User talk:Soroxas: Difference between revisions

No edit summary
Line 323: Line 323:


::::For the third time, I was understandably nescient and never clicked "undo". My point is you didn't have to revert ''all'' my edits. You were ''aware'' and seemed to do what you did either out of laziness or spite. There's a huge difference in context between my edit and your edit and I think I have the right to "grouse" (no, it's really just mentioning what you did). All I said was "Actually look at my edits before you click undo" on the article. You're the one so bothered by that that you decide to leave me a message and yet you claim I'm the upset one? Sure. [[User:Soroxas|Soroxas]] ([[User talk:Soroxas|talk]]) 04:03, 18 February 2019 (UTC)
::::For the third time, I was understandably nescient and never clicked "undo". My point is you didn't have to revert ''all'' my edits. You were ''aware'' and seemed to do what you did either out of laziness or spite. There's a huge difference in context between my edit and your edit and I think I have the right to "grouse" (no, it's really just mentioning what you did). All I said was "Actually look at my edits before you click undo" on the article. You're the one so bothered by that that you decide to leave me a message and yet you claim I'm the upset one? Sure. [[User:Soroxas|Soroxas]] ([[User talk:Soroxas|talk]]) 04:03, 18 February 2019 (UTC)
:::::"I was understandably nescient" -- this is the thing that you need to correct. That is why I made a post informing you of the misstep that you had made, so that you could spend effort trying to correct it. Excuses do not correct the misstep.
:::::"and never clicked "undo"" -- this isn't relevant. You undid an edit that was fixing the article. Whether you actually clicked the "undo" button or not, you made a misstep.
:::::" My point is you didn't have to revert ''all'' my edits." -- as I've tried to explain multiple times -- yes, I did. Reviewers are supposed to be checking all the edits going through to make sure they are good -- taking the time to fix bad edits step by step, instead of just rejecting them, is a bonus, not the expectation. Time is at a premium.
:::::"I think I have the right to "grouse"" -- you don't. This kind of thing is why the "2-years" thing was suggested to begin with. You are ''not'' familiar with the wiki's policies or standards, and when you're informed of them you've habitually lashed out instead of rigorously trying to get up to speed. I and many other editors have been banned in the past for less. Please focus on trying to learn the wiki's standards, as long as you learn them nobody is going to care whether or not your prior missteps were on purpose. All we care about is good content.
:::::"You're the one so bothered by that that you decide to leave me a message" -- I'm correcting you on wiki policy and standards. That doesn't make me upset.{{User:KrytenKoro/Sig}} 14:23, 18 February 2019 (UTC)


== Under Construction ==
== Under Construction ==
Please don't remove the under construction notices from the keyblades. They are still missing recipe and stat growth info, as well as (in discussion) formchange and shotlock info.{{User:KrytenKoro/Sig}} 01:25, 18 February 2019 (UTC)
Please don't remove the under construction notices from the keyblades. They are still missing recipe and stat growth info, as well as (in discussion) formchange and shotlock info.{{User:KrytenKoro/Sig}} 01:25, 18 February 2019 (UTC)
:Also, the "Keyblades (Sora)" category is added automatically by the template, or at least is supposed to be.{{User:KrytenKoro/Sig}} 01:28, 18 February 2019 (UTC)
:Also, the "Keyblades (Sora)" category is added automatically by the template, or at least is supposed to be.{{User:KrytenKoro/Sig}} 01:28, 18 February 2019 (UTC)
53,710

edits