Editing Template talk:Non-canon
Discussion page of Template:Non-canon
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 3: | Line 3: | ||
:On further review: The {{tl|non-canon}} template should be very rarely used (it could be considered, by a wiki vote, to mark all ''[[Galactica 1980]]'' articles with this since that series is so unpopular). However, the {{tl|separate continuity}} template fits the 1980 articles best. We've normally marked retcon material by notes and references in the central article, precluding the need for such a template. The {{tl|fandom}} template is OK for popular sites such as [[Frak party]], but is also a rarity since we aren't trying to document every fan site. This template is OK, but I don't know if non-canon is useful now. --[[User:Spencerian|Spencerian]] 14:47, 3 August 2007 (CDT) | :On further review: The {{tl|non-canon}} template should be very rarely used (it could be considered, by a wiki vote, to mark all ''[[Galactica 1980]]'' articles with this since that series is so unpopular). However, the {{tl|separate continuity}} template fits the 1980 articles best. We've normally marked retcon material by notes and references in the central article, precluding the need for such a template. The {{tl|fandom}} template is OK for popular sites such as [[Frak party]], but is also a rarity since we aren't trying to document every fan site. This template is OK, but I don't know if non-canon is useful now. --[[User:Spencerian|Spencerian]] 14:47, 3 August 2007 (CDT) | ||