User talk:TheSun42

Dude can you add a picture of Oggy from season 4 idk how to find a picture that isn't copyrighted

I think in April 2024, her article was deleted. I think it should be restored for various reasons: 1.Movie Mario, Movie Luigi, Movie Princess Peach, Movie Toad, Movie Donkey Kong, Movie Cranky Kong, the Koopa General, and Movie Lumalee all have pages on the sister site, and I think it feels odd with Movie Pauline not having a page.

2.Movie Pauline has (somewhat) became a fan-favorite after the release of the movie.

Well, it was deleted in March, and she's only a cameo character who gets slight screen-time in the film and that's it. The page on there even said that she doesn't get a lot of screen-time in the film.

short anwser no this rule isn’t going to be abolished as without it pages would just be to long to read and aren’t needed to be over detailed as they should just get the point with good enough context and leave it at that. Aka quality over quantity

What if a user wanted to make their page the longest page in the site. I made The Super Mario Bros. Movie page extremely long, and that the thing that I am suggesting could make a page be featured. Additionally, the old and new closed and the deleted-as of January 2023 sites didn't have that rule (if I also do truely indeed really remember).

@The Super MarioBobFan Bros. Movie this rule is in place because we don’t want bloated articles you have proven to be very unaware of this wiki recent changes and why pages were deleted and more you need competence before you can request rule changes plus length isn’t a good quality for featured articles we go by quality not quantity. Not to mention the old and closed sites aren’t relevant to the topic so that’s a red herring fallacy.

I am aware of the recent changes, especially with the fact that I have seen a lot of the "then-new" rules.

Yeah about that your clearly not you weren’t even aware of why long pages on this wiki are a limit because mariobobfan you told many times to not bloat pages and you still do. Plus you still aren’t quailtfied to make rule changes request as you don’t know the impact it can cause plus quailty over quantity is the way not quantity over quality.

	Being helpful on reports and being nice to work with.
	Even though you mostly active on the music wikis more then characters Wiki's I will still give this to being an admin that is willing to listen to reports It has been nice working with you on some request I needed an admin before I got it for some time.

I have tired to be nice and be reasonable with them by asking them to provide a reason for reverting my cleaning tag with a reason and they still haven't given me one.

Well crap, after I saw that edit war going on that page, I had to protect it for a while due to the edit warring, but later on, i deleted it because that page looks abysmal.

Tbh I agree now the editors on that page kept bringing back the pointers that I removed for a reason because they are so basic and context lacking. Like what does beating people that are weaker than you qualify for being a jerk and a mean popular girl trope also making people rage pointer is just game mechanics and not everyone is going to have the same issue. Plus by that logic if beating people weaker then you somehow makes a characters a jerk is about the same as those killing zombies are jerks because they killed a bunch of monsters that are weaker then them even though the zombies would have killed them and are known to be bad.

https://loathsomecharacters.miraheze.org/wiki/Category:Characters_who_should_be_in_a_nursing_home not only is it pointless it also clogs the wiki with unnecessary catagorys that serve no importance to the wiki.

It seems like I don't see a page in that category and no one created that category (if they did, then I would have deleted it right away), its just that JamieRules123 added that page onto the Leo Wong page, in which Wikiti removed it from the page already, because of how insulting it is.

ok so the pages hasn't been created yet

What I'm saying is that the category wasn't made yet, if it was made right now, then I would have deleted it. I'm just saying that JamieRules123 (whose been given way too many chances to stay on the character wikis) added that category onto the Leo Wong page, but the category was removed from the page due to it being insulting.

Thanks for telling me anyway besides that minor inconvenience. The poorly written comic relief in my opinion is one of the most bloated pages I have ever seen.

Yeah, all those unexplained examples will be removed until they are properly explained why they're poorly/well written.

and so far I have counted without including the western part of poor and the whole part of good and I have counted 218 Unexplained examples and that many Unexplained examples is enough to bloat a page.

Wow... it seems like there are no explained examples at all.

and guess what I even counted more and the whole poor section comes to a total of 523 examples with no reasoning.

That literally is a lot. It also seems like the "Well-written" has no explained examples whatsoever.

Yeah that's why I mentioned serious cleanup was needed. Now that I think about it when compared to king dedede and Louie Farley and Poorly written. Poorly written takes the cake for being the most Unexplained reasons as while the other two are over detailed they have reasons for their existence just trim it down and it will still be a readable amount but with this page of poorly written removing all the examples will make the page bites take a huge nuke to it.

As soon as I saw the well-written comic relief example section, it seems like Bart and Luigi are the only explained examples on there.

https://loathsomecharacters.miraheze.org/wiki/Category:Candidates_for_deletion

I'm glad you deleted that page.