User talk:Baronmarty
Regarding your aritcle revision to the Allow-Url_Fopen page, I'm at a loss as to why you made the change. I've never seen an "error" message that confirms the function is enabled; when there is an error because it is disabled, the message returned is what was originally in the article. As a result, I've reverted the page to return it to it's previous condition. If you still feel that your revision was correct, please initiate a discussion of that on the article's talk page before editing it again, and we can discuss it there, ok? Thanks! Rlparker 14:44, 16 Dec 2006 (PST)
I'm trying to show some courtesy here, and previously noted why I reverted your edit on Allow_url_fopen asking that you discuss your change with other editors if you think your edit was correct. Your subsequent reversion, without comment or discussion, begins to take on the color of a revert war, which is neither appropriate nor necessary. If you think your edit is correct, let's discuss it. I'll happily leave it alone if you, or another editor, can show me how your edit is correct. If you continue to revert without comment, I can only assume your actions to be vandalism and will take a different approach. Rlparker 16:20, 16 Dec 2006 (PST)
