Talk:SGU Episode 363

From SGUTranscripts
Jump to navigation Jump to search

I can take on the proof-reading for this episode. Thanks for doing the transcription, Rich!
-- Av8rmike (talk) 12:31, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

Great, thanks! :D
Rwh86 (talk) 07:41, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

TK: Now that you've changed all the double hyphens to one, I suppose it's worth asking if we should be using the proper HTML elements, like — (—) or – (–) instead. I can do a search and replace on other pages I've already typed up rather than you doing it manually, if you think it's important enough.
-- Av8rmike (talk) 12:24, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

Hmmm, I did look this up on wikipedia a couple of months ago (here), but because we're doing quite a different thing with transcriptions, it's not entirely relevant, so I gave up. I found I needed something to indicate broken sentences, if they change track or get interrupted, so I ended up using hyphens cos they're easy. I thought about — and –, but I'm not sure if/how to regulate this across transcriptions. I'd be happy to follow/contribute to a loose manual of style, e.g American spelling, spelling numbers under 10 etc., but I don't know about other users. What do you think?
With the double-hyphens here, I just saw one as I was formatting links, then another, I didn't realise it wasn't a typo until I was too far in. Sorry about that.
While it's good to keep things clean and uniform across transcripts, and I personally prefer guidelines, I think most people will probably prefer to keep it organic (although I have nothing to base that on). I really don't know what's best for the purposes of the site. This is probably one for the community portal, Any ideas?
--Teleuteskitty (talk) 20:15, 12 July 2012 (UTC)
Yeah, as much as I like the idea of having a style manual and clear guidelines, I think it might impose an undue burden, especially when we're still trying to encourage participation on the site. If down the road, it seems like the need is arising for more uniformity, we can worry about it then. For now, maybe it's best to say, "when in doubt about punctuation usage (for example), refer to the Wikipedia Manual of Style" (and holy crap is that a detailed manual). People who prefer the regimentation can follow it, but it doesn't have to be a strict requirement.
I see that the subject of American vs. British spelling had been discussed before, so I've been trying to ignore my spell-checker when proof-reading. It just makes more sense to me to use American spelling (I'm sorry, but "scepticism" just looks wrong), but that's because the panel and I are American. If being forced to use a different spelling is going to turn people away, maybe we shouldn't worry about it.
-- Av8rmike (talk) 13:34, 13 July 2012 (UTC)