Difference between revisions of "User talk:Xtian"

From ArchWiki
Jump to: navigation, search
m (Editing talk pages: fixed indentation)
(Editing talk pages: re)
Line 20: Line 20:
  
 
:[[User:Xtian|Xtian]] ([[User talk:Xtian|talk]]) 23:37, 23 September 2013 (UTC)
 
:[[User:Xtian|Xtian]] ([[User talk:Xtian|talk]]) 23:37, 23 September 2013 (UTC)
 +
 +
::Editing old tab could indeed cause this problem, be more careful next time. -- [[User:Lahwaacz|Lahwaacz]] ([[User talk:Lahwaacz|talk]]) 16:54, 24 September 2013 (UTC)

Revision as of 16:54, 24 September 2013

Editing talk pages

I think there has been a misunderstanding regarding your recent edits: [1], [2]. I think that you visited the history of those pages, found your edits and clicked edit, right? Newer edits have been done since your last edit, and those edits were undone, because you edited an old revision of the page.

This is why you should never edit an old revision, unless you know exactly what you are doing (see also Help:Style#Discussion_pages):

  1. Never remove other people's posts, unless of course removing properly closed discussion (like in [3]).
  2. Do not edit your posts if somebody has already replied.

I'll have to undo those edits, please express yourself in a regular reply. (The reference to Help:Style from [4] was meant for your future edits.)

-- Lahwaacz (talk) 17:26, 15 September 2013 (UTC)

I must first say this feels weird to have a discussion on my "User talk:Xtian" page.
While I'm sure I did not visit history, its certainly possible we edited the same page within minutes (9/16). Its very possible I edited a tab rather than reloading the page (>_<) I will be more careful in the future.
As to the remark of 'some wireless driver's not requiring firmware' that's not me. In fact this is the reason for the discussion as I stated in the talk page, precisely because I don't know how dmesg reports other system hardware as a rule.
I included the BBS page--while it doesn't represent the same case--because it does represent quite well a diagnosis. And while the diagnosis is thorough, it nonetheless pulls the device driver name out of thin air. Yet, an earlier diagnosis step does identify the device driver. To include a back reference to this step seemed like a logical document fix.
Xtian (talk) 23:37, 23 September 2013 (UTC)
Editing old tab could indeed cause this problem, be more careful next time. -- Lahwaacz (talk) 16:54, 24 September 2013 (UTC)