Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
To revert edits that you have made (for example, edits that you accidentally made) To revert edits by banned or blocked users in defiance of their block or ban (but be prepared to explain this use of rollback when asked to) To revert widespread edits (by a misguided editor or malfunctioning bot) unhelpful to the encyclopedia, provided that you ...
Get AOL Mail for FREE! Manage your email like never before with travel, photo & document views. Personalize your inbox with themes & tabs. You've Got Mail!
PDF24 Creator is an application software by Geek Software GmbH for the creation of PDF files from any application and for converting files to the PDF format. The application is released under a proprietary freeware license.
Can you revert only part of the edit, or do you need to revert the whole thing? (The latter option is better executed through an undo action .) In the edit summary or on the talk page, succinctly explain why the change you are reverting was a bad idea or why reverting it is a better idea.
Restoring part of a reverted edit is a recommended practice in online collaborative writing. Often when an article version contains more than one disagreeable passage, it is easy to revert to a previous version.
CutePDF is a proprietary Portable Document Format converter and editor for Microsoft Windows developed by Acro Software. [1] [2] CutePDF Writer can create PDF files, [3] and CutePDF Form Filler can edit simple PDF forms so that they can be sent without using more expensive PDF authoring software.
You've Got Mail!® Millions of people around the world use AOL Mail, and there are times you'll have questions about using it or want to learn more about its features. That's why AOL Mail Help is here with articles, FAQs, tutorials, our AOL virtual chat assistant and live agent support options to get your questions answered.
Using the revert approach, you'd have to revert the article to the last good version (the one on January 1), and then manually add back the good edits of January 4 and 5. That would be the only way to avoid denying the readers of Wikipedia the good information and penalizing the editors who supplied it but missed the vandalism.