Jump to content

Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Assessment/SMS Rheinland: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
m [[SMS Rheinland]]: replace invalid format code '6' with '2';
m Fix Linter errors.
 
Line 39: Line 39:
*I don't know if you care about consistency with hyphens before "class", Nate ... if so, search for "Sachsen class armored frigate". - Dank ([[User talk:Dank|push to talk]])
*I don't know if you care about consistency with hyphens before "class", Nate ... if so, search for "Sachsen class armored frigate". - Dank ([[User talk:Dank|push to talk]])
*Although "manned" is acceptable to some, and there's an argument that it fits with the wiki-philosophy that we're not trying to be in any sense "better" or "more sensitive" than our sources, I still think that we need to be aware that most writers, academics and professionals have felt that words like "manned" have been outdated since before 1980, and some feel they reflect negatively on the writer (and copyeditor!) ... even though the crew was (probably) all male. The thinking has been that the automatic and unconscious use of such words reinforces the bias that things will go horribly wrong if you put women on a ship. But I think the main argument isn't about "sensitivity", it's that I haven't seen the word for over 30 years in writing of the kind we're trying to emulate. - Dank ([[User talk:Dank|push to talk]])
*Although "manned" is acceptable to some, and there's an argument that it fits with the wiki-philosophy that we're not trying to be in any sense "better" or "more sensitive" than our sources, I still think that we need to be aware that most writers, academics and professionals have felt that words like "manned" have been outdated since before 1980, and some feel they reflect negatively on the writer (and copyeditor!) ... even though the crew was (probably) all male. The thinking has been that the automatic and unconscious use of such words reinforces the bias that things will go horribly wrong if you put women on a ship. But I think the main argument isn't about "sensitivity", it's that I haven't seen the word for over 30 years in writing of the kind we're trying to emulate. - Dank ([[User talk:Dank|push to talk]])
*<s>I believe I've copyedited the ''Battle of the Gulf of Riga'' section before. - Dank ([[User talk:Dank|push to talk]])
*<s>I believe I've copyedited the ''Battle of the Gulf of Riga'' section before. - Dank ([[User talk:Dank|push to talk]])</s>
*Same with ''Battle of Jutland'' and the first paragraph in the next section. If someone could look through to make sure that the stuff that was copyedited before still looks good, I'd appreciate it. It's a fine article but I'll hold off on my support for now. - Dank ([[User talk:Dank|push to talk]]) 04:23, 28 July 2010 (UTC)</s>
*<s>Same with ''Battle of Jutland'' and the first paragraph in the next section. If someone could look through to make sure that the stuff that was copyedited before still looks good, I'd appreciate it. It's a fine article but I'll hold off on my support for now. - Dank ([[User talk:Dank|push to talk]]) 04:23, 28 July 2010 (UTC)</s>


<b>Support</b> per usual [[User:Dank/Copyediting|disclaimer]]. I finished up the copyediting I was asking for help with. I would appreciate it if someone would check my copyediting. - Dank ([[User talk:Dank|push to talk]]) 22:46, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
<b>Support</b> per usual [[User:Dank/Copyediting|disclaimer]]. I finished up the copyediting I was asking for help with. I would appreciate it if someone would check my copyediting. - Dank ([[User talk:Dank|push to talk]]) 22:46, 28 July 2010 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 16:44, 4 April 2024