Board Thread:Wiki-Related Questions and Answers/@comment-4975807-20130417180235/@comment-2153169-20150109030742

Andrew Robbins wrote: Well, if someone says that Regina naming her horse Rocinante is not enough evidence to know if he is really the Rocinante or just an allusion, I can say that the writers naming that character Mr. Darcy is not enough evidence to know if he is really the Mr. Darcy or just an allusion. I honestly don't see the difference.

Exactly! I completely agree with you. If we begin to create some story pages just because a character is named like a novel character, i also don't see why Don Quixote should not have its page. That's the same thing, except Rocinante is more important than Mr. Darcy.

Then, CooDudeAl, i'm sorry but that's not because I don't say or complain about something which mean I agree with it. Honestly, because we don't complain about one thing, it necessary means we accept it? I don't think so.

Then, your point about I disagree without reason is completely false. Again, I don't see where you saw me disagree with something without giving a reason. Maybe it happened; but on this thead, I always gave a reason. So again, I don't see where you find this point.

Then, the encyclopedic thing. Yeah, we agree with that. Yeah I also agree with that. But as far as i know, we decided to apply this idea to elements from the show, for now. So personally, I think we should all be okay with these kind of pages, before talking about stories page. I'll be honest with you CoolDude, for me, you're using our decision in order to create these pages you wanted since a long time. But yeah, maybe it is an enclyclopedic aspect I don't see for now. But it is certainly not the most important.

Finally, I just find you're talking like I was in minority about TBGG page. Maybe it is right, but for now I did not see a lot of persons saying yes too.