Talk:DNS: Difference between revisions

From FlightGear wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
No edit summary
mNo edit summary
Line 7: Line 7:


[[User:T3r|T3r]] ([[User talk:T3r|talk]]) 10:23, 14 November 2016 (EST)
[[User:T3r|T3r]] ([[User talk:T3r|talk]]) 10:23, 14 November 2016 (EST)
: Obviously, it was far from unmaintained- in fact, it received more edits than the version you started (and also contained more information). The motivation (as stated in the edit logs) was to fork your article, because we obviously disagreed regarding the contents to be added, i.e. so that we can maintain a copy until your article actually contains a similar degree of information, I've restored the copy elsewhere. Otherwise, there simply is a significant disparity between the degree of information available in the archives and what we make available in the wiki. Actually, it was a rather bold move to simply delete my work and hijack its title without properly discussing this with fellow wiki admins first. If others had done this to articles documenting your work, there would be hardly any useful information left here - as a matter of fact, I don't think the [[Phi]] article contains even a single edit made by you, despite containing tons of content you posted via the devel list. Thus, I would politely suggest to tread more carefully here. We don't need to make this a virtual peeing contest. Thank you.  --[[User:Hooray|Hooray]] ([[User talk:Hooray|talk]]) 14:04, 17 November 2016 (EST)

Revision as of 19:04, 17 November 2016

Page name

What is the rationale to copy the content of my original page "Dns" to the uppercase variant of "DNS"?

This unsigned comment was added by T3r (Talk | contribs) 13:01, November 14, 2016 (UTC)

Sorry for leaving my comment unintentionally unsigned. My wiki skills are a little rusted.

T3r (talk) 10:23, 14 November 2016 (EST)

Obviously, it was far from unmaintained- in fact, it received more edits than the version you started (and also contained more information). The motivation (as stated in the edit logs) was to fork your article, because we obviously disagreed regarding the contents to be added, i.e. so that we can maintain a copy until your article actually contains a similar degree of information, I've restored the copy elsewhere. Otherwise, there simply is a significant disparity between the degree of information available in the archives and what we make available in the wiki. Actually, it was a rather bold move to simply delete my work and hijack its title without properly discussing this with fellow wiki admins first. If others had done this to articles documenting your work, there would be hardly any useful information left here - as a matter of fact, I don't think the Phi article contains even a single edit made by you, despite containing tons of content you posted via the devel list. Thus, I would politely suggest to tread more carefully here. We don't need to make this a virtual peeing contest. Thank you. --Hooray (talk) 14:04, 17 November 2016 (EST)