|
1,
2,
3,
4,
5,
6,
7,
8,
9,
10 |
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 21 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 3 sections are present. |
Hi Larry, have restored my version of this article. I do not agree with the reversion of articles for any other reason than vandalism and will restore any articles that are reverted. Am sorry that you believe this is a "rush job". I think that I have made the article more readable and have had added content. As before, I am willing to listen to your suggestions and you of course are free to make any edits that you please. Rogermx ( talk) 18:13, 2 March 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you. As part of that freedom, I made basic changes such as turning the word “bishopof” into two words. These are changes that should be caught by even the most cursory proofreading. If such issues come up once in a while, no worries. If they come up on nearly every edit, it comes across as an indication of carelessness.
- Please don't be sorry about what I believe. It is only productive to be sorry about your own actions (especially actions that occur over and over again). Larry Hockett ( Talk) 22:55, 2 March 2024 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading File:Mike Sandlock in The New York Times in 2013.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. -- B-bot ( talk) 18:19, 8 March 2024 (UTC)
Good article reassessment for Kansas City Chiefs
Kansas City Chiefs has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Hog Farm Talk 18:51, 29 March 2024 (UTC)
|
1,
2,
3,
4,
5,
6,
7,
8,
9,
10 |
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 21 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 3 sections are present. |
Hi Larry, have restored my version of this article. I do not agree with the reversion of articles for any other reason than vandalism and will restore any articles that are reverted. Am sorry that you believe this is a "rush job". I think that I have made the article more readable and have had added content. As before, I am willing to listen to your suggestions and you of course are free to make any edits that you please. Rogermx ( talk) 18:13, 2 March 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you. As part of that freedom, I made basic changes such as turning the word “bishopof” into two words. These are changes that should be caught by even the most cursory proofreading. If such issues come up once in a while, no worries. If they come up on nearly every edit, it comes across as an indication of carelessness.
- Please don't be sorry about what I believe. It is only productive to be sorry about your own actions (especially actions that occur over and over again). Larry Hockett ( Talk) 22:55, 2 March 2024 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading File:Mike Sandlock in The New York Times in 2013.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. -- B-bot ( talk) 18:19, 8 March 2024 (UTC)
Good article reassessment for Kansas City Chiefs
Kansas City Chiefs has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Hog Farm Talk 18:51, 29 March 2024 (UTC)