Talk:Galactic Terran Alliance - Revision history

General Battuta: no nm should have trusted Snail

2014-02-14T00:34:04Z

no nm should have trusted Snail

← Older revision		Revision as of 00:34, 14 February 2014
Line 9:		Line 9:

	What the fuck is going on with this article? Much of it seems to have been made up from whole cloth. I can't find canon reference for a lot of this. [[User:General Battuta\|General Battuta]] 00:20, 14 February 2014 (UTC)		What the fuck is going on with this article? Much of it seems to have been made up from whole cloth. I can't find canon reference for a lot of this. [[User:General Battuta\|General Battuta]] 00:20, 14 February 2014 (UTC)
			*I take it back, this is more solid than I thought! [[User:General Battuta\|General Battuta]] 00:34, 14 February 2014 (UTC)

General Battuta: what the fuck is up with this article?

2014-02-14T00:20:34Z

what the fuck is up with this article?

← Older revision		Revision as of 00:20, 14 February 2014
Line 7:		Line 7:
	**I'm still not satisfied with how non-canon'd this thing is, especially given how an important faction this is in the FS universe. It's chock full of contradictory to canon statements and just doesn't seem right that someone's guesswork should be able to go straight onto this thing like this. - [[User:Snail\|Snail]] 09:11, 20 June 2009 (UTC)		**I'm still not satisfied with how non-canon'd this thing is, especially given how an important faction this is in the FS universe. It's chock full of contradictory to canon statements and just doesn't seem right that someone's guesswork should be able to go straight onto this thing like this. - [[User:Snail\|Snail]] 09:11, 20 June 2009 (UTC)
	***That template refers to the Origins section. It doesn't say much anyway, so let's get rid of it. The other sections are all right to my eyes. - [[User:TopAce\|TopAce]] 15:54, 20 June 2009 (UTC)		***That template refers to the Origins section. It doesn't say much anyway, so let's get rid of it. The other sections are all right to my eyes. - [[User:TopAce\|TopAce]] 15:54, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

			What the fuck is going on with this article? Much of it seems to have been made up from whole cloth. I can't find canon reference for a lot of this. [[User:General Battuta\|General Battuta]] 00:20, 14 February 2014 (UTC)

TopAce at 15:54, 20 June 2009

2009-06-20T15:54:32Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:54, 20 June 2009
Line 6:		Line 6:

	**I'm still not satisfied with how non-canon'd this thing is, especially given how an important faction this is in the FS universe. It's chock full of contradictory to canon statements and just doesn't seem right that someone's guesswork should be able to go straight onto this thing like this. - [[User:Snail\|Snail]] 09:11, 20 June 2009 (UTC)		**I'm still not satisfied with how non-canon'd this thing is, especially given how an important faction this is in the FS universe. It's chock full of contradictory to canon statements and just doesn't seem right that someone's guesswork should be able to go straight onto this thing like this. - [[User:Snail\|Snail]] 09:11, 20 June 2009 (UTC)
			***That template refers to the Origins section. It doesn't say much anyway, so let's get rid of it. The other sections are all right to my eyes. - [[User:TopAce\|TopAce]] 15:54, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

Snail: Canon ish blahblahblah don't mind me

2009-06-20T09:11:44Z

Canon ish blahblahblah don't mind me

← Older revision		Revision as of 09:11, 20 June 2009
Line 4:		Line 4:

	*I revised the article and found the following: Only the "Origins" section looks non-canon to me. Others are canon, maybe the bit about the "There was no initial military conflict" isn't. (I don't remember such a thing). If there are contradictions between the article and canon, point them out. Other than that, the article is okay. Still needs the GTA logo and perhaps some more details about the organization itself. <br> Something else: Some articles are referenced too many times in the article, like [[Shivans]] and [[Vasudans]]. I removed most of the links because I cannot find an apparent reason for linking to the [[Shivans]] page every time the species' name is mentioned. Distracting, in my opinion. - [[User:TopAce\|TopAce]] 06:58, 18 July 2008 (CDT)		*I revised the article and found the following: Only the "Origins" section looks non-canon to me. Others are canon, maybe the bit about the "There was no initial military conflict" isn't. (I don't remember such a thing). If there are contradictions between the article and canon, point them out. Other than that, the article is okay. Still needs the GTA logo and perhaps some more details about the organization itself. <br> Something else: Some articles are referenced too many times in the article, like [[Shivans]] and [[Vasudans]]. I removed most of the links because I cannot find an apparent reason for linking to the [[Shivans]] page every time the species' name is mentioned. Distracting, in my opinion. - [[User:TopAce\|TopAce]] 06:58, 18 July 2008 (CDT)

			**I'm still not satisfied with how non-canon'd this thing is, especially given how an important faction this is in the FS universe. It's chock full of contradictory to canon statements and just doesn't seem right that someone's guesswork should be able to go straight onto this thing like this. - [[User:Snail\|Snail]] 09:11, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

TopAce at 11:58, 18 July 2008

2008-07-18T11:58:32Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 11:58, 18 July 2008
Line 2:		Line 2:

	Parts of this article are not only non-canon, but ''contradictory'' to canon. Would anybody mind if I nuked this article and rewrote it? - [[User:Snail\|Snail]] 18:35, 17 July 2008 (CDT)		Parts of this article are not only non-canon, but ''contradictory'' to canon. Would anybody mind if I nuked this article and rewrote it? - [[User:Snail\|Snail]] 18:35, 17 July 2008 (CDT)

			*I revised the article and found the following: Only the "Origins" section looks non-canon to me. Others are canon, maybe the bit about the "There was no initial military conflict" isn't. (I don't remember such a thing). If there are contradictions between the article and canon, point them out. Other than that, the article is okay. Still needs the GTA logo and perhaps some more details about the organization itself. <br> Something else: Some articles are referenced too many times in the article, like [[Shivans]] and [[Vasudans]]. I removed most of the links because I cannot find an apparent reason for linking to the [[Shivans]] page every time the species' name is mentioned. Distracting, in my opinion. - [[User:TopAce\|TopAce]] 06:58, 18 July 2008 (CDT)

Snail at 23:35, 17 July 2008

2008-07-17T23:35:06Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 23:35, 17 July 2008
Line 1:		Line 1:
	Where's the GTA insignia?		Where's the GTA insignia?

			Parts of this article are not only non-canon, but ''contradictory'' to canon. Would anybody mind if I nuked this article and rewrote it? - [[User:Snail\|Snail]] 18:35, 17 July 2008 (CDT)

Galemp: New page: Where's the GTA insignia?

2008-07-10T19:18:24Z

New page: Where's the GTA insignia?

New page

Where's the GTA insignia?

← Older revision		Revision as of 00:20, 14 February 2014
Line 7:		Line 7:
	**I'm still not satisfied with how non-canon'd this thing is, especially given how an important faction this is in the FS universe. It's chock full of contradictory to canon statements and just doesn't seem right that someone's guesswork should be able to go straight onto this thing like this. - [[User:Snail\|Snail]] 09:11, 20 June 2009 (UTC)		**I'm still not satisfied with how non-canon'd this thing is, especially given how an important faction this is in the FS universe. It's chock full of contradictory to canon statements and just doesn't seem right that someone's guesswork should be able to go straight onto this thing like this. - [[User:Snail\|Snail]] 09:11, 20 June 2009 (UTC)
	***That template refers to the Origins section. It doesn't say much anyway, so let's get rid of it. The other sections are all right to my eyes. - [[User:TopAce\|TopAce]] 15:54, 20 June 2009 (UTC)		***That template refers to the Origins section. It doesn't say much anyway, so let's get rid of it. The other sections are all right to my eyes. - [[User:TopAce\|TopAce]] 15:54, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

			What the fuck is going on with this article? Much of it seems to have been made up from whole cloth. I can't find canon reference for a lot of this. [[User:General Battuta\|General Battuta]] 00:20, 14 February 2014 (UTC)