Miraclepine (talk | contribs) re |
|||
Line 36: | Line 36: | ||
Hi! I'm a bit late to this perhaps, but I've been noticing you put the useful sentence "On June 25, 2019, The New York Times Magazine listed XXX among hundreds of artists whose material was reportedly destroyed in the 2008 Universal fire" in many articles. Might I suggest that it would be better if each of these was terser? It's mostly irrelevant that the Times reported this, and it's mostly irrelevant that it was reported on June 25. "Reportedly" makes me wonder if there's some uncertainty as to whether it was actually destroyed. Were it me, I'd have phrased it as "XXX was among hundreds of artists whose material was destroyed in the 2008 Universal fire." I'd guess you did this in a semi-automated fashion; I wonder if you'd consider making a bulk edit to tighten this. Thanks for your consideration. [[User:Jpgordon|--jpgordon]]<sup><small>[[User talk:Jpgordon|𝄢𝄆 𝄐𝄇 ]]</small></sup> 05:24, 27 November 2019 (UTC) |
Hi! I'm a bit late to this perhaps, but I've been noticing you put the useful sentence "On June 25, 2019, The New York Times Magazine listed XXX among hundreds of artists whose material was reportedly destroyed in the 2008 Universal fire" in many articles. Might I suggest that it would be better if each of these was terser? It's mostly irrelevant that the Times reported this, and it's mostly irrelevant that it was reported on June 25. "Reportedly" makes me wonder if there's some uncertainty as to whether it was actually destroyed. Were it me, I'd have phrased it as "XXX was among hundreds of artists whose material was destroyed in the 2008 Universal fire." I'd guess you did this in a semi-automated fashion; I wonder if you'd consider making a bulk edit to tighten this. Thanks for your consideration. [[User:Jpgordon|--jpgordon]]<sup><small>[[User talk:Jpgordon|𝄢𝄆 𝄐𝄇 ]]</small></sup> 05:24, 27 November 2019 (UTC) |
||
:{{re|Jpgordon}} Not much time to do it, but I should point out I added "listed" and "reportedly" to clarify the fact that it was listed there at all, and added "New York Times Magazine listed" to make it look neutral. [[User:Miraclepine|ミラ]][[User talk:Miraclepine|P]] 14:01, 27 November 2019 (UTC) |
:{{re|Jpgordon}} Not much time to do it, but I should point out I added "listed" and "reportedly" to clarify the fact that it was listed there at all, and added "New York Times Magazine listed" to make it look neutral. [[User:Miraclepine|ミラ]][[User talk:Miraclepine|P]] 14:01, 27 November 2019 (UTC) |
||
::How can it be non-neutral? It's a fact the stuff was destroyed; it doesn't matter in the least who reported it. [[User:Jpgordon|--jpgordon]]<sup><small>[[User talk:Jpgordon|𝄢𝄆 𝄐𝄇 ]]</small></sup> 17:23, 27 November 2019 (UTC) |
Revision as of 17:23, 27 November 2019
ArbCom 2019 election voter message
Japanese sources
Hello, and thanks for nominating Kiuchi Kyō for DYK. Just wondering: are you fluent in Japanese? I've been trying to look for places where I could find Japanese language journals and academic material, both for Wikipedia and real-life uses, but I haven't been able to have much luck so far finding an appropriate resource. Thanks. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 00:00, 20 November 2019 (UTC)
- @Narutolovehinata5: I'm not fluent with respect to speaking the language, but I've had enough experience with anime subtitles and Google Translate to be certain I'm getting the translation right. I also had to look up several Japanese words on WT. ミラP 00:03, 20 November 2019 (UTC)
Universal fire victims
Hi! I'm a bit late to this perhaps, but I've been noticing you put the useful sentence "On June 25, 2019, The New York Times Magazine listed XXX among hundreds of artists whose material was reportedly destroyed in the 2008 Universal fire" in many articles. Might I suggest that it would be better if each of these was terser? It's mostly irrelevant that the Times reported this, and it's mostly irrelevant that it was reported on June 25. "Reportedly" makes me wonder if there's some uncertainty as to whether it was actually destroyed. Were it me, I'd have phrased it as "XXX was among hundreds of artists whose material was destroyed in the 2008 Universal fire." I'd guess you did this in a semi-automated fashion; I wonder if you'd consider making a bulk edit to tighten this. Thanks for your consideration. --jpgordon𝄢𝄆 𝄐𝄇 05:24, 27 November 2019 (UTC)
- @Jpgordon: Not much time to do it, but I should point out I added "listed" and "reportedly" to clarify the fact that it was listed there at all, and added "New York Times Magazine listed" to make it look neutral. ミラP 14:01, 27 November 2019 (UTC)
- How can it be non-neutral? It's a fact the stuff was destroyed; it doesn't matter in the least who reported it. --jpgordon𝄢𝄆 𝄐𝄇 17:23, 27 November 2019 (UTC)