6,353
edits
Talk:IQ: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
m
→Norming
m (→Norming) |
|||
| Line 67: | Line 67: | ||
:: I'll correct the rest of your new edits later, rolled them back for now, and locked the page. I'll go by your edits at my leisure and keep the good edits and remove/modify the points of disagreement between us. Not going to bother with edit wars (they are against the rules, in any case). I'll unlock this page when I'm done so you can state your points of disagreement again, and I will take them into consideration, but I will warn you not to touch the new lede until I've responded. That would constitute edit-warring. You'll have to learn to be happy with the lede as it then stands. You'll also have to wait for me to reintegrate your edits as there are more important articles to look over and edit. Not going to argue over this issue further, I've said my piece and it's clear you refuse to co-operate, read, or listen when it comes to certain bugbears you hold, in this case in regards to what I see as minor issues. [[User:Altmark22|Altmark22]] ([[User talk:Altmark22|talk]]) 09:46, 29 April 2021 (UTC) | :: I'll correct the rest of your new edits later, rolled them back for now, and locked the page. I'll go by your edits at my leisure and keep the good edits and remove/modify the points of disagreement between us. Not going to bother with edit wars (they are against the rules, in any case). I'll unlock this page when I'm done so you can state your points of disagreement again, and I will take them into consideration, but I will warn you not to touch the new lede until I've responded. That would constitute edit-warring. You'll have to learn to be happy with the lede as it then stands. You'll also have to wait for me to reintegrate your edits as there are more important articles to look over and edit. Not going to argue over this issue further, I've said my piece and it's clear you refuse to co-operate, read, or listen when it comes to certain bugbears you hold, in this case in regards to what I see as minor issues. [[User:Altmark22|Altmark22]] ([[User talk:Altmark22|talk]]) 09:46, 29 April 2021 (UTC) | ||
::: I have not much to say about this except that this is a rather drastic response to a medium-sized edit of an unfinished article that is not A-class, let alone categorized by quality at all. Unfinished articles benefit from reorganization and larger edits. I did not remove any information, I only removed some redundancies like the repetition on how IQ is related to various measures of success, as well as some redundant wording. [[User:Bibipi|Bibipi]] ([[User talk:Bibipi|talk]]) 15:26, 29 April 2021 (UTC) | ::: I have not much to say about this except that this is a rather drastic response to a medium-sized edit of an unfinished article that is not A-class, let alone categorized by quality at all. Unfinished articles benefit from reorganization and larger edits. I did not remove any information, I only removed some redundancies like the repetition on how IQ is related to various measures of success, as well as some redundant wording. [[User:Bibipi|Bibipi]] ([[User talk:Bibipi|talk]]) 15:26, 29 April 2021 (UTC) | ||
: Yeah, it's actually good. I was just annoyed that you completely altered the lede while I was gone tbh. I think four paragraphs, (what wikipedia advises) is a good general guide to optimal lede length. And I think the article is worthy of being A-class classified. I'll unlock soon and you can change what you don't like. [[User:Altmark22|Altmark22]] ([[User talk:Altmark22|talk]]) 23:07, 11 May 2021 (UTC) | |||