Misplaced Pages

User talk:Morton devonshire: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 20:53, 26 September 2006 view sourceMorton devonshire (talk | contribs)6,576 edits Arbcom has been rejected -- archiving← Previous edit Revision as of 11:51, 27 September 2006 view source Runcorn (talk | contribs)8,425 edits Further to my previous commentsNext edit →
Line 27: Line 27:
|}<!--Template:Archivebox--> |}<!--Template:Archivebox-->
---- ----

== Further to my previous comments ==

I see that you have archived my previous message and have not acted on any of it. This is not in your own best interests. I am quite impartial as to the content dispute, and am solely interested in maintaining Misplaced Pages. You cannot be seen as a credible participant in the content dispute while you have ] in its present form. It would be a good idea to withdraw your remark here.

And you cannot refuse to take part in an Arbcom case. You need to tsake it seriously.--] 11:51, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

Revision as of 11:51, 27 September 2006

Please leave a new message.
File:Mao-tiananmen-portrait.jpg This user is a member of the Counter-Propaganda Unit

   Discussion Conventions

  • Please post new messages at the bottom of the page to prevent confusion.
  • Please sign your comments. Type ~~~~ after your text or use the edit toolbar.
  • Please use section headings to separate conversation topics.
  • Caveat: Please keep in mind that I don't necessarily agree with the thoughts expressed by others on this page.
Archive
Archives

Archive 1
Archive 2
Archive 3
Archive 4


Further to my previous comments

I see that you have archived my previous message and have not acted on any of it. This is not in your own best interests. I am quite impartial as to the content dispute, and am solely interested in maintaining Misplaced Pages. You cannot be seen as a credible participant in the content dispute while you have this page in its present form. It would be a good idea to withdraw your remark here.

And you cannot refuse to take part in an Arbcom case. You need to tsake it seriously.--Runcorn 11:51, 27 September 2006 (UTC)