User talk:Falcons745

John Tomkins‎ vs The Bishop
Yes, the reason given in your edit summary was legitimate, so technically it was wrong of me to rollback your edit (that's why I reverted myself immediately). However, I don't agree with the way you performed the fork, since it is similar to a cut-and-paste move. In my opinion, it would have been better to delete The Bishop, and then move John Tomkins‎ to The Bishop (leaving a redirect at John Tomkins‎). Since the move is not completely uncontroversial, it would be best to leave a note on the talk page first. Gail (talk) 17:33, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
 * You're right about the "innocent unless proven guilty" part, that's why I agreed that the article should be moved to The Bishop. And you're probably also right about setting John Tomkins‎ as a stub (with a prominent link, context explained, to The Bishop) rather than a plain redirect. What I don't agree with is that the history of the article construction is presently being left at John Tomkins‎, rather than being moved to The Bishop (compare John Tomkins‎ history against The Bishop history). I'll be parting on vacation soon, so I can't take care of the issue myself. If you need assistance, try posting at Editor assistance/Requests... the people there are generally quite helpful. Gail (talk) 23:51, 30 June 2008 (UTC)