Difference between revisions of "Talk:Lincoln Osis"
Sarna News
BobTheZombie (talk | contribs) m (my two cents) |
(response) |
||
| Line 5: | Line 5: | ||
... the novelization of MechWarrior 3??? What the heck? There is no way this is a legit source. At best, this should be an indented subsection of the notes. (A similar approach was used with Nondi Steiner/Peter Steiner Davion's duel on Tharkad.) [[User:ClanWolverine101|ClanWolverine101]] 22:29, 22 April 2010 (UTC) | ... the novelization of MechWarrior 3??? What the heck? There is no way this is a legit source. At best, this should be an indented subsection of the notes. (A similar approach was used with Nondi Steiner/Peter Steiner Davion's duel on Tharkad.) [[User:ClanWolverine101|ClanWolverine101]] 22:29, 22 April 2010 (UTC) | ||
:Rather than remove it, perhaps we should put an "apocryphal" tag around it and clearly state where it is coming from? -[[User:BobTheZombie|BobTheZombie]] ([[User talk:BobTheZombie|talk]]) 21:19, 28 July 2013 (PDT) | :Rather than remove it, perhaps we should put an "apocryphal" tag around it and clearly state where it is coming from? -[[User:BobTheZombie|BobTheZombie]] ([[User talk:BobTheZombie|talk]]) 21:19, 28 July 2013 (PDT) | ||
| + | ::We just finished the apocryphal debate. What bothers me is that there's not even a page number here? [[User:ClanWolverine101|ClanWolverine101]] ([[User talk:ClanWolverine101|talk]]) 22:30, 28 July 2013 (PDT) | ||
Revision as of 01:30, 29 July 2013
|
This article is within the scope of the Project Characters, a collaborative effort to improve BattleTechWiki's coverage of Characters. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. |
|
No offense, but....
... the novelization of MechWarrior 3??? What the heck? There is no way this is a legit source. At best, this should be an indented subsection of the notes. (A similar approach was used with Nondi Steiner/Peter Steiner Davion's duel on Tharkad.) ClanWolverine101 22:29, 22 April 2010 (UTC)
- Rather than remove it, perhaps we should put an "apocryphal" tag around it and clearly state where it is coming from? -BobTheZombie (talk) 21:19, 28 July 2013 (PDT)
- We just finished the apocryphal debate. What bothers me is that there's not even a page number here? ClanWolverine101 (talk) 22:30, 28 July 2013 (PDT)