Trusted
34,029
edits
Forum:Doctor Who: Worlds in Time: Difference between revisions
From Tardis Wiki, the free Doctor Who reference
→Getting back to the question of RPGs
OttselSpy25 (talk | contribs) |
|||
| Line 229: | Line 229: | ||
::::But you've again gone to an argument to try to keep WIT around without answering the first question. We ''first'' need to know, "Do we cover RPGs (and therefore MMOs and MMORPGs) here"? You don't seem prepared to just say "no" to that. Why? What is it about RPGs you're trying to hold on to? {{user:CzechOut/Sig}} <span style="{{User:CzechOut/TimeFormat}}">14:15: Mon 02 Apr 2012 </span> | ::::But you've again gone to an argument to try to keep WIT around without answering the first question. We ''first'' need to know, "Do we cover RPGs (and therefore MMOs and MMORPGs) here"? You don't seem prepared to just say "no" to that. Why? What is it about RPGs you're trying to hold on to? {{user:CzechOut/Sig}} <span style="{{User:CzechOut/TimeFormat}}">14:15: Mon 02 Apr 2012 </span> | ||
:::::Well, frankly, because I think some of them can be well-encore rated into our articles. I brought up FYF because I note that it could and is be well incorporated into pages like [[Omega]] and [[2056]]... So I think we should AT LEAST keep those... I can actually kinda see why you wouldn't like WIT, although I still think that besides the name nothing is changed... But at this point, I think marking WIT as Nc would not be the end of the world. I just think we should keep FYF. [[User:OttselSpy25|OS25]] ([[User Talk:OttselSpy25|talk to me, baby.]]) 15:48, April 2, 2012 (UTC) | |||
