Talk:Pollux
This should be merged with Castor . . . 24.42.141.143 02:17, 9 August 2006 (MST)
- I can see an argument for it, but personally I like having separate articles for individually-named Youma. I don't see any real harm in it, anyway. dooky 06:59, 9 August 2006 (MST)
- I agree with the merge. The two youma are so alike, it seems a bit redundant to have two whole articles about them. BettyAnn 11:20, 17 July 2007 (MST)
- I'm not sure why this is being brought up again a year later, but I disagree with the merge. Cyprine and Ptilol have separate articles, as do Chiral and Achiral and Deimos and Phobos. As dooky said, it does no harm to have two different ones. Kerochan no Miko 13:57, 17 July 2007 (MST)
- Because it is still there a year later, and there hasn't been much discussion about it in all that time. Don't want people to discuss it later? End the discussion or remove it. Anyway, I think a merge would be good because they are essentially the same character, and anything written about one (with the exception of name origins) is pretty much just going to be the SAME thing that is written about the other. Besides, these two characters depend extremely heavily on each other; what is Castor without Pollux, and vice versa? There is no harm in two different ones vs. the same one, but consider that these two are a pair. Honestly, who do you think is searching for Pollux and not Castor? Do you really think that people are researching Castor's character to the exclusion of Pollux? I think that anyone trying to find information on them will be more inclined to research the pair as a team rather than individuals (because they do not operate as individuals). And since they ONLY function as a team (not as individuals), we should make it very clear that they should be considered a team. BettyAnn 23:18, 18 July 2007 (MST)
- For your first point, I don't see a point in removing a discussion simply because it's over.
- For the second, they aren't going to be merged. Feel free to edit the article and make it clear that they work as a team, but the articles are staying separate. Kerochan no Miko 23:24, 18 July 2007 (MST)
- Because it is still there a year later, and there hasn't been much discussion about it in all that time. Don't want people to discuss it later? End the discussion or remove it. Anyway, I think a merge would be good because they are essentially the same character, and anything written about one (with the exception of name origins) is pretty much just going to be the SAME thing that is written about the other. Besides, these two characters depend extremely heavily on each other; what is Castor without Pollux, and vice versa? There is no harm in two different ones vs. the same one, but consider that these two are a pair. Honestly, who do you think is searching for Pollux and not Castor? Do you really think that people are researching Castor's character to the exclusion of Pollux? I think that anyone trying to find information on them will be more inclined to research the pair as a team rather than individuals (because they do not operate as individuals). And since they ONLY function as a team (not as individuals), we should make it very clear that they should be considered a team. BettyAnn 23:18, 18 July 2007 (MST)
- I'm not sure why this is being brought up again a year later, but I disagree with the merge. Cyprine and Ptilol have separate articles, as do Chiral and Achiral and Deimos and Phobos. As dooky said, it does no harm to have two different ones. Kerochan no Miko 13:57, 17 July 2007 (MST)
- So basically, you're refusing to listen to opinions for the merge, and haven't even justified why you think they should not be merged? I don't think consensus can be reached that way... BettyAnn 23:55, 18 July 2007 (MST)
- No, I listened to your reasons and, as I said previously, I agree with dooky's opinion from last year, that there's absolutely no harm in having two separate articles and merging them seems rather pointless to me. And frankly, I have to wonder why you're so worked up about this issue that you feel the need to be rude about it. Kerochan no Miko 00:14, 19 July 2007 (MST)
- I was wondering the same thing about your comment. It seemed rather snarky; instead of saying, "Good points, but I think we should keep them separate," you seemed to say, "I don't care what anyone else says, I'm the boss here." I got a bad attitude vibe from you, so I responded to that. I'm not "worked up" over anything; I just feel like 1) other people's opinions should be valued and 2) we should try to present articles in a way that makes sense based on the character. Quality over quantity. Fans are coming here for clear, concise information, so it's important to be as clear as possible. With separate articles, I personally do not feel that the casual reader will understand how strong the connection between the two characters is, that the two absolutely cannot work separately.
- And just to be clear, I do value other people's opinions against the merge, it's just that no one has given strong reasons against it. No one has even refuted my arguments for it. The best argument here is, "it's harmless to leave it as it is," but that certainly doesn't mean it can't be improved upon. BettyAnn 07:20, 19 July 2007 (MST)
- As I said earlier, we have separate articles for Deimos and Phobos and they're always together, and the same with Cyprine and Ptilol and Chiral and Achiral. You haven't objected to them having separate articles, even though I'd say they're just as close as Castor and Pollux.
- My point here is, if they already have separate articles and nobody can give me a compelling reason to merge them, I think that different characters = different articles no matter how closely they work. You insist that I need to give you a strong reason against the merge, but I think that it needs to go the other way around, since it's already this way and nobody else has objected. Kerochan no Miko 08:46, 19 July 2007 (MST)
- No, I listened to your reasons and, as I said previously, I agree with dooky's opinion from last year, that there's absolutely no harm in having two separate articles and merging them seems rather pointless to me. And frankly, I have to wonder why you're so worked up about this issue that you feel the need to be rude about it. Kerochan no Miko 00:14, 19 July 2007 (MST)
- So basically, you're refusing to listen to opinions for the merge, and haven't even justified why you think they should not be merged? I don't think consensus can be reached that way... BettyAnn 23:55, 18 July 2007 (MST)
