Osiris: 1 revision: Talk Namespace

2012-12-26T03:16:11Z

1 revision: Talk Namespace

New page

Nope. I don't think you can avoid being ''indelicate'', there. And I really don't understand the "Velocity" one, even supposing that's [[.303 Bookworm]]. --[[User:Old Dickens|Old Dickens]] 00:42, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
:Me neither. I don't think its from any of the books. At least, I don't remember it. I may be wrong but if it's not from a book should it be here? --[[User:Beligaronia|Beligaronia]] 21:15, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

Well, it's an ''annotation'', so it doesn't have to be true or even reasonable to me or anyone. It's an opinion or conjecture or a fact; they're all the same. I can't argue with your opinion. I ''hate'' annotations. --[[User:Old Dickens|Old Dickens]] 00:06, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

I believe I have spotted him in {{GO}}. [[Special:Contributions/99.238.41.80|99.238.41.80]] 00:51, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

== ==
I don't think we know what the "Pépé Le Pew reference" is any more. It's a bit of a "huh?" moment. --[[User:Old Dickens|Old Dickens]] 02:05, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

Same here. Is there anything to associate him with the rather rapey skunk other than the womanising factor? --[[User:Hapenny|Hapenny]] 18:07, 17 April 2012 (GMT)
: Not ''other than'', perhaps, but then that's the main factor. Actually the original comment referred to an edit by Agprov that referred to the reference after having deleted it. Long time no see, by the way. [[User:Old Dickens|Old Dickens]] 00:23, 18 April 2012 (CEST)

: O hai, surprised you remember me! Should we remove the Pepe portion or restore the old reference? - [[User:Hapenny|Hapenny]] 02:11, 18 April 2012 (GMT)

: Wait, I see what you mean. It's still a little confusing for me, I definitely had a "huh?" moment when I read the current edit. [[User:Hapenny|Hapenny]] 02:16, 18 April 2012 (GMT)

Talk:Giamo Casanunda - Revision history

Osiris: 1 revision: Talk Namespace