Talk:Thomas Moy

Chanute's version (Moy's version)

The numbers do not 'clog things up' and are needed here to show the vast difference between the accounts. If you really think that the numbers are a problem feel free to remove the numbers relating to Gibbs Smith's account. However if you find it difficult to read a paragraph with four numbers in it, perhaps you should consider editing pages of a less challenging nature. And your rude editing comments are an ongoing problem. Sooner or later you'll learn that if you insist on acting like a spoiled little boy, you'll get spanked like one. Ion G Nemes (talk) 02:07, 23 April 2015 (UTC)

Grow up. It is you who is cruisin' for a bruisin, as you should have realised after you ill-judged excursion to ANI. I'm reverting your edits again: the figures are already in the article, and moreover have been properly inserted with conversions.TheLongTone (talk) 12:44, 23 April 2015 (UTC)

The positioning of the numbers is appropriate as they stand, in the description of the Aerial Steamer. Duplication is unnecessary. Out of three editors on the talk page, there is now a consensus to report the numbers only once, and in the position where they are. ScrapIronIV (talk) 18:15, 23 April 2015 (UTC)

Since you're so worried about duplicating numbers, I have removed the duplication of Numbers from Gibbs Smith, and removed claim that it was somewhat successful since this is disputed by Moy himself as well as Chanute.Ion G Nemes (talk) 03:23, 24 April 2015 (UTC)

And removed some relevant material, and inserted stuff in horrible English. Reverting you.TheLongTone (talk) 11:49, 24 April 2015 (UTC)