Talk:Solway Harvester

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ships, a project to improve all Ship-related articles. If you would like to help improve this and other Ship-related articles, please join the project. All interested editors are welcome.
Start	rated as Start-Class on the assessment scale
Mid	rated as mid-importance on the assessment scale

	Solway Harvester is within the scope of WikiProject Fishing, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of fishing. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can register your interest for the project and see a list of open tasks.
Start	This article has been rated as Start-Class on the assessment scale.
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-Importance on the assessment scale.
	Please explain ratings on the ratings summary page.

A fact from Solway Harvester appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know? column on 21 February 2008.

[edit] Edit war over "In Service" field in infobox

Please discuss any changes here before reverting other editor's edits. Dan1980 (talk | stalk) 13:30, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Please see the other editor's talkpage. This was a simple misunderstanding over the use of template field by a new editor. After bringing this up at his talkpage, and encouraging him to discuss it, I removed the incorrect fields. Please don't try to escalate the situation by calling it an edit war when it really isn't. Benea (talk) 15:11, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Ok, I didn't see that he has since re-added the field. I am choosing not to war over this, because it really is a silly little thing. In future however please make yourself aware of Wikipedia:Don't template the regulars, and rather than jumping the gun with a template, raise your concerns in person if you feel it necessary. Benea (talk) 15:40, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

You were both guilty of reverting three times, so it would have been unfair to warn the other user and not you also. OK, I was maybe a bit lazy in using the template rather than writing you a personal message, but if there's an easy way to so something I'll usually choose that option! :-) Dan1980 (talk | stalk) 15:48, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Fair enough I suppose, but perhaps bear it in mind for next time. Incidentally it seems very likely that the other user is in fact a sockpuppet of a banned user, and having got a reaction is now trying to spread a little disruptive editing our way. If he is blocked, reverting it as vandalism seems justifiable. But at the end of the day it's one small field in an infobox, I don't think I'll lose sleep over it. Benea (talk) 15:57, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

He's been blocked for being a sockpuppet, so I've reverted back to your version. Dan1980 (talk | stalk) 23:31, 19 February 2008 (UTC)