Difference between revisions of "Talk:Lycanthropy"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Crawldragon (talk | contribs) (→Do we need the terminology clarification?: new section) |
(turned into a footnote) |
||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
Simply put, the [[Lycanthropy#Abuse of terminology|Abuse of Terminology]] section seems a bit unnecessary and pedantic to me. Does anyone else feel like it should be there? - [[User:Crawldragon|Crawldragon]] ([[User_talk:Crawldragon|talk]]|[http://roguebasin.com/index.php?title=User:Crawldragon rog]) 02:44, 4 February 2015 (UTC) | Simply put, the [[Lycanthropy#Abuse of terminology|Abuse of Terminology]] section seems a bit unnecessary and pedantic to me. Does anyone else feel like it should be there? - [[User:Crawldragon|Crawldragon]] ([[User_talk:Crawldragon|talk]]|[http://roguebasin.com/index.php?title=User:Crawldragon rog]) 02:44, 4 February 2015 (UTC) | ||
| + | |||
| + | : Mentioning the terminology issue seems fine with me, but I agree that it doesn't deserve a whole section of its own. I've edited the article to turn it into a footnote. —[[User:Ilmari Karonen|Ilmari Karonen]] ([[User talk:Ilmari Karonen|talk]]) 15:37, 5 February 2015 (UTC) | ||
Revision as of 15:37, 5 February 2015
Do we need the terminology clarification?
Simply put, the Abuse of Terminology section seems a bit unnecessary and pedantic to me. Does anyone else feel like it should be there? - Crawldragon (talk|rog) 02:44, 4 February 2015 (UTC)
- Mentioning the terminology issue seems fine with me, but I agree that it doesn't deserve a whole section of its own. I've edited the article to turn it into a footnote. —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 15:37, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
