Talk:Road: Difference between revisions
Latest comment: 30 December 2015 by Dannyboy601 in topic Deletion
| Line 15: | Line 15: | ||
:As an article, yeah, it's not needed. But I am thinking that it could still work as a disambiguation page linking to more notable roads. {{:User:The Goron Moron/sig}} 22:11, 30 December 2015 (UTC) | :As an article, yeah, it's not needed. But I am thinking that it could still work as a disambiguation page linking to more notable roads. {{:User:The Goron Moron/sig}} 22:11, 30 December 2015 (UTC) | ||
::Oh, that's a good idea, actually. I hadn't thought of that. There are certainly enough places with road in their name to warrant it. {{:User:Dannyboy601/sig}} 22:35, 30 December 2015 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 22:35, 30 December 2015
I think this article needs to be retitled- the manual calls it "Road" and not "Dirt Path".
See the below scan of the pertinent page (click on link):
[[1]]
![[1]](http://i98.photobucket.com/albums/l245/dinosaur_bob/TerrainTypes.jpg){kind=link}
Thanks for your time. Dinosaur bob 08:09, 17 October 2007 (EDT)
- Done. I never liked the name Dirt Path, and it only came from what someone decided to write on the Zelda II article. --Adam 16:31, 17 October 2007 (EDT)
Deletion
Do I even need to say anything? An article for something as generic and commonplace as roads is completely unnecessary, and the only thing that actually links to this article is a redirect. Dannyboy601Talk 21:29, 30 December 2015 (UTC)
- As an article, yeah, it's not needed. But I am thinking that it could still work as a disambiguation page linking to more notable roads. - Midoro (T C) 22:11, 30 December 2015 (UTC)
- Oh, that's a good idea, actually. I hadn't thought of that. There are certainly enough places with road in their name to warrant it. Dannyboy601Talk 22:35, 30 December 2015 (UTC)