Thread:DrTeatime/@comment-16533050-20160614041510/@comment-16533050-20160614063900

I think you're misrepresenting my position here: I wasn't complaining about it, I just explained why I did it, and in a later post what my goal was - to put the original poster's name back on it. That obviously failed, so it became a bum situation.

As for the esoteric quality, that I do understand. For myself, I often like to go through the history of an article's creation process, seeing what was added, what was deleted, and why. Now let's take Delilah's page for example, if I go through the process back to April 22, 2013 to see what the page looked like back then, the pic I would get would not be the older version of Delilah, but the newer one which would (falsely) appear to be added way back then.

I guess it is a matter of perspective on this point - is your esoteric reasoning better or is mine? Neither is, I would say, as we each make valid points.

When I first made my message here, I was merely trying to explain what I did and why. I wasn't trying to cause a disagreement.