Ikan Kekek ( talk) 09:43, 14 January 2018 (UTC) Reply I do remember this problem editor. If he's right that I mistakenly removed any useful, non-touty content that wasn't added by a vandal, I hope he restores it. I could be wrong, but he hasn't explained, and should we really let an insistent dynamic IP edit warrior get his way on every little point he insists on, just because? Ikan Kekek ( talk) 08:03, 14 January 2018 (UTC) Reply A clear reason for the edit was finally given, so as far as I'm concerned, this matter is closed, unless the dynamic IP editor would like to follow up with action based on his remarks at User talk:Ikan Kekek#Agra. It's a minor point, but "pretty good" or "relatively good", if true, are better than no description or "reasonable", which could refer to price, and he's never explained what's wrong with "Comesum", which from web searching looks like a brand name of food courts to me. I think this is once again the never-registered dynamic IP editor who insists on having the exact wordings his way and doesn't really explain anything except that everyone else's English must be bad because his is good. If you have the time, have a look at the history of the Agra article. 27 WV:Deny recognition and open discussions about particular vandals.26 What do you recommend doing with users that act like this?.23 "Repeat offenses" and other language.21 Reporting sockpuppets of vandals to Meta.17 The North Face vandalism of Wikipedia.16 Partial blocks deployment to Wikivoyage.14 What to do with pages created by banned accounts.12 Protect 'high-ranking' articles from being moved.8 Extend the IP address block maximum to six months.4 How many of the new users are Telstra?.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |