Difference between revisions of "Talk:Sydney Kirsch"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
What do we think about the current article name? Can anyone think of a better one? --[[User:Ronichu|Ronichu]] 01:08, 13 May 2010 (UTC) | What do we think about the current article name? Can anyone think of a better one? --[[User:Ronichu|Ronichu]] 01:08, 13 May 2010 (UTC) | ||
*I say Sydney Kirsch would be an appropriate name. --[[User:Shearod]] 0:12, 13 May 2010 (CST) | *I say Sydney Kirsch would be an appropriate name. --[[User:Shearod]] 0:12, 13 May 2010 (CST) | ||
*Champthom mentioned this. He noted that most troll | *Champthom mentioned this. He noted that most troll name pages (such as Vanessa) tend to be about the troll, while the other information goes under a saga page. Sydney was far, far too short, private and fail to be a saga IMHO. Yet her personality is very unrelated to Chris and therefore shouldn't be awarded its own page (AKA Matthew Devoria). Sydney can be summed up in a few sentences. Yet, there are phone calls as well as emails, so it's not clear cut. I considered 'Sydney Trolling Effort', 'Sydney Trolling Fail' and a few others. This was the most neutral I could think of. --[[User:Ronichu|Ronichu]] 07:01, 13 May 2010 (UTC) | ||
Revision as of 02:02, 13 May 2010
Article Name?
What do we think about the current article name? Can anyone think of a better one? --Ronichu 01:08, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
- I say Sydney Kirsch would be an appropriate name. --User:Shearod 0:12, 13 May 2010 (CST)
- Champthom mentioned this. He noted that most troll name pages (such as Vanessa) tend to be about the troll, while the other information goes under a saga page. Sydney was far, far too short, private and fail to be a saga IMHO. Yet her personality is very unrelated to Chris and therefore shouldn't be awarded its own page (AKA Matthew Devoria). Sydney can be summed up in a few sentences. Yet, there are phone calls as well as emails, so it's not clear cut. I considered 'Sydney Trolling Effort', 'Sydney Trolling Fail' and a few others. This was the most neutral I could think of. --Ronichu 07:01, 13 May 2010 (UTC)