Notice: We are aware that many of the Chewiki’s images are still broken. We promise: we will try our best to fix it, but we don't guarantee that the fix will be trivial.
Difference between revisions of "Talk:The Book Trilogy"
From Chewiki Archive - YouChew:
1% Funny, 99% Hot Gas
(Created page with "There is no point in this article. It's just like my "seven wonders" article from earlier. - TSamson 23:21, 6 July 2012 (PDT)") |
|||
| (One intermediate revision by one other user not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| − | There is no point in this article. It's just like my "seven wonders" article from earlier. - [[User:TSamson|TSamson]] 23:21, 6 July 2012 (PDT) | + | There is no point in this article. It's just like my "seven wonders" article from earlier. Instead of making a vague list, the two other books should have their own article. - [[User:TSamson|TSamson]] 23:21, 6 July 2012 (PDT) |
| + | |||
| + | :This article was originally written in 2009, when jokes like that were erlaut. Plus, this article is of at least slightly better quality than yours. Plus, it is not just a collection of [[spadinner]] jokes. As for giving the other 2 their own article, they are not significant enough to write an article about. -[[User:Yoshit|Yoshit]] 06:34, 7 July 2012 (PDT) | ||
Latest revision as of 05:34, 7 July 2012
There is no point in this article. It's just like my "seven wonders" article from earlier. Instead of making a vague list, the two other books should have their own article. - TSamson 23:21, 6 July 2012 (PDT)
- This article was originally written in 2009, when jokes like that were erlaut. Plus, this article is of at least slightly better quality than yours. Plus, it is not just a collection of spadinner jokes. As for giving the other 2 their own article, they are not significant enough to write an article about. -Yoshit 06:34, 7 July 2012 (PDT)
