Review Proposed Changes
| Profile: | Bacopa | ||
| Field: | |||
| Status: | Approved | ||
| Votes: | 10 | ||
| Submitter: | mattyboombatty | ||
| Reason: | Created new profile for review | ||
| Old Text: | New Text: | ||
| Votes | ||
| Member | Vote | Weight |
| clownloachfan | Approve | 1 |
| Doedogg | Approve | 2 |
| mattyboombatty | Neutral | 0 |
| sirbooks | Approve | 3 |
| Wingsdlc | Approve | 1 |
| LITTLE_FISH | Approve | 2 |
| zachf92 | Approve | 1 |
| Total: 10 | ||
| Comments | |
| mattyboombatty | Created new profile for review |
| LITTLE_FISH | Approve |
| zachf92 | Approve |
| Wingsdlc | Approve |
| sirbooks | Approve There are a couple of errors in Care and Propagation. |
| LITTLE_FISH | sirbooks, For the benefit of us all, what are the errors that you speak of? Care seems complete to me, propagation could have included "by runners". But I don't see anything wrong with the existing statements themselves. Ingo |
| sirbooks | Sorry, I was just referring to spelling. Care has "it's" and "paramaters", and Prop has "inchhes". I know I come across that way, but I'm honestly not some loser who gets hung up on spelling and grammar junk. |
| mattyboombatty | Yes you are j/k it's(this time [it is] ) good that somebody notices these things. Otherwise the profiles would look like some sloppy ignorant fool made them*points at self* . |
| Doedogg | Approve |
| LITTLE_FISH | Makes sense sirbooks Being the bad speller that I am, I did not even look at the spelling that Matty fabricated there ![]() And sure you are right to point this out and the action is really proper. Ingo |
| clownloachfan | Approve Good information, nice pic. I might have to try this plant again since i have better lighting now. |
j/k it's(this time [it is]
) good that somebody notices these things. Otherwise the profiles would look like some sloppy ignorant fool made them*points at self*
.