Content deleted Content added
→Revert: cmt |
→Revert: Reply |
||
Line 29:
::::::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)
:::::::Are you two seriously resorting to debating the definition of 'copy edit'? We are talking about simple changes to improve cohesion, sentence flow and remove idiosyncratic phrasing. The only thing you don't like about this edit is that I made it, and it is pathetic. – [[User:Joe Roe|Joe]] <small>([[User talk:Joe Roe|talk]])</small> 04:28, 11 November 2022 (UTC)
== Some cleanup ==
| |||