User talk:Mc hammark/Claircognizance - Revision history

imported>Ryangibsonstewart: Talk:Claircognizance moved to User talk:Mc hammark/Claircognizance: moving out of main namespace since we don't have any clear examples of the ability; see discussion page

2010-01-27T04:45:28Z

Talk:Claircognizance moved to User talk:Mc hammark/Claircognizance: moving out of main namespace since we don't have any clear examples of the ability; see discussion page

← Older revision		Revision as of 04:45, 27 January 2010
(No difference)

imported>Ryangibsonstewart: Talk:Claircognizance moved to User talk:Mc hammark/Claircognizance: moving out of main namespace since we don't have any clear examples of the ability; see discussion page

2010-01-27T04:45:28Z

Talk:Claircognizance moved to User talk:Mc hammark/Claircognizance: moving out of main namespace since we don't have any clear examples of the ability; see discussion page

← Older revision		Revision as of 04:45, 27 January 2010
(No difference)

imported>Ryangibsonstewart: /* Unconfirmed ability */

2010-01-27T04:44:04Z

Unconfirmed ability

← Older revision		Revision as of 04:44, 27 January 2010
Line 27:		Line 27:
	*****you can put them in my namespace, just incase. --[[User:Mc hammark\|mc_hammark]] 18:05, 26 January 2010 (EST)		*****you can put them in my namespace, just incase. --[[User:Mc hammark\|mc_hammark]] 18:05, 26 January 2010 (EST)
	****** I vote for deletion [[User:Draphoenix\|Draphoenix]] 23:04, 26 January 2010 (EST)		****** I vote for deletion [[User:Draphoenix\|Draphoenix]] 23:04, 26 January 2010 (EST)
			******* Will do. -- {{User:Ryangibsonstewart/sig}} 23:44, 26 January 2010 (EST)

imported>Draphoenix: /* Unconfirmed ability */

2010-01-27T04:04:23Z

Unconfirmed ability

← Older revision		Revision as of 04:04, 27 January 2010
Line 26:		Line 26:
	**** Taking in consideration we'll probably don't see them again, could you also delete the abilities in this situation which have been moved to my namespace? It's boring to have them ready just in case they show up again. [[User:Intuitive Empath\|Intuitive Empath]] - [[User talk:Intuitive Empath\|Talk]] - [[Special:Contributions/Intuitive Empath\|Contributions]] 16:30, 26 January 2010 (EST)		**** Taking in consideration we'll probably don't see them again, could you also delete the abilities in this situation which have been moved to my namespace? It's boring to have them ready just in case they show up again. [[User:Intuitive Empath\|Intuitive Empath]] - [[User talk:Intuitive Empath\|Talk]] - [[Special:Contributions/Intuitive Empath\|Contributions]] 16:30, 26 January 2010 (EST)
	*****you can put them in my namespace, just incase. --[[User:Mc hammark\|mc_hammark]] 18:05, 26 January 2010 (EST)		*****you can put them in my namespace, just incase. --[[User:Mc hammark\|mc_hammark]] 18:05, 26 January 2010 (EST)
			****** I vote for deletion [[User:Draphoenix\|Draphoenix]] 23:04, 26 January 2010 (EST)

imported>Mc hammark: /* Unconfirmed ability */

2010-01-26T23:05:37Z

Unconfirmed ability

← Older revision		Revision as of 23:05, 26 January 2010
Line 25:		Line 25:
	*** I agree, the article should be deleted. That doesn't mean we're saying Draph doesn't have the ability--we're just saying we don't have any solid examples of him using it. The page should be deleted. -- {{User:Ryangibsonstewart/sig}} 16:18, 26 January 2010 (EST)		*** I agree, the article should be deleted. That doesn't mean we're saying Draph doesn't have the ability--we're just saying we don't have any solid examples of him using it. The page should be deleted. -- {{User:Ryangibsonstewart/sig}} 16:18, 26 January 2010 (EST)
	**** Taking in consideration we'll probably don't see them again, could you also delete the abilities in this situation which have been moved to my namespace? It's boring to have them ready just in case they show up again. [[User:Intuitive Empath\|Intuitive Empath]] - [[User talk:Intuitive Empath\|Talk]] - [[Special:Contributions/Intuitive Empath\|Contributions]] 16:30, 26 January 2010 (EST)		**** Taking in consideration we'll probably don't see them again, could you also delete the abilities in this situation which have been moved to my namespace? It's boring to have them ready just in case they show up again. [[User:Intuitive Empath\|Intuitive Empath]] - [[User talk:Intuitive Empath\|Talk]] - [[Special:Contributions/Intuitive Empath\|Contributions]] 16:30, 26 January 2010 (EST)
			*****you can put them in my namespace, just incase. --[[User:Mc hammark\|mc_hammark]] 18:05, 26 January 2010 (EST)

imported>Intuitive Empath at 21:30, 26 January 2010

2010-01-26T21:30:53Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:30, 26 January 2010
Line 24:		Line 24:
	** I can't think of a single case where we kept an article for an unconfirmed ability. I'll go ahead and remove the example and add the AFD notice to see what others think.--[[User:Referos\|Referos]] 15:44, 26 January 2010 (EST)		** I can't think of a single case where we kept an article for an unconfirmed ability. I'll go ahead and remove the example and add the AFD notice to see what others think.--[[User:Referos\|Referos]] 15:44, 26 January 2010 (EST)
	*** I agree, the article should be deleted. That doesn't mean we're saying Draph doesn't have the ability--we're just saying we don't have any solid examples of him using it. The page should be deleted. -- {{User:Ryangibsonstewart/sig}} 16:18, 26 January 2010 (EST)		*** I agree, the article should be deleted. That doesn't mean we're saying Draph doesn't have the ability--we're just saying we don't have any solid examples of him using it. The page should be deleted. -- {{User:Ryangibsonstewart/sig}} 16:18, 26 January 2010 (EST)
			**** Taking in consideration we'll probably don't see them again, could you also delete the abilities in this situation which have been moved to my namespace? It's boring to have them ready just in case they show up again. [[User:Intuitive Empath\|Intuitive Empath]] - [[User talk:Intuitive Empath\|Talk]] - [[Special:Contributions/Intuitive Empath\|Contributions]] 16:30, 26 January 2010 (EST)

imported>Ryangibsonstewart: /* Unconfirmed ability */

2010-01-26T21:18:00Z

Unconfirmed ability

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:18, 26 January 2010
Line 23:		Line 23:
	*That's quite the predicament. I think the example should definitely be removed, but I'm not sure whether the article should be deleted or not. I really wouldn't mind either way.--[[User:PJDEP\|PJDEP]] - [[User Talk:PJDEP\|Need further explanation?]] 15:29, 26 January 2010 (EST)		*That's quite the predicament. I think the example should definitely be removed, but I'm not sure whether the article should be deleted or not. I really wouldn't mind either way.--[[User:PJDEP\|PJDEP]] - [[User Talk:PJDEP\|Need further explanation?]] 15:29, 26 January 2010 (EST)
	** I can't think of a single case where we kept an article for an unconfirmed ability. I'll go ahead and remove the example and add the AFD notice to see what others think.--[[User:Referos\|Referos]] 15:44, 26 January 2010 (EST)		** I can't think of a single case where we kept an article for an unconfirmed ability. I'll go ahead and remove the example and add the AFD notice to see what others think.--[[User:Referos\|Referos]] 15:44, 26 January 2010 (EST)
			*** I agree, the article should be deleted. That doesn't mean we're saying Draph doesn't have the ability--we're just saying we don't have any solid examples of him using it. The page should be deleted. -- {{User:Ryangibsonstewart/sig}} 16:18, 26 January 2010 (EST)

imported>Referos: /* Unconfirmed ability */

2010-01-26T20:44:16Z

Unconfirmed ability

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:44, 26 January 2010
Line 22:		Line 22:
	Josh Davis said that Draph read the girls' minds. The fact that he ''might'' have used claicognizance is irrelevant. If we have a source claiming that this was telepathy and not claircognizance, then we can't speculate. The problem is, currently, there's only one single example of this ability; if we remove it, claircognizance becomes an unconfirmed ability. The article would then have to be deleted, since the precedent is to create articles only for abilities that were demonstrated. Thoughts?--[[User:Referos\|Referos]] 14:35, 26 January 2010 (EST)		Josh Davis said that Draph read the girls' minds. The fact that he ''might'' have used claicognizance is irrelevant. If we have a source claiming that this was telepathy and not claircognizance, then we can't speculate. The problem is, currently, there's only one single example of this ability; if we remove it, claircognizance becomes an unconfirmed ability. The article would then have to be deleted, since the precedent is to create articles only for abilities that were demonstrated. Thoughts?--[[User:Referos\|Referos]] 14:35, 26 January 2010 (EST)
	*That's quite the predicament. I think the example should definitely be removed, but I'm not sure whether the article should be deleted or not. I really wouldn't mind either way.--[[User:PJDEP\|PJDEP]] - [[User Talk:PJDEP\|Need further explanation?]] 15:29, 26 January 2010 (EST)		*That's quite the predicament. I think the example should definitely be removed, but I'm not sure whether the article should be deleted or not. I really wouldn't mind either way.--[[User:PJDEP\|PJDEP]] - [[User Talk:PJDEP\|Need further explanation?]] 15:29, 26 January 2010 (EST)
			** I can't think of a single case where we kept an article for an unconfirmed ability. I'll go ahead and remove the example and add the AFD notice to see what others think.--[[User:Referos\|Referos]] 15:44, 26 January 2010 (EST)

imported>PJDEP: /* Unconfirmed ability */

2010-01-26T20:29:47Z

Unconfirmed ability

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:29, 26 January 2010
Line 21:		Line 21:

	Josh Davis said that Draph read the girls' minds. The fact that he ''might'' have used claicognizance is irrelevant. If we have a source claiming that this was telepathy and not claircognizance, then we can't speculate. The problem is, currently, there's only one single example of this ability; if we remove it, claircognizance becomes an unconfirmed ability. The article would then have to be deleted, since the precedent is to create articles only for abilities that were demonstrated. Thoughts?--[[User:Referos\|Referos]] 14:35, 26 January 2010 (EST)		Josh Davis said that Draph read the girls' minds. The fact that he ''might'' have used claicognizance is irrelevant. If we have a source claiming that this was telepathy and not claircognizance, then we can't speculate. The problem is, currently, there's only one single example of this ability; if we remove it, claircognizance becomes an unconfirmed ability. The article would then have to be deleted, since the precedent is to create articles only for abilities that were demonstrated. Thoughts?--[[User:Referos\|Referos]] 14:35, 26 January 2010 (EST)
			*That's quite the predicament. I think the example should definitely be removed, but I'm not sure whether the article should be deleted or not. I really wouldn't mind either way.--[[User:PJDEP\|PJDEP]] - [[User Talk:PJDEP\|Need further explanation?]] 15:29, 26 January 2010 (EST)

imported>Leckie: /* Example */

2010-01-26T19:42:32Z

Example

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:42, 26 January 2010
Line 11:		Line 11:
	Should the example really be used if it's not a confirmed example? It seems to just be speculation. --[[User:OutbackZack\|OutbackZack]] 11:34, 9 December 2009 (EST)		Should the example really be used if it's not a confirmed example? It seems to just be speculation. --[[User:OutbackZack\|OutbackZack]] 11:34, 9 December 2009 (EST)
	*I agree, it's unconfirmed. Also, Josh believed he read their minds, and telepathy is an ability Draph is confirmed to have.--[[User:PJDEP\|PJDEP]] - [[User Talk:PJDEP\|Need further explanation?]] 19:52, 2 January 2010 (EST)		*I agree, it's unconfirmed. Also, Josh believed he read their minds, and telepathy is an ability Draph is confirmed to have.--[[User:PJDEP\|PJDEP]] - [[User Talk:PJDEP\|Need further explanation?]] 19:52, 2 January 2010 (EST)
			* Same, I think it should be removed. Because [[Draph]] never elaborated on whether it was [[Telepathy]] or not it should be removed, it could be added in the notes section though? --{{User:Leckie/Signature 10}} 14:42, 26 January 2010 (EST)

	==Too much for an ability?==		==Too much for an ability?==

← Older revision		Revision as of 04:04, 27 January 2010
Line 26:		Line 26:
	**** Taking in consideration we'll probably don't see them again, could you also delete the abilities in this situation which have been moved to my namespace? It's boring to have them ready just in case they show up again. [[User:Intuitive Empath\|Intuitive Empath]] - [[User talk:Intuitive Empath\|Talk]] - [[Special:Contributions/Intuitive Empath\|Contributions]] 16:30, 26 January 2010 (EST)		**** Taking in consideration we'll probably don't see them again, could you also delete the abilities in this situation which have been moved to my namespace? It's boring to have them ready just in case they show up again. [[User:Intuitive Empath\|Intuitive Empath]] - [[User talk:Intuitive Empath\|Talk]] - [[Special:Contributions/Intuitive Empath\|Contributions]] 16:30, 26 January 2010 (EST)
	*****you can put them in my namespace, just incase. --[[User:Mc hammark\|mc_hammark]] 18:05, 26 January 2010 (EST)		*****you can put them in my namespace, just incase. --[[User:Mc hammark\|mc_hammark]] 18:05, 26 January 2010 (EST)
			****** I vote for deletion [[User:Draphoenix\|Draphoenix]] 23:04, 26 January 2010 (EST)

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:44, 26 January 2010
Line 22:		Line 22:
	Josh Davis said that Draph read the girls' minds. The fact that he ''might'' have used claicognizance is irrelevant. If we have a source claiming that this was telepathy and not claircognizance, then we can't speculate. The problem is, currently, there's only one single example of this ability; if we remove it, claircognizance becomes an unconfirmed ability. The article would then have to be deleted, since the precedent is to create articles only for abilities that were demonstrated. Thoughts?--[[User:Referos\|Referos]] 14:35, 26 January 2010 (EST)		Josh Davis said that Draph read the girls' minds. The fact that he ''might'' have used claicognizance is irrelevant. If we have a source claiming that this was telepathy and not claircognizance, then we can't speculate. The problem is, currently, there's only one single example of this ability; if we remove it, claircognizance becomes an unconfirmed ability. The article would then have to be deleted, since the precedent is to create articles only for abilities that were demonstrated. Thoughts?--[[User:Referos\|Referos]] 14:35, 26 January 2010 (EST)
	*That's quite the predicament. I think the example should definitely be removed, but I'm not sure whether the article should be deleted or not. I really wouldn't mind either way.--[[User:PJDEP\|PJDEP]] - [[User Talk:PJDEP\|Need further explanation?]] 15:29, 26 January 2010 (EST)		*That's quite the predicament. I think the example should definitely be removed, but I'm not sure whether the article should be deleted or not. I really wouldn't mind either way.--[[User:PJDEP\|PJDEP]] - [[User Talk:PJDEP\|Need further explanation?]] 15:29, 26 January 2010 (EST)
			** I can't think of a single case where we kept an article for an unconfirmed ability. I'll go ahead and remove the example and add the AFD notice to see what others think.--[[User:Referos\|Referos]] 15:44, 26 January 2010 (EST)