Changes

Jump to navigation Jump to search
→‎More content: Edits reverted without explanation; please justify the edit.
Line 214: Line 214:     
Ok, there being no objections, I'm going to go ahead and re-add the portion that was deleted. If anyone can come up with a reason to revert it, again, then let me know. [[User:ShawnJ|ShawnJ]] 22:38, 27 November 2008 (EST)
 
Ok, there being no objections, I'm going to go ahead and re-add the portion that was deleted. If anyone can come up with a reason to revert it, again, then let me know. [[User:ShawnJ|ShawnJ]] 22:38, 27 November 2008 (EST)
 +
 +
: I see that three different edits have recently been made by three different editors, and all three have been reverted ''without explanation'', despite none of them being vandalism or obviously inappropriate.
 +
: As for ShawnJ's edit, my view is that the added information is not particularly relevant.  I'd like to see some justification for it being in the article.
 +
: [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 06:23, 4 December 2008 (EST)
nsTeam2RO, nsTeam2RW, nsTeam2_talkRO, nsTeam2_talkRW
13,254

edits

Navigation menu