Talk:Catchphrase

From Encyclopedia Dramatica

Jump to: navigation, search

Do you think this should be a category? Otherwise it will be a manually updated list that never reflects the full range of catchphrases. Else it should turn into a definition and commentary that catchphrases link back to. --Ghostlight 18:59, 3 Mar 2005 (UTC)

I agree, but Aussie and Girlvinyl just looove having only 35 categories. --Q\DAN 19:51, 3 Mar 2005 (UTC)

I can't wait for JIHAD!! to be added to the list of catchphrases!! --Alexjon 06:07, 25 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Aren't these all just old memes? --Mister Six 22:49, 12 Sep 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Srsly

I really think it should be List of Catchphrases... btw you missed the h.. ~ Banaan 17:50, 28 Jan 2006 (UTC)

  • I concur with this. --Bastardman 17:53, 28 Jan 2006 (UTC)
  • I agree, since, Catchphrase could be a valid article about catchphrases per se and not just a list of them. ~ Krade hi yo~ 18:13, 28 Jan 2006 (UTC)
    • Cycle of Blame completed, I restored the article to its original title. ~ Banaan 22:44, 28 Jan 2006 (UTC)
      • Technically! Technically, it should be "catchphrases", not "Catchphrases". Butt fuck it. --Bastardman 23:32, 28 Jan 2006 (UTC)
        • This was the original problem I recognized, but then I realised that the whole thing should be at Catchphrase according to our usual convention. I agree that Catchphrase could be a valid article about catchphrases, but such an article could include a list of catchphrases. Few people would expect a List of Catchphrases to be a separate article from the Catchphrase article. If you want to enhance Catchphrase so that it is a more complete article, go ahead.
Having Catchphrase as a link to List of Catchphrases is a little like having Canada as a mere link to an article called List of Canadans or Thinspiration redirecting to List of Thinspirations. Clearly, this is not consistent with the general style of ED. --Jacknstock 01:34, 29 Jan 2006 (UTC)
  • I added a blurb about catchphrases and made the List of Catchphrases a new section. Aren't you guys glad that you have me around so we can all reach to an agreement that pleases both parties? (that was a sarcastic rethorical question, don't answer plz).
  • "Both parties" meaning Jacknstock vs everyone else. :P --Bastardman 02:20, 29 Jan 2006 (UTC)

Okay whatever ~ Banaan 17:06, 29 Jan 2006 (UTC)

Personal tools
Your Ad Here