Difference between revisions of "Talk:Usuki"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
(seperating two different discussions, response) |
(That's not fair!) |
||
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
:It should be described here. --[[User:Jacob|Jacob]] 13:42, 18 Jul 2007 (UTC) | :It should be described here. --[[User:Jacob|Jacob]] 13:42, 18 Jul 2007 (UTC) | ||
::Why? Why does Usuki not deserve to get the same treatment as other colours? --[[Special:Contributions/4.156.96.124|4.156.96.124]] 20:05, 17 December 2008 (UTC) | |||
==Should formats be the same?== | ==Should formats be the same?== | ||
Latest revision as of 20:05, 17 December 2008
Where to mention colour?[edit]
As I am going through the articles, I noticed we had no article about the Usuki Colour. I wonder if it should be described here (like it is done with Quiguki) or if it should get an own article.--Demon 04:42, 18 Jul 2007 (UTC)
- It should be described here. --Jacob 13:42, 18 Jul 2007 (UTC)
- Why? Why does Usuki not deserve to get the same treatment as other colours? --4.156.96.124 20:05, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
Should formats be the same?[edit]
On the Quiguki article the colour section seems to be the dominant section and the doll section the more minor. Here, it is the opposite, although, there seems to be more regarding the Paper Dolls than the Dolls themselves. Which should be the focus... should the Quiguki page be altered to more closely resemble this one? Is a listing of the paper dolls with release dates really necessary? It seems that the link to the page would be plenty.--Cath 22:31, 30 May 2008 (CDT)
- You raise a very valid point. Considering the dolls came before the colour, talk of the dolls should be first in discussion, then the colour (for Quiguki too). What do others think? --Jacob 20:49, 16 Jun 2008 (CDT)