1,052
edits
User talk:Pumpkinking0192/Archive 3: Difference between revisions
User talk:Pumpkinking0192/Archive 3 (view source)
Revision as of 21:11, 27 December 2013
, 27 December 2013→Aerodactyl: new section
(→Aerodactyl: new section) |
|||
| Line 97: | Line 97: | ||
I didn't see a rule saying that the top two trivia MUST be the same on all (except Fairy) types, so what's up with that? {{unsigned|CamjChari}} | I didn't see a rule saying that the top two trivia MUST be the same on all (except Fairy) types, so what's up with that? {{unsigned|CamjChari}} | ||
:It's a stock trivium; changing that messes up the pattern. It's not a policy (that I know of), but it's common sense; consistency is important in order to look professional. I'd be more comfortable with it changing if an admin approved it first. [[User:Pumpkinking0192|Pumpkinking0192]] ([[User talk:Pumpkinking0192|talk]]) 01:22, 24 December 2013 (UTC) | :It's a stock trivium; changing that messes up the pattern. It's not a policy (that I know of), but it's common sense; consistency is important in order to look professional. I'd be more comfortable with it changing if an admin approved it first. [[User:Pumpkinking0192|Pumpkinking0192]] ([[User talk:Pumpkinking0192|talk]]) 01:22, 24 December 2013 (UTC) | ||
== Aerodactyl == | |||
I understand the dislike of speculation entirely (though I think it's an obvious reference and doesn't count, but that's opinion). But, no references to copyrighted works? Pokemon makes tons of references to other things, why would they not be allowed to be noted? [[User:Drake Clawfang|Drake Clawfang]] ([[User talk:Drake Clawfang|talk]]) 21:11, 27 December 2013 (UTC) | |||