Talk:Loli Daemonette

Half the images Fatum dumped in here don't belong in this article. Fail less, damnit! --23:32, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

Move them or shut up, smart guy. Fatum 04:23, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

You gave them stupid and misleading names, though.

The horror, the horror! What are we gonna do????!!!!!! Fatum 12:57, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

Uhm, mister Fatum, sir, does'nt the bit that goes something like "(...)the name given to a Slaaneshi daemonette." basically result in your delightfull pics of khornate, tzeentchite and nurgling lolis being slightly out of place? Just saying, is all... BladePHF 19:07, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

It wasn't my idea to make non-slaaneshi daemonettes, and starting a new article for those would by plain stupid, right? I can't even think of a reasonable name for it, so it goes like this: are these female daemons and thus daemonettes? Yes. Thus, the pics belong to Daemonette article. Period. After all, the article isn't named 'Slaaneshi daemonette', is it? Or alternatively we can just add "Canonically" to that "(...)the name given to a Slaaneshi daemonette." and be done with that. Fatum 21:49, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

Uh. You DO realise this is the LOLI daemonette article, referring to a specific character, and we have an actual separate daemonette article that you should have put the pictures in? P.S. Learn what the hell loli means you guys I mean jeez, barely any of the pictures added recently qualify --23:25, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

If by loli you mean pre-teen - yeah, sure, those are irrelevant. On the other hand, daemonettes are canonically based on post-teen woman proportions, unlike more teenage character appearance on these pics.

No he doesn't mean pre-teen, he means "Loli Daemonette", the name of a SPECIFIC SINGLE CHARACTER. Get a brain, moran. Someone needs to make a nurglette article

A character needs at least some back to be specific. While it doesn't, it's just a generalized category.