| Revision as of 05:00, 26 February 2008 view sourceDorftrottel (talk | contribs)14,762 edits →warning: new section← Previous edit | Revision as of 05:02, 26 February 2008 view source CvyvvZkmSUDowVf (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers25,542 edits →warning: someone has a learning problemNext edit → | ||
| Line 19: | Line 19: | ||
| :My ; you missed the whole point. ] (]) 10:59, 22 February 2008 (UTC) | :My ; you missed the whole point. ] (]) 10:59, 22 February 2008 (UTC) | ||
| == warning == | |||
| Do '''not''' me "moron" again. I was just responding to your edit summary , adding a comment on your turned-down proposal since I missed the chance to comment on it in the original discussion. '''D'''or'''ft'''ro'<!-- -->''tt'''el (]) 05:00, ], 200<!--DT-->8 | |||
Revision as of 05:02, 26 February 2008
 Archives | |
|
|
Archive box
Please note that some articles have additional information in their "manual" archive boxes, such as date ranges, issues addressed within the archive and so on. I have reverted your change in the archive style at Talk:Albert Einstein (I hope you don't mind). Anyway, I trust you will use sound judgement on whether an automatic archive box works for a particular talk page or not. Cheers, Silly rabbit (talk) 04:28, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
- I updated Talk:Albert Einstein to use the "archive banner" template again. I think you'll like the improvements I made. Thanks for your suggestion. Timneu22 (talk) 14:35, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks! Silly rabbit (talk) 14:51, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
Rickey Henderson
I completely agree with your comment to this. Please see my comment, and then based off of that - shall we ask for a reassessment? - Milk's Favorite Cookie 18:59, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
- I added more notes to it. I think they should just add the {{fact}} tags and then we'd have a starting point. Otherwise, it is just vague -- you need more references, but I won't tell you where. How is that helpful? ;-) Timneu22 (talk) 11:29, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
Copyvio
Regarding your assertion that copyvio tags aren't necessary... copyright infringement is a very serious issue and must be dealt with swiftly and properly. I'm sure you didn't insert copyrighted material in the article, however I find it worrisome that you object to copyvio tags being placed on articles that clearly are in violation of legal copyrights. Please review our policies regarding copyrights. Thanks. /Blaxthos ( t / c ) 20:17, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
- My reply; you missed the whole point. Timneu22 (talk) 10:59, 22 February 2008 (UTC)