4,336
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
mLine 130:
Line 130: − +
User talk:Cоnservative (view source)
Revision as of 16:35, February 23, 2009
, 16:35, February 23, 2009edit old user's sig - there are 31 pages linking to non-existant "request for admin thanks to that
*I am barely recovered, and do we really need to engage in some silly Sysop War of reverts? Please, some Bureaucrat lock it up. --[[User:TK|<small>Sysop-</small>TK]] <sub>[[User_talk:TK|/MyTalk]]</sub> 21:46, 27 April 2007 (EDT)
*I am barely recovered, and do we really need to engage in some silly Sysop War of reverts? Please, some Bureaucrat lock it up. --[[User:TK|<small>Sysop-</small>TK]] <sub>[[User_talk:TK|/MyTalk]]</sub> 21:46, 27 April 2007 (EDT)
::TK, sysops can lock articles as well, not just 'crats. Secondly, one of the ''major problems'' with CP is that so many articles are "protected". --[[User:Hacker|Hacker]]<sup><code>([[User talk:Hacker|Write some code]] • [[Conservapedia:Requests for adminship#Support|Support my RfA]])</code></sup> 07:40, 28 April 2007 (EDT)
::TK, sysops can lock articles as well, not just 'crats. Secondly, one of the ''major problems'' with CP is that so many articles are "protected". --[[User:Hacker|Hacker]]<sup><code>([[User talk:Hacker|Write some code]] • Conservapedia:Requests for adminship#Support|Support my RfA)</code></sup> 07:40, 28 April 2007 (EDT)
:::TK is worried about a possible edit war between two sysops, so I gather he was asking for a Bureaucrat to lock it to stop sysops editing it. I doubt that's even possible, and I don't believe it's necessary anyway, but I think that's what he had in mind. [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 09:05, 28 April 2007 (EDT)
:::TK is worried about a possible edit war between two sysops, so I gather he was asking for a Bureaucrat to lock it to stop sysops editing it. I doubt that's even possible, and I don't believe it's necessary anyway, but I think that's what he had in mind. [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 09:05, 28 April 2007 (EDT)