Talk:Cache Containers - Revision history

NiraD: explain rollback

2009-07-08T20:28:28Z

explain rollback

2005-07-16T19:27:24Z

2005-07-16T19:27:11Z

2005-07-10T19:43:57Z

Entire page is GC.com-centric

New page

It appears these container sizes match with one company's use of the terms. Of course, other sites do not necessarily ascribe to these terms.

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:28, 8 July 2009
Line 2:		Line 2:

	Please, feel free to edit the entry to give it a neutral point of view. Mentions of gc.com are ok, but point out when the material is specific to gc.com. -- Scout		Please, feel free to edit the entry to give it a neutral point of view. Mentions of gc.com are ok, but point out when the material is specific to gc.com. -- Scout
		+
		+	I just removed a link to a URL www.geocaching-containers.com that just redirects to another site www.shop4swag.com that is already on our list.
		+	- [[User:NiraD\|niraD]] 16:28, 8 July 2009 (EDT)

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:27, 16 July 2005
Line 1:		Line 1:
	It appears these container sizes match with one company's use of the terms. Of course, other sites do not necessarily ascribe to these terms.		It appears these container sizes match with one company's use of the terms. Of course, other sites do not necessarily ascribe to these terms.

−	Please, feel free to edit the entry to give it a neutral point of view. Mentions of gc.com are ok, but point out when the material is specific to gc.com.	+	Please, feel free to edit the entry to give it a neutral point of view. Mentions of gc.com are ok, but point out when the material is specific to gc.com. -- Scout

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:27, 16 July 2005
Line 1:		Line 1:
	It appears these container sizes match with one company's use of the terms. Of course, other sites do not necessarily ascribe to these terms.		It appears these container sizes match with one company's use of the terms. Of course, other sites do not necessarily ascribe to these terms.
		+
		+	Please, feel free to edit the entry to give it a neutral point of view. Mentions of gc.com are ok, but point out when the material is specific to gc.com.