Talk:Dummy System: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
No edit summary |
UrsusArctos (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
| Line 18: | Line 18: | ||
:::Oh... I never really thought of that. I guess whatever pages we have that don't utilize capitalization (like the aforementioned [[Evangelion equipment]]) along with the practicality of not having to type the same basic thing twice in a row for the purposes of "piping" set my expectations in a certain place. --[[User:Reichu|Reichu]] 19:34, 15 April 2009 (PDT) | :::Oh... I never really thought of that. I guess whatever pages we have that don't utilize capitalization (like the aforementioned [[Evangelion equipment]]) along with the practicality of not having to type the same basic thing twice in a row for the purposes of "piping" set my expectations in a certain place. --[[User:Reichu|Reichu]] 19:34, 15 April 2009 (PDT) | ||
==Rephrasing this== | |||
*Eva-01 under the dummy system breaks Eva-03's neck in seconds (When the Angel-infected eva failed to strangle Eva-01 after a much longer period of time) and destroys the rest of its body seemingly without effort. It is not explicit if Eva-01 is physically more powerful, if Eva-03 is weakened by its mutations, or if the dummy system bestows abnormal power, but Maya's line "Is this the power of the dummy plug?" seems to support the latter. | |||
That and all the talk about the dummy plug being "emotionally unstable"...does that go in a separate T&A article or should it stay here, with appropriate rephrasing? --[[User:UrsusArctos|UrsusArctos]] 07:46, 7 May 2009 (PDT) | |||
Revision as of 14:46, 7 May 2009
I'm pretty sure the plug is just a vessel for the system. Ergo, Dummy Plug should redirect to Dummy System, not the other way around. --Reichu 22:08, 22 August 2007 (EDT)
Done, and it took only 18 months. --thewayneiac 20:54 EST. Feb. 23, 2009.
- ^ lol.
- BTW, in retrospect, capitalizing "Dummy Plug" and "Dummy System" looks kind of weird. Anyone else want to go "dummy plug" and "dummy system"? --Reichu 00:35, 13 April 2009 (PDT)
- Fine with me. Links aren't case-sensitive, are they? --UrsusArctos 18:38, 13 April 2009 (PDT)
- Beyond the first letter, they are case-sensitive. (E.g. evangelion equipment works but Evangelion Equipment doesn't.) --Reichu 21:11, 13 April 2009 (PDT)
So the problem is that capitalizing the page titles, which is proper, is forcing us to capitalize terms like these in ordinary text when capitalization isn't proper in order to make the links work? Solution: [[Dummy System|dummy system]]. --thewayneiac 19:15 EDT. April 14, 2009
- I was under the impression that it was more the other way around... The page title is in all caps because people were writing the term like that anyway, so if we're going to write the term in lowercase we should just rename the bloody page. (It automatically makes a redirect and we can fix old links at our leisure.) --Reichu 20:46, 14 April 2009 (PDT)
- But wouldn't it look weird to not have the page titles capitalized? Titles are supposed to be capitalized. We wouldn't want people saying "Heh, these guys don't even know to capitalize titles". --thewayneiac 14:51 EDT April 15, 2009
- Oh... I never really thought of that. I guess whatever pages we have that don't utilize capitalization (like the aforementioned Evangelion equipment) along with the practicality of not having to type the same basic thing twice in a row for the purposes of "piping" set my expectations in a certain place. --Reichu 19:34, 15 April 2009 (PDT)
Rephrasing this
- Eva-01 under the dummy system breaks Eva-03's neck in seconds (When the Angel-infected eva failed to strangle Eva-01 after a much longer period of time) and destroys the rest of its body seemingly without effort. It is not explicit if Eva-01 is physically more powerful, if Eva-03 is weakened by its mutations, or if the dummy system bestows abnormal power, but Maya's line "Is this the power of the dummy plug?" seems to support the latter.
That and all the talk about the dummy plug being "emotionally unstable"...does that go in a separate T&A article or should it stay here, with appropriate rephrasing? --UrsusArctos 07:46, 7 May 2009 (PDT)
