Open main menu


From User talk:Rua

Esteemed Codecat,

Re this and other reverts.

I very rarely use the ad hominem, but recently I read the eye-opening tutorial to a- and neuro-typical aspects of Wiki editing. I shall thus risk and with a doze of trepidation ask: are you an Aspie?

If so, please (re-?)read the aforementioned guide and compare your "all or none" edits and the declared approach with e.g. the fixes made by your equally zealous Wiktionary colleagues (click), who instead of reverting such en masse, maybe grumble some, in jest and fix the codes or placement if that makes sense for the [5 pillars]' sake. I do the same to their edits, see my history herein.

Self ad-hominem now and taking a plunge at levity: listen, I am a cat], too, maybe too WP:Bold as a neurotypical :).

Shall we thus cooperate, for Wiktionary's sake?

Your eternal servitor, a slavic kludge, apt only at cludgeling with Slavic cudgels Zezen (talk) 23:12, 29 January 2016 (UTC)

Zezen (talk)23:12, 29 January 2016

Probably shouldn't insert myself into this but I agree with Zezen here, reverting someone's in-good-faith work, particularly a non-IP user, is something I would generally avoid doing because it comes across as kind of hostile. I suggest either fixing it and grumbling on the person's talk page, or just pointing out the problems on the person's talk page and asking them if they could fix it. I would wait to start reverting until it's clear someone isn't willing to learn from their mistakes.

Benwing2 (talk)11:42, 30 January 2016