Talk:William Fothergill Cooke
 | This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||
| ||||||||
Large-scale revert
[edit]Note that per the discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Richard Warren Lipack, this article has been reverted to a state prior to the edits by user Richard Warren Lipack/Epochwiki77. Apologies for any useful edits reverted in the process. AndyTheGrump (talk) 14:19, 8 August 2013 (UTC)
- Collateral damage worth taking, I would say. I have restored some small bits & pieces. GiantSnowman 14:24, 8 August 2013 (UTC)
- That's a lot of information that is gone. I think the chances are low that anyone except Lipack will take the time to build this article back up. Couldn't much of that content been salvaged? The ANI might not approve of him using his own material as a source but that wasn't the bulk of the citations. Newjerseyliz (talk) 22:54, 8 August 2013 (UTC)
- The vast majority of the references were Lipack's own. GiantSnowman 08:22, 9 August 2013 (UTC)
- First time I came to this page was after stumbling across the Lipack debacle, but it looks like Lipack makes up less than half of the pre-revert reflist. Is it the case that he drew primarily from his own work and included the others only superficially? --Rhododendrites (talk) 14:31, 9 August 2013 (UTC)
- The vast majority of the references were Lipack's own. GiantSnowman 08:22, 9 August 2013 (UTC)
- That's a lot of information that is gone. I think the chances are low that anyone except Lipack will take the time to build this article back up. Couldn't much of that content been salvaged? The ANI might not approve of him using his own material as a source but that wasn't the bulk of the citations. Newjerseyliz (talk) 22:54, 8 August 2013 (UTC)