374
edits
User talk:Christoph Schrader/Magic Page Specimen: Difference between revisions
User talk:Christoph Schrader/Magic Page Specimen (edit)
Revision as of 17:55, 29 September 2010
, 14 years ago→Comments and Suggestions
| Line 42: | Line 42: | ||
In general, the format we have now (1) describes what the attack does in the lead, (2) describes how to get it, and (3) describes what the name means. That's all the ''actual'' information about a technique there is - as shown here, anything else you try to throw in ends up being waffling, filler, or otherwise completely irrelevant.[[User:KrytenKoro|<small>Glorious</small>]] [[User_talk:KrytenKoro|<small>CHAOS!</small>]] 03:31, September 29, 2010 (UTC) | In general, the format we have now (1) describes what the attack does in the lead, (2) describes how to get it, and (3) describes what the name means. That's all the ''actual'' information about a technique there is - as shown here, anything else you try to throw in ends up being waffling, filler, or otherwise completely irrelevant.[[User:KrytenKoro|<small>Glorious</small>]] [[User_talk:KrytenKoro|<small>CHAOS!</small>]] 03:31, September 29, 2010 (UTC) | ||
I accept your criticisms, though I disagree with several. | {{Chris|Text=I accept your criticisms, though I disagree with several. | ||
Salvation is relevant, since it does the same thing, just as abilities that use the same attribute as the Fire, Blizzard, Thunder, and Aero spells are relevant on those pages. | Salvation is relevant, since it does the same thing, just as abilities that use the same attribute as the Fire, Blizzard, Thunder, and Aero spells are relevant on those pages. | ||
| Line 54: | Line 54: | ||
What a technique does and how to obtain it are the basic points of information about it. | What a technique does and how to obtain it are the basic points of information about it. | ||
You are also, quite frankly, tactless. What is more, you say to tell what the name means, but criticise me for providing its origin? Please, do be more consistent. Individual usages of a word within certain media do not constitute an etymology. The etymology of the word "holy" is its history as a part of the English language -- it is the direct descendant of the Middle English "hooly", which is, in turn, a descendant of Old English "halig", both of which sound very nearly like the word as it is now pronounced. You also know that I am perfectly aware of your opinion of my formatting this page, and so restating it here strikes me as a want of self-control and a tendency to think your opinion above that of anybody else. Please kindly remember that it is not, and that I do not appreciate being so addressed on my own talk page. | You are also, quite frankly, tactless. What is more, you say to tell what the name means, but criticise me for providing its origin? Please, do be more consistent. Individual usages of a word within certain media do not constitute an etymology. The etymology of the word "holy" is its history as a part of the English language -- it is the direct descendant of the Middle English "hooly", which is, in turn, a descendant of Old English "halig", both of which sound very nearly like the word as it is now pronounced. You also know that I am perfectly aware of your opinion of my formatting this page, and so restating it here strikes me as a want of self-control and a tendency to think your opinion above that of anybody else. Please kindly remember that it is not, and that I do not appreciate being so addressed on my own talk page.}} | ||