Difference between revisions of "Talk:Charles Sanders Peirce"
From Conservapedia
(retitle?) |
|||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
this article is shaping up very well indeed! maybe the title should be changed to "Charles S. Peirce" or "Charles Sanders Peirce" (nobody callshim Charles Peirce). ???? [[User:RJJensen|RJJensen]] 08:36, 16 April 2009 (EDT) | this article is shaping up very well indeed! maybe the title should be changed to "Charles S. Peirce" or "Charles Sanders Peirce" (nobody callshim Charles Peirce). ???? [[User:RJJensen|RJJensen]] 08:36, 16 April 2009 (EDT) | ||
| + | |||
| + | :Yes, the article has definitely come a long way in a few days. I'm okay with "Charles Peirce," but I like "Charles S. Peirce" better and "Charles Sanders Peirce" best of all, I'm not sure why, maybe because having the full middle name is the surest way in the long run to avoid having a disambiguation thing at the page's top. [[User:ForNow|ForNow]] 23:01, 16 April 2009 (EDT) | ||
Revision as of 03:01, April 17, 2009
this article is shaping up very well indeed! maybe the title should be changed to "Charles S. Peirce" or "Charles Sanders Peirce" (nobody callshim Charles Peirce). ???? RJJensen 08:36, 16 April 2009 (EDT)
- Yes, the article has definitely come a long way in a few days. I'm okay with "Charles Peirce," but I like "Charles S. Peirce" better and "Charles Sanders Peirce" best of all, I'm not sure why, maybe because having the full middle name is the surest way in the long run to avoid having a disambiguation thing at the page's top. ForNow 23:01, 16 April 2009 (EDT)
