| rdfs:comment
| - There's already a page for this, am I wrong? YuriKaslov 23:59, March 25, 2011 (UTC) Link, please. - Bovell (talk) 00:46, March 26, 2011 (UTC) Battlefield Wiki:Friends, I believe. YuriKaslov 00:51, March 26, 2011 (UTC) A merge to this title might be more appropriate. Additionally, the line "they may or may not regard us likewise" is quite out of place; we want these sites listed here to be ones that we know share the same outlook on us as we do to them. - Bovell (talk) 13:14, March 26, 2011 (UTC) PoV from one of the guys who saw this page go up. We've been using the Battlefield Wiki:Friends page for a long time, and it's fine as it is. It's a waste of effort and time to merge a page and change the navigation bar when that page and this one, which hasn't been around for half the time o
|
| abstract
| - There's already a page for this, am I wrong? YuriKaslov 23:59, March 25, 2011 (UTC) Link, please. - Bovell (talk) 00:46, March 26, 2011 (UTC) Battlefield Wiki:Friends, I believe. YuriKaslov 00:51, March 26, 2011 (UTC) A merge to this title might be more appropriate. Additionally, the line "they may or may not regard us likewise" is quite out of place; we want these sites listed here to be ones that we know share the same outlook on us as we do to them. - Bovell (talk) 13:14, March 26, 2011 (UTC) PoV from one of the guys who saw this page go up. We've been using the Battlefield Wiki:Friends page for a long time, and it's fine as it is. It's a waste of effort and time to merge a page and change the navigation bar when that page and this one, which hasn't been around for half the time of the other one, are the same as each other. And also, sometimes the whole userbase of a site may not consider us friends while we consider them our friends, thus justifying the point of the sentence. 1.
* Redirect File:P043.pngHeatedPete - 14:41, March 26, 2011 (UTC) I was not aware that page merging was a "waste of time and effort," as I've been able to do it swiftly and effortlessly a numerous amount of times. In addition, it is blatantly obvious that we cannot be "friends" with an entire userbase of a site. We can simply make a list of friends and affiliates without any explanation, and the point will still get across. - Bovell (talk) 17:19, March 26, 2011 (UTC) I think clearly the 2 need merging. I prefer this title, to be honest, but I don't think it actually matters. Although, it's not difficult to change the navigation and things really. - 14:56, March 26, 2011 (UTC) Matter, it does not. Merged, it has been. SSDGFCTCT9 (Talk) 15:19, March 26, 2011 (UTC) Two things: 1.
* What do we do about Battlefield Wiki talk:Friends? (I suggest we move it here, with one of those move template thingies) 2.
* When did we become a friend of Bad Company 24/7 or Battlefield3Forums? SSDGFCTCT9 (Talk) 15:23, March 26, 2011 (UTC) Battlefield Wiki talk:Friends is sorted. It's content is above and the page redirects here. Bovell organised the other partnerships by email - 15:28, March 26, 2011 (UTC) Oh, I see. It'd be nice if they could say so on their sites... SSDGFCTCT9 (Talk) 15:33, March 26, 2011 (UTC) Bad Company 24/7 supposedly put up a link to our site on their main page. - Bovell (talk) 17:19, March 26, 2011 (UTC) Ah yes, I see it. It's under their "BAD COMPANY 24/7" tab. <a href="/mediawiki/User:SSDGFCTCT9" title="User:SSDGFCTCT9">SSDGFCTCT9</a>(<a href="/mediawiki/User_talk:SSDGFCTCT9" title="User talk:SSDGFCTCT9">Talk</a>) File:AdminRibbon.png File:UserMonthRibbon.png File:AwardRibbon.png File:800px-Template Ribbon.png 17:26, March 26, 2011 (UTC)
|
![[RDF Data]](/fct/images/sw-rdf-blue.png)