User talk:Azure King

WelcomeEdit

Hello Azure King! Welcome to UESPWiki. It's always good to have new members. If you would like to help improve any of our pages, you may want to take a look at the following links:

• Policies and Guidelines: UESPWiki standards and expectations
• Quick Editing Guide: a quick guide to wiki markup
• Getting Started: how you can help

If you, on the other hand, would like to spice up your userpage, take a look at this link:

• Userboxes: near complete list of userboxes, including a guide to make your own

When you're editing, it's always a good idea to leave edit summaries to explain the changes you have made to a particular page, and remember to sign your talk page posts with four tildes ~~~~. Also, the "show preview" button is a great way to view the changes you've made so far without actually saving the page (our patrollers really appreciate it!).

Feel free to practice editing in the sandbox or discuss the games in the forums. If you need any help, don't hesitate to contact one of our mentors. Have fun! --Kitkat ^{•Talk•Contrib•E-mail} 11:41, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

• Why did you just copy and paste all this to my talk page? I have obvioulsly read it all and have started editing already. So... Thanks for the welcome I guess. Azure_King 20:21, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

About my talk pageEdit

Hey I was just reading through my talk page and I realise that you might have thought my comment was insulting you but I really wasn't, I was only asking if you were from Ireland as well, I probably should have phrased it better. sorry for any confusion or anything like that:)RIM 20:26, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

Ya, its all good I just read it more as "you are a weird child" and less of "are you from Ireland".

As it so happens I am from the U.S. (California to be exact). Do you happen to know the Userbox code for the U.S.?

Oh good, anyway you can use this {{User American}X} just remove the X.RIM 20:39, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

Lusty Argonian MaidEdit

I would submit it is a matter of fact that the excerpts are "mercifully" short, though I don't really care. But FYI, someone else might see fit to revert you. I don't know the exact source for the phrase, but as far as I can tell, it was introduced by a bot over two years ago, so there's a small possibility it was derived from game data, meaning it's sacrosanct and questions of its accuracy don't apply (see, for example, here). But if you insist on trying to eliminate the adverb, you missed one. Minor Edits 05:51, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for voicing your opinon. I agree that it may be based on game data but at the present time I see no definitive proof of such a claim. As a new member, I am obviously prone to mistakes. However, "mercifully" is an additive. It is unneeded and reeks of personal opinion. Correct me if I am wrong but does it not say here that content should not be first person (opinionated), and should be Accurate and Verifiable?

The bit about perspective is more about sentence structure than content. The rule about first person doesn't mean articles should be free of all opinion, it means referring to yourself or framing things as a personal experience is wrong ("I went through this ruin and saw..."). In this instance, the description would be undeniably "accurate and verifiable" if it was taken from the game data, as it could be easily corroborated by others through the game data.

Anyways, given the wiki's policy on achieving consensus, it's also possible for an opinion held by the majority of the community to be considered fact and thereby make it onto the pages. There's subtle examples of this all over the place, but for the most blatant demonstrations, check out the easter egg pages. So, for example, if the vast majority of contributors would agree that the short nature of the excerpts is merciful, then there would likely be no real problem with saying so. The fact that the description existed for over two years without being substantially altered (besides vandalism) could be interpreted as tacit approval of the adverb by the community.

Conversely, it could be interpreted to mean that people just didn't notice or didn't care enough to change it, and people likewise won't notice or care about its absence. However, the line was also somewhat humorous, and I'm not sure we have to take the encyclopedic format so seriously that we muffle all levity on the wiki, especially in the description of books that are themselves jokes. Long story short, I truly am ambivalent on the matter; I just want the pages to be uniform one way or the other. Minor Edits 07:05, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

Thank you, I believe much as you do that its acceptable one way or the other. The issue for me only arrises when: one, no other page has such qualifying words, and two, when it seems more accurate to describe something in short and concise detail rather than adding "Fluff".

In short, I am simply trying to simplify the page. This is because, even as I read the description, I found myself asking "what does that have to do with anything". What then, can we ask of the even newer players of TES? Azure_King 02:26, 11 January 2012 (UTC)