| Error creating thumbnail: File missing Join our Discord! |
| If you have been locked out of your account you can request a password reset here. |
User talk:PainMan356: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
|||
| Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
== Lets play nice == | == Lets play nice == | ||
''First: I don't know of anyone appointing you LordGod of this site. I don't take kindly to people giving me orders. So knock it off. I changed the caption on the Lee-Enfield page because it was wrong--which is confirmed by the photographer (MoviePropMaster2008 9 -- see article Talk page). If you object to an edit I've made you can certainly do so politely and without the ridiculous attitude. | |||
I CAN prove that I'm right. The information comes from an illustrated book about small arms. As the photo is copyrighted I can hardly simply post it. Therefore, I'll place a source note. Combined with MovePropMaster2008's post should settle the issue once and for all.'' | |||
PainMan356 why don't you relax. I'm one of the moderators on this site and I can and will make corrections if I think they are necessary. Which means I do have the authority to give orders (your word) and make changes. If I'm wrong then I will apologize and we will move on. But I don't appreciate people leaving agressive posts on my discussion page. So cease and desist please and lets try to be friends. --[[User:Jcordell|Jcordell]] 12:35, 2 April 2011 (CDT) | |||
Revision as of 17:48, 2 April 2011
Lee Enfield
You need to do a better job of showing your sources before you go and make changes like you did on the Lee Enfield page. Those photos were taken by a MPM2008. He has access to the actual weapons. I've rolled back the changes. And I will continue to do so until I see your sources documented. Use the discussion page for that work please. Thank you. --Jcordell 18:12, 15 December 2010 (UTC)
- Hello, I am the photographer of that particular rifle and boy do I WISH it were an ultra rare SMLE No 1 MK II but it isn't. I looked up a photo of the ultra rare No 1. Mk II (Pre WW1 rifle) and the receiver is different. Mine is a plain jane (and thus not super valuable) No 1, Mk III. Don't know what made you think it was a No II but the area for the stripper clip and the rear sight are completely different on the two rifles. I also went to the rack where that rifle is and double checked (actually hoping that I had the vastly more valuable No 1 Mk II, but that isn't the case.)MoviePropMaster2008 20:32, 15 December 2010 (UTC)
Lets play nice
First: I don't know of anyone appointing you LordGod of this site. I don't take kindly to people giving me orders. So knock it off. I changed the caption on the Lee-Enfield page because it was wrong--which is confirmed by the photographer (MoviePropMaster2008 9 -- see article Talk page). If you object to an edit I've made you can certainly do so politely and without the ridiculous attitude.
I CAN prove that I'm right. The information comes from an illustrated book about small arms. As the photo is copyrighted I can hardly simply post it. Therefore, I'll place a source note. Combined with MovePropMaster2008's post should settle the issue once and for all.
PainMan356 why don't you relax. I'm one of the moderators on this site and I can and will make corrections if I think they are necessary. Which means I do have the authority to give orders (your word) and make changes. If I'm wrong then I will apologize and we will move on. But I don't appreciate people leaving agressive posts on my discussion page. So cease and desist please and lets try to be friends. --Jcordell 12:35, 2 April 2011 (CDT)