Jump to content

Talk:Kuroko

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from Talk:Kuroko (kabuki))

Requested move

[edit]
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was Move KurokoKuroko (Samurai Shodown), then Kuroko (kabuki)Kuroko. —Wknight94 (talk) 15:21, 6 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Kuroko (kabuki)KurokoUser:Brain has requested this move in WP:JA. As he says.... "Kabuki meaning is the 'original' or 'main' definition, and the video game character is derivative." The current Kuroko article should be moved to something else, such as Kuroko (Samurai Shodown). Endroit 22:05, 31 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Survey

[edit]
Add  # '''Support'''  or  # '''Oppose'''  on a new line in the appropriate section followed by a brief explanation, then sign your opinion using ~~~~.

Survey - Support votes

[edit]
  1. Support, as nominator. And the following move should be done also: KurokoKuroko (Samurai Shodown).--Endroit 22:07, 31 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Support - seems an obvious move, since the other article is about a fictional character named after this common-use word brain 23:04, 31 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Support - Makes sense to me. LordAmeth 10:49, 1 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Support Kuroko (kabuki)Kuroko and KurokoKuroko (Samurai Shodown) as I think Kuroko (kabuki) qualifies primary topic. In addition, we need Kuroko (disambiguation); Wikipedia currently has three articles about kuroko, Kuroko (kabuki), Kuroko (Samurai Shodown), and Kuroko (Ninja-Boy) but lacks a disambiguation page for them. --Kusunose 13:16, 1 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Support Fg2 23:59, 2 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Survey - Oppose votes

[edit]

Discussion

[edit]
Add any additional comments:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Can we expand this?

[edit]

I think this should be expanded, like use in popular culture. I seem to remember a Pepsi comercial using it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.242.145.54 (talk) 05:31, 6 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There is a policy guideline about these kinds of things: Wikipedia:Avoid trivia sections in articles. Not every instance of someone in all black is a direct reference to kuroko, or for that matter to ninja either. But, if it truly is notable - if it is one of those relatively rare instances of actual references to traditional culture in a modern TV ad - then by all means go and add it. LordAmeth 10:18, 6 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Kuroko. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:57, 13 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]