This article is within the scope of WikiProject Czech Republic, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Czech Republic on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Czech RepublicWikipedia:WikiProject Czech RepublicTemplate:WikiProject Czech RepublicCzech Republic articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Middle Ages, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Middle Ages on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Middle AgesWikipedia:WikiProject Middle AgesTemplate:WikiProject Middle AgesMiddle Ages articles
What is 'wrong' with giving information in the title, as well as in the body? You and everyone else do it all of the time, all over the project!
And then to block reversion. This is what I mean by writers feeling that they have far too proprietary rule over what is published, (i.e.: made public). Perhaps Wikipedia ought simply to make all articles uneditable. That is what I see happening. Authors can not let go of even atrocious grammar, or wrong use of 'their', 'there' and 'they're'. Or 'your' and 'you're'. Or 'yore'. Or 'AIDS', 'aide', 'aides', 'aid' or 'aids'. Or think that 'I could care less!' means exactly: 'I couldn't care less'. Or flipping the simple past tense with the perfect tenses. These are signs of idiocy, or under-education, NOT literary style or sophistication.
Why does Wikipedia even make editing possible if the article authors don't/won't allow it?
And why does Wikiworld tell me that I need to talk about edits if no-one else has the courtesy so to do with me? Can anyone say 'Double Standard'? SMOMMSS (talk) 23:33, 4 August 2020 (UTC) my sources are personal experience.
