Editing User talk:Rohan123 (section)

=== Edits ===

Just curious. You list some recent edits as fixing "grammatical" errors. You are aware that typesetting of ellipses and emdashes is typically considered a style issue rather than a grammatical one, yes? It's an issue of form, rather than function, if you will. I don't actually disagree with the chosen style—I prefer emdashes unspaced, and have no particular attachment either way with ellipses. It's just slightly ... odd seeing it referred to as a grammatical issue.

Also, updated a talk page regarding capitalization of parental references.
-[[User:Shift|shift]] ([[User talk:Shift|talk]]) 22:38, 26 July 2013 (CDT)

:Yes, I am aware of that but the thing is that I don't really fill the summary box for every edit that I make, I just quickly pick one from the drop-down list of previously used summaries, and also I didn't really think that the summary being listed as "grammatical" would bother people, but seeing that you are indeed bothered by it, I will summarize such edits appropriately in the future. Thanks for pointing that out to me and sorry for any inconvenience my laziness might have caused you. --[[User:Rohan123|Rohan123]] ([[User talk:Rohan123#top|talk]]) 12:43, 27 July 2013 (CDT)

::There's not really any need to apologize on your part. The only practical problem there might potentially be with it is if it ended up sparking edit wars due to differences of opinion, with no project guidelines to arbitrate. Other than that, it's mainly a personal thing, and something I doubt most people would care about. On my side having them accurately labeled and separated speeds things up (skim punctuation, quick-check typo fixes, in-depth check grammar and flow changes), but it's not particularly practical to expect people to group edits by category, especially when I don't generally do that myself.

::With regard to the potential for edit wars over punctuation ... I don't know if you'll believe this, but apparently things like "curly quotes vs. typewriter quotes" are or were a pretty big deal to some people, if some of the user:talk pages are anything to go by... In the case of grammar, the clash could be justified if either side is clearly in the wrong or just being stubborn. But in the case of punctuation style... well, let's just say I would find such edit wars rather pointless and best avoided. Granted, IMO '''''all''''' edit wars are best avoided. ^^; But judging by your reaction—which was quite mild, whether by nature or intention—it seems worrying over such a possiblity was unnecessary.

::Heh. Anyway, sorry to be such a pain—hopefully I didn't appear as condescending and overbearing/controlling as I have a habit of doing. I doubt you'll ever encounter anyone else on BT who takes issue with the content of the ''summary boxes'', of all things. Keep up the good work, and cheers! -[[User:Shift|shift]] ([[User talk:Shift|talk]]) 15:50, 27 July 2013 (CDT)