User talk:TrainBusFan06

Minor edit[edit]

Hello – a polite reminder to only tick the minor edit when there's a superficial difference – edits you've recently marked as minor have not been so. "A good rule of thumb is that edits consisting solely of spelling corrections, formatting changes, or rearrangement of text without modification of the content should be flagged as minor edits"

Best wishes, Turini2 (talk) 16:56, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Turini2: Hello and thanks for your message. I was thinking that rewriting something without changing its meaning should also count as minor. But I appreciate your early feedback on my contributions and will try and adjust where I see fit... TrainBusFan06 (talk) 19:00, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Also I like to remain consistent with the grammar used throughout one or more articles as the information looks better organised that way. Hence why I have been actively making changes recently... TrainBusFan06 (talk) 19:24, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

July 2024[edit]

Hello, I'm Danners430. I noticed that you recently removed content from London Underground rolling stock without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the removed content has been restored. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Removing sourced content counts as unexplained removal of content. If the removal is part of a content correction, then a new source must be used to refute the existing source. Danners430 (talk) 07:40, 1 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Danners430: that one particular bit of information, even though it was sourced, I felt I still had to delete as it was redundant/not worthy of mention. Not because it was incorrect. It can already be mentioned elsewhere. As a whole I was just trying to rewrite the whole section so that it was easier to read, which should not be discounted... TrainBusFan06 (talk) 07:51, 1 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No, it shouldn't be discounted - however, I would argue if you're re-writing sections to the extent that you're removing sources without replacement, maybe it's worth discussing at the talk page first? In any case, have a read of WP:BRD which would apply in this circumstance. Danners430 (talk) 10:00, 1 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Danners430: yes I am well aware of WP:BRD, hence why I did not want to carry on reverting. But thanks for your understanding of the situation. TrainBusFan06 (talk) 10:44, 1 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@TrainBusFan06 did you used to edit without being logged in? I was under the impression that you've only started making edits recently - it's good to have more editors around :) Turini2 (talk) 13:23, 1 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Turini2: yes, that is correct. I have edited on and off for the past couple of years. But I then preferred to have all my contributions in one place, even if I was not going to be a regular editor, rather than scattered about over various IPs. So in the end I decided to register. TrainBusFan06 (talk) 05:33, 3 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]