Talk:Covenant battleship: Difference between revisions
From Halopedia, the Halo wiki
Rotaretilbo (talk | contribs) |
Rotaretilbo (talk | contribs) |
||
| Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
*'''Against''' - Definately not. it is pure hypothesis that the supercarrier had "5 bulb<nowiki>[ous]</nowiki> sections". Cheers, '''[[User:RelentlessRecusant|<font color="red">Relentless</font>]][[User talk:RelentlessRecusant|<font color="blue">Recusant</font>]][[Image:Jedi_Order.jpg|20px]]''' 02:13, 21 November 2006 (UTC) | *'''Against''' - Definately not. it is pure hypothesis that the supercarrier had "5 bulb<nowiki>[ous]</nowiki> sections". Cheers, '''[[User:RelentlessRecusant|<font color="red">Relentless</font>]][[User talk:RelentlessRecusant|<font color="blue">Recusant</font>]][[Image:Jedi_Order.jpg|20px]]''' 02:13, 21 November 2006 (UTC) | ||
:*Yours is the pure hypothesis. Mine is based on fact! -- [[User:Fist of Rukt|Fist of Rukt]] 04:42, 21 November 2006 (UTC) | :*Yours is the pure hypothesis. Mine is based on fact! -- [[User:Fist of Rukt|Fist of Rukt]] 04:42, 21 November 2006 (UTC) | ||
::*Actually, yours are both hypothesis, but his is a fanon name, while yours is a fanon merge. I'll take a fanon name when a canon name isn't present over a fanon merge any day. | ::*Actually, yours are both hypothesis, but his is a fanon name, while yours is a fanon merge. I'll take a fanon name when a canon name isn't present over a fanon merge any day.--[[User:Rotaretilbo|Rotaretilbo]] 05:23, 12 December 2006 (UTC) | ||
Revision as of 00:23, December 12, 2006
Votes for Merge
- Merge This is obviously a Covenant supercarrier as mentoned in Halo: First Strike which says there was a ship that had 5 bubies sectons, and larger then a carrier -- Fist of Rukt 01:43, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
- Against - Definately not. it is pure hypothesis that the supercarrier had "5 bulb[ous] sections". Cheers, RelentlessRecusantFile:Jedi Order.jpg 02:13, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
- Yours is the pure hypothesis. Mine is based on fact! -- Fist of Rukt 04:42, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
- Actually, yours are both hypothesis, but his is a fanon name, while yours is a fanon merge. I'll take a fanon name when a canon name isn't present over a fanon merge any day.--Rotaretilbo 05:23, 12 December 2006 (UTC)