Discussione:Sepp Kerschbaumer: differenze tra le versioni

Versione delle 16:12, 29 dic 2012

Versione delle 05:35, 8 gen 2013

Riga 131:

:Qui funziona così: si discute prima, si ricerca il [[WP:CONSENSO|consenso]], poi si mdoficia; non si ragiona per [[WP:ANALOGIA|analogia]]; si rispetta il [[WP:NPOV|punto di vista neutrale]]; [[WP:NRO|non si accettano ricerche originali]] e le [[WP:F|fonti]] devono essere [[WP:FA|attendibili]].

:Detto questo, qui a pretendere sei tu, cercando di imporre la tua visione delle cose portando il tuo punto di vista con interpretazioni personali e quindi, in questa sede, senza alcun valore.--'''''[[Utente:Dome|<span style="color:#0000CC;">Dome</span>]]''''' <small>^{''[[Discussioni utente:Dome|A disposizione!]] ''}</small> 15:12, 29 dic 2012 (CET)

Sorry for being unable to write in Italian.<br>

Dome: That's definitely ''not'' qui funziona così. Changes never require discussion and agreement ''in advance''. (That would mean that Wikipedians were obliged to discuss and reach agreement before, then write later. It would also imply that old versions are by nature better than new ones. We would not have much text in wikipedia that way.)<br>It is exactly the other way 'round. By principle, changes are expected/suspected/conjectured to be improvements; even better when they are explained on the discussion's page. Whoever disagrees with a change ''then'' has the chance to contest it, to discuss and to falsify it. Especially when the old wording/formulation has not even been discussed ever before, it has no such privilege of age, or old tradition or such.<br>So it is your turn now, Dome, to explain to us why 78.134.1.163's modifications were wrong. Annulling such changes without responding to the subject matter is at best arbitrary; I am sad to say that I believe it is trolling. You had no right to do so, for the changes were not obvious trolling, but seemed to be sound and well-founded at first glance. Therefore, they deserve to stay, then to be scrutinized, and in case to be falsified or accepted in discussion ''now'', and in case to be replaced by a better - maybe the old - version. Best greetings, WaldiR