User:SOTO/Forum Archive/The Panopticon/@comment-4028641-20151101035254/@comment-1827503-20160707023356: Difference between revisions
From Tardis Wiki, the free Doctor Who reference
(Bot: Automated import of articles) |
m (Bot: Automated text replacement (-'''User:(SOTO/Forum Archive)/(.*?)/\@comment-([\d\.]+)-(\d+)/\@comment-([\d\.]+)-(\d+)'''\n([\s\S]*)\[\[Category:SOTO archive posts\]\] +\7\2/\4-\3/\6-\5)) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
The pro-Petronella side would say that "Jane" was part of the nickname solely for the sake of the rhyme, so "Jane" has even less of a case than "Petronella" does. At least with "Petronella", Osgood herself stated it was her name, even if she may have been lying. | The pro-Petronella side would say that "Jane" was part of the nickname solely for the sake of the rhyme, so "Jane" has even less of a case than "Petronella" does. At least with "Petronella", Osgood herself stated it was her name, even if she may have been lying. | ||
Also, for non-comic readers, what was the reveal in ''Weapons of Past Destruction''? | Also, for non-comic readers, what was the reveal in ''Weapons of Past Destruction''? | ||
<noinclude>[[Category:SOTO archive posts]]</noinclude> | <noinclude>[[Category:SOTO archive posts|The Panopticon/20151101035254-4028641/20160707023356-1827503]]</noinclude> | ||
Latest revision as of 23:25, 27 April 2023
The pro-Petronella side would say that "Jane" was part of the nickname solely for the sake of the rhyme, so "Jane" has even less of a case than "Petronella" does. At least with "Petronella", Osgood herself stated it was her name, even if she may have been lying.
Also, for non-comic readers, what was the reveal in Weapons of Past Destruction?
