Talk:Common English usage misconceptions/Archive 2: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 01:15, 28 February 2013

Latest revision as of 01:28, 18 January 2015

(3 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown)

Line 208:

:::::But I think we've laid out our positions at this point. Let's see if anyone else cares to weigh in. Thanks. --[[User:Airborne84|Airborne84]] ([[User talk:Airborne84|talk]]) 18:40, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

::::::Since there doesn't seem to be any more interest in commenting on the RfC, I removed the entry. --[[User:Airborne84|Airborne84]] ([[User talk:Airborne84|talk]]) 05:35, 3 November 2012 (UTC)

== Automatic archiving? ==

This page is getting a bit long - I didn't want to do anything out of turn, but maybe we should have the page archived by [[User:MiszaBot I]]? Not sure what the optimal parameters are for this, but maybe an incremental archive, 2 months with archive sizes of 70K looks good to me. the code for this is:

<pre>

<nowiki>

{{User:MiszaBot/config

| algo = old(60d)

| archive = Talk: Common English usage misconceptions/Archive %(counter)d

| counter = 1

| maxarchivesize = 70K

| archiveheader = {{talk archive navigation}}

| minthreadstoarchive = 1

| minthreadsleft = 4

}}

</nowiki>

</pre>

It seems like [[User:Airborne84|Airborne84]] and [[User:Mr swordfish|Mr. Swordfish]] are the people who have primarily been active in this page, so if you guys agree I'd say we should go ahead. --[[User:0x0077BE|0x0077BE]] ([[User talk:0x0077BE|talk]]) 22:33, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

:I would support "plain vanilla" auto archiving, and was under the assumption that it was already in place. If it's not, then let's do. [[User:Mr swordfish|Mr. Swordfish]] ([[User talk:Mr swordfish|talk]]) 01:17, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

:: According to [[User:MiszaBot/Archive_HowTo|this]], it seems like the one I've posted above is the most common archive method. I don't see any archive code in the page, so I don't think it's implemented. Plus this page is huge, so even if it were implemented, the settings probably would need to be tweaked a bit. --[[User:0x0077BE|0x0077BE]] ([[User talk:0x0077BE|talk]]) 01:26, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

::: Sounds fine to me. Thanks. --[[User:Airborne84|Airborne84]] ([[User talk:Airborne84|talk]]) 03:25, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

:::Then I'd say put these settings into place, as they are the most common. If someone feels the need to tweak the settings later, I'm ok with that too. [[User:Mr swordfish|Mr. Swordfish]] ([[User talk:Mr swordfish|talk]]) 15:48, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

:::: OK, I've put it at the top of the page. Not sure when it kicks in or if anything on the page qualifies yet because of the 2-month window. I'll check back in a week and make sure it's working. [[User:0x0077BE|0x0077BE]] ([[User talk:0x0077BE|talk]]) 17:44, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

:::::Now that the archiving has occurred, I see that the Guidelines section that opened the page is no longer there. We probably need to make that "sticky". [[User:Mr swordfish|Mr. Swordfish]] ([[User talk:Mr swordfish|talk]]) 01:39, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

:::::: <strike>Good point. I'll see about doing that.</strike> Done. --[[User:0x0077BE|0x0077BE]] ([[User talk:0x0077BE|talk]]) 01:57, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

== Bizarre entry ==

A previous user had hidden the following text, commenting--sagely, I think--that "this needs to be re-written to be more understandable, or removed. Perhaps better examples would help, assuming this entire entry is not merely a hoax."

{{bq|'''Misconception:''' ''All phrases in speech that include a preposition are considered to be prepositional phrases''. This misconception originates from a misunderstanding of the word "preposition".{{citation needed|date=January 2012}} For a complement to be defined as a preposition, the word must be positioned before the other parts of speech in the phrase; e.g., "I walked home '''from the park'''". An [[adpositional phrase]], on the other hand, represents all complements of a phrase that the prepositional phrase is a subset of. [[Preposition and postposition|Circumpositions and postpositions]] also fall under the adposition category.}}

I've gone ahead and removed it, given its unsourcedness, its pedantry, and its (as far as I can tell) total irrelevance and lack of notability. Made me chuckle, though.--[[User:Lemuellio|Lemuellio]] ([[User talk:Lemuellio|talk]]) 04:49, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

: Ouch ... now that I read the above, I notice how mean it sounds in print. My sincere apologies to the writer of the entry!--[[User:Lemuellio|Lemuellio]] ([[User talk:Lemuellio|talk]]) 04:52, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

== Academic/Scientific Writing ==

Academic writing in the sciences such as dissertations and journal submissions follow many of these rules. For example double spacing sentences and not using contractions. You can check guidelines for submitting articles to Royal Society of Chemistry Journals. Scientific writing is also supposed to be written in passive voice. Furthermore Shakespeare was a poet? author? so why is his grammar being used to prove misconceptions? Authors have poetic license to do as they please it would similar to saying sentences do not need to be capitalized because e e cummings wrote without capitalizing his works.

[[Special:Contributions/163.118.206.80|163.118.206.80]] ([[User talk:163.118.206.80|talk]]) 06:03, 24 September 2013 (UTC)

:"Scientific writing is also supposed to be written in passive voice."

:The American Psychological Association prefers the active voice: https://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/resource/560/15/ [[User:Airborne84|Airborne84]] ([[User talk:Airborne84|talk]]) 22:01, 13 December 2013 (UTC)

== Split infinitives ==

For the new editor adding the material to the infinitives section, please provide a source before adding the material again. Please also familiarize yourself with Wikipedia's policy on [[Wikipedia:BRD|reverting and discussing]].

A relevant source is needed because many people have their opinions on English, but it may not be the case that a particular opinion is held in high regard by [[Wikipedia:Reliable sources|reliable sources]], or that those sources think a particular fact has any bearing on a topic. As editors, we don't note our opinions here; only the opinions of reliable sources. Thanks for your interest. [[User:Airborne84|Airborne84]] ([[User talk:Airborne84|talk]]) 19:43, 29 July 2014 (UTC)