Talk:Top (rolling papers)

Brands Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Brands, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of brands on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.BrandsWikipedia:WikiProject BrandsTemplate:WikiProject BrandsBrands articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Psychoactive and Recreational Drugs (defunct)

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Psychoactive and Recreational Drugs, a project which is currently considered to be defunct.Psychoactive and Recreational DrugsWikipedia:WikiProject Psychoactive and Recreational DrugsTemplate:WikiProject Psychoactive and Recreational DrugsPsychoactive and Recreational Drugs articles

Merge

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

Common name

I am seeing sources use all caps when talking about TOP so I believe TOP is the commonname [1], [2]. Valoem ^talk ^contrib 17:29, 3 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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)[reply]