Talk:Powershield canceling

Add topic
Active discussions
Revision as of 23:29, March 2, 2018 by Serpent King (talk | contribs) (Serpent King moved page Talk:Power shield canceling to Talk:Powershield canceling: By consensus and also to be consistent with Powershield)
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

Move proposalEdit

Neutral, leaning towards support. This one makes a bit more sense, but you seem very nitpicky about the names of articles. Black Vulpine of the Furry Nation. Furries make the internets go! :3 18:57, 27 February 2018 (EST)

Why does it matter that I'm being "nitpicky" if I'm attempting to be constructive? Awesome Cardinal 2000 20:22, 27 February 2018 (EST)
Support as per Vulpine but that is absolutely not being constructive. St. Reggie, Leprachaun 23:50, 27 February 2018 (EST)
Learn what constructive means. This is being done in an attempt to standardize the namings of articles, according to the Manual of Style. Awesome Cardinal 2000 00:48, 28 February 2018 (EST)
As I said before.

Unnecesary.

St. Reggie, the Iron Leprachaun Warrior 21:50, 1 March 2018 (EST)

There are more constructive ways to discuss this if you want your voice to be heard. Awesome Cardinal 2000 00:31, 2 March 2018 (EST)
Define "constructive". St. Reggie, the Iron Leprachaun Warrior 01:37, 2 March 2018 (EST)
A constructive response consists of bringing up different points/responding to the points that others have made, that contributes to the discussion, without posting responses that are only a couple of words long. Awesome Cardinal 2000 01:42, 2 March 2018 (EST)
Exactly. It has absolutely nothing to do with why I brought it up in the first place. St. Reggie, the Iron Leprachaun Warrior 01:51, 2 March 2018 (EST)