Okay that makes sense. Thanks for clarifying.
Actually, it wasn't worded very good. IAmMaxB (talk) 17:31, June 7, 2016 (UTC)
Hello. I undid your edit for two reasons. First, you added the Venator-class to the list of KDY products, but without giving a source for it. Secondly, the grammatical correction you did was in fact no correction at all. IT'S is a contraction for "it is" or "it has", while ITS indicates possessive. In this case, it meant "Kuat Drive Yards' allegiance", thus "its" was the correct form. --LelalMekha (talk) 15:54, September 7, 2016 (UTC)
Hey! Speculation/unverified info means that rither what you adding is either speculation or it isnt sourced, if you add information please make sure its sourced! In this case you just need that it comes from the episode 'The Lawless' then that's fine, hope this helps --Lewisr (talk) 16:22, October 2, 2016 (UTC)
Hello. I undid your edit for two reasons. First, you added the Venator-class to the list of KDY products, but without giving a source for it. Secondly, the grammatical correction you did was in fact no correction at all. IT'S is a contraction for "it is" or "it has", while ITS indicates possessive. In this case, it meant "Kuat Drive Yards' allegiance", thus "its" was the correct form. --LelalMekha (talk) 15:54, September 7, 2016 (UTC)
- Apparently, the association between KDY and the Venator-class can indeed be sourced to Ultimate Star Wars. My bad on that one. However, the grammatical "correction" was still wrong. --LelalMekha (talk) 16:01, September 7, 2016 (UTC)
- Well firstly, The Venator-class star destroyer's page directly states it was manufactured by Kuat Drive Yards, if the page lacks a source you could simply add it yourself, instead of removing a perfectly valid edit. In addition, a possessive noun has an apostrophe, i don't know where you learnt to write English, but it clearly wasn't very accurate in it's information. --GeneralZELITE () 16:19, September 7, 2016 (UTC)