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 "Template talk:Long"
NinjaCoachZ (talk | contribs) |
|||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
I agree. I refuse to shorten my page; I put an incredible amount of time (more than a year) and effort into making my page that way and will not simply let portions of it be wiped out with the press of a button. I have always been vividly interested in Wikipedia-style articles, which is why I come back to it so much. I'd say delete marked pages. -NS2 | I agree. I refuse to shorten my page; I put an incredible amount of time (more than a year) and effort into making my page that way and will not simply let portions of it be wiped out with the press of a button. I have always been vividly interested in Wikipedia-style articles, which is why I come back to it so much. I'd say delete marked pages. -NS2 | ||
| + | |||
| + | Yeah, I'd rather have articles chock-full of information, rather than barebones. In fact, I consider the point of the Chewiki to learn more about characters, sources, and poopers. | ||
| + | |||
| + | And also, this template is only adding to the bandwith-wasting. How hypocritical. [[User:NinjaCoachZ|NinjaCoachZ]] 17:22, 16 October 2009 (CDT) | ||
Revision as of 14:22, 16 October 2009
I think that pages marked with the "Delete" tag should be deleted instead. -Yoshit.
I agree. I refuse to shorten my page; I put an incredible amount of time (more than a year) and effort into making my page that way and will not simply let portions of it be wiped out with the press of a button. I have always been vividly interested in Wikipedia-style articles, which is why I come back to it so much. I'd say delete marked pages. -NS2
Yeah, I'd rather have articles chock-full of information, rather than barebones. In fact, I consider the point of the Chewiki to learn more about characters, sources, and poopers.
And also, this template is only adding to the bandwith-wasting. How hypocritical. NinjaCoachZ 17:22, 16 October 2009 (CDT)
