User talk:Braiam

say when will this be update? I can't wait to read it again though... if you could can you hurry up and update the part 3,4,and 5 and the next life 2 too...

Hmm... You are asking to the wrong one. Check the registration page, and you must remember that all translators are volunteer, so there is no schedule. Eternal Dreamer its who took over the volume, its up to him when he release the next part or the whole chapter. --Braiam 10:38, 8 May 2012 (CDT)

Dusk Taker is the avatar name. The author usually does not use an avatar name for the volume title. It might be close, but not the exact name which is in English. Xplorer30 - Talk 17:11, 2 September 2012 (CDT)

I'm doing the V8C1+2.--Kadi (talk) 17:40, 14 September 2012 (CDT)

Golden Time main page

Please refrain from changing the volume header lines for "Golden Time". Those must stay the way they are, as the links between the chapters use them. Whenever you click on "Main Page" from a chapter page, it takes you back to the section header for the volume of the moment. When you move the "Full Text" stuff onto that line, it breaks the links.

As for the Spanish stuff, without those links, they have no home for now. And probably never will, given the pace (or lack thereof) at which it is being (not) worked on. I could do the Spanish translation myself, but (1) it would come out slightly odd to a native speaker (which I am not), and (2) it would slow down my progress on the Japanese to English translation. --Rpapo (talk) 05:05, 11 April 2013 (CDT)

OreImo v12c02

Doumo, doumo, konnichiwa...

Your fixes to OreImo v12c02 w/ regard to the misc. accidental wiki-markup missed before, et cetera, are much appreciated! However, I was wondering whether the removal of certain italics was intentional?

I realize they can look a lot like unbalanced double quotes in the edit-view if they're done with doubled-up single-quotes (''italics'') rather than HTML (<i>italics!</i>), so I thought I'd see if that was the case. The last thing I want to start is a fight, so I figured it'd be best to check rather than assuming one way or the other and reverting those particular changes.

That aside, thanks for staying vigilant with edits! Every positive contribution helps make the TLs that much better for the readers!

Cheers, -shift (talk) 14:10, 1 July 2013 (CDT)

Yeah, for my point of view, they were more trailing quotes than attempts of using italics, as you can see only two single-quotes at the start of the line, instead both start and end, so I took them as mistake since they didn't appear to fit as murmur from Kyosuke and in same chapter line 4 (actually 12-something but I'm not going to count) translator used 'Sentence' for internal troughs/flashback, and that didn't looks like when I read the text and since formatting of internal troughs don't have defined rule in the guidelines I just went and deleted em. About the use of HTML syntax for the wiki, I'm rather against it for 3 reasons:

1. This is a wiki, not a HTML page, hence if it has a proper syntax, why reinvent the wheel?
2. I have 3 keys less to press when using single-quotes marks (not counting that for <> I have to use Shift too),
3. The source page looks cleaner that way.
4. The only advantage that has the HTML is for large chunk of text where single quotes is a hassle to use.
5. It uses less bandwidth/disk space since it only uses 32 bits of data.

Well, I said 3... but who cares about what I say. I will normalize the use of italics for two single-quote marks where I see fit in any case.

I generally prefer wiki-markup to html-markup on the wiki, as well—except perhaps in cases where multi-line markup is necessitated (#4 on your list), if only because of the fact that it's much harder to miss an un-closed HTML tag than it is to forget to italicize a line at the end. Space concerns I won't address, except to say that, from a programmer's perspective, in this modern age clarity is often of greater (albeit subjective) value than brevity. As I said, I don't really disagree with the choice of wiki-markup over HTML markup, so there's really nothing to "argue" there.

I know from where you come as I had wrote/figure out code in Python, Javascript, HTML, and played around fixing (was more like hammering my way through) PHP where I didn't know what the heck was happening. (I still have a piece of over 2000 lines of JS that I still don't know how it works

Haha, yeah. Programming can be like that. But no worries, judging by the "launch(public beta), emergency bugfix, repeat" cycle common with this past generation's games, there are corporate giants who don't understand thousands if not millions of their own lines of code.

Fun fact: The lack of trailing single-quote pairs is apparently by design, meaning they aren't necessary for lines that are entirely of a single style. Even the wikipedia wiki-markup help page mentions that the formatting marks only work on a single line. My guess is that it's to prevent exactly the issue one comes across when forgetting to close tags in HTML. Rarely does one honestly need to italicize multiple paragraphs of text at a time, in English, anyway. LNs at least seem to utilize much, much shorter "paragraphs", so sometimes multi-line formatting is needed for comparatively "large" blocks of internal monologue (more than a single thought).

Yeah, I was reading those looking how the trailing quotes worked about as once I tried to ''Paragraph 1 / br / br / Paragraph 2'' and didn't work (figures).

The thought/flashback thing (e.g., your "Sentence" ref.) is actually most likely due to the source text: occasionally the author uses 『』 style Japanese "double-quotes" (so to speak) to delineate flashback quotes or set-off otherwise significant lines. Actual thoughts aren't always so clearly marked off, and I suspect some of them are actually discretionary designations based on how the words are presented in the original text. E.g. something like "Ah, I get it already, shut up!" would seem more likely to be a thought than narration, and thus in the "TL" (EN -> EN, does it get any easier!) it might be presented as Ah, I get it already, shut up!

The vast majority of narration is done from the past-tense first person perspective of Kyousuke, anyway, which can make it even more difficult to tell where Kyousuke is "recalling" something as a narrator and where he is "commenting" on it as a participant. My interpretation, anyway. I'm not the TL so I can only guess how it affects the TLs, past and present. I just reference the text occasionally to maintain consistency during edits, and that's the impression I've gotten thus far.

For me is just annoying having to check the format (the last thing I do when writing a text anyways) and I try to interpret the point of view while reading in any case, so at least for me the formatting isn't important.

Anyway, I completely understand the potential for confusion—I've accidentally removed a few italic markups myself before realizing in the preview that the formatting was changed and the quotes didn't appear in the actual rendered page. I'm taking your response as go ahead to re-introduce those particular italics to the text, then? -shift (talk) 15:27, 1 July 2013 (CDT)

Re:Re: Yeah, I actually watch any page I've edited for at least a few days to make sure there isn't any fallout or follow up, as applicable. It's just -so- much easier to follow a conversation that's on a single page. XD -shift (talk)

Just submitting when you posted your response. --Braiam (talk) 15:48, 1 July 2013 (CDT)

Yep, B-T notified me of the edit already. Thanks a bunch for your work! -shift (talk) 15:59, 1 July 2013 (CDT)

Rakudai Kishi

You asked: Why reverting the noinclude tag changes? It makes reading the "Full Text" volumes version awkward compared to other projects presentations, since it doesn't have the references at the end of the page (where most readers expect them to be). I don't understand why you revert a non-destructive edit.

I do not endorse placing references at the end of the volume, because for me the references represent page footnotes (though due to how the wiki works, this is equivalent to chapter end-notes), and I write the references accordingly: with the expectation that they are attached to particular chapters. Moving all of them to the end of the volume and numbering them consecutively the way that the noinclude tag does removes that context and therefore they become less informative at a glance. Since I did not write the references to be read as a glossary, they are sub-optimal when formatted that way. While it is true that full-text views on Baka-Tsuki generally put the references at the end of volumes, that is a common usage which I view as not the best for the Rakudai Kishi project, and since Baka-Tsuki allows projects to enforce their own individual formatting standards, I exercise that prerogative in this case. Hope that clears it up. -- KLSymph (talk) 22:01, 26 June 2015 (UTC)