Difference between revisions of "Talk:Pocket door"
(Created page with "Nige, the object of the exercise is to leave some useful information that is also informative and interesting to read. Trimming a number of quite valid benefits of the system...") |
|||
| (3 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| − | Nige, the object of the exercise is to leave some useful information that is also informative and interesting to read. Trimming a number of quite valid benefits of the system | + | Nige, the object of the exercise is to leave some useful information that is also informative and interesting to read. Trimming a number of quite valid benefits of the system just devalues the whole piece. --[[User:John Rumm|John Rumm]] ([[User talk:John Rumm|talk]]) 13:23, 10 June 2018 (UTC) |
| + | |||
| + | I just snipped out the marketing junk. If you think any of it factual you could always reinsert it, perhaps with some explanation of how it's valid. | ||
| + | [[User:NT|NT]] ([[User talk:NT|talk]]) 13:00, 12 June 2018 (UTC) | ||
| + | |||
| + | Who are you trying to kid? You "snipped out" most of the article! | ||
| + | |||
| + | In short you removed: | ||
| + | * the description of what a pocket door is, and how it works; | ||
| + | * details on where and how it saves space; | ||
| + | * application note for use as a "temporary" door - room dividing etc; | ||
| + | * application note for use for sub-dividing rooms where there is inadequate space for a conventional door (en-suites etc); | ||
| + | * that its a relatively easy DIY install; | ||
| + | * that there are self install kits available; | ||
| + | |||
| + | That was why I reverted your edits. | ||
| + | |||
| + | I do agree that some of the language was a little too full of marketing hype, and there was a dubious claim on the amount of floor space saved, so I toned those down. | ||
| + | |||
| + | IMHO the wiki would benefit from greater rather than fewer contributors, and trashing articles from new contributors does not seem like a productive way to encourage more contributions. | ||
| + | --[[User:John Rumm|John Rumm]] ([[User talk:John Rumm|talk]]) 01:04, 13 June 2018 (UTC) | ||
| + | |||
| + | |||
| + | I see it's back to marketing nonsense. | ||
| + | [[User:NT|NT]] ([[User talk:NT|talk]]) 09:50, 16 June 2018 (UTC) | ||
Latest revision as of 09:50, 16 June 2018
Nige, the object of the exercise is to leave some useful information that is also informative and interesting to read. Trimming a number of quite valid benefits of the system just devalues the whole piece. --John Rumm (talk) 13:23, 10 June 2018 (UTC)
I just snipped out the marketing junk. If you think any of it factual you could always reinsert it, perhaps with some explanation of how it's valid. NT (talk) 13:00, 12 June 2018 (UTC)
Who are you trying to kid? You "snipped out" most of the article!
In short you removed:
- the description of what a pocket door is, and how it works;
- details on where and how it saves space;
- application note for use as a "temporary" door - room dividing etc;
- application note for use for sub-dividing rooms where there is inadequate space for a conventional door (en-suites etc);
- that its a relatively easy DIY install;
- that there are self install kits available;
That was why I reverted your edits.
I do agree that some of the language was a little too full of marketing hype, and there was a dubious claim on the amount of floor space saved, so I toned those down.
IMHO the wiki would benefit from greater rather than fewer contributors, and trashing articles from new contributors does not seem like a productive way to encourage more contributions. --John Rumm (talk) 01:04, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
I see it's back to marketing nonsense.
NT (talk) 09:50, 16 June 2018 (UTC)