Talk:Lego Ninjago: Masters of Spinjitzu
|This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:|
I wish that I had seen this article sooner as I've done a fair amount of work on the other article, and this one has most things that are good, although it still needs cleaning up, as can be seen in the list of characters section. So I propose that the intro, the episodes, and the cast of 'my article' be integrated into this article's sections, and the other article deleted. I'll start transferring as long as people agree. Mike44456 (talk) 04:37, 20 January 2012 (UTC)
Yes, I also belive that the articles should be merged into one, it is silly to have two articles about the exact same topic with the exact same information. Also, one is lacking information that the other one has. 220.127.116.11 (talk) 20:12, 27 March 2012 (UTC)
- I've declined a speedy deletion request at Ninjago: Masters of Spinjitzu because content may have been merged so we need to keep attribution, and it is valid redirect anyways. Feel free to check for more mergeable content where not done already.--Tikiwont (talk) 20:19, 5 May 2012 (UTC)
I seriously doubt anyone will thank whoever merges the Ninjago page about the LEGO sets and the page about the series based on it. I vote that we keep the two pages seperate. --ProtoDrake (talk) 22:37, 7 June 2012 (UTC)
I think that we should just copy the tv show plots into this article. The other article is about the LEGO sets, so technically, the plots should be here in the tv show article. QuadPuff (talk) 01:03, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
- QuadPuff Hi there, you're responding to a 3 year old conversation. It's also unclear specifically what you are proposing. The List of episodes article is too large to be merged back into this article, if that's what you were suggesting. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 16:05, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
Are either of the two merge proposals mentioned here still relevant? If not, this discussion should probably be archived for out-of-date content, to prevent confusion. If the merge proposals are still relevant, what exactly do they mean?
- For the first merge proposal: Mike44456, 18.104.22.168, Tikiwont, ProtoDrake, if this discussion is still relevant, which two pages are you talking about?
- For the second merge proposal: QuadPuff, if your proposal is still relevant, what exactly were you proposing?
During October Teletoon marathoned a bunch of episodes. I noticed that on the 18 October 4:30pm EST taping of "Blackout" that the title was different, the series was stylized "NinjaGo: Masters of Spinjitzu: Rebooted". It was odd because normally they didn't include the season title, I had to manually tape it because the difference didn't show up in the manual follow.
Less than the season though, I am wondering about the capital G. Does this recur enough that we should also list the capital G as a stylization of the series title? It seems to match with the battle cry "Ninja...Go!" they sometimes do.
Incorrect positioning of infobox
Hi! I noticed that, in mobile web viewing, the lede for this page appears above the infobox, not below. However, I think that the lede should appear below the infobox. I tried to move the infobox above the lede (in this edit), but the infobox remained below the lede. If anyone can figure out a way to move the infobox above the lede, please let me know! Thanks! Noah Kastin (talk) (🖋) 22:56, 25 May 2017 (UTC)
- I just realized that this occurs for me on all mobile Wikipedia pages, so it is likely something about my device rather than the page, and, as such, does not need fixing. Noah Kastin (talk) (🖋) 23:53, 25 May 2017 (UTC)
Content Reversion: 5/25/17 UTC
Hi, 22.214.171.124! Thank you for editing Wikipedia!
I just reverted some of your edits to this page. These edits stated similarities between Season 4 of Lego Ninjago: Masters of Spinjitzu and the Mortal Kombat film. The edits were reverted because the alleged similarities were not supported by a reliable source, and so were a violation of Wikipedia's policies on original research and synthesis.
If you can find a reliable source that states these similarities, you can re-add the material, followed by the source, so that the material is attributable. Please note that it should be preceded by "(person stating similarities) (states/points out/reasonable alternative) that", as statements of opinion can be presented only with attribution (and I'm pretty sure that "X and Y are similar" is a statement of opinion).
If you have any questions, please let me know.
Lego Ninjago group deletion?
Hi! A discussion as to what should be done with a group of Lego Ninjago-related articles (including this one) is going on at Talk:Lego Ninjago#Lego Ninjago group deletion?. If you can, please check out the discussion and let me know what you think there. Thanks! Noah Kastin (talk) (🖋) 01:49, 26 July 2017 (UTC)
Content Reversion: 11/28/17 UTC
Hi, Phineas53, 2600:1700:f930:7040:1c40:8136:114b:1db5, and 2607:fea8:4fa0:51:5899:6a58:51ad:f987! Thank you for editing Wikipedia!
I just reverted 5 edits, 3 made by 2607:fea8:4fa0:51:5899:6a58:51ad:f987, 1 made by 2600:1700:f930:7040:1c40:8136:114b:1db5, and 1 made by Phineas53. (The edit reversion was done in this edit.) Here's why I reverted these edits:
- 2607:fea8:4fa0:51:5899:6a58:51ad:f987's edits (1, 2, and 3) were reverted for the following reasons:
- Edit 1 added a seemingly unnecessarily large amount of information about the characters to the lede. How much information should be written about the characters is open for debate, but as such a discussion has not yet occurred, the information in the Cast and characters section should probably be sufficient.
- Edits 1 and 2 added information about The Lego Ninjago Movie. However, high-level information about the Lego Ninjago Movie is already on the Lego Ninjago page, so it probably does not need to be here as well.
- Edit 3 expanded on the information about The Lego Ninjago Movie, which was removed because of problems with the information being there in the first place (as stated in the previous bullet point).
- 2600:1700:f930:7040:1c40:8136:114b:1db5's edit (4) was reverted because it was in-between other edits that I wanted to revert. I am not sure whether or not I should manually restore the edit, however, as the changes that it made seem to be part of a silent edit war as to whether or not those changes should be there.
- Phineas53's edit (5) was reverted because it restored a change which I previously reverted in this edit, for reasons explained in the edit summary of that edit. Since Phineas53's edit restored that change without providing a reason for doing so, I reverted the change again. Phineas53, could we discuss whether or not your change should go through, and why?
If anyone has any questions, please let me know.