| Revision as of 21:57, 20 August 2004 editOrtolan88 (talk | contribs)10,369 edits the more informative the edit summary, the fewer questions raised← Previous edit | Revision as of 22:00, 20 August 2004 edit undoVioletriga (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users37,361 editsmNo edit summaryNext edit → | ||
| Line 9: | Line 9: | ||
| Works for me. The words "superfluous and miscoded" in the comment would have warned me off my question. ] 21:57, 20 Aug 2004 (UTC) | Works for me. The words "superfluous and miscoded" in the comment would have warned me off my question. ] 21:57, 20 Aug 2004 (UTC) | ||
| :You're right - I did mention it in an edit on the main article itself but should have done it on each altered article. ] 22:00, 20 Aug 2004 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 22:00, 20 August 2004
Is there anybody out there?
Yep, me. I'm aware of the eclampsia problem. Unfortunately, I know too little about it to properly write it up from scratch. Do you have any information I could fall back on? Nice review articles from good medical journals are always welcome. JFW | T@lk 16:11, 19 Aug 2004 (UTC)
Why delete links to Lists of fictional animals? There has to be a pretty good reason for removing links in Misplaced Pages, which is all about links. Ortolan88 21:03, 20 Aug 2004 (UTC)
- Because the only content of that article is a failed redirect to Category:Lists of fictional animals and all the relevant articles are in that category anyway. violet/riga 21:09, 20 Aug 2004 (UTC)
Works for me. The words "superfluous and miscoded" in the comment would have warned me off my question. Ortolan88 21:57, 20 Aug 2004 (UTC)
- You're right - I did mention it in an edit on the main article itself but should have done it on each altered article. violet/riga 22:00, 20 Aug 2004 (UTC)