Spacecowboy420 (talk | contribs) |
Flyer22 Frozen (talk | contribs) →Are you...: The way you indent. Add. |
||
(2 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) | |||
Line 52: | Line 52: | ||
Are you going to stick to articles I edit? If so, you know that I'd prefer you don't. Are you truly cleaning up your act? I ask because we both know that I know which past editor you are. I will leave you be this time, so as long as I see no [[WP:Disruptive]] editing from you. You know, I'm "reborn" and all. Currently, however, you are pushing it a bit at the [[Cisgender]] article. [[User:Flyer22 Reborn|Flyer22 Reborn]] ([[User talk:Flyer22 Reborn|talk]]) 19:24, 14 December 2015 (UTC) |
Are you going to stick to articles I edit? If so, you know that I'd prefer you don't. Are you truly cleaning up your act? I ask because we both know that I know which past editor you are. I will leave you be this time, so as long as I see no [[WP:Disruptive]] editing from you. You know, I'm "reborn" and all. Currently, however, you are pushing it a bit at the [[Cisgender]] article. [[User:Flyer22 Reborn|Flyer22 Reborn]] ([[User talk:Flyer22 Reborn|talk]]) 19:24, 14 December 2015 (UTC) |
||
: I'm sure this comment will be met with skepticism, but I don't actually know you, so I guess you are mistaking me for someone else. But please, if you think that I am someone else there is no need to be shy, which editor do you think I am? I'm really curious. |
|||
However as you seem concerned about my edits, I will try to explain how and why I edit - I have to admit that I am sometimes drawn to the more controversial articles, and I certainly do push my opinions/edits a little too hard at times. My edits on [[cisgender]] and other related articles might even reflect my personal opinions regarding the subject, although I do try really hard to make edits that will result in better articles. [[User:Spacecowboy420|Spacecowboy420]] ([[User talk:Spacecowboy420#top|talk]]) 05:50, 15 December 2015 (UTC) |
:However as you seem concerned about my edits, I will try to explain how and why I edit - I have to admit that I am sometimes drawn to the more controversial articles, and I certainly do push my opinions/edits a little too hard at times. My edits on [[cisgender]] and other related articles might even reflect my personal opinions regarding the subject, although I do try really hard to make edits that will result in better articles. [[User:Spacecowboy420|Spacecowboy420]] ([[User talk:Spacecowboy420#top|talk]]) 05:50, 15 December 2015 (UTC) |
||
::Since you don't want to acknowledge your past account(s), even though significantly experienced editors can see that you are no [[WP:Newbie]], I will simply counter your editing when it is problematic via the Wikipedia rules and other wiki ways. If I see a need to report you in a [[WP:Sockpuppet investigation]], I will, or I will simply ask a [[WP:CheckUser]] via email to trust me that I'm right, like various ones have done before, and you will be identified in that way. Again, if I see a need to report you. Edit well, and there will be no editing problems. [[User:Flyer22 Reborn|Flyer22 Reborn]] ([[User talk:Flyer22 Reborn|talk]]) 19:06, 15 December 2015 (UTC) |
Revision as of 19:12, 15 December 2015
Use of "whilst" in UK English
Hello, Spacecowboy420, I hope you are well. I am currently working to improve the article Wild Palms (band) which uses UK English. The article creator used the word "whilst" twice in the article in ways that look odd to my eye, but I'm not familiar enough with UK usage of the word to be sure whether it's correct or not. Would you mind taking a look?
(On an unrelated note, you may not be aware that it's preferred to archive conversations from one's talk page rather than simply blanking the page. Previous versions remain visible via the article history page, but blanking one's user talk page can create the appearance of having something to hide, which I doubt you intended. Help:Archiving a talk page has more information; if you have questions, feel free to visit the Teahouse for further assistance.) —GrammarFascist contribstalk 14:07, 9 November 2015 (UTC)
- It's still reasonably common (when being formal) to use the word "whilst" however, while is a totally acceptable alternative and I thought that there was some kind of policy/guideline that stated we should choose words that are acceptable for all forms of English, if there was a suitable term available. (I may be wrong about that policy, I will take a look) Spacecowboy420 (talk) 14:10, 9 November 2015 (UTC)
- I replied to you on my talk page. Thanks again for your help! —GrammarFascist contribstalk 14:28, 9 November 2015 (UTC)
Another UK music article (why do I do this to myself)
Hello again! I recently created an article about the now-defunct Camden Crawl music festival, and have run into some issues with it. This is your personal invitation to join the discussion going on here about how to handle unwieldy lineup information. If this is outside your areas of interest, feel free to simply ignore. Happy editing, GrammarFascist contribstalk 20:03, 14 November 2015 (UTC)
- I will take a look. Sorry, I only edit from Monday - Friday, so I didn't reply earlier. Spacecowboy420 (talk) 05:56, 16 November 2015 (UTC)
- No worries, WP:TIND. Thanks for you contribution to the discussion! —GrammarFascist contribstalk 11:08, 16 November 2015 (UTC)
Removing "Homophobia" section title on article
Hi, I reverted the section title being homophobic is different from being accused of being homophobic (which is what is being written in the article). To give an extreme example, a person who is accused of rape/murder, would not have the section titled "rapist"/"murderer" just because he is accused of it. Hope you understand. Zhanzhao (talk) 13:42, 30 November 2015 (UTC)
- It seems pretty clear that he is homophobic, but after second thoughts, "pretty clear" implies original research, so I agree with your revert. Besides anyone can read the article and judge for themselves. Spacecowboy420 (talk) 13:53, 30 November 2015 (UTC)
- It can get quite tricky when dealing with labels, especially with controversial figures which may attract supporters for/against them. I did play around with possibly going for "accusations/allegations of homophobia" but that seems to be a loaded title as well. What are your thoughts on that? Zhanzhao (talk) 09:18, 1 December 2015 (UTC)
- It seems pretty clear that he is homophobic, but after second thoughts, "pretty clear" implies original research, so I agree with your revert. Besides anyone can read the article and judge for themselves. Spacecowboy420 (talk) 13:53, 30 November 2015 (UTC)
- If there are enough really reliable sources that call them homophobic, then yes. If those sources aren't quite so strong in calling them homophobic, then controversy would be the safer option.Spacecowboy420 (talk) 09:37, 1 December 2015 (UTC)
CMS
I'm not done adding information to this article. This school has become notable in recent years. The StormCatcher (talk) (contribs) 07:58, 2 December 2015 (UTC)
- I'm not 100% sure, but I thought the normal way was to construct an article in your personal sandbox, and when it meets all the required criteria for a wikipedia article, then to create the article. That way people don't see a half made article and suggest it for deletion. Either way, I would suggest improving it kinda quickly, as a previously deleted article, it's probably going to have people (other than me) wanting it deleted again. Spacecowboy420 (talk) 08:11, 2 December 2015 (UTC)
Oeuvre in Jean Sibelius
Thank you, Spacecowboy, for your interest in the Jean Sibelius article. While I share your desire to simplify the level of language used in Wikipedia articles, I don't think it is grammatically correct to replace "the core of his oeuvre" by "the core of his works". A "core" can only be applied to a single entity. Furthermore, oeuvre is widely used to cover the sum of a composer's work. A quick look at the biographies of other composers reveals that it is used in connection with Wagner, Vaughan Williams, Mahler and Benjamin Britten. The sentence with your change now contains the word "works" twice: "The core of his works is his set of seven symphonies which, like his other major works..." which is not at all elegant. The sentence now needs to be rewritten to avoid repetition. I think you must agree the change you made was a backward step.--Ipigott (talk) 10:55, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
- I agree, it is pretty ugly English to have works twice. I have reverted myself, if I can think of a nicer way to reword it, I will propose it on the talk page, so that editors who have put time and effort in the article can give their opinions. What can I say? I had to use a dictionary to find the meaning of the word "oeuvre" - so I guessed it was a reasonably obscure term. (either that, or I just need to read/learn a little more.) Spacecowboy420 (talk) 11:33, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
- We all live and learn. It it is a fairly obscure term but is used quite a bit in art, music and literature. It is used similarly in French where in the singular it means the total work of an artist. Thanks for cooperating on this. I hope you will continue to take an interest in articles on classical music. Unfortunately there are not more than a handful of us who contribute to any extent. Let me know if I can help you in any with with your own articles.--Ipigott (talk) 14:34, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
- That's my main motivation in editing wikipedia, I tend to edit a lot of articles that I know nothing about and end up learning something new. I think that is probably the first classical music related article that I've edited, but if I find myself on one in the future, I will keep your offer in mind. Spacecowboy420 (talk) 05:58, 9 December 2015 (UTC)
Chavs
Can't see that File:Glasgow_youths_4_06.jpg is "already in use on another article on wikipedia" - from the links on the image page it's currently being used on talk pages at Talk:Ned (Scottish) and Wikipedia:Scottish Wikipedians' notice board/New images/Archives/March and April 2006, and some foreign-language Wikipedia articles about drinking in public. By all means cut the cartoon while it's being discussed, but we should not be presenting a photo of three Scottish kids as "typical chavs". --McGeddon (talk) 10:19, 10 December 2015 (UTC)
- My mistake, it was used in the past, but not right now. Spacecowboy420 (talk) 10:22, 10 December 2015 (UTC)
Are you...
Are you going to stick to articles I edit? If so, you know that I'd prefer you don't. Are you truly cleaning up your act? I ask because we both know that I know which past editor you are. I will leave you be this time, so as long as I see no WP:Disruptive editing from you. You know, I'm "reborn" and all. Currently, however, you are pushing it a bit at the Cisgender article. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 19:24, 14 December 2015 (UTC)
- I'm sure this comment will be met with skepticism, but I don't actually know you, so I guess you are mistaking me for someone else. But please, if you think that I am someone else there is no need to be shy, which editor do you think I am? I'm really curious.
- However as you seem concerned about my edits, I will try to explain how and why I edit - I have to admit that I am sometimes drawn to the more controversial articles, and I certainly do push my opinions/edits a little too hard at times. My edits on cisgender and other related articles might even reflect my personal opinions regarding the subject, although I do try really hard to make edits that will result in better articles. Spacecowboy420 (talk) 05:50, 15 December 2015 (UTC)
- Since you don't want to acknowledge your past account(s), even though significantly experienced editors can see that you are no WP:Newbie, I will simply counter your editing when it is problematic via the Wikipedia rules and other wiki ways. If I see a need to report you in a WP:Sockpuppet investigation, I will, or I will simply ask a WP:CheckUser via email to trust me that I'm right, like various ones have done before, and you will be identified in that way. Again, if I see a need to report you. Edit well, and there will be no editing problems. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 19:06, 15 December 2015 (UTC)