Talk:Latin Meltdown: Difference between revisions
From MediaWiki
Jump to navigationJump to search
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
:: I concur with Killmichael. [[User:Tom Servo the Great|Tom Servo the Great]] 22:45, 18 November 2011 (EST) | :: I concur with Killmichael. [[User:Tom Servo the Great|Tom Servo the Great]] 22:45, 18 November 2011 (EST) | ||
Canon is agnostic in regards to appropriateness. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 00:39, 19 November 2011 (EST) | Canon is agnostic in regards to appropriateness. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 00:39, 19 November 2011 (EST) | ||
While I still see no reason for a single gag like this to warrant an article of its own, as long as it's hear it should at least comment on it's nature. --[[User:KilMichaelMcC|KilMichaelMcC]] 10:33, 19 November 2011 (EST) | |||
While I still see no reason for a single gag like this to warrant an article of its own, as long as it's hear it should at least comment on it's nature. So now it does. --[[User:KilMichaelMcC|KilMichaelMcC]] 10:33, 19 November 2011 (EST) | |||
Revision as of 15:33, 19 November 2011
Does this one (unfunny, racist, sexist) gag need an article? --KilMichaelMcC 22:00, 18 November 2011 (EST)
- I concur with Killmichael. Tom Servo the Great 22:45, 18 November 2011 (EST)
Canon is agnostic in regards to appropriateness. --ItsWalky 00:39, 19 November 2011 (EST)
While I still see no reason for a single gag like this to warrant an article of its own, as long as it's hear it should at least comment on it's nature. So now it does. --KilMichaelMcC 10:33, 19 November 2011 (EST)
