Talk:Archangel (disambiguation)

I'm removing the link for visionarygames.com from the definition of archangel as an RPG. It feels like advertising. --Mitsukai 16:05, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Use of redirects

In response to this, please read WP:PIPING and WP:R2D. A redirect is ok per the guidelines. In this instance, linking the individual 'Daniel Craig' would only be good if 'Archangel (TV series)' was a red link (further information can be found at MOS:DABRL). As this is not the case, then the change I've implemented is a subtle way of handling it. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 21:17, 30 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Daniel Craig

This is ridiculous. I came to this page looking for the "archangel" that Danial Craig was in. His name was not listed against any entry, so after identifying the correct entry from the couple of realistic options, I added his name alongside the correct one, as being arguably the most recognisable hook for recognition alonside BBC television and the novel. This simple and obvious improvement is astonishingly being edit warred over. Depite explaining the fact that Craig was the only hook I had when soming here to find the article I wanted, his name is still being reverted because "This adds nothing here and our goal is to keep it short". Adding nothing? Clearly wrong as explained repeatedly now. Policy is to keep it short? The whole entry including Daniel Craig [1] is on one line, ending well before the width of most screen resolutions. This more than meets the db style guide. This is incredibly lame, but if the reverters don't come up with better reasons than they have so far for making this page wores, I will be forced out of principle to take this further. MickMacNee (talk) 19:08, 31 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Agree with parent. Looks like some religious fanatics are corrupting things.

What are you talking about?! You haven't given any good reason for adding him. You say "agreed as an exception to the rule, but it still needs Craig as a recognition hook (it is how I got here in the first place)" and "well, considering that's why I came to this page, that is patently wrong." but that doesn't tell us anything. See, we could list him if he was nicknamed 'Archangel' or something, but according to his article, this is not the case. It just seems like you're putting in a random cast member for no reason. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 20:44, 31 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The second part of the first diff, and the second diff, both explain why your assertion that his name was not needed was obviously false, as I used his name as a recognition hook to find the article I was looking for (I thought I had explained that quite clearly above). We are not listing Craig as an item here, so whether he was nicknamed archangel is totally irrelevant. And random cast member? He is the main and most recognisable character in it. Have you even seen the film? MickMacNee (talk) 14:10, 2 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Item Archangel (TV series)

I tried to change this because I think this is the root cause for the "Daniel Craig" controversy above. The TV series was recut into a movie. It was put on a DVD and is broadcast in this format elsewhere. People who are looking for info on this movie don't know that they should be looking for a TV series. They get misdirected to a Guy Maddin film. I suggest we change this item to "British TV series/ made for TV movie" and everyone should be happy and able to find things. Since I can't DIY this change I'd appreciate it if s.o. who can would put this or something similar in. THANKS 76.97.245.5 (talk) 06:47, 14 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Needed addition

This needs to be added. "The Archangel is based on a similar cropduster airframe, that of the Thrush Model 660"

After being the target of past attacks and edit wars I no longer personally waste my time futilely adding info. (random IP addy) 193.116.229.24 (talk) 05:53, 20 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]