On 10/7/05, Ryan Delaney ryan.delaney@gmail.com wrote:
Maybe my way of responding to that is viewed as hostile because this isn't part of the common understanding, but I think it probably should be. Of course I don't want to step on anyone's toes, but if the article has to suffer because someone takes reverts personally, there isn't much I can do.
Actually, there IS much you can do. Start by leaving a talk page post explaining just what you think is wrong with the other person's edits each time you use your "rv: not an improvement" message. That's all it takes. You can do a lot with very little effort.
Your way is hostile not because it isn't part of the common understanding, it's hostile because it criticizes other editors and makes no attempt to be non-hostile. It also gives no impression of what you find wrong with someone else's good faith edit. I sincerely hope your current method NEVER becomes part of the common understanding.
-- Michael Turley User:Unfocused