Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Military history/Academy/Checklist/Archive1

Page moved
I just moved the checklist from WikiProject Military history/Coordinators/Strategy think tank/Training and gave it its own link at the academy (the last link in the "Advanced" section). There was some discussion of the checklist on that talk page. - Dank (push to talk) 16:23, 13 January 2011 (UTC)

Commas
Baha didn't like my section on commas, but I'm finding that missing the second comma in a pair of commas is such a common problem with this particular group of editors that I really need to be able to point to an explanation. Feel free to revert or twiddle. - Dank (push to talk) 15:35, 14 January 2011 (UTC)
 * I didn't say I didn;t like it, I said I didn't understand what you were trying to discourage. Re-reading it, I'm getting the sense that people are not placing a second comma at the end of a thought/clause, and using the analogy that the commas should sandwich a diverting thought as if it was within a set of parenthesis, otherwise, you wind up with a bit of a run-on. Is that about right? I'm sure there is some technical grammatical term for this, but I don't know it. It may be worth asking the WP:GCE if they know. I think we can come up with a better example than what we have currently, however.  bahamut0013  words deeds 20:48, 18 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Chicago 6.17, "Commas in pairs", says that whenever a comma "set[s] off an element", you need another comma at the end of the element unless you've reached the end of the sentence. I didn't think their wording was all that helpful.  They have 37 sections on commas, but we won't go there in the checklist, that's a copyeditor's job.  If we ever mention another comma rule, my vote would be the one on restrictive vs. non-restrictive clauses, but it hasn't been a big problem in the articles I've been copyediting so far. - Dank (push to talk) 01:36, 19 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Oh ... I didn't answer your question. I've heard this called what I called it, parenthetical words and phrases (and clauses, but the rule isn't so reliable for clauses).  There's no one term for it, mostly because it's more of an observation than a rule; there are many different rules called lots of different things.  Btw, what would you prefer for an example? - Dank (push to talk) 01:41, 19 January 2011 (UTC)
 * I think a complete sentence, illustrated with the incorrect and correct comma usage, would illustrate the point far more clearly. I mean, I didn't get it at first, and I like to think I'm fairly literate.  bahamut0013  words deeds 12:47, 19 January 2011 (UTC)
 * You're literate. Okay, I'll rephrase some examples from Chicago's comma sections. - Dank (push to talk) 12:50, 19 January 2011 (UTC)
 * LOL. My first instinct is to start making hillbilly jokes about myself, but I'll spare you my stale wit.  bahamut0013  words deeds 13:49, 19 January 2011 (UTC)

Acronyms
Is UN an example of a common acronym that needs no introduction? Hawkeye7 (talk) 20:34, 24 January 2011 (UTC)
 * You're reading my mind; I was considering removing "Acronyms" from the checklist, because there are so many questions that are so hard to answer ... like that one. Thoughts? - Dank (push to talk) 20:57, 24 January 2011 (UTC)
 * You'd think so, but I wouldn't start making exceptions. Even though it seems unlikely, I'm sure there are some readers who would benefit from a wikilink there (even if only for a brain fart rather than ignorance or poor English skills). Of course, I'm assuming you refer to the United Nations, because there are other things abbreviated to UN, which kind of proves my point.  bahamut0013  words deeds 12:38, 25 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Okay, no objection so far to removing "acronyms". I think there's value in keeping the list manageable even by editors who are having a hard time. - Dank (push to talk) 14:30, 25 January 2011 (UTC)