Talk:Pro Impact Players/Videography

Possible Move/Merge?

I believe this should be moved to Pro Impact Players/Videography or merged into the Pro Impact Players article. Please put your comments below. DarkFox01, ETC. 18:46, 21 October 2012 (EDT)

Move

Make it a sub-page. We have a selected Vidiogrpahy which gives the most notable videos, and this can be linked there as the comprehensive list. That is the most encyclopedic way to do it. Clarinet Hawk (talk · contributions) 19:15, 21 October 2012 (EDT)

I agree with the sub page concept. If there were to be a merge, half the Pro Impact page would just be video links. Keep encyclopedic information on one page, videos on the other. --Havoc48 >:D!!! 14:37, 27 October 2012 (EDT)

No merge Pro-merge has no real argument for merging instead of having a subpage, while C. Hawk has one for the subpage. Omega Tyrant 09:19, 28 October 2012 (EDT)

Merge

This is essentially a list of links. It would best be merged with the Pro Impact Players article. Mousehunter321 (talk · contributions) 18:48, 21 October 2012 (EDT)

I think a merge would be best. Air Conditioner All you need is love! And $$$. 19:03, 21 October 2012 (EDT)

Merge per Mouse's points. --RoyboyX Talk 19:16, 21 October 2012 (EDT)

Considering there is a videography section on the Pro Impact Players article, merge it. Toast ltimatum 19:25, 21 October 2012 (EDT)

Having seen what the Pro Impact Players page would look like with this videography on it, I support even moreso, the videography fit in very nicely without taking up a heap of space. Toast ltimatum 14:30, 27 October 2012 (EDT)

Go ahead and merge it once the time comes.--Starman125 (talk) 19:32, 21 October 2012 (EDT)

Merge Article isn't too long to merge with the main article. Mr. Anontalk 22:16, 21 October 2012 (EDT)

I think this section could be good to merge. Dots The Kirby 17:15, 26 October 2012 (EDT)

Delete

In my opinion, having a videography for a particular player or clan is a poor idea to start with, especially as I don't think any other player/clan has one like this. List a couple of their biggest things, but then just link to the YouTube channels. Toomai Glittershine The Irrepressible 10:12, 28 October 2012 (EDT)

Comments

Why are all you merge guys blatantly ignoring what Clarinet Hawk said? Omega Tyrant 22:20, 21 October 2012 (EDT)

We're not, we're only expressing our opinions that this should be merged, for various reasons. --RoyboyX Talk 22:32, 21 October 2012 (EDT)

Why are you assuming that because we don't agree with a bureaucrat, we didn't read what he typed? Toast ltimatum 13:50, 22 October 2012 (EDT)

I think what OT was trying to say is that no one has justified why this information is notable enough to be on the main Pro Impact page, and not part of a sub-page linked therein. Clarinet Hawk (talk · contributions) 13:57, 22 October 2012 (EDT)

I'd like to bring this back up. This imo should be merged with the Pro Impact Players article, because the videography section on that page is quite sloppy, and this article's content can replace that as it is much better organized. We can add explanations of the videos to the table if anyone desires to keep them. --RoyboyX Talk 17:13, 26 October 2012 (EDT)

I do have one suggestion: We move the page to Pro Impact Players/Videography right now, so we can ditch the move tag, and improve what we currently have, then keep the discussion on merging going. Does anybody oppose this? Toast ltimatum 17:19, 26 October 2012 (EDT)

Go ahead. --RoyboyX Talk 17:19, 26 October 2012 (EDT)

That's... actually a brilliant compromise. I support. Air Conditioner I am the air con. 17:37, 26 October 2012 (EDT)

We moved the article so we could continue discussing merge, so the move discussion is now off the table. No one has said anything about not merging other than Clarinet Hawk. --RoyboyX Talk 14:23, 27 October 2012 (EDT)

C. Hawk's argument for moving to a subpage is a whole lot stronger than what you merge guys are putting up (which just essentially consists of "I think this should be merged"), as well as blindly accusing me of appealing to authority when I pointed out you guys haven't addressed him. Refute C. Hawk, or there will be no merge.

Your argument also ignores how the videography section on the main page is for the most notable videos here. Omega Tyrant 09:19, 28 October 2012 (EDT)

As well as blindly accusing me of appealing to authority

I'm sorry, but if you don't want us to do that, don't claim that the reason we don't agree with Clarinet Hawk is because we haven't read what he typed, or that we are ignoring it for t3h lulz, rather than considering the possibility that we simply have our opinions. I shall stick by mine, as having seen the videography on the main article, it fits in very nicely. Toast ltimatum 10:01, 28 October 2012 (EDT)

And here you are being an ass. I said nothing about "not agreeing with C. Hawk", I pointed out you guys didn't address what he said. "We have our opinions" is arrogant and ignoring proper protocol of how a talk page discussion works; when someone brings up a strong point in opposition, you address it and refute, you don't just ignore it. Just saying "I like this better" over and over is not how you handle talk page discussions. Omega Tyrant 10:11, 28 October 2012 (EDT)

I'm just going to respond to OT's original point and confess that I did not see Clarinet Hawk's post at the top, and that my current position on this is neutral. Mr. Anontalk 12:35, 28 October 2012 (EDT)