User talk:Wiiformii
| This is Wiiformii's talk page, where you can send them messages and comments. |
|
Archives: 1Auto-archiving period: 4 days  |
May 2024[edit]
Thank you for trying to keep Wikipedia free of vandalism. However, one or more edits you labeled as vandalism are not considered vandalism under Wikipedia policy. Wikipedia has a stricter definition of the word "vandalism" than common usage, and mislabeling edits as vandalism can discourage editors. Please see what is not vandalism for more information on what is and is not considered vandalism. Thank you. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 15:27, 30 May 2024 (UTC)
- Hi! I reverted your edits due to them including issues that did not exist in the article and deletion of controversial material Wiiformii (talk) 15:37, 30 May 2024 (UTC)
- Reasoned removal of content is not vandalism. Please familiarize yourself with this topic before marking not-vandalism edits as vandalism. Unexplained removal of content can and should be reverted (and marked as such), but my removal had a clear edit summary explaining my reasoning. If you disagree, you can of course revert, but it's hard to see why the inclusion of some primary local government council report of a fine being issued, despite no secondary reporting, should be included, nor did you offer any explanation about it. It's also hard to see why the controversial[sarcasm] sentence
"The Sam's brand expanded from 1990 to 1991 with the introduction of a "2 For 2" deal, consisting of two strip burgers and two portions of chips for £2."
should have been retained. Please pay more careful attention. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 16:18, 30 May 2024 (UTC)
- Reasoned removal of content is not vandalism. Please familiarize yourself with this topic before marking not-vandalism edits as vandalism. Unexplained removal of content can and should be reverted (and marked as such), but my removal had a clear edit summary explaining my reasoning. If you disagree, you can of course revert, but it's hard to see why the inclusion of some primary local government council report of a fine being issued, despite no secondary reporting, should be included, nor did you offer any explanation about it. It's also hard to see why the controversial[sarcasm] sentence
- I was referencing the controversy you removed, it might come off as a WP:NPOV view as it might be seen as you were trying to remove criticism and controversy from the article. I agree with that portion of the removal as it did not add to the article but primarily reverted it for the deletions of controversy Wiiformii (talk) 16:33, 30 May 2024 (UTC)
Wild Island[edit]
It was not a mistake. All was true edits. Waltermain (talk) 00:53, 31 May 2024 (UTC)
Super Size Me[edit]
Why did you revert my edit on the Super Size Me page? 75.189.135.47 (talk) 01:36, 2 June 2024 (UTC)
- I reverted it as it did not talk about the impact of the film on society, but went off talking about the director which was confusing and seemed like reasoning for a claim "which added to the film's impact on audiences" I was also confused on "by making them recall the fact that it was his passion project that they would remember him for making." as it seemed to ramble on and did not connect to the impact. With best regards, Wiiformii (talk) 01:40, 2 June 2024 (UTC)
Be careful with reverts[edit]
You need to take content disputes to talk pages. I assume you ARE focusing on your reverts... right? 12.75.41.81 (talk) 04:05, 2 June 2024 (UTC)
- What? I do not have a content dispute with anybody. I was working on anti vandalism work Wiiformii (talk) 04:06, 2 June 2024 (UTC)
- You just reverted me, and added WP:COATRACK material to an article. I've pinged you at the talk page to explain the content you have readded. 12.75.41.81 (talk) 04:11, 2 June 2024 (UTC)
- Wait... Did you assume because I removed a reference and I prefer not to have an account, I am a WP:VANDAL? Would you be willing to clarify why you reverted my edit while doing antivandalism work unless you mistook me for a vandal? 12.75.41.81 (talk) 04:18, 2 June 2024 (UTC)
- See WP:GF that I used. You have assumed me of WP:COATRACK when I never wrote that. It seems you didn't assume good faith when I tried to, as I was genuinely confused with the removal within your changes. I truly don't believe anybody is inherently a vandal and Wikipedia would not exist without the open edits of millions. Wiiformii (talk) 04:23, 2 June 2024 (UTC)
- Wait... Did you assume because I removed a reference and I prefer not to have an account, I am a WP:VANDAL? Would you be willing to clarify why you reverted my edit while doing antivandalism work unless you mistook me for a vandal? 12.75.41.81 (talk) 04:18, 2 June 2024 (UTC)
- You just reverted me, and added WP:COATRACK material to an article. I've pinged you at the talk page to explain the content you have readded. 12.75.41.81 (talk) 04:11, 2 June 2024 (UTC)
The Duke of Death & His Maid - Anime Edits[edit]
Hello,
I made recent edits to this anime's article and believe you made a mistake in reverting the page. The name of one of the character's was spelt incorrectly and provided more of a description for Mr. Flea. I also added The Duke's grandmother, Liz as she is a character in the television series. Why did you revert the Wikipage? Ladybugsensei1899 (talk) 16:23, 2 June 2024 (UTC)