Talk:Dalgety plc

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 one external links on Dalgety plc. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Replaced archive link http://www.webcitation.org/5fpozLphU?url=http://www.australia.mid.ru/0img/60_Years.pdf with http://www.webcitation.org/5fpozLphU?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.australia.mid.ru%2F0img%2F60_Years.pdf on http://www.australia.mid.ru/0img/60_Years.pdf
 * Added archive http://www.webcitation.org/5yO3S13nr?url=http://www.prnewswire.co.uk/cgi/news/release?id=20467 to http://www.prnewswire.co.uk/cgi/news/release?id=20467

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 09:33, 5 December 2016 (UTC)

The Drover's Wife
I am unable to understand your difficulties. Please take more room and explain them properly here. Thanks, Eddaido (talk) 11:34, 19 July 2021 (UTC)


 * This issue arose because I deleted a sentence: "then, in an apparent about-face, for a tenth of the sum bought the largest stockyards in Europe at Banbury. The stockyard was sold off in 1976." This sentence is unsourced and makes no sense:


 * An "about face" over what? Why was it an about face?
 * A reversal of new policy
 * Prima facie, it was two acquisitions in a row, not a reversal of policy. Dormskirk (talk) 09:39, 20 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Yes?? Is that not a little shallow?


 * A tenth of what sum? (No sum is given in the first place.)
 * A minor purchase compared with the malt but still the largest stockyard in Europe
 * This remains meaningless without knowing the original sum. Dormskirk (talk) 09:39, 20 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Meaningless to you.


 * What was this large stockyard in Banbury? (the fact that it was the largest in Europe is unsourced).
 * The fact that it was sold off in 1976 is also unsourced.
 * Look elsewhere in edit summaries about over-sourcing
 * We need to observe guidelines such as WP:CITE and WP:RS not edit summaries. Dormskirk (talk) 09:39, 20 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Yes, omitted because they would all have clogged the system. Where do you imagine I got the info?


 * Dormskirk (talk) 12:12, 19 July 2021 (UTC)


 * It seems to me to make perfect sense. I do not see how either of you have your difficulties. I try to write in English, if I've done wrong tell me where and don't be so subjective. Thanks, Eddaido (talk) 09:10, 20 July 2021 (UTC)


 * Please see my comments above. Dormskirk (talk) 09:39, 20 July 2021 (UTC)
 * And now see my responses. Eddaido (talk) 09:43, 20 July 2021 (UTC)


 * I'll happily take on a bullying old sandgroper but the background to this is that I wrote this article because the subject needed to be covered. i.e. Australasia's stock and station agents and it was followed quickly by kind comment from you. When finished I could say I tried to do one stock and station agent in depth. You are welcome to refine anything about the article but when you seem to make a mistake or two as above I will continue to point it out. You decide what you want to do, I will query it if I see a need to. I hope that is comprehendible. Regards, Eddaido (talk) 09:52, 20 July 2021 (UTC)
 * I know just what I meant when I wrote (whatever) and it still means the same to me x years later. Doesn't mean everyone else grasps what I intended. I think you should make the changes you see necessary and we can discuss them if it turns out we disagree. Eddaido (talk) 05:32, 31 July 2021 (UTC)


 * Dormskirk told you very clearly where you went wrong, and the above responses explain nothing (or are simply misguided, such as the defence of unreferenced claims) and are profoundly unhelpful. The Drover&#39;s Wife (talk) 10:19, 20 July 2021 (UTC)