Wookieepedia:Votes for deletion/LEGO

< Wookieepedia:Votes for deletion

This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was keep.—Silly Dan (talk) 23:41, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

LEGO (talk - history - links - logs)

Keep

  1. ~~ Commander Jorrel Fraajic Wiki-shrinkable Communications Relay ~~ 00:12, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
  2. If this was more of a Wikipedia article, then why do we still have Hasbro?? This article is useful and improtant to some people. --Darth Phonebook 01:51, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
  3. It is useful! I added the list to Brickipedia, which, might I add, is in desperate need of attention. This article is definitely a keeper. -Milo FettComlink 02:05, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
  4. Keep. This is like saying delete Del Rey, Hasbro, DK, etc. —Xwing328(Talk) 02:06, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
  5. You'd have to be absolutely stupid to delete it (sorry about that comment just annoyed at seeing this up for deletion) -NighthawkLeader 02:28, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
  6. It needs a lot of work, but there is no need to delete it. And Nighthawk, please avoid using the phrase "absolutely stupid" to describe other users just because they disagree with you.–SentryTalk 03:15, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
  7. Yoshi626 03:17, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
  8. Strong Keep. --Azizlight 03:20, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
  9. Green Tentacle (Talk) 10:51, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
  10. Strong Keep, per Xwing328. jSarek 12:01, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
  11. I need a name (Complain here) 12:01, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
  12. A company like any other and I'm all about helping other wikis as well. -- Riffsyphon1024 12:10, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
  13. WHO tagged this to be deleted? after all, LEGO did make LEGO Star Wars, didn't it? It's like saying we should delete a company article!--SWME 21:56, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
  14. Wildyoda 05:45, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
  15. Kuralyov 05:47, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
  16. Keep! Fireball93
  17. What's next? Dark Horse, Kenner, or perhaps LucasArts? KEJ 19:40, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
  18. I thought at first this was an article about LEGO the toy, which would be like having an article on joysticks or dice since we have article on video games and RPGS. But since it's about LEGO the Lucasfilm-licensee producing games and toys, we need it. —Silly Dan (talk) 02:05, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
    As occasional viewer of Wookiepedia I want to find ANYthing about SW, even information about merchandising. LEGO is quite important in that context and part of the SW universe for many years now. I recommend to leave this article and even to expand it with more pictures. 17 January 2007
  19. What are we talking about? Darth Olson 17:18, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Merge

Redirect

Delete

  1. This is more of a Wikipedia article than a Wookiepedia one. - Patricksheridan 6:30pm, January 11, 2007

Comments

Right now I'm voting for keep, as some of the information is useful. However, if a category named "Keep but total rewrite" were present, I'd pick that. ~~ Commander Jorrel Fraajic Wiki-shrinkable Communications Relay ~~ 00:13, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

  • As occasional viewer of Wookiepedia I want to find ANYthing about SW, even information about merchandising. LEGO is quite important in that context and part of the SW universe for many years now. I recommend to leave this article and even to expand it with more pictures.