FANDOM


"Special needs" Edit

Does this require its own page? It's also in the ref section of "Context Is for Kings" but only in quotes in the article. We know it's her allergies so isn't "special needs" sufficient? -- Compvox (talk) 16:57, October 11, 2017 (UTC)

I think so yeah. She initially talks about special needs, and only later clarifies its allergies. So we have two concepts, "special needs" which apparently is enough of a term that people in-universe would understand what it means, and the alergies which are one type of special needs. -- Capricorn (talk) 02:55, October 12, 2017 (UTC)

Makes sense. I think it's an awkward bit of dialog and the article would only have allergies in it, but in that context I wouldn't oppose a new article any further. -- Compvox (talk) 00:02, October 13, 2017 (UTC)

Hang on, how are you using this discussion to justify removing the special needs reference @ "Context Is for Kings"?? -- Capricorn (talk) 12:12, January 9, 2018 (UTC)

After a few months it hadn't been linked anywhere else and wasn't a stub. I'm fine with it being added back though. -- Compvox (talk) 12:45, January 9, 2018 (UTC)

I think it should be. The term was unquestionably used in the episode (so even in your reading it would be a redirect), and something being a redlink is not in itself a reason for removing stuff. Wikis are perpetually under construction, after all... -- Capricorn (talk) 11:17, January 13, 2018 (UTC)

I fine with a redirect. -- Compvox (talk) 11:53, January 13, 2018 (UTC)

I wasn't so much trying to suggest that as I was trying to make a point as to why redlinks shouldn't be removed, but I guess that was of lesser interest to you. -- Capricorn (talk) 12:37, January 15, 2018 (UTC)

I understood. It's not like I'm removing all redlinks, just because. I'm okay with it added back or it redirected. It's a wiki after all. -- Compvox (talk) 09:59, January 17, 2018 (UTC)