View Single Post
Old 02-25-2006, 02:46 PM   #35
Mark Prior
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Gender: Undisclosed
Posts: 305
Thanks: 21
Thanked 22 Times in 17 Posts
Points: 6,526.56
Bank: 828.59
Total Points: 7,355.15
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crazyswordsman
That's all your opinion. B&G and 8BT have OVERBLOWN CHARACTER LISTS AS SEPARATE ARTICLES. No one seems to bash those as "fancruft."

And the resaon there's no following that is rallying to save NC from Wiki-deletion is because we're smart enough to know that no one here who does not contribute to things outside NC will have their opinion counted.

Who uses B&G as a "Source of info?" Who uses 8BT as a "Source of info?" Fewer people than NC, in fact. If you actually knew NC's history, you'd know that it has tons of articles related to the Neglected Characters of the Mario Universe. Also, about THREE THOUSAND PEOPLE PER DAY use SMBHQ as a source of info, and SMBHQ was cited by both Nintendo Power AND EGM. NC/SMBHQ is site is more popular than Starmen.net, which is a VERY popular. So don't go bashing it and calling it "unpopular."

1UP, by the way, is a major gaming site, kind of like IGN or GameStop.

And the only reason I said what I did about Tom Soda is because he personally attacked my posting style in an unintelligent way.

Oh yeah, and by calling NC obscure, you guys are bashing it now. If there's any place you should not be bashing NC without us coming down on you, it's here. -CSM
sites like 8BT and B&G can have separate pages for characters, because their characters aren't one dimensional, and require a lot of explanation in terms of story, etc. Meanwhile, NC is one dimensional fluff.

Second paragraph, don't need to argue that one. The only ones who see it as worth saving are the two people who contribute to it.

Paragraph 3, you destroy your own argument by taking about now no one uses 8BT and B&G as a source of info, and then go on about how NC has pages about Neglected Mario characters. What is the point of that? Then you go on and talk about SMBHQ, which has absolutely nothing to do with this argument at all.

So 1 "major" site endorsed NC, and that automatically means it is relevant?

As for that last paragraph, I'd totally expect you to "come down" on me for having a different opinion and being blunt. It's the only tactic you have left, because I've kicked your guys' asses around this topic for the last page or so.
Mark Prior is offline  
 
Page generated in 0.08724 seconds with 12 queries