Difference between revisions of "Talk:Second Impact"

From EvaWiki
Jump to: navigation, search
Line 6: Line 6:
 
:::::You mean you even want the one gone from the "[[Evangelions]]" article?  But quotes make things look shiny (so long as they're from ''within'' the show).  --[[User:V|V]] 12:28, 24 December 2007 (PST)
 
:::::You mean you even want the one gone from the "[[Evangelions]]" article?  But quotes make things look shiny (so long as they're from ''within'' the show).  --[[User:V|V]] 12:28, 24 December 2007 (PST)
 
::::Any which ones. "Shiny" is irrelevant. If it's important, it'll be in the article itself, not floating on top taking up space. Savvy? --[[User:Reichu|Reichu]] 12:34, 24 December 2007 (PST)
 
::::Any which ones. "Shiny" is irrelevant. If it's important, it'll be in the article itself, not floating on top taking up space. Savvy? --[[User:Reichu|Reichu]] 12:34, 24 December 2007 (PST)
 +
:::::Don't make me start crying....don't....oh, too late......well are you sure?  The Star Trek Wiki uses quotes for stuff like Klingons: http://memory-alpha.org/en/wiki/Klingon --[[User:V|V]] 14:18, 24 December 2007 (PST)
  
 
==O BLAAARGAAAG???==
 
==O BLAAARGAAAG???==
 
Guoooo! Quotes again? By the way, the total death toll was three billion, so Adam was technically responsible, directly or indirectly, for getting rid of half of mankind and not a third. The quotation might be spiffy but it does not exactly seem correct in context- not to mention that it would peddle the idea that "Eva is religious propaganda" to a newcomer.--[[User:UrsusArctos|UrsusArctos]] 17:38, 23 December 2007 (PST)
 
Guoooo! Quotes again? By the way, the total death toll was three billion, so Adam was technically responsible, directly or indirectly, for getting rid of half of mankind and not a third. The quotation might be spiffy but it does not exactly seem correct in context- not to mention that it would peddle the idea that "Eva is religious propaganda" to a newcomer.--[[User:UrsusArctos|UrsusArctos]] 17:38, 23 December 2007 (PST)
 
:"Eva is religious propaganda", well yeah; what did you think I was trying to do? :)  Yes, but the bible quote using a "third" is misleading because it was really a half....hmm......--[[User:V|V]] 17:54, 23 December 2007 (PST)
 
:"Eva is religious propaganda", well yeah; what did you think I was trying to do? :)  Yes, but the bible quote using a "third" is misleading because it was really a half....hmm......--[[User:V|V]] 17:54, 23 December 2007 (PST)

Revision as of 22:18, 24 December 2007

Eh? What the blazes is all this, V? What have you done to this page? --UrsusArctos 02:52, 20 December 2007 (PST)

Quotes make things look spiffy. --V 09:33, 23 December 2007 (PST)
This is an encyclopedia. They're unnecessary fluff. --Reichu 10:57, 24 December 2007 (PST)
Quotes from the series then? Yeah I admit the biblical quote was kind of out there. --V 11:06, 24 December 2007 (PST)
No. No quotes at all. Fluff, like I said. --Reichu 11:26, 24 December 2007 (PST)
You mean you even want the one gone from the "Evangelions" article? But quotes make things look shiny (so long as they're from within the show). --V 12:28, 24 December 2007 (PST)
Any which ones. "Shiny" is irrelevant. If it's important, it'll be in the article itself, not floating on top taking up space. Savvy? --Reichu 12:34, 24 December 2007 (PST)
Don't make me start crying....don't....oh, too late......well are you sure? The Star Trek Wiki uses quotes for stuff like Klingons: http://memory-alpha.org/en/wiki/Klingon --V 14:18, 24 December 2007 (PST)

O BLAAARGAAAG???

Guoooo! Quotes again? By the way, the total death toll was three billion, so Adam was technically responsible, directly or indirectly, for getting rid of half of mankind and not a third. The quotation might be spiffy but it does not exactly seem correct in context- not to mention that it would peddle the idea that "Eva is religious propaganda" to a newcomer.--UrsusArctos 17:38, 23 December 2007 (PST)

"Eva is religious propaganda", well yeah; what did you think I was trying to do? :) Yes, but the bible quote using a "third" is misleading because it was really a half....hmm......--V 17:54, 23 December 2007 (PST)