| This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
 | This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Tidied up the paragraph in relation to time at Chesterfield. Many grammar errors and several parts were almost unintelligible.
Poster has reverted to the version with many grammar errors and done so with no explanation. The purpose of the edit is to make the subject read clearer and to be more accurate. Please do not revert without reason. thanks Lemlinspire (talk) 14:55, 19 April 2015 (UTC)
Again you have simply reverted this to a version that makes little or no sense and have done so without making comment. Please stop taking this personally and look at the revision. The fnial sentence is outdated and much of the grammar is incorrect.Lemlinspire (talk) 17:32, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
So Yet again you think ending it with "Richard Brindley's future is in doubt at Chesterfield" is accurate? He left the club 2 years ago.
also what does
Though he had a limited on his league debut against Wimbledon, Brindley said of his league debut as grateful
mean?
These were the errors I have tried to correct but apparently ownership of a badly written paragraph is more important than it reading correctly.
Lemlinspire (talk) 18:05, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
- You are of course free to edit but not engage in Edit warring, see WP:3RR... JMHamo (talk) 18:12, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
I think you will find that I did NOT break the 3 revert rule despite your hasty and incorrect threat on my page. I think you will find I DID post my reasons on this page which you suggested I do AFTER I had already done it. I think you will find that my editting and reverting was to make the article clearer unlike the OP that just did so because he feels nobody is allowed to correct his frankly appalling grammar. I think you will find that you made no attempt to address these issues when raised on your talk page. I think you will find I have now retired from the site so it can look as unproffessional as it likes.Lemlinspire (talk) 16:44, 21 April 2015 (UTC)