Talk:1635: The Cannon Law

move page 1635: The Cannon Law -> 1635: Cannon Law

 * deleting by nowiki: per the below reason // Fra nkB  02:24, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

This page should be renamed, because "1635: Cannon Law" is the title of the work. Also the canon law does not seem correct. Canon law having a religious connotation, and cannon law being a double-entendre. 132.205.93.33 22:22, 6 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Strong Object&mdash;Erroneous and so a Bad nomination

The title is very correct, as was the original image I uploaded (erroneously deleted as well! I can't even take a month off for real life and earn some income apparently! ). This image is solely the e-book version and was probably a prototypical (not yet finished pre-production) artwork released on Baen's website.

The physical copy (a Hardcopy) beside me, as did the deleted pic reads 1635: The Cannon Law, as stubbed out back in July and August. IIi2}}Sorry Anom., but the double entendre is entirely meant by the author and fits right in with the plot and 'canon law' too. A fun series. // Fra nkB 02:23, 11 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Strongly agree 1635: Cannon Law is what's on the jacket of the book, and is also what Amazon calls it. Does someone know how to check how it's registered at Library of Congress? That should easily settle it. I'm also sure the double entendre is entirely meant by the author, but that double meaning hits home better without 'The'. Chris the speller (talk) 16:38, 11 May 2008 (UTC)