Talk:Mahouka Koukou no Rettousei:Volume 9 Chapter 7 - Revision history

24.49.205.51: Translation question

2013-11-02T01:20:32Z

Translation question

← Older revision		Revision as of 01:20, 2 November 2013
Line 51:		Line 51:

	Made that edit concerning "would" and the two who edited it back, thank you, your completely right, I completely misunderstood/missed the subtle meaning T_T (sorry for being a bother)		Made that edit concerning "would" and the two who edited it back, thank you, your completely right, I completely misunderstood/missed the subtle meaning T_T (sorry for being a bother)

			Quick question: The line “There wasn't a prayer that Miyuki would begin eating without waiting for Tatsuya”, coming from the Japanese 深雪が達也を待たずに食事を済ませるということはあり得ない。, seems like it should be "...would finish eating without waiting for Tatsuya." Am I reading this right? The former seems to imply an entirely different level of commitment if so.

	==Edit War over "would or would not"..==		==Edit War over "would or would not"..==

Curs3d: /* Edit War over "would or would not".. */

2013-09-15T09:06:20Z

Edit War over "would or would not"..

← Older revision		Revision as of 09:06, 15 September 2013
Line 72:		Line 72:
	I registered an account afterwards, but couldn't find a way to make a note/talk after the fact (and how do you "talk" ?), which is why I wrote here explaining myself. (Again sorry for making a bother of myself -_-)		I registered an account afterwards, but couldn't find a way to make a note/talk after the fact (and how do you "talk" ?), which is why I wrote here explaining myself. (Again sorry for making a bother of myself -_-)

	And "80.223.220.209" is right about the reason/thoughts behind the edit.		And "80.223.220.209" is right about the reason/thoughts behind the edit. (I'm 193.14.104.26 btw, the 3rd edit wasn't me)

Curs3d: /* Edit War over "would or would not".. */

2013-09-15T09:04:15Z

Edit War over "would or would not"..

← Older revision		Revision as of 09:04, 15 September 2013
Line 69:		Line 69:

	I was the one who did the original edit, but I didn't properly understand the reason for the undoing so I edited it again, the next person clearly stated the underlying meaning (which I previously failed to understand) so I wrote here saying I was wrong.		I was the one who did the original edit, but I didn't properly understand the reason for the undoing so I edited it again, the next person clearly stated the underlying meaning (which I previously failed to understand) so I wrote here saying I was wrong.

	I registered an account afterwards, but couldn't find a way to make a note/talk after the fact (and how do you "talk" ?), which is why I wrote here explaining myself. (Again sorry for making a bother of myself -_-)		I registered an account afterwards, but couldn't find a way to make a note/talk after the fact (and how do you "talk" ?), which is why I wrote here explaining myself. (Again sorry for making a bother of myself -_-)

	And "80.223.220.209" is right about the reason/thoughts behind the edit.		And "80.223.220.209" is right about the reason/thoughts behind the edit.

Curs3d: /* Edit War over "would or would not".. */

2013-09-15T09:03:29Z

Edit War over "would or would not"..

← Older revision		Revision as of 09:03, 15 September 2013
Line 70:		Line 70:
	I was the one who did the original edit, but I didn't properly understand the reason for the undoing so I edited it again, the next person clearly stated the underlying meaning (which I previously failed to understand) so I wrote here saying I was wrong.		I was the one who did the original edit, but I didn't properly understand the reason for the undoing so I edited it again, the next person clearly stated the underlying meaning (which I previously failed to understand) so I wrote here saying I was wrong.
	I registered an account afterwards, but couldn't find a way to make a note/talk after the fact (and how do you "talk" ?), which is why I wrote here explaining myself. (Again sorry for making a bother of myself -_-)		I registered an account afterwards, but couldn't find a way to make a note/talk after the fact (and how do you "talk" ?), which is why I wrote here explaining myself. (Again sorry for making a bother of myself -_-)
			And "80.223.220.209" is right about the reason/thoughts behind the edit.

Curs3d: /* Edit War over "would or would not".. */

2013-09-15T09:01:20Z

Edit War over "would or would not"..

← Older revision		Revision as of 09:01, 15 September 2013
Line 67:		Line 67:
	I think, the people involved in this "edit war" should register and discuss this issue in the talk page. I don't like seeing ipaddress debating each other and it is difficult to keep track who say what. [[User:Xenocross\|Xenocross]] ([[User talk:Xenocross\|talk]]) 11:00, 14 September 2013 (CDT)		I think, the people involved in this "edit war" should register and discuss this issue in the talk page. I don't like seeing ipaddress debating each other and it is difficult to keep track who say what. [[User:Xenocross\|Xenocross]] ([[User talk:Xenocross\|talk]]) 11:00, 14 September 2013 (CDT)

	I was the one who did the original edit, but I didn't properly understand the reason for the undoing so I edited it again, the next person clearly stated the underlying meaning (which I failed to understand) so I wrote saying I was wrong.
	I registered an account afterwards, but couldn't find ~~any~~ way to make a note/talk (how do "talk" ~~tho~~?) ~~after the fact~~, which is why I wrote here explaining myself. (Again sorry for making a bother of myself -_-)		I was the one who did the original edit, but I didn't properly understand the reason for the undoing so I edited it again, the next person clearly stated the underlying meaning (which I previously failed to understand) so I wrote here saying I was wrong.
			I registered an account afterwards, but couldn't find a way to make a note/talk after the fact (and how do you "talk" ?), which is why I wrote here explaining myself. (Again sorry for making a bother of myself -_-)

Curs3d: /* Edit War over "would or would not".. */

2013-09-15T08:59:35Z

Edit War over "would or would not"..

← Older revision		Revision as of 08:59, 15 September 2013
Line 66:		Line 66:

	I think, the people involved in this "edit war" should register and discuss this issue in the talk page. I don't like seeing ipaddress debating each other and it is difficult to keep track who say what. [[User:Xenocross\|Xenocross]] ([[User talk:Xenocross\|talk]]) 11:00, 14 September 2013 (CDT)		I think, the people involved in this "edit war" should register and discuss this issue in the talk page. I don't like seeing ipaddress debating each other and it is difficult to keep track who say what. [[User:Xenocross\|Xenocross]] ([[User talk:Xenocross\|talk]]) 11:00, 14 September 2013 (CDT)

			I was the one who did the original edit, but I didn't properly understand the reason for the undoing so I edited it again, the next person clearly stated the underlying meaning (which I failed to understand) so I wrote saying I was wrong.
			I registered an account afterwards, but couldn't find any way to make a note/talk (how do "talk" tho?) after the fact, which is why I wrote here explaining myself. (Again sorry for making a bother of myself -_-)

Xenocross: edit war....

2013-09-14T16:00:34Z

edit war....

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:00, 14 September 2013
Line 64:		Line 64:

	:I believe the people wanting to change it to "would not" are misinterpreting the sentence as something like this: "They could take Lina prisoner by revealing his connection to the military, but because this is such a huge incident, it would not be possible to keep it a secret". This interpretation is wrong; revealing his connection to the military would reveal top-secret information regardless of the scale of the incident. The correct interpretation is "They could take Lina prisoner by revealing his military status, but there's no way they (the military or Tatsuya himself) would reveal top-secret information just to resolve such a relatively small-scale incident". [[Special:Contributions/80.223.220.209\|80.223.220.209]] 10:51, 14 September 2013 (CDT)		:I believe the people wanting to change it to "would not" are misinterpreting the sentence as something like this: "They could take Lina prisoner by revealing his connection to the military, but because this is such a huge incident, it would not be possible to keep it a secret". This interpretation is wrong; revealing his connection to the military would reveal top-secret information regardless of the scale of the incident. The correct interpretation is "They could take Lina prisoner by revealing his military status, but there's no way they (the military or Tatsuya himself) would reveal top-secret information just to resolve such a relatively small-scale incident". [[Special:Contributions/80.223.220.209\|80.223.220.209]] 10:51, 14 September 2013 (CDT)

			I think, the people involved in this "edit war" should register and discuss this issue in the talk page. I don't like seeing ipaddress debating each other and it is difficult to keep track who say what. [[User:Xenocross\|Xenocross]] ([[User talk:Xenocross\|talk]]) 11:00, 14 September 2013 (CDT)

80.223.220.209: /* Edit War over "would or would not".. */

2013-09-14T15:51:18Z

Edit War over "would or would not"..

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:51, 14 September 2013
Line 62:		Line 62:

	Therefore to me, "would not" makes less sense, since the incident scale is redunant. --[[User:Drowzycow\|Drowzycow]] ([[User talk:Drowzycow\|talk]]) 08:49, 14 September 2013 (CDT)		Therefore to me, "would not" makes less sense, since the incident scale is redunant. --[[User:Drowzycow\|Drowzycow]] ([[User talk:Drowzycow\|talk]]) 08:49, 14 September 2013 (CDT)

			:I believe the people wanting to change it to "would not" are misinterpreting the sentence as something like this: "They could take Lina prisoner by revealing his connection to the military, but because this is such a huge incident, it would not be possible to keep it a secret". This interpretation is wrong; revealing his connection to the military would reveal top-secret information regardless of the scale of the incident. The correct interpretation is "They could take Lina prisoner by revealing his military status, but there's no way they (the military or Tatsuya himself) would reveal top-secret information just to resolve such a relatively small-scale incident". [[Special:Contributions/80.223.220.209\|80.223.220.209]] 10:51, 14 September 2013 (CDT)

Drowzycow: oops- signs

2013-09-14T13:49:17Z

oops- signs

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:49, 14 September 2013
Line 61:		Line 61:
	the use of "would not" changes this to (as mentioned by an editor, the use of a double negative makes it absolute): They could take Lina prisoner by showing he is with the 101 but unfortunately it would reveal his classfied status over an incident of this scale.		the use of "would not" changes this to (as mentioned by an editor, the use of a double negative makes it absolute): They could take Lina prisoner by showing he is with the 101 but unfortunately it would reveal his classfied status over an incident of this scale.

	Therefore to me, "would not" makes less sense, since the incident scale is redunant.		Therefore to me, "would not" makes less sense, since the incident scale is redunant. --[[User:Drowzycow\|Drowzycow]] ([[User talk:Drowzycow\|talk]]) 08:49, 14 September 2013 (CDT)

Drowzycow: Edit war discussion

2013-09-14T13:46:30Z

Edit war discussion

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:46, 14 September 2013
Line 51:		Line 51:

	Made that edit concerning "would" and the two who edited it back, thank you, your completely right, I completely misunderstood/missed the subtle meaning T_T (sorry for being a bother)		Made that edit concerning "would" and the two who edited it back, thank you, your completely right, I completely misunderstood/missed the subtle meaning T_T (sorry for being a bother)

			==Edit War over "would or would not"..==
			If he could prove his connection to the Independent Magic-Equipped Battalion they could take her prisoner, but unfortunately there was no chance his highly classified status wouldn't be brought to light over an incident of this scale.

			Don't really want to get dragged into this, but personally I think it should be '''would'''

			therefore meaning :They could take Lina prisoner by showing he is with the 101 but unfortunately they don't want to reveal his classfied status over an incident of this scale.

			the use of "would not" changes this to (as mentioned by an editor, the use of a double negative makes it absolute): They could take Lina prisoner by showing he is with the 101 but unfortunately it would reveal his classfied status over an incident of this scale.

			Therefore to me, "would not" makes less sense, since the incident scale is redunant.