User talk:SinsI

High School DxD

You don't really have to edit them part by part, you can edit the whole chapter if you click the edit tab at the top of the page. Also, you really don't need to change all the "which's" into "that's" since they aren't wrong, so basically it comes down to an individual's preferences. Use that with restrictive clauses, but keep which with non-restrictive clauses.--Hiro Hayase 14:18, 3 June 2012 (CDT)

Please look over your changes and fix them, otherwise I might have to rollback everything at once. --Hiro Hayase 14:21, 3 June 2012 (CDT)

I edit part by part because there are actually "which's" that are correct, and it gets tedious searching through the text again (maybe it is my browser, but after I edit the text search is reset back to the top of the text). And it reduces the risk of losing all the edits. Although copying to a notepad and doing it all there at once might be a better choice...

As for "restrictive - non-restrictive", it seems that Code-Zero is not very proficient with that particular rule, so he makes a lot of mistakes with them. Everything I changed is exactly following that rule.

I use http://grammar.quickanddirtytips.com/which-versus-that.aspx as a guideline.

Alright then, I was a bit concerned if you were using find&replace to make those changes without first reading the sentences. Yes, that is a good site.--Hiro Hayase 14:52, 3 June 2012 (CDT)

Hi. Just wanted to tell you that in Volume 11 Life 1, the reading remains in past tense even if some of the words are in present tense. It doesn't read correctly unless some words are in present tense. I'm going to change back those words, but I won't change anything else. Also there is still a mix between present and past tense in your edit. Do you want me to change it all to past tense? Dan1023 14:56, June 8, 2012

Dress Boku

Thanks very much for the edits! I've learnt a lot from my mistakes (no exaggeration)! I hope you'll continue to help the project, although I might not update it regularly. Pudding321 06:14, 18 February 2013 (CDT)

"incorrect which"

I think several of the uses of "which" you've edited out are completely valid, and in some cases actually preferable. For example, in your last edit, the original "clubs which didn't require magic" should be perfectly fine. If you claim this is incorrect, perhaps you're referring to the outdated and incorrect grammar rule seen in some places that claimed "which" could not be used in restrictive clauses? Anon

"While some writers seem to have abandoned the distinction entirely, no better rule has come along to replace the traditional rule. "
http://www.kentlaw.edu/academics/lrw/grinker/LwtaThat_Versus_Which.htm

Furthermore, the "that" rule is more in use in American English, and Baka-Tsuki tend to favor that version, given the requirement to use a specific AE dictionary... http://stancarey.wordpress.com/2011/10/18/that-which-is-restrictive/

Since there are far too many "which"-"that" errors (in which "which" is "an awkward grammar"), I assume the choice on the translators part was not deliberate but due to his ignorance of the rule. User:SinsI

The "no better rule has come along" thing is the first link is stupid. Of course it's impossible to have a valid rule choosing one over the other when both can be valid. If you read the latter link, I don't think it in any way supports the "rule" for any dialect of English. Anon