Needs Help: You Keep Using That Word

I could see those having Useful Notes pages.

I think those should just be removed, since that sort of nitpicking was why this thread was made.

Edited by GastonRabbit on Jun 29th 2020 at 9:49:49 AM

Yeah those aren't You Keep Using That Word. I agree that those nitpicky examples aren't worth keeping. But the crowner says "maybe make a useful notes" for those examples and I wasn't sure what happened.

Honestly, I don't think we should have such a Useful Notes page. If Useful Notes pages are supposed to be more breezily worded than Wikipedia articles, then I think making one that's basically a more nitpicky counterpart to Wiktionary wouldn't be clear, concise, or witty.

Regardless, maybe we could have a Single Proposition crowner regarding whether a Useful Notes page should be made.

Edited by GastonRabbit on Jun 29th 2020 at 9:58:48 AM

The TRS-TLP disconnect has been a problem for a long time. Back in 2012 there was an extensive TLP (back then known as YKTTW) discussion where this was a major topic and where both technical and social factors were mentioned.

I think the only solution so far is to stipulate that once TRS has sent something to TLP, it's up to TLP to decide what to do with it.

My ideal scenario would be that the TLP-draft would still be seen as a TRS-project with TLP-input. Part of the issue is that the drafts just die as soon as they're made because nobody from the TRS actually bothers to do any of the TLP work, which is incredibly unfair to the people in the TLP who didn't agree to have anything to do with it. Expecting them to finish the work that other people decided should be done makes no sense to me; what does make sense is that things shouldn't be sent back to TLP unless it not only has a willing and active sponsor but if the people who wanted to send it back also intend to work on it and intend to follow the TLP process properly.

We need the two sides to come together, but I believe the TRS should absolutely do the brunt of the work on something that the TRS decided to do.

I don't think things should always go to the TLP, it depends on the thread. Sometimes, threads have a clear idea of what the new trope is about, and they've already pulled out a bunch of examples from the wick check (often the case with a trope transplant). In these cases, the new trope should just be made directly via sandbox.

In other cases, the thread will go "hey, this seems like a tropeworthy concept, but we're not sure what is is exactly. Ehhh lets give it to the TLP and see what happens". In those cases, imo, the progress of the thread should not be dependent on the TLP outcomes, and the TLP saying "we don't want this" is allowable.

For this thread in particular, this seems like clearly the first case to me.

Edited by naturalironist on Jun 30th 2020 at 8:02:19 AM

So...sandbox?

I think the subpages about commonly misused words should be kept as Useful Notes. It's not just a dictionary, it's clearing up misconceptions.

Sandbox.You Keep Using That Word already exists.

Edited by GastonRabbit on Jul 9th 2020 at 1:57:17 PM

That was a half-assed attempt at seeing if we were sticking with the sandbox or doing TLP.

Sandbox.You Keep Using That Word looks good. It just needs more examples. It currently has the minimum of three, so I suggest we swap it in and keep adding as wick cleanup progresses.

Edited by naturalironist on Jul 11th 2020 at 4:59:21 AM

Technically the three-example minimum has been pretty much deemed outdated or unhelpful nowadays. It's been decided that 12 wicks are what's needed for a trope to not be "not thriving" from the start.

I'm not necessarily opposed to just rolling with it, I'm just making it clear that 3 examples almost never actually fly nowadays.

Here's a single prop crowner to decide whether we should make a Useful Notes page for examples of works misusing words without an in-universe correction.

I’ll state for the record that most of the examples of the old definition I’ve seen so far are incredibly nitpicky and vaguely complainy, and I don’t see the value in keeping them around. Edit: realizing there is some ambiguity here. The crowner is referring to the “commonly misused words” subpages, but all wicks with the old definition.

The trope has more than a thousand wicks right now and will collect more on-page examples as it gets crosswicked through wick cleanup, so I don’t think being in a not thriving state is likely.

Edited by naturalironist on Jul 12th 2020 at 12:38:28 PM

Fair enough.

As for the current definition, Idk. It was nitpicky but also informative and I thought it was kind of interesting. I wouldn't mind keeping the best information from that page.

There's already The Big List of Booboos and Blunders, although it has its own problems. Many of the examples are of confusing two words, but a lot are just common misspellings... or misspellings that someone decided to add after seeing them once. Some examples are invalid; just to cite one example, whoever added "dialogue" wasn't aware of the difference between UK and US usage here. There's a lot of natter, which makes it a drag to look through. Maybe the two pages could be cleaned up and combined?

Edited by Vilui on Jul 12th 2020 at 10:39:08 AM

Mind elaborating on how that would work? I don't want us to put the cart before the horse.

Not entirely sure; it just seems redundant to have two separate collections of commonly confused words.

Bump for crowner votes.

Crowner is probably callable to move the subpages to Useful Notes. What should the page be called? Commonly Misused Words?

In the meantime, we're free to start cleaning wicks, right? Such as this incredibly pedantic one from Ghost in the Shell: Stand Alone Complex:

• You Keep Using That Word: "Vaccine" is consistently used to refer to a cure for a cyber-virus, never as a preventative measure. The same for the Murai Vaccine - it doesn't prevent Cyberbrain Sclerosis, it just suppresses it.

Let's do that. I'll call the crowner, then we can hack away.

Also, name sounds good.

Edited by Berrenta on Aug 3rd 2020 at 11:48:52 AM

I made UsefulNotes.Commonly Misused Words by copying over from the subpages on You Keep Using That Word. I didn't change much from the original page, but I think some of the entries need looking at. There is lots of bad example indentation which I will correct soon, and I'm not sure about how some of the examples are characterized.

In particular, the Very Pedantic section contains both entries such as begging the question that are commonly misused phrases that don't seem all that pedantic to me, as well as entries like the Anal describing slang and formal definitions being different, which doesn't seem like misuse to me or particularly noteworthy.

Also, the page is giving an Overly Long page warning. We will need to trim it down.

Edited by naturalironist on Aug 4th 2020 at 7:56:37 AM

The slang definition of "anal" is short for "anal-retentive", which comes from Freudian psychology and not the Internet. I guarantee nobody is confusing the figurative definition with the literal definition.

Anyway, why not move them to subpages, like CommonlyMisusedWords.Very Pedantic? Then you could cutlist the You Keep Using That Word subpages and the Commonly Misused Words subpages would catch the inbounds and presumably also the search results. Alternatively, maybe you could turn the old locations into redirects and remove their wicks from the You Keep Using That Word page.

Edited by GastonRabbit on Aug 4th 2020 at 7:22:31 AM