This is an old revision of this page, as edited by SlamDiego (talk | contribs) at 17:54, 5 June 2007 (Moved stale stuff to archive.). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Revision as of 17:54, 5 June 2007 by SlamDiego (talk | contribs) (Moved stale stuff to archive.)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)| Contents |
|---|
| Orc Hives |
| Some earlier messages may be found |
| · in the first orc hive, |
| · in the second orc hive, |
| · in the third orc hive, |
| · in the fourth orc hive, |
| · in the fifth orc hive, |
| · in the sixth orc hive, |
| · in the seventh orc hive, or |
| · in the eighth orc hive. |
Request for Mediation
|
A Request for Mediation to which you are a party has been accepted. You can find more information on the mediation subpage, Misplaced Pages:Requests for mediation/Phi Kappa Psi.
|
I have agreed to mediate this dispute. Please take a look at the preliminary questions at Misplaced Pages talk:Requests for mediation/Phi Kappa Psi. Thanks, WjBscribe 02:34, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
“unsourced”
- Please don't confuse a datum lacking a footnote with one that is necessarily unsourced. (Note now that most of the article on Willem Mengelberg remains unfootnoted.)
- Please use the {{fact}} tag, rather than summarily removing content that is-or-is-believed to be unsourced. The tag can provoke helpful edits from users who would otherwise not know that they can make a contribution, and it means that intermediate edits don't foul what should be a simple process.
—SlamDiego←T 14:43, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
- yes, but there's no sense in permitting more unreferenced data just because the rest of it is unsourced. anyway the point is moot, as i provided the necessary link myself. --emerson7 | Talk 16:50, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
- You provided a footnote from a source that was already provided at the end of the article (by me). Meanwhile, the rest of the article is unfootnoted, yet sourced. —SlamDiego←T 11:08, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
- ...same net effect. --emerson7 | Talk 11:35, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
- A rather silly net effect: A footnote for the pension datum, and only for the pension datum. —SlamDiego←T 11:39, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
- ...same net effect. --emerson7 | Talk 11:35, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
- You provided a footnote from a source that was already provided at the end of the article (by me). Meanwhile, the rest of the article is unfootnoted, yet sourced. —SlamDiego←T 11:08, 5 June 2007 (UTC)