Talk:Sage

Why was this article put up for deletion? --ShounenSuki (talk 17:55, October 2, 2009 (UTC)
 * Idk, Tserg seems to like putting delete tags up for no reason... Simant (talk) 17:59, October 2, 2009 (UTC)


 * That is just a memory waste: Narutopedia, as well as Wikipedia strongly suggest that the pages are not created where articles consist of 1 - 2 sentences. The same ones are in the Senjutsu page. That's not because I've been entertaining myself. --Tserg (talk) 12:37, October 3, 2009 (UTC)
 * Where do they suggest that?
 * Any way, the article has enough potential for expansion, methinks. It also allows us to use 'sage' as a character classification. --ShounenSuki (talk 14:41, October 3, 2009 (UTC)
 * Character Classification is ok, but if it really has enough potential, if you think, that this article will be used in the long run, then why not to wait a liitle bit and collect enough info, at least for one paragraph, for a stub-level, at once. Up for now this article is completely pointless: it doesn't give any information about sages, except the definition, which have already been written in the another article. Also, it haven't been edited much since June of this year. Unfortunately, short, pointless articles should be deleted, as it is written in the rules.  --Tserg (talk) 15:15, October 3, 2009 (UTC)
 * If your referring to "Do not make pointless articles. If you see one, put the Request for Deletion tag on", this article hardly matches that criteria. Classification itself is enough for it not to be tagged. This article also links to other more useful article should the reader want to know more i.e Senjutsu, and Sage mode...--AlienGamer--Talk (contribs)-- 15:16, October 3, 2009 (UTC)