Ghyll talk:Dagger Seas - Revision history

Morbus Iff: Resolved.

2005-06-14T13:26:10Z

Resolved.

Jcowan: Removed obsolete discussion

2004-10-14T13:56:33Z

Removed obsolete discussion

Morbus Iff at 01:30, 7 October 2004

2004-10-07T01:30:47Z

Jcowan: FIxing bogus phantoms

2004-10-03T05:34:31Z

FIxing bogus phantoms

Joe Bowers: /* Copy editor's note */

2004-09-28T13:09:01Z

Copy editor's note

PhineasCrank: Sailing, sailing.... ^_^

2004-09-28T12:35:39Z

Sailing, sailing.... ^_^

PhineasCrank: /* Citation problem */ Damn signature....

2004-09-27T14:51:14Z

Citation problem: Damn signature....

209.95.74.2: Thanks! On to the fixes...

2004-09-27T14:47:00Z

Thanks! On to the fixes...

PhineasCrank: /* Citation problem */ On the necessity of phantom creation

2004-09-27T14:22:43Z

Citation problem: On the necessity of phantom creation

Jcowan: Copy editor's note

2004-09-27T13:21:10Z

Copy editor's note

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:26, 14 June 2005
Line 1:		Line 1:
−	Wow. Given [[Talk:Cranee_Historical_Society\|the recent state of the art]], this entry is like a worst case scenario. I introduce all of this throw-away history for the sake of a cheap joke. But it's a joke I kinda like; If anybody is annoyed by The Habit of Coming Up With Long Names For Imperial Cultures That Could Just As Easily Be Anonymous, lemme know and I'll cut them from the entry. I just stumbled on the Cranee Historical Society thread after completing the entry... --[[User:Joe Bowers\|Joe Bowers]] 00:31, 27 Sep 2004 (EDT)	+	{{ResolvedTalk}}
−
−	Well, my suggestion may not be good Ghyll, but how about including where the Dagger Seas are in relation to something else which we know the location of? It might be nice, since you've done so much work on the geography of all this already, to know where the shore actually is in relation to, say, Folktown. Also, it would make a map easier.... --[[User:PhineasCrank\|Doctor Phineas Crank]] 08:35, 28 Sep 2004 (EDT)

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:56, 14 October 2004
Line 1:		Line 1:
	Wow. Given [[Talk:Cranee_Historical_Society\|the recent state of the art]], this entry is like a worst case scenario. I introduce all of this throw-away history for the sake of a cheap joke. But it's a joke I kinda like; If anybody is annoyed by The Habit of Coming Up With Long Names For Imperial Cultures That Could Just As Easily Be Anonymous, lemme know and I'll cut them from the entry. I just stumbled on the Cranee Historical Society thread after completing the entry... --[[User:Joe Bowers\|Joe Bowers]] 00:31, 27 Sep 2004 (EDT)		Wow. Given [[Talk:Cranee_Historical_Society\|the recent state of the art]], this entry is like a worst case scenario. I introduce all of this throw-away history for the sake of a cheap joke. But it's a joke I kinda like; If anybody is annoyed by The Habit of Coming Up With Long Names For Imperial Cultures That Could Just As Easily Be Anonymous, lemme know and I'll cut them from the entry. I just stumbled on the Cranee Historical Society thread after completing the entry... --[[User:Joe Bowers\|Joe Bowers]] 00:31, 27 Sep 2004 (EDT)
−
−	All of your formal citations are to phantoms. You have to cite one actually existing article and two novel phantoms (which must be the ''only'' novel phantoms in your text). I find the hardest part of writing Ghyll entries to be finding the most relevant actually existing article (I fudged it in the [[Conflict That Is Not Happening]] by implying that the most important part of the article was the part removed by the Copy Editor). Picking just two novel terms to turn into phantoms is also difficult. --[[User:Jcowan\|Jcowan]] 09:08, 27 Sep 2004 (EDT)
−
−	Something else of a "mindbender" for me was discovering that I didn't actually need to create new phantoms, at least, if I understand the Rules now. As long as I reference two, as yet undefined, phantoms, I do not need to create new ones. --[[User:PhineasCrank\|Doctor Phineas Crank]] 10:51, 27 Sep 2004 (EDT)
−
−	"Eke" means "augment", as in "ekename" (which later became "nickname"), a name that augments your original name. So the phrase "eke out a meager [or meagre, if you're a Brit] living by X" means to ''augment'' the meager living you already have from some other source Y (farming, fishing, or what not) by doing X as well. This may or may not be what you meant. Please fix. --[[User:Jcowan\|Jcowan]] 09:21, 27 Sep 2004 (EDT)
−
−	You got it. I spaced the whole Third Avazian War bizness. I'll fix the existing citations. I'd like some "This isn't good Ghyll" Commentary, though- There's been a lot of discussion about our aims recently, that I've missed, and I don't what to be the guy who swerves left after we've agreed as a body to turn right. (Also, the eke will be changed ASAP. Thanks for the help!) --[[User:PhineasCrank\|Doctor Phineas Crank]] 10:47, 27 Sep 2004 (EDT)

	Well, my suggestion may not be good Ghyll, but how about including where the Dagger Seas are in relation to something else which we know the location of? It might be nice, since you've done so much work on the geography of all this already, to know where the shore actually is in relation to, say, Folktown. Also, it would make a map easier.... --[[User:PhineasCrank\|Doctor Phineas Crank]] 08:35, 28 Sep 2004 (EDT)		Well, my suggestion may not be good Ghyll, but how about including where the Dagger Seas are in relation to something else which we know the location of? It might be nice, since you've done so much work on the geography of all this already, to know where the shore actually is in relation to, say, Folktown. Also, it would make a map easier.... --[[User:PhineasCrank\|Doctor Phineas Crank]] 08:35, 28 Sep 2004 (EDT)

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
-Wow. Given [[Talk:Cranee_Historical_Society|the recent state of the art]], this entry is like
+Wow. Given [[Talk:Cranee_Historical_Society|the recent state of the art]], this entry is like a worst case scenario. I introduce all of this throw-away history for the sake of a cheap joke. But it's a joke I kinda like; If anybody is annoyed by The Habit of Coming Up With Long Names For Imperial Cultures That Could Just As Easily Be Anonymous, lemme know and I'll cut them from the entry.  I just stumbled on the Cranee Historical Society thread after completing the entry... --[[User:Joe Bowers|Joe Bowers]] 00:31, 27 Sep 2004 (EDT)
 All of your formal citations are to phantoms.  You have to cite one actually existing article and two novel phantoms (which must be the ''only'' novel phantoms in your text).  I find the hardest part of writing Ghyll entries to be finding the most relevant actually existing article (I fudged it in the [[Conflict That Is Not Happening]] by implying that the most important part of the article was the part removed by the Copy Editor).  Picking just two novel terms to turn into phantoms is also difficult.  --[[User:Jcowan|Jcowan]] 09:08, 27 Sep 2004 (EDT)
@@ Line 14: / Line 5: @@
 Something else of a "mindbender" for me was discovering that I didn't actually need to create new phantoms, at least, if I understand the Rules now.  As long as I reference two, as yet undefined, phantoms, I do not need to create new ones. --[[User:PhineasCrank|Doctor Phineas Crank]] 10:51, 27 Sep 2004 (EDT)
-== Copy editor's note ==
+"Eke" means "augment", as in "ekename" (which later became "nickname"), a name that augments your original name.  So the phrase "eke out a meager [or meagre, if you're a Brit] living by X" means to ''augment'' the meager living you already have from some other source Y (farming, fishing, or what not) by doing X as well. This may or may not be what you meant.  Please fix.  --[[User:Jcowan|Jcowan]] 09:21, 27 Sep 2004 (EDT)
-You got it. I spaced the whole Third Avazian War bizness. I'll fix the existing citations. I'd like some "This isn't good Ghyll" Commentary, though- There's been a lot of discussion about our aims recently, that I've missed, and I don't what to be the guy who swerves left after we've agreed as a body to turn right. (Also, the eke will be changed ASAP. Thanks for the help!)
+You got it. I spaced the whole Third Avazian War bizness. I'll fix the existing citations. I'd like some "This isn't good Ghyll" Commentary, though- There's been a lot of discussion about our aims recently, that I've missed, and I don't what to be the guy who swerves left after we've agreed as a body to turn right. (Also, the eke will be changed ASAP. Thanks for the help!) --[[User:PhineasCrank|Doctor Phineas Crank]] 10:47, 27 Sep 2004 (EDT)
 Well, my suggestion may not be good Ghyll, but how about including where the Dagger Seas are in relation to something else which we know the location of?  It might be nice, since you've done so much work on the geography of all this already, to know where the shore actually is in relation to, say, Folktown.  Also, it would make a map easier.... --[[User:PhineasCrank|Doctor Phineas Crank]] 08:35, 28 Sep 2004 (EDT)

@@ Line 22: / Line 22: @@
 You got it. I spaced the whole Third Avazian War bizness. I'll fix the existing citations. I'd like some "This isn't good Ghyll" Commentary, though- There's been a lot of discussion about our aims recently, that I've missed, and I don't what to be the guy who swerves left after we've agreed as a body to turn right. (Also, the eke will be changed ASAP. Thanks for the help!)
---[[User:209.95.74.2|209.95.74.2]] 10:47, 27 Sep 2004 (EDT)
+--[[User:PhineasCrank|Doctor Phineas Crank]] 10:47, 27 Sep 2004 (EDT)
 Well, my suggestion may not be good Ghyll, but how about including where the Dagger Seas are in relation to something else which we know the location of?  It might be nice, since you've done so much work on the geography of all this already, to know where the shore actually is in relation to, say, Folktown.  Also, it would make a map easier.... --[[User:PhineasCrank|Doctor Phineas Crank]] 08:35, 28 Sep 2004 (EDT)
 To be honest, I've been too scared to do this. Lemme check the [[WhereIsWhere]]...  --[[User:Joe Bowers|Joe Bowers]] 09:09, 28 Sep 2004 (EDT)

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:09, 28 September 2004
Line 25:		Line 25:

	Well, my suggestion may not be good Ghyll, but how about including where the Dagger Seas are in relation to something else which we know the location of? It might be nice, since you've done so much work on the geography of all this already, to know where the shore actually is in relation to, say, Folktown. Also, it would make a map easier.... --[[User:PhineasCrank\|Doctor Phineas Crank]] 08:35, 28 Sep 2004 (EDT)		Well, my suggestion may not be good Ghyll, but how about including where the Dagger Seas are in relation to something else which we know the location of? It might be nice, since you've done so much work on the geography of all this already, to know where the shore actually is in relation to, say, Folktown. Also, it would make a map easier.... --[[User:PhineasCrank\|Doctor Phineas Crank]] 08:35, 28 Sep 2004 (EDT)
		+
		+	To be honest, I've been too scared to do this. Lemme check the [[WhereIsWhere]]... --[[User:Joe Bowers\|Joe Bowers]] 09:09, 28 Sep 2004 (EDT)

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:35, 28 September 2004
Line 23:		Line 23:

	--[[User:209.95.74.2\|209.95.74.2]] 10:47, 27 Sep 2004 (EDT)		--[[User:209.95.74.2\|209.95.74.2]] 10:47, 27 Sep 2004 (EDT)
		+
		+	Well, my suggestion may not be good Ghyll, but how about including where the Dagger Seas are in relation to something else which we know the location of? It might be nice, since you've done so much work on the geography of all this already, to know where the shore actually is in relation to, say, Folktown. Also, it would make a map easier.... --[[User:PhineasCrank\|Doctor Phineas Crank]] 08:35, 28 Sep 2004 (EDT)

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:47, 27 September 2004
Line 19:		Line 19:

	This may or may not be what you meant. Pkease fix. --[[User:Jcowan\|Jcowan]] 09:21, 27 Sep 2004 (EDT)		This may or may not be what you meant. Pkease fix. --[[User:Jcowan\|Jcowan]] 09:21, 27 Sep 2004 (EDT)
		+
		+	You got it. I spaced the whole Third Avazian War bizness. I'll fix the existing citations. I'd like some "This isn't good Ghyll" Commentary, though- There's been a lot of discussion about our aims recently, that I've missed, and I don't what to be the guy who swerves left after we've agreed as a body to turn right. (Also, the eke will be changed ASAP. Thanks for the help!)
		+
		+	--[[User:209.95.74.2\|209.95.74.2]] 10:47, 27 Sep 2004 (EDT)

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:22, 27 September 2004
Line 11:		Line 11:

	All of your formal citations are to phantoms. You have to cite one actually existing article and two novel phantoms (which must be the ''only'' novel phantoms in your text). I find the hardest part of writing Ghyll entries to be finding the most relevant actually existing article (I fudged it in the [[Conflict That Is Not Happening]] by implying that the most important part of the article was the part removed by the Copy Editor). Picking just two novel terms to turn into phantoms is also difficult. --[[User:Jcowan\|Jcowan]] 09:08, 27 Sep 2004 (EDT)		All of your formal citations are to phantoms. You have to cite one actually existing article and two novel phantoms (which must be the ''only'' novel phantoms in your text). I find the hardest part of writing Ghyll entries to be finding the most relevant actually existing article (I fudged it in the [[Conflict That Is Not Happening]] by implying that the most important part of the article was the part removed by the Copy Editor). Picking just two novel terms to turn into phantoms is also difficult. --[[User:Jcowan\|Jcowan]] 09:08, 27 Sep 2004 (EDT)
		+
		+	Something else of a "mindbender" for me was discovering that I didn't actually need to create new phantoms, at least, if I understand the Rules now. As long as I reference two, as yet undefined, phantoms, I do not need to create new ones.

	== Copy editor's note ==		== Copy editor's note ==

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:21, 27 September 2004
Line 11:		Line 11:

	All of your formal citations are to phantoms. You have to cite one actually existing article and two novel phantoms (which must be the ''only'' novel phantoms in your text). I find the hardest part of writing Ghyll entries to be finding the most relevant actually existing article (I fudged it in the [[Conflict That Is Not Happening]] by implying that the most important part of the article was the part removed by the Copy Editor). Picking just two novel terms to turn into phantoms is also difficult. --[[User:Jcowan\|Jcowan]] 09:08, 27 Sep 2004 (EDT)		All of your formal citations are to phantoms. You have to cite one actually existing article and two novel phantoms (which must be the ''only'' novel phantoms in your text). I find the hardest part of writing Ghyll entries to be finding the most relevant actually existing article (I fudged it in the [[Conflict That Is Not Happening]] by implying that the most important part of the article was the part removed by the Copy Editor). Picking just two novel terms to turn into phantoms is also difficult. --[[User:Jcowan\|Jcowan]] 09:08, 27 Sep 2004 (EDT)
		+
		+	== Copy editor's note ==
		+
		+	"Eke" means "augment", as in "ekename" (which later became "nickname"), a name that augments your original name. So the phrase "eke out a meager [or meagre, if you're a Brit] living by X" means to ''augment'' the meager living you already have from some other source Y (farming, fishing, or what not) by doing X as well.
		+
		+	This may or may not be what you meant. Pkease fix. --[[User:Jcowan\|Jcowan]] 09:21, 27 Sep 2004 (EDT)