Talk:Piriodo

Name
The Eternal Pose of the island says Piriodo. --Klobis (talk) 08:07, December 24, 2012 (UTC)

And about Firs Island and Secon Island? They both use "-TO" in the end to mean "Island" as for Piriodo. Rayleigh92 (talk) 09:22, December 25, 2012 (UTC)

So? There're Firs and Secon's eternal pose view? Rayleigh92 (talk) 21:28, December 25, 2012 (UTC)


 * The Eternal Poses of the two islands do not make appearances in the movie. --Klobis (talk) 03:03, December 26, 2012 (UTC)

Stubby
First of all, rollbacks are only supposed to be used in the case of vandalism, which this case is not.

Secondly, the original version of this page before your removal of the stub template had the stub template, so continuing to remove it while this discussion is ongoing is a rule violation.

Thirdly, the page is a stub. Look at other well written location articles such as Punk Hazard for a model of what a location article should be. At the very least, this article needs more information about the geography of the island, because as it stands now, there is no mention of the features of the island at all. Mr. Whatever (talk) 16:24, September 8, 2014 (UTC)

You should help fix that rather than complain about it. 16:26, September 8, 2014 (UTC)

...That's completely unrelated to the discussion at hand? The point of this post is that the stub template must remain until the information is added to the article. Whether I, or another user does the addition doesn't matter, but removing the stub template will do nothing more than hide a bad article from the category. Mr. Whatever (talk) 16:31, September 8, 2014 (UTC)

Removing stub templates from articles that can clearly be expanded won't help the progress of this wikia at all. It would rather make it look like you were trying to hide unfinished work.

Having this as an active discussion is a massive waste of resources. We have so many other discussions in need of input more than this one. Either put the stub template back on or add the content it needs, nobody's gonna disagree with those options. 19:01, September 8, 2014 (UTC)

The only reason I opened it up was because of Besty continuously rolling back the edits. Obviously, if 1 or 2 more people post soon, we can call this closed and leave the template (or if someone improves the article, we can take it off). Mr. Whatever (talk) 19:12, September 8, 2014 (UTC)