Siteadmin, Check users, nsTeam1RO, nsTeam1RW, nsTeam1_talkRO, nsTeam1_talkRW, oversight, Administrators
30,650
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
mLine 111:
Line 111: − − ::::Correcting a perceived math error is a good justification for an edit, especially one that's not harming the point of the story it was a part of. Ed Poor could have just reverted the edit and explained to StatMsn why his figure was incorrect, but a block? This is a wiki, after all, so there should be more tolerance for edits made in good faith. --[[User:DinsdaleP|DinsdaleP]] 21:47, 27 May 2008 (EDT)
Reverted edits by DinsdaleP (Talk); changed back to last version by Aschlafly
::: When someone insists on "correcting" someone else, as in StatsMsn's case, then he should have a good justification. Otherwise, he's just harming the site, and the site is better off by blocking him.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 21:35, 27 May 2008 (EDT)
::: When someone insists on "correcting" someone else, as in StatsMsn's case, then he should have a good justification. Otherwise, he's just harming the site, and the site is better off by blocking him.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 21:35, 27 May 2008 (EDT)