Talk:Lamport and Holt

My revert
I reverted a massive addition here. There's something odd about it. Aside from the many unsourced entries, the citations that are present show accessdates ("retrieved") from 2016 etc. I have no idea if the cited sources are reliable but I did check the contributor's edit history and this seems not to have been something built up in a sandbox over many months and then copied over to the article. It could, of course, have been created impeccably off-wiki and then pasted here, previewed for markup errors and committed, and I also cannot see why anyone would want to post anything other than correct information to an article such as this. Nonetheless, it could do with an explanation, sorry. - Sitush (talk) 00:31, 19 January 2018 (UTC)

I did a subsequent revert a few days ago on the basis mainly of WP:SPS, although I also really do not think people should completely usurp articles with a version drafted in user space or offline - it is the antithesis of collaborative editing. However, it seems from this conversation that the SPS may be ok because the author is some sort of expert, even though neither I nor the person I asked to review my revert were either made aware of it or able to work it out. I'll leave it to others to decide - completely fed up of the transport types who simply do not care to work with the wider community. - Sitush (talk) 19:34, 7 July 2020 (UTC)


 * I have reinstated the longer, informative and properly referenced article. There are plenty of articles that are insufficient and get completely rewritten. Any hard feelings by an editor over this are less important than Wikipedia having articles that are correct and useful to the encyclopedia user.ThoughtIdRetired (talk) 12:55, 8 July 2020 (UTC)