Talk:Real-time tactics

message: Let's please discuss individual changes/issues on the Talk page while the article is undergoing RfC, please? These sorts of contentions edits while the article is undergoing discussion aren't very constructive. What are your changes, and why do you want to change them? In addition it may be helpful to place each one in its own section. SharkD  Talk  09:14, 29 March 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I had such a request from another editor (see above) and they simply used it as an excuse to revert and then add a statement to the talk page that basically asked me not to edit again. I don't think that really helped. Why not take a look at WP:BRD, someone was bold enough to change the article and add new information, revert and discuss that first. Alastairward (talk) 10:17, 29 March 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: That's not how I see it. It looks to me as if the editor actually thanked you for bringing the issue to the Talk page. SharkD  Talk  10:51, 29 March 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Lol, I can detect irony, Miqademus was very unhappy that I was daring enough to edit an article that they appear to own. Discussion with that particular editor was largely irrelevant in any case, he/she was quite happy to ignore discussion and third opinions and revert anything I tried to do with any RTT related articles. Alastairward (talk) 11:22, 29 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Discuss changes before implementing them, please? 

message: I've removed an old neutrality tag from this page that appears to have no active discussion per the instructions at Template:POV:
::This template is not meant to be a permanent resident on any article. Remove this template whenever:
::#There is consensus on the talkpage or the NPOV Noticeboard that the issue has been resolved
::#It is not clear what the neutrality issue is, and no satisfactory explanation has been given
::#In the absence of any discussion, or if the discussion has become dormant.
Since there's no evidence of ongoing discussion, I'm removing the tag for now. If discussion is continuing and I've failed to see it, however, please feel free to restore the template and continue to address the issues. Thanks to everybody working on this one! -- Khazar2 (talk) 18:57, 29 June 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  removing POV tag with no active discussion per [[Template:POV]] 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Real-time tactics. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071231194439/http://www.strategyplanet.com/features/articles/pcp-resources/ to http://www.strategyplanet.com/features/articles/pcp-resources/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071030014041/http://archive.gamespy.com/articles/february02/stratfinal/ to http://archive.gamespy.com/articles/february02/stratfinal/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090412124256/http://uk.gamespot.com/pc/strategy/rometotalwar/review.html to http://uk.gamespot.com/pc/strategy/rometotalwar/review.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:17, 13 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Should Sydicate be added to the Futuristic section?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 139.47.79.141 (talk) 10:33, 23 February 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  More games