Grammar mechanics

So, I've noticed this wiki tends to follow a more standard British English approach in regard to quotation use, placing ending punctuation after the quotation. I'm perfectly fine with this because it adds a sense of coherence, although it does contradict standard American English format. It would be difficult to alter all these particular instances anyway. Spelling, however, should always follow American English guidelines. Another issue that has been brought up is the usage of possessiveness in regard to names ending in "s". Although it has been stated both forms are correct and acceptable, the popular opinion seems more directed toward the usage of [...]'s in all instances as opposed to dropping the "s" in cases involving names ending in "s". I feel that for future reference, the [...]'s usage should be used in all instances. However, both of these issues are minor; I'm just reiterating what has already been discussed, as well as noting another particular grammar mechanic. I have been considering adding this to the MoS for future reference. Thoughts? Opinions? Any other things that need to be distinguished?

Moviebaby (talk) 19:11, November 30, 2012 (UTC)

Just adding another minor issue I've noticed. Standard American English dictates that long works are to be italicized, whereas short works are to be placed in quotation marks. For example, the names of novels, television series, movies, music albums, and of course, video games should be italicized, whereas short stories, poems, chapters, episodes, and songs should be placed in quotation marks. I realize many of these things will never be mentioned on this wiki. However, I've noticed it before (I believe with song titles), and I just want to clarify for future reference. Also, italicization can be used to place emphasis on a particular word, hence its frequent usage in "Trivia" sections that involve etymology.

While I'm at it, I may as well mention other styling methods used on this wiki that don't necessarily fall under grammar mechanics. We [[link]] for things that either already have an existing page or warrant an existing page. We bold for the first mention of the page name, alternative titles for the page name, and things that are significant but do not warrant their own page. We follow the italicizing and quotation rules mentioned above, as well as "quote" insignificant (does not warrant its own page) monsters and items to help distinguish them. At first, I bolded them, but it looked awkward because they were not significant enough to be distinguished in such a manner. I began placing them in quotation marks because I noticed that with no punctuation or style change whatsoever, many monster and item names made sentences sound confusing. Therefore, I recommend this new process, as it has been working well so far. I will allow opportunity for response before implementing this information to the MoS.

Moviebaby (talk) 21:27, July 3, 2013 (UTC)

One more thing! Treat image information boxes as a separate entity from the article itself, i.e., temporarily ignore the link at first mention rule. For example, an article states, "Fire Ball is a spell in the Tales series. It appears in Tales of Symphonia." An image information box depicting Fire Ball as it appears in Tales of Symphonia should state, "Fire Ball as it appears in Tales of Symphonia." Consequently, both "Fire Ball" and "Tales of Symphonia" are bolded and linked, respectively, twice on the page. This is because the image information box should be treated as a separate entity. I like to clarify even the smallest of details so that I don't have to continuously fix them. The MoS should include all these details so that there will be no excuses for these mistakes in the future. Oh, and remember for images: [image size]|thumb|left/right.

Moviebaby (talk) 21:37, July 3, 2013 (UTC)

For images, yes, they are separate from the main text and should have links that are independent of the content of the articles proper, but among the captions of all images on a single page, the linking-at-first-mention rule applies. For titles of games, please always italicize them in the main text on any page, talk/user pages exempted of course. If the titles are also the bolded topic in the lead sentence of an article, then they must be bolded and italicized. For titles of songs, quotations may be most appropriate, but I am not necessarily concerned about this. Song titles only have to follow the way they are rendered officially in English text, which may include leading lowercase words, as with "flying" and "good night". Italics are also to be used for Japanese romanizations in nearly every context, if not all contexts. It is true that we do not follow certain MLA styles perfectly, but in general, the rules of Wikipedia can be used as a reference for grammar concerns unless we have policies that specifically contradict and override the ones used there, as with Japanese romanization, or the proper capitalization of section headers as if they are book titles.
Byakuren Hijiri (talk) 22:46, July 3, 2013 (UTC)

Policy category

I noticed this is classed under browse. I was wondering, could it be also appropriate to categorize this under Category:Policy? Other project pages such as Aselia:Copyrights are there.

I also noticed that the policies category appears to be orphaned. Looking at other wikis, for example w:c:Disgaea:Category:Policy, it may usually classed under Category:Organisation which we seem to lack, which usually includes the forums and stuff.

Though I have seen alternate spellings for example w:c:Nintendo:Category:Organization. Not exactly sure what leads the Default setup to create it with either the S or Z spelling.

I just figured the MoS seemed very policy-oriented. Also as I mentioned elsewhere, I think that renaming Forum:Priority_reminders to be a Project Page as this one is ("Aselia:" prefix) would be useful so that it could have a talk page too, and discourage users from editing it. I did so because I thought it was a forum but was informed otherwise by having the contribution removed. +Yc 04:04, January 31, 2013 (UTC)

We do not follow the example of other wiki sites. Do not compare us to them. We have our own policies and our own page structure. We do what works for us, not what works for others. Thus, the "policy" category on this wiki is irrelevant and has no purpose, and it will not be used because only the pages created automagically by the MediaWiki software will go there. Our policies belong here, and they will not be moved or reorganized. You will also cease and desist from pursuing any sort of change in policy.
Byakuren Hijiri (talk) 04:32, January 31, 2013 (UTC)


The Manual of Style is a very long article, way too long in my opinion. Would it be possible to trim it down by making separate Project/Help pages for some of the sections? I think I saw "Japanese Translations" to receive its own space.—Kaimi (999,999 CP/5 TP) ∙ 14:10, October 2, 2014 (UTC)

I agree, and I will look into getting this done.

Arosia (talk) 23:59, October 2, 2014 (UTC)

Linking to "Tempest"

Please rewrite the "Disambiguation" section so it doesn't link to "Tempest (spell)" since it's been for some time on "Tempest".—Kaimi (999,999 CP/5 TP) ∙ 12:47, August 31, 2016 (UTC)

Ad blocker interference detected!

Wikia is a free-to-use site that makes money from advertising. We have a modified experience for viewers using ad blockers

Wikia is not accessible if you’ve made further modifications. Remove the custom ad blocker rule(s) and the page will load as expected.