Talk:Metallicar
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] Removed broken image link Image:PromoSN100-01.jpg
I removed the link Image:PromoSN100-01.jpg, since it is red and apparently broken. Maybe it's a typo in the file name? Feel free to reinsert it or another appropriate image of the car. Dugwiki 16:55, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
[edit] an article about the car?
I'm as big a fan of Supernatural as the nest guy, but I simply don't see the point of having an article about an inatimate object. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 75.34.94.212 (talk • contribs) 19:14, 28 August 2006 (UTC).
- Plenty of inanimate objects merit their own articles, but I agree on this one, I'm not sure it needs one. I think it could quite easily be merged into the main Supernatural article. Shannernanner 02:07, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Stub or no
(moving discussion from User talk:Shannernanner#Metallicar, stub or no to here)
Regarding marking Metallicar as a stub or not... articles don't remain as stubs just because they need extra editing... most articles on Wikipedia tend to be far from perfect. The definitions mentioned at WP:STUB seem to boil down to "is there still a noticable/significant amount of information that needs to be added?" Do you believe that the article is obviously too small, that any non-expert could add information to the article simply by googling for more information?
Up until just a few weeks ago, WP:STUB defined stubs as any article that had "3 to 10 short sentences". It's recently changed to be more flexible for more detailed topics, but given that many topics on Wikipedia get more than 2000 google hits, I see no reason why the 3-10 sentences criteria doesn't apply to Metallicar, and at 14 sentences, it doesn't seem like there could be much more information out on the web for non-experts to add to the article. --Interiot 05:11, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
- Perhaps this ought to be discussed on the Metallicar talk page. It says on the Wikipedia:Stub page that "The length of the article is not an absolute rule to classify between a stub and a non-stub." Shannernanner 05:21, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
-
- The recent changes to WP:STUB haven't really been discussed much yet, but to me anyway, the gist of the new definition seems to be:
- Even a long article on a complicated topic may be a stub; conversely, a short article on a topic of narrow scope may not be a stub.
- Since this article is about a more narrow scope, I don't see why the criteria that existed for quite some time don't apply to this article.
- Just answer this specific question: Do you believe that the article is still obviously missing quite a bit of information, and that any non-expert could expand the article without significant effort? If the answer is no, then please use a more appropriate tag like {{expansion}} or {{copyedit}}. --Interiot 05:46, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
- The recent changes to WP:STUB haven't really been discussed much yet, but to me anyway, the gist of the new definition seems to be:
-
- I can see that you feel very strongly about this; though I feel your question is irrelevant, I'll apply specific tags. Shannernanner 07:10, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Merge or Delete?
Honestly, I'm not sure that this article should even exist, per WP:NEO. Anything useful in this article should be merged into the Supernatural (TV series) article and deleted. The monikor Metallicar steers a little too close to WP:CRUFT, and I think it should be dropped in the Supernatural article unless the name has been picked up by the show's creators. And that would need to be cited from a reputable source (i.e. - not a blog or message board). - Debuskjt 19:20, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
- I agree about the title, but I think there is some information in the article about the car itself that could be usefully merged into the Supernatural main article. -Shannernanner 04:34, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
- If anything, it should be merged. --Stretch 07:03, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
