Talk:Bart Millard

edit warring over individual wordings

While there is nothing wrong with "garnered", about the only good reason I can see for having it, is that the original editor wrote it that way (in good faith). However, that's not a good enough reason for opposing further edits. You asked for this to be taken to talk, which I hereby am doing: I'm changing "garnered" to the simpler "won" - please only revert if you have a reason other than "I wrote it that way". Of course, should consensus agree to something else, I will not contest that. However, I do not expect anyone to make a mountain out of a molehill, so in all likelyhood, this should be the end of it. A gentle reminder that "Work submitted to Wikipedia can be edited, used, and redistributed by anyone", and that neither you, I nor anyone else "owns" an article. Neither does the initial editor's contributions have precedence over any subsequent edits (expect in specific cases, such as the choice of American or British English). If you can't agree to this, Wikipedia might not be for you. Thank you for your understanding. Best regards, CapnZapp (talk) 14:02, 19 June 2018 (UTC)

Spelling of "likelihood" aside, this is not Wikipedia:Simple English Wikipedia. It's not about what can and can't be edited, it's about engaging your brains rather than dumbing-down this project because we don't understand the language. Since you don't know that garner means to collect something, usually after much work or with difficulty while winning has many more definitions and definitely implies competing against others. Garner is a much more neutral and accurate term. Walter Görlitz (talk) 15:06, 19 June 2018 (UTC)

If you wish to engage me in further discussion, you need to dial down the rudeness. CapnZapp (talk) 19:13, 19 June 2018 (UTC)

I'm sorry that you think I was being rude. I will be reverting that reasonable edit at some point. Is it that you don't like that I actually used the definition of the word you don't like or is it something else? Walter Görlitz (talk) 19:18, 19 June 2018 (UTC)

Please, no editing war

With due respect to the eminent Walter Görlitz, we would not say "a songs collection" (at least not in American English), so why "a hymns album"? Perhaps my compromise submission is acceptable.

Also, "six independent...and one compilation album" is a grammatical monster, whatever presumed benefits that sequence might confer...well, never mind...we're saved. Looks as if MercyMe has released three compilation albums, so hopefully this disagreement is moot. :-) --2603:6081:8004:DD5:5973:2AD2:97AF:6162 (talk) 10:57, 11 August 2021 (UTC)

With more due respect, https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Bart_Millard&diff=1034666423&oldid=1023439917 is an awful edit. It contains inaccurate information and all I stated was that the order made more sense before your previous change. Take a look at the difference between your two edits: https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Bart_Millard&type=revision&diff=1038242645&oldid=1034666423 . You might actually earn more respect if you explain your edits instead of claiming "Minor mechanics" (what ever that means) and get an account and edit from it so we can communicate with you better. It's not a requirement, but it helps. Walter Görlitz (talk) 05:32, 13 August 2021 (UTC)