Talk:Permutations: Difference between revisions
Content added Content deleted
mNo edit summary |
|||
| Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
If however, you do feel that users might clearly benefit in some way from the deletion of existing code, you can explain and motivate that suggestion here, and see whether you are able to establish any consensus. "Genuine" certainly sounds like an interesting concept, which other might like to have explained to them. Until then, the existing contributions can be restored, and your own can be added as a suggested variation [[User:Hout|Hout]] ([[User talk:Hout|talk]]) 23:01, 4 December 2016 (UTC) |
If however, you do feel that users might clearly benefit in some way from the deletion of existing code, you can explain and motivate that suggestion here, and see whether you are able to establish any consensus. "Genuine" certainly sounds like an interesting concept, which other might like to have explained to them. Until then, the existing contributions can be restored, and your own can be added as a suggested variation [[User:Hout|Hout]] ([[User talk:Hout|talk]]) 23:01, 4 December 2016 (UTC) |
||
:: Note incidentally, that the <pre>{{Trans|Language}}</pre> code is provided on this wiki because in the context of a Rosetta exercise, pieces of code which take the same approach but are written in different languages have a particular value, shedding light on similarities and differences between languages. Deletion of existing code will often (as in this case) unintentionally reduce the value of the site to users by unwittingly breaking {{Trans|Language}} links, both from and to the existing pieces of code. [[User:Hout|Hout]] ([[User talk:Hout|talk]]) 23:15, 4 December 2016 (UTC) |
|||
Revision as of 23:15, 4 December 2016
JavaScript – would you like to explain and motivation your deletion of existing contributions ?
I notice that Regexorciser has deleted some existing JavaScript contributions, replacing it with a variant explained only as constituting "genuine" JavaScript.
There is no need to delete existing contributions – you can simply add an alternative version and explain its merits.
If however, you do feel that users might clearly benefit in some way from the deletion of existing code, you can explain and motivate that suggestion here, and see whether you are able to establish any consensus. "Genuine" certainly sounds like an interesting concept, which other might like to have explained to them. Until then, the existing contributions can be restored, and your own can be added as a suggested variation Hout (talk) 23:01, 4 December 2016 (UTC)
- Note incidentally, that the
{{Trans|Language}}code is provided on this wiki because in the context of a Rosetta exercise, pieces of code which take the same approach but are written in different languages have a particular value, shedding light on similarities and differences between languages. Deletion of existing code will often (as in this case) unintentionally reduce the value of the site to users by unwittingly breaking links, both from and to the existing pieces of code. Hout (talk) 23:15, 4 December 2016 (UTC)
- Note incidentally, that the