Beaconboy, I have no idea what you're talking about. I did not "demand corrections", I did not "attack" anyone, and I certainly never said nor implied that anything in the section was a lie, except in your imagination. I simply pointed out that some passages, as written, made no sense, which is true, and did not require a reading of the source, grammar is not source-specific (even if meaning was, and therefore, would've required it to clarify the matter). Thanks again for your help. Nightscream ( talk) 15:40, 6 January 2015 (UTC)
Thank you for the kind words you left on my talk page! Wahrmund ( talk) 17:30, 18 November 2015 (UTC)
An IP editor has made a couple reverts here. He's not happy with citing the James Paul book. Do you have a copy of it so that a more exact citation can be given? I no longer have a copy. Wahrmund ( talk) 21:44, 29 March 2016 (UTC)
I will get out the book and cite the exact page.
Please do not add commentary, your own point of view, or your own personal analysis to Wikipedia articles, as you did to Christine Collins. Doing so violates Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy and breaches the formal tone expected in an encyclopedia. Thank you. NinjaRobotPirate ( talk) 19:19, 21 July 2018 (UTC)
What do you call it when someone ignores the truth as handed down by the State of Calfornia? That is not my commentary, point of view or my analysis............it is the truth. Is there no room for the truth in Wiki? As the article reads, it gives readers the false impression that the son was not murdered. Is there no room for these facts? Beaconboy ( talk) 19:50, 21 July 2018 (UTC)
Please do not add or change content, as you did at Adolph Rupp, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. Rockchalk 7 17 23:52, 6 July 2023 (UTC)
For starters I didn't even know I had that turned on, I have turned it off. Second, it's not unprofessional or threatening to ask you not to start an edit war. I ask that when I feel like reverts might be headed towards an edit war. It's nothing personal, it's just to avoid the frustration that comes with edit wars for both sides. My comments do not demean Adolph Rupp. I didn't say he was a terrible player or a horrible human being. I just stated his playing career did not meet Wikipedia's definition of notable. I reiterated this right here on your talk page. Yes I did learn from the other editor that was irrelevant for inclusion in the opening. Not a single thing I said to you was remotely close to threatening and I have gone back reviewed everything I said. This is your talk page and you're more than welcome to remove my comments but I will not be removing my comments myself because they were not wrong. I do not appreciate being wrongfully accused of a lack of professionalism or demeaning the subject of the article, especially in a hidden way like emailing me. Just let what happened go. You got your way and what you wanted is in the article. I will not be returning to this talk page about this subject because I'm done discussing this and was done with it a month and a half ago.--Rockchalk 7 17 04:36, 22 August 2023 (UTC)
Beaconboy, I have no idea what you're talking about. I did not "demand corrections", I did not "attack" anyone, and I certainly never said nor implied that anything in the section was a lie, except in your imagination. I simply pointed out that some passages, as written, made no sense, which is true, and did not require a reading of the source, grammar is not source-specific (even if meaning was, and therefore, would've required it to clarify the matter). Thanks again for your help. Nightscream ( talk) 15:40, 6 January 2015 (UTC)
Thank you for the kind words you left on my talk page! Wahrmund ( talk) 17:30, 18 November 2015 (UTC)
An IP editor has made a couple reverts here. He's not happy with citing the James Paul book. Do you have a copy of it so that a more exact citation can be given? I no longer have a copy. Wahrmund ( talk) 21:44, 29 March 2016 (UTC)
I will get out the book and cite the exact page.
Please do not add commentary, your own point of view, or your own personal analysis to Wikipedia articles, as you did to Christine Collins. Doing so violates Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy and breaches the formal tone expected in an encyclopedia. Thank you. NinjaRobotPirate ( talk) 19:19, 21 July 2018 (UTC)
What do you call it when someone ignores the truth as handed down by the State of Calfornia? That is not my commentary, point of view or my analysis............it is the truth. Is there no room for the truth in Wiki? As the article reads, it gives readers the false impression that the son was not murdered. Is there no room for these facts? Beaconboy ( talk) 19:50, 21 July 2018 (UTC)
Please do not add or change content, as you did at Adolph Rupp, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. Rockchalk 7 17 23:52, 6 July 2023 (UTC)
For starters I didn't even know I had that turned on, I have turned it off. Second, it's not unprofessional or threatening to ask you not to start an edit war. I ask that when I feel like reverts might be headed towards an edit war. It's nothing personal, it's just to avoid the frustration that comes with edit wars for both sides. My comments do not demean Adolph Rupp. I didn't say he was a terrible player or a horrible human being. I just stated his playing career did not meet Wikipedia's definition of notable. I reiterated this right here on your talk page. Yes I did learn from the other editor that was irrelevant for inclusion in the opening. Not a single thing I said to you was remotely close to threatening and I have gone back reviewed everything I said. This is your talk page and you're more than welcome to remove my comments but I will not be removing my comments myself because they were not wrong. I do not appreciate being wrongfully accused of a lack of professionalism or demeaning the subject of the article, especially in a hidden way like emailing me. Just let what happened go. You got your way and what you wanted is in the article. I will not be returning to this talk page about this subject because I'm done discussing this and was done with it a month and a half ago.--Rockchalk 7 17 04:36, 22 August 2023 (UTC)