This wiki is a XML full dump clone of "Heroes Wiki", the main wiki about the Heroes saga that has been shut down permanently since June 1, 2020. The purpose of this wiki is to keep online an exhaustive and accurate database about the franchise.
Category talk:Characters with The Mark: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Content deleted Content added
imported>Hardvice No edit summary |
imported>Ryangibsonstewart No edit summary |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
Should it be "Characters with the Mark" (lowercase ''t'')? — [[User:Ryangibsonstewart|<font color=#0147FA>RyanGibsonStewart</font>]] ([[User talk:Ryangibsonstewart|<font color=#0147FA>talk</font>]]) 15:40, 20 February 2007 (EST) |
Should it be "Characters with the Mark" (lowercase ''t'')? — [[User:Ryangibsonstewart|<font color=#0147FA>RyanGibsonStewart</font>]] ([[User talk:Ryangibsonstewart|<font color=#0147FA>talk</font>]]) 15:40, 20 February 2007 (EST) |
||
* Probably. Next question: Should it be? Isn't this all pretty well covered in each character's Notes and on [[the mark]]?--[[User:Hardvice|Hardvice]] <small>[[User talk:Hardvice|(talk)]]</small> 16:21, 20 February 2007 (EST) |
* Probably. Next question: Should it be? Isn't this all pretty well covered in each character's Notes and on [[the mark]]?--[[User:Hardvice|Hardvice]] <small>[[User talk:Hardvice|(talk)]]</small> 16:21, 20 February 2007 (EST) |
||
**I agree. Since we already have it, I'm not strongly opposed to it. But it does seem superfluous. And extra. And unnecessary. And redundant. And ... — [[User:Ryangibsonstewart|<font color=#0147FA>RyanGibsonStewart</font>]] ([[User talk:Ryangibsonstewart|<font color=#0147FA>talk</font>]]) 16:47, 20 February 2007 (EST) |
|||
Revision as of 21:47, 20 February 2007
Should it be "Characters with the Mark" (lowercase t)? — RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 15:40, 20 February 2007 (EST)
- Probably. Next question: Should it be? Isn't this all pretty well covered in each character's Notes and on the mark?--Hardvice (talk) 16:21, 20 February 2007 (EST)
- I agree. Since we already have it, I'm not strongly opposed to it. But it does seem superfluous. And extra. And unnecessary. And redundant. And ... — RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 16:47, 20 February 2007 (EST)