 Join our Discord!
|
| If you have been locked out of your account you can request a password reset here. |
Difference between revisions of "Talk:Shiloh 2: Shiloh Season"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
(Created page with "My main objection is that the screencap is a bit too small, and there's no way to make a positive ID on the shotgun. I'm leaning towards storing it here until that changes. --...") |
m (Ben41 moved page Talk:Shiloh 2 to Talk:Shiloh 2: Shiloh Season) |
||
| (4 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
My main objection is that the screencap is a bit too small, and there's no way to make a positive ID on the shotgun. I'm leaning towards storing it here until that changes. --[[User:Funkychinaman|Funkychinaman]] ([[User talk:Funkychinaman|talk]]) 08:20, 21 August 2015 (EDT) | My main objection is that the screencap is a bit too small, and there's no way to make a positive ID on the shotgun. I'm leaning towards storing it here until that changes. --[[User:Funkychinaman|Funkychinaman]] ([[User talk:Funkychinaman|talk]]) 08:20, 21 August 2015 (EDT) | ||
| + | : Well, I agree on the screencap, but also the page lacks some code as well as cover art and categorization, fairly basic things that are required of any new media page. It just seems a halfhearted effort at best, and clearly lacking in regards to the required standards, which is why I marked it. [[User:StanTheMan|StanTheMan]] ([[User talk:StanTheMan|talk]]) 13:58, 21 August 2015 (EDT) | ||
| + | ::That's just lack of formatting, which is pretty easy to fix. If it wasn't for the cap, I'd have deleted in a heartbeat. --[[User:Funkychinaman|Funkychinaman]] ([[User talk:Funkychinaman|talk]]) 14:09, 21 August 2015 (EDT) | ||
Latest revision as of 00:58, 22 August 2015
My main objection is that the screencap is a bit too small, and there's no way to make a positive ID on the shotgun. I'm leaning towards storing it here until that changes. --Funkychinaman (talk) 08:20, 21 August 2015 (EDT)
- Well, I agree on the screencap, but also the page lacks some code as well as cover art and categorization, fairly basic things that are required of any new media page. It just seems a halfhearted effort at best, and clearly lacking in regards to the required standards, which is why I marked it. StanTheMan (talk) 13:58, 21 August 2015 (EDT)
- That's just lack of formatting, which is pretty easy to fix. If it wasn't for the cap, I'd have deleted in a heartbeat. --Funkychinaman (talk) 14:09, 21 August 2015 (EDT)