Talk: Veetor'Nara

This is the talk page for Veetor'Nara.
Please limit discussions to topics that go into improving the article.
If you wish to discuss matters not relevant to article upkeep, take it to the blogs, forums,
Discord chat, or discussions module.
Thank you.

Does anyone have info on who Veetor's voice actor is? It's not on IMDB, and I'm curious.

Kardar233 08:02, April 5, 2010 (UTC)kardar233

Section Title[]

Based on the information in the first paragraph in this article, it would seem that it's more about Veetor's history and bits about his behavior in social situations. The rest of the article (excluding the trivia) talks about his presence on Freedom's Progress and what happened there when the Collectors showed up. I propose that a section title be added to the second part of the article (the Freedom's progress section) to split up the information in the article so it's easier to see where the biographical information ends and where the mission information begins. I'm interested to hear some more thoughts on this as well. --

(Talk)
(Requests)

04:23, January 15, 2011 (UTC)

I see what you're driving at, though I must confess I don't entirely see the necessity of it. I think the initial reason for the undo may have been more a semantics issue, though I could be mistaken. You said your adding of a section headline was to "split up the information", but strictly speaking, it didn't split up anything that wasn't already split up by the spoiler tag. Now, on to the issue at hand: I do see what you are saying here, but honestly I don't think that there is enough info to warrant sections. Having the intro describing the character themselves divided from the main body by a spoiler tag is pretty common for minor characters like Veetor. Prazza is another example of this.

That said, if there were more info on Veetor elsewhere, like maybe an expanded section involving him back in the Migrant Flotilla, I could easily see multiple sections for ease of reference. I'd hoped to cite Kal'Reegar as an example here, but it turns out his page is (IMO) sorely in need of division. SpartHawg948 21:21, January 15, 2011 (UTC)

Alright, that's fair. Thanks for the response. :)

(Talk)
(Requests)

21:23, January 15, 2011 (UTC)

No probalo! Sorry it took so long, as was so poorly worded, as I just learned. ("sorely in need to division"? WTF does that even mean?) :P SpartHawg948 21:27, January 15, 2011 (UTC)