Because of your consistent (and plentiful) good edits over the past several weeks, the staff of All The Tropes has promoted you to autopatrolled/automoderated. Your edits will no longer need moderator approval before being applied to the wiki.
As a side effect, all your outstanding edits in the Moderation Queue have been automatically approved.
Thank you for all your efforts on behalf of the wiki!
-- Looney Toons, admin
Hello! I see that you have some pending edits that include footnotes. I, personally, am not going to approve or reject these edits because they don't match this wiki's Style Guide. You make so many edits that I don't have time to go in and fix them after approving them, but simply including the footnotes doesn't automatically disqualify the edits. (Yes, I'm passing the buck to the other admins.)
Please read All The Tropes:Style Guide, then reply to this thread to let us know that you've done so.
I read through this and I'm giving this a pass. The reference links are after appropriately long descriptions, merely providing an external source for more specific information.
Also please read All The Tropes:Uploading and Adding an Image to a Page. The markup you are using for top-of-page images not only does not adhere to our style (which calls for frames around images), it also does not allow for the captions you are adding. Please use "thumb" or "frame" instead of "right" on image markups; these will allow your captions to appear. "right" does not.
I have not finished reading yet, but have a query:
It appears I had misremembered how the alt text syntax works for frameless images on mediawiki. It shouldn’t matter often here since it’s going to be framed anyway, but just in case the caption isn’t descriptive of picture contents, it is acceptable to use alt=, correct?
Understood, is there any way to implement alt text here if needed, or should alt text be avoided?
Not really, no. The alt= param for the image markup should work, per Help:Visual file markup, but it doesn't. (Why not, I can't say. Configuration differences between Wikipedia and here, most likely.) Caption text will become alt text when you don't use frame or thumb, but again, our house style requires the frames.
I caught a potential mistake in my earlier edits.
 |
Wherever possible, a work name should also be a link. |
 |
I had previously been going on by typically only linking the first example. In paragraphs/sections. I will make sure to link when appropriate per this guidance.
Noting my prior usage of “Not to be confused with” on Sword and Shield for later correction.
|
…the infamous "Not to be confused with". Be careful with the latter usage, though, because it is often employed for humorous purposes. |
|
Noting my prior usage of bold emphasis instead of italics for later correction on Bitmaps, Sprites and Textures.
|
Also, please don't use boldface (generated with three single quotes) for emphasis. |
|
Regarding footnotes, I believe this is likely regarding my work on the E3 page. I know this isn’t like Wikipedia, and I understand that typically it is not required, and probably would have been fine without them. That said, there’s a lot of Urban Legend of Zelda out there, so I figured adding a few would improve credibility/verifiability for those interested enough to delve deeper. That said, I did reference some primary sources with just footnotes, so it’s definitely against the style guide. Would an in text citation be a preferable correction?
When I add citations, I usually add them as inline links, like so:
Which produces:
I’ve submitted an edit to inline most of the primary source references on the page. (Writers block on how best to write for the 2001 entries, it will come to me soon I’m sure.) Thank you angain again for your guidance!
Just to be clear, I am willing to fix my own mistakes listed above, I am simply noting them for transparency as part of this conversation and reading of the manual of style.
I have concluded my first reading of the manual of style. Aside from some typos and formatting mistakes outside those listed above, I believe those are my main deviations from the manual of style. Please let me know how you would like me to do before I go back and fix these identified errors, then resume editing. (Assuming it is permitted, which if not I understand)
Thank you. I've replied to the one case where we made a mistake in the guide, and to your question. We can let your existing edits stay as they are unless you want to go back and change them.
As for using "Not to be confused with", it's okay to actually use the phrase -- I use it myself. The caution is because some people use it to add a quick joke to the end of the work or trope description... which is acceptable here.
Understood, I appreciate your guidance! I apologize for my earlier errors.
You added the phrase "until recently when it was sunset". Recent as of when? (I've worked in IT for three decades, so I know, but Tropers who work in IT are a very small minority.) We have pages that have said "recently" for over a decade.
Also, I, personally, would not call four years ago "recent" for anything related to programming. So the statement is already outdated.
MOD: Please read All The Tropes:Examples Are Not Recent.
You are not in trouble -- everybody makes mistakes on occasion.
Good point! I will keep All The Tropes:Examples Are Not Recent in mind, and be more specific regarding dates.
Thank you for the catch.
|
Please let me know if I followed local guidelines right. |
|
You did just fine. We'd've rather seen a longer description with more information about the work, but you did indicate in your edit reason that the page was a skeleton for future expansion. No hurry.
-- Looney Toons, admin