Maybe this will seem sacrilegious, but I don't see all of these as a problem on the part of the original coder.

In your I'll look into it example, you are telling the coder that they are violating the DRY principle, then telling them to refactor a code block from a single location into a function, and then call that function. Of course there might be other reasons for pulling the code block into a function, but... where is the code being repeated?

In your The Know-It-All example... are you sure it's the other coder who is the "know-it-all"? If an engineer is confident in their approach and is willing to defend it (obviously we cannot actually judge their approach here) then that's not always a bad thing.

In The Ghost... certainly you're in the right for insisting on adherence to coding standards, but this could be a sign of a poor engineering culture overall, if engineers are unaware that any standards exist.

In It's tested... could it, well, actually have been tested?

But I will 100% agree with Next PR. Any engineer who is unwilling to jump in and fix their spelling mistakes displays a lack of professionalism, and lack of pride in their work.

Either way, still an entertaining read.