Talk:Haste (535): Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
Yay, Haste Formula! I was wondering if it was ari to thank some mage's hat for the formula here, since I'm not supposed to include credits in the actual article. *shrug?* [[User:DOOMDUCK|Doom Duck]] 15:30, 19 January 2006 (PST) |
Yay, Haste Formula! I was wondering if it was ari to thank some mage's hat for the formula here, since I'm not supposed to include credits in the actual article. *shrug?* [[User:DOOMDUCK|Doom Duck]] 15:30, 19 January 2006 (PST) |
||
: You can thank whoever you want in the talk space, that's for sure. You could mention that he came up with the formula in the article as well, if you wanted. The idea is that facts should be in there, but not opinions. He being the one that developed the formula would be a fact, him being a great guy because of it would be an opinion. So something like "The roundtime reduction appears to follow the following formula, due to Joe Bob Johnson" would be just fine. - [[User:Ildran|Ildran]] 18:36, 19 January 2006 (PST) |
|||
Revision as of 20:36, 19 January 2006
Yay, Haste Formula! I was wondering if it was ari to thank some mage's hat for the formula here, since I'm not supposed to include credits in the actual article. *shrug?* Doom Duck 15:30, 19 January 2006 (PST)
- You can thank whoever you want in the talk space, that's for sure. You could mention that he came up with the formula in the article as well, if you wanted. The idea is that facts should be in there, but not opinions. He being the one that developed the formula would be a fact, him being a great guy because of it would be an opinion. So something like "The roundtime reduction appears to follow the following formula, due to Joe Bob Johnson" would be just fine. - Ildran 18:36, 19 January 2006 (PST)