User talk:Wikiwikiwankawanka

London School of Economics
Thank you for your edit to the article London School of Economics. I have noticed you reverted my inclusion of a referenced comment to an important statistic in the lead of the article. My reasoning for the clarification is that the statistic by itself is rather misleading. If such a statistic is included in the lead, then it should be explained properly or not included at all. It is for this reason that I understand your previous reversion of my inclusion of a certain world ranking in the lead. By inserting the clarification, I was following WP:BOLD. I cannot see any explanation for your reversion, which, unfortunately, is particularly unhelpful. For this reason, I am restoring the addition. If you still disagree with what is written after reading this message, please reply to me either here or on the talk page of the article and we can discuss what would be most appropriate and seek guidance from other editors. For the time being, however, it is very difficult to know your opinion when you have not explained your revert. 131.111.185.66 (talk) 21:35, 14 November 2013 (UTC)

London School of Economics (again)
Dear Wikiwikiwankawanka, please may you provide an explanation for your multiple reverts? I have already written to you with a thorough description of how I see the situation, yet you have simply reverted the changes without any justification. This is extremely unhelpful. I have inserted an entry about this in the article's talk page so that other editors can also comment. Wikipedia relies upon editor's justifying their actions, and it cannot function well without this. 131.111.185.66 (talk) 03:56, 17 November 2013 (UTC)