Difference between revisions of "Talk:Shield"

From FreeSpace Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search
m (Debatable statements?)
(Read this, SaltyWaffles.)
Line 6: Line 6:
 
*The current revision is fine without it. What was missing was the bit about there being no canon info on whether or not beams could pierce the Lucy's shields. That said, this article really rubs me the wrong way, as it doesn't show the sources for the various statements, making it hard to find out which statement is definitely canon, and which are only conjecture.[[User:The E|The E]] 13:03, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
 
*The current revision is fine without it. What was missing was the bit about there being no canon info on whether or not beams could pierce the Lucy's shields. That said, this article really rubs me the wrong way, as it doesn't show the sources for the various statements, making it hard to find out which statement is definitely canon, and which are only conjecture.[[User:The E|The E]] 13:03, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
 
**We've never had an operable citation system, unlike Wikipedia. We don't have as many canon sources as would require it to be implemented. - [[User:TopAce|TopAce]] 14:17, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
 
**We've never had an operable citation system, unlike Wikipedia. We don't have as many canon sources as would require it to be implemented. - [[User:TopAce|TopAce]] 14:17, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
 +
 +
==Lucifer shields, beam cannons and beam canon==
 +
The reason why there is no canon info on whether or not beams would be able to penetrate the Lucifer's shields is that there is no canon engagement between the Lucifer and another beam-equipped vessel. As such, any speculation on this topic is noncanon, with no particular canon information to support either side of the debate. [[User:The E|The E]] 11:22, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

Revision as of 06:22, 25 June 2012

What canon evidence do we have that the GTD Amadeus was taken out with a single wing of bombers? --Mars 02:22, 5 August 2006 (BST)

Debatable statements?

Which statements in particular made you stick a non-canon tag on this page, The E? I find the mention of "sheath shielding" and Mars's point above as debatable. The rest of the article are fine. - TopAce 09:55, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

  • The current revision is fine without it. What was missing was the bit about there being no canon info on whether or not beams could pierce the Lucy's shields. That said, this article really rubs me the wrong way, as it doesn't show the sources for the various statements, making it hard to find out which statement is definitely canon, and which are only conjecture.The E 13:03, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
    • We've never had an operable citation system, unlike Wikipedia. We don't have as many canon sources as would require it to be implemented. - TopAce 14:17, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

Lucifer shields, beam cannons and beam canon

The reason why there is no canon info on whether or not beams would be able to penetrate the Lucifer's shields is that there is no canon engagement between the Lucifer and another beam-equipped vessel. As such, any speculation on this topic is noncanon, with no particular canon information to support either side of the debate. The E 11:22, 25 June 2012 (UTC)