User talk:1garden: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 06:08, 26 March 2007

This is my user page

Uncited material

Thanks for noticing uncited material at the Waldorf education article. Usually the first thing to do is to put on a fact tag, {{fact}}, which is really a request to supply a citation. If after a few weeks nothing is done about this, it's probably time to delete the section. I have rewritten the section with citations to the foundation that supports the school; have a look and see what you think (and make any changes you feel are necessary).

I'm wondering why you sometimes change the internal format of articles to fixed line-lengths? Does this work better for your browser? It seems unusual for Wikipedia, but I'm not sure if there is any sort of standard. Hgilbert 20:59, 25 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

BDORT page

Hello 1garden. Thanks very much for answering the request for comments I put up. There have been many problems with this article over many months and a lot of dispute. I would really appreciate your input. I am preparing a list and explanation of points/changes that I think are necessary and very clear to see. Please dont be influenced negatively towards me personally by me being banned from editing this article. If you read through the Arbitration case with a neutral 'eye' I believe you can see that I had many clear and valid points - and the Arbitration Committee does not really focus on content. I will put a note here when I have prepared the list of points about the current content which I will do very soon. Thanks again for your input.Richardmalter 06:08, 26 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 6: / Line 6: @@
 I'm wondering why you sometimes change the internal format of articles to fixed line-lengths? Does this work better for your browser? It seems unusual for Wikipedia, but I'm not sure if there is any sort of standard. [[User:Hgilbert|Hgilbert]] 20:59, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
+== BDORT page ==
+Hello 1garden. Thanks very much for answering the request for comments I put up. There have been many problems with this article over many months and a lot of dispute. I would really appreciate your input. I am preparing a list and explanation of points/changes that I think are necessary and very clear to see. Please dont be influenced negatively towards me personally by me being banned from editing this article. If you read through the Arbitration case with a neutral 'eye' I believe you can see that I had many clear and valid points - and the Arbitration Committee does not really focus on content. I will put a note here when I have prepared the list of points about the current content which I will do very soon. Thanks again for your input.[[User:Richardmalter|Richardmalter]] 06:08, 26 March 2007 (UTC)