Talk:Consumption tax

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Taxation, an effort to create, expand, organize, and improve Tax related articles to a feature-quality standard.
Assessment ratings and other indicators given below are used by the Project in prioritizing and managing its workload.
Start	This article has been rated as Start-Class on the Project's quality scale.
High	This article has been rated as High-priority on the Project's priority scale.
	After rating the article, please provide a short summary on the article's comments page to explain your ratings and/or identify the strengths and weaknesses.

Contents 1 level 3 header 2 Sprotected 3 not good, not good 4 VAT ?

[edit] level 3 header

It really doesn't make any sense as a level 2 header I don't know why you people keep reverting it back--152.163.100.198 01:48, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Sprotected

The first sentence or two the start of the article, then it branches into the separate parts. Due to the spamming and rude comments from IPs Sprotect has been added until an administrator arrives Cordially SirIsaacBrock 01:46, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

• Um, no, that's not how sprotect works--152.163.100.198 01:47, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

Only admins can protect pages. Please see Wikipedia:Requests for page protection or the Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents to find an admin. I don't think you can just put up the template. Also, I don't think this is not a justified use for it. There's a disagreement on this page, not vandalism.--Bkwillwm 01:52, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

Read the edit comments SirIsaacBrock 01:56, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

I have. They're not a sign of good behavior, but not being cordial isn't listed as a justification for semiprotection.--Bkwillwm 01:58, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

User:152.163.101.9 This editor is a well known spammer named "Mr Treason" the notice advises that any contribution made by this editor has prior Wikipedia approval for deletion, which I did do.

The user(s) responsible for these edits are all banned, and all edits by them should be reverted on sight regardless of content.

Cordially SirIsaacBrock 03:11, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

Well that's a stupid message to put on the talk page of a sharedip--205.188.116.201 03:52, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] not good, not good

It's generally not considered polite to blank other people's comments--152.163.100.198 01:49, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] VAT ?

I suppose, that if we are talking about consumption tax the theoretical point of view, than as an example we have to mention not only American version, but also Value added taxes and Excise taxes.

I agree. Morphh ^(talk) 15:01, 03 April 2007 (UTC)