Klausschneider131

Good faith

In an edit summary on the article on Marc Fielmann, you questioned my good faith, presumably because I had earlier listed the article for deletion. It has forthe last 12 years here always been my practice when I recommend an article for deletion, and it is nonethless kept by consensus, for me to try to improve the article.

If the article was kept despite somewhat inadequate references or content, as often does happen, I try to add such references. If is was kept because of some degree of promotionalism. I try to remove the promotionalism. In any case, I always try to fix any problems with grammar or Wikipedia format or style.

Consequently, I have been improving the article by fixing the grammar, and moving some material to the article on the company, where it is badly needed. DGG ( talk ) 22:12, 9 October 2019 (UTC)

Dear DGG, thank you for your clarification. Allow me to say that I respect the work that you do and that you contribute to the Wikipedia community. (I agree with you about the changes to the Fielmann article that definitely needs editing.) Whereas I think that the deletion listing was properly discussed, I was slightly surprised to see your recent contribution to the article on Marc Fielmann in question as it included various altercations and minor mistakes (grammar, formatting) that deviate from your usual standard. Please note that in my edit I wrote AGF (assumption of good faith) hence I did not question your intentions but assumed good faith despite previous discussions with other users over edits. As you can see from my edits we share a similar intent with regards to improving the standard of the article. klausschneider131 ( talk ) 20:57, 29 October 2019 (GMT)