Placerdome
January 2010
edit
Your recent edit removed content from Sea Shepherd Conservation Society. When removing text, please specify a reason in the edit summary and discuss edits that are likely to be controversial on the article's talk page. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia, and if you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Don't remove sources. Thank you. Cptnono (talk) 07:52, 28 January 2010 (UTC)
Charmed I am sure, and you are very brusque. I note that in the discussion you apologise for reverting my valid edit and calling my edit 'vandalism', but I also note you did not reinstate my perfectly valid edit, I presume that is because the reversion of my edit suits your anti-Sea Shepherd editing just fine, even though my edit was balanced, neutral and concise, and the reasons given for that considered ([[1]]. placerdome
- It was still a bad edit even though it wasn't malicious.Cptnono (talk) 23:56, 31 January 2010 (UTC)
It was not a bad edit; I reverted to the original sentence in the article, a neutral and concise sentence that served the article admirably. I changed nothing. placerdome | talk 03:20, 1 February 2010 (UTC)
- And I disagreed. If you had not removed refs it wouldn't have been reverted.
That is why there is a talk page. Make your point there.Oops. That part was already handled. So there should not be any problems now unless your pride is hurt. Cptnono (talk) 03:23, 1 February 2010 (UTC)
Well, I reverted a bad edit to the original, and by your comments (above, starting: 'And I disagreed...) you've noticed that I gave good and adequate explanation in the discussion pages :-) What remains, since you have not supported good neutral edits is what is called a biased 'dog's breakfast'. bis zum nächsten Mal placerdome talk 04:16, 1 February 2010 (UTC)
- As I said on the talk page, I quite possibly said it was vandalism too fast. To prevent confusion from happening again you should refrain from removing good sources. You should make an edit summary if you feel you need to. If you want to turn this around on me to deflect your mistake, I actually supported the removal of the terrorist segment. Since you are reading the talk page: read the whole discussion. I also only speak English.Cptnono (talk) 04:24, 1 February 2010 (UTC)