User talk:Breawycker/rollback errors/Archive 1

Yes, you stifled my right to complain about an unfair edit. This is disgusting. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.113.119.2 (talk) 20:39, 1 June 2011 (UTC) —75.183.106.119 (talk) 18:44, 2 June 2011 (UTC) Is anybody actually reading this edit? (Which wasn't even my edit in the 1st place.) It's "bloody" as in "bloodiest single-day battle in American history", not as in "bloody hell". Now, if someone wishes to argue that "Union victory" is a better description of the Battle of Antietam than "bloody stalemate", that's fine by me. I just don't think it should have been auto-reverted by a robot (the robots around here in general do an extraordinary job), nor do I think the robot's edit should be mindlessly defended by sanctimonious human Wikipedians. 184.36.90.183 (talk) 05:13, 17 January 2011 (UTC) --Breawycker (talk) 19:12, 17 January 2011 (UTC) Re: roll-back for melanoma page changes Uh, why did you rollback my recent change on the melanoma page ? It is real doctor-speak more than what was there originally, anyway. Least it was when I learned this stuff. YMMV, naturally. Jackfirst (talk) 22:50, 17 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Do you mean changing it to the or more to mmore?--Breawycker (talk) 23:36, 17 January 2011 (UTC)
 * I'll check. If I made a typo, change that, don't revert. Particularly don't revert without an explaination on the talk page. Guaranteed to make good-faith editors angry and it is decidedly unwikilike. [sic]
 * If you like, I can cite you "the rules" ad nauseum about all the stuff necessary to maintain collegiality here. And yes, your efforts in correcting vandalism are appreciated. But occasionally there are such things here as real editors and real edits. But doubtless you know this.
 * BTW, I note the "wellcome to wikipedia". While I have not run into you previously, I have been posting here on and off for roughly four years. Also was invited to post to derm articles ( see my talk poge )). Which I am doing. Jackfirst (talk) 00:02, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

Stop deleting images of mollusks without contacting the WikiProject Gastropods group and ASKING
Not to be disrespectful, but please do not interfere with the images being uploaded by this new editor. (Example, Conus andremenezi.) I know that you think that you are being helpful by your deletions, but you are not. The images in the Cone snail articles which you deleted were just recently uploaded (less than a day or two ago) by a brand new editor who is being watched and mentored. Your "help" will end up discouraging him at absolutely the wrong time - when he needs to be encouraged and feel good about his work. The new editor in question has over 2300 images he can help WikiProject Gastropods with, a huge and valuable assistance.

What needed to be done was for the images to be given proper captions. The different images are meant to reflect the variability of the species - something unique to living creatures rather than manufactured items. Mollusks are not like postage stamps, so having multiple images which show the variation in shape and color is extremely important. I have replaced the images in question and given the images captions to reflect that the image is to show variation in the species. The new editor is just learning, and deleting his work may have a strong negative influence rather than a positive one. Let us police our own. Thank you. User:Shellnut (talk) 05:10, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

Île-de-France tramway Line 1
Useddenim (talk) 22:11, 8 July 2012 (UTC)
 * 1) All the information in the table was included in the Route Diagram Template.
 * 2) The images were moved for clarity.
 * 3) I didn't appreciate the newbie message.
 * 4) Don't bother undoing your "corrections". I've already reverted them.

Roger Goodman
Please see copy received earlier this evening from KOMO 4 News--showing that it is recognized that an error was made. They have corrected the libelous statement accordingly, therefore, any changes to reflect otherwise are considered intentional. THANKS. (I apologize. I reported this before reading your earlier message.)

-

Liv Grohn (talk) 04:38, 23 July 2014 (UTC)Liv Grohn