Difference between revisions of "User talk:RobLeonardWoo"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
(Yes, it is impossible to explain this kind of action. How can copy edits offend, it isn't clear?) |
(Let's have a proper discussion!) |
||
| Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
::[[User:RobSmith|RobS]], I do not understand this reaction to my copy editing. Where is the edit warring? I thought my edits were constructive and I carefully avoided – or at least tried to – any substantive change to meaning. I admit to finding aspects of the article narrow, even misogynistic, given that there are conservative women, such as Phyllis Schafly, who fought for women's rights from a conservative point of view. Even Andy Schafly, in an interview, felt that his mother might have been a feminist, because she believed in equality. | ::[[User:RobSmith|RobS]], I do not understand this reaction to my copy editing. Where is the edit warring? I thought my edits were constructive and I carefully avoided – or at least tried to – any substantive change to meaning. I admit to finding aspects of the article narrow, even misogynistic, given that there are conservative women, such as Phyllis Schafly, who fought for women's rights from a conservative point of view. Even Andy Schafly, in an interview, felt that his mother might have been a feminist, because she believed in equality. | ||
Surely these edits didn't require discussion and if [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] had problem with anything, he should have calmly explained what was wrong. I began with a small edit to test the water and this was accepted and remains.--[[User:RobLeonardWoo|RobLeonardWoo]] ([[User talk:RobLeonardWoo|talk]]) 18:04, September 13, 2022 (EDT) | Surely these edits didn't require discussion and if [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] had problem with anything, he should have calmly explained what was wrong. I began with a small edit to test the water and this was accepted and remains.--[[User:RobLeonardWoo|RobLeonardWoo]] ([[User talk:RobLeonardWoo|talk]]) 18:04, September 13, 2022 (EDT) | ||
| + | |||
| + | :::I checked my edits and remain bewildered. What has upset you [[User:Conservative|Conservative]]? Let's discuss this on the Talk page..--[[User:RobLeonardWoo|RobLeonardWoo]] ([[User talk:RobLeonardWoo|talk]]) 19:09, September 13, 2022 (EDT) | ||
Revision as of 23:09, September 13, 2022
You may not edit Conservapedia's feminism article anymore. Your edits are not wanted. Conservative (talk) 14:32, September 13, 2022 (EDT)
- What is this nonsense Conservative, explain yourself? I made perfectly "legitimate" edits that were intended to make the article more concise and therefore more effective.
- No, I do not care to explain myself. And you are banned from editing the article. Conservative (talk) 17:19, September 13, 2022 (EDT)
- Looks like a topic ban. There's been edit warring on the page since May, with little or no constructive changes made to the article. Perhaps you should have posted proposed changes on talk before edit warring? RobSIch bin ein breakfast taco 17:26, September 13, 2022 (EDT)
- RobS, I do not understand this reaction to my copy editing. Where is the edit warring? I thought my edits were constructive and I carefully avoided – or at least tried to – any substantive change to meaning. I admit to finding aspects of the article narrow, even misogynistic, given that there are conservative women, such as Phyllis Schafly, who fought for women's rights from a conservative point of view. Even Andy Schafly, in an interview, felt that his mother might have been a feminist, because she believed in equality.
Surely these edits didn't require discussion and if Conservative had problem with anything, he should have calmly explained what was wrong. I began with a small edit to test the water and this was accepted and remains.--RobLeonardWoo (talk) 18:04, September 13, 2022 (EDT)
- I checked my edits and remain bewildered. What has upset you Conservative? Let's discuss this on the Talk page..--RobLeonardWoo (talk) 19:09, September 13, 2022 (EDT)