Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Aircraft/Footer dispute

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

If you want a history with no commentary and was what was actually on the page I have no problem with that. However, we don't need to 'summaries' or history's with 'corrections' on the main page. There's a direct link to your summary in your section as well. Greyengine5 01:46, 13 Apr 2004 (UTC)

So says you. I say that the commentary provides useful background to the dispute. I have no problem with you blanking your side of the story, linking it to something off this page, or updating it as you see fit. I prefer my words to stand where they are. However, if a neutral third party agrees with your assessment, I have no problem with her or him (re)moving that material. But, as I see it, it's not your call to make --Rlandmann 01:50, 13 Apr 2004 (UTC)

I had no problem with you moving all dispute histry off the page, yet your not willing stick to keeping this page concise now? Greyengine5 01:54, 13 Apr 2004 (UTC)

That's because the dispute history is something like 91k long, and I genuinely thought that my concise version was uncontentious. When that turned out to be apparently not true, I was more than happy for you to add your own version of events. But it's a moot point now anyway --Rlandmann 02:07, 13 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Yes it is. Thank you for cedeing the issue. Greyengine5 02:21, 13 Apr 2004 (UTC)

No problem - I'm more than willing to abide by any decision reached through consensus or mediation. --Rlandmann 02:30, 13 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Agreed. Greyengine5 02:37, 13 Apr 2004 (UTC)