Jump to content

Talk:List of Frontier Brains

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

Cleanup

[edit]

I think we should clean up this article, what do you think Minun (talk) 19:51, 1 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]


Replaced a page that redirected here

[edit]

The page Anabel redirected to the article to which this talk page is attached. Feel free to add an item that links here, if it's apropriate (I wouldn't know one way or the other, and simply have aquired a taste for etymology).  — AnnaKucsma   (Talk to me!) 18:29, 27 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Tucker

[edit]

How does "Tucker" sound like "Tactics"? ~Crowstar~crow calls 23:39, 17 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

erm....it starts with a "T"?—Loveはドコ? (talkcontribs) 23:44, 17 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Battle Frontier in Pokemon Platinum

[edit]

So how are we going to write about this in this article? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Blueknightex (talkcontribs) 11:27, 15 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

proposing a merge

[edit]
The following is a closed discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was to merge a summary to list of Pokémon characters.

I think it would be appropriate to merge this list into List of Pokémon characters. Most of the relevant information is already listed at List of Pokémon characters#Battle Frontier Frontier Brains. Also, there are a lack of reliable third-party sources for this article suggesting that it could be removed for failing WP:V (let alone WP:N). It also fails WP:PLOT and WP:UNDUE for going into exhaustive detail about every last appearance in games/anime/manga, beyond what is necessary for a WP:CONCISEPLOT. All in all, this list does not really meet our policies, but the information could be salvaged at the larger character list. Randomran (talk) 06:42, 24 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Agree. The lack of sources and amount of detail are not good signs. Merging the content sounds like the best solution at this time. (Guyinblack25 talk 17:20, 26 March 2009 (UTC))[reply]
Support merge. For the most part, no reliable sources exist to allow this article to exert notability. Artichoker[talk] 20:40, 27 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support cutting down and merging. Irredeemable mess as not enough sources exist to maintain this level of detail. bridies (talk) 02:36, 28 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.