| Revision as of 21:43, 29 January 2015 editChaheel Riens (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers38,625 edits reply← Previous edit |
Latest revision as of 14:25, 3 January 2025 edit undoClueBot III (talk | contribs)Bots1,385,862 editsm Archiving 1 discussion to User talk:Chaheel Riens/Archive 1. (BOT)Tag: Replaced |
| (922 intermediate revisions by more than 100 users not shown) |
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
|
|
{{User:ClueBot III/ArchiveThis |
|
Because the fact that it started in Liverpool is well documented (as stated), whilst the dubious claim that it was already on the way elsewhere isn't. As i have already said, I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt and a chance to cite your info. if you want to keep it then cite it. You could attempt to argue your point under your 'Ghmyrtle' username, you know. |
|
|
|
|archiveprefix=User talk:Chaheel Riens/Archive |
|
|
|
|
|
|format= %%i |
|
#The issue is your poor choice of words. You cannot make a claim that something started in place "A" and at the same time claim that it was already present in place "B". Additionally, the "Perry boys" source states that Manchester also had a casual scene form the middle of the seventies. |
|
|
|
|age=1080 |
|
#I couldn't argue the point under my 'Ghmyrtle' username, because it's not my username. My username is Chaheel Riens. Accusing editors of sock-puppetry is unlikely to win you friends and influence people to your argument. I'll let it slide this time and not take it to ANI, but you might as well consider yourself warned. ] (]) 21:43, 29 January 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|maxarchsize=1000 |
|
|
|numberstart=1 |
|
|
|archivebox=yes |
|
|
}} |
