Jump to content

Talk:Piccolo (Dragon Ball)

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 71.239.23.70 (talk) at 19:03, 1 December 2009 (→‎Piccolo Jr.). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

WikiProject iconAnime and manga: Dragon Ball C‑class Low‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Anime and manga, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of anime, manga, and related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
CThis article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
LowThis article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the Dragon Ball work group.

Template:Maintained

Proposed Merge

I propose that Piccolo be merged with List of characters in Dragon Ball. The article has no character reception or and more than 90% of the character is written in universe. Much text about the character within the plot which can be say much easier and faster at Dragon Ball series article SSJ 5 (talk) 01:10, 20 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hate to say it but I think you're only doing this because the Yamcha page (which you worked hard on) was merged. Sorry but WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS is really an illegitimate argument. If all Piccolo needs is reception data and some trimming, then a merger is not appropriate at this time. Lord Sesshomaru (talkedits) 14:35, 20 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I'm agreeing with Sesshomaru here; Piccolo is in good enough shape to stand on it's own. It needs a good clean up, but what article doesn't? Reception info is hard to get, Trunks (Dragon Ball) is missing it too, but it's enough to condemn the article for.--Koji 16:39, 20 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I think I made some good arguments. You can accept them or reject them. Arguments have nothing to do with Yamcha article, although that was the reason for the nomination (it is legit anywayz, because the page is not satisfying). The article is in terrible shape, and cleanup was requested (by me, on DB project) a few months ago, but no one responded. Thus, I think that the article would be a good candidate for a merge. If anyone can find verifiable reception info, please do so. SSJ 5 (talk) 17:15, 20 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Started working in the reception from the article.Tintor2 (talk) 21:51, 21 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Piccolo Jr.

Hey guys. How're you doing? --71.239.23.70 (talk) 19:03, 1 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]