User talk:HPRappaport: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
JRNorbergé (talk | contribs) Peons. |
→Eponymous: new section |
||
| (11 intermediate revisions by 3 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
== Eponymous == |
|||
I say! I have found this article most intreguing! Now we can make the peons feel even more inferior! |
|||
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:How_to_copy-edit.--[[User:JRNorbergé|JRNorbergé]] 20:38, 8 November 2006 (UTC) |
|||
I saw your edit to Brad Pitt. I believe the word "eponymous" should be formally banned from Wikipedia, even when used correctly. As long as I'm dredging up pet peeves, I also think the word "titular" (usually used in the phrases "titular character" or "titular role" as opposed to "title character" or "title role") should be banned, although I don't feel as strongly about it. In my early editing days at Wikipedia, I once had the temerity to change titular to title and was reverted with some nonsensical edit summary accusing me of dumbing things down.--[[User:Bbb23|Bbb23]] ([[User talk:Bbb23|talk]]) 20:53, 31 March 2011 (UTC) |
|||
Latest revision as of 20:53, 31 March 2011
Eponymous
[edit]I saw your edit to Brad Pitt. I believe the word "eponymous" should be formally banned from Wikipedia, even when used correctly. As long as I'm dredging up pet peeves, I also think the word "titular" (usually used in the phrases "titular character" or "titular role" as opposed to "title character" or "title role") should be banned, although I don't feel as strongly about it. In my early editing days at Wikipedia, I once had the temerity to change titular to title and was reverted with some nonsensical edit summary accusing me of dumbing things down.--Bbb23 (talk) 20:53, 31 March 2011 (UTC)