67
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 67:
Line 67: + + +
→Vandalism: Vandalism by RShlafly
I have reverted edits* made by RSchlafly, as I consider them to be tantamount to vandalism. The material was well-sourced, relevant to the article as it stood, and fitted in well. There was no reason given for its removal. If this behavour persists, I shall report the user to a Sysop and request that he or she be banned from conservapedia.
I have reverted edits* made by RSchlafly, as I consider them to be tantamount to vandalism. The material was well-sourced, relevant to the article as it stood, and fitted in well. There was no reason given for its removal. If this behavour persists, I shall report the user to a Sysop and request that he or she be banned from conservapedia.
* (*) Actually, it's not quite true that I have simply reverted the edits. I have actually incorporated the amterial into the article. '''OfficerDibble'''.
* (*) Actually, it's not quite true that I have simply reverted the edits. I have actually incorporated the amterial into the article. '''OfficerDibble'''.
:: I have now reverted two uncommented upon edits by RSchlafly. I shall report this behaviour to a Sysop.