Revision as of 16:47, 24 January 2015 edit Dsimic (talk \| contribs) Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers 39,664 edits →History: Replied ← Previous edit		Revision as of 19:33, 24 January 2015 edit undo Smuckola (talk \| contribs) Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers 32,228 edits →History Next edit →
Line 242: ::::::: Of course not, those three references above would be only ''added'' to back what we already have as the article content. There are no reasons to discard anything that's already part of the article. — [[User:Dsimic\|Dsimic]] ([[User talk:Dsimic#nobold\|talk]] \| [[Special:Contributions/Dsimic\|contribs]]) 16:47, 24 January 2015 (UTC) ::::::::{{reply to \| Dsimic}} No, I said "disregard", not "discard". The existing content is presumably based upon the references which are already present to be harvested for inline citations. There may not be any need for new references. If there were, they'd be RSes, not the sources you presented. — [[User:Smuckola\|Smuckola]] <small>[[Special:EmailUser/Smuckola\|(Email)]] [[User talk:Smuckola\|(Talk)]]</small> 19:33, 24 January 2015 (UTC)

Talk:Microcode: Difference between revisions