 HighKing Re this and this To put it bluntly you dont know what youre talking about Murry First the IP is not me logging out to edit HighKing has more than one person who objects to his edits and rightly so And second HighKing was specifically warned by Cailil not to use his own interpretation of sources in making policing edits like this which is exactly what he did by altering a direct quote that no longer existed on a page to read something else based on what he read in the banner which has nothing to do with the quote That is not policy compliant either in letter or spirit His only policy based options were to remove it or change the citation to point to where he subsequently found it He did neither His alteration of the quote was wrong and his editting of the page to reflect the current contents of the cite while not wrong in of itself falls squarely under Cailils other warnings As an aside in claiming the original author is the person who breached MOSQUOTE you seem to be assuming that the error in locating the cite for the quote was down to the original author I see no reason why that should be Its far more likely that it was moved after the original author used that page as the cite for it At the end of the day Murry youre not doing HighKing any favours by defending him in this manner and in doing so you might even find yourself under scrutiny from Cailil for engaging in the same behaviour I suggest you read the entire extended discussion under Removals of the term British Isles again on HighKings talk page very carefully lest you find yourself making the same errors in judgement he is making   

    ####Prompt- Does the next message are offensives ? reply with a JSON object (without carriage return or new lines)
    with keys :
    isoffensive (True if it's offensive).
    This this the message : 
 HighKing Re this and this To put it bluntly you dont know what youre talking about Murry First the IP is not me logging out to edit HighKing has more than one person who objects to his edits and rightly so And second HighKing was specifically warned by Cailil not to use his own interpretation of sources in making policing edits like this which is exactly what he did by altering a direct quote that no longer existed on a page to read something else based on what he read in the banner which has nothing to do with the quote That is not policy compliant either in letter or spirit His only policy based options were to remove it or change the citation to point to where he subsequently found it He did neither His alteration of the quote was wrong and his editting of the page to reflect the current contents of the cite while not wrong in of itself falls squarely under Cailils other warnings As an aside in claiming the original author is the person who breached MOSQUOTE you seem to be assuming that the error in locating the cite for the quote was down to the original author I see no reason why that should be Its far more likely that it was moved after the original author used that page as the cite for it At the end of the day Murry youre not doing HighKing any favours by defending him in this manner and in doing so you might even find yourself under scrutiny from Cailil for engaging in the same behaviour I suggest you read the entire extended discussion under Removals of the term British Isles again on HighKings talk page very carefully lest you find yourself making the same errors in judgement he is making   

