@ireneista To be clear: I think the first one was definitely deserved. None of us have edited Wikipedia for about 20 years and back then the flow was to add a stub and then extend it, because it's much easier to get people to improve articles than contribute new ones, so that's what we tried to do. That seems not to be the flow anymore.
The second one was probably a valid concern as well. We made a lot of improvements after that.
The third one just seems like an editor being obnoxious for no reason. On the other hand, maybe I'm too close to the material and the explanations need to be clearer. But some guidance on that would help, rather than just 'a 15-year-old, who is reading an article on a subject that requires you to have some understanding of how instruction sets work, would not understand this'.
I've had several books, over 150 articles, and a load of academic papers published, so I have some idea of how editing normally works in a variety of contexts. A content editor who wrote the comment from the last review would not remain working at a publisher for very long.
=> More informations about this toot | View the thread | More toots from david_chisnall@infosec.exchange
=> View ireneista@irenes.space profile
text/geminiThis content has been proxied by September (3851b).