Talk:Recovered Memory

From LGPedia
Revision as of 04:13, 31 March 2008 by Platypusrex256 (Talk | contribs) (my objection in detail)

Jump to: navigation, search

Young Bree and Gina

Shouldn't the young actresses get credit nods? --TimiN 17:23, 27 March 2008 (CDT)

I just added them as Bree and Gina; no need for "Young Bree" and "Young Gina", that just seemed silly. That was in of itself tricky, since the VidChar template takes things over on its own... - Shiori 17:58, 27 March 2008 (CDT)
Actually, lots of movies and TV shows credit characters as "Young CharacterName" when its the younger version of that character, so I think it makes sense to credit them like that, personally. --Zoey 18:12, 27 March 2008 (CDT)
Works for me. I was going to add "Zoey can change it if she wants to my last comment, but it was self-evident. :P - Shiori 18:13, 27 March 2008 (CDT)
  • further, i would create separate pages for Young Bree and Young Gina. Although they are related, they should be treated as separate characters because they belong to a separate universe, the universe of breeniverse past. - platy
I wouldn't, especially since we know next to nothing about them from when they were younger. If we get a significant amount of information, I'd think a subsection of the existing pages would make more sense. - Shiori 19:37, 30 March 2008 (CDT)

a + b = c

the three points have been arranged in a mathematical structure.

  • condition one (a) is that the screen name is an anagram for verdus15. condition two (b) is that the user implies that they will be present at the meeting. the conclusion (c) is that the user is elizabeth
  • the conclusion is dependant and yet separate from the conditions. if you want to expand on the conclusion, you are free to do so.

- platy

  1. Writing prose is not maths.
  • i wouldn't call it prose. it's a logical argument. - platy
  1. Even if you could argue that way, it still wouldn't change the multiple other problems with your phrasing I listed elsewhere.
  • you can argue this way. take a course in logic sometime. - platy
  1. You're still lacking the courtesy to adhere to common procedures and leave the page alone until the discussion is finished.
  • You don't adhere to those procedures, either. - platy
  1. If that's your only concern, you should be fine with this version. No need to change it anymore.
  • My objection is that you insist on long phrases and you think its poetry. - platy
~ Renegade (talk | contribs) 19:49, 30 March 2008 (CDT)

my objection in detail

dear fellow pedians, please excuse the continuing argument between user:renegade and myself. my only hope in these continuing skirmishes is to develop some sort of standard by which we write notes.

  • It has been noted
  • besides the obvious problem with the ambiguously attributed verb, there is no need to say it has been noted. imagine opening a dictionary and the entry said it has been defined. that is redundant.
  • the name of the mysterious chatter
  • it is fair to assume that the reader has read text leading up to this note. and if not, it is not sufficient to say the mysterious chatter. you would have to say the mysterious chatter who met in the chat room while gina was online.
  • likely a reference
  • the anagram is a literary device and author intent has nothing to do with the validity of asserting a connection.
  • throw the reader a little credit, that they know what lg15 means.
  • At the end of the chat, redSUV51 switches from telling Gina to go to the meeting to telling her to come to the meeting, implying s/he will be there.
  • my wording is better because it does not begin with a prepositional phrase.
  • Since Bree's mother both works at Verdus and was scheduled to attend the meeting, it is widely believed redSUV51 was her. This point was later reinforced by the fact that, in The Devil Speaks, it was shown Bree's mother came to the meeting alone.
  • my phrasing is better because it does not begin with a conjunction.

- platy