FANDOM

 
33,486 Pages

This Forum has been archived

Visit the new Forums
Forums - CUUSOO projects in years
This page is an archive. Please do not edit the contents of this page.


Comment: remove section from year articles



(Example). Do we really need this section? Especially failed projects/ones which haven't even reached 10,000 votes? They're not official sets/being yet being considered for official sets, they're fan concepts, so why does it belong here? Can't we just stick the approved sets in the CUUSOO section under "Sets Introduced" section and leave it at that? NightblazeSaber 02:44, August 18, 2012 (UTC)

  • I agree, it's fine to have a "Sets Introduced" and an "In Review Stage" section. Although to have a "Failed" section on the 2012 article seems quite unnecessary and I feel certain some users are just using that section as a way to score edits and points for badges. I think it's alright to possibly have the "Failed" and "5000-9999" projects section on the CUUSOO article, but otherwise I see no logical reason to allow these sections published on the 2012 article. - Power Jim Talk Blogz08:38, 8/18/2012 08:38, August 18, 2012 (UTC)
  • I agree too. --LSHF (Talk) | I'm vandal's reckoning BaneFig1
  • I agree. Failed sets need not be remembered because if they fail by LEGO, they are lost to history. Lego613master
  • Fails failed, why remember them? The Fail stops there. SuperSpyX Knowledge isPower
  • ^ Haha good point :D --Jurassic park787 Vittoria per gli Assassini! 01:38, August 19, 2012 (UTC)
  • I agree we don't need to add "Customs" to pages, there not official sets, and it makes them customs. We don't archive customs on pages, so we don't need to archive "CUUSOO Customs" too -

  • This is one of those times where a notability policy would be nice. Anyway, I think that we should only have projects which have passed review on the year page, which would only be Minecraft for now, but I don't see a reason not to mention products under review, like the Western Town, or failed projects, like the Winchester Pub, on the Cuusoo page. --Berrybrick (Talk) 17:24, August 19, 2012 (UTC)
    • Yeah, I don't mind mentioning projects under review, it's just the failed ones or those which are over 5000 votes (which means nothing) NightblazeSaber 23:08, August 19, 2012 (UTC)
  • I agree about the year page, and I assume rejected projects means failed here? If so, then per others. -NBP 14:59, August 20, 2012 (UTC)