User talk:87.28.141.207

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

It might not have been your intention, but your recent edit removed content from Red Brigades. Please be careful not to remove content from Wikipedia without a valid reason, which you should specify in the edit summary or on the article's talk page. Take a look at our welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. A link to the edit I have reverted can be found here: link. If you believe this edit should not have been reverted, please contact me. NickContact/Contribs 08:52, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

January 2008[edit]

Information.png

Hi, the recent edit you made to Atom Heart Mother has been reverted, as it appears to be unconstructive. Use the sandbox for testing; if you believe the edit was constructive, ensure that you provide an informative edit summary. You may also wish to read the introduction to editing. Thanks. – Gurch 17:30, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

December 2012[edit]

Hello, I'm Auric. I noticed that you recently removed some content from Campo de' Fiori without explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry, I restored the removed content. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks! Auric 12:59, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

If this is a shared IP address, and you didn't make the edit, consider creating an account for yourself so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.
Dear Auric, (1) In Wikipedia it is not mandatory to explain all edits. As you will notice, many in that very article (as well as in many other Wikipedia articles) are not explained. (2) Specifically, I did not think it was necessary to explain, e.g., the change from "field of flowers" to "field of the flowers", corresponding to a correct translation from Italian; unfortunately, you have reverted to the wrong translation (and without offering an explanation of your change...). Overall, you did not do Wikipedia a good service this time around. Furthermore, you defined "vandalism" my edits and I expect apologies for that. Thanks. --87.28.141.207 (talk) 16:37, 5 January 2013 (UTC)
Sorry about that. I had intended to revert only your removal of the note "<ref name="Romanesco" group="note"/>", which caused a Cite error. You are welcome to change it back, although it still feels ungrammatical in English. I checked it in Google Translate and "Campo de' Fiori" does not translate to anything but "Campo de' Fiori". Campo del Fiori, however, comes back as "field of flowers". Explaining edits, such as your removal of the note, is not mandatory, but is considered good manners. Also please add new comments to the bottom of talkpages, as I have done here.--Auric Talk 17:32, 5 January 2013 (UTC)
Sir, Google Translator is not the right tool of the trade in these situations. Clarifying the technical/content issue would entail for me to write at length to explain the difference between «campo de' fiori», «campo dei fiori», «campo di fiori» and «campo del fiori» (your reading). I will not embark in such venture. Also, I hope you will take no offense but here is reminding you that I do not work for you (more on this here: http://phys.org/news/2013-01-wikipedia-editors.html). "Good manners" would perhaps suggest that you go restoring that article. However this is for you to judge and I will certainly not interfere with your duties today. Regards. --87.28.141.207 (talk) 17:16, 6 January 2013 (UTC)
I'm sorry, but "field of the flowers" still feels off to me. Are you a professional translator? You are welcome to restore your translation if you want. (WP:SOFIXIT) You do not work for me, but I also do not work for you.--Auric Talk 17:59, 6 January 2013 (UTC)