RB:Entropa
From Transformers Fanon Wiki
Transformers Fanon Wiki > Review board > Entropa
Contents |
Entropa
Review
- Great article, but it has too many red-links. Also, it has no link to another article here. And it doesn't have a personality and traits section. General Grham Talk to me. NCIS Wiki 11:59, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
- Agreed with colleague. No links to another article on this site.—DarthtylerTalk 13:24, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
Things that need to be done
- Change the tense to past-tense
- Create articles off of 3/4 of those redlinks
- That's about it.—DarthtylerTalk 13:26, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
- The fiction section is already in past tense. Entropa isn't dead, so the introductory paragraph that says what she's like should absolutely not be in past tense. --ItsWalky 21:41, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
- The qualifications said "atleast one link to an article on the Transformers Fanon Wiki," not 3/4. Entropa has exactly one link to a fanon page. Sarrc 22:00, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
- You are correct, but I'm afraid that the article that is linked to is invalid. I mean, really, On Fire?! It need to be deleted. Its a decent article, but A: It belongs on wikipedia, and B: Even on Wikipedia, I doubt you'd find an article labeled 'On fire'. Unless the article is given some addition, then it will be deleted. PhobiSpeak To the Almighty... 01:40, 13 July 2007 (UTC) 23:06, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
- It needs to be deleted because it has a link to on fire? That's excessively harsh. It's the most well-written entry on this entire wiki, whether it has one gag-link or not. And it certainly does not belong on Wikipedia, because it's a Transformers fancharacter of no notability. As a Transformers fancharacter, I'd imagine it'd go, well, on HERE. Is this not a Wiki for Transformers fancharacters? --ItsWalky 23:11, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
- I believe what Shadow means is that On fire should be deleted and the link to it. Am I right? General Grham Talk to me. NCIS Wiki 23:15, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
- "On fire" wasn't written by Walky or any of his friends. I wrote it independantly because I thought it was a good idea to explain with a joke how characters who are on fire don't die instantly or set everything on fire all around them. Explaining something in the fiction with something that's unofficial but generally accepted by all is the definition of fanon. Even the Star Wars fanon wiki states that as a part of fanon in it's er.. generous definition of the term. Sarrc 00:47, 14 July 2007 (UTC)
- I believe what Shadow means is that On fire should be deleted and the link to it. Am I right? General Grham Talk to me. NCIS Wiki 23:15, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
- It needs to be deleted because it has a link to on fire? That's excessively harsh. It's the most well-written entry on this entire wiki, whether it has one gag-link or not. And it certainly does not belong on Wikipedia, because it's a Transformers fancharacter of no notability. As a Transformers fancharacter, I'd imagine it'd go, well, on HERE. Is this not a Wiki for Transformers fancharacters? --ItsWalky 23:11, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
- You are correct, but I'm afraid that the article that is linked to is invalid. I mean, really, On Fire?! It need to be deleted. Its a decent article, but A: It belongs on wikipedia, and B: Even on Wikipedia, I doubt you'd find an article labeled 'On fire'. Unless the article is given some addition, then it will be deleted. PhobiSpeak To the Almighty... 01:40, 13 July 2007 (UTC) 23:06, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
- That's about it.—DarthtylerTalk 13:26, 13 July 2007 (UTC)