Revision as of 22:35, 26 October 2014 editEChastain (talk | contribs)2,665 edits →arbcom: re← Previous edit | Revision as of 22:49, 26 October 2014 edit undoEvergreenFir (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Administrators129,239 editsNo edit summaryNext edit → | ||
Line 84: | Line 84: | ||
@] There are no ] in ] supporting your claim that it's an academic concept. No reason for your revert. ] (]) 22:35, 26 October 2014 (UTC) | @] There are no ] in ] supporting your claim that it's an academic concept. No reason for your revert. ] (]) 22:35, 26 October 2014 (UTC) | ||
:There are. Read ]. Also see ]. Attempting dispute resolution. ] ] <small>Please {{]}}</small> 22:49, 26 October 2014 (UTC) |
Revision as of 22:49, 26 October 2014
Welcome
|
arbcom
You are clearly editing in response to Wikipedia_talk:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Gender_Gap_Task_Force. Please follow Misplaced Pages's guidelines and rules, specifically regarding WP:RS. You do not seem to be adhering to a neutral point of view. EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{re}} 22:25, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
@User:EvergreenFir There are no reliable sources in Mansplaining supporting your claim that it's an academic concept. No reason for your revert. EChastain (talk) 22:35, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
- There are. Read WP:LEAD. Also see Talk:Mansplaining#Meme. Attempting dispute resolution. EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{re}} 22:49, 26 October 2014 (UTC)