Talk:Marth: Difference between revisions
m (SmashWiki talk:Merge/Marth moved to Talk:Marth: Merging Page History) |
(moved non-SSBM-related posts from talk:Marth (SSBM)) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
# | == Marth fan club == | ||
the marth fan club is going on, at the bottom of my user page you can sign your username and you get a marth badge, hurry up and join the club. | |||
To all marth lovers [[User:Colter111|Colter111]] ([[User talk:Colter111|talk]]) 16:09, 4 July 2008 (UTC) | |||
==[[Marth#Story in Fire Emblem games|Story in Fire Emblem games]]== | |||
Is this section really necessary, or even appropriate for this page, considering that there are separate articles for both ''[[Fire Emblem: Shadow Dragons and the Blade of Light]]'' and ''[[Fire Emblem: Monsho no Nazo]]'', both of which contain the exact same descriptions word for word? I tried removing it once already but [[User:Erik the Appreciator|Erik the Appreciator]] seemed to think required some discussion. But I should note that I mistakenly forgot to explain my reasons in my edit, I think my reasons for doing so are speak for themselves, so I'm going to go ahead and remove the two paragraphs again and just add links to the other articles. If anyone still disagrees, feel free to undo it. --[[User:Bman87301|Bman87301]] ([[User talk:Bman87301|talk]]) 18:17, 28 July 2008 (UTC) | |||
:I agree with you, it is kinda unneccesary--[[User:Smorekingxg456|Smorekingxg456]] ([[User talk:Smorekingxg456|talk]]) 18:23, 28 July 2008 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 20:04, July 28, 2008
Marth fan club
the marth fan club is going on, at the bottom of my user page you can sign your username and you get a marth badge, hurry up and join the club. To all marth lovers Colter111 (talk) 16:09, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
Story in Fire Emblem games
Is this section really necessary, or even appropriate for this page, considering that there are separate articles for both Fire Emblem: Shadow Dragons and the Blade of Light and Fire Emblem: Monsho no Nazo, both of which contain the exact same descriptions word for word? I tried removing it once already but Erik the Appreciator seemed to think required some discussion. But I should note that I mistakenly forgot to explain my reasons in my edit, I think my reasons for doing so are speak for themselves, so I'm going to go ahead and remove the two paragraphs again and just add links to the other articles. If anyone still disagrees, feel free to undo it. --Bman87301 (talk) 18:17, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
- I agree with you, it is kinda unneccesary--Smorekingxg456 (talk) 18:23, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
