Siteadmin, Bureaucrats, Check users, nsAm_Govt_101RO, nsAm_Govt_101RW, nsAm_Govt_101_ta, nsJudgesRO, nsJudgesRW, nsJudges_talkRO, nsJudges_talkRW, nsTeam2RO, nsTeam2RW, nsTeam2_talkRO, nsTeam2_talkRW, oversight, Administrators
125,794
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 174:
Line 174: + +
Conservapedia:Contact Us (view source)
Revision as of 18:56, December 28, 2009
, 18:56, December 28, 2009→Nova: I'll move "NOVA" to "NOVA (PBS)", and you can then have "Nova". Thanks.
I believe this is right place to ask this, so here I am. I want to write an article on the astronomical phenomenon known as a "Nova", however all search on this site for that word is already directed towards "NOVA", a stub on the PBS series of that name. Should I rebuild that article to focus on the astronomical phenomena as that is what the base definition of a nova means? Or start a whole new article, such as "nova_(star)"? Thanks. --[[User:BMcP|BMcP]] 13:18, 28 December 2009 (EST)
I believe this is right place to ask this, so here I am. I want to write an article on the astronomical phenomenon known as a "Nova", however all search on this site for that word is already directed towards "NOVA", a stub on the PBS series of that name. Should I rebuild that article to focus on the astronomical phenomena as that is what the base definition of a nova means? Or start a whole new article, such as "nova_(star)"? Thanks. --[[User:BMcP|BMcP]] 13:18, 28 December 2009 (EST)
: I'll move "NOVA" to "NOVA (PBS)", and you can then have "Nova". Thanks.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 13:56, 28 December 2009 (EST)