Revision as of 12:02, 10 September 2006 editERcheck (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Administrators44,345 edits Your ANI posting← Previous edit | Revision as of 15:43, 10 September 2006 edit undoPropol (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users1,703 edits →Your ANI postingNext edit → | ||
Line 84: | Line 84: | ||
Propol, I've responded to your ]. I hope both parties will be open to dispute resolution and that both of the articles will become balanced. — ] (]) 12:02, 10 September 2006 (UTC) | Propol, I've responded to your ]. I hope both parties will be open to dispute resolution and that both of the articles will become balanced. — ] (]) 12:02, 10 September 2006 (UTC) | ||
:Thanks for the reponse. I also provided an update there. ] 15:43, 10 September 2006 (UTC) |
Revision as of 15:43, 10 September 2006
Hi.
Welcome
|
roskam
Hi Propol,
I'm wondering why you oppose adding the Josh Marshall text to the Roskam article. Feel free to reply here — goethean ॐ 18:54, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
Peter Roskam
I was asked, as I set out, in a bit more detail, at Talk:Peter Roskam, to act as an advocate for Joehazelton relative to the Roskam article, and I have attempted to delineate precisely those issues about which Joe is concerned and to frame several questions rather clearly in order that a focused discussion might be undertaken. On Joe's behalf, and in view of my appreciation for the advancement of the project, I'd ask that, at your leisure, you offer your views at the Roskam talk page. Thanks very kindly in advance! Joe 05:02, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
- I posted a response at Talk:Peter Roskam. Thanks. Propol 18:08, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
Your ANI posting
Propol, I've responded to your ANI posting. I hope both parties will be open to dispute resolution and that both of the articles will become balanced. — ERcheck (talk) 12:02, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
- Thanks for the reponse. I also provided an update there. Propol 15:43, 10 September 2006 (UTC)