Kaerana

Javi Gracia

It isn't possible to "compromise" between idiomatic and unidiomatic English. You restored the unidiomatic English. That was not constructive. Kaerana (talk) 18:33, 1 December 2019 (UTC)

Are you talking about the paragraph you added in which you spelled his name wrong? Kaerana (talk) 18:41, 1 December 2019 (UTC)

If you think there was some specific part of value in your edit which restored ungrammatical nonsense and unidiomatic phrasing to the article, then go ahead and make that specific change. When you undo my grammatical fixes in their entirety, an act tantamount to vandalism, don't expect me to search through your edit for some possible needle in a haystack of unconstructive changes. Kaerana (talk) 19:43, 1 December 2019 (UTC)

Now why would I say that you restored all of the grammatical blunders that I fixed? Maybe because that is what you did. [1]. Kaerana (talk) 20:29, 1 December 2019 (UTC)

explanation

I reverted you, and explained why here. Geo Swan (talk) 01:34, 2 December 2019 (UTC)

Please be more careful...

In this edit you seem to have combined editorial changes with removing or adding newlines.

Do you realize that because the standard diff renderer uses newlines as the marker for logical lines you are seriously eroding the diff renderer's utility?

In future, would you please consider making multiple edits. Make your changes to the article's editorial content - what it actually says to our readers - in separate edits.

In my opinion contributors should never take a paragraph, composed of multiple logical lines, and remove newlines, to make it a paragraph consisting of a single logical line. There is no utility to our readers to this change, and it unnecessarily erodes the utility of the diff renderer. Similarly, newlines should not be added, if they don't affect what our readers see.

I'd appreciate it if you made this effort, in future. Geo Swan (talk) 02:31, 2 December 2019 (UTC)

What is your history here...

What is your history here? You seem to have started using the Kaerana ID with some knowledge of the wikipedia's policies, but your user page doesn't contain any explanation like

"I participated here in 2017, using Joe Blow99, but I can't remember my password, lol, hence the fresh start. I am not trying to evade responsibility for my previous work..."

"I participated here in 2017, but was subjected to harrassment. I am not trying to evade responsibility for my previous work. Administrator JaneBlow knows the details, but I am not going to name my previous ID, for obvious reasons. But administrator JaneBlow will confirm I retired my previous ID in good standing."

Here is a suggestion. Why don't you add a brief explanation of your history to User:Kaerana. Why? Well you have a bold and confrontational editing style, and people might wonder whether you were evading a block placed on your previous ID. Geo Swan (talk) 02:51, 2 December 2019 (UTC)