FANDOM

 
33,482 Pages

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Galactus article.
This is not a forum for general discussion about the article's subject.
The forum can be found here

Article policies

Name

  • Since I got an edit conflict doing exactly what I was going to do, yes. If Superman, Man of Steel was the only name given in a valid source from LEGO/reporting on LEGO, that would be what his article would be called. --Berrybrick (Talk) 22:06, January 8, 2013 (UTC)
  • Sounds stupid enough...-JMS
  • Thank you for your ever positive input. Half a mind to give you a warning for general rudeness, again. (Arguing will make up my mind.) --Berrybrick (Talk) 22:09, January 8, 2013 (UTC)
  • I know Berry doesn't like Marvel, and idk about Jedi Master Sith, but i know Marvel, his name is Galactus, Title is Devourer of Worlds Fire InfernalRaceLord talk, Lord of NothingFire Infernal
  • That is not my point and it never was. I never denied that his name was Galactus. If this conversation is not going past this point, then I am done. --Berrybrick (Talk) 22:17, January 8, 2013 (UTC)
  • At least don't put the coma as it makes it look like crud-JMS
  • I thought Devourer of the World was just the title they were giving him so people could tell he was a bad guy (I had knew clue who he was). Would it not be like saying Elizabeth the Second, by the Grace of God, of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, and of Her other Realms and Territories, Queen, Head of the Commonwealth, Defender of the Faith. ~ CJC 22:17, January 8, 2013 (UTC)
  • I think that the wording of the sentence was enough to signify his role. I still say my point stands. --Berrybrick (Talk) 22:20, January 8, 2013 (UTC)
    • Correct me if I'm wrong, but your point is that as LEGO included his name and title, it should be considered part of the article name? ~ CJC 22:23, January 8, 2013 (UTC)
      • Pretty much. Titles can be considered part of the name. For example, Gandalf the Grey/White. --Berrybrick (Talk) 22:25, January 8, 2013 (UTC)
        • But that is just called Gandalf :P Basicly, going per the naming conventions, which states we go by the name LEGO gives, I'd interpert name as just being their name, although I will grant that name could be taken into a wider sense to include title. Of course, a much better point for me to use would be BP:UCS. ~ CJC 22:31, January 8, 2013 (UTC)
          • Gandalf was Gandalf the Grey until the video game had a Gandalf the White variant. I wouldn't say I am not using common sense, I would say I am interpreting something differently. --Berrybrick (Talk) 22:33, January 8, 2013 (UTC)
  • ...I give up -JMS
  • Lets just have the Info box as Galactus, and the Page and Page name be Devourer of the Worlds Fire InfernalRaceLord talk, Lord of NothingFire Infernal
    • If anything, I'd say do it the other way around... ~ CJC 22:23, January 8, 2013 (UTC)
  • Fair enough.-JMS
  • I fail to see how naming the page Galactus Devourer of the Worlds and the infobox title Galactus makes sense, but naming the page Galactus and the infobox title being Galactus Devourer of the Worlds doesn't. ~ CJC 22:31, January 8, 2013 (UTC)
  • I actually agree with Berrybrick on this one. Even though Galactus is his real name, we only have one source that calls him Devourer of Worlds. So I vote keep the name. --LSHF (Talk) | I'm vandal's reckoning BaneFig1
  • Okay, that clears things up, I guess. --Berrybrick (Talk) 01:29, January 9, 2013 (UTC)

Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.