User talk:Chénier: Difference between revisions
Van Peteghem (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
Van Peteghem (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
What a pity, the Fronen Commentator is not an alliteration, unlike most newspapers... How about the Fronen Foley? The Fronen Fold(er)? The Fronen Fascicule? [[User:Van Peteghem|Van Peteghem]] 20:57, 3 December 2006 (CET) | What a pity, the Fronen Commentator is not an alliteration, unlike most newspapers... How about the Fronen Foley? The Fronen Fold(er)? The Fronen Fascicule? [[User:Van Peteghem|Van Peteghem]] 20:57, 3 December 2006 (CET) | ||
([[User_Talk:Van Peteghem|answer]]) | |||
Well, there are two ways to define original: original in being different from the others by not having an alliteration, or original in having done the effort to come up with a nice second part of the newspaper to fit to the realm name to form an alliteration. Guess which one I'd prefer =).[[User:Van Peteghem|Van Peteghem]] 21:04, 3 December 2006 (CET) | |||
Revision as of 20:04, 3 December 2006
The Fronen Commentator
What a pity, the Fronen Commentator is not an alliteration, unlike most newspapers... How about the Fronen Foley? The Fronen Fold(er)? The Fronen Fascicule? Van Peteghem 20:57, 3 December 2006 (CET)
(answer)
Well, there are two ways to define original: original in being different from the others by not having an alliteration, or original in having done the effort to come up with a nice second part of the newspaper to fit to the realm name to form an alliteration. Guess which one I'd prefer =).Van Peteghem 21:04, 3 December 2006 (CET)