This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Vernon39 (talk | contribs) at 09:27, 13 September 2006 (query on reversion of JG Bennett). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Revision as of 09:27, 13 September 2006 by Vernon39 (talk | contribs) (query on reversion of JG Bennett)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Archives Note: The links below are permanent links to the correct versions of the archived talk pages. Any "newer" versions of these pages may have been compromised. |
|---|
| 1 2 3 |
Richardson
Hey John254 -- thanks for quickly reverting the recent vandalism on the Richardson, Texas page. Much appreciated... --nathanbeach 22:48, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
Your edit to Misplaced Pages:Process is Important
You added: However, some editors give a narrow construction to Ignore all rules, and claim that process should be adhered to unless there is a compelling justification for ignoring all rules. It is said that the repeated deletion and undeletion of this essay which began with a speedy deletion demonstrates the need to follow appropriate processes in most cases.
This doesn't make sense to me. Speedy deletion is performed hundreds of times every day. --Tony Sidaway 02:15, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
John G. Bennett page
Don't know why you regard my correction o "Woolrich" to "Woolwich" as vandalism!
Vernon White 09:27, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
____