Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors

Notice of July drive

I don't know if this is only to be done by coordinators, but I changed the notice to say that the drive is complete. If I did wrong, sorry. Cheers, MediaKill13 (talk) 08:11, 4 August 2016 (UTC)

Thanks! – Jonesey95 (talk) 11:21, 4 August 2016 (UTC)

The tender age of legendary infamy

A word from a passer-by. My recent copyedit of the article TVR Typhon was feeble for various reasons: hurriedness, sleepiness, etc. But I did zap instances of "legendary" and "infamous". Anyone looking for an article to copyedit could find it by searching for these or other key bullshit terms. (My "favourite" is "tender age", which occasionally turns up legitimately within quotations but far more often is a sign of grotesquely inappropriate style or plain incompetence.) -- Hoary (talk) 02:04, 23 September 2016 (UTC)

Thanks; looks like we're all busy with other articles :-). All the best, Miniapolis 13:42, 24 September 2016 (UTC)

Oh yes, I realize this and much appreciate it. ¶ Actually the trouble with articles whose writers wax poetical over tenderness is often less the wording than the general promotionalism. The first "tender" article I happen to come across this morning is "Spencer Battiest", which would take me an hour or more to sort out. -- Hoary (talk) 23:46, 24 September 2016 (UTC)

Update due?

Hi, Coordinators. I was just wondering whether this page is not due for updating. For instance, the July 2015 backlog has been cleared but the notice on this page remains. Regards, BroVic (talk) 15:30, 2 October 2016 (UTC)

I fixed what I think you are talking about. You are welcome to be bold and fix it yourself. – Jonesey95 (talk) 18:59, 2 October 2016 (UTC)

I think it may have just needed clearing the cache. --Stfg (talk) 19:04, 2 October 2016 (UTC)

Okay, thanks — BroVic (talk) 20:42, 2 October 2016 (UTC)

Hello

I'm thinking of copy editing. How do I start? Where do I find the articles that need editing? Thanks!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Satkinson3 (talk • contribs) 14:59, 18 October 2016 (UTC)

Welcome! Please read Wikipedia:WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors, including the sections titled "How you can help" and "New copy editors", and follow the appropriate links. – Jonesey95 (talk) 17:05, 18 October 2016 (UTC)

Tools

I'd like to start a conversation about copy editing tools. I use quite a few tricks or tools and I wonder what other people use. Here's my list:

• Redirects in green with my User:SchreiberBike/common.css page
• A Firefox extension that enables me to change the capitalization of text quickly
• Switching between American, British and Canadian English dictionaries in Firefox
• Syntax highlighter available under Preferences/Gadgets to color text in the editing window
• A macro program to aid repetitive edits
• AutoWikiBrowser

Anybody have any other suggestions? Maybe this could even turn into a suggested tools section of the guild's pages.  SchreiberBike | ⌨  02:13, 19 November 2016 (UTC)

I use the syntax highlighter, which works pretty well. I use an external text editor to straighten curly quotes, although a script or browser extension would probably be better. Other than that, I just read the prose aloud and look for errors and inconsistencies to fix. Works for me. Anyone else? – Jonesey95 (talk) 04:50, 19 November 2016 (UTC)

There are many obvious grammatical errors in Wikipedia that could be detected using an automated grammar checker, like this one. As far as I know, Wikipedia is not yet using any such tool. Jarble (talk) 19:56, 29 November 2016 (UTC)

There are many editors who "adopt" and fix specific typos. You might be interested in talking to the Typo Team, or looking at Wikipedia:Typo Team/moss or Wikipedia:Adopt-a-typo. – Jonesey95 (talk) 22:40, 29 November 2016 (UTC)

Template:Spacing nominated for deletion

See Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion/Log/2016_December_4#Template:Spacing. – Jonesey95 (talk) 16:48, 4 December 2016 (UTC)

Grammar Disagreement on Cataract

Please visit the cataract talk page to see the discussion. It would be nice for other Wikipedia copyeditors to be aware of and address the problems since it's become rather frustrating to deal with one individual who insists he's right and refuses to be told otherwise. Thank you. TylerDurden8823 (talk) 17:57, 18 December 2016 (UTC)

I think you're off base there. You justify your edits by saying they went through Grammarly? I think the other version is clear and correct enough, though some of your changes don't hurt. Dicklyon (talk) 19:41, 18 December 2016 (UTC)

And I see that your similar copy-editing is quite widespread. I have undone some of it. I invite other project members to have a look and to help coach you toward being a better copy editor. Dicklyon (talk) 19:57, 18 December 2016 (UTC)

Oh, really? Please provide some high-quality sources to support your assertions. I must strongly disagree with your assessment that the previous version was adequately clear and correct. TylerDurden8823 (talk) 20:03, 18 December 2016 (UTC)

WolfmanSF has done a pretty good job on a point-by-point basis at Talk:Cataract#Revert. I might differ with him in a few details, but overall, I think he has a more reader-centric position than yours; removing optional commas does not generally improve the readability; neither does adding unneeded articles. Dicklyon (talk) 22:47, 18 December 2016 (UTC)

Well, then we'll have to agree to disagree on what is unnecessary or readable. I disagree with both of you and have yet to see any reason put forward to think otherwise. TylerDurden8823 (talk) 23:06, 18 December 2016 (UTC)

Without delving into the merits of this particular dispute (life is too short, frankly, and even copyeditors don't particularly like the grammar police), I note that Dicklyon accepted the standard offer last December after a history of edit warring. It's not a GAN, FAC or similar, so what's the big deal? For God's sake, there's more than one "right" way to cast a sentence. All the best, Miniapolis 23:56, 18 December 2016 (UTC)