Difference between revisions of "Talk:Connecticut"
From Conservapedia
(reply to LiamG) |
(→Useful article: new section) |
||
| (2 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
What's the sense of [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Connecticut&curid=8177&diff=568821&oldid=568341 this reversion]? Isn't it better to put the links in reference format? [[User:LiamG|LiamG]] 12:45, 25 November 2008 (EST) | What's the sense of [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Connecticut&curid=8177&diff=568821&oldid=568341 this reversion]? Isn't it better to put the links in reference format? [[User:LiamG|LiamG]] 12:45, 25 November 2008 (EST) | ||
:It was already reverted, but you would have been fine to go ahead with the revert. The user seems to revert without rhyme or reason. -[[User:Foxtrot|Foxtrot]] 01:09, 26 November 2008 (EST) | :It was already reverted, but you would have been fine to go ahead with the revert. The user seems to revert without rhyme or reason. -[[User:Foxtrot|Foxtrot]] 01:09, 26 November 2008 (EST) | ||
| + | |||
| + | Hey for famous people 5 out of 6 is not bad. - jowns | ||
| + | |||
| + | ==Reference quality== | ||
| + | A reference on this page (currently #3) points to answers.com, which somehow doesn't seem like a reputable, citable source. can we get something better than this? --[[User:DavidB4|David B]] ([[User talk:DavidB4|talk]]) 01:15, 19 April 2016 (EDT) | ||
| + | |||
| + | == Useful article == | ||
| + | |||
| + | This article might be useful if we decide to expand upon the state's political situation: [https://thehill.com/opinion/campaign/416862-did-revisionist-history-help-keep-connecticut-dems-in-power] --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 14:23, 17 November 2018 (EST) | ||
Latest revision as of 19:23, November 17, 2018
What's the sense of this reversion? Isn't it better to put the links in reference format? LiamG 12:45, 25 November 2008 (EST)
- It was already reverted, but you would have been fine to go ahead with the revert. The user seems to revert without rhyme or reason. -Foxtrot 01:09, 26 November 2008 (EST)
Hey for famous people 5 out of 6 is not bad. - jowns
Reference quality
A reference on this page (currently #3) points to answers.com, which somehow doesn't seem like a reputable, citable source. can we get something better than this? --David B (talk) 01:15, 19 April 2016 (EDT)
Useful article
This article might be useful if we decide to expand upon the state's political situation: [1] --1990'sguy (talk) 14:23, 17 November 2018 (EST)
