Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates/Jesus/archive3

"If a nominator feels that an Oppose has been addressed, they should say so after the reviewer's signature rather than striking out or splitting up the reviewer's text. Per talk page guidelines, nominators should not cap, alter, strike, break up, or add graphics to comments from other editors; replies are added below the signature on the reviewer's commentary."

1. Not here anymore is not a nominator. 2. The comments were not added below my sig. Strangesad (talk) 14:09, 13 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

(1) The protocols don't prohibit non-nominators to respond to a reviewer in the reviewer's section. (2) Some of his comments were added after your signature, yet you moved them as well, making the discussion harder to follow.--FutureTrillionaire (talk) 14:56, 13 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, my bad. I guess I'm more used to what people do in practice. --Stfg (talk) 14:32, 13 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This is probably the most oft-ignored guideline at FAC. Most nominators thread their responses to reviewers. --Laser brain (talk) 14:41, 13 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

... in favour of collegiate discussion, yes. But formally speaking, I was in the wrong. It might be best just to let be, do you think, FT and Laser brain? --Stfg (talk) 15:00, 13 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It's not worth edit warring over, for sure. --Laser brain (talk) 15:13, 13 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Agree.--FutureTrillionaire (talk) 15:15, 13 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]