User talk:Deadman137
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 30 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 2 sections are present. |
2025 Stanley Cup playoffs
[edit]How does my edit "not add much"? That was literally the defining part of the game. It seems like the kind of information Wikipedia should display. Mk8mlyb (talk) 04:27, 1 May 2025 (UTC)
- It's appropriate for the playoffs section of the team season article. Plus if you're mentioning what Florida did you'd have to mention that Tampa also did the same to keep it balanced. Stuff like that just has no long term value as it is not that uncommon for a team to score twice in quick succession. If they had set or tied the league record it would have something to stand on, but this doesn't get there. Deadman137 (talk) 04:40, 1 May 2025 (UTC)
- I think one source mentioned that both teams recorded their fastest two goals in the playoffs in their franchise histories. Does that make it worth mentioning? Mk8mlyb (talk) 05:00, 1 May 2025 (UTC)
- Not in the league article, it's fine for both team season articles though. Deadman137 (talk) 01:19, 2 May 2025 (UTC)
- I think one source mentioned that both teams recorded their fastest two goals in the playoffs in their franchise histories. Does that make it worth mentioning? Mk8mlyb (talk) 05:00, 1 May 2025 (UTC)
1984 Stanley Cup playoffs
[edit]Why did you revert my edit? The version I edited was more grammatically correct. Mk8mlyb (talk) 07:06, 18 May 2025 (UTC)
- No, you did more of the same stuff that we've talking to you about not doing for the last month. You are quickly running out of chances before actions may need to be considered to stop you.
- You have a passion and that's great but there is a mismatch between what you want to do and what is required to be effective in those areas. I know that you're trying to help out but you're just making more work for everyone else. Deadman137 (talk) 03:29, 19 May 2025 (UTC)
- The sentence was grammatically incorrect before I changed it to say something that sounded more structured, yet maintained the train of thought. How exactly is that the "same stuff" I've supposedly been doing? What exactly is disruptive about that? I'm basically trying to do what I've seen other editors do. I realize I need to understand policy better and that I've made some bad mistakes before, but I am genuinely trying to improve my actions and seek good sources and edit according to consensus. Most important, I've learned not to edit war. Mk8mlyb (talk) 04:20, 19 May 2025 (UTC)