This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||
|
Recent anonymous edits have made this article bulky and unreadable. Consider this run-on sentence:
Yikes!
Consider:
Ignoring the writing style, can anybody substantiate the claim that Dangerous had previously been demoted or testified against a corrupt officer? Of course, in the first episode, he caught a retiring officer, and that did him no good in the eyes of his fellows. My impression that he had repeatedly been passed-over for promotion, but not that he had ever been demoted. Ronstew ( talk) 18:02, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
A list of readily discovered sources are added as Further reading for your convenience. @ Ronstew: I will remove the one sentence that you note as being unsubstantiated and questionable. 71.201.62.200 ( talk) 14:18, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
The episode summaries are all wrong, and by wrong I mean completely fabricated. It seems that every article about this character has received the visit of someone bent on disinformation. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.241.129.158 ( talk) 18:13, 21 April 2016 (UTC)
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||
|
Recent anonymous edits have made this article bulky and unreadable. Consider this run-on sentence:
Yikes!
Consider:
Ignoring the writing style, can anybody substantiate the claim that Dangerous had previously been demoted or testified against a corrupt officer? Of course, in the first episode, he caught a retiring officer, and that did him no good in the eyes of his fellows. My impression that he had repeatedly been passed-over for promotion, but not that he had ever been demoted. Ronstew ( talk) 18:02, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
A list of readily discovered sources are added as Further reading for your convenience. @ Ronstew: I will remove the one sentence that you note as being unsubstantiated and questionable. 71.201.62.200 ( talk) 14:18, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
The episode summaries are all wrong, and by wrong I mean completely fabricated. It seems that every article about this character has received the visit of someone bent on disinformation. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.241.129.158 ( talk) 18:13, 21 April 2016 (UTC)