Talk:Underbase Saga: Difference between revisions
From MediaWiki
Jump to navigationJump to search
Omnisvalidus (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
Deceptitran (talk | contribs) |
||
| (One intermediate revision by one other user not shown) | |||
| Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
:: Possibly it should point to [[Underbase]]. I welcome debate. [[User:JW|JW]] 15:26, 29 November 2007 (UTC) | :: Possibly it should point to [[Underbase]]. I welcome debate. [[User:JW|JW]] 15:26, 29 November 2007 (UTC) | ||
:::Should it be a redirect at all? Wouldn't a short article explaining which issues the saga relates to with links to each issue be better? [[User:Omnisvalidus|Omnisvalidus]] 10:09, 30 November 2007 (UTC) | :::Should it be a redirect at all? Wouldn't a short article explaining which issues the saga relates to with links to each issue be better? [[User:Omnisvalidus|Omnisvalidus]] 10:09, 30 November 2007 (UTC) | ||
::::Yes. I think all the "important" multipart stories should have "index" pages of that nature. --[[User:Steve-o|Steve-o]] 01:41, 4 December 2007 (UTC) | |||
Latest revision as of 13:52, 26 March 2009
Redirect?
[edit]Should this really be a redirect to one issue? The Underbase Saga spanned issue 47 to 50. -- Repowers 15:12, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
- It certainly shouldn't be pointing to the LAST issue of it. --ItsWalky 15:22, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
- Should it be a redirect at all? Wouldn't a short article explaining which issues the saga relates to with links to each issue be better? Omnisvalidus 10:09, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
- Yes. I think all the "important" multipart stories should have "index" pages of that nature. --Steve-o 01:41, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
- Should it be a redirect at all? Wouldn't a short article explaining which issues the saga relates to with links to each issue be better? Omnisvalidus 10:09, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
