Talk:Colonial Defense Force/Archive 1: Difference between revisions
Discussion page of Colonial Defense Force/Archive 1
More actions
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
:::Then it must be ''erradicated''.--[[User:Ricimer|Ricimer]] 16:12, 30 January 2006 (EST) | :::Then it must be ''erradicated''.--[[User:Ricimer|Ricimer]] 16:12, 30 January 2006 (EST) | ||
::::We should ask [[User:Lestatdelc]] where he got the name. Unfortunatley, he hasn't been active for two months. I'd hesitate on deleting it, it could be from a podcast or a blog entry. --[[User:BMS|BMS]] 17:38, 30 January 2006 (EST) |
Revision as of 22:38, 30 January 2006
Is this an actual canonical name, or one we made up?--Ricimer 15:42, 30 January 2006 (EST)
- I concur that this name sounds shady, mostly due to its lack of citations. It'd be nice if we could confirm it, or if not at least indicate that this is a placeholder and not canonical. --Steelviper 15:52, 30 January 2006 (EST)
- As far as I know, it's non canonical. -- Joe Beaudoin 15:56, 30 January 2006 (EST)
- Then it must be erradicated.--Ricimer 16:12, 30 January 2006 (EST)
- We should ask User:Lestatdelc where he got the name. Unfortunatley, he hasn't been active for two months. I'd hesitate on deleting it, it could be from a podcast or a blog entry. --BMS 17:38, 30 January 2006 (EST)
- Then it must be erradicated.--Ricimer 16:12, 30 January 2006 (EST)