• This edit serves no real purpose as it does not alter the information presented.

    Neither does this one.

    You have been warned before about them, and I'm doing so again.

    - Geist

      Loading editor
    • Do edits have to alter the information present? Many times, people have made edits that improve the flow of a sentence, which is what the first one does, and the full stop removed in the second is, on this wiki, incorrect, and correcting grammatical things like that is perfectly acceptable.

        Loading editor
    • Correcting or altering¬†grammar to make a sentence read or flow better is indeed an acceptable reason to make an edit... at least as far as I know. If this is incorrect then I am unaware of it.

      That being said, the first edit doesn't really change the flow as far as I can tell. Personally, I would have made it "...during Dishonored and two of its DLCs, The Knife of Dunwall and The Brigmore Witches", but that's just me. However, all three (the original, my version, and your version) pretty much read the same.

      As for the second, I seem to have missed the actual rule where it says that periods (or full stops as you put it) are not supposed to be in the quote portion of the page. That also being said, you seem to be the only one that removes these periods from that particular part of the quote sections.

        Loading editor
    • That's the thing though, it's not actually written down, I simply have to go with how it's normally done. A previous time something came up that was done but was not in the MoS, I asked for it to be added to the MoS, but it has not been. It is my firm belief that the majority of edits I perform that people do not like could easily be solved if the MoS was more detailed than it currently is, but that does not happen.

        Loading editor
    • There is a difference between a general acceptance for slight deviations of writing formats based on the fact that we have a diverse community of editors, and a nigh obsessive need to bend things into conformity simply because that is how one likes it.

      While you may not be (I don't actually know), your editing history seems to indicate the latter. There are too many examples of this:

      As far as I know, the Manual of Style isn't supposed to be some hammer that you bash articles with so that everything is the same cookie-cutter shape. Rather it is a guide to help steer those who may not know how best to present a page. The purpose of editing should be to make the wiki as a whole better for everyone, not simply scouring every finite detail to see what is not conforming.

      Take this into consideration: if we were to follow the rules here, as presented both from the MoS and the RoC as if they were stone-carved LAW, then by those very tenets you have been warned far in excess of what should normally be allowed, and should probably be banned from this site for at least another month for previous actions you have taken and been warned against.

      However, the admin (and others here) are not so two-dimensional to think in only black and white. There is some leeway allowed, and discussions brought up.

        Loading editor
    • A FANDOM user
        Loading editor
Give Kudos to this message
You've given this message Kudos!
See who gave Kudos to this message
Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.

Fandom may earn an affiliate commission on sales made from links on this page.

Stream the best stories.

Fandom may earn an affiliate commission on sales made from links on this page.

Get Disney+