Talk:Homosexuality: Disease or Way of Life?

Formatting
DePiep, could you please explain the reason for this edit? I am not sure why you consider the change an improvement. FreeKnowledgeCreator (talk) 15:22, 27 January 2018 (UTC)
 * sfn does not recognise multiple authors (they don't show, and are like "bad parameters"). sfnm does, and uses those systematic parameter names (1a1, 1a2 for authors etc.). Best test is to compare the pre- and after- versions of my edit. -DePiep (talk) 20:10, 27 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your response. I have carefully compared the most recent revision of the article, edited by you, to the previous version and I honestly fail to see any improvement. I am not even clear what you mean when you say that multiple editors "don't show" when sfn is used. Looking at the references section in the previous version of the article, I see that all author names are listed in the footnotes, with the single exception of Bieber and his co-authors, who are listed as "Bieber et al." The current version is exactly the same - there is no improvement. FreeKnowledgeCreator (talk) 20:24, 27 January 2018 (UTC)
 * I did not check myself for visual, rendered effect (I worked by template definition; and did no typo checks). Later more. -DePiep (talk) 20:23, 27 January 2018 (UTC)


 * This is the diff:
 * edit diff

pre:

after

-DePiep (talk) 20:31, 27 January 2018 (UTC)
 * OK, I see the relevant difference now. Restored your change. FreeKnowledgeCreator (talk) 20:33, 27 January 2018 (UTC)
 * It is wiki-illegal to change a talkpage post after someone replied. Because: that makes others like me look like a fool. I now leave this silly thread. Ping me if there is a serious issue. But only then-DePiep (talk) 20:38, 27 January 2018 (UTC)


 * You are the one who changed a talkpage post, by removing my comments here. I did you the favor of assuming that was simply a mistake. Did you even check carefully to see what you did in that edit? You should be aware that edits like this, removing whole discussions including comments by another user, look like simple vandalism. FreeKnowledgeCreator (talk) 20:43, 27 January 2018 (UTC)

WP:REDACT
Now listen. This is the edit sequence:
 * 1. DP: 20:11 my re
 * 2. FKC: 20:17 ok, all fine
 * 3. FKC: 20:21 wtf???
 * 4. DP/FKC ec: 20:23 wtf??? (even changed time?!)
 * 5. DP: 20:23 reply to OP,
 * 6. FKC: 20:24 full rv

In other words, you edited your post (2, 3) afterwards, and while I was replying to your OP. Sou you are trespassing DePiep (talk) 21:13, 27 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Once again, did you even bother to look at the edit you made here? You removed part of my talk page post with no explanation and no justification. You simply should not have done that. WP:REDACT has no relevance to the issue. Nor does it justify this further removal of my talk page comments, or the presumptuous alteration of my talk page comments you made here. FreeKnowledgeCreator (talk) 21:19, 27 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Yes, that is the DP: 20:23 diff I listed above! It shows YOU edited your post afterwards, while I was responding to your original post. That is what WP:REDACT is about. -DePiep (talk)
 * No, you are simply mistaken. I linked to an edit by you, not by me. You are apparently confused about what edit you are referring to. Furthermore, you had not replied to me when I made this alteration to my previous talk post, so I had every right to make it. Note that you once again removed part of my talk page comments here, once again with no justification. FreeKnowledgeCreator (talk) 21:40, 27 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Yesssss, you brilliant bright bulb. I encountered an edit conflict, because you did edit afterwards. That is why it was "my" edit. That is what the diff shows! Now if you keep denying you did edit in your original post afterwards, try ANI. - DePiep (talk) 22:41, 27 January 2018 (UTC)