Talk:List of Strawberry Shortcake characters

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the List of Strawberry Shortcake characters article.
Article policies
Remember that article talk pages are provided to coordinate the article's improvement only, and are not for engaging in discussion of off-topic matters not related to the main article. User talk pages are more appropriate for non-article-related discussion topics. Please do not use this page as a discussion forum for off-topic matters. See talk page guidelines.
Warning THIS IS NOT A FORUM ABOUT THE CHARACTERS OR THE SHOW. Any such messages will be removed on sight!

[edit] Merging

List of Strawberry Shortcake villains should be merged in here. Why have two different articles? Moreover, both articles need serious cleanup. -- Magioladitis (talk) 20:24, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Sure, why not? Blake Gripling (talk) 23:19, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
I'd strongly recommend against it. The character page is closing in on the 32k size rule (notice how Wikipedia displays a size warning during editing when the page comes close to or becomes bigger than 32k). Why I broke out some of the characters I see as minor into a different page (the page was 34k before the breakout, 31k - borderline to the limit - after). RAM (talk) 17:22, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
On the topic of merging, I have merged in the fillies page. However I had to make some sacrifices to keep things below 32k. Characters that are not yet introduced in the 2003 series have been moved to the minor characters page. This page is now at 31k. RAM (talk) 04:07, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Since the Fillies already have their own page (a very good arrangement, Honey Pie should be in there too), it just doesn't seem responsible that their information should be repeated on the "main characters" page, in favor of well-known "classic" characters like Lime Chiffon. Just because a character isn't involved in the current revival does NOT mean that they aren't important! Strawberry Shortcake's chronology looks spotty and poorly edited with certain names relegated to "minor" status on that basis alone. In short: Fillies OUT, "Not Yet Reintroduced Characters" Back IN! I'm sure that some space could be saved by trimming down certain characters' individual entries. Angel Cake's paragraph, for instance, seems needlessly long (although I DID have a hand in that..). Just my opinion, I don't have many. Thanks! 206.58.228.162 (talk) 17:33, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

The fillies page was nominated for AfD and was deleted. The concensus was to merge with the list of characters. Look closely- the link in the infobox redirects to the Fillies anchor on the Characters page. And shouting gets you nowhere -.- . As for trimming their entries, well, I don't think so. That could be in violation of the anti-censorship rights of wikipedia RAM (talk) 08:43, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, my bad, I put those caps in for EMPHASIS, not to indicate shouting. :^) Why was the Fillies Page deleted? Are the "Villains" and "Minor Characters" pages in jeopardy as well? There are many, many things I (obviously!) don't know about how Wikipedia runs. Is this 32k space restriction something new? It sure throws a wrench into the works of an elaborate project such as this page...

What do You think of the idea of possibly a separate entry, dedicated solely to the "Classic" Strawberry Shortcake pantheon? This would free up some space on the existing page, which could then also "shuffle" the entries around to reflect the "Current" chronology of character introduction. I may be totally alone in this, but I do NOT (emphasis) consider characters such as Lime Chiffon and Baby Needs-A-Name to be Minor at all. I still feel that the main page looks wrong with all those names missing.

Just another of my "not-very-many" opinions... Thanks so much for Your input! Berry Prince (talk) 07:47, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

Well, the person who nominated the deletion claims that the information is not important enough to warrant a separate page from what I can understand. For now, the Villains and Minors page is safe. To be truthful, I didn't know about the 32k rule either until someone brought it up to me last month, although someone else now says that the rule isn't really compulsory, but I abide by it anyway because I also visit Wikipedia on my PDA Phone regularly and large pages slow the device to a crawl.
As for a separate entry dedicated only to the classic characters, by all means go ahead, I'm for the idea. We'll know if it's a bad idea or not when it gets nominated for AfD (with any luck, it won't). Remember to update the infobox and related sections in the main article accordingly tho. RAM (talk) 05:19, 2 June 2008 (UTC)