User:Maurreen/Sandbox

Semi-related, not involving me

Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Edit Warring on Talk:John J. Pershing, including [1] (a diff just to make easier to find later)

Subhead deletion

Do you think it is appropriate to repeatedly delete subheads with no explanation?

When explanation was finally given, it was: "Stop adding subheads when someone objects. It means people can't refer back to the earlier section when section-editing."

This was clarified as meaning that editing directly in a subsection prevents the editor from simultaneously seeing what is above in the section.

Removal of update

An RFC establishes community support, in principle, for a new procedure. A number of people work to develop the procedure. A couple of weeks later, someone asks if anything remains to be done. About a week later, implementation begins.

A few days later, several editors discuss a summary of the procedure. During that discussion, tweaks were made but no objections were raised. One editor adds the summary to a policy page. I added the summary to other pages, including a talk page.

Fourteen hours later, an editor removed my notice from that talk page, with an edit summary of "still being worked out".

Do you think that deletion was appropriate?

Moving of comment

I open a new talk page section. An editor moves my comment. The edit summary doesn't even say that my comment was moved.

After I object, the editor explains, "Then don't open new sections to reply to a question I asked you in another section. ..."

I hadn't even seen the question. In between her question and my comment were four sections and five screens of text.

Do you think that movement was appropriate?

Removal of proposal

A new procedure (same as above) is undergoing rapid changes and much discussion. I put two proposals on the talk page. In the same section, I add what is at that time on the project page as the third proposal. An editor removed that, saying essentially that it has already gained consensus. The editor later says that any choice among the listed proposals would be tainted, because the other version was not compared.

Do you think that deletion was appropriate?