| Display title | Talk:Orion class battlestar/Archive 1 |
| Default sort key | Orion class battlestar/Archive 1 |
| Page length (in bytes) | 6,513 |
| Namespace ID | 1 |
| Namespace | Talk |
| Page ID | 35083 |
| Page content language | en - English |
| Page content model | wikitext |
| Indexing by robots | Allowed |
| Number of redirects to this page | 0 |
| Number of subpages of this page | 0 (0 redirects; 0 non-redirects) |
| Edit | Allow all users (infinite) |
| Move | Allow all users (infinite) |
| Page creator | VARGR (talk | contribs) |
| Date of page creation | 17:08, 23 November 2012 |
| Latest editor | VARGR (talk | contribs) |
| Date of latest edit | 20:00, 12 December 2012 |
| Total number of edits | 16 |
| Recent number of edits (within past 90 days) | 0 |
| Recent number of distinct authors | 0 |
Description | Content |
Article description: (description)
This attribute controls the content of the description and og:description elements. | Battlestar? Where did this Battlestar designation come from? From the evidence it is clearly far too small and underpowered to be a battlestar. It also got its fighters from other ships and had to create a vacum in its hangar to let raptors in/out. It is also tiny compared to basestars and and completely outgunned. If anything this ship is similar to a frigate or destroyer, but a battlestar it is not. A much larger stronger ship the Loki is clearly identified as a heavy-cruiser and not a battlestar so this smaller ship is not either. VARGR 12:08, 23 November 2012 (EST) |
