Talk:PocketMonsters.net: Difference between revisions
mNo edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
I have their names. But technically, they're not ''staff'' per se, just ops, and almost everyone (human) has an op. Anarchist Pokémon channel, I called it. I don't really think we should have an article on this, because it has limited relevance. - [[User:Zhen Lin|振霖]]<sub>[[User talk:Zhen Lin|T]]</sub> 11:40, 26 Apr 2005 (UTC) | I have their names. But technically, they're not ''staff'' per se, just ops, and almost everyone (human) has an op. Anarchist Pokémon channel, I called it. I don't really think we should have an article on this, because it has limited relevance. - [[User:Zhen Lin|振霖]]<sub>[[User talk:Zhen Lin|T]]</sub> 11:40, 26 Apr 2005 (UTC) | ||
I'm inclined to agree. If they had some huge impact on the fandom overall, or at the very least were involved in some famous split from #f_p or similar, an article of some length might be suitable, but as it stands here, it looks more a vanity article than anything else. | |||
Revision as of 13:15, 26 April 2005
Removed non-encyclopedic phrases. If we're going to even bother mentioning the staff, we'll need to include their s/n's, otherwise we shouldn't bother with that section. --Archaic 10:59, 26 Apr 2005 (UTC)
I have their names. But technically, they're not staff per se, just ops, and almost everyone (human) has an op. Anarchist Pokémon channel, I called it. I don't really think we should have an article on this, because it has limited relevance. - 振霖T 11:40, 26 Apr 2005 (UTC)
I'm inclined to agree. If they had some huge impact on the fandom overall, or at the very least were involved in some famous split from #f_p or similar, an article of some length might be suitable, but as it stands here, it looks more a vanity article than anything else.
