Talk:List of Johnny Test characters

Current sourcing
Okay, the current sources such as, "Mentioned in many episodes", "See Johnny Long Legs", and "Parodies Darth Vader" appear to be unreliable. They don't utilize any source templates, not to mention they come off as original research. A user adding such information in an Add a reference slot doesn't make it anymore reliable. Creditable third party sources are key here. Otherwise, they just don't belong here. Sarujo (talk) 22:51, 15 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Yes, they do, for the first and final time. If you continue to not accept my editing, you will find your self blocked (echo).

99.19.92.173 (talk) 23:54, 15 January 2010 (UTC)


 * No they are not. And I'd appreciate it if you'll refrain from making threats to other editors. Sarujo (talk) 01:01, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

Knock it off Sarujo
Okay, I already said an unreferenced article doesn't belong on Wikipedia. I proposed a meger, but you didn't listen. Now, I'll just have to propose it for deletion, and this is no idle threat. 99.19.92.173 (talk) 00:52, 20 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Uh no, character lists do not belong in the main article as the main article is only for the series itself. It's development and reception. Your proposals for deletion have no merit, as to why no one will listen to them. The other reason is that we all know that you're really the editor formally known as Warmpuppy trying to start drama for the other editors trying to help these Johnny Test articles, just because you can't have your way with the direction the articles are going. So as a friendly warning, please stop with foolishness before either me or some other is forced to report you. Sarujo (talk) 01:08, 20 January 2010 (UTC)


 * What Warmpuppy? That ship has sailed. Also, I proposed it for deletion for the reasons in there. Add references, or this'll happen. Plus, it's "formerly". Also, I said characters are part of a series, but of COURSE you don't believe me. If this continues, you will be reported, so please stop attacking me.

99.19.92.173 (talk) 02:10, 20 January 2010 (UTC)
 * AH! BTW, you can't contest a deletion. 99.19.92.173 (talk) 02:31, 20 January 2010 (UTC)


 * (Edit Conflict)The only person attacking here is you making idol threats whenever you can't have your way or somebody calls you on a violation. As I recall, you tried adding sources but I removed them as they were unreliable. So now you're resorting to an all out deletion-how childish.
 * If you don't want every editor on Wikipedia knowing who you are, then you shouldn't make the same foolish mistakes as before. Whining and making administrator threats when your edits are reverted or removed, vandalizing articles and user pages with personal messages just to get under an editor's skin, using lines like "That ship has sailed", using the same method of signing your messages. Also you have no business crossing out another editors comments. Doing such is deemed vandalism, and as you already know I don't make idol threats so I will report you. And another thing, I don't need you pointing out my spelling and grammatical errors.
 * Shows just how much you claim to know about Wikipedia's rules and guidelines. Any deletion claim can be contested through consensus discussion. Yet you've failed to start any deletion discussion proposing the so-called claims you're making. Claims of acts that you yourself were guilty of making. And another thing, you have never proposed any such merger for this article. So stop making up stuff. Sarujo (talk) 03:29, 20 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Fine. I'll remove the deletion. 99.19.92.173 (talk) 21:28, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

Foot Fetish
The following line appears in the Lila Test section:


 * "...and extremly high red high heels in barefeet, so she is never seen wearing her socks at all. Her toes can be seen in certain episodes only. It still uncertain whether her toes are painted or not, but it is extremely likely that they are not painted at all;"

Not only do I find it unnecessary, but it is subjective ("extremely high heels"), unsourced ("seen in certain episodes only") and speculative ("it is uncertain", "it is extremely likely") and just plain pointless (who cares about her painted nails?). I had previously removed this section of text but it was restored. I am removing it again. It the person defending its presence wishes to restore it, I urge him to discuss it here first.

Sings-With-Spirits (talk) 17:01, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

Age Okay so why does it say that johnny, susan and mary are all a year older? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.64.104.4 (talk) 01:45, 13 September 2011 (UTC)

General
There's a lot of nonsense in here. Someone put a lot of work into it, but there's still a lot of nonsense. I took out a couple unnecessary parenthetical statements A lot of this is here to amuse fans and that's not the purpose of an encyclopedia article. PurpleChez (talk) 20:54, 24 January 2013 (UTC)