Revision as of 21:36, 18 December 2007 editSlimVirgin (talk | contribs)172,064 editsm Unprotected Talk:Carl Hewitt: as discussed on WT:BLP← Previous edit |
Revision as of 21:43, 18 December 2007 edit undoSlimVirgin (talk | contribs)172,064 edits suggestionNext edit → |
Line 21: |
Line 21: |
|
:The consensus there is clearly that this should not be protected. As a fellow admin, I therefore ask SV to remove the protection. ''']''' (]) 18:08, 18 December 2007 (UTC) |
|
:The consensus there is clearly that this should not be protected. As a fellow admin, I therefore ask SV to remove the protection. ''']''' (]) 18:08, 18 December 2007 (UTC) |
|
::I've replied on ]. <font color="Purple">]</font> <small><sup><font color="Blue">]</font><font color="Green">]</font></sup></small> 19:06, 18 December 2007 (UTC) |
|
::I've replied on ]. <font color="Purple">]</font> <small><sup><font color="Blue">]</font><font color="Green">]</font></sup></small> 19:06, 18 December 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
==Suggestion== |
|
|
Following a suggestion from Black Falcon, I've unprotected the page to allow people to discuss the Observer article for a few days, as some editors seem to feel that discussion is required. The suggestion is that the discussion will be blanked after a few days as a courtesy. I was thinking three days, although no one's going to blank it mid-sentence so if it takes a bit longer, that's fine. But the idea is to discuss it, wrap it up, then blank the discussion. I hope the editors here see that as a fair compromise. <font color="Purple">]</font> <small><sup><font color="Blue">]</font><font color="Green">]</font></sup></small> 21:43, 18 December 2007 (UTC) |
I've archived and protected this talk page because people were adding problematic material. As the article is currently protected from editing, there's no need for this to be open at the moment anyway. If anyone has a query, by all means e-mail me. Many thanks, SlimVirgin 17:08, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
Following a suggestion from Black Falcon, I've unprotected the page to allow people to discuss the Observer article for a few days, as some editors seem to feel that discussion is required. The suggestion is that the discussion will be blanked after a few days as a courtesy. I was thinking three days, although no one's going to blank it mid-sentence so if it takes a bit longer, that's fine. But the idea is to discuss it, wrap it up, then blank the discussion. I hope the editors here see that as a fair compromise. SlimVirgin 21:43, 18 December 2007 (UTC)