User talk:Hippo43/Archives/2019/June

Bits and pieces

Hello there,

i know that Sergio Cirio (and many many others) was (were) in horrible shape (according to you and only you, seemingly) before you stepped in, but how would you rate this article then? "Kind of" in need of a cleanup, would you agree?

Attentively --Quite A Character (talk) 19:41, 31 May 2019 (UTC)

What needs cleaned up there? --hippo43 (talk) 20:38, 31 May 2019 (UTC)

You do have a point there, as article is very very small. But the two lines of text are appalling, and ditto for the overall display. This maybe was not the best choice to illustrate my point, but bottom line is: i've seen (and continue to see) articles on pro players/managers in conditions unfit for a blog or a forum, let alone an encyclopedia, in much much much worse conditions than those i work on, still a bit amazed/uneasy to find my edits continue to draw your attention so much.

Attentively --Quite A Character (talk) 18:23, 1 June 2019 (UTC)

I didn't make a point. I don't know what you are talking about. What is appalling in that article?

The article on Sergio Cirio was badly written, at least partly by someone who is not a native English speaker. For example, the body of the article didn't even mention 3 of the clubs he played for.

I found it because I was searching for a phrase that appears in a lot of football articles and is not appropriate in an English encyclopedia. I improved the article considerably. What exactly is your problem? --hippo43 (talk) 19:45, 1 June 2019 (UTC)

1 - everything, but if you feel differently then we clearly have different definitions of what a proper article looks like, not criticising your M.O.; 2 - in my view, spells with amateur teams do not necessarily belong in storyline, given that to play in Segunda División B or lower does not grant one an article.

3 - problem(s)? None whatsoever, you on the other hand seem to have one with my edits, and that is what i referred to in my last lines of the original message. I fear we are never going to see eye to eye regarding our approach(es) to the encyclopedia, so i'll just stop posting here regarding this subject. Sorry to bother you. --Quite A Character (talk) 20:47, 1 June 2019 (UTC)

Again, what is wrong with that article? Yes, it is very short, but what else? And why don't you fix it if it's so bad?

And yes, some of your English is not good at all, as I've tried to explain before, and when I see badly written articles I try to fix them. If you stopped making the same mistakes I wouldn't have to. As you have pointed out before, other editors have criticised your use of English, so I am not the only person to notice. I really don't know what you want to get from posting here. Do you want me to stop improving poor material? --hippo43 (talk) 23:00, 1 June 2019 (UTC)

Regarding your last line, no of course not, you're always welcome to do so! Attentively --Quite A Character (talk) 20:27, 2 June 2019 (UTC)

So what do you actually want? --hippo43 (talk) 21:15, 2 June 2019 (UTC)

Interact regarding content, isn't it what talkpages are for (and regarding Jonathan Ruiz (footballer, born 1982), what's wrong with writing "latter club"? Perfectly correct usage of English, or not?)? Have a nice week --Quite A Character (talk) 22:24, 2 June 2019 (UTC)

Almost forgot to comment on this: in one of your replies, you say "other editors have criticised your use of English". Other than yourself, who? The IP who's trying to hound me out of WP? Not that many, to be fair (although i cannot stress it enough that i agree with you, i do incur in more grammatical/syntax mistakes than i would like to)... --Quite A Character (talk) 22:28, 2 June 2019 (UTC)

When I ask 'what do you want?' I mean what are you hoping for here? Are you asking me to do something or what? I don't understand the purpose of your posts.

Re Jonathan Ruiz - no, "the latter club" is not 'perfectly correct usage of English'. I have explained this before. If it was perfectly correct, I wouldn't have changed it.

And regarding other editors, why are you disputing this? If you agree that you make too many mistakes, what difference does it make how many editors say the same thing? Apart from me, the IP guy, yourself, and the other editors who you pester with questions and who know your English is not great but are too polite to say so, no one thinks your English is a problem. Why are you posting here asking why I have corrected some of your mistakes when you clearly already know the answer? Do you think editors who do not write English to a high standard should not have it corrected? --hippo43 (talk) 23:46, 2 June 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply(es). Regarding Mr. Ruiz's article (I honestly forgot what your original reply was regarding the matter), if you have two subjects (in this case football clubs), when is it deemed appropriate to use "former" and "latter" to avoid repetition of said subjects? --Quite A Character (talk) 07:53, 3 June 2019 (UTC)

There's no need to use three words in place of one. There's no problem repeating a word in a sentence like that. It is much clearer to just use the club's name than to use a construction which is not widely used in English and which is not going to be easily understood by some readers. --hippo43 (talk) 17:38, 3 June 2019 (UTC)

Precious anniversary

A year ago ...

"it doesn't belong in the encyclopedia"
... you were recipient no. 1965 of Precious, a prize of QAI!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:57, 30 June 2019 (UTC)