Talk:Colonial Workers Alliance/Archive 1: Difference between revisions
Discussion page of Colonial Workers Alliance/Archive 1
More actions
Move |
|||
| Line 10: | Line 10: | ||
Grammatically, the correct name is "Workers'" as opposed to "Worker's". The nitpicking brigade at your service. --[[User:Catrope|Catrope]]<sup>([[User talk:Catrope|Talk to me]] or [[Special:Emailuser/Catrope|e-mail me]])</sup> 14:10, 7 June 2007 (CDT) | Grammatically, the correct name is "Workers'" as opposed to "Worker's". The nitpicking brigade at your service. --[[User:Catrope|Catrope]]<sup>([[User talk:Catrope|Talk to me]] or [[Special:Emailuser/Catrope|e-mail me]])</sup> 14:10, 7 June 2007 (CDT) | ||
:Do we even need the apostrophe? Just "Colonial Workers Aliance" is fine too. --[[User:Serenity|Serenity]] 14:11, 7 June 2007 (CDT) | |||
Revision as of 19:11, 7 June 2007
Name
Roslin: Oh I'm sorry. I thought you were engaged in collective bargaining on behalf of the Colonial Worker's Alliance. If that's not the case, then..
- Should we move this to the name that Roslin called it? --Steelviper 13:26, 18 April 2007 (CDT)
- Yeah, and maybe leave the redirect. Although grammatically it should be "Workers' Union" or something. With an apostrophe --Serenity 13:29, 18 April 2007 (CDT)
- Great. I thought there was a name for it. Good cite. --Spencerian 14:56, 18 April 2007 (CDT)
Move
Grammatically, the correct name is "Workers'" as opposed to "Worker's". The nitpicking brigade at your service. --Catrope(Talk to me or e-mail me) 14:10, 7 June 2007 (CDT)
- Do we even need the apostrophe? Just "Colonial Workers Aliance" is fine too. --Serenity 14:11, 7 June 2007 (CDT)