Could you please show us all the quote in question before and after the revision/modification? I've never edited a quote, that I can remember.
Then your memory is short indeed.
You made the bold assertion several times that Darwin recanted on his deathbed. You called it "historical fact." When asked for evidence to support this claim, you posted:
Lady Hope "did visit Charles between Wednesday, 28 September and Sunday, 2 October 1881, almost certainly when Francis and Henrietta were absent, but his wife, Emma, probably was present."
This was in post #451.
The problem with this "evidence" to support your claim is that the sentence is incomplete. The sentence actually reads "Moore concludes that Lady Hope probably did visit Charles between Wednesday, 28 September and Sunday, 2 October 1881, almost certainly when Francis and Henrietta were absent, but his wife, Emma, probably was present." (emphasis mine) You eliminated the beginning of the sentence, making Moore's opinion appear to be a statement of fact.
It gets worse. You also conveniently ignore the sentences following the one you quoted, which read:
(Moore) points out that (Lady Hope's) published story contained some authentic details as to time and place, but also factual inaccuracies—Charles was not bedridden six months before he died, and the summer house was far too small to accommodate 30 people. The most important aspect of the story, however, is that it does not say that Charles either renounced evolution or embraced Christianity.
That's called quote-mining. You pick one piece of a quote, edit out others, and remove it from its context to make it appear to say something other than what it actually says.
It gets worse. You also ignore the final paragraph of the essay:
It therefore appears that Darwin did not recant, and it is a pity that to this day the Lady Hope story occasionally appears in tracts published and given out by well-meaning people.
So much for your "historical fact." This is from a creationist website, no less, and you still couldn't find anything whatsoever to back up your false claim.
That was a transparently dishonest reponse to being challenged in a lie. It only compounds your original error.
I was willing to cut you the benefit of the doubt at first. I thought you were maybe simply mistaken. But when you lied defending your lie, it became clear that you were simply being dishonest.
I've never edited a quote, that I can remember.
So as we have seen, your memory is short. Or you could just be lying again.
The quote was taken from a long article and I quoted the pertinent part, not the entire article. But there are no modifications to the quote - it's verbatim as I found it. Did you expect me to quote the entire article? If I quote a paragraph or part therof from a book, by your logic it's an edited quote since I did not quote the entire book.