Talk:Hun-Grrr (SG): Difference between revisions
From MediaWiki
Jump to navigationJump to search
Interrobang (talk | contribs) |
|||
| Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
:::If SG Hun-Grrr is here it implies there aren't any other Hun-Grrrs. But there is. There is a G1 Hun-Grrr whose name has an alternate spelling of "Hun-Gurrr". - [[User:Starfield|Starfield]] 16:12, 12 November 2009 (EST) | :::If SG Hun-Grrr is here it implies there aren't any other Hun-Grrrs. But there is. There is a G1 Hun-Grrr whose name has an alternate spelling of "Hun-Gurrr". - [[User:Starfield|Starfield]] 16:12, 12 November 2009 (EST) | ||
::::That's what the disambig template ''is for''. "Hey, there's another dude with the same name! Go here if you want him." [[User:Interrobang|—Interrobang]] 16:41, 12 November 2009 (EST) | ::::That's what the disambig template ''is for''. "Hey, there's another dude with the same name! Go here if you want him." [[User:Interrobang|—Interrobang]] 16:41, 12 November 2009 (EST) | ||
:::::The G1 character is officially Hun-Gurrr, Hun-Grrr or Hun-Grr depending on the source medium. Therefore, all three namespaces are already occupied. Any new character using any of those spellings would automatically need a disambig (in this case Hun-Grrr (SG)). The G1 character would then occupy namespaces Hun-Gurrr, Hun-Grrr (G1) and Hun-Grr. At least that's what I think Jeysie means. [[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] 16:49, 12 November 2009 (EST) | |||
Revision as of 21:49, 12 November 2009
Deleting/Moving
Considering this is a canon spelling for the G1 character, I think it's a bad idea to move the SG article here. Clarity trumps very technical accuracy, IMHO. --Jeysie 06:59, 12 November 2009 (EST)
- I agree. - Starfield 09:04, 12 November 2009 (EST)
- I concur as well. Geewunling 09:08, 12 November 2009 (EST)
- What "clarity" are you invoking here? How is redirecting this to Hun-Gurrr more "clear" than having the SG guy here? Why can't the disambig template do the job it's made for? —Interrobang 16:07, 12 November 2009 (EST)
- If SG Hun-Grrr is here it implies there aren't any other Hun-Grrrs. But there is. There is a G1 Hun-Grrr whose name has an alternate spelling of "Hun-Gurrr". - Starfield 16:12, 12 November 2009 (EST)
- That's what the disambig template is for. "Hey, there's another dude with the same name! Go here if you want him." —Interrobang 16:41, 12 November 2009 (EST)
- The G1 character is officially Hun-Gurrr, Hun-Grrr or Hun-Grr depending on the source medium. Therefore, all three namespaces are already occupied. Any new character using any of those spellings would automatically need a disambig (in this case Hun-Grrr (SG)). The G1 character would then occupy namespaces Hun-Gurrr, Hun-Grrr (G1) and Hun-Grr. At least that's what I think Jeysie means. Khajidha 16:49, 12 November 2009 (EST)
- That's what the disambig template is for. "Hey, there's another dude with the same name! Go here if you want him." —Interrobang 16:41, 12 November 2009 (EST)
- If SG Hun-Grrr is here it implies there aren't any other Hun-Grrrs. But there is. There is a G1 Hun-Grrr whose name has an alternate spelling of "Hun-Gurrr". - Starfield 16:12, 12 November 2009 (EST)
- What "clarity" are you invoking here? How is redirecting this to Hun-Gurrr more "clear" than having the SG guy here? Why can't the disambig template do the job it's made for? —Interrobang 16:07, 12 November 2009 (EST)
