Talk:Top (rolling papers)
Add topic | This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||
.jpg){kind=small}
Merge
[edit]Strongly Oppose -- What exactly makes this material suitable for integration into the main rolling papers article, whereas numerous other brands retain stand-alone articles? Clearly, this article is a stub, but that certainly doesn't mean there isn't vast room for expansion. Merging the articles simply makes no sense whatsoever. If someone can present a reasonable case for the proposed merge, I'm all ears. --Raoul Duke 10:41, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
- You might want to take that up at the target article. I've put a more functional template on the page, that will take you there.
brenneman {L} 11:54, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
Common name
[edit]I am seeing sources use all caps when talking about TOP so I believe TOP is the commonname , . Valoem talk contrib 17:29, 3 December 2018 (UTC)
- There are a few reasons why I'd rather see this article at "Top". WP:TITLETM guidelines suggest the the title should follow "standard capitalization". The brand is is named after a Top, and is not an initialism for anything. And lastly, several of the articles own (archived) references use "Top". +mt 18:26, 3 December 2018 (UTC)
Who do I complain to about my purchasing of top and always half with sticky and half none 2601:43:0:560:F46C:4F06:EDF9:402C (talk) 22:53, 29 November 2024 (UTC)