This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Vaoverland (talk | contribs) at 09:48, 2 August 2007 (worked on your suggestions about the lead). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Revision as of 09:48, 2 August 2007 by Vaoverland (talk | contribs) (worked on your suggestions about the lead)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)You basically gutted my edits to the lead of the Michael Vick article stating "The lead already refers to the controversy. Elaborating the controversy can be (and is) done in the body. This is more appropriate of an encylopedic article.)" Yet, you removed all mention of the controversy from the lead. So, you obviously got confused (or something). I put it back like it was, admittedly could be briefer, but not by removing all mention of the current controversy, which goes well beyond mentioning the criminal charges already filed. Vaoverland 14:21, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
- I received your message on my Talk page and I have gone back in and worked on your suggestions about the lead. Being brief is an area of growth for me. <gr> This and related ones have been a tough articles to work with lately, and I did not intend to tromp on your efforts to help, which my comment above may imply. I hope you will see the edits I made after your message as collaboration, as it is one of the things I like the most about WP. So, stay with us and feel free to contact me again as you may feel helpful. Yours in the Historic Triangle of Virginia, Mark, aka Vaoverland 09:48, 2 August 2007 (UTC)