Difference between revisions of "Talk:Rommel"
(Just ignore for now) |
m |
||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{WikiProject Ground Units|tr=new}} | {{WikiProject Ground Units|tr=new}} | ||
− | So I guess we're not going to note the widespread opinion that removing the Rommel tank from BattleTech is a dumb idea? | + | So I guess we're not going to note the widespread opinion that removing the Rommel tank from BattleTech is a dumb idea?{{Unsigned|Lanzman}} |
: I don't remember being asked for my opinion on whether I considered it a dumb idea. [[User:Madness Divine|Madness Divine]] ([[User talk:Madness Divine|talk]]) 21:14, 5 November 2022 (EDT) | : I don't remember being asked for my opinion on whether I considered it a dumb idea. [[User:Madness Divine|Madness Divine]] ([[User talk:Madness Divine|talk]]) 21:14, 5 November 2022 (EDT) | ||
: It's one of the original tanks from TRO 3025 and removing it "because nazis" smacks of idiocy. Patton/Rommel were a historic rivalry from WWII and it makes perfect sense to have a pair of related tanks named after them. [[User:Lanzman|Lanzman]] | : It's one of the original tanks from TRO 3025 and removing it "because nazis" smacks of idiocy. Patton/Rommel were a historic rivalry from WWII and it makes perfect sense to have a pair of related tanks named after them. [[User:Lanzman|Lanzman]] |
Latest revision as of 06:15, 6 November 2022
So I guess we're not going to note the widespread opinion that removing the Rommel tank from BattleTech is a dumb idea?— The preceding unsigned comment was posted by Lanzman (talk • contribs) .
- I don't remember being asked for my opinion on whether I considered it a dumb idea. Madness Divine (talk) 21:14, 5 November 2022 (EDT)
- It's one of the original tanks from TRO 3025 and removing it "because nazis" smacks of idiocy. Patton/Rommel were a historic rivalry from WWII and it makes perfect sense to have a pair of related tanks named after them. Lanzman
- The point is that you don't decide what opinion is widespread.
- Regardless of one's opinion, grousing about it doesn't belong in any article on the wiki. Madness Divine (talk) 01:08, 6 November 2022 (EDT)
Sarna should stay out of this. All we got is a plan for a future intention, the reasons for which were described as "obvious" combined with a refusal to elaborate. That flies in the face of the fact-based wiki I wantSarna to be. It’s not worth noting; actually, this kind of non-information should be actively ignored at least until something BT-relevant has actually happened. Let’s not jump to conclusions, promulgate rumors or even fight about what this was "obviously" supposed to mean. Frabby (talk) 01:38, 6 November 2022 (EST)