You've recently undone some of my edits at Condor (airline), stating "So we’re blanking sourced sections are we?" in the summary which is in fact far beside the reason for the edits. I removed a recently added statement regarding the average fleet age which in WP:AIRLINES is clearly stated we never mention, additionally the given reference was airfleets.net which has been considered unreliable for ages on here. Also someone added a new section lead stating Condor operates A319s which it clearly does not as sourced in the same section. You can argue the advertisement regarding the sustainability of their new A330s I removed can stay, I would consider it blatant promotion as the delivery was described in the article much more neutral beforehand though (hence the title was changed from "fleet" to the unusual "fleet and sustainability" by someone which is clearly not the intention of this article section but and obvious try to advertise the airline). Your response is quite simply rude and disregards my existing edit summaries explaining my removals were in line with our guidelines. Best regards. 2001:A61:12C1:2001:F14A:74EE:1DC2:1D96 (talk) 07:40, 29 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
However, none of the information in that pre-existing table has any immediate citations: so, if you want to be consistent (which is the basis of rigor) you would need to delete all the information.
The table doesn't have citations because the introduction above it provides the sources from which it is drawn. And, it is this same book from which I have added my additional information - which is citation 12 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LMS_Coronation_Class#cite_note-Baker-13.
Therefore, I'm curious as a new user: do want want to delete all the table's info pending citations (in every single cell?); allow my additions from the same source cited above; or would you like to edit to show a better way of attributing all this information to sources? 2A04:CEC2:5:636A:8108:84A3:CC5A:E571 (talk) 11:41, 29 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Firstly, I suggest you read the notice at the top of this talk page, that says you should respond on your own talk page when I leave you a message there - there are already two there.
Secondly, if the source you're using for your edits is already in the article and already in the place it's meant to be, riddle me this - how am I meant to know that's the source you're using? If you used an edit summary and explained your edit, perhaps I and other editors would be able to know what it is you're doing. Danners430tweaks made11:44, 29 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
.svg){kind=small}
.jpeg){kind=small}
