Jump to content

User talk:Apollo1203: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
→‎Revert: itemized
Line 15: Line 15:
8. I downcased another ref title.
8. I downcased another ref title.
Which of these do you consider not to be an improvement in the copy? [[User:LeadSongDog|LeadSongDog]] <small>[[User talk:LeadSongDog#top|<span style="color: red; font-family:Papyrus;">come howl!</span>]]</small> 20:29, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
Which of these do you consider not to be an improvement in the copy? [[User:LeadSongDog|LeadSongDog]] <small>[[User talk:LeadSongDog#top|<span style="color: red; font-family:Papyrus;">come howl!</span>]]</small> 20:29, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
<br>
:Thank you for the clarification. I've reviewed the edits further:
::1. I edited the references as you had in my edits
::2. He is introduced as Pramukh Swami Maharaj throughout, so keeping 'Pramukh Swami Maharaj received...' is fine regarding initiation
::3. Yogiji Maharaj became guru in 1951 when Shastriji Maharaj passed away. Yogiji Maharaj is credited as declaring Pramukh Swami Maharaj as his successor upon his passing in 1971.
::4. I replaced the use of Pramukh Swami Maharaj with 'he' in the instance of 'As president of BAPS...'
[[User:Apollo1203|Apollo1203]] ([[User talk:Apollo1203#top|talk]]) 20:52, 10 December 2019 (UTC)

Revision as of 20:52, 10 December 2019

Revert

You reverted me saying "unsourced edits". What part of that edit did you think was a change of substance that needed new refs? I thought it was just copyediting. LeadSongDog come howl! 18:48, 10 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Correct it wasn't a substance change, however, I don't think it helped improve the article therefore I reverted your edits. I believe there wasn't anything incorrect with the grammar or English the way it was written. Apollo1203 (talk) 19:33, 10 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
In future, please try not to use misleading edit comments. It undermines good faith editing. Now, item by item:

1. I downcased a ref title from "A New Face of Hinduism: The Swaminarayan Religion" to "A new face of Hinduism: The Swaminarayan religion" as is the normal practice. I trust that was not objectionable. 2. I corrected an anachronism from "Pramukh Swami Maharaj" to "Patel", as he had not yet taken that name. 3. I removed the recent addition of the ambiguous "Yogiji Maharaj" used to indicate Shastriji Maharaj. 4. I corrected the redundant use of "Pramukh Swami Maharaj" for the second time in a single para. 5. I used more succinct phrasing, avoiding repetition of the article title, and corrected tense. 6. I corrected the misattribution of effort by BAPS as a whole to its leader. 7. I used more succinct phrasing, avoiding repetition of the article title. 8. I downcased another ref title. Which of these do you consider not to be an improvement in the copy? LeadSongDog come howl! 20:29, 10 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the clarification. I've reviewed the edits further:
1. I edited the references as you had in my edits
2. He is introduced as Pramukh Swami Maharaj throughout, so keeping 'Pramukh Swami Maharaj received...' is fine regarding initiation
3. Yogiji Maharaj became guru in 1951 when Shastriji Maharaj passed away. Yogiji Maharaj is credited as declaring Pramukh Swami Maharaj as his successor upon his passing in 1971.
4. I replaced the use of Pramukh Swami Maharaj with 'he' in the instance of 'As president of BAPS...'

Apollo1203 (talk) 20:52, 10 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]