Talk:Armistice Line/Archive 1: Difference between revisions

Latest revision as of 20:56, 12 March 2009

Is there a reason there is a link specifically to the Korean DMZ? I could understand an external link to DMZ generally, but I fail to see why the Korean DMZ would specifically be singled out in this way. If there are no objections, I'd prefer to change the link to "DMZ" generally. Itsgms 19:18, 12 March 2009 (UTC)Reply

Excellent point, link updated. Don't hesitate to be bold in the future, especially when you note it on the talk page. JubalHarshaw 20:56, 12 March 2009 (UTC)Reply

Revision as of 19:18, 12 March 2009 view source Itsgms (talk \| contribs) 2 edits No edit summary ← Older edit		Latest revision as of 20:56, 12 March 2009 view source JubalHarshaw (talk \| contribs) Chiefs 2,947 edits m good point; be bold, especially when you leave your reasoning on the talk page
Line 1:		Line 1:
	Is there a reason there is a link specifically to the Korean DMZ? I could understand an external link to DMZ generally, but I fail to see why the Korean DMZ would specifically be singled out in this way. If there are no objections, I'd prefer to change the link to "DMZ" generally. [[User:Itsgms\|Itsgms]] 19:18, 12 March 2009 (UTC)		Is there a reason there is a link specifically to the Korean DMZ? I could understand an external link to DMZ generally, but I fail to see why the Korean DMZ would specifically be singled out in this way. If there are no objections, I'd prefer to change the link to "DMZ" generally. [[User:Itsgms\|Itsgms]] 19:18, 12 March 2009 (UTC)
			:Excellent point, link updated. Don't hesitate to [[BW:BOLD\|be bold]] in the future, especially when you note it on the talk page. [[User:JubalHarshaw\|JubalHarshaw]] 20:56, 12 March 2009 (UTC)