User talk:AIienlong

December 2024

Welcome to Wikipedia, and thank you for your contributions. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, please note that there is a Manual of Style that should be followed to maintain a consistent, encyclopedic appearance. Deviating from this style disturbs uniformity among articles and may cause readability or accessibility problems. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. ... discospinster _talk 18:31, 1 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at History of ancient Israel and Judah. Your edits continue to appear to constitute vandalism and have been automatically reverted.

If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Note that human editors do monitor recent changes to Wikipedia articles, and administrators have the ability to block users from editing if they repeatedly engage in vandalism.
ClueBot NG makes very few mistakes, but it does happen. If you believe the change you made should not have been considered as unconstructive, please read about it, report it here, remove this warning from your talk page, and then make the edit again.
If you need help, please see the Introduction to Wikipedia, and if you can't find what you are looking for there, place {{Help me}} on your talk page and someone will drop by to help.
The following is the log entry regarding this warning: History of ancient Israel and Judah was changed by AIienlong (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.920581 on 2024-12-01T18:52:03+00:00

Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 18:52, 1 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Dewritech. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Film have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Teahouse or the Help desk. Thanks. Dewritech (talk) 16:48, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I mean I would have wanted to change title if its applicable due to its unfit to the rules it use British standard for the title while under that in the template its said that you need to use American English standard, due to that inconsistency I did edit but it might seem did not change title as in the outcome AIienlong (talk) 16:52, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"Film" is a word used by all varieties of English and is more formal. The template is just to ensure that the article spelling, grammar, etc is uniformly American English ( probably because that's how it was first written, and there is no reason to change it). Escape Orbit ^(Talk) 16:59, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your thread has been archived

Hello AIienlong! The thread you created at the Teahouse, About Photo uploads, has been archived because there was no discussion for a few days.

You can still read the archived discussion. If you have follow-up questions, please create a new thread.

See also the help page about the archival process. The archival was done by lowercase sigmabot III, and this notification was delivered by KiranBOT, both automated accounts. You can opt out of future notifications by placing {{bots|deny=KiranBOT}} on top of the current page (your user talk page). —KiranBOT (talk) 03:15, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Commas

While, as a matter of taste, you could argue that "X, or x, is .." would be better phrased "X or x is ...", leaving it as " X or x, is ...", with an intrusive comma, makes no grammatical sense at all. Escape Orbit ^(Talk) 16:36, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The comma in "X, or x," disrupts the sentence unnecessarily. "Or" functions to link the two parts (X and x) as alternatives, not to separate them, so adding a comma doesn't reflect this relationship correctly. By removing the comma, the sentence maintains its grammatical integrity and better matches the intended flow and meaning. AIienlong (talk) 16:42, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If you removed both commas, that would be fine. Removing the first comma but not the second one is incorrect. Schazjmd (talk) 16:46, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

then I'll remove both commas, I would also say for example X and x would fit better. I don't mind changes to simplify the article so that user feels comfortable to read it through. AIienlong (talk) 16:48, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Stop putting "by request of user Schazjmd" in your edit summaries. I did not request that you make that edit. I pointed out how your edit was incorrect. Schazjmd (talk) 17:09, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

And what's the comma you left behind between the x and "is" doing? Previously it marked the end of the clause, but there is no clause to end once you remove the first comma. It no longer has any business being there.

You are far better to ask about an edit like this first. Or try it out on one article first before implementing it on the entire alphabet. It is unlikely that the current format wasn't reach by consensus and review by dozens of editors before you. Escape Orbit ^(Talk) 16:49, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If I would've wrote that in talk I would've been quickly shut down by those who don't want changes so If you're the administrator of article it would've been for me much more easier to address that issue. AIienlong (talk) 16:54, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Also do I really need a talk for the minor edits? AIienlong (talk) 16:59, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Usually not, but changing the lead sentence on 26 articles on a matter of taste isn't really minor. Particularly on articles that have been viewed by a great many editors who had no problem with them. It suggests that your change is something only you think needs done, so you should think and tread carefully. Otherwise you could find all you work just undone. Maybe the way it is has been discussed before. Maybe there is a very good reason for the way it is, that isn't obvious to you. Escape Orbit ^(Talk) 17:06, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Seek consensus on Talk before changing multiple articles. Dewritech (talk) 17:06, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

well user Schazjmd suggested to get rid of both commas so I don't see it as something that everyone reached consensus on. Also by telling matter of taste you impose to this way it's correct, without thought of changes as this could be not noticed by other editors. AIienlong (talk) 17:10, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

so again do I need to open talk on all 26 articles for minor changes just because this pattern repeats itself multiple times doesn't have to do with the perception of it, but as the matter of minor changes on each one of these multiple articles? AIienlong (talk) 17:11, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If there's discussion and consensus for change on one article, it's likely that that consensus would include doing the same on all the articles, for consistency sake. That's why they are already so similar. It wasn't just chance they ended up that way. But you'd have to establish that consensus first. Escape Orbit ^(Talk) 17:18, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Also, BTW, I'm in agreement with you on the edits on Google, Microsoft and Apple. I don't think that commas at the end of short, introductory, prepositional phrases are necessary. However, I accept it's a matter of taste, so I don't go around Wikipedia changing articles simply to suit my own preference. You should consider this. Escape Orbit ^(Talk) 17:13, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, an okay I'll open talk on this but only one not 26 so I should open talk on letter A to suggest on all articles AIienlong (talk) 17:15, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]