661
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 52:
Line 52: + +
→Links in Capitals
::Oh, and one more thing: you can drop the royal "we" when you're talking to me! I do not accept the assertion of superiority! [[User:Giles|Giles]] ([[User talk:Giles|talk]]) 18:46, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
::Oh, and one more thing: you can drop the royal "we" when you're talking to me! I do not accept the assertion of superiority! [[User:Giles|Giles]] ([[User talk:Giles|talk]]) 18:46, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
::And another thing while we're at it. I don't track your activity. But one edit I saw from last week made link changes I would not have made myself, nor did I suggest something like that in what I wrote to you. I have noted that you tend to have a literalistic, legalistic way of interpreting all writing around here (and its grammar), and that is quite simply an inappropriate way to treat language and communication. Language is the way it is because it needs to be flexible in everyday life. Yes, if it's not used grammatically, what comes out may not be clear or particularly useful, but that's the author's worry. Read some literature. The best writers have an instinct about what a language can or ought to do that goes beyond the guidelines of grammar - which are guidelines, not absolute rules.