Talk:Cute Overload

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is part of Blogging WikiProject, an attempt to build better coverage of Blogging on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can visit the Project Page, where you can join the project, see a list of open tasks, and join in discussions on the project's talk page.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the assessment scale. Please rate the article and then leave a short summary here to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the priority scale.


Contents

[edit] Beginnings

A very rough page, but one that should definitely be here! (Widely viewed and an award winner - definitely does not meet any deletion criteria!) --JD79 16:09, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

Love to help, but extended exposure to pictures of bunnies, kittens and puppies makes me queasy ;-) Fan-1967 22:25, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
No worries....? I just added links to all of the Rules of Cuteness to the page. Dracwolley 18:06, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
And someone deleted that. Great. That took me two hours. Dracwolley 10:28, 23 April 1007 (UTC)
Someone put them back - they should stay there, as there's not a concise list on the site. This page has come pretty far! --JD79 17:21, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Rules of Cuteness

Please leave the Rules of Cuteness in the article. They are not easily obtainable as a concise list through the CO website and therefore WP serves as a unique & easily usable source of that information. --JD79 19:41, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

Err, the rules are linked to right in the categorie menu...all right there...in a line...one right after the other...none missing. So yes, they are extremely easy to obtain through the CO website. Leaving them in here is a blatant disregard to policy, in that Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information. I'm removing them. As a compromise, I'll link to the "Rules of Cuteness" page in the external links section. --74.137.225.219 19:58, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Vocabulary section

I added a separate section with a few vocab words and their "translations", and it was removed as being "fancruft". I think there were 5 different words there, so it wasn't overbearing, and I felt it added some colour the entry. CO has some, well, CUTE vocabulary and I think the section is worth keeping.

Comments? Msp0 08:26, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

It is fancruft. Go to that page to look at the definition of fancruft, which is, in a nutshell, anything that only fans of the topic would care about. Considering that only people within the Cute Overload universe use the words, the vocab is the very definition of fancruft. A few examples are all that is necessary, not a list of it. Plus the creator is constantly coming up with more, which means the list would never end. To go even further, Wikipedia is not a dictionary OR an indiscriminate collection of information. The same goes for the rules. It's cluttering the page up with useless information to anyone who doesn't visit the webpage. Again, just a few examples would suffice, rather than listing every single one of them. --74.137.225.219 19:54, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
As Msp0 said, there were only a few words listed. Thus, what this user did wouldn't be fancruft, because it wasn't a full listing. It was just a small example of words used.Ingres77 17:52, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
According to the history, there were nine words. Nine words is not a few. Even worse, they were in list format. Two or three examples are sufficient enough to get the point across and it doesn't get repetative or move in the direction of breaking policy. --74.137.227.117 22:40, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
Who the fuck is "User:74.137.227.117"? For being so bloody pedantic and officious about this WP entry, why don't they have a proper WP ID? Listen up, 74: create an account, log in and sign your posts; otherwise, we're not going to take your opinion seriously anymore. Bricology (talk) 03:29, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] See Also section

I added a See Also section so we can included related websites indexed by wikipedia. --Talltree1 13:29, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Since the only article listed there was promptly deleted, I have since removed the section. The section can be included again if another similar article is found. --74.137.227.117 03:32, 29 August 2007 (UTC)