Talk:benchmark

RFC discussion: July–August 2010
The etymology section for this entry is wordy, and possibly a copyvio. --EncycloPetey 21:14, 30 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Hello, I added that etymology. I also added a reference to the source. I'll try to improve it. Suggestions are welcome. GiuseppeMassimo 01:51, 1 August 2010 (UTC)
 * There, I believe I fixed the wordiness and removed any possibility of a copyvio. This is the first time I deal with a  situation and am not sure what is the protocol, so I'll wait a few days for feedback before removing the  from the entry (or feel free to remove it if you are satisfied with the changes). GiuseppeMassimo 02:07, 1 August 2010 (UTC)
 * I adjusted the entry to use . DCDuring TALK 11:33, 1 August 2010 (UTC)
 * If there are no more comments, I'll remove the today. Let me know if I am jumping the gun. GiuseppeMassimo 15:44, 2 August 2010 (UTC)
 * For the original contributor should not be the one to remove the tag. For the  and, the challenger should not delete the challenged entry or part and the contributor or attester should generally not remove the tag. It's an easily enforced practice intended to make sure that multiple people (at least two or three) have taken a look at the issue. It works well for English. Languages with fewer contributors depend more on the restraint and good judgment of the veteran contributors. DCDuring TALK  15:57, 2 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the info! I think the issue is solved, so who should remove the rfc tag then? GiuseppeMassimo 19:08, 4 August 2010 (UTC)
 * So do I. Striking. Thanks to those who worked on this. &#x200b;—msh210℠ (talk) 20:01, 4 August 2010 (UTC)