![[icon]](http://l-userpic.livejournal.com/119956036/1407919) |
Meme-Free Zone - Jaffa bias
|
| | Security: | | | Subject: | Jaffa bias | | Time: | 12:04 pm |
|
| A while ago I edited the Wikipedia article on Jaffa cakes, mostly pointing out that they are no longer a monopoly of McVities and are sold by numerous competitors, and are now made in several sizes. Someone seems to have removed all my changes - I wonder who that could possibly be...
Later -  johnreiher seems to have persuaded the deletion person that this is a valid change, and my amendments are now in place. Many thanks! | comments: Leave a comment     |
| | As usual it will probably turn out to be some PR flunky for the company, or someone who wants 20 different sources before accepting any change. | | (Reply) (Parent) (Thread) |
| | From what I can see on the talk page for the article, he's called TheRedPenOfDoom, which I suppose is one step up from EliteWikipediaSuperEditor[citation_needed]1992. | | (Reply) (Thread) |
| | Some sort of deletionist wingnut then, if it isn't a McVities person. | | (Reply) (Parent) (Thread) |
| | He/she is someone I've come across several times before (on Wikipedia, not so far as I am aware in real life). Very definitely the kind of deletionist who demands that pretty much everything is sourced, but will sometimes (unlike quite a few others) do a rapid check for possible sources before deleting an unsourced statement. This seems to be what has happened the second time around on this occasion - note that he/she has now edited the article further down with a sourced paraphrase of your amendments (done that way, I suspect, on the basis that statements made in the introduction to an article don't need to be sourced there provided that they are repeated, usually in greater detail, and properly sourced further down). | | (Reply) (Parent) (Thread) |
|
Meme-Free Zone - Jaffa bias
|
|