User talk:K2L3798@legacy41960118

Past archives

Archive 1

Future Tense

Yes, it's correct that the articles should be in present tense. But don't be too hasty. A lot of what you've been changing because you thought it was future tense, wasn't actually future tense. For example, the sentence He will start to lose his balance and then get knocked off the pillar by his own boomerang when it comes back. This "will" here is the third-person singular simple present will. Meaning it is in present tense. So were many others you changed. User:Matt/sig 20:44, June 2, 2010 (UTC)

Oh, I see. The problem is that, in some articles, the verbs are used in any time tense. For example, in the Wizzrobe and Darknut articles, as well as numeros articles about the Zelda II bosses, all verbs were in past tense, hence why I was fixing them. But thanks for the advice. --K2L 21:00, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

Yeah. All that Past tense, then future tense, and then present, and then back to past kind of stuff all in one article bugs me too. It's good to clean it up.User:Matt/sig 21:03, June 2, 2010 (UTC)

Thoughts!

I read your thoughts section, and I think it's a good start for those who don't know where to begin in writing and organizing articles! The reason why ZW doesn't have a manual of style, and may never have one, honestly, is because wiki editing, organization, and such is up to the user's discretion, especially at a small wiki like this one. Because we are community-based and the information is ever changing, a strict manual of style may restrict a better way of organizing and writing pages - chances are these pages as we see them will not look anything like they do now in the future, in order to provide the best possible organization and content as new information comes along. But I think you're on the right track, at our size and scope! ;) User:Cipriano 119/sig 02:22, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the advice, good to see that someone took the proposal in consideration. My intention with the proposal is not necessarily to restrict the editing freedom, but to provide a model that can assist users, a guide of sorts (and it doesn't have to be as severe as the Wikipedia MOS). I mean, when I came to the wiki for the first time, certain pages had sections that could also be useful for other articles. For example, only Majora's Mask had a Reception section, only The Adventure of Link had a Legacy section (and it was known in those times as "Pros"), only The Wind Waker and Twilight Princess (well, perhaps Ocarina of Time too) had Timeline Placement sections, etc. Then I thought: "Hmmm . . . and what if each game article had each section like these?" And you already know what happened later =P. But it's OK if there isn't an official MOS; as I said, I simply want to make the articles less convoluted. Same goes for dungeon articles, boss articles, etc. Perhaps the best tool for an editor is to use common sense.

P.S.: What do you think about the new scheme of my userpage? Just a question =). --K2L 02:49, 11 June 2010 (UTC)