Mother Jones I am puzzled why you removed Elliott J Gorn Mother Jones The Most Dangerous Woman in America 2001 ISBN 0 8090 7094 4 from the Mother Jones article describing your action as removing biased POV edits Although i m not familiar with the book the reference to Mother Jones as The Most Dangerous Woman in America was a common one I believe that her supporters were not offended by such a description they were working people who felt abused by the economic system and they relished such a claim This is not to say that your edit was improper i d have to read the book to know more But if your edit resulted from use of this phrase and for no other reason then it was in my view mistaken about the general perception of that description I say this as a strong Mother Jones supporter and fan best wishes Raymond Cambefort I do not gainsay he was a french soldier during WWI I just wanted to add that he was not one of the last official French WWI vet this last point may be important cuz there is not a while that the French government has approved a state funeral for the last official one to die and I think the reader has to be aware of it that s all Sincerily Matt Sanchez A request for consensus about what to do about some changes you recently reverted has been posted at Talk Matt Sanchez Thanks Oldest people Hi I see you ve reverted my changes with the comment current format has better visual appeal Wikipedia is not paper I m trying to understand but all I can make of this is a statement of personal taste and I m not convinced Can we try to compare arguments To me there are two disadvantages to the old format 1 it contains duplicate information the To column saying when someone lost the status of oldest person is always necessarily so equal to the person s day of death 2 it actually is less appealing to me because the information fills more space and there are many line breaks It looks more tidy in my version I m therefore rather surprised at your change Thanks for a reply Please note that if we did the table in real time and not reconstructed history we would have people like Charlotte Benkner lose the title when someone older was found not when they died Thus it could technically be different Second I realize it is not absolutely necessary however I do think a little redundancy is OK Visually if the cases are too close together then their time with the title looks insignificant yak talk Did you have to create my user page just in order to respond My talk page did exist I was going to create it eventually but in my own tome How do I get it deleted again now not just empty but deleted Such thoughtlessness really makes me angry I ve copied your comment here and I m asking you to continue the debate on this page I was aware of the theoretical argument you made You say yourself that it doesn t apply as you it is a retroactive version Your visual argument I think I understand Are you saying that with your version each table entry is a two liner whereas in mine some entries take up one line and some two PS I ve since found out how to request my user page to be deleted so I m no longer looking for guidance on that Ah it s worked already How would I go about finding out Hi there It s good to get in contact with you again I have a question relating to a couple of problems I have relating to Wikipedia articles I have seen and in some cases even written Yours was the first name I thought of when consideirng this question and whether you could help me further Let s take an article such as Horace Wass for example which I wrote from information available on the Internet The Wikipedia article as well as the source from which I received the information with which I wrote the