Your opinion on deleting other people's work in wikis

So I went to the Terrible Shotgun page and saw that the description I had written had been completely removed by somebody and replaced with what they wanted to write. In your opinion, is it okay for someone to completely remove someone else's work to replace it with your own? Nothing that I wrote was false, either.

I can see that being a kick in the balls, it's never easy when something you work hard on is replaced.

Hmm, if nothing was false and it was well written then, yes, it's out of line.

eh, i wouldnt do that to someone....go back and delete what they said, and replace it with your own....again

If what they write is better, sure. I keep hard copies (data copies, anyway) of every article I majorly edit just in case some douchetard goes and erases my work with something that is actually worse.

If mine is better then thats fine, or their are problems or plagerism then thats fine too.

I agree with Drebin. If you were coherent and accurate, then no, that is not cool. If you want to play dirty, reciprocate the edit.

@Jayge

Nice combination with douchetard!

Yeah that sucks man.  I don't really know what the answer is.  Maybe make it so preference goes to those with more wiki points?  But then they might have a stranglehold on all the wikis (but maybe they should).  It's a tough question.

I don't edit a lot but I don't really like deleting anyone's edits because of the work they put into it. As long as I know I haven't read it on Wikipedia before and it's not completely false I'll try and work around it.

If the original stuff is garbage, then I don't see the problem but like Jayge said, keep a hard copy in case you get erased.

I will agree that the page looks slightly more polished, but I am disappointed that what I wrote was deleted and basically rewritten by someone else.

Well, it's a community site, and it sounds like it was made better to me >.>

I edited the GTA4 page about the new DLC yesterday, and somebody deleted and rewrote it today. It sucks knowing that the work I did is gone, but I think what it was replaced with was better written. So I guess it's not always bad.

Kind of the point of a wiki. If you want sole credit for what you wrote don't post it on a wiki where everybody can change and edit things. That's the reason why I don't even bother with writing wikis anymore since I want my work to last.

I had redplaced someone's description of a game.  Their description was loaded with grammatical errors and wasen't very...  well...  'descriptive'.

I think that it's dishonest to do such a thing.  If such a person does take someones work, they will be the ones who have to live with it, and the one that got screwed over will just have to deal with it whether they like it or not.  Anything worth fighting for is worthwhile, and if one can prove that someone took their work, nail them!

Yeah, that's pretty weak. If its poorly written and you want to reword it and build on it, I think that's alright. I guess it's kind of a difficult issue. On the few pages I've edited, I just try to add stuff to what is already written and also fix other people's grammar and spelling mistakes.

That's the point of a wiki. If someone feels they can make it better, it is their prerogative to do so.

However, it's polite to keep at least some of the original content in, I think.

If they are making the article better, then they should totally delete other peoples work. It's a wiki, the whole point of wiki's is that anyone can improve on an article. If they replace other peoples work with inferior writing, then that is wrong.

its annoying to say the least the only  thing ive got left ( excludeing pictures) is a  paragraph on the harley quinn page :P

Depends on the accuracy of the data, and the opinion of the mod who ok'ed it.

Honestly, it sounds like your data was wrong, or the new guys is. He can't have replaced it with the same information if one says "80dmg, most powerful" and one says "79dmg, one of the most powerful" theres quite a big divide between the most powerful and one of the most powerful. I'd argue whichever one is more accurate should be the one that takes precedent.

When I edit something though, if someone has accurate information that is written clearly, I try to keep it, although I will clear up any grammatical errors I spot and attempt to make things easier to read. But i'm the first to admit my grammar is hardly the best, so I wouldn't mind too much if someone did it to me.

@natetodamax

meh get over it...

The point of a wiki is to continuously improve what was written.

Even those little changes improved the content.

So don't take it personal.

If an article is kinda bare, I usually try to leave as much of the original content in as possible, as long as it makes the whole thing coherent.
On the other hand, I have deleted nearly entire pages worth of material, purely cus the other editor has straight up copied n pasted info from wikia, leaving in all the links....

Do you keep the points you earn?

Unrelated but a pro tip for users who do not have 1000 points yet: avoid pages that are in the news, most of the times a 1Kplus user will beat you to it and there is nothing else we wiki mods can do then deny your submission when we see it.

This is why you need to write EPIC descriptions. +1000 points!

I think it would suck to have so stuffed edited and/or replaced.  I would personally like to see on the page if such content was edited and why? And if possible actually see the content that was originally edited.