Forum:Are some of the FX/SFX and Editor's Note descriptions too opinionated?: Revision history

13 August 2022

• curprev 16:1816:18, 13 August 2022‎ imported>Shakla‎ 4,676 bytes +413‎ No edit summary

31 July 2022

• curprev 14:1814:18, 31 July 2022‎ CooleyBoy10 talk contribs‎ 4,263 bytes +598‎ No edit summary

30 June 2022

• curprev 04:0304:03, 30 June 2022‎ StarlightFantasy talk contribs‎ 3,665 bytes +142‎ No edit summary
• curprev 04:0004:00, 30 June 2022‎ StarlightFantasy talk contribs‎ 3,523 bytes +816‎ No edit summary
• curprev 02:5102:51, 30 June 2022‎ imported>TVB‎ 2,707 bytes +700‎ No edit summary

29 June 2022

• curprev 02:5702:57, 29 June 2022‎ Camenati talk contribs‎ 2,007 bytes −187‎ No edit summary
• curprev 02:5502:55, 29 June 2022‎ Camenati talk contribs‎ 2,194 bytes +2,194‎ Created page with "{{Forumheader|Editing Help}} {{Forumpost |text=After the banning of one user for writing with a biased point of view (adding "Stunning" and other positive connotations into one of the logos for the Warner Bros. and MGM pages), this is something I would like to bring up that made me feel iffy about. The thing is, I've seen a lot of pages where the FX/SFX and Editor's Note seem opinionated yet everyone is cool with that. I think this is against the true meaning and purp..."