Jump to content

User talk:95.145.130.94: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Line 4: Line 4:
:It is not. See the [[WP:MOS]]. Stop undoing my corrections before it becomes vandalism. [[Special:Contributions/95.145.130.94|95.145.130.94]] ([[User talk:95.145.130.94#top|talk]]) 17:53, 7 October 2017 (UTC)
:It is not. See the [[WP:MOS]]. Stop undoing my corrections before it becomes vandalism. [[Special:Contributions/95.145.130.94|95.145.130.94]] ([[User talk:95.145.130.94#top|talk]]) 17:53, 7 October 2017 (UTC)
::Even if you are correct you cannot be utterly inconsistent and just change one instance of it and leave the dozens of other instances in all other AU election articles as-is. [[User:Timeshift9|Timeshift]] ([[User talk:Timeshift9|talk]]) 17:59, 7 October 2017 (UTC)
::Even if you are correct you cannot be utterly inconsistent and just change one instance of it and leave the dozens of other instances in all other AU election articles as-is. [[User:Timeshift9|Timeshift]] ([[User talk:Timeshift9|talk]]) 17:59, 7 October 2017 (UTC)
:::I am correct, and it's not my responsibility to fix everything. If articles are inconsistent, that is the fault of the people who didn't bother to read the MOS properly, like yourself. Your edit warring is now problematic. Time for a report. [[Special:Contributions/95.145.130.94|95.145.130.94]] ([[User talk:95.145.130.94#top|talk]]) 18:19, 7 October 2017 (UTC)

Revision as of 18:19, 7 October 2017

Bolding of federal election is correct. See Australian federal election, 2004 and Australian federal election, 2010. Thanks and goodbye. Timeshift (talk) 17:47, 7 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It is not. See the WP:MOS. Stop undoing my corrections before it becomes vandalism. 95.145.130.94 (talk) 17:53, 7 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Even if you are correct you cannot be utterly inconsistent and just change one instance of it and leave the dozens of other instances in all other AU election articles as-is. Timeshift (talk) 17:59, 7 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I am correct, and it's not my responsibility to fix everything. If articles are inconsistent, that is the fault of the people who didn't bother to read the MOS properly, like yourself. Your edit warring is now problematic. Time for a report. 95.145.130.94 (talk) 18:19, 7 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]