Skakid9090 (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
Line 50: | Line 50: | ||
== Attention faggots == |
== Attention faggots == |
||
You don't understand Strong Like Bearway, stop pretending you do. Go die, you weak fucking butterflies. — '''[[User:Skakid9090|<font color="black">Skakid</font>]]''' 00:20, 3 June 2008 (EDT) |
You don't understand Strong Like Bearway, stop pretending you do. Go die, you weak fucking butterflies. — '''[[User:Skakid9090|<font color="black">Skakid</font>]]''' 00:20, 3 June 2008 (EDT) |
||
+ | |||
+ | == Clean up? == |
||
+ | A lot of builds on the wiki have gone to hell. Strong Like Bearway? What the fuck. Is it a good build? yes. Is the joking appropriate? no. Make it serious. Put some REAL usage and REAL name and REAL variants. You might say that the build is straightforward and doesn't need all that, but still. Build articles are kept to a standard in the aspect of how good the build is. They should ALSO be kept up to a standard of content. I understand its funny and whatnot, but articles like this one should be fixed up. I'm not singling out THIS build. There are plenty of build with no usage and poor content. Pros do not use this site. Its only noobs and people who wish they were pro. Noobs will not understand wtf is going on with a lot of this. IMO, fix it up --[[Image:Healing_Hands.jpg|19px]][[User:Bim|''Bim'']] <small>([[User_talk:Bim|talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/Bim|contribs]])</small> 15:28, 3 June 2008 (EDT) |
Revision as of 19:28, 3 June 2008
I'd rather be strong like rhino than strong like buffalo tbh--Goldenstar 23:16, 1 June 2008 (EDT)
adam strong like bear. wind sways east like powerful buffalo.
REQUIRES ONLY THE STRONGEST OF WARRIORS — Skakid 23:25, 1 June 2008 (EDT)
- needs moar taint & stuff--Goldenstar 23:33, 1 June 2008 (EDT)
Note to people editing this page: use minor edit, 'mkay? (i.e. click the box labled "This is a minor edit" before clicking Save page). *Defiant Elements* +talk 23:59, 1 June 2008 (EDT)
Amazing name. --Tab Moo 06:20, 2 June 2008 (EDT)
Buffalo are slow and stupid. --71.229 06:23, 2 June 2008 (EDT) tasty, though.
- Be strong like mudkip and swift like pidgey!--Goldenstar 15:10, 2 June 2008 (EDT)
- Cute like piplup. --Tab Moo 16:23, 2 June 2008 (EDT)
- Duh--Goldenstar 16:30, 2 June 2008 (EDT)
- Mean like Goldenstar :< --Tab Moo 16:31, 2 June 2008 (EDT)
- Sorry tab--Goldenstar 18:30, 2 June 2008 (EDT)
- Mean like Goldenstar :< --Tab Moo 16:31, 2 June 2008 (EDT)
- Duh--Goldenstar 16:30, 2 June 2008 (EDT)
- Cute like piplup. --Tab Moo 16:23, 2 June 2008 (EDT)
BEAR
I hurd Frenzy, Adam, Graham, and Seal {FAGS}, were the only people strong like bear
Defence
This needs some. ¬ Klumpeet 20:42{GMT}2-06-MMVIII
- ...Wow. --Tab Moo 16:42, 2 June 2008 (EDT)
- ...Wow. — Skakid 16:43, 2 June 2008 (EDT)
ROFL, Yea I remember that! Ya'll yelled that out, it was funny, I can't remember if we beat you or not, I think we lost, not sure. Nature 17:47, 2 June 2008 (EDT)
Defense for pansies.
This build is so strong, it needs no defense. Magebane is all the defense bears need, being strong.
- Bears have innate defence vs water magic with their fur. --Tab Moo 16:45, 2 June 2008 (EDT)
Vandal
Someone vandalized so I undid it. Nature 17:50, 2 June 2008 (EDT)
- Some people have no taste White 18:29, 2 June 2008 (EDT)
why must morons mistake my contributions for vandalism
Name
Is so fucking leet, so strong, so bear. There are no variants. ONLY STRONG LIKE BEAR! <--- I actually rofl'd when I saw that. /FrosTalk\ 18:25, 2 June 2008 (EDT)
- is the name a joke? is the build a joke? i dont get it... Looks like the fucking generic build these days anyway. Lots of mele and a rit to beef them up. --Bim (talk|contribs) 21:28, 2 June 2008 (EDT)
Attention faggots
You don't understand Strong Like Bearway, stop pretending you do. Go die, you weak fucking butterflies. — Skakid 00:20, 3 June 2008 (EDT)
Clean up?
A lot of builds on the wiki have gone to hell. Strong Like Bearway? What the fuck. Is it a good build? yes. Is the joking appropriate? no. Make it serious. Put some REAL usage and REAL name and REAL variants. You might say that the build is straightforward and doesn't need all that, but still. Build articles are kept to a standard in the aspect of how good the build is. They should ALSO be kept up to a standard of content. I understand its funny and whatnot, but articles like this one should be fixed up. I'm not singling out THIS build. There are plenty of build with no usage and poor content. Pros do not use this site. Its only noobs and people who wish they were pro. Noobs will not understand wtf is going on with a lot of this. IMO, fix it up --Bim (talk|contribs) 15:28, 3 June 2008 (EDT)