Talk:T'plana-hath
 | This redirect does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||
| ||||||||
VfD[edit]
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)
Notability[edit]
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)