345
pages
ALL POSTSList of minors characters 
<p>First, I'd say that I don't understand why do we have this page, since iCarly Wiki and Victorious Wiki have pages for every seen and mentionned characters.
</p><p>But the most important is than some of them deserve their own pages. Here are the ones in my opinion:
</p><p>Aunt Fergene: She has been mentionned four times so far, while Cat's brother, who has been mentionned only twice, has his own page.
</p><p>Ellie: I don't understand why she's here, she has been in the whole episode.
</p><p>Hector: I think he was important for the episode, he was in multiples scenes and was the subject of the trade.
</p><p>Mr. Drange: Unlike the majority of parents in this show, he was important, being in three scenes.
</p><p>Randy: He appeared three times, and Dan told on his blog than he's trying to make him being recurring.
</p><p>Please discuss if you're agreeing or disagreeing with me
</p>
(Edited by administrators)
<p>
Oppose — We need the page because we have decided not to give every single character a page unlike the Victorious and iCarly wikis. Ever since 2012, the Sam & Cat Wiki has decided not to make this wiki exactly how the iCarly and Victorious wikis are run. I'm not trying that the Victorious and iCarly wikis are ran poorly, it's just that we want this wiki to be, y'know, different. That is why we have image policies unlike the Vic and iC wikis, and our policies are styled differently. We also don't promote users by request, we promote users via our nominations for user rights page.
</p><p>I'm gonna go straight to the point now. Bottom line: I think what we have is just fine. No need to change anything.
</p>
Oppose — We need the page because we have decided not to give every single character a page unlike the Victorious and iCarly wikis. Ever since 2012, the Sam & Cat Wiki has decided not to make this wiki exactly how the iCarly and Victorious wikis are run. I'm not trying that the Victorious and iCarly wikis are ran poorly, it's just that we want this wiki to be, y'know, different. That is why we have image policies unlike the Vic and iC wikis, and our policies are styled differently. We also don't promote users by request, we promote users via our nominations for user rights page.
</p><p>I'm gonna go straight to the point now. Bottom line: I think what we have is just fine. No need to change anything.
</p>
(Edited by ArianaGrandeForever)
<p>It's okay, I can understand than you want to keep this page anyways.
</p><p>But it was just a little introduction to the post. The real subject was: Do these characters mentionned in my post would be allowed to have their own pages because of the reasons I gave ? Or am I wrong in arguments ?
</p>
(Edited by PrinceBowserJr)
<p>Well I do agree with you with some parts. If Ellie, Mr. Drange, and Randy had pages, I would be okay with it. But I think Aunt Fergene and Hector should stay in the minor characters page.
</p>
(Edited by ArianaGrandeForever)
<p>Okay.
</p><p>Aunt Fergene has chances to be mentionned again, so we'll see for her later.
</p>
(Edited by PrinceBowserJr)
My main criteria for deciding whether a a character gets its own page is whether we have enough information to properly develop an article. If you can properly develop an article for some of those characters I have no issue with them having their own articles.
(Edited by 3cooldog92)
0
<p>I actually don't really see the purpose of the minor characters page. I think it's very helpful to users who come to the wiki looking for any obscure information about Sam & Cat to search for something and find it on its own page. If you want a list of minor characters, you could go to the category page for minor characters and see all the characters listed there or look through the character navigation box. We don't have a page limit on the wiki either, and as long as the character has appeared on the show or been mentioned multiple times I think it's fair to make a page if there is significant information known about the character beyond them just being a student in the background or something like that. It also makes the character easier to comment on if it has its own page.
</p><p>I see AGF's point in saying that we don't have to be the same as other wikis, but I also think systems that work on other wikis can be preserved, and things can be improved from there as well.
</p><p>Cooldog, this criteria of yours - what exactly do you think makes up "enough information to properly develop an article"? There should be some clear definition of that for users to follow.
</p>
(Edited by Cc71)