Difference between revisions of "Category talk:Robot In Development"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
RobertWalker (talk | contribs) (Agreed) |
GrubbmGait (talk | contribs) (Good thought about renaming) |
||
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
Shouldn't this category be called "Robot'''s''' in development"? Or, better yet, "Unreleased robots"? (Since "Robots in development" can suggest that they are still being modified after they have been released.) --<code>[[User:AaronR|AaronR]]</code> 17:56, 12 December 2007 (UTC) | Shouldn't this category be called "Robot'''s''' in development"? Or, better yet, "Unreleased robots"? (Since "Robots in development" can suggest that they are still being modified after they have been released.) --<code>[[User:AaronR|AaronR]]</code> 17:56, 12 December 2007 (UTC) | ||
* I think you are right: "Unreleased robots" would be a much better category name. [[User:RobertWalker|RobertWalker]] 19:02, 12 December 2007 (UTC) | * I think you are right: "Unreleased robots" would be a much better category name. [[User:RobertWalker|RobertWalker]] 19:02, 12 December 2007 (UTC) | ||
| + | * Yep, good thought. A lot of bots are unreleased but not developed any further. [[User:GrubbmGait|GrubbmGait]] 00:56, 14 December 2007 (UTC) | ||
Revision as of 01:56, 14 December 2007
Category name
Shouldn't this category be called "Robots in development"? Or, better yet, "Unreleased robots"? (Since "Robots in development" can suggest that they are still being modified after they have been released.) --AaronR 17:56, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
- I think you are right: "Unreleased robots" would be a much better category name. RobertWalker 19:02, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
- Yep, good thought. A lot of bots are unreleased but not developed any further. GrubbmGait 00:56, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
