Why revert this?

Jump to: navigation, search

Hey yo, just wondering why you reverted this edit. Since the content in that section only responds to the question posited in the section header by saying "No, because the Supreme Court established this and that" and says nothing in reaction to the ID idiocy in the section to the left, I thought I'd add something that more directly addressed the text in that section. 84.198.53.190 (talk

84.198.53.190 (talk04:21, 1 January 2013

I had no problem with the content of the edit itself, it just seemed a bit too ad hominem for one of our top-rated articles for my liking, which is why I reverted it. However, I am willing to re-consider.

Reckless Noise Symphony (talk)09:39, 1 January 2013
Ceiling cat.jpg W A R N I N G

You are not logged in. Your IP address will be recorded in this page's edit history, and will be visible to anyone. See our privacy policy for further information. To protect your privacy, please log in or create an account

Please note that all contributions to RationalWiki are considered to be released under the CC-BY-SA 3.0, or any later version (see RationalWiki:Copyrights for details). If you do not want your writing to be edited mercilessly and redistributed at will, then do not submit it here.
You are also promising us that you wrote this yourself, or copied it from a public domain or similar free resource.
Do not submit copyrighted work unless you have permission.

Cancel | Editing help (opens in new window)
Your changes will be visible immediately.

Please note:
 
Personal tools
Namespaces

Variants
Actions
Navigation
Community
Tools
support