Talk:Unpaintable plastic: Difference between revisions
From MediaWiki
Jump to navigationJump to search
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
-www.frenzyrumble.com {{unsigned|24.228.45.37|10:47, August 29, 2009 (EDT)}} | -www.frenzyrumble.com {{unsigned|24.228.45.37|10:47, August 29, 2009 (EDT)}} | ||
: Well then, apparently everybody at Hasbro is just retarded, then. Thanks, sir! Move to delete, based on this anonymous guy's unsupported contradiction? --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 10:57, 29 August 2009 (EDT) | : Well then, apparently everybody at Hasbro is just retarded, then. Thanks, sir! Move to delete, based on this anonymous guy's unsupported contradiction? --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 10:57, 29 August 2009 (EDT) | ||
::There's "unpaintable with the paints Hasbro use" and there's "unpaintable with ANY paint". No doubt, if budget and inventiveness (and safety regs - lead-based paints, for example, are out for obvious reasons) weren't an issue, Hasbro COULD find a /paint/s that would adhere to these plastics. Before Sipher's edit of an hour or so ago, the article suggested the latter rather than the former. Which would need some serious citing to support. - [[User:SanityOrMadness|SanityOrMadness]] 14:43, 29 August 2009 (EDT) | |||
Revision as of 18:43, 29 August 2009
There's no such thing as "unpaintable plastic"
-www.frenzyrumble.com —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.228.45.37 (talk • contribs) 10:47, August 29, 2009 (EDT).
- Well then, apparently everybody at Hasbro is just retarded, then. Thanks, sir! Move to delete, based on this anonymous guy's unsupported contradiction? --ItsWalky 10:57, 29 August 2009 (EDT)
- There's "unpaintable with the paints Hasbro use" and there's "unpaintable with ANY paint". No doubt, if budget and inventiveness (and safety regs - lead-based paints, for example, are out for obvious reasons) weren't an issue, Hasbro COULD find a /paint/s that would adhere to these plastics. Before Sipher's edit of an hour or so ago, the article suggested the latter rather than the former. Which would need some serious citing to support. - SanityOrMadness 14:43, 29 August 2009 (EDT)
