| Revision as of 02:19, 25 December 2007 edit71.167.76.13 (talk)No edit summary← Previous edit | Revision as of 02:20, 25 December 2007 edit undo71.167.76.13 (talk)No edit summaryNext edit → | ||
| Line 5: | Line 5: | ||
| I agree that trimming in-universe summary is important, but sourcing does not seem to me to be a useful way to approach the matter, especially as sourcing is, by longstanding convention, not an issue with the sort of material being used here. I think a more productive approach would be to simply remove it per ]. ] (]) 04:37, 24 December 2007 (UTC) | I agree that trimming in-universe summary is important, but sourcing does not seem to me to be a useful way to approach the matter, especially as sourcing is, by longstanding convention, not an issue with the sort of material being used here. I think a more productive approach would be to simply remove it per ]. ] (]) 04:37, 24 December 2007 (UTC) | ||
| == Edit Waring== | |||
| {{{icon|] }}}You currently appear to be engaged in an ]{{{{{subst|}}}#if:Pope John Paul II|  according to the reverts you have made on ]}}. Note that the ] prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the ]. If you continue, you may be ] from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a ] among editors. --] (]) 02:19, 25 December 2007 (UTC) | {{{icon|] }}}You currently appear to be engaged in an ]{{{{{subst|}}}#if:Pope John Paul II|  according to the reverts you have made on ]}}. Note that the ] prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the ]. If you continue, you may be ] from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a ] among editors. --] (]) 02:19, 25 December 2007 (UTC) | ||
Revision as of 02:20, 25 December 2007
 Archives |
Cleaning up government agencies article
I agree that trimming in-universe summary is important, but sourcing does not seem to me to be a useful way to approach the matter, especially as sourcing is, by longstanding convention, not an issue with the sort of material being used here. I think a more productive approach would be to simply remove it per WP:FICT. Phil Sandifer (talk) 04:37, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
Edit Waring
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Pope John Paul II. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. --71.167.76.13 (talk) 02:19, 25 December 2007 (UTC)