Revision as of 21:28, 21 May 2015 editEpeefleche (talk | contribs)Pending changes reviewers150,049 edits →Repeated deletions of inlines: new section← Previous edit | Revision as of 07:30, 30 May 2015 edit undoLibertarian12111971 (talk | contribs)5,635 edits →Repeated deletions of inlinesNext edit → | ||
Line 5: | Line 5: | ||
An editor has now repeatedly ... in a slow-motion edit war ... deleted inlines to redirects. Asserting, without basis, that they are "useless". They are in fact useful. They alert readers here to the fact that there is discussion of the subjects at the page in question. Which, of course, is the entire purpose of redirects. --] (]) 21:28, 21 May 2015 (UTC) | An editor has now repeatedly ... in a slow-motion edit war ... deleted inlines to redirects. Asserting, without basis, that they are "useless". They are in fact useful. They alert readers here to the fact that there is discussion of the subjects at the page in question. Which, of course, is the entire purpose of redirects. --] (]) 21:28, 21 May 2015 (UTC) | ||
:Why not just guide your way through the article? That's just pure laziness. ] (]) 07:30, 30 May 2015 (UTC) |
Revision as of 07:30, 30 May 2015
Islam Unassessed | ||||||||||
|
Arizona Unassessed | ||||||||||
|
Repeated deletions of inlines
An editor has now repeatedly ... in a slow-motion edit war ... deleted inlines to redirects. Asserting, without basis, that they are "useless". They are in fact useful. They alert readers here to the fact that there is discussion of the subjects at the page in question. Which, of course, is the entire purpose of redirects. --Epeefleche (talk) 21:28, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
- Why not just guide your way through the article? That's just pure laziness. Libertarian12111971 (talk) 07:30, 30 May 2015 (UTC)