| Display title | Talk:Striker/Archive 1 |
| Default sort key | Striker/Archive 1 |
| Page length (in bytes) | 2,463 |
| Namespace ID | 1 |
| Namespace | Talk |
| Page ID | 5119 |
| 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 | Hawke (talk | contribs) |
| Date of page creation | 02:57, 30 January 2006 |
| Latest editor | Joe Beaudoin Jr. (talk | contribs) |
| Date of latest edit | 01:58, 11 April 2020 |
| Total number of edits | 8 |
| 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. | Does anyone else notice a conflict here? It's already been stated that there is a Celestra emulation in the TNS's fleet. (Examine Here) The emulation looks exceptionally like the old Celestra, and supposedly has the name Celestra already on the CGI model. If this is the case, then why is this ship the Striker? Is Striker a call-sign or handle, or is this the name of the ship? I highly doubt that there are two of this ship type in the fleet, as in the old series, this ship was described as being a unique para-military "work" ship, skippered by a one-time military captain. Yes, it sounds like I'm nitpicking, and this might be a petty point, except I get quite... "frustrated" at what can be none other than laziness and miscommunication amongst TPTB on this series. -- Hawke 21:57, 29 January 2006 (EST) |
