![]() | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
About a problem with {{ likeresume}}. See Wikipedia:Village_pump_(miscellaneous)#Which_copyediting_tag_to_use_for_resume-like_articles.3F. -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 23:24, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
Hello everybody. Did somebody just blank the Project page? Good grief! BroVic ( talk) 16:15, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
Not sure if this is the right place to suggest this or not, but I think it would be better to have an article theme for the February Blitz like there was in the August 2016 Blitz instead of getting rid of the oldest month. I think it would be more interesting, and there aren't many articles left in the March 2016 list anyways. CoolieCoolster ( talk) 23:15, 2 February 2017 (UTC)
Hello. A request for move is underway at Talk:Narrow gauge railways in Saxony. At issue is whether a hyphen should be inserted between "Narrow" and "gauge". One of the participants solicited editor involvement from Wikipedia:WikiProject Trains and another objected on the basis that those editors would tend to support one side of the issue. For balance, we hope to get some additional involvement here. Thank you. ― Mandruss ☎ 03:18, 28 January 2017 (UTC)
Following up on this, since it closed without resolution and an RFC was suggested, I'm wondering what the GOCE thinks about such things. I do get Miniapolis's point that "life is too short" to argue over details such as this, and that a lot of people may feel that way and not want to be involved. But does the GOCE have anything like copyediting guidelines, or how would copyeditors normally approach a question like when to hyphenate compounds used as adjectives? Is it a per-individual preference? Or do we generally try to provide the parsing cues that will help unfamiliar readers? Or some other strategy? Is the GOCE a place where an RFC on this would make sense? Or where? My impression is that we usually hyphenate to help the reader, and that the "narrow gauge" thing is an outlier worth fixing, but would love to hear what others think. Dicklyon ( talk) 04:15, 3 February 2017 (UTC)
Wikipedia generally prefers the name that is most commonly used (as determined by its prevalence in a significant majority of independent, reliable English-language sources).– Jonesey95 ( talk) 04:44, 3 February 2017 (UTC)
At Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)#RfC: Hyphen in titles of articles on railways of a narrow gauge I have started an RFC. The question reads: Should articles with "Narrow gauge railways" and such in their titles include a hyphen as "Narrow-gauge railways"? And is there any tweak needed to the guidelines at WP:HYPHEN to be more helpful in deciding such things? Participation is welcome. Dicklyon ( talk) 06:01, 4 February 2017 (UTC)
At Wikipedia:Templates for discussion, I have now suggested that {{ Empty section}} (along with the preceding header) and {{ Expand section}} should be removed after a certain time limit, mainly because they don't seem to actually result in expanded sections in the long term. Please share your thoughts there:
Mikael Häggström ( talk) 13:47, 12 February 2017 (UTC)
... to Jonesey95 on their well-deserved induction into the Guild of Copy Editors Hall of Fame! All the best, Mini apolis 16:22, 15 February 2017 (UTC)
A discussion is underway at Wikipedia talk:Article titles#Words as words about whether WP:ITALICTITLE should mention "words as words" (i.e. articles that are about a specific word or phrase) as an instance of where italics are used in running text, and should therefore be used in article titles. — Sangdeboeuf ( talk) 09:11, 1 March 2017 (UTC)
In the first section under the blue headers, partially in bold it says "...make them clear, correct, concise, comprehensible...". Comprehensible is a synonym of clear and for some reason it won't let me edit it. I'm sorry and I really don't mean to nit-pick but seeing how this is the copy editors guild I think special attention should be given to the page.
I'm not perfect especially now as I am writing this on a subway on-the-fly, I'm sure that I'm making grammatical mistakes (heck, I'm not even sure if I used "on-the-fly" correctly) but I'm trying my best and though I haven't gone over the rest of the article (I don't have enough time, it's only a 15 minute ride), I think someone with a lot more experience and expertise than me should sit down and go over it carefully.
I'm not simply trying to pass this off on another, when I said I'm not perfect I meant it, I think half of the edits/corrections I've done have been undone (simply browse my account history to see how bad I am). Even though I'm not good enough to be a guild member, I truly feel passionate about what you guys are doing. Bringing (more) credibility to Wikipedia, which I believe to be a modern library of Alexandria.
It's a sum total of all human knowledge which I believe that not only today is a vital, free education tool that has proven itself to raise the collected intelligence of the world. But will someday stand as a magnificent, anthropological source for all those who would want to know who we were/are. It's a grand, living testament to human accomplishment. Think about how crazy it sounds, millions of people freely collaborating on something just for the betterment of all mankind. It sounds like the plot to a utopian sci-fi or perhaps an idea proposed at Epcot center's tommorowland in the 50's.
If I had my way, we would beam the vast majority of this encyclopedia into space like the golden record of the voyager missions (maybe leave some of the articles about war out of the transmission lol) I'm lucky to live in this time period. Now that I properly inspired you, go out and prove why the guild is and should be doing what it does. -- Rpm2004 ( talk) 23:01, 24 May 2016 (UTC)
{{u|
Checkingfax}} {
Talk}
17:18, 31 May 2016 (UTC)
Hello! I think I'm finished with my first major ce for a request. Can someone take a look at Alexandra Stan and give me some feedback? Thanks in advance!! – gwendy ( talk) 14:29, 15 March 2017 (UTC)
Hi, I just made Spell and Grammer check in Culture_of_Egypt. Kindly give your feedback for improvement. Sulthan90 ( talk) 05:12, 27 March 2017 (UTC)
I set up an April-June archive table so that editors can continue to archive their articles. I hope nobody minds. I leave the housekeeping, if any, for the January-March table for those who know. Twofingered Typist ( talk) 20:24, 1 April 2017 (UTC)
What do you do when you come across an article like Tere Mere Beech? I can't understand it well enough to copy-edit it. I'm not sure there's anything salvageable there.
Thanks! – gwendy ( talk) 04:12, 20 March 2017 (UTC)
Right folks, I am setting this up to run May 15 to June 30 again...with the usual Amazon vouchers up for grabs. Cheers, Cas Liber ( talk · contribs) 13:35, 12 April 2017 (UTC)
Hello,
I reviewed a DYK nomination that I think could use a second opinion. The proposed hook is:
I explained that "has been" doesn't sound correct to me and passed the hook as:
I would like someone else to review this grammar issue and thought this page is the best place to find a good answer, but please write comments on the DYK nomination page: Template:Did you know nominations/Jerrold Tarog. Thanks! AHeneen ( talk) 02:22, 13 April 2017 (UTC)
Please read Wikipedia talk:Requests for adminship#Poll candidate search needs your participation.
Please join and participate.
Anna Frodesiak ( talk) 00:01, 23 April 2017 (UTC)
I'm somewhat confused by the way "Working" is currently used in response to requests. The introductory guidelines to the request page seem to imply a few things I find overall damaging to streamlined collaborative workflow. I wasn't sure which GOCE talk page to bring this up on so I stuck it here. Let me know if I fraked up by doing so.
"When you accept a request, place an indented Working template immediately beneath the request and sign your post with four tildes so other copy editors know not to accept it."
This encourages the skimming of the requests page for untemplated requests, which is a good way for casting the widest net possible, but many pages are now way too much work for this kind of resource allocation. The speed at which article requests could be processed could drastically increase if the template would also include a rating from the initial accepting GOCE member gauging the scale of the project thus giving the Working template not only the ability to elegantly communicate "One person job, I've got this" but also "This needs more eyeballs on it if it is going to get done before the sun dies." or "I'm pretty sure this is way above my paygrade, lets speedy reject?"
For example "Working - Additional help needed (Scale:Large)" or "Working - Additional help needed (Advisement:WAMP)" wouldn't clutter up the request page, as it is still one line of text. However, people skimming down would have at-a-glance information about the page.
I know that it could be said if you take a request page and need more help or some advice about what to do with the request we already have an established process in which an editor should go to various talk pages, or ping various people, or use yet more templates. This ping-pong approach to resource allocation is antiquated and clumsy, and could be easily streamlined.
Why is {in-use} only 24 hours? That is enough time for a short workday, short commute, short leisure time, short edits, and sleep. That is a wonderful Pleasant Valley Sunday vision of modern life but isn't very friendly to students or professionals who sometimes have to put in an 18 hour workday, or it is Friday so after work you wind up drinking and taking stimulants until 7am. Using my 6am Friday alarm clock to Sunday afternoon hangover-fade hypothesis, which I just came up with but I swear is super scientific, 60 hours would be the ideal cut-off. One way or another, 24 hours is too short. "In use" should also feature the assessment information I suggested in the previous section. "At-a-glance whenever and wherever elegant" is an ethos I think would be a net positive for GOCE.
Jasphetamine ( talk) 01:50, 1 April 2017 (UTC)
I was editing random articles and noticed one with a {{cleanup}} tag dated January 2010. That got me to wondering - why are 'cleanup' and 'copyedit' separate projects? The cleanup project page lists page layout, wikification, spelling, grammar and typographical errors, tone, and sourcing as topics which they cover. That seems to overlap with copyedit extensively. Is this just a historical thing? Thanks, Leschnei ( talk) 14:23, 10 June 2017 (UTC)
We have failed to clear the copyediting backlog for years on end. The last thing we need to do is to dig the hole deeper. Over the last 6 months, we have reduced the backlog by an amazing 50 articles (of 1800). Maybe someday we can expand our scope.... Lfstevens ( talk)
I'm just wondering if there isn't a loosen the ketchup bottle effect inherent in using the current request system as a tally, if it might act as a disincentive to people who want to work on articles but know they likely can't finish them, and in a worst-case scenario give people an incentive to try to cheat the system by "Finishing" requests quickly to get a tally up, which passes the workload onto the senior people who review articles being "Finished." Jasphetamine ( talk) 19:03, 27 June 2017 (UTC)
Hello. Since I was advised to leave a note here, I would like to get some suggestions from you on this page. Thank you. ~ Itsused( Talk· Contribs) 12:48, 16 October 2017 (UTC)
Is there an October Blitz?-- Dthomsen8 ( talk) 17:14, 7 October 2017 (UTC)
I never mind a requests blitz :-), but have been a bit busy IRL lately. All the best, Mini apolis 13:49, 16 October 2017 (UTC)
Is Category:Old copy edit requests for League of Copyeditors still useful for this project? The category is populated by transclusions of {{ LOCErequest}}, yet LOCE was marked historical in 2008 and redirected in 2009. If the category is not still useful, could we remove all transclusions of the template and delete it and the category? -- Black Falcon ( talk) 01:31, 18 September 2017 (UTC)
Hello, recently we have started a discussion in the WikiProject Volleyball talk about how should a volleyball player article look like. Can you please give us some pieces of advice, we might be doing some mistakes without even notice them. We have never take an article to GA, probably we are not going anywhere forward. Thanks in advance. -- — Preceding unsigned comment added by Osplace ( talk • contribs)
This article has been copy edited by guild members when the project was called LoCE, long time back. If we get a nice copy edit, this article goes to FA. May be as part of the blitz? Aditya( talk • contribs) 02:31, 22 October 2017 (UTC)
![]() ![]() Contest details: create biographical articles for women of any country or occupation in the world:
| ||
(To subscribe: Women in Red/English language mailing list and Women in Red/international list. Unsubscribe: Women in Red/Opt-out list) |
-- Ipigott ( talk) 15:36, 22 October 2017 (UTC)
Can I please ask for a second opinion on this dispute. It is over a sentence which I think is a textbook garden path sentence (originally me and one other editor were "fixing it" to something grammatically incorrect because we were both parsing it wrong), but the article is being protected by someone who keeps reverting my every effort to clarify it. – filelakeshoe ( t / c) 10:28, 4 November 2017 (UTC)
Regarding Avengers: Infinity War, there is a discussion regarding listing 29 names in a sentence. Please see the discussion here. Erik ( talk | contrib) ( ping me) 23:32, 18 November 2017 (UTC)
Wikipedia has many thousands of wikilinks which point to disambiguation pages. It would be useful to readers if these links directed them to the specific pages of interest, rather than making them search through a list. Members of WikiProject Disambiguation have been working on this and the total number is now below 20,000 for the first time. Some of these links require specialist knowledge of the topics concerned and therefore it would be great if you could help in your area of expertise.
A list of the relevant links on pages which fall within the remit of this wikiproject can be found at http://69.142.160.183/~dispenser/cgi-bin/topic_points.py?banner=WikiProject_Guild_of_Copy_Editors
Please take a few minutes to help make these more useful to our readers.— Rod talk 15:52, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Village pump (miscellaneous)/Archive 57#RfC: Nonbinding advisory RfC concerning financial support for The Internet Archive -- Guy Macon ( talk) 12:11, 22 December 2017 (UTC)
Congrats on bringing the backlog below 1,000 articles for the first time! I sure appreciate GOCE participants for their help. Keep up the great work, and Happy New Year! --- Another Believer ( Talk) 02:42, 24 December 2017 (UTC)
Think I've started drives and blitzes in the past by copy-pasting {{ GAN changes}}, but it's not working this time; everything's moving over one column for some reason. If someone else would do it (I'll try to start the graph in the meantime), I'll look at it in edit mode and figure out what I did wrong. Happy New Year and all the best, Mini apolis 23:53, 31 December 2017 (UTC)
![]() | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
About a problem with {{ likeresume}}. See Wikipedia:Village_pump_(miscellaneous)#Which_copyediting_tag_to_use_for_resume-like_articles.3F. -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 23:24, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
Hello everybody. Did somebody just blank the Project page? Good grief! BroVic ( talk) 16:15, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
Not sure if this is the right place to suggest this or not, but I think it would be better to have an article theme for the February Blitz like there was in the August 2016 Blitz instead of getting rid of the oldest month. I think it would be more interesting, and there aren't many articles left in the March 2016 list anyways. CoolieCoolster ( talk) 23:15, 2 February 2017 (UTC)
Hello. A request for move is underway at Talk:Narrow gauge railways in Saxony. At issue is whether a hyphen should be inserted between "Narrow" and "gauge". One of the participants solicited editor involvement from Wikipedia:WikiProject Trains and another objected on the basis that those editors would tend to support one side of the issue. For balance, we hope to get some additional involvement here. Thank you. ― Mandruss ☎ 03:18, 28 January 2017 (UTC)
Following up on this, since it closed without resolution and an RFC was suggested, I'm wondering what the GOCE thinks about such things. I do get Miniapolis's point that "life is too short" to argue over details such as this, and that a lot of people may feel that way and not want to be involved. But does the GOCE have anything like copyediting guidelines, or how would copyeditors normally approach a question like when to hyphenate compounds used as adjectives? Is it a per-individual preference? Or do we generally try to provide the parsing cues that will help unfamiliar readers? Or some other strategy? Is the GOCE a place where an RFC on this would make sense? Or where? My impression is that we usually hyphenate to help the reader, and that the "narrow gauge" thing is an outlier worth fixing, but would love to hear what others think. Dicklyon ( talk) 04:15, 3 February 2017 (UTC)
Wikipedia generally prefers the name that is most commonly used (as determined by its prevalence in a significant majority of independent, reliable English-language sources).– Jonesey95 ( talk) 04:44, 3 February 2017 (UTC)
At Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)#RfC: Hyphen in titles of articles on railways of a narrow gauge I have started an RFC. The question reads: Should articles with "Narrow gauge railways" and such in their titles include a hyphen as "Narrow-gauge railways"? And is there any tweak needed to the guidelines at WP:HYPHEN to be more helpful in deciding such things? Participation is welcome. Dicklyon ( talk) 06:01, 4 February 2017 (UTC)
At Wikipedia:Templates for discussion, I have now suggested that {{ Empty section}} (along with the preceding header) and {{ Expand section}} should be removed after a certain time limit, mainly because they don't seem to actually result in expanded sections in the long term. Please share your thoughts there:
Mikael Häggström ( talk) 13:47, 12 February 2017 (UTC)
... to Jonesey95 on their well-deserved induction into the Guild of Copy Editors Hall of Fame! All the best, Mini apolis 16:22, 15 February 2017 (UTC)
A discussion is underway at Wikipedia talk:Article titles#Words as words about whether WP:ITALICTITLE should mention "words as words" (i.e. articles that are about a specific word or phrase) as an instance of where italics are used in running text, and should therefore be used in article titles. — Sangdeboeuf ( talk) 09:11, 1 March 2017 (UTC)
In the first section under the blue headers, partially in bold it says "...make them clear, correct, concise, comprehensible...". Comprehensible is a synonym of clear and for some reason it won't let me edit it. I'm sorry and I really don't mean to nit-pick but seeing how this is the copy editors guild I think special attention should be given to the page.
I'm not perfect especially now as I am writing this on a subway on-the-fly, I'm sure that I'm making grammatical mistakes (heck, I'm not even sure if I used "on-the-fly" correctly) but I'm trying my best and though I haven't gone over the rest of the article (I don't have enough time, it's only a 15 minute ride), I think someone with a lot more experience and expertise than me should sit down and go over it carefully.
I'm not simply trying to pass this off on another, when I said I'm not perfect I meant it, I think half of the edits/corrections I've done have been undone (simply browse my account history to see how bad I am). Even though I'm not good enough to be a guild member, I truly feel passionate about what you guys are doing. Bringing (more) credibility to Wikipedia, which I believe to be a modern library of Alexandria.
It's a sum total of all human knowledge which I believe that not only today is a vital, free education tool that has proven itself to raise the collected intelligence of the world. But will someday stand as a magnificent, anthropological source for all those who would want to know who we were/are. It's a grand, living testament to human accomplishment. Think about how crazy it sounds, millions of people freely collaborating on something just for the betterment of all mankind. It sounds like the plot to a utopian sci-fi or perhaps an idea proposed at Epcot center's tommorowland in the 50's.
If I had my way, we would beam the vast majority of this encyclopedia into space like the golden record of the voyager missions (maybe leave some of the articles about war out of the transmission lol) I'm lucky to live in this time period. Now that I properly inspired you, go out and prove why the guild is and should be doing what it does. -- Rpm2004 ( talk) 23:01, 24 May 2016 (UTC)
{{u|
Checkingfax}} {
Talk}
17:18, 31 May 2016 (UTC)
Hello! I think I'm finished with my first major ce for a request. Can someone take a look at Alexandra Stan and give me some feedback? Thanks in advance!! – gwendy ( talk) 14:29, 15 March 2017 (UTC)
Hi, I just made Spell and Grammer check in Culture_of_Egypt. Kindly give your feedback for improvement. Sulthan90 ( talk) 05:12, 27 March 2017 (UTC)
I set up an April-June archive table so that editors can continue to archive their articles. I hope nobody minds. I leave the housekeeping, if any, for the January-March table for those who know. Twofingered Typist ( talk) 20:24, 1 April 2017 (UTC)
What do you do when you come across an article like Tere Mere Beech? I can't understand it well enough to copy-edit it. I'm not sure there's anything salvageable there.
Thanks! – gwendy ( talk) 04:12, 20 March 2017 (UTC)
Right folks, I am setting this up to run May 15 to June 30 again...with the usual Amazon vouchers up for grabs. Cheers, Cas Liber ( talk · contribs) 13:35, 12 April 2017 (UTC)
Hello,
I reviewed a DYK nomination that I think could use a second opinion. The proposed hook is:
I explained that "has been" doesn't sound correct to me and passed the hook as:
I would like someone else to review this grammar issue and thought this page is the best place to find a good answer, but please write comments on the DYK nomination page: Template:Did you know nominations/Jerrold Tarog. Thanks! AHeneen ( talk) 02:22, 13 April 2017 (UTC)
Please read Wikipedia talk:Requests for adminship#Poll candidate search needs your participation.
Please join and participate.
Anna Frodesiak ( talk) 00:01, 23 April 2017 (UTC)
I'm somewhat confused by the way "Working" is currently used in response to requests. The introductory guidelines to the request page seem to imply a few things I find overall damaging to streamlined collaborative workflow. I wasn't sure which GOCE talk page to bring this up on so I stuck it here. Let me know if I fraked up by doing so.
"When you accept a request, place an indented Working template immediately beneath the request and sign your post with four tildes so other copy editors know not to accept it."
This encourages the skimming of the requests page for untemplated requests, which is a good way for casting the widest net possible, but many pages are now way too much work for this kind of resource allocation. The speed at which article requests could be processed could drastically increase if the template would also include a rating from the initial accepting GOCE member gauging the scale of the project thus giving the Working template not only the ability to elegantly communicate "One person job, I've got this" but also "This needs more eyeballs on it if it is going to get done before the sun dies." or "I'm pretty sure this is way above my paygrade, lets speedy reject?"
For example "Working - Additional help needed (Scale:Large)" or "Working - Additional help needed (Advisement:WAMP)" wouldn't clutter up the request page, as it is still one line of text. However, people skimming down would have at-a-glance information about the page.
I know that it could be said if you take a request page and need more help or some advice about what to do with the request we already have an established process in which an editor should go to various talk pages, or ping various people, or use yet more templates. This ping-pong approach to resource allocation is antiquated and clumsy, and could be easily streamlined.
Why is {in-use} only 24 hours? That is enough time for a short workday, short commute, short leisure time, short edits, and sleep. That is a wonderful Pleasant Valley Sunday vision of modern life but isn't very friendly to students or professionals who sometimes have to put in an 18 hour workday, or it is Friday so after work you wind up drinking and taking stimulants until 7am. Using my 6am Friday alarm clock to Sunday afternoon hangover-fade hypothesis, which I just came up with but I swear is super scientific, 60 hours would be the ideal cut-off. One way or another, 24 hours is too short. "In use" should also feature the assessment information I suggested in the previous section. "At-a-glance whenever and wherever elegant" is an ethos I think would be a net positive for GOCE.
Jasphetamine ( talk) 01:50, 1 April 2017 (UTC)
I was editing random articles and noticed one with a {{cleanup}} tag dated January 2010. That got me to wondering - why are 'cleanup' and 'copyedit' separate projects? The cleanup project page lists page layout, wikification, spelling, grammar and typographical errors, tone, and sourcing as topics which they cover. That seems to overlap with copyedit extensively. Is this just a historical thing? Thanks, Leschnei ( talk) 14:23, 10 June 2017 (UTC)
We have failed to clear the copyediting backlog for years on end. The last thing we need to do is to dig the hole deeper. Over the last 6 months, we have reduced the backlog by an amazing 50 articles (of 1800). Maybe someday we can expand our scope.... Lfstevens ( talk)
I'm just wondering if there isn't a loosen the ketchup bottle effect inherent in using the current request system as a tally, if it might act as a disincentive to people who want to work on articles but know they likely can't finish them, and in a worst-case scenario give people an incentive to try to cheat the system by "Finishing" requests quickly to get a tally up, which passes the workload onto the senior people who review articles being "Finished." Jasphetamine ( talk) 19:03, 27 June 2017 (UTC)
Hello. Since I was advised to leave a note here, I would like to get some suggestions from you on this page. Thank you. ~ Itsused( Talk· Contribs) 12:48, 16 October 2017 (UTC)
Is there an October Blitz?-- Dthomsen8 ( talk) 17:14, 7 October 2017 (UTC)
I never mind a requests blitz :-), but have been a bit busy IRL lately. All the best, Mini apolis 13:49, 16 October 2017 (UTC)
Is Category:Old copy edit requests for League of Copyeditors still useful for this project? The category is populated by transclusions of {{ LOCErequest}}, yet LOCE was marked historical in 2008 and redirected in 2009. If the category is not still useful, could we remove all transclusions of the template and delete it and the category? -- Black Falcon ( talk) 01:31, 18 September 2017 (UTC)
Hello, recently we have started a discussion in the WikiProject Volleyball talk about how should a volleyball player article look like. Can you please give us some pieces of advice, we might be doing some mistakes without even notice them. We have never take an article to GA, probably we are not going anywhere forward. Thanks in advance. -- — Preceding unsigned comment added by Osplace ( talk • contribs)
This article has been copy edited by guild members when the project was called LoCE, long time back. If we get a nice copy edit, this article goes to FA. May be as part of the blitz? Aditya( talk • contribs) 02:31, 22 October 2017 (UTC)
![]() ![]() Contest details: create biographical articles for women of any country or occupation in the world:
| ||
(To subscribe: Women in Red/English language mailing list and Women in Red/international list. Unsubscribe: Women in Red/Opt-out list) |
-- Ipigott ( talk) 15:36, 22 October 2017 (UTC)
Can I please ask for a second opinion on this dispute. It is over a sentence which I think is a textbook garden path sentence (originally me and one other editor were "fixing it" to something grammatically incorrect because we were both parsing it wrong), but the article is being protected by someone who keeps reverting my every effort to clarify it. – filelakeshoe ( t / c) 10:28, 4 November 2017 (UTC)
Regarding Avengers: Infinity War, there is a discussion regarding listing 29 names in a sentence. Please see the discussion here. Erik ( talk | contrib) ( ping me) 23:32, 18 November 2017 (UTC)
Wikipedia has many thousands of wikilinks which point to disambiguation pages. It would be useful to readers if these links directed them to the specific pages of interest, rather than making them search through a list. Members of WikiProject Disambiguation have been working on this and the total number is now below 20,000 for the first time. Some of these links require specialist knowledge of the topics concerned and therefore it would be great if you could help in your area of expertise.
A list of the relevant links on pages which fall within the remit of this wikiproject can be found at http://69.142.160.183/~dispenser/cgi-bin/topic_points.py?banner=WikiProject_Guild_of_Copy_Editors
Please take a few minutes to help make these more useful to our readers.— Rod talk 15:52, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Village pump (miscellaneous)/Archive 57#RfC: Nonbinding advisory RfC concerning financial support for The Internet Archive -- Guy Macon ( talk) 12:11, 22 December 2017 (UTC)
Congrats on bringing the backlog below 1,000 articles for the first time! I sure appreciate GOCE participants for their help. Keep up the great work, and Happy New Year! --- Another Believer ( Talk) 02:42, 24 December 2017 (UTC)
Think I've started drives and blitzes in the past by copy-pasting {{ GAN changes}}, but it's not working this time; everything's moving over one column for some reason. If someone else would do it (I'll try to start the graph in the meantime), I'll look at it in edit mode and figure out what I did wrong. Happy New Year and all the best, Mini apolis 23:53, 31 December 2017 (UTC)