| Revision as of 03:50, 8 November 2007 editPerspicacite (talk | contribs)6,334 edits →Higher resolution: Rhodesia← Previous edit | Revision as of 07:09, 8 November 2007 edit undoAlice (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users2,878 edits →RhodesiaNext edit → | ||
| Line 35: | Line 35: | ||
| ==Rhodesia== | ==Rhodesia== | ||
| Not sure if you saw yet, but I reverted all recent edits to ], including yours. Some of the changes, and I'm not sure who made them, came across as very POV, specifically "uncivilized tribal population." There were other changes which were pov to a lesser degree. As a common courtesy I am letting you know why I felt a reversion was necessary. ] 03:50, 8 November 2007 (UTC) | Not sure if you saw yet, but I reverted all recent edits to ], including yours. Some of the changes, and I'm not sure who made them, came across as very POV, specifically "uncivilized tribal population." There were other changes which were pov to a lesser degree. As a common courtesy I am letting you know why I felt a reversion was necessary. ] 03:50, 8 November 2007 (UTC) | ||
| I think it is courteous, civil and helpful of Perspicacite to draw your attention to this revert of his (and implicitly clarify that he does not regard you, at least, as a vandal). | |||
| That being said, I have personally questioned why he feels he can not make substantive and constructive edits, perhaps editing or tagging or discussing those passages that he feels do not adequately summarize the cited sources - rather than make multiple reverts that re-introduce long-corrected errors, etc.] 07:09, 8 November 2007 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 07:09, 8 November 2007
- /Archive 1: material mostly over 1 month old
|
I will reply to messages wherever they are posted. If you write something here, my reply will also be here. If I have written something on someone else's talk page, I will be watching it for at least 5 days. Any article I have contributed to recently will be on my watchlist. |
Invitation
.svg) | You have been invited to join the Rhodesia task force, a collaborative effort focused on improving Misplaced Pages's coverage of Rhodesia. If you'd like to join, just add your name to the member list. Thanks for reading! |
Kintetsubuffalo. Thanks for the invitation. I will take a look at your group sometime soon. Bob BScar23625 08:16, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
About using the tabulator
Bob, the usual way of responding to comments on talk pages is to use the tabulator to intendent your remarks so that they seem to be below the previous texts. This is done in Misplaced Pages using : one or more times. Your way of putting your remarks to the talk page without intendation, but with italics, makes the discussion difficult to read. Please consider using the intendation instead. --MPorciusCato 13:20, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
MPorciusCato. Thankyou for the advice. I will bear that in mind. Bob BScar23625 13:22, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
Geting the truth.
Heres an exellent forum where you could debat all you like your thuoghts about the "inmorality" of Finland during WWII Just go to the section Winterwar/countinuation war, they also have a section where you could praise the USSR.--Posse72 16:32, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
Posse72. Thanks for that. I will take a look at it sometime. Bob BScar23625 16:36, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
Higher resolution
Could you plese provide Image:Smithy3.jpg in higher resolution? —V. Z. 19:05, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
VZ. I will see what I can do. It was taken by a friend of mine with cheap camera and the original is very poor quality. Bob BScar23625 09:01, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
OK. Thanks. —V. Z. 21:13, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
Rhodesia
Not sure if you saw yet, but I reverted all recent edits to Rhodesia, including yours. Some of the changes, and I'm not sure who made them, came across as very POV, specifically "uncivilized tribal population." There were other changes which were pov to a lesser degree. As a common courtesy I am letting you know why I felt a reversion was necessary. Perspicacite 03:50, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
I think it is courteous, civil and helpful of Perspicacite to draw your attention to this revert of his (and implicitly clarify that he does not regard you, at least, as a vandal).
That being said, I have personally questioned here why he feels he can not make substantive and constructive edits, perhaps editing or tagging or discussing those passages that he feels do not adequately summarize the cited sources - rather than make multiple reverts that re-introduce long-corrected errors, etc.Alice.S 07:09, 8 November 2007 (UTC)