Talk:St Winifred's School Choir
(Redirected from Talk:Dawn Ralph)
Latest comment: 8 years ago by Rms125a@hotmail.com in topic Reverts
| This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Merge proposal Dawn Ralph to St Winifred's School Choir edit
Ralph doesn't seem independently notable, but is worth a section here. Boleyn (talk) 10:53, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
Merged, as no objection within a year. Boleyn (talk) 18:38, 9 December 2014 (UTC)
Reverts edit
- "Dawn Ralph was the young female soloist who sang on "There's No-one Quite Like Grandma"r" -- what do you mean take it up on the talk page -- the above sentence is illiterate ("Grandmar")!!! If you're illiterate don't edit Wikipedia or nit pick about nonsense. Quis separabit? 18:49, 19 September 2015 (UTC)
- It's a spelling mistake, get over yourself. And learn proper indentation. The edits I made did the following:
- Removed information which had already appeared in the article. Restating that the song was by the choir is unnecessary as the context is obvious.
- I updated information about Dawn's children - this is the information as given in the citation.
I would like a clear explanation of how this is "borderline vandalism." I am not a vandal, I have edited here responsibly for many years and have made over 12000 edits, thank you very much. Sophie means wisdom (talk) 18:56, 19 September 2015 (UTC)
- I never used the term "borderline vandalism" today. I have used that term in the past on occasion but not today or herein. Read my above comments and/or the related edit summaries. You must be seeing things. And had you not been so arrogant and heavy handed ("take it to the talk page") coming out of nowhere or bothered to explain your edits, perhaps this would not have escalated to this point, Sophie, dear. Quis separabit? 19:00, 19 September 2015 (UTC)
- Yes you did. the fact that you did not say it today is irrelevant. I explained what i was doing in the edit summaries, there was no need to re-explain them when reverting your reversion. Sophie means wisdom (talk) 19:10, 19 September 2015 (UTC)
- AH two days ago. Sorry, I don't keep track. Also, I clearly wrote "possible" in the edit summary in question -- something you notably omitted from your above comments. The comment was the result entirely of your messy, haphazard, inadequately explained (if at all) re-editing, which gave me cause for concern. I am sorry for offending you, Sophie. I am moving on. Suggest you do the same. Quis separabit? 19:33, 19 September 2015 (UTC)
- Yes you did. the fact that you did not say it today is irrelevant. I explained what i was doing in the edit summaries, there was no need to re-explain them when reverting your reversion. Sophie means wisdom (talk) 19:10, 19 September 2015 (UTC)
- I never used the term "borderline vandalism" today. I have used that term in the past on occasion but not today or herein. Read my above comments and/or the related edit summaries. You must be seeing things. And had you not been so arrogant and heavy handed ("take it to the talk page") coming out of nowhere or bothered to explain your edits, perhaps this would not have escalated to this point, Sophie, dear. Quis separabit? 19:00, 19 September 2015 (UTC)