Talk:Errantry: Difference between revisions
From Tolkien Gateway
m (dumbledor - reply) |
m (my bad, forgot to sign) |
||
| Line 7: | Line 7: | ||
I'm not entirely comfortable with referencing David Day in either this article or [[Dumbledors]] to be honest. I can't actually find any other source to back up his claim, can anyone else? Loads of websites say that same thing but they all reference David Day (which I don't think is healthy). --[[User:Mith|Mith]] 11:37, 14 January 2008 (EST) | I'm not entirely comfortable with referencing David Day in either this article or [[Dumbledors]] to be honest. I can't actually find any other source to back up his claim, can anyone else? Loads of websites say that same thing but they all reference David Day (which I don't think is healthy). --[[User:Mith|Mith]] 11:37, 14 January 2008 (EST) | ||
:Well, if we built in a heavy caveat emptor in the Bestiary article, and put up a noncanon tag on every reference to it, shouldn't that be enough? | :Well, if we built in a heavy caveat emptor in the Bestiary article, and put up a noncanon tag on every reference to it, shouldn't that be enough? [[User:Ederchil|Ederchil]] 11:43, 14 January 2008 (EST) | ||
Revision as of 16:43, 14 January 2008
Should "Dumbledor" have a seperate article? --Narfil Palùrfalas 13:52, 20 June 2006 (EDT)
- I think so. I've thrown up a stub over at Dumbledors, the plural to go with the standard of Orcs, Men, Elves, etc. --Hyarion 14:23, 20 June 2006 (EDT)
Dumbledor
I'm not entirely comfortable with referencing David Day in either this article or Dumbledors to be honest. I can't actually find any other source to back up his claim, can anyone else? Loads of websites say that same thing but they all reference David Day (which I don't think is healthy). --Mith 11:37, 14 January 2008 (EST)
- Well, if we built in a heavy caveat emptor in the Bestiary article, and put up a noncanon tag on every reference to it, shouldn't that be enough? Ederchil 11:43, 14 January 2008 (EST)
