Talk:Deep Space 24: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
m (New page: ==Naming== Uh...wouldn't this be more appropriate if it was named "Deep Space 24"? You could still have the Challenger category associated with it. -~~~~) |
m (→Stats) |
||
| (4 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
==Naming== | ==Naming== | ||
Uh...wouldn't this be more appropriate if it was named "Deep Space 24"? You could still have the Challenger category associated with it. -[[User:Varaan|Varaan]] 09:39, 18 January 2008 (CST) | Uh...wouldn't this be more appropriate if it was named "Deep Space 24"? You could still have the Challenger category associated with it. -[[User:Varaan|Varaan]] 09:39, 18 January 2008 (CST) | ||
:Would also recommending keeping the station as a seperate section from the Challenger, as [[Deep Space 17]] is separate from the [[USS Wallace]]. - [[User:Salak|<font color="maroon">Lt.JG Salak</font>]]<sup><i>[[User talk:Salak|Talk]]</i></sup> 10:44, 19 January 2008 (CST) | |||
==Stats== | |||
Are they from Ditl? The personnel figures seem huge for a station made of 6 Ambassador saucers... (unlike most of the other Engineers in the fleet, I DON'T trust DITL, feel it's too error filled) - [[User:Salak|<font color="maroon">Lt. Salak</font>]]<sup><i>[[User talk:Salak|Talk]]</i></sup> 02:59, 4 March 2008 (CST) | |||
Latest revision as of 09:00, 4 March 2008
Naming
Uh...wouldn't this be more appropriate if it was named "Deep Space 24"? You could still have the Challenger category associated with it. -Varaan 09:39, 18 January 2008 (CST)
- Would also recommending keeping the station as a seperate section from the Challenger, as Deep Space 17 is separate from the USS Wallace. - Lt.JG SalakTalk 10:44, 19 January 2008 (CST)
Stats
Are they from Ditl? The personnel figures seem huge for a station made of 6 Ambassador saucers... (unlike most of the other Engineers in the fleet, I DON'T trust DITL, feel it's too error filled) - Lt. SalakTalk 02:59, 4 March 2008 (CST)