page came ''years'' afterward.


===Leave its hull structurally intact===
===Leave its hull structurally intact===


===Comments===
===Comments===

Revision as of 18:13, February 12, 2019

Sink this article

Proposal.svg This talk page section contains an unresolved talk page proposal. Please try to help and resolve the issue by voting or leaving a comment.

Current time: Sunday, May 5, 2024, 22:44 GMT

Be sure to give this proposal a read.

Specialized submarines, such as Marine Pop, Captain Wario, and Subwarine, already have their own articles. I don't see why we really need to keep this around since it fails the generic subjects policy in nearly every way. Most of the submarines on this list still act like...surprise, surprise...a submarine.

As for the Sub Coaster, I think it may be worthy of its own article, though it would help if someone who had the Mario Kart 8 or Mario Kart 8 Deluxe Prima guides could look up its official name.

Proposer: Toadette the Achiever (talk)
Deadline: February 26, 2019, 23:59 GMT

Sink it

  1. Toadette the Achiever (talk) Per my proposal.
  2. Alex95 (talk) - This is probably the blandest generic subject article I've seen. Per proposal.
  3. Yoshi the SSM (talk) Per proposal. (maybe the New-Super-Mario-Bros.-U-and-games-related-to-it's version may apply to the gameplay one, but I highly doubt that it would fit the generic subject policy due to how short it is.)
  4. Waluigi Time (talk) Per all, this article is ridiculous.
  5. TheFlameChomp (talk) Per proposal.
  6. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) Additionally, if you check the initial creation edit, you can see it wasn't really needed then, either. The category's been around since 2007. The page came years afterward.

Leave its hull structurally intact

Comments