| Revision as of 05:02, 26 October 2010 editLudwigs2 (talk | contribs)Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers19,240 edits →harassment: new section← Previous edit | Revision as of 05:04, 26 October 2010 edit undoQuackGuru (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users79,978 edits You have refused to engage in discussion and you made mass edits to NPOV policy against consensus.Next edit → | ||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| Hey QG, | Hey QG, | ||
| A major/minor copy edit may substantially clarify or rephrase text so that it says what it was intended to say with better grammar, clearer explanation, and fewer words. If you prefer ''non-policy rewrite'', that's fine. I left the note on the NPOV talk page where Ludgwigs raised the issue, but I can also add a note to the FAQ talk page. Why do you think the FAQ was weakened rather than strengthened. I think you are making an assumption there. Would you check the diff and see if there are actually any places where the meaning is ''less'' direct rather than equal or more? | A major/minor copy edit may substantially clarify or rephrase text so that it says what it was intended to say with better grammar, clearer explanation, and fewer words. If you prefer ''non-policy rewrite'', that's fine. I left the note on the NPOV talk page where Ludgwigs raised the issue, but I can also add a note to the FAQ talk page. Why do you think the FAQ was weakened rather than strengthened. I think you are making an assumption there. Would you check the diff and see if there are actually any places where the meaning is ''less'' direct rather than equal or more? | ||
| == harassment == | |||
| your edits to my talk page are bordering on harassment. please desist, per ]. when you've read my previous explanations on the NPOV talk page and understood them, then you can edit my talk again and we can discuss the matter. I'm simply not going to explain it to you for the 5 millionth time. --] 05:02, 26 October 2010 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 05:04, 26 October 2010
Hey QG, A major/minor copy edit may substantially clarify or rephrase text so that it says what it was intended to say with better grammar, clearer explanation, and fewer words. If you prefer non-policy rewrite, that's fine. I left the note on the NPOV talk page where Ludgwigs raised the issue, but I can also add a note to the FAQ talk page. Why do you think the FAQ was weakened rather than strengthened. I think you are making an assumption there. Would you check the diff and see if there are actually any places where the meaning is less direct rather than equal or more?