User talk:Iliekmudkips: Difference between revisions
From Bulbapedia, the community-driven Pokémon encyclopedia.
Jump to navigationJump to search
No edit summary |
Iliekmudkips (talk | contribs) |
||
| Line 8: | Line 8: | ||
Putting all branches in all members of a branched evolution line is not the way things are done at many Pokémon sites. [[serebii.net|Serebii]] doesn't do it, Bulbapedia doesn't do it, I could go on and on. Maybe you ought to lay off licking (or should I say "[[Lick (move)|lieking]]") {{p|Mudkip}}s--who knows what's in their scales?!--and actually read the {{bp|manual of style}} and {{bp|notability requirements}} before making another snap judgement.--[[User:Shiningpikablu252|Shiningpikablu252]] 22:53, 30 September 2007 (UTC) | Putting all branches in all members of a branched evolution line is not the way things are done at many Pokémon sites. [[serebii.net|Serebii]] doesn't do it, Bulbapedia doesn't do it, I could go on and on. Maybe you ought to lay off licking (or should I say "[[Lick (move)|lieking]]") {{p|Mudkip}}s--who knows what's in their scales?!--and actually read the {{bp|manual of style}} and {{bp|notability requirements}} before making another snap judgement.--[[User:Shiningpikablu252|Shiningpikablu252]] 22:53, 30 September 2007 (UTC) | ||
:Using "Find" and searching for the string "evolv" (which will catch evolving and evolve), I only found a guideline covering the anime. If most of the rest of the population think inclusion of the forks are a mistake, I have no problem with the changes being removed. I also did not anticipate anyone becoming seriously upset by the change because content was only added, in a similar format to an already existing article, rather than content replaced or article style broken in a new way. Its a simple revert, its not like I templated out the evolutionary lines or anything major in terms of reformatting. | |||
Revision as of 02:29, 1 October 2007
So I heard some things... File:Ani258MS.gif
Anyway, welcome to Bulbapedia! Remember to follow the manual of style, and of course, capitalize Pokémon names. TTEchidna 22:48, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
Please remember to categorize all new pages you create. --PAK Man Talk 19:04, 29 September 2007 (UTC)
Two-Pronged Articles
Putting all branches in all members of a branched evolution line is not the way things are done at many Pokémon sites. Serebii doesn't do it, Bulbapedia doesn't do it, I could go on and on. Maybe you ought to lay off licking (or should I say "lieking") Mudkips--who knows what's in their scales?!--and actually read the manual of style and notability requirements before making another snap judgement.--Shiningpikablu252 22:53, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
- Using "Find" and searching for the string "evolv" (which will catch evolving and evolve), I only found a guideline covering the anime. If most of the rest of the population think inclusion of the forks are a mistake, I have no problem with the changes being removed. I also did not anticipate anyone becoming seriously upset by the change because content was only added, in a similar format to an already existing article, rather than content replaced or article style broken in a new way. Its a simple revert, its not like I templated out the evolutionary lines or anything major in terms of reformatting.
