21:4221:42, 19 February 2024diffhist−189
Society of the Song dynasty
Someone who is not very bright decided to break apart this narrative with a statement that does not logically follow the previous one. Looking at previous versions of the article, it was something added long after I submitted the article for FA status. Even worse, this person was clearly the same who added the other improperly sourced statements that had to be removed. This article requires a uniform style; if you cite something, then provide the full source in the list of sources at the end.
21:0621:06, 19 February 2024diffhist−196
Society of the Song dynasty
→Women: legality and lifestyles: Blake who? There is no full reference for this under the main list of sources at the end of the article. This was not cited properly per the rest of the article. Also, the person who added it also oddly placed a quotation mark at the beginning of the next sentence despite nothing being quoted directly. Is anyone really reading and paying attention to this Featured article? Its quality has been diminished by people who don't know how to edit properly.
16:5716:57, 19 February 2024diffhist+721
Society of the Song dynasty
→top: I thought something didn't sound right, and lo and behold the first paragraph has been altered by people who don't know what they're doing and don't speak English as a native language, apparently. Restoring to an older version.
19:0119:01, 18 February 2024diffhist+660
Science in the ancient world
→top: The lead is perhaps sufficient now, but could still use a lot of work and multiple paragraphs instead of just one. It would be wise to cover the scope of this article in terms of the various sciences that are discussed throughout its sections. This is merely an attempt to start that coverage.
16:4416:44, 18 February 2024diffhist+63 m
Chinese astronomy
→Constellations: or, instead of being condescending, you could look at the edit I made as a whole and realize I just cited Sun and Kistemaker (1997) right in the accompanying text. But gee, thanks, we really needed you to waste our time with your tag instead.