Editing Talk:1st McCarron's Armored Cavalry
Warning: You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you log in or create an account, your edits will be attributed to your username, along with other benefits.
The edit can be undone.
Please check the comparison below to verify that this is what you want to do, and then save the changes below to finish undoing the edit.
Latest revision
Your text
Line 15:
Line 15:
==No merge== ==No merge==
− Very interesting discussion on the top of the page in the past. My opinion is, seperate regimental pages rule, if we put all info in one page with regiments, compositions, images, infoboxes etc. we blow up the page, any thougs to handle this on one page. I'm very interested, but the way we handle it at this time is good, one subject one page.--[[User:Doneve|Doneve]] 17:08, 30 March 2012 (PDT) + Very interesting discussion on the top of the page in the past, my opinion is, seperate regimental pages rule, if we put all info in one page with regiments, compositions etc. we blow up the page, any thougs to handle this on one page, iam very interested but the way we handle it at this time is good, one subject one page.--[[User:Doneve|Doneve]] 17:08, 30 March 2012 (PDT)
The edit can be undone. Please check the comparison below to verify that this is what you want to do, and then save the changes below to finish undoing the edit.
Latest revision | Your text | ||
Line 15: | Line 15: | ||
==No merge== | ==No merge== | ||
− | Very interesting discussion on the top of the page in the past | + | Very interesting discussion on the top of the page in the past, my opinion is, seperate regimental pages rule, if we put all info in one page with regiments, compositions etc. we blow up the page, any thougs to handle this on one page, iam very interested but the way we handle it at this time is good, one subject one page.--[[User:Doneve|Doneve]] 17:08, 30 March 2012 (PDT) |