Content deleted Content added
→Revert: fix indenting Tag: Reverted |
→Revert: cmt |
||
Line 27:
:::::[[Copy editing]] is generally understood as rewriting text to improve its readability without substantially changing its meaning. That is what I did. I'm sorry if you found the edit summary misleading, but what am I supposed to do about that now, three days and four reverts later? I will try to rephrase my question again: what changes would I have to make, for you to be happy with the edit you have chosen to revert? – [[User:Joe Roe|Joe]] <small>([[User talk:Joe Roe|talk]])</small> 06:08, 10 November 2022 (UTC)
::::::You quoted the broad introductory sentence from an article, but seem to have ignored my quote from the same article which put limitations on that - {{tq|simple revisions ... [not] rewrite a text line by line}} which I believe is aligned with the interpretation of copyediting held by the majority of the community. If I write "the author has written half a dozen books" and you change it to "the author has written six books", that is just a different way of saying the same thing. It is a stylistic change. Both are correct, you may think your way improves readability, but that would be just your opinion. If a such a stylistic change is disputed, the original version stands unless you can get a consensus to change it. You have provided no justification to make any changes, other than you seem to like your version better. {{noping|Pppery}} saw one small area to improve and made a minor change. {{noping|HouseBlaster}} has one specific concern which we are discussing, and said in general "It looks fabulous! " (that is in the archive if you don't believe me). Neither of them has called for a large rewrite. No one here agrees with you. This is really becoming [[WP:Disruptive]]. I wish you would drop this and [[WP:Listen|move on.]] [[User:MB|<b style="color:#034503">MB</b>]] 19:21, 10 November 2022 (UTC)
::::::Put in a nutshell, copy editors do not rewrite an author's work just because they don't like his/her style. Caution should be exercised before citing [[Copy editing]] without first reading the page. For one thing, copy editors are not necessarily subject experts. The NPP ''regulars'' work as a team and share the same goals for Wikipedia, the same as other work groups for any part of Wikipedia. As far as I can see, there is more than sufficient local consensus here that major changes to the text are not required. Any suggestions should be possible without incivility and personal attacks. The page is already better than it was before, because before it there was no page - and MB's idea that we have all adopted and improved together before publication is a huge contrast to the usual walls of policy and blue text new users are forced to swallow immediately. The new NPP coordinators and regulars are aware of recent new challenges of reviewing pages and with the WMF's collaboration, they are doing something about it. [[User:Kudpung|Kudpung กุดผึ้ง]] ([[User talk:Kudpung|talk]]) 03:56, 11 November 2022 (UTC)
== Some cleanup ==
| |||