Editing Talk:Night Flight/Archive 1
Discussion page of Night Flight/Archive 1
More actions
The edit can be undone.
Please check the comparison below to verify that this is what you want to do, and then publish the changes below to finish undoing the edit.
| Latest revision | Your text | ||
| Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
:It's a weird name. I could understand night/instrument flight qualification (which doesn't make sense in this context) but as a ship name it sounds strange. --[[User:Serenity|Serenity]] 14:44, 9 May 2007 (CDT) | :It's a weird name. I could understand night/instrument flight qualification (which doesn't make sense in this context) but as a ship name it sounds strange. --[[User:Serenity|Serenity]] 14:44, 9 May 2007 (CDT) | ||
::It's a common American alliterative (see [[w:Night Flight|Wikipedia's disambig]]). Personally I find the ship's name less strange than ''[[Embla Brokk]]'' and the dreaded ''[[Faru Sadin]]''. --[[User:Spencerian|Spencerian]] 14:50, 9 May 2007 (CDT) | ::It's a common American alliterative (see [[w:Night Flight|Wikipedia's disambig]]). Personally I find the ship's name less strange than ''[[Embla Brokk]]'' and the dreaded ''[[Faru Sadin]]''. --[[User:Spencerian|Spencerian]] 14:50, 9 May 2007 (CDT) | ||
About the "weapons" portion of the infobox... aren't we inferring too much on that one? -- [[User:Joe Beaudoin Jr.|Joe Beaudoin]] <sup>[[User talk:Joe Beaudoin Jr.|So say we all]] - [[Battlestar Wiki:Site support|Donate]]</sup> 19:05, 9 May 2007 (CDT) | About the "weapons" portion of the infobox... aren't we inferring too much on that one? -- [[User:Joe Beaudoin Jr.|Joe Beaudoin]] <sup>[[User talk:Joe Beaudoin Jr.|So say we all]] - [[Battlestar Wiki:Site support|Donate]]</sup> 19:05, 9 May 2007 (CDT) | ||
| Line 13: | Line 12: | ||
:::::Since they haven't "transporters", must be able to go quickly for mobilization, it would be logical to think that a battlestar has facilities for Vipers and Raptors, and have an FTL drive. Otherwise it couldn't be part of a battlestar group with other FTL ships. I agree on the Star Trek generalizations; that basic spec is as specific as it should get. --[[User:Spencerian|Spencerian]] 08:27, 10 May 2007 (CDT) | :::::Since they haven't "transporters", must be able to go quickly for mobilization, it would be logical to think that a battlestar has facilities for Vipers and Raptors, and have an FTL drive. Otherwise it couldn't be part of a battlestar group with other FTL ships. I agree on the Star Trek generalizations; that basic spec is as specific as it should get. --[[User:Spencerian|Spencerian]] 08:27, 10 May 2007 (CDT) | ||
:My educated guess for the covered battlestar name would be ''Oedipus'', but of course we can't be sure. --[[User:Catrope|Catrope]]<sup>([[User talk:Catrope|Talk to me]] or [[Special:Emailuser/Catrope|e-mail me]])</sup> 06:04, 10 May 2007 (CDT) | :My educated guess for the covered battlestar name would be ''Oedipus'', but of course we can't be sure. --[[User:Catrope|Catrope]]<sup>([[User talk:Catrope|Talk to me]] or [[Special:Emailuser/Catrope|e-mail me]])</sup> 06:04, 10 May 2007 (CDT) | ||