Talk:Smartwool adds forced arbitration to EULA: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 19:12, 25 October 2025 edit AnotherConsumerRightsPerson (talk \| contribs) confirmed, Administrators 2,883 edits →Should this incident be written in past tense?: Reply Tag: Reply ← Older edit		Revision as of 19:31, 25 October 2025 edit undo Beanie Bo (talk \| contribs) confirmed, Administrators 907 edits →Should this incident be written in past tense?: Reply Tag: Reply Newer edit →
Line 18:		Line 18:

	:I’d say that past tense is generally the tense that should be used in the wiki, but for titles, think of them as like news articles where in that case they’re present tense. [[User:AnotherConsumerRightsPerson\|<i><b>AnotherConsumerRightsPerson</b></i>]] ([[User talk:AnotherConsumerRightsPerson\|talk]]) 19:12, 25 October 2025 (UTC)		:I’d say that past tense is generally the tense that should be used in the wiki, but for titles, think of them as like news articles where in that case they’re present tense. [[User:AnotherConsumerRightsPerson\|<i><b>AnotherConsumerRightsPerson</b></i>]] ([[User talk:AnotherConsumerRightsPerson\|talk]]) 19:12, 25 October 2025 (UTC)
			::Raster is correct, especially for incident articles as they are usually current events, and especially for forced arbitration which will likely be there forever. [[User:Beanie Bo\|Beanie Bo]] ([[User talk:Beanie Bo\|talk]]) 19:31, 25 October 2025 (UTC)