User talk:174.131.48.89

Hello, I'm Mako001. I noticed that in this edit to Patrick Rothfuss, you removed content without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wik.ipedia.Pro with an . If this was a mistake, don't worry, the removed content has been restored. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Mako001 (C)  (T)  🇺🇦 07:56, 16 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Yes, I believe you made an error. First I'd suggest you read both the sentence I removed and the sentence immediately above it. If you require further explanation read on. The first sentence (the one I left there) says "Since 2008 ...has raised over $11.5 million..." and the second sentence, the one I removed, says "...has raised over $10 million...". Logically the first sentence necessarily implies the second. The (removed) sentence adds nothing. But. I understand there *might* be a difference between the modifying phrases "primarily for Heifer" and "in support of Heifer". But there might not, and in fact probably is not. Whether there is or isn't a difference can NOT be determined by the content of this Wik.ipedia.Pro section. (I also note the editor made a mistake (or, at least, a questionable decision when referring to a changing quantity like cumulative donations) in leaving the date out (for instance "as of early 2020") of the first sentence, Wik.ipedia.Pro is archival, as you know; the accuracy of the statement "Since (date X)..." depends on when it was written, that date should be included.) So, my argument for deletion is that the 2nd sentence is redundant or it is confusing, there's no real difference between "primarily for" and "in support of" since both imply that some money was not given to Heifer Intl. I was confused by the two sentences, so if you choose to leave the 2nd sentence in, you should add a clarifying statement explaining why it is needed. There is also another possibility, perhaps the word "Since" in the first sentence is incorrect? I've noted that some of my German friends struggle with "since", "until", and "by" and sometimes use them incorrectly. If the editor meant "up until 2008" which is exactly opposite "Since 2008" in meaning, it would make sense that both sentences are kept (once corrected). Thanks for your time. I'm sorry if I've made a mistake, it seemed clear to me that the 2nd sentence should be removed, but I will leave that to your judgement, since you obviously care.174.131.48.89 (talk) 22:28, 16 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]