v50 Steam/Premium information for editors
- v50 information can now be added to pages in the main namespace. v0.47 information can still be found in the DF2014 namespace. See here for more details on the new versioning policy.
- Use this page to report any issues related to the migration.
This notice may be cached—the current version can be found here.
Difference between revisions of "v0.31 Talk:Camel"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
(Created page with 'Is there any reason we shouldn't make this page a redirect to one-humped camel and put a link on that page to [[DF2010:Two-humped camel|two-humped cam…') |
(DF2010 -> v0.31 (090/687)) |
||
| (2 intermediate revisions by one other user not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| − | Is there any reason we shouldn't make this page a redirect to [[ | + | Is there any reason we shouldn't make this page a redirect to [[v0.31:One-humped camel|one-humped camel]] and put a link on that page to [[v0.31:Two-humped camel|two-humped camel]], or vice versa? As it stands, this page is just a two-article disambiguation disguised as a crappy article. --[[User:FunkyWaltDogg|FunkyWaltDogg]] 18:36, 20 May 2010 (UTC) |
| + | |||
| + | :The only reason I can think of is that this helps people make sure they're looking at the right camel. But yeah, putting a link on each camel page about the other camel would probably be good enough. --[[User:SenorPwnage|Señor Pwnage]] 23:00, 20 May 2010 (UTC) | ||
Latest revision as of 16:15, 17 February 2012
Is there any reason we shouldn't make this page a redirect to one-humped camel and put a link on that page to two-humped camel, or vice versa? As it stands, this page is just a two-article disambiguation disguised as a crappy article. --FunkyWaltDogg 18:36, 20 May 2010 (UTC)
- The only reason I can think of is that this helps people make sure they're looking at the right camel. But yeah, putting a link on each camel page about the other camel would probably be good enough. --Señor Pwnage 23:00, 20 May 2010 (UTC)