Board Thread:Support Requests - Community Management/@comment-24460960-20200810104852/@comment-38078079-20200810122155

I will be honest: I agree with the admin's actions.

If there is anything with "likely" or "may" on our wiki, we also remove it, and if you think there is evidence to support this, then it should have been in your edit from the start. It is possible the admin would have been more lenient with "one possible outcome for Nora is that she was sent to an asylum, because -" (while adding references to back up your claim, too).

I also agree with them "selfish" is an opinion; we also remove such statements, too, as the "definition" is irrelevant when selfish actions are very relative and are determined by interpretation; I can think of thousands of examples where one character's actions are considered "fair" to one person, "selfish" to another, and even "selfless" to a third faction.

You need to do the following:


 * Check the wiki local rules

That's it. . . if there's nothing in the local rules allowing the admin to revert edits in that manner, then you have a right to ask them to revise/edit the rules for clarity, so that further mistakes will not be made by you or other editors in future, but otherwise you haven't much of a leg to stand on. This isn't an abuse of power. This is an admin trying to maintain credibility and reliability of their wiki, by making sure it meets a bare minimum standard of objectivity.