Talk:Lolrus

I'm still not sure why this was deleted. Most of the votes on the Votes for Deletion page were for keep. Way to go wikipedia. 134.173.93.73

Agreed. Not impressed. There had clearly been no conclusion in the matter. In all fairness the five days of discussion were up, and it did have some sourcing problems, but i think people forgot that it was a work in progress. It was nominated for deletion right from when it was effectively a stub, so it wasn't given much of a chance for improvement. Even so, within five days it had a lot more sources and links and it was seriously beginning to shape up, rendering most of the early deletion comments pretty much irrelevant, so i just find it a shame that an article which was clearly a useful encylopedic entry with a lot of interesting information could get deleted just as it was starting to get itself together. I guess it's still gonna be in history, though, so the second anybody prints a good solid article about the lolrus in other media we can revive it.Bjakt 17:02, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Well wikipidea, BURNINATE! and whoever made the new artical, screw them. this artical is not deserving of the greatness of Lolrus! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 205.222.248.107 (talk) 14:47, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

The Milton of Office Space reference needs to be supported with external citations, if it is to be considered valid. Otherwise, you no can has. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.188.7.19 (talk) 06:36, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

The information on "Lolrus" exits in the Wikipedia article Southern Elephant Seal, under the section concerning Minazo. How about a redirect there, instead of sending it to an article like "lolcat" which provides no information at all? 71.112.40.212 (talk) 07:56, 25 October 2009 (UTC)