| Revision as of 19:45, 11 November 2024 editBearian (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, New page reviewers, Rollbackers84,448 edits →Dutch exonyms: new sectionTags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit New topic← Previous edit | Revision as of 19:45, 11 November 2024 edit undoBearian (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, New page reviewers, Rollbackers84,448 edits →Dutch exonyms: Fixed syntaxTags: Mobile edit Mobile web editNext edit → | ||
| Line 46: | Line 46: | ||
| == ] == | == ] == | ||
| I think this was kept but ] (]) 19:45, 11 November 2024 (UTC) | I think this was kept but ]. Do you want to nominate this again? ] (]) 19:45, 11 November 2024 (UTC) | ||
Revision as of 19:45, 11 November 2024
 Archives (Index) |
|
This page is archived by ClueBot III. |
Edit to Adultery page
Hello,
I had started to try and rework the Hinduism section on the page as it was bloated, didn't read well and had problems with the sources. However I have seen that these edits were reverse, I thought I would reach out to you here to discuss the section. I am not trying to restate any of the facts, just clean up a number of errors (especially in regards to the sources) and generally make the section higher quality and more legible. I would like to discuss the edits with you here before I make any more edits, to reassure that these edits are genuine and will produce a better article.
Best, Bodha2 (talk) 13:54, 22 September 2024 (UTC)
- You should take this discussion to the article’s talk page. PepperBeast (talk) 14:33, 22 September 2024 (UTC)
I think your edit was a mistake, I have reverted you
I think that this edit was a mistake, instead of engaging with what were valid and constructive points you shut down the conversation. I am at a loss for why you would do that, but anyway I have reverted. Have a nice day. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 16:43, 26 September 2024 (UTC)
- Hatnote was appropriate. An article talk page is not the best place to discuss Misplaced Pages in general or what articles should be created. It was also several years ago. PepperBeast (talk) 02:17, 27 September 2024 (UTC)
Name articles
Variations of names are a legitimate addition to articles about the history and usage of said names. Most of the variants are included in name dictionaries. i am reverting your deletions and suggest you discuss it on the talk pages before restoring your deletions. Your edits are disputed. Bookworm857158367 (talk) 03:46, 4 October 2024 (UTC)
Shia islam: Terminology
I don't believe your recent edit on shia Islam, is constructive. Terminology section is part of the body and should act as a semi full overview. Your edit diminished insight and visibility of the subject. I want to revert it and I'll edit it for clarity if you think it needs more work.
reaching out because I'm watching the page. Bro The Man (talk) 16:01, 29 October 2024 (UTC)
- This discussion belongs over at Talk:Shia. PepperBeast (talk) 16:54, 29 October 2024 (UTC)
- i realised i missread the edits you made. They are constructive. thank you. Bro The Man (talk) 04:17, 31 October 2024 (UTC)
Dutch exonyms
I think this was kept but consensus seems to have changed. Do you want to nominate this again? Bearian (talk) 19:45, 11 November 2024 (UTC)