User talk:Camils
 |
You have been temporarily blocked for violation of the three-revert rule. Please feel free to return after the block expires, but also please make an effort to discuss your changes further in the future. |
Healines Are Good
So are paragraphs and links. To start a new section with its own headline, click the + at the top of the page next to the edit this page link. Then add a subject and whatever text you wanted to type. This makes it easier for users to distinguish seperate topics of discussion on the page if they are unfamiliar with the content of it. It also allows the wiki software to generate a table of contents once the page is large enoug. These these comments are intended for all parties involved, I'm not singling anyone out. it is much more productive to your cause if you add links to relevant policy when quoting it. Nobody's an expert here, and alluding to Wikipedia policy and guidelines without citations is worse than not mentioning them at all. It is condescending and counterproductive to cooperation, without which this issue (these issues?) will not be resolved. BigNate37 21:00, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
And a Quick Note: Again, your staff is being rude by changing my proper corrections, back to poor, incorrect grammar, which looks shameful on your (the site's) behalf, as to suggest none of you knows grammatical English or the appropiate literacy skills needed to accuratley call himself an editor.
Proper Grammar: Singular and Plural discussions
Everyone Questioning my grammatical changes note this: A Singular noun must be succeeded by a singular pronouns. The Yankees, is the name of the team. A (one) team is a singular. Though it's comoprised of more than one person, it is only one group a single group needs singualr pronouns. Thus, the Yankees are, is incorrect as 'are' is pluarl. Many argue 'Yankees' refers to the players, but then that muast be specifiec within the context of the sentence. Otherwise it's refenced as a team, club, organization, group of people - singular. So, too, would "their, they, them, themselves" in context of the Yankees (unless specified as the players themselves) must by it, its or itself; and with the singular particples following, making "were", "was", or "are", "is"
Further, in regards to any group - i.e. a sports team or a band - although there are multiple members of these groups, each is still only one group, and thus singular. For exmaple, the band the Tragically Hip is only ONE BAND. Therefore, a sentence should read: The Tragically Hip is (not are) a music band. It (not they) plays (ends with an 's' since it's singular) rock music.
That's all well and good, but it's also stupid. The New York Yankees are a baseball team and the Tragically Hip are a band, most especially because they are North American. American/Canadian English doesn't use constructions like that. Adam Bishop 03:41, 22 June 2006 (UTC) Sorry, Mr. Bishop, but while you are being increasingly rude, you are also wrong. In North America as you say, we use proper grammatical Englsih. Yes, we use 'constructions' like that. It is not stupid. You see it that way, because you cannot comprehend simple logic. "Adam Bishop are going to the store to buy themselves drinks." Now, doesn't that sound stupid, as you like to call it. You are wrong. Deal with it.
Alright, I suppose I'm being trolled, but "proper grammatical English" is irrelevant here. I don't care what the rule is because nobody speaks like that. "The Yankees is" is gibberish. "The Tragically Hip" is not an inanimate object, miraculously inspired with life and capable of playing instruments all by itself. Adam Bishop 04:43, 22 June 2006 (UTC) Mr. Bishop, as an "aminstrative editor" or whatever your position is with this site, you should know how to properly edit. A singular group, much to your dismay, is, in fact, an inanimate object, as while there are living people to the group, it is only one group, thus needing appropiate grammatical Englsih. No one talks that way, as you say, because sadley, in this day and age, too few people are properly taught how to write and speak. For example, most people today would say "everyone has their own opinion". However, everyone is singular, thus making the noun "his/her", and not "their". You seem to understand that much as I noticed you wrote that correctly, so then why can you not comprehend the same concept (not the exact same as most people would say, because using "exact" and "same" is redundant) with teams? It is shameful that you are a "professional" editior of this site and yet you not only have poor grammatical skills, but are also rude about it as to tell me "it's stuipd; no one speaks that way; it's gibberish," and then further mock me.Further, I have edited works in newspapers and other professional texts. Oh, and by the way, if you are going to tell me how wrong I am, then please, sir, do not contradict yourself in your writing. You personally wrote: The Band isimmensely popular in Canada. This shows that I am right, because the The Hip Is only one band, as you acknowledge, meaning it is singular! I know my stuff. You, sir, are wrong. Deal with it.
No matter how "politely" you say it, calling someone an idiot is a personal attack and you will refrain from doing so. As for your attempts to make the article say the "Yankees is" - I have two words for you: singular plural. Please make sure you know what you're talking about, because I am starting to suspect Adam might be right about the trolling. Moulder 20:20, 22 June 2006 (UTC) MR. Moulder, I do appologise about the language used in my last letter. I was rather frustrated by the fact Mr. Bishop completely disregarded my notation about proper grammar. The fact is, I know I am right, and rahter than trying to comprehend it, or at least speak to me abot it, he simpley shuts my down. Again, I am sorry about my diction, and I will refrain from hereonin. However, I cannot refrain to making changes when they are needed. Thank You, Michael Isenberg - that is my real name, by the way. I am not afraid to hide myself.
I'm not arguing that it is prescriptively "proper", I'm just arguing that I don't care. You can't change something like that without making it sound ridiculous, so stop it. Adam Bishop 21:44, 22 June 2006 (UTC) Might I suggest everyone considers the information at Discretionary plurals about this. The use of plurals for sports teams (and bands) is correct. --AlisonW 22:03, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
By arguing that you do not care, you are not only acting very unprofessional (and rude), but you are aslo acknowledging the fact that I am right and you choose not to accept and admit it. As I've said before, to further prove my point, you even stated within the article that the team "is", then refered back to the Yankees as "are". That's wrong, because "Yankees" is simply the name of the team. Your plural English claims are falsely made. You say my work sounds "ridiculous" but that's because in today's society people are unfarmiliar with proper grammaer, sadely, this includes you, a so-called editior. If this were to be properly implimented as it should be - grammatically correct. The evidence is right infront of you. Sadley, none of you chooses to accept the truth. If it's one organization, than it's one team, thus making it ONE - singular - noun. It's not complicated. Telling me it's ridiculous, now that is truly ridiculous, as you claim. (Please sign your comments with Mike 21:09, 23 June 2006 (UTC), thankyou)
I'm not sure who that was directed at as nothing in there seems to apply to the previous comment (mine, in fact). I've reverted your change on Boston Red Sox and again must, it seems, advise you that you are in error with this behaviour and it is not acceptable on Wikipedia. As you express yourself so concerned with grammar, or rather you consider others "unfarmiliar with proper grammaer", it would be preferable for you to discuss this on the article discussion pages before making further edits to the relevant articles. Thankyou. --AlisonW 18:25, 23 June 2006 (UTC) To whom it may concern,
I am writing to inform you that a couple of the adminsitrative editors on Wikipedia - Mr. Adam Bishop and Mr. Moulder - have been increasinly rude to me about my editng corrections and very unprofessional about it, telling my that while I may be right in my changes, people do not speak or write in that manner now a days, making their improper grammar "appropiate" this is highly unnacceptable. Unfortunately, in today's society, most people's grammatical skills are quite poor as they have been poorly taught in school and cannot make educated connections on their own as to what is and is not proper grammar. Regardless, just because most people do not know how to write and speak, does not mean they should be accommodated by using grammar that they comprehend. What's more, the aformentioned names were further unprofessional, telling me my work is ridiculous, that I do not know what I am talking about - contradicting themselves after they already acknowledged I am correct, but choose not to admit it for fear of anti-conformaty to improper grammar and aslo for their apparent prides in that they (do not want to) accept that they are wrong. It is becomming increas ingly frustrating for me to sit back and not only take their abuse, but also see that atrocious grammar is being placed on sites by men who claim to be "professionals"
Hi. Two quick notes. One, please assume good faith. I don't think anyone has been "increasingly rude" to you. Their comments might be direct and to the point, but they are just trying to be clear. Two, please sign your posts by adding Mike 21:09, 23 June 2006 (UTC) after your comments. Thanks. --mtz206 (talk) 20:20, 23 June 2006 (UTC) By increasingly rude, I refer to comments made such as "It's all well, but it's stupid", or "gibberish" or "nonesense" and other means of immediately shutting my notaions down without considering my point or cunsulting me, ironic, because within Wipipedia it states that no one is to shut others down, or something along those lines which is what has been happening to me. As for an early comment to me regarding the plural enlgish, I have answerd this before in one of my first blogs, but, perhaps to your suprise, i do, in fact, understand that in regards to groups, the names (i.e Yankees, The Hip, Maple Leafs, etc) can refer to either the team as a whole, or the players, thus making those words plural or singular, but only in the appropiate context. The usage of 'Yankees', for example, does not always mean it will be plural. In fact, it is assumed (or is supposed to be, but again, people are unfamilair with proper grammar and its stylistics)that the saying the name is still singular unless specified. After all, 'Yankees', though plural, is the team name. There is only one team. Thus, while not every time in an article must it be singular, the opening sentence of every article be it a sports team, a band or another group, must read: The New York Yankees is a Major League Baseball team. You are using it in the conext of the players being the team, when in actuality the context is the team as not only does the opening start with the cirty (singualr), but also specifies the group being a team. "The New York Yankees players lost their 10th straight game." Only here is it okay to say their, as it was specified that the context is that of the players. As you claim to know this difference, I hope that you will take this into consideration, with my future changes to non-specified lines, or those which should properly be singular. Look at it this way: With people, the expression "everyone has their own opinion" is wrong, because everyone is singualr and their is a plural pronoun. Therefore, it should read "everyone has his (or her, if you want to be politcally correct) own opinion." Most people, though, to avoid both gender bias and refrain from always writing he/she, uses 'their' as to sugest both sexes. Im sure you know that is wrong, I just established, because there was no plural ever specified. The same can be said in regards to other forms of groups (teams, bands, etc). Thank You for your cooperation. It is just frustrating from my point to see so many people in toay's society completely ignorant to what is and is not correct and how what is tollerated is not what should be acceptable on account it is wrong. - Mike
|
You have been temporarily blocked for violation of the three-revert rule. Please feel free to return after the block expires, but also please make an effort to discuss your changes further in the future. |
-- pgk(talk) 21:10, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
This is your only warning; if you vandalize Wikipedia again, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Yankees76 21:21, 23 June 2006 (UTC)