Language desk
< January 30	<< Dec \| January \| Feb >>	Current desk >

Welcome to the Wikipedia Language Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is a transcluded archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages.

January 31

Mistakes?

Hello, I've written a part of a new page, could someone told me if there are some grammar mistakes? (I have yet to put details like sources, etc). Thank you!
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Sandbox&oldid=702575009

A mistake in your request: not "told" but rather "tell". HOTmag (talk) 13:18, 31 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The simple answer is: yes, there are grammar mistakes. As with your question here, the use of the past tense seems to be an issue. I feel I should also point out that you wrote that material in the sandbox, which is constantly over-written with other people testing out how to use Wikipedia. There's nothing wrong with what you did, it's just that your material is now more difficult to find and any changes anyone made to help fix it would also be lost. My first recommendation to you would be to create an account. One of the benefits of doing so is that you get a sandbox of your own to play in - other people can more easily edit it and point out issues (if you want them to). People with accounts also have talk pages, making it much easier for them to communicate with other users. Matt Deres (talk) 13:42, 31 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. In the meanwhile I've created the page Jimmy Thelin filling it with all details like references, tables, etc --Random Wikipedia User (talk) 14:14, 31 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I did a bit of rework. I don't understand Swedish, but the sentence I worked on is still ambiguous: did he add the U-19 and U-21 teams while still doing the U-17s. If it's complicated (and it might be), a table might be the best way to present the information. Apologies for not realizing you already had an account; you didn't sign your earlier post and used the generic sandbox. At the top of the webpage, you should see a series of links (to your talk page, contributions, etc.) - one of those is your sandbox, where you can work on stuff without getting it over-written. Unlike the other links, the sandbox is probably in red. Matt Deres (talk) 14:33, 31 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Use of square brackets in quotes

I've been reading many articles, and still haven't got one particular use of square brackets in quotes. The list of things named after Kim Il-sung contains many uses of these brackets. In the first usage,

"[i]t is probably the case that Kim Il-sung..."

I don't understand why the first letter (i) has to be put inside square brackets. Same goes for "[m]ore" further down the lead. The Average Wikipedian (talk) 14:36, 31 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

According to MOS:B&P (version of 04:00, 30 January 2016), "[s]quare brackets are used to indicate editorial replacements and insertions within quotations, though this should never alter the intended meaning."

—Wavelength (talk) 14:46, 31 January 2016 (UTC) and 22:57, 31 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

(ec) It is used to indicate that, in the source, the letter in square brackets appeared in a different form, but has been changed by the person quoting it, for grammar, sentence flow or some other reason. For example, here, the original source had a sentence that said - "It is probably the case that..." (with upper case "I" in "It"). The author of the Wikipedia article has decided to adopt the quoted sentence as part of the sentence in the article, so it would not be grammatical to keep it as upper case. To indicate that (only) the capitalisation of that letter has changed from the quoted source, it is put in square brackets.

Another similar way of using square brackets is if the original source uses pronouns, for example "He did not recognise her", and it would have been clear in the original context who is "he" or "her", but this would be unclear, or would not make sense in the new context, then you could substitute them with names in square brackets, like "[Johnny] did not recognise [Jane]". --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 14:53, 31 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I'd write it "he [Johnny] did not recognise her [Jane]". Clarityfiend (talk) 00:18, 1 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

MOS:Quote says these brackets are not necessary. "A quotation is not a facsimile, and in most cases it is not desirable to duplicate the original formatting. Formatting and other purely typographical elements of quoted text should be adapted to English Wikipedia's conventions without comment provided that doing so will not change or obscure the meaning of the text; this practice is universal among publishers. These are alterations which make no difference when the text is read aloud..." — Kpalion^(talk) 09:26, 4 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

TindinitisTendinitis/Tendonitis

Why is inflammation of a tendon spelled Tendinitis in many sources rather that just adding -itis to the root tendon? Are there other parts of the body the inflammation of which is spelled by changing the spelling of the root? For instance inflammation of the prostate is generally Chronic prostatitis, not prostititis. Dermatitis, not dermititis. Hepatitis, not hepititis. Trigonitis, not triginitis. Synovitis, not synivitis. Pneumonitis not pneuminitis. Edison (talk) 15:08, 31 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The words in -itis are based on the Latin or Greek forms, and the vowels preceding the ending are determined by whatever vowel is part of the original stem. For "tendon", the Latin is nominative tendo, genitive tendinis, so the derivation is from tendin-. (The English base form tendon itself is a doublet loan from French.) Fut.Perf. ☼ 15:24, 31 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Were you also asking about tindinitis? -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 21:54, 31 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Misspelling, since corrected. Edison (talk) 04:58, 1 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Presumably he meant Tintinitis, which is acute suffering of having a quiff.

KägeTorä - (影 虎) (もしもし！)

08:20, 2 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]