Thread:Nausiated/@comment-32978104-20171031220110/@comment-4651179-20171104023415

The very first thing I did in my original reply was to apologize for chiming in because this discussion was directed towards you. Additionally, just because the message was directed towards you doesn't mean other users can't interject, considering the topic of discussion concerned matters of the wiki. Even then, that doesn't excuse talking disrespectfully towards not only a fellow user but also a fellow member of the staff.

I also find it quite interesting that only now you bring up that I chimed in, just as a way to brush aside the main concerns I was adressing.

And finally, in Invisiblewoman64's own words, their main concern was that "it does not make sense to keep inaccurate and outdated information on Sue's page that even Marvel has discarded." The appropriateness of the original story was more of an afterthought, and one not entirely invalid considering those opinions are shared by the editorial team at Marvel and were the reason behind the retcon.

There's another thing that peaked my interest now looking back at the chain of events. Invisiblewoman64 didn't bring up personal opinions on their edits or edit summaries. Yet it seems you claim their edits were reverted because of their personal opinions. How can that be the case when Invisiblewoman64 didn't make their personal opinions on this matter clear until after you reverted your edits?