User talk:Ronherry/Archives/2024/June

Misleading edit summaries (false CE marking of significant edits)
Please do not use misleading edit summaries when making changes to Wikipedia pages, as you did to Cultural impact of Taylor Swift. This behavior is viewed as disruptive, and continuation may result in loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Horse Eye&#39;s Back (talk) 06:56, 2 June 2024 (UTC)


 * Please learn what's actually a WP:COPYEDIT. Thank you.  ℛonherry  ☘  08:12, 2 June 2024 (UTC)
 * In case you couldn't locate in the guideline what I'm talking, "copyedit" involves changes the "layout" of the information as well. Conversion of a wordy paragraph into a compact sentence listing the subjects (when the subjects all share the same motif) is a common type of copyedit on Wikipedia.  ℛonherry  ☘  08:18, 2 June 2024 (UTC)
 * These edits are not copy editing, I'm seeing significant changes... for example you remove sources and information, not just change their location. For example you removed "Organizers stated that the conference was more academic than fan-oriented with a fair amount of criticism among the approximately 400 papers submitted." completely as well as the given source . You also added content about the University of Kent which wasn't there to begin with. Horse Eye&#39;s Back (talk) 15:44, 2 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Yes, I added Kent as it's 4th university to host a conference on Swift, giving me incentive to stratify that entire bit into a list of universities instead of delving into the details of each of those symposiums.  ℛonherry  ☘  16:12, 2 June 2024 (UTC)
 * So... Yes it was not a copy edit? Horse Eye&#39;s Back (talk) 16:18, 2 June 2024 (UTC)
 * It is. Just because I did not only make a copyedit, but also added new information, does not mean it's not a copyedit. Regards.  ℛonherry  ☘  16:27, 2 June 2024 (UTC)
 * If its a copy edit *and* other stuff then using the CE summary alone is misleading. Horse Eye&#39;s Back (talk) 16:29, 2 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Even if the edit summary is "misleading" like you claim, it is not grounds for reverting a copyedit and a piece of new information.  ℛonherry  ☘  16:41, 2 June 2024 (UTC)
 * The grounds for reversion are that its not an improvement. Your misleading use of edit summaries is a behavioral issue, not a content issue. Note that you made two edits with misleading edit summaries, but only one got reverted. Horse Eye&#39;s Back (talk) 16:43, 2 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Disagreed. "Behavioral issue"? An ironic allegation considering your disruptive use of Wikipedia articles to provoke and hound editors you personally dislike. Your talk page history tells all. All I did here was turn a "A blah blah blah B blah blah blah C blah blah" paragraph into a concise "A, B, C" sentence.  ℛonherry  ☘  16:57, 2 June 2024 (UTC)
 * WP:NPA, please. Horse Eye&#39;s Back (talk) 19:07, 2 June 2024 (UTC)