27:, you made a "bold" change, you were reverted and you now should not revert but take it to the talk page to discuss. I did not say that I was against the change because of consensus. I am against the change because it is an extremely important and highly notable quote: a member of the royal family confirms the existence of corruption. The quote is set against the text discussing corruption. If you try to revert again, it will be edit warring (and remember edit-warring isn't just 3RR).
23:
You misunderstood my edit summary. The quote has been stable in the article for some time. In order to change it you need to establish that there is consensus to change. Per
43:
42:
After posting the above, I notice you have only made 59 edits and may not be familiar with
Knowledge policies. Please read
47:
55:
32:
24:
51:
28:
17:
59:
36:
8:
7:
14:
44:WP:BOLD, revert, discuss cycle
1:
76:
60:22:11, 4 June 2011 (UTC)
37:22:05, 4 June 2011 (UTC)
67:
75:
74:
70:
69:
68:
66:
65:
64:
48:WP:Edit warring
21:
12:
11:
5:
73:
71:
63:
62:
20:
15:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
72:
61:
57:
53:
49:
45:
41:
40:
39:
38:
34:
30:
26:
19:
16:
22:
18:Saudi Arabia
52:DeCausa
29:DeCausa
25:WP:BRD
56:talk
46:and
33:talk
58:)
50:.
35:)
54:(
31:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.