Category talk:Wording Issues

I wish that someone had told me of this place earlier. Ever seen a category completely emptied by a man? --SgtLion 21:24, 31 December 2009 (UTC)

Incorrect Categorization

Hey, I was just wondering, some pages in this section seem incomplete rather than having grammatical issues. I was wondering, are incomplete pages supposed to be in this category, or can I delete some of these templates?--Vrail 02:24, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

This template is only supposed to be used for things which have wording/grammar issues. If it's being used when there aren't any, then go ahead and delete (it's always possible that the problems were fixed, but nobody removed the template). If this template is being used for the wrong purpose, then delete it and replace it with whatever the correct template should be. Thanks for keeping on top of this stuff! JazzMan 02:20, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

Ok, awesome. I'll go over it a bit to see if problems with that still exist. Oh, and sorry about not signing my post, always forgetting. :P--Vrail 02:24, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

Lol, it happens to the best of us. JazzMan 02:25, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

Done

I just finished fixing every page in this category. Hopefully in the future this page can be kept clean and worked on once there are one or two pages listed here. Oh, and to anybody who reads this, remember to post the grammar template on any poorly written pages you find. :)--Vrail 04:05, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

Awesome!

Sorry, though, I added one more :( Under People (3.5e Race) has horrible, horrible grammar. JazzMan 04:14, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

Ummm... are we reading the same article? It may have a few formatting issues, but the grammar is fine. I had a read over it and posted it on a word doc to check for anything I had missed, and it was fine. Could you explain what you mean by horrible grammar?--Vrail 04:28, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

Sentence one: "Living deep inside the earth there humanoid people have never before been seen, until now, no more than a few years ago a group of dwarfs where mining for ores when they came upon a natural cave." I kinda stopped there, so maybe the rest of the article is fine. JazzMan 04:49, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

Alright, I missed one there-their and a semi colon. Other than that, the first sentence seems fine. I'll remove the template for now, but if you do read over more and still think it's wrong, then you can put it back up and I'll look over it again. :)--Vrail 04:56, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

Ok, now I'm done. :P--Vrail 05:00, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

There's more than that, but I got it so don't worry about it. I'm a little anal :) JazzMan 06:04, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

You just love spoiling my fun don't you? :P--Vrail 06:08, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

Ha ha ha, it's only fair that I add back templates to this category while you're emptying it. You're doing the same thing to me on candidates for deletion :) JazzMan 22:13, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

Jazz, I read over a few of your changes, on some things it seems like you're not just fixing grammar, but changing the wording so it sounds better. When I fix articles I try to keep the wording as much the same as I can, even if it doesn't flow well. This is because as long as something isn't structurally wrong and it is understandable then everybody deserves their own way of saying things. --Vrail 21:58, 6 June 2010 (UTC)

Am I changing the meaning? I don't intend to. But if it's unclear or awkwardly worded, I don't have any problems changing it. The right to manners (of the strange kind) of speaking everyone has, as the right, which will be fully acted upon, to fix said strange manners do I. :) JazzMan 23:34, 6 June 2010 (UTC)

Lol, changing awkward wording is what I mean. You do still present the same message, its just that I try hard to only change structural things, even if it is awkwardly worded. However well put, and yes I would say you have the right to fix poorly worded sentences to a degree, its just my preference not to. :) --Vrail 04:17, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

Helping out

I am not checking this page as much as I could be, so when I do it takes an hour or two to clean it up again. What I'm trying to say is that, it takes a lot of work to maintain the cleanness of the page and wondering if anybody would mind helping out every so often? :D --Vrail 21:56, 6 June 2010 (UTC)

I'll try but I can't guarantee nothin'. I usually stick to things I don't have to think about too much. JazzMan 23:34, 6 June 2010 (UTC)

Thanks jazz. I often do the same thing (as you may have noticed from my previous wiki cleanup efforts) however I'm also very picky about spelling and grammar, I find a wiki is so much more appealing and professional if everything is written well. --Vrail 04:11, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

I cleaned out this category completely and have been keeping it clean for a few months, however I'm growing a bit tired of it, perhaps somebody else could take over for a while? I'll clean it out one last time if anybody agrees, so you can start with a clean slate. Thanks. --Vrail 00:47, 2 August 2010 (UTC)

Automatic template added

Working hard on clearing the category again. As far as I can make out, this template is automatically added to a lot of pages with the text "Does not read through well". This leads to a lot of pages that are simply incomplete and/or abandoned to clog up the wording issues category without actually having any grammatical issues. --SgtLion (talk) 14:29, 29 July 2013 (MDT)

The needsbalance, stub, wikify and wording templates are actually in the preload, with instructions that the author should "remove this template as appropriate". But, as with the instructions to remove comment markers, this tends not to happen. New contributors tend not read these instructions (eager to get stuck into writing).

The comment markers in particular seem to confuse people, they think they need to remain in place then do not understand why their text isn't appearing.

I feel that these templates and markers should be removed from the preloads. I will action this if there is concensus to do so. Marasmusine (talk) 15:35, 29 July 2013 (MDT)

Thanks for the keen eye and concision of response. After having been explained why this template keeps appearing, I obviously agree that they should all be removed from preloads, and hope others feel similarly. --SgtLion (talk) 16:42, 29 July 2013 (MDT)

Not that I know the right format for doing this, but movin' the discussion to Talk:3.5e_Class_Preload#Preload_templates. --SgtLion (talk) 04:17, 24 August 2013 (MDT)