The most recent edit of this article changed from book-based information to movie-based information. I had thought that books trump movies where the two conflict, but I couldn't find anything specific about it on the Wiki format page. What is the rule on this? --Lasaraleen Tarkheena 18:30, April 12, 2012 (UTC)
- Not only does book-canon always trump movie-canon, but this a plot summary of the book! So, I have changed it back. Thanks, Las! ●
If there's anyone still working on this site, please block 126.96.36.199 and 188.8.131.52 for more inappropriate editing. I imagine it's the same guy as the one before (above). And also, I seem to be having some trouble with the rollback. Everytime I try it, it just goes back to the last edit made by the same guy, and won't let me do anymore rollbacking. Storyseeker1 (talk) 10:01, June 20, 2013 (UTC)
In regards to your latest change, Lasaraleen Tarkheena, the word "record" just seems a bit out of place. The LWW is a children's story, fullstop. It's not a report, which is what 'record' is usually used for. Storyseeker1 (talk) 00:33, August 15, 2013 (UTC)
I see what you're saying, and it makes sense to be leary of overusing "record" to refer to things that aren't formal reports. But on the other hand, LWW's not just a children's story from an IU perspective; it's a real adventure that actually took place. The nice thing about "record" is that it is clearly IU. And although I've definitely heard it used in the context of official reports, it is also grammatically correct and often used in this capacity. The primary definition of record (dictionary.com) is "to set down in writing," which applies to both official reports and adventures.
This one word, of course, isn't that big a deal, but there seems to be a pattern--maybe because of our dissimilar writing styles--where one of us edits a page, changing words here and there to make sentences clearer, and then the other comes along three hours later and changes the same words back to what they were before without realizing it. Since I've noticed the pattern, I've started trying to check page histories to see what you actually changed so that I don't unintentionally undo your work. (Although please, by all means, let me know if there's a time when you still feel like I'm stepping on your toes on a page you were already working on.) Would you consider trying that? It might help us avoid some of these frustrating, nit-picky discussions over things that don't matter that much anyway. Lasaraleen Tarkheena (talk) 06:17, August 15, 2013 (UTC)
"It's a real adventure that actually took place"??? Umm, can I just check with you; you are aware that Narnia is totally fiction, right?
I'm not completely bothered, but the word "record" just doesn't seem right to me. Seems more like something that would be used in an accounting report or police statement. Storyseeker1 (talk) 09:14, August 15, 2013 (UTC)