| Revision as of 07:06, 15 September 2006 editHornplease (talk | contribs)9,260 edits →POV: qn← Previous edit | Revision as of 09:50, 15 September 2006 edit undoHkelkar (talk | contribs)7,279 edits →POVNext edit → | ||
| Line 11: | Line 11: | ||
| :::I dont believe Hkelkar needs to listen to someone who has declared hostilities already.] <font color = "blue"><sub>]</sub></font> 00:43, 15 September 2006 (UTC) | :::I dont believe Hkelkar needs to listen to someone who has declared hostilities already.] <font color = "blue"><sub>]</sub></font> 00:43, 15 September 2006 (UTC) | ||
| ::Thank you for that input. How precisely have I 'declared hostilities' when I clearly ask for a reply with good reasons? ] 07:06, 15 September 2006 (UTC) | ::Thank you for that input. How precisely have I 'declared hostilities' when I clearly ask for a reply with good reasons? ] 07:06, 15 September 2006 (UTC) | ||
| :::Hornplease you have unilaterally removed a completely legitimate report published by a notable journalist.There is ample precedent for putting columnist opinions (provided they are stated as such) on wikipedia so They should be put back.] 09:50, 15 September 2006 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 09:50, 15 September 2006
Title
I think the title should be as per Misplaced Pages:Naming conventions. →Talk 18:50, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
POV
Please try and restrict the POV in the investigations section. There's a lot of selective quoting happening there. Hornplease 19:28, 14 September 2006 (UTC) Also, I am not reverting again, but will do so tomorrow: the arrests are the most important part of the investigation section! HKelkar, please stop attempting to bury them at the bottom, because very shortly I will have to stop assuming good faith here. Your edits insisting that the forensic report came before cannot justify, at the very least, putting the past history of Malegaon aead of the arrests. Unless you reply with good reasons, I will revert again tomorrow. Hornplease 23:52, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
- You have declared that you will violate wikipedia rules and you have little regard for them. I thank you for your honesty at least.Hkelkar 00:07, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
- Furthermore, you are slanting bias into the article by lopsiding the sequence of events.I will put an NPOV tag on this section.Hkelkar 00:07, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
- Eh? I have not declared that I will violate the rules! I am trying hard not to. I gave you an opportunity to make your case, while leaving it in your preferred version! How is that a violation? Instead of putting an NPOV tag on it, try and work it out here. I dont want the sequence 'lopsided', I just think that the analysis of the investigation should follow the actual action taken. Hornplease 00:15, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
- I dont believe Hkelkar needs to listen to someone who has declared hostilities already.Bakaman Bakatalk 00:43, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
- Thank you for that input. How precisely have I 'declared hostilities' when I clearly ask for a reply with good reasons? Hornplease 07:06, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
- Hornplease you have unilaterally removed a completely legitimate report published by a notable journalist.There is ample precedent for putting columnist opinions (provided they are stated as such) on wikipedia so They should be put back.Hkelkar 09:50, 15 September 2006 (UTC)