Difference between revisions of "Talk:Hull Plating"
From OCE Space Simulation
m (responded) |
m (alumni displeasure?) |
||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
:If we only put stuff that is accepted as Canon on this, then no work will ever get done. This is a work in progress, and it is on this, the discussion page, that debates concerning the content of the Hull plating article should take place. If you still do not approve, bear in mind that I, as leader of the Pseudoscience taskforce and Wikimaster, have given permission for descriptions that have not yet been officialized to be posted here. [[User:Stefanido|Stefanido]] 13:28, 8 April 2006 (EDT) | :If we only put stuff that is accepted as Canon on this, then no work will ever get done. This is a work in progress, and it is on this, the discussion page, that debates concerning the content of the Hull plating article should take place. If you still do not approve, bear in mind that I, as leader of the Pseudoscience taskforce and Wikimaster, have given permission for descriptions that have not yet been officialized to be posted here. [[User:Stefanido|Stefanido]] 13:28, 8 April 2006 (EDT) | ||
| + | |||
| + | ::I believe that my previous comment removes the need for an alumni displeasure warning on this article. I will, however, leave it on until an alumnus has had time to review it. | ||
Revision as of 12:30, 8 April 2006
Has this been accepted as Canon? It is written here as if it is, but I'm under the impression it is still be debated. - Avacar 11:55, 7 April 2006 (EDT)
- If we only put stuff that is accepted as Canon on this, then no work will ever get done. This is a work in progress, and it is on this, the discussion page, that debates concerning the content of the Hull plating article should take place. If you still do not approve, bear in mind that I, as leader of the Pseudoscience taskforce and Wikimaster, have given permission for descriptions that have not yet been officialized to be posted here. Stefanido 13:28, 8 April 2006 (EDT)
- I believe that my previous comment removes the need for an alumni displeasure warning on this article. I will, however, leave it on until an alumnus has had time to review it.
