User talk:Onward ND

Thanks for your suggestion re: Wikipedia rules and policies; I'm quite familiar with them. My revert is not vandalism. It was a good faith revert of material that had existed untouched from 12/24 until 1/21--when significant deletions were made by an anon user without comment, often a sign of vandalism.

The discussion on "currentism" had been in place since November, but had not resulted in any changes to the article. Your one and only addition to the discussion occurred today, and then it was your decision to simply revert a prior wholesale deletion (including nicknames that were not even part of the discussion, e.g. King George) that had the appearance of vandalism. But don't worry, I won't accuse you of vandalism, as I'm sure it wasn't bad faith on your part--only misguided or ill-considered.--68.164.89.52 05:23, 22 January 2006 (UTC)