Talk:T'plana-hath
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
| This article is part of WikiProject Star Trek, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to all Star Trek-related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. | |
| Redirect | This page is not an article and does not require a rating on the quality scale. |
| NA | This page is not an article and does not require a rating on the importance scale. |
[edit] VfD
On April 16, this article was nominated for deletion. The discussion can be found at Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/T'plana'hath. The result was keep. —Xezbeth 18:04, Apr 24, 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Notability
VfD wasn't exactly a glowing recommendation and this article hasn't been expanded in nearly two years. It should be merged. Chris Cunningham 09:59, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
- VfD decided it was notable enough, that's good enough for me. thanks/Fenton, Matthew Lexic Dark 52278 Alpha 771 10:04, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
- It isn't good enough for me. It's obvious that there's nothing more to add to this article. Chris Cunningham 10:07, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
- So what do you suggest? It's perfectly notable - so if your admitting it is notable and you want it gone/merged due to length what use is a notability tag? thanks/Fenton, Matthew Lexic Dark 52278 Alpha 771 10:09, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
- To remind me to do it. I'll merge this later. A notability tag is not some personal insult on your editing work, so kindly quit reverting it. Chris Cunningham 10:12, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
- Wikipedia isn't your blog or storage department - if you can't remember to do it then that's your problem, if you wish to propose a merger (as this is a controversial issue) use {{mergefrom}} and {{mergeto}} (ps: Please see WP:3RR) thanks/Fenton, Matthew Lexic Dark 52278 Alpha 771 10:15, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
- While I acknowledge that having a day job is "my problem", it isn't grounds for a revert. Three minutes is not an appropriate amount of time to leave a template in place pending discussion. See your talk page. I'd appreciate you returning the template. Chris Cunningham 10:35, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
- Your welcome to propose a merge with the merger templates however you want to add a template for a totally different reason - that is not acceptable to me - and - if you will forget why don't you write your self a note on your user page. thanks/Fenton, Matthew Lexic Dark 52278 Alpha 771 10:45, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
- Done. It'd be nice if this template was still here in ten minutes' time. Chris Cunningham 10:54, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
- Just to clarify: I object to a merge. thanks/Fenton, Matthew Lexic Dark 52278 Alpha 771 18:01, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
- Done. It'd be nice if this template was still here in ten minutes' time. Chris Cunningham 10:54, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
- Your welcome to propose a merge with the merger templates however you want to add a template for a totally different reason - that is not acceptable to me - and - if you will forget why don't you write your self a note on your user page. thanks/Fenton, Matthew Lexic Dark 52278 Alpha 771 10:45, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
- While I acknowledge that having a day job is "my problem", it isn't grounds for a revert. Three minutes is not an appropriate amount of time to leave a template in place pending discussion. See your talk page. I'd appreciate you returning the template. Chris Cunningham 10:35, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
- Wikipedia isn't your blog or storage department - if you can't remember to do it then that's your problem, if you wish to propose a merger (as this is a controversial issue) use {{mergefrom}} and {{mergeto}} (ps: Please see WP:3RR) thanks/Fenton, Matthew Lexic Dark 52278 Alpha 771 10:15, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
- To remind me to do it. I'll merge this later. A notability tag is not some personal insult on your editing work, so kindly quit reverting it. Chris Cunningham 10:12, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
- So what do you suggest? It's perfectly notable - so if your admitting it is notable and you want it gone/merged due to length what use is a notability tag? thanks/Fenton, Matthew Lexic Dark 52278 Alpha 771 10:09, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
- It isn't good enough for me. It's obvious that there's nothing more to add to this article. Chris Cunningham 10:07, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
