| Revision as of 02:21, 10 September 2014 editLowercase sigmabot III (talk | contribs)Bots, Template editors2,302,531 editsm Archiving 1 discussion(s) to User talk:DD2K/Archive 2) (bot← Previous edit | Revision as of 01:43, 12 September 2014 edit undoLowercase sigmabot III (talk | contribs)Bots, Template editors2,302,531 editsm Archiving 1 discussion(s) to User talk:DD2K/Archive 2) (botNext edit → | ||
| Line 18: | Line 18: | ||
| | ] || ] | | ] || ] | ||
| |} | |} | ||
| == ] Comment == | |||
| Your edits made this history section much better. I would put it under "provisional" as the two citations still don't meet ], but I am now convinced a reliable source does exists. Actually, that new second source might be, but the link is dead. Can you fix that? Also, that link to the town website is not a ], however, the link suggests the information comes from the Brownstone Historical Society. A direct reference to their publishing of this history would likely be WP:Reliable Source, but the town website is not. Anyways, if you have any questions feel free to ask. --<span style="font-family:Georgia;">]</span> <span style="font-family:Verdana;">(])</span> 21:28, 11 August 2014 (UTC) | |||
| == ] == | == ] == | ||
Revision as of 01:43, 12 September 2014
RealClearPolitics
Look, I don't what to get into another dispute about this. My only concern is that the source does not say that they are conservative but that they have the same concerns conservatives have. Whether or not you agree isn't really an issue, because that's my position. So what can we agree on in terms of wording that would satisfy both of us? I'm fine saying they are conservative leaning if there is a source for that. Heck, I'm fine with saying it was founded by conservatives if there is a better source that says so explicitly. So what language would you propose?--v/r - TP 21:30, 12 August 2014 (UTC)
- I saw the revert, but haven't had time to fully check out what's going on again. I was under the impression that it was agreed to leave in the descriptor, but evidently I was wrong. I do know this has been going on for the past 6-7 years or so, with the descriptor being there most of that time. I'll have to check it out and see. Dave Dial (talk) 22:03, 12 August 2014 (UTC)
- The last I remember on the issue was that it was removed and we went to dispute resolution, we all left comments but the DR volunteer was inactive and the case was eventually archived.--v/r - TP 00:35, 13 August 2014 (UTC)
United Parcel Service
This was not a significant edit, but I think that reverting my edit to "Grumman Olson" is wrong. I changed "Grumman Olson" to "Morgan Olson" as the company/product name changed more than 10 years ago (2003). These vehicles are not only old vehicles - brand new Morgan Olson vehicles are being purchased by UPS today. Further, the link "Grumman Olson" takes us to the Morgan Olson article. A google search for Grumman Olson does the same. If the term "Grumman Olson" needs to be mentioned anywhere then it's only on the Morgan Olson page as part of that company's history. Dariomur (talk) 04:06, 15 August 2014 (UTC)
- Dariomur, yes, that is why I corrected myself 3 minutes later with the 'oops' edit summary. Then I fixed the wikilink to the Utilimaster Corporation article. So I think all is as it should be, unless you see some other problem with the article. Thanks. Dave Dial (talk) 13:22, 15 August 2014 (UTC)
Didn't see the correction at the time, sorry. All's well, thanks. Dariomur (talk) 01:13, 18 August 2014 (UTC)
- No problem, I definitely mistakenly reverted you and you must have received that message. Thanks for the messages. Dave Dial (talk) 01:45, 18 August 2014 (UTC)
Rudolf Hess: Revision history
Okay, you bumped my unfinished work. Now you're obliged to engage on the talk page! No hard feelings, I look forward to continuing the discussion. Womby838 (talk) 04:32, 19 August 2014 (UTC)
Mortal Kombat vs Marsha Kinder
Not content with the fact that critical theory is already Marxist she adds even more Marxism to it, and is a feminist too. An yes, Marxist feminism is a thing. --SNAAAAKE!! (talk) 04:14, 3 September 2014 (UTC)
Also don't remove 12 kilobytes of content to make a point of disagreeing with 2 words. --SNAAAAKE!! (talk) 04:16, 3 September 2014 (UTC)
- No, do not make mass changes to articles without an edit summary. Most especially, do not add descriptors of people that can be controversial without sourcing. And Talk page consensus. Dave Dial (talk) 04:18, 3 September 2014 (UTC)
- No, do not mass reverts CONTEST THE FUCKING THINGS YOU DISAGREE FUCK. --SNAAAAKE!! (talk) 04:20, 3 September 2014 (UTC)
Is it really hard to remove smething manually? Is it? --SNAAAAKE!! (talk) 04:23, 3 September 2014 (UTC)
- Is it hard to not sneak in your unsourced anti-feminist bullshit into articles? More editors should keep their eyes on you. You are a detriment to the project, and very much so. Dave Dial (talk) 04:27, 3 September 2014 (UTC)