Talk:Cadbury's Roses: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
(New page: Could be worth deleting - a bit too tenuous and uninteresting for inclusion, I think. ~~~~) |
No edit summary |
||
| (2 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
Could be worth deleting - a bit too tenuous and uninteresting for inclusion, I think. [[User:ArtVandelay13|ArtVandelay13]] 12:59, 20 March 2008 (GMT) | Could be worth deleting - a bit too tenuous and uninteresting for inclusion, I think. [[User:ArtVandelay13|ArtVandelay13]] 12:59, 20 March 2008 (GMT) | ||
* i vote to keep it but only because people outside the UK might not know what they are. i for one didn't. [[User:Steve is King|Steve is King]] 14:42, 20 March 2008 (GMT) | |||
::Then I'd change the page that refers to it to link to Wikipedia. [[User:ArtVandelay13|ArtVandelay13]] 15:03, 20 March 2008 (GMT) | |||
==category== | |||
pages like this don't fit into our current categories but need to go into one. can anyone think of a good new category in which this would fit? [[User:Steve is King|Steve is King]] 04:41, 30 December 2008 (GMT) | |||
Latest revision as of 04:41, 30 December 2008
Could be worth deleting - a bit too tenuous and uninteresting for inclusion, I think. ArtVandelay13 12:59, 20 March 2008 (GMT)
- i vote to keep it but only because people outside the UK might not know what they are. i for one didn't. Steve is King 14:42, 20 March 2008 (GMT)
- Then I'd change the page that refers to it to link to Wikipedia. ArtVandelay13 15:03, 20 March 2008 (GMT)
category
pages like this don't fit into our current categories but need to go into one. can anyone think of a good new category in which this would fit? Steve is King 04:41, 30 December 2008 (GMT)