Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Anime and manga/Digimon/Article reorganization

message: I updated the Pokemon and Digimon section, pointing out that Digimon tends to borrow more from the Mecha/Super Robo genre and pointed out several mecha references. Granis 10:54, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Pokemon and Digimon Update

message: already ran into a problem. A DNA digimon, like Paildramon, would go into Veemon or Wormmon's article?
Or should the information be repeated on both?
Or should we consider the DNA digimon a new character (since it's a combination of two seperate characters), and have a seperate article for Paildramon/Imperialdramon/Fightermode/Paladinmode?
--Yaksha 12:42, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Probably just put the info in both articles. Aside from summaries of the plot, there really isn't a lot to say about the DNA Digimon. -- Ned Scott 07:46, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

text: It's best if DNA Digivolved Digimon have their own articles. User:Fractyl
--> replied on the digimon project talk page. --`/aksha 09:25, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: DNA digimon

message: Sorry I haven't been more involved with helping to keep this moving. I think we pretty much know, or at least have the basic idea, of where to put info. I think our next step is to take some example articles and show how a merged / listed entry will look, or whatever. We probably need examples for human characters with partner Digimon, examples for a list of Digimon, etc. I'll see what I can come up with, and I suggest that everyone feel free to experiment around with different formats and such in their sandboxes. Although, I'm not sure about what to do with some of the elements of the "list of Digimon" type articles. Are we going to bother with card numbers and attack names for them? There's so much cruft and weird trivia to pick though, for a lot of these it would almost seem easier to start from scratch.. -- Ned Scott 03:51, 27 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: i've had some thoughts on how to do article layout, but i haven't really had time to try making any sample articles to show what i mean. And i doubt i will any time in the next few weeks, i'm about to hit exam week. I guess i'll just dump down all the ideas i had here, and hopefully you or someone else can make sense of it  =P. --`/aksha 04:49, 27 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  this is a big job.. 

message: ===General TCG things===
*Card numbers - i think not. They're just a data dump, it's meaningless, difficult to verify, and doesn't tell the reader anything about the digimon. 
*Digivolutions - avoid (unless the digimon is TCG-only...although i don't think there're any TCG only digimon). Just take a look at Agumon's TCG digivolutions (here) to get an idea of how much of a mess it will be. The large number of digivolution possibilities enhances the strategy aspect of a card game, but otherwise makes little sense - it's just a data dump. 
*Trivia - avoid TCG trivia. Every card in the TCG has a digimon description - in other words, an "intersting (but useless) fact". It's just pure trivia.  
*Attacks - avoid TCG attacks (unless for TCG only digimon). And we need to be more strict on the "we will delete attacks unless you tell us where they are from". Because most of the attacks on the digimon now are unsourced, and i'm highly suspicious of where they come from. And almost impossible for us to verify each one. 
things like "attribute" and "type" and "family" may be worth keeping, since they do describe the digimon. 
As you can see, i don't think very highly of TCG information. The Digimon have an encyclopedia entry because they appear in anime/games/manga...etc, not because there's a trading card on them.
:I couldn't agree more. The less TCG info the better. -- Ned Scott 06:25, 27 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  some ideas for the new articles 

message: *Card numbers - i think not. They're just a data dump, it's meaningless, difficult to verify, and doesn't tell the reader anything about the digimon. 
*Digivolutions - avoid (unless the digimon is TCG-only...although i don't think there're any TCG only digimon). Just take a look at Agumon's TCG digivolutions (here) to get an idea of how much of a mess it will be. The large number of digivolution possibilities enhances the strategy aspect of a card game, but otherwise makes little sense - it's just a data dump. 
*Trivia - avoid TCG trivia. Every card in the TCG has a digimon description - in other words, an "intersting (but useless) fact". It's just pure trivia.  
*Attacks - avoid TCG attacks (unless for TCG only digimon). And we need to be more strict on the "we will delete attacks unless you tell us where they are from". Because most of the attacks on the digimon now are unsourced, and i'm highly suspicious of where they come from. And almost impossible for us to verify each one. 
things like "attribute" and "type" and "family" may be worth keeping, since they do describe the digimon. 
As you can see, i don't think very highly of TCG information. The Digimon have an encyclopedia entry because they appear in anime/games/manga...etc, not because there's a trading card on them.
:I couldn't agree more. The less TCG info the better. -- Ned Scott 06:25, 27 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: General TCG things

message: The biggest problem is disambiguation. Simple things like Agumon adventure and Agumon savers, a link can be added in the "see also" line. So agumon adventure will have a link to agument savers and vice versa. 
Similarly, rapidmon armor would have a link to rapidmon ultimate. 
But, the agumon article currently documents agumon's appearance in things like Frontier, Next, D-Cyber...etc. Where is all that going to go? On Agumon adventure's article or on agumon saver's article? Or should we have another entry for agumon (species) in one of the miscellenous article lists?
--`/aksha 04:49, 27 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Additional problems

message: I was thinking about this - and what should we do about characters that are evolved forms of Digimon (say Agumon) that have taken on a life outside of their own.  By this, I mean Magnamon, Omnimon, WarGreymon, and the like.  They've all been characters in their own right - Magnamon existed independantly of Veemon in X-Evolution, Omnimon is a separate character in V-Tamer, X-Evolution, D-Cyber, and Savers (by all appearances).  The same goes for WarGreymon, who has appeared in several circumstances.
That said, Omnimon at least deserves a page to himself. O_o I mean, how does one consolidate something like him into a particular page?  He can't be in both Agumon and Gabumon's pages. ---Razorsaw 17:15, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: They will have separate areas depending on who they are. For example, there will be an Agumon (Savers) as well as an Agumon or Agumon (Adventure).  Then these areas will have see also links when appropriate. So when we talk about merging different Digimon we mean to merge the information that is about the same character. As for Omnimon, other than plot summary there really isn't much to say about him, and we could easily have a duplicate section in both articles. If it becomes an issue we can split the article later on, but I don't think it will be necessary. -- Ned Scott 04:05, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: A concern about combining evolved forms into one page

message: Oh just thought i'd mention i was scrolling through the pages and noticed there's very little detail on the main charactor of the digimon film. like it could be said that he created the virus rather than just saying his digimon was infected by one. also that he was obnormally smart as he was in elementary school and taking classes and coloarado state --Jonoridge 18:44, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Add more to Willis (digimon the movie)

message: I've recently discovered that both Panimon and Lykamon were listed as Ultimates (Perfects) in their articles which I removed, neither of them have official levels (same goes for Hermmon who is listed as a Mega), from what I've heard they were supposed to appear in V-Tamer but they never did because of time restraints, if they had appeared they would have been created the same way Callismon was created which means they would have been more than likely Megas. Currently Lykamon is listed on the Ultimate Misc section (Panimon is not listed anywhere...) , I'm not sure if we should move him to the Mega Misc section or not, but he should be removed from the Ultimate section.Nightmare SE 14:58, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: uhh...no i'm starting to suspect whether they actually exist or not. I'll try some google searches, but if there's no reliable sources to support the fact that they where meant to have appeared in V-Tamer but got cut out, we shouldn't have anything on them at all. Otherwise, we can simply merge them into the V-Tamer section. So add a section in the V-Tamer article about digimon who were supposed to appear, but got cut out. --`/aksha 01:31, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah I guess you're right, but they do have images, they can be found on Wikimon.    Nightmare SE 02:51, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Panimon]] and [[Lykamon]]

message: From the Wikipedia Signpost:
:"Redirects to sections now work, using text such as #REDIRECT Main Page#Other areas of Wikipedia.  The feature should be used cautiously, because users may be confused by being sent to the middle of a page when clicking an ordinary-looking link, and the redirect notice will be obscured by the jump."
This means all those redirects that the article merging will create will now be able to point specifically to that Digimon on a list. So a link such as Tacomon could redirect specifically to a section on List of Digimon based on food, etc. -- Ned Scott 05:47, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: For example C'mon Digimon. -- Ned Scott 06:02, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  sectional redirects now work 

message: Umm, hi, I'm still kinda new here, but I really love Digimon and have been editing a few of the Digimon articles for a while now.
Anyway, I saw a message stating that there was discussion 'bout merging Ai and Mako's article with Impmon's, and while I realize that there's not a whole lotta information on Ai and Mako ('specially in comparison to some of the other Tamers), I still think that they warrant seperate articles.  Every other Tamer, including Alice McCoy and Minami Uehara have their own articles seperate from their Digimons', and they have just 'bout as much information and are 'bout as well known (or unknown) as Ai and Mako.  Every other Tamer has their article, so it'd make sense for Ai and Mako's article to remain seperate as well. Plus, if their articles were merged, then someone trying to use the wiki search engine for their names will get limited or no results since they'd be under Impmon's article and title name.  And, as it's been stated on his article, though Impmon's primarily known for Tamers, he has appeared in other Digimon franchises, and he may yet appear as someone's Partner in a future franchise, so I think it's best to keep Ai and Mako seperate in order to avoid as much confusion as possible as to which one belongs to which franchise and that Ai and Mako were Partners only to the Tamers Impmon.
So, I think their articles should remain seperate, but that's just my personal opinion. Tasermon's Partner 12:28, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merging Ai and Mako with Impmon 

message: Turuiemon is currently listed as Digimon Tamers Lopmon's Champion form in the Project Page, I'm going to remove him from there and add him to the Champion Misc section unless there are any objections as Turiemon is not officially Lopmon's Champion form. Nightmare SE 01:04, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Turuiemon

message: Let the articles stay separate. I know they aren't the same, but this merge on some of them is pointless. They already did it with Agumon, Guilmon, Terriermon, Renamon, Impmon, Veemon, Hawkmon, Wormmon, and the Royal Knights. I want them separate again. Rtkat3 (talk) 5:20, 31 January 2007
:Maybe you should look at WP:ILIKEIT. Circeus 22:26, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Keep the articles separate

message: There is a lot of speculation in the digimon related articles so while you guys are merging and etc, etc, you could also check that you are not overlooking the speculation or copy and pasting it to the new articles.Sam ov the blue sand 05:04, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I've defintely been keeping an eye out for it. But if you find anything that's obviously just someone's speculation, you're welcome to edit the article and remove it. --`/aksha 07:24, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Too much speculation 

message: Umm, I was looking at this article, and there are only two characters on it, Daemon and Willis's Terriermon.  Unless more characters are added, might I recommend simply merging Willis's Terriermon with the main Terriermon article and givin' Daemon his own article, or mergin' him with something else?  Having a list of minor characters with only two characters on it just kinda seems like it's unnecessary, 'specailly when Terriermon can be merged with the main Terriermon article.
But that's just my personal thoughts on the subject.  Tasermon's Partner 16:39, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: More will be added, it's all a work in progress. As noted above, we're separating the articles by character instead of by Digimon species. -- Ned Scott 21:54, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: List of Digimon Adventure minor characters

message: After three days of work I was able to merge all Armor Digimon into two lists. The first list includes the Armor Digimon A-N, while the second goes from O-Y (since there is no Armor Digimon whose name starts with Z). Hope you are OK with this lists. Diabound00 16:58, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: If the two list of Armor Digimon are completed, shouldn't they be marked as (Complete) on the main page? I'm going to go ahead and put (Complete) next to them under the Masterlist part of the page. Does anyone disagree with this or feel that they are not complete?--Mmmundo 20:16, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Completed merge of Armor Digimon 

message: Even though Omnimon is a Digivolved form of both Agumon and Gabumon, Omnimon should have his own article. Omnimon appears a great deal of times in the Anime and the Manga, plus, no one Digimon article (Agumon or Gabumon) should keep solo status on Omnimon since Omnimon acts as a true mega form for both (I also know that Omnimon's info can be found in the Royal Knights article). I think there should be an article for Omnimon, having information on all of the roles he played, not unlike the Gotsumon article. I also think that Imperialdramon (and his various modes) should also have his own article. Unknown Dragon 17:56, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: We're changing away from that format of having articles by Digimon species, and instead going by character. -- Ned Scott 05:27, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I suppose we should stick Omnimon in the Gabumon article, though. Indiawilliams 17:36, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I know, but Omnimon seems to be a character on his own, something seperate from Agumon/WarGreymon and Gabumon/MetalGarurumon altogether, plus he has enough information on him to have an article focusing only on him. Unknown Dragon 02:22, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: And that is exactly what you don't understand. "an article focusing only on him". Exactly which "him" are you referring to? The word "Omnimon" isn't the name of an individual character, it's the name of a digimon species, which at current includes several omnimon who have charactered in several different digimon items. This is the point which you are not understanding. --`/aksha 07:59, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

text: I don't have a personal problem against you. And i know what you're trying to say. The kind of article you have in mind is exactly the kind of article "Omnimon" once was. In fact, all digimon species used to be like that. But now they're not. And Omnimon is no exception. --`/aksha 09:57, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Omnimon having his own article 

message: All except Pinamon I think has information on it. Now to rest my fingers. Also if there are any pages that need a spell check tell me as I have a whole page spell checker.trainra 07:08, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  List of In-Training Digimon is Finished 

message: Shouldn't he be mentioned and merged in to all the Frontier DigiDestineds Articles (Minus Kouichi of course)? trainra 10:25, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I only added him to Takuya and Koji's pages because they where originally like that. But if all five of the kids actually combined to become Susanoomon, then yes, he should be on all the pages. However, i had been under the impression that it was only Takuya and Koji who bought the 20 spirits together, didn't the other kids give their spirits to those two? Since, only Takuya and Koji have unified forms (EmperorGreymon and MagnaGarurumon being 10 spirits each). --`/aksha 05:12, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Koji and Takuya became Susanoomon first when Kouichi was scanned, then when they returned to the real world all 5 of them (Takuya, Koji, Tommy, J.P. and Zoe) became Susanoomon to defeat Lucemon Shadow Form mode. Than when that his done and he is attavked by its Larvae Mode he expels all 5 of them from his body. trainra 05:30, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for the explaination. In that case, he should be on all their pages. I'll go add him in.--`/aksha 05:36, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Susanoomon 

message: CHaracters like Tai Kamiya do not have much notability outside of the said anime show and magna, so I was wondering if we ought to merge them into, say List of Digmon: Digital Monsters DigiDestined (season 01) or something (we can come up wti ha better title). Hbdragon88 05:34, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: That could be a good idea, but doesn't each character have alot of information about them. That could cause a problem with the end article being to cluttered or to lengthly.--Mmmundo 03:43, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I have to agree with Mmmundo each character is noteworthy enough to have their own articles. trainra 09:53, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

text: A merge isn't a bad idea, especially considering that most of the character articles are just plot summary that needs to be trimmed down. -- Ned Scott 03:03, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I understand where you are coming form with the merging of the character articles, but I just think that there is too much information about each individual DigiDestined ( even if the majority of the article is just a plot summary). The plot summaries in each of the individual DigiDestined's articles usually explains in greater deatil their own personal involvement and role that they played in a specific event. Each individual article also gives a little back story to each character that I do not think can be given/expressed clearly if they are merged into one master list. I do, however, agree that the character pages do need some trimming down and some rewritting to maybe make them more unified.--Mmmundo 03:35, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, it's not really a big deal right now, especially with all the very minor Digimon still left to merge. -- Ned Scott 03:37, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Chracter merge? 

message: What do we make of this?-- bulletproof 3:16 18:28, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I fixed it up a bit, but I think it should just be deleted. Nightmare SE 18:36, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Same here. We'll see what happens. -- bulletproof 3:16 19:06, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I feel that it should be deleted.--Mmmundo 02:06, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Greymon Family]]

message: How do we merge these 3 articles: Myotismon - VenomMyotismon - MaloMyotismon into one? Or should they even be merged into one? I mean they are technically the same Digimon right? And they definately fall under the Important Digimon characters list - they (or he) played a very important role as one of the main villians in Digimon Adventure/02. I would merge these 3 articles together but I have no idea how to. If someone could help me out in doing this, I would very much appreciate it!--Mmmundo 02:49, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: similar to the partner digimon pages Kennethayes 12:19, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Myotismon/VenomMyotismon/MaloMyotismon 

message: How do we merge these 7 articles: Kuramon - Tsumemon - Keramon - Diaboromon - Chrysalimon - Infermon - Armageddemon  into one? I mean they are technically the same Digimon right? And they definately fall under the Important Digimon characters list - this digimon played a very important role in two Digimon Adventure/02 movies. I would merge these 7 articles together but I have no idea how to. If someone could help me out in doing this, I would very much appreciate it!--Mmmundo 02:54, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: chrysalimon is not needed in this character page =) Kennethayes 12:20, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Kuramon/Tsumemon/Keramon/Diaboromon/Chrysalimon/Infermon/Armageddemon  

message: How do we merge these 2 articles: Etemon - MetalEtemon into one? I mean they are technically the same Digimon right? And they definately fall under the Important Digimon characters list - they (or he) played a very important role as one of the main villians in Digimon Adventure. I would merge these 2 articles together but I have no idea how to. If someone could help me out in doing this, I would very much appreciate it!--Mmmundo 02:57, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Etemon/MetalEtemon 

message: I'm pretty sure that I have (not single handedly of course) completed the Digimon Sovereigns group. I marked it as (Complete) on this page. Does anyone disagree with this or feel that there is something more that needs to be added to that page?--Mmmundo 03:39, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Digimon Sovereigns  

message: I have merged the main article Soulmon to List of Champion Digimon (Part 1). I think I redirected it right from its orginal article - can someone please check to make sure that I did it right? Also for some reason Soulmon does not appear in the Category:Champion Digimon page anymore after I made this merge. Why is that - did I do something wrong when I merged it? If so can someone tell me what I did wrong so I do not make the same mistake again in the future (I plan to be a big part in the merging of Digimon into their appropriate level category). Thanks. --Mmmundo 20:37, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Not to be pushy/rude - but can somebody please look into this for me asap, I'm eager to get started with merging but I dont want to do something wrong. Like I have previously stated I have succeeded in merging Soulmon to the List of Champion Digimon (Part 1) but since I have done this, under the Category:Champion Digimon Soulmon is no longer there on the list and he was there before I did the merge. Did I do soemthing wrong bacause I have seen other merges to the List of Champion Digimon (Part 1) page and they are still present under the Category:Champion Digimon. Please help! Thanks.--Mmmundo 00:59, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Fixed. Next time you merge a -mon article to the masterlist leave the categories (which are at the bottom). Nightmare SE 01:09, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you very much for fixing it and for helping me!--Mmmundo 01:29, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

text: Sorry -  but when you said leave the Categories, what did you mean. Because I just tried to do Eaglemon for the List of Mega Digimon (Part 1), and it didnt work, its is still not showing Eaglemon in the Mega Category.--Mmmundo 01:42, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

text: Also how did you fix the Soulmon thing I had messed up?--Mmmundo 02:25, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I fixed the Eaglemon page. You can see what should be left behind here: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Eaglemon&action=edit. Kennethayes 12:15, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you very much - that was very helpful!--Mmmundo 19:37, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

text: Also leave inter-wiki links. trainra 06:46, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Soulmon Merged 

message: For those that appeared in two seasons e.g. Digitamamon and Wizardmon, should a new heading be added saying "Both Seasons" do you think? Also I believe Vademon should not ba added to the minor characters section as his section isn't nearly large enough and was a one off villain. trainra 06:46, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah I think that there should be a heading for Digimon that appear in both seasons, maybe it should be called "Digimon Adventure and Digimon Adventure 02" or "Digimon Adventure and Adventure 02" or "Digimon Adventure/02".--Mmmundo 21:02, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: but that's clumsy Kennethayes 19:00, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Clumsy? How would you suggest to word it?--Mmmundo 19:51, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: List of Digimon Adventure minor characters

message: suggestion:
*A-B  31
*C-F  35
*G-L  32
*M-Q  39
*R-Z  39      - Kennethayes 10:29, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: If we could, I think it would be a really good idea if we kept the maxium at 4 pages. It doesn't matter that much, just thought that it would look neater because of Champion and Ultimate lists are also 4 pages. However, there are quit a few more Megas than Champion or Ultimate.--Mmmundo 13:34, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: that is. but 45-47-44-40 will be really long for each page.  Kennethayes 13:44, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: That is true - I guess 5 pages would be alright for all of the Megas, its not like we can't change it later if we wanted/had to.--Mmmundo 14:15, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

text: I have just finished some heavy merging, B-F. These Digimon need to be placed on their proper pages though. There are some Digimon on List of Mega Digimon (Part 1) that should not be on that page. Also wouldn't it be a good idea to go ahead and make the rest of the lists for the Megas? Have we decided on how many pages we are going to have for them yet (See above)?--Mmmundo 19:58, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mega List 

message: Somebody please block/stop user: 189.177.59.25 this user has continually been messing up the Digimon articles! This user deletes things for no reason and continually writes in spanish on articles that should not be in spanish! I would block him myself but I'm fairly new and don't know how! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Mmmundo (talk • contribs).
:This user made exactly 2 edits hardly "continually been messing up" by any definition of "continually" Circeus 03:57, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Alright I admitt continually messing up was probably a poor choice of words on my part. However, the user did mess that one section up a little, took out a Digimon (Lucemon Shadow Lord Mode) and wrote in Spainsh under the Lucemon Larva. Now there is really no excuse for anyone to be writting in Spanish under that article, as this is not the Spanish section of Wikipedia (wouldn't you think that person could see that nowhere else in that article Spanish had been written?) It just made me angry when I have been working really hard on the mergings, as we all have been, and someone comes and, what looks to me, deliberately messes it up. Also on another note someone has tampered with the Agumon section.--Mmmundo 20:57, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: No worries, it strangely happens more often than one would think. Thankfully it's easier to track such changes now with the article merges, instead of watching each and every single Digimon article (which I actually have on my watch list.. oyi what a pain.. ). -- Ned Scott 00:42, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Help! 

message: Can someone please check on the article Pinamon and merge it to its proper list. I'm not sure if it is already merged or not. Also I thought Pinamon was an in-training Digimon but on its article it says it is a fresh level Digimon.--Mmmundo 00:58, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: oh... it's merged, but not yet redirected. (just like kuramon a few days ago) Kennethayes 06:51, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: My fault, I didn't redirect, Sorry trainra 12:28, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pinamon 

message: I have noticed that the List of minor characters for the Digimon anime are not all uniform: 
*List of Digimon Adventure minor characters(ok)
*List of Digimon Frontier minor characters (ok)
*List of Digimon characters in V-Tamer     (changed to List of Digimon V-Tamer minor characters)
*List of minor Digimon Savers characters   (changed to List of Digimon Savers minor characters)
- does anyone else agree that these two articles should be renamed, for neatness/uniform sake? I think that it would look much better. I dont know how to rename articles and I would never do it without first consenting others.--Mmmundo 01:55, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I was thinking about that the other day as well, but then I started to think about how other anime articles do their character lists. Basically, drop the "minor" all together, list all characters, but use  and a brief description for the ones who have their own article. Just a thought. But other than that, it wouldn't bother me to rename the articles. -- Ned Scott 06:35, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Not familiar with Savers but the V-Tamer article should stay as it contains most of the main characters, I believe. Trainra 06:49, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

text: They should be renamed to "List of characters in ~~", like most other things do.KrytenKoro 00:48, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article Rename? 

message: What exactly needs to be done with, for example, the Dark Masters and Celestial Digimon? I'm not sure I understand what is meant by "completing" them.KrytenKoro 01:22, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  I'm not sure I understand... 

message: I'm not sure I like the fact that typing in a characters name usually leads you to the Adventure profile of that Digimon - for example, when typing the profile on Mephismon, it took me about ten minutes to finally find the actual profile I wanted, that of Tamers Omnimon, instead of the Adventure version, which doesn't even link to the lists. While making the digivolution's name a link is a nice solution, I still don't think it is satisfactory - we already have the "main" links in the lists, why not have the lists be the primary destination of the redirect, and then, let someone choose which incarnation they want from there? Agumon and stuff could be changed to "Agumon (Adventure)", which would work well enough, and it would make typing the profiles much easier - instead of typing "Biyomon" and having to check that the link points to the correct one, you could just type "Biyomon (Adventure)", and in the list profiles, you could just type "Biyomon" as the rookie form of Birdramon, instead of "List of Rookie Digimon (part 1)#Biyomon|Biyomon". This seems to be a more logical and uniform way to set this up.KrytenKoro 01:43, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Agumon and friends?