TrainBusFan06

Minor 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)

@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)

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)

July 2024

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)

@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)

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)

@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)

@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)

@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)

Hello. I have noticed that you often edit without using an edit summary. Please do your best to always fill in the summary field. This helps your fellow editors use their time more productively, rather than spending it unnecessarily scrutinizing and verifying your work. Even a short summary is better than no summary, and summaries are particularly important for large, complex, or potentially controversial edits. To help yourself remember, you may wish to check the "prompt me when entering a blank edit summary" box in your preferences. Thanks! Danners430 (talk) 11:16, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

@Danners430: To be honest, an edit summary is not strictly necessary when only making minor alterations. If you look at my edit history in full, I do usually describe any major changes/additions whenever possible. TrainBusFan06 (talk) 13:17, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

Quoting from the link above:

According to the consensus policy, all edits should be explained (unless the reason for them is obvious)—either by clear edit summaries, or by discussion on the associated talk page. It is a good practice to provide a meaningful summary for every edit, especially when reverting (undoing) the actions of other editors or deleting existing text; otherwise, people may question your motives for the edit. In appropriate circumstances, a summary can be quite brief ("ce" and "rvv" for example).

Accurate summaries help other contributors decide whether they want to review an edit, and to understand the change should they choose to review it. Edits without edit summaries are more likely to be reverted incorrectly because they provide no explanation or rationale for the change. Editors should not revert an otherwise good edit because of a missing or confusing edit summary; good editors may simply have forgotten, or a confusing edit summary may have been the result of an autofill mishap. (If the edit summary itself violates privacy or other policies, see the Fixing section below.) However, realistically, when a major edit (e.g., addition or deletion of a substantial amount of article text, or a substantial rewrite) doesn't have an edit summary, some busy editors might not assume good faith and revert the change without evaluating it properly. Providing an edit summary helps prevent that kind of error.

Summaries are less important for minor changes (which means generally unchallengeable changes, such as spelling or grammar corrections), but a brief note like "fixed spelling" is helpful even then.

To avoid accidentally leaving edit summaries blank, registered editors can select "Prompt me when entering a blank edit summary" on the Editing tab of the user preferences.

It is incredibly helpful for other editors if you leave an edit summary - even if it's simply "sp" if you fixed spelling. Looking at recent edits you have marked as "minor" and provided no edit summary for, they include changing dates as well as other minor tweaks - people have no idea what you are doing if you don't leave a summary. So as per the quoted text, please do make an effort to leave one wherever possible. Some editors even add edit summaries when replying to talk pages! Danners430 (talk) 13:51, 18 July 2024 (UTC)