User talk:72.184.7.232: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
|||
(2 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
Line 5: | Line 5: | ||
:::Looking at your recent edits it seems you may have taken my input a little too far. You don't have to change every case of <nowiki>{{s}} you come across to {{iw}}, only the ones with 3 inputs (ie {{s|wiki|foo|bar}})</nowiki>. There's no harm in doing it for the 2 input ones, but I hope you don't feel obligated to do so. --[[User:CanvasK|CanvasK]] ([[User talk:CanvasK|talk]]) 00:32, March 1, 2021 (EST) | :::Looking at your recent edits it seems you may have taken my input a little too far. You don't have to change every case of <nowiki>{{s}} you come across to {{iw}}, only the ones with 3 inputs (ie {{s|wiki|foo|bar}})</nowiki>. There's no harm in doing it for the 2 input ones, but I hope you don't feel obligated to do so. --[[User:CanvasK|CanvasK]] ([[User talk:CanvasK|talk]]) 00:32, March 1, 2021 (EST) | ||
::::Gotcha. I'll keep that in mind for future reference. [[Special:Contributions/72.184.7.232|72.184.7.232]] 00:38, March 1, 2021 (EST) | ::::Gotcha. I'll keep that in mind for future reference. [[Special:Contributions/72.184.7.232|72.184.7.232]] 00:38, March 1, 2021 (EST) | ||
== Update history sections. == | |||
Hello, I noticed that you were adding back information about the day one patch and Final Smash changes to the update history summaries for various characters. These omissions were very much deliberate: these summaries are supposed to illustrate the competitive history of characters relative to game updates; since there was not a legitimate scene for Ultimate 1.0.0, and Final Smashes are not used in competitive play, mentioning them in the summary only adds useless bloat to sections that already tend to be needlessly heavy. They are still mentioned in the actual changelog anyway. Thank you for reading and have a nice day! [[User:Rdrfc|Rdrfc]] ([[User talk:Rdrfc|talk]]) 17:33, July 15, 2021 (EDT) | |||
:Hey, I already told you once about this, please do not add 1.1.0 changes and Final Smash changes to these summaries again.--[[User:Rdrfc|Rdrfc]] ([[User talk:Rdrfc|talk]]) 14:14, October 31, 2021 (EDT) | |||
== "Minor edit" == | |||
Hey there, you might know me as the guy with a strange obsession with {{uv|Banjo-Kazooie}}, and who likes to scrutinise edits to related articles. On top of that, when I notice something strange about a person's editing behaviour, I have a tendency to investigate their contribution history. I have the option, after all, and it can lead to some interesting discoveries. Case in point: I noticed that you seem to not quite understand what a "minor edit" is. Or, at the very least you've lost sight of what it means. Nearly every edit you've made since June 28 has had the term "minor edit" as the edit summary. | |||
What do you think the word "minor" means? We clearly don't have the same definition. As a registered user (which you should totally become, by the way - it's very easy and you gain access to all sorts of useful tools), you have access to a toggle next to your edit summary ("This is a minor edit") that gives other users a convenient way of sorting out overlookable edits. [[Help:Editing#More detail|Help:Editing]] describes the proper usage of the toggle, and by extension the term: "...mark an edit as minor... to let people know your edit is not something substantive." Of course, there is no problem with having an alternative method of clarifying your edits to be "minor." What's misleading, however, is your usage of the term. I would hardly call a +543-byte edit to [[Dark Link]], an edit to [[Pyra]] that quadruples the size of one Trivia point, or an edit to [[Banjo & Kazooie]] that substantially reworks several article-wide wording patterns and extensively elaborates on several sections, "not something substantive." | |||
To clarify, there is no problem with your editing. Actually, you're probably better at it than I am. I just want to clear up whatever misunderstanding is happening with your inaccurate usage of this edit summary notation. | |||
I spent far too long iterating on this message. Hope you're picking up what I'm laying down. Please re-assess your usage of the term "minor edit," and have a great day! Sincerely, [[User:SamtheBKBoss|Samuel]] the [[User talk:SamtheBKBoss|<span style="color: #0123A8">'''Banjo-'''</span>]][[Special:Contributions/SamtheBKBoss|<span style="color: #FF1901">'''Kazooie'''</span>]] Boss. [[File:SamtheBKBossSIGN.png|16px]] 00:05, August 15, 2021 (EDT) |
Latest revision as of 13:14, October 31, 2021
Template Usage[edit]
I noticed in a couple of your edits that you changed {{iw}} to {{s}}. They are very similar, however {{iw}} can take an extra input for text in parenthesis (making it able to distinguish between Sonic the Hedgehog (film) or Sonic the Hedgehog (character)). Changing them to {{s}} causes the links to sometimes not work as intended; doing so in the previous example would link to the Sonic the Hedgehog franchise instead of the film or character. --CanvasK (talk) 22:33, February 16, 2021 (EST)
- I honestly had no idea that was the case, and simply thought they were interchangeable to the point of being a matter of preference. Thanks for the heads up. 72.184.7.232 08:41, February 17, 2021 (EST)
- I can see that. If you see {{s}} with 3 inputs feel free to change it to {{iw}}, because at some point {{s}} had 3 inputs and was used interchangeably but was changed to have a different role. --CanvasK (talk) 09:01, February 17, 2021 (EST)
- Looking at your recent edits it seems you may have taken my input a little too far. You don't have to change every case of {{s}} you come across to {{iw}}, only the ones with 3 inputs (ie {{s|wiki|foo|bar}}). There's no harm in doing it for the 2 input ones, but I hope you don't feel obligated to do so. --CanvasK (talk) 00:32, March 1, 2021 (EST)
- Gotcha. I'll keep that in mind for future reference. 72.184.7.232 00:38, March 1, 2021 (EST)
- Looking at your recent edits it seems you may have taken my input a little too far. You don't have to change every case of {{s}} you come across to {{iw}}, only the ones with 3 inputs (ie {{s|wiki|foo|bar}}). There's no harm in doing it for the 2 input ones, but I hope you don't feel obligated to do so. --CanvasK (talk) 00:32, March 1, 2021 (EST)
- I can see that. If you see {{s}} with 3 inputs feel free to change it to {{iw}}, because at some point {{s}} had 3 inputs and was used interchangeably but was changed to have a different role. --CanvasK (talk) 09:01, February 17, 2021 (EST)
Update history sections.[edit]
Hello, I noticed that you were adding back information about the day one patch and Final Smash changes to the update history summaries for various characters. These omissions were very much deliberate: these summaries are supposed to illustrate the competitive history of characters relative to game updates; since there was not a legitimate scene for Ultimate 1.0.0, and Final Smashes are not used in competitive play, mentioning them in the summary only adds useless bloat to sections that already tend to be needlessly heavy. They are still mentioned in the actual changelog anyway. Thank you for reading and have a nice day! Rdrfc (talk) 17:33, July 15, 2021 (EDT)
- Hey, I already told you once about this, please do not add 1.1.0 changes and Final Smash changes to these summaries again.--Rdrfc (talk) 14:14, October 31, 2021 (EDT)
"Minor edit"[edit]
Hey there, you might know me as the guy with a strange obsession with Banjo-Kazooie, and who likes to scrutinise edits to related articles. On top of that, when I notice something strange about a person's editing behaviour, I have a tendency to investigate their contribution history. I have the option, after all, and it can lead to some interesting discoveries. Case in point: I noticed that you seem to not quite understand what a "minor edit" is. Or, at the very least you've lost sight of what it means. Nearly every edit you've made since June 28 has had the term "minor edit" as the edit summary.
What do you think the word "minor" means? We clearly don't have the same definition. As a registered user (which you should totally become, by the way - it's very easy and you gain access to all sorts of useful tools), you have access to a toggle next to your edit summary ("This is a minor edit") that gives other users a convenient way of sorting out overlookable edits. Help:Editing describes the proper usage of the toggle, and by extension the term: "...mark an edit as minor... to let people know your edit is not something substantive." Of course, there is no problem with having an alternative method of clarifying your edits to be "minor." What's misleading, however, is your usage of the term. I would hardly call a +543-byte edit to Dark Link, an edit to Pyra that quadruples the size of one Trivia point, or an edit to Banjo & Kazooie that substantially reworks several article-wide wording patterns and extensively elaborates on several sections, "not something substantive."
To clarify, there is no problem with your editing. Actually, you're probably better at it than I am. I just want to clear up whatever misunderstanding is happening with your inaccurate usage of this edit summary notation.
I spent far too long iterating on this message. Hope you're picking up what I'm laying down. Please re-assess your usage of the term "minor edit," and have a great day! Sincerely, Samuel the Banjo-Kazooie Boss. 00:05, August 15, 2021 (EDT)