Talk:Flying saucer: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
m (Deleting links to images that have been deleted) |
||
| (3 intermediate revisions by 3 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
We should probably keep this page, but most of the individual ships mentioned deserve their own page imo -- [[User:Capricorn|Capricorn]] 10:24, 8 April 2008 (UTC) | We should probably keep this page, but most of the individual ships mentioned deserve their own page imo -- [[User:Capricorn|Capricorn]] 10:24, 8 April 2008 (UTC) | ||
Maybe Flying Saucer should be a category?--[[User:Skittles the hog|Skittles the hog]] | Maybe Flying Saucer should be a category?--[[User:Skittles the hog|Skittles the hog]] 10:39, 8 April 2008 (UTC) | ||
:Yes, many ships here probably do deserve their own pages. And maybe we should have a flying saucer category (but still keep general information on this page). {{:User:Ghelæ/sig}} 15:05, 8 April 2008 (UTC) | :Yes, many ships here probably do deserve their own pages. And maybe we should have a flying saucer category (but still keep general information on this page). {{:User:Ghelæ/sig}} 15:05, 8 April 2008 (UTC) | ||
:a category might be an useful addition, but the info contained on this page in the intro text and behind the scenes section are notable even if some of the rest of the info could better be placed on individual pages. Thus, info should be moved as much as possible, and perhaps a category created to augment the usefulness, but the page itself should, in a reduced form, most defiantly stay. -- [[User:Capricorn|Capricorn]] 16:05, 8 April 2008 (UTC) | :a category might be an useful addition, but the info contained on this page in the intro text and behind the scenes section are notable even if some of the rest of the info could better be placed on individual pages. Thus, info should be moved as much as possible, and perhaps a category created to augment the usefulness, but the page itself should, in a reduced form, most defiantly stay. -- [[User:Capricorn|Capricorn]] 16:05, 8 April 2008 (UTC) | ||
I Think the that the info on the page relating to flying saucers in general should remain here but pages should be created for each ship instead of links for those ships coming to this page [[User:Dark Lord Xander|Dark Lord Xander]] 06:28, 29 June 2008 (UTC) | |||
==Why we don't use HTML coding== | |||
If you need proof as to why you don't use most HTML coding on Wiki articles, take a look at what I just repaired. The only acceptable coding is "br" for a forced line break. Otherwise never use "ul" or "li" as it messes everything up. [[User:23skidoo|23skidoo]] 19:36, October 25, 2009 (UTC) | |||
==List of appearances?== | |||
Is the appearance list necessary? Isn't it already better covered in article? The list doesn't include the Foo Fighters or the Dominator or Adiposian saucers (is it because the latter's article calls them "saucer-like"?) and if I have to tack on all the comic appearances of Dalek saucers, I think it'll overtax the infobox.--[[User:Nyktimos|Nyktimos]] 22:58, November 9, 2009 (UTC) | |||
Latest revision as of 02:07, 26 April 2013
We should probably keep this page, but most of the individual ships mentioned deserve their own page imo -- Capricorn 10:24, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
Maybe Flying Saucer should be a category?--Skittles the hog 10:39, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
- Yes, many ships here probably do deserve their own pages. And maybe we should have a flying saucer category (but still keep general information on this page). ~ Ghelæ -talk-contribs 15:05, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
- a category might be an useful addition, but the info contained on this page in the intro text and behind the scenes section are notable even if some of the rest of the info could better be placed on individual pages. Thus, info should be moved as much as possible, and perhaps a category created to augment the usefulness, but the page itself should, in a reduced form, most defiantly stay. -- Capricorn 16:05, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
I Think the that the info on the page relating to flying saucers in general should remain here but pages should be created for each ship instead of links for those ships coming to this page Dark Lord Xander 06:28, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
Why we don't use HTML coding[[edit source]]
If you need proof as to why you don't use most HTML coding on Wiki articles, take a look at what I just repaired. The only acceptable coding is "br" for a forced line break. Otherwise never use "ul" or "li" as it messes everything up. 23skidoo 19:36, October 25, 2009 (UTC)
List of appearances?[[edit source]]
Is the appearance list necessary? Isn't it already better covered in article? The list doesn't include the Foo Fighters or the Dominator or Adiposian saucers (is it because the latter's article calls them "saucer-like"?) and if I have to tack on all the comic appearances of Dalek saucers, I think it'll overtax the infobox.--Nyktimos 22:58, November 9, 2009 (UTC)
