Hi Paperkite! I have asked before, please don't remove information from articles, in particular the Holly's trivia section. I also ask that you don't use the edit summaries to leave snark remarks to other editors. If there is an issue, feel free to leave me a message about it. Thanks!
I apologize, the only information that was removed from the Holly page appeared to me to have nothing to do with Hollies specifically. It talks about how other holidays were updated with spriter's alts that year, but not even Hollies. The only relation I could find between that and the information was that Hollies were the only holidays lacking these alts, which I instead wrote to avoid removing entirely what was being said. It seems a better idea to me to write this trivia in the sections of relating dragons. And this "snark remark" I left? I regret if you feel I was purposely attempting to make critical comments about any user at all. Perhaps it read rudely, but my intention was to ask if something was finally in a format that was found acceptable, since you had not been happy when I made earlier edits. A single word was not the sole reason I had used an edit summary. You seem to be able to run this thing well enough by yourself, so don't worry. I'll back off, and you won't have to worry about my snark and poor editing.
The information you were removing is a context thing- to leave what you suggested only reports half of the story. I realise that a lot more dragons apart from just the Holly get mentioned (p.s. it's more than just a "relation"- the Hollies are directly mentioned through the point), but you can't give readers just half the story with that. I'm currently overhauling dragon articles and you'll see that same trivia will be added to all the dragons' pages too. It still talks about the Holly just fine, and is perfectly relevant, it just also happens to mention other dragons as well because that was the nature of the event/story. Much like the Howler Drake has information about the Neotropical (technically speaking), because the information relates to both of them.
I made mention of the remark because it came across to me that any constructive feedback that was being left when fixing the edits were being disregarded instead of being used to help improve your editing. I'm not telling you to back off Paperkite, I never have and I'm sorry if you feel that way. I give advice to help improve your editing style because I want to see users like yourself grow and learn. Many many times though I have highlighted (across many articles) the information removal aspect of your editing style. Instead of doing the same thing and hoping it is "acceptable" as you put in your edit summary, why not look at how others edit or what corrections were made so you can see what needs improvement?
Hi there, I thought it would go without saying but please do not edit the rules section of any part of the wiki. If there's an issue you feel needs to be attended to regarding a rule set, please send one of the admins a message, don't just make the changes yourself. Thanks!