User talk:RaseaC
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
RaseaC, what is your problem with the Only Fools and Horses episode summaries? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.141.102.66 (talk) 09:58, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
- Hi, I wonder if it would be worth adding {{fact}} tags to the particular parts of these articles that are potentially disputable - have tried to do this on The Sky's the Limit (Only Fools and Horses). Have to admit when I see these top-of-page tags I find it helpful to have some indication of which parts need particular attention (although I reserve maximum irritation for the tags that should have supporting discussion... and have none!). It could be argued that a large part of these articles (the synopsis) is referenced by the episode itself with just a few bits that are more difficult to verify so there would be some benefit in highlighting these. Halsteadk (talk) 22:55, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
Contents |
[edit] Red Light Camera
I added some references. Now, it sounds better--Larno Man (talk) 05:56, 22 February 2008 (UTC).
[edit] B&Q Products
Care to tell me why a list of the products the DIY store sells is not needed?!? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.207.14.197 (talk) 12:14, 22 March 2008 (UTC)
-
- Replied on user's talk page.RaseaC (talk) 18:52, 22 March 2008 (UTC)
[edit] IP "vandal"
No, it indeed had to be said; thanks. I'll get back to you later. --M1ss1ontomars2k4 (talk) 00:24, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Threatening users with a block.
Please don't do it - especially when you are incorrect about policy.[1]
Any editor who is not the creator of a page may remove a speedy tag from it. Thanks the_undertow talk 22:07, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
- Instead of threatening them with a block, so as to not scare of new editors, maybe you could link them to the policy page about removal of tags? That might teach them something, and encourage them to stay. the_undertow talk 22:50, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
- I agree with you. When I started, all I did was vandalfighting, at it gets tough. Thank God for VP, right? the_undertow talk 22:57, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
[edit] There were complaints
that the lead focused too much on the financial success of Harry Potter and not enough on JK Rowling. So I shifted the balance a little. Serendipodous 11:38, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
