Talk:The Cutie Map

Unexplained removal of verified content
what is with this unexplained removal of verified content?--RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 00:23, 9 April 2015 (UTC)

Warning!
There was nothing wrong with my edit! People like a bit of speculation! And if you think I'm wrong, post a warning on my profile, dammit! --LooneyTunerIan (talk) 18:58, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
 * It was explained many times why this edit was wrong. Speculation does not belong into Wikipedia. That’s one of the basic rules. And a plot summery should be short. Wondering whether a villain might return is no important plot point and therefor nothing to be mentioned in a short summery. A talk page warning is not required when reverting. Gial Ackbar (talk) 07:47, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Oh, yeah? Well, I'm putting my edit back! And the only way I'll stop editing certain My Little Pony episodes is if someone puts a warning mark on my talk page. --LooneyTunerIan (talk) 16:29, 21 April 2015 (UTC)

I'm making one small edit to the article and nobody better change it. SEE?! --LooneyTunerIan (talk) 05:06, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia is not a fan wiki, we're an encyclopedia. Plots are to be kept concise and to the point, and cannot include colorful lanuauge or supposition. --M ASEM (t) 05:12, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Well, you're a supposition! So there! --LooneyTunerIan (talk) 05:52, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Masem is right there. This does not belong here as it is no important plot point of this episode. Gial Ackbar (talk) 08:16, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

Notability?
I'm a little iffy on notability here. Much of the article appears to be based on primary sources, and specifically tweets published by some of the show's crew. Is "Equestria Daily" considered a reliable source? I'm not sure if two reviews from Unleash the Fanboy and The Federalist are enough to make the standalone notability bar, although the article in The Federalist alone is a fairly comprehensive analysis. I'm sensing a merge to My Little Pony: Friendship Is Magic (season 5) might be best. Mz7 (talk) 03:21, 21 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Yes, I'll scratch this now. The Hugo Award nomination makes this likely notable. Mz7 (talk) 03:53, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Indeed, seeing this in competition with the likes of Doctor Who and Jessica Jones left me a bit surprised. Hektor (talk) 12:35, 28 April 2016 (UTC)

Mindless trivia
The DYK section has been disappointing more often lately but is this pink horse tosser trivia really interesing or noteworthy enough for the front page? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pickled Undergarments (talk • contribs) 22:46, 4 February 2022 (UTC)
 * It isn't about "noteworthiness" (please define what is considered "noteworthy" and what is not), but being new enough (i.e. being created, converted from a redirect, 5x expanded or improved to GA status within the past seven days), long enough (more than 1500 characters), policy compliant (neutral, well-sourced and plagiarism-free) and having an interesting fact. This article has been covered enough by reliable source to be deemed notable. You can nominate an article on something super obscure if it meets the DYK criteria if you want. And how could this NOT be interesting? It's a children's show and Marxism and Stalinism are very adult themes. If you think there's a problem with DYK, raise it at WT:DYK nothing's going to come out of a discussion here. Thank you for your time. Pamzeis (talk) 03:33, 5 February 2022 (UTC)