User talk:BastianBalthazarBux: Difference between revisions
No edit summary Tag: 2017 source edit |
No edit summary |
||
| (3 intermediate revisions by 3 users not shown) | |||
| Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
== Past tense for living people == | == Past tense for living people == | ||
Hm. I see. I suppose it does no great harm to let the present tense version stand in the specific case of [[Jacob Black]] if there is ''already'' inconsistent precedent. That being said, until such a time as a Forum conversation (or otherwise, some more solid official change of policy) emerges, I think the best practice would be not to alter the tenses of any existing pages one way ''or the other''; just leave the crime scene undisturbed, as it were, until an agreement is reached on how to clean it all up. So please don't start going around systematically altering "was"es to "is"es on existing pages. <span style="color: #baa3d6;font-family:Comic Sans;">[[User:Scrooge MacDuck|'''Scrooge MacDuck''']]</span> <span style="color: #baa3d6;">[[User_talk:Scrooge MacDuck|⊕]]</span> 19:53, 11 February 2022 (UTC) | Hm. I see. I suppose it does no great harm to let the present tense version stand in the specific case of [[Jacob Black]] if there is ''already'' inconsistent precedent. That being said, until such a time as a Forum conversation (or otherwise, some more solid official change of policy) emerges, I think the best practice would be not to alter the tenses of any existing pages one way ''or the other''; just leave the crime scene undisturbed, as it were, until an agreement is reached on how to clean it all up. So please don't start going around systematically altering "was"es to "is"es on existing pages, any more than I will now endeavour to "correct" "is"es to "was"es on the existing present-tense pages mentioned on the talk page you linked me to. <span style="color: #baa3d6;font-family:Comic Sans;">[[User:Scrooge MacDuck|'''Scrooge MacDuck''']]</span> <span style="color: #baa3d6;">[[User_talk:Scrooge MacDuck|⊕]]</span> 19:53, 11 February 2022 (UTC) | ||
== I mean == | |||
She had her "senior moment" in 2018. But it's all just a joke anyhow. [[User:Najawin|Najawin]] [[User talk:Najawin|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 22:20, 16 June 2023 (UTC) | |||
== Re:References to other DWU media == | |||
Hi, thanks for your message! I certainly didn't mean to disparage your efforts, sorry if it came across that way. I wasn't intending to single you out, in fact other users, including myself, have added "references" of that kind. These sorts of connections are also very interesting in their own right, and at the ''very least'' would be valuable to mention in the notes sections of relevant pages, although collating them in one place is nice. I really just think it's something worth discussing at some point, because overt reuse of EU concepts are something completely different to probable (yet cool!) coincidences, maybe we should be treating them differently? I'd definitely be eager to hear your thoughts on the matter though, whenever it is discussed. All the best, [[User:Danochy|Danochy]] [[User talk:Danochy|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 00:18, 8 August 2023 (UTC) | |||
:: It's quite alright! --[[User:Scrooge MacDuck|'''Scrooge MacDuck''']] [[User_talk:Scrooge MacDuck|⊕]] 15:57, 3 November 2023 (UTC) | |||
Latest revision as of 15:57, 3 November 2023
Re. Non-heterosexual real world people[[edit source]]
I initially started with present tense references under the belief that they should, but Jack "BtR" Saxon began amending them to past tense as correction. I deferred to their greater level of experience on the matter, and have went with past tense in further edits since. I am waiting to hear back from them regarding the exact nature of the precedent for doing so, but felt it best to do as such so as to not cause any impression of being obstructive or 'edit-war' like in behaviour. JDPManjoume ☎ 16:23, 8 February 2022 (UTC)
Past tense for living people[[edit source]]
Hm. I see. I suppose it does no great harm to let the present tense version stand in the specific case of Jacob Black if there is already inconsistent precedent. That being said, until such a time as a Forum conversation (or otherwise, some more solid official change of policy) emerges, I think the best practice would be not to alter the tenses of any existing pages one way or the other; just leave the crime scene undisturbed, as it were, until an agreement is reached on how to clean it all up. So please don't start going around systematically altering "was"es to "is"es on existing pages, any more than I will now endeavour to "correct" "is"es to "was"es on the existing present-tense pages mentioned on the talk page you linked me to. Scrooge MacDuck ⊕ 19:53, 11 February 2022 (UTC)
I mean[[edit source]]
She had her "senior moment" in 2018. But it's all just a joke anyhow. Najawin ☎ 22:20, 16 June 2023 (UTC)
Re:References to other DWU media[[edit source]]
Hi, thanks for your message! I certainly didn't mean to disparage your efforts, sorry if it came across that way. I wasn't intending to single you out, in fact other users, including myself, have added "references" of that kind. These sorts of connections are also very interesting in their own right, and at the very least would be valuable to mention in the notes sections of relevant pages, although collating them in one place is nice. I really just think it's something worth discussing at some point, because overt reuse of EU concepts are something completely different to probable (yet cool!) coincidences, maybe we should be treating them differently? I'd definitely be eager to hear your thoughts on the matter though, whenever it is discussed. All the best, Danochy ☎ 00:18, 8 August 2023 (UTC)
- It's quite alright! --Scrooge MacDuck ⊕ 15:57, 3 November 2023 (UTC)
