Talk:Matt Parkman's team (explosion future) - Revision history

imported>Ryangibsonstewart: Talk:Matt Parkman's team (Explosion Future) moved to Talk:Matt Parkman's team (explosion future): no need for caps

2008-11-01T17:41:32Z

Talk:Matt Parkman's team (Explosion Future) moved to Talk:Matt Parkman's team (explosion future): no need for caps

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:41, 1 November 2008
(No difference)

imported>Ryangibsonstewart: Talk:Matt Parkman's team (Explosion Future) moved to Talk:Matt Parkman's team (explosion future): no need for caps

2008-11-01T17:41:32Z

Talk:Matt Parkman's team (Explosion Future) moved to Talk:Matt Parkman's team (explosion future): no need for caps

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:41, 1 November 2008
(No difference)

imported>Pinkkeith: Talk:Matt Parkman's team (future) moved to Talk:Matt Parkman's team (Explosion Future)

2008-10-02T19:19:52Z

Talk:Matt Parkman's team (future) moved to Talk:Matt Parkman's team (Explosion Future)

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:19, 2 October 2008
(No difference)

imported>FrenchFlo: /* Group */ +1 for deletion

2007-05-28T11:41:02Z

Group: +1 for deletion

← Older revision		Revision as of 11:41, 28 May 2007
Line 21:		Line 21:
	:PS: It's being discussed on [[Category talk:Future Groups]] as to whether to delete the future category altogether, though I rather think we should keep it, add a past groups portal/category after past groups are introduced in ''Volume Two: Generations'', and add all groups to the groups category.--[[User:MiamiVolts\|MiamiVolts]] ([[User_talk:MiamiVolts\|talk]]) 17:36, 27 May 2007 (EDT)		:PS: It's being discussed on [[Category talk:Future Groups]] as to whether to delete the future category altogether, though I rather think we should keep it, add a past groups portal/category after past groups are introduced in ''Volume Two: Generations'', and add all groups to the groups category.--[[User:MiamiVolts\|MiamiVolts]] ([[User_talk:MiamiVolts\|talk]]) 17:36, 27 May 2007 (EDT)
	*I agree, Flo, it seems odd to me that they would be included in a category, but not the corresponding portal or section on the navbar. However, it would seem even weirder to me to include them twice on the navbar or in both portals. However, I'm of the mind to delete the Future Groups category altogether. If there are more future groups, then we could re-add it. — [[User:Ryangibsonstewart\|<font color=#0147FA>RyanGibsonStewart</font>]] ([[User talk:Ryangibsonstewart\|<font color=#0147FA>talk</font>]]) 21:34, 27 May 2007 (EDT)		*I agree, Flo, it seems odd to me that they would be included in a category, but not the corresponding portal or section on the navbar. However, it would seem even weirder to me to include them twice on the navbar or in both portals. However, I'm of the mind to delete the Future Groups category altogether. If there are more future groups, then we could re-add it. — [[User:Ryangibsonstewart\|<font color=#0147FA>RyanGibsonStewart</font>]] ([[User talk:Ryangibsonstewart\|<font color=#0147FA>talk</font>]]) 21:34, 27 May 2007 (EDT)
			**Yeah, deleting the Future Groups cat seems good. We will just have to add somwhere in the group's page a note about the fact this is a future group. Things would be much easier. For now, it's pretty weird, especially the navbar in which we don't add future-named group as both future and named (and a duplicate on a navbar would make the navbar weird too). Just delete the Future Groups cat! -- [[User:FrenchFlo\|'''FrenchFlo''']] [[User talk:FrenchFlo\|<span style="font-size:8pt">(talk)</span>]] <span style="border: 1px solid black">[[Wikipedia:Toulouse\|<span style="background-color:blue">  </span><span style="background-color:white">  </span><span style="background-color:red">  </span>]]</span> 07:41, 28 May 2007 (EDT)

imported>Ryangibsonstewart: /* Group */

2007-05-28T01:34:07Z

Group

← Older revision		Revision as of 01:34, 28 May 2007
Line 20:		Line 20:
	* I don't really see it as a problem, but I agree that we should probably include the future groups with the regular groups on the portal (not sure about the nav). Technically, though, I think we should add all of the group articles to the 'Groups' category the same way it's done for the 'Characters' category. I think that would be less confusing.		* I don't really see it as a problem, but I agree that we should probably include the future groups with the regular groups on the portal (not sure about the nav). Technically, though, I think we should add all of the group articles to the 'Groups' category the same way it's done for the 'Characters' category. I think that would be less confusing.
	:PS: It's being discussed on [[Category talk:Future Groups]] as to whether to delete the future category altogether, though I rather think we should keep it, add a past groups portal/category after past groups are introduced in ''Volume Two: Generations'', and add all groups to the groups category.--[[User:MiamiVolts\|MiamiVolts]] ([[User_talk:MiamiVolts\|talk]]) 17:36, 27 May 2007 (EDT)		:PS: It's being discussed on [[Category talk:Future Groups]] as to whether to delete the future category altogether, though I rather think we should keep it, add a past groups portal/category after past groups are introduced in ''Volume Two: Generations'', and add all groups to the groups category.--[[User:MiamiVolts\|MiamiVolts]] ([[User_talk:MiamiVolts\|talk]]) 17:36, 27 May 2007 (EDT)
			*I agree, Flo, it seems odd to me that they would be included in a category, but not the corresponding portal or section on the navbar. However, it would seem even weirder to me to include them twice on the navbar or in both portals. However, I'm of the mind to delete the Future Groups category altogether. If there are more future groups, then we could re-add it. — [[User:Ryangibsonstewart\|<font color=#0147FA>RyanGibsonStewart</font>]] ([[User talk:Ryangibsonstewart\|<font color=#0147FA>talk</font>]]) 21:34, 27 May 2007 (EDT)

imported>MiamiVolts: /* Group */ format indent

2007-05-27T21:37:24Z

Group: format indent

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:37, 27 May 2007
Line 19:		Line 19:
	Well, I added to this page the category [[:Category:Unnamed Groups]] but I'm not sure to understand how it works. First of all, I did because I realeasized that both [[Moab Penitentiary response team]] and [[Homeland Security]] are of course, Future Groups but also Named/Unnamed groups. The problem is, in the .. euh.. group-tree (?), Named, Unnamed and Future are at the same level.. The other problem is that we have a navbar that display this page as a Future Group, but know I added the Unnamed cat, shouldn't it appear in this line of the template too ? I need a small recap. :) -- [[User:FrenchFlo\|'''FrenchFlo''']] [[User talk:FrenchFlo\|<span style="font-size:8pt">(talk)</span>]] <span style="border: 1px solid black">[[Wikipedia:Toulouse\|<span style="background-color:blue">  </span><span style="background-color:white">  </span><span style="background-color:red">  </span>]]</span> 16:58, 27 May 2007 (EDT)		Well, I added to this page the category [[:Category:Unnamed Groups]] but I'm not sure to understand how it works. First of all, I did because I realeasized that both [[Moab Penitentiary response team]] and [[Homeland Security]] are of course, Future Groups but also Named/Unnamed groups. The problem is, in the .. euh.. group-tree (?), Named, Unnamed and Future are at the same level.. The other problem is that we have a navbar that display this page as a Future Group, but know I added the Unnamed cat, shouldn't it appear in this line of the template too ? I need a small recap. :) -- [[User:FrenchFlo\|'''FrenchFlo''']] [[User talk:FrenchFlo\|<span style="font-size:8pt">(talk)</span>]] <span style="border: 1px solid black">[[Wikipedia:Toulouse\|<span style="background-color:blue">  </span><span style="background-color:white">  </span><span style="background-color:red">  </span>]]</span> 16:58, 27 May 2007 (EDT)
	* I don't really see it as a problem, but I agree that we should probably include the future groups with the regular groups on the portal (not sure about the nav). Technically, though, I think we should add all of the group articles to the 'Groups' category the same way it's done for the 'Characters' category. I think that would be less confusing.		* I don't really see it as a problem, but I agree that we should probably include the future groups with the regular groups on the portal (not sure about the nav). Technically, though, I think we should add all of the group articles to the 'Groups' category the same way it's done for the 'Characters' category. I think that would be less confusing.
		⚫	:PS: It's being discussed on [[Category talk:Future Groups]] as to whether to delete the future category altogether, though I rather think we should keep it, add a past groups portal/category after past groups are introduced in ''Volume Two: Generations'', and add all groups to the groups category.--[[User:MiamiVolts\|MiamiVolts]] ([[User_talk:MiamiVolts\|talk]]) 17:36, 27 May 2007 (EDT)

⚫	PS: It's being discussed on [[Category talk:Future Groups]] as to whether to delete the future category altogether, though I rather think we should keep it, add a past groups portal/category after past groups are introduced in ''Volume Two: Generations'', and add all groups to the groups category.--[[User:MiamiVolts\|MiamiVolts]] ([[User_talk:MiamiVolts\|talk]]) 17:36, 27 May 2007 (EDT)

imported>MiamiVolts: /* Group */ Why not add all groups to 'Groups' category?

2007-05-27T21:36:26Z

Group: Why not add all groups to 'Groups' category?

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:36, 27 May 2007
Line 18:		Line 18:
	== Group ==		== Group ==
	Well, I added to this page the category [[:Category:Unnamed Groups]] but I'm not sure to understand how it works. First of all, I did because I realeasized that both [[Moab Penitentiary response team]] and [[Homeland Security]] are of course, Future Groups but also Named/Unnamed groups. The problem is, in the .. euh.. group-tree (?), Named, Unnamed and Future are at the same level.. The other problem is that we have a navbar that display this page as a Future Group, but know I added the Unnamed cat, shouldn't it appear in this line of the template too ? I need a small recap. :) -- [[User:FrenchFlo\|'''FrenchFlo''']] [[User talk:FrenchFlo\|<span style="font-size:8pt">(talk)</span>]] <span style="border: 1px solid black">[[Wikipedia:Toulouse\|<span style="background-color:blue">  </span><span style="background-color:white">  </span><span style="background-color:red">  </span>]]</span> 16:58, 27 May 2007 (EDT)		Well, I added to this page the category [[:Category:Unnamed Groups]] but I'm not sure to understand how it works. First of all, I did because I realeasized that both [[Moab Penitentiary response team]] and [[Homeland Security]] are of course, Future Groups but also Named/Unnamed groups. The problem is, in the .. euh.. group-tree (?), Named, Unnamed and Future are at the same level.. The other problem is that we have a navbar that display this page as a Future Group, but know I added the Unnamed cat, shouldn't it appear in this line of the template too ? I need a small recap. :) -- [[User:FrenchFlo\|'''FrenchFlo''']] [[User talk:FrenchFlo\|<span style="font-size:8pt">(talk)</span>]] <span style="border: 1px solid black">[[Wikipedia:Toulouse\|<span style="background-color:blue">  </span><span style="background-color:white">  </span><span style="background-color:red">  </span>]]</span> 16:58, 27 May 2007 (EDT)
			* I don't really see it as a problem, but I agree that we should probably include the future groups with the regular groups on the portal (not sure about the nav). Technically, though, I think we should add all of the group articles to the 'Groups' category the same way it's done for the 'Characters' category. I think that would be less confusing.

			PS: It's being discussed on [[Category talk:Future Groups]] as to whether to delete the future category altogether, though I rather think we should keep it, add a past groups portal/category after past groups are introduced in ''Volume Two: Generations'', and add all groups to the groups category.--[[User:MiamiVolts\|MiamiVolts]] ([[User_talk:MiamiVolts\|talk]]) 17:36, 27 May 2007 (EDT)

imported>FrenchFlo: == Group ==

2007-05-27T20:58:52Z

== Group ==

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:58, 27 May 2007
Line 15:		Line 15:
	*** Since we're not renaming this article, I added all of Matt's other teams that I could think of.--[[User:MiamiVolts\|MiamiVolts]] ([[User_talk:MiamiVolts\|talk]]) 18:10, 9 May 2007 (EDT)		*** Since we're not renaming this article, I added all of Matt's other teams that I could think of.--[[User:MiamiVolts\|MiamiVolts]] ([[User_talk:MiamiVolts\|talk]]) 18:10, 9 May 2007 (EDT)
	**** I think two separate articles will do fine. One for the present and one for the future.--[[User:Ice Vision\|Ice Vision]] 18:35, 9 May 2007 (EDT)		**** I think two separate articles will do fine. One for the present and one for the future.--[[User:Ice Vision\|Ice Vision]] 18:35, 9 May 2007 (EDT)

			== Group ==
			Well, I added to this page the category [[:Category:Unnamed Groups]] but I'm not sure to understand how it works. First of all, I did because I realeasized that both [[Moab Penitentiary response team]] and [[Homeland Security]] are of course, Future Groups but also Named/Unnamed groups. The problem is, in the .. euh.. group-tree (?), Named, Unnamed and Future are at the same level.. The other problem is that we have a navbar that display this page as a Future Group, but know I added the Unnamed cat, shouldn't it appear in this line of the template too ? I need a small recap. :) -- [[User:FrenchFlo\|'''FrenchFlo''']] [[User talk:FrenchFlo\|<span style="font-size:8pt">(talk)</span>]] <span style="border: 1px solid black">[[Wikipedia:Toulouse\|<span style="background-color:blue">  </span><span style="background-color:white">  </span><span style="background-color:red">  </span>]]</span> 16:58, 27 May 2007 (EDT)

imported>Ice Vision: /* The Haitian */

2007-05-09T22:35:30Z

The Haitian

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:35, 9 May 2007
Line 14:		Line 14:
	**I'd suggest then that the title of this article be clarified, and there be a seperate Moab Pen. Response Team article. If and when we learn the complete nature of their relationship to Matt, then we could adjust things on both articles. Potentially, we could not only add that the Haitian worked for Matt in the alternate-future episode FYG, but also mention Matt's old police partner ''[[Tom McHenry]]'', and his FBI collegue ''[[Audrey Hanson]]''.--[[User:MiamiVolts\|MiamiVolts]] ([[User_talk:MiamiVolts\|talk]]) 00:16, 7 May 2007 (EDT)		**I'd suggest then that the title of this article be clarified, and there be a seperate Moab Pen. Response Team article. If and when we learn the complete nature of their relationship to Matt, then we could adjust things on both articles. Potentially, we could not only add that the Haitian worked for Matt in the alternate-future episode FYG, but also mention Matt's old police partner ''[[Tom McHenry]]'', and his FBI collegue ''[[Audrey Hanson]]''.--[[User:MiamiVolts\|MiamiVolts]] ([[User_talk:MiamiVolts\|talk]]) 00:16, 7 May 2007 (EDT)
	*** Since we're not renaming this article, I added all of Matt's other teams that I could think of.--[[User:MiamiVolts\|MiamiVolts]] ([[User_talk:MiamiVolts\|talk]]) 18:10, 9 May 2007 (EDT)		*** Since we're not renaming this article, I added all of Matt's other teams that I could think of.--[[User:MiamiVolts\|MiamiVolts]] ([[User_talk:MiamiVolts\|talk]]) 18:10, 9 May 2007 (EDT)
			**** I think two separate articles will do fine. One for the present and one for the future.--[[User:Ice Vision\|Ice Vision]] 18:35, 9 May 2007 (EDT)

imported>MiamiVolts: Talk:Matt Parkman's team moved to Talk:Matt Parkman's team (future): So I can use the original name for present/past teams

2007-05-09T22:30:11Z

Talk:Matt Parkman's team moved to Talk:Matt Parkman's team (future): So I can use the original name for present/past teams

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:30, 9 May 2007
(No difference)

← Older revision		Revision as of 11:41, 28 May 2007
Line 21:		Line 21:
	:PS: It's being discussed on [[Category talk:Future Groups]] as to whether to delete the future category altogether, though I rather think we should keep it, add a past groups portal/category after past groups are introduced in ''Volume Two: Generations'', and add all groups to the groups category.--[[User:MiamiVolts\|MiamiVolts]] ([[User_talk:MiamiVolts\|talk]]) 17:36, 27 May 2007 (EDT)		:PS: It's being discussed on [[Category talk:Future Groups]] as to whether to delete the future category altogether, though I rather think we should keep it, add a past groups portal/category after past groups are introduced in ''Volume Two: Generations'', and add all groups to the groups category.--[[User:MiamiVolts\|MiamiVolts]] ([[User_talk:MiamiVolts\|talk]]) 17:36, 27 May 2007 (EDT)
	*I agree, Flo, it seems odd to me that they would be included in a category, but not the corresponding portal or section on the navbar. However, it would seem even weirder to me to include them twice on the navbar or in both portals. However, I'm of the mind to delete the Future Groups category altogether. If there are more future groups, then we could re-add it. — [[User:Ryangibsonstewart\|<font color=#0147FA>RyanGibsonStewart</font>]] ([[User talk:Ryangibsonstewart\|<font color=#0147FA>talk</font>]]) 21:34, 27 May 2007 (EDT)		*I agree, Flo, it seems odd to me that they would be included in a category, but not the corresponding portal or section on the navbar. However, it would seem even weirder to me to include them twice on the navbar or in both portals. However, I'm of the mind to delete the Future Groups category altogether. If there are more future groups, then we could re-add it. — [[User:Ryangibsonstewart\|<font color=#0147FA>RyanGibsonStewart</font>]] ([[User talk:Ryangibsonstewart\|<font color=#0147FA>talk</font>]]) 21:34, 27 May 2007 (EDT)
			**Yeah, deleting the Future Groups cat seems good. We will just have to add somwhere in the group's page a note about the fact this is a future group. Things would be much easier. For now, it's pretty weird, especially the navbar in which we don't add future-named group as both future and named (and a duplicate on a navbar would make the navbar weird too). Just delete the Future Groups cat! -- [[User:FrenchFlo\|'''FrenchFlo''']] [[User talk:FrenchFlo\|<span style="font-size:8pt">(talk)</span>]] <span style="border: 1px solid black">[[Wikipedia:Toulouse\|<span style="background-color:blue">  </span><span style="background-color:white">  </span><span style="background-color:red">  </span>]]</span> 07:41, 28 May 2007 (EDT)

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:35, 9 May 2007
Line 14:		Line 14:
	**I'd suggest then that the title of this article be clarified, and there be a seperate Moab Pen. Response Team article. If and when we learn the complete nature of their relationship to Matt, then we could adjust things on both articles. Potentially, we could not only add that the Haitian worked for Matt in the alternate-future episode FYG, but also mention Matt's old police partner ''[[Tom McHenry]]'', and his FBI collegue ''[[Audrey Hanson]]''.--[[User:MiamiVolts\|MiamiVolts]] ([[User_talk:MiamiVolts\|talk]]) 00:16, 7 May 2007 (EDT)		**I'd suggest then that the title of this article be clarified, and there be a seperate Moab Pen. Response Team article. If and when we learn the complete nature of their relationship to Matt, then we could adjust things on both articles. Potentially, we could not only add that the Haitian worked for Matt in the alternate-future episode FYG, but also mention Matt's old police partner ''[[Tom McHenry]]'', and his FBI collegue ''[[Audrey Hanson]]''.--[[User:MiamiVolts\|MiamiVolts]] ([[User_talk:MiamiVolts\|talk]]) 00:16, 7 May 2007 (EDT)
	*** Since we're not renaming this article, I added all of Matt's other teams that I could think of.--[[User:MiamiVolts\|MiamiVolts]] ([[User_talk:MiamiVolts\|talk]]) 18:10, 9 May 2007 (EDT)		*** Since we're not renaming this article, I added all of Matt's other teams that I could think of.--[[User:MiamiVolts\|MiamiVolts]] ([[User_talk:MiamiVolts\|talk]]) 18:10, 9 May 2007 (EDT)
			**** I think two separate articles will do fine. One for the present and one for the future.--[[User:Ice Vision\|Ice Vision]] 18:35, 9 May 2007 (EDT)