> Animal testing

dogbiscuit

Tim Vickers, always good at sounding bemused when faced with stupidity, locks horns, in that nice understated British way of his, when Slim takes ownership of the page.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Animal_testing#Editing

QUOTE

Tim, would you mind adding your own material instead of editing mine? Then once it's all there we can rewrite for flow. The current chopping things around is leading to poor flow and, I think, some OR too. Also, the normal thing with reporters is simply to name the publication, unless the reporter is well-known, or it's a controversial opinion piece. SlimVirgin (talk)(contribs) 05:37, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

Which parts of the article are yours? Tim Vickers (talk) 05:39, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

Piperdown

QUOTE(dogbiscuit @ Fri 14th December 2007, 4:21pm)

Tim Vickers, always good at sounding bemused when faced with stupidity, locks horns, in that nice understated British way of his, when Slim takes ownership of the page.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Animal_testing#Editing

QUOTE

Tim, would you mind adding your own material instead of editing mine? Then once it's all there we can rewrite for flow. The current chopping things around is leading to poor flow and, I think, some OR too. Also, the normal thing with reporters is simply to name the publication, unless the reporter is well-known, or it's a controversial opinion piece. SlimVirgin (talk)(contribs) 05:37, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

Which parts of the article are yours? Tim Vickers (talk) 05:39, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

Brilliant.

Cheers to the Vicar.

Emperor

It's going to take a lot more than wisecracks to get Slim to give up on the Animal Testing article. Now watch Crum and Localzuk swarm on this poor sap.

dogbiscuit

Here is another Slim gem:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Animal_testing

Pick up the Primary/Secondary sources section (can't link for some reason)

QUOTE

Primary/secondary sources

Someone here was asking elsewhere for definitions of primary and secondary, so I'm posting this from an early version of WP:ATT, which I think is clearer than the defs on the current NOR page:

In other words, she's (temporarily) lost control of the policy page, so she is working to her own version of what she wants the policy page to be.