Board Thread:General Discussion/@comment-5585298-20130614202111/@comment-7404610-20130615134025

We don't have to agree on one "correct" pronoun to use any more than we have to agree on American/British spelling/vocabulary variants (although I'm prepared to accept the British due to Keith T. Maxwell's obvious accent if we simply must standardize.  Uh, "standardise". :-).  In fact, just as I edited a lot of weapons articles to get rid of repetitive "deal" language, I think it's poor writing to use the same words and phrases too often.  I was specifically taught to go to the thesaurus and find synonyms to bring a little variety into the writing.

The pages for each system are currently being reworked with a section for each planet, with boilerplate, IMO boringly-repetitive text.  Compare the current wording of Magnetar system to the modifications I've done to Aquila system and Augmenta system to break up the monotony.  I think I've improved them quite a bit by doing so.

In general, when I see the same sentences repeated over and over, with just a few words different, they either need to be replaced with a table (such as the upgraded Kaamo stats section on every ship page) or re-worded to be less repetitive.

Yes, the GameGuides can be pretty rough, and the FanFic is generally excerable.  I'm in favor of ridding the wiki of FanFic entirely, because it has not a damned thing to do with playing the game, and I can't be arsed to spend a bit of effort cleaning it up (which arguably isn't even possible for anyone but the original author to do anyway).  Meanwhile, so long as it has its own namespace, I am doing my best to simply ignore it.

GameGuides can at least be improved to the point that they provide help to a newb about strategies and tactics to do better at the game (I've reworked a few myself already), but need that clear distinction from the articles that provide objective facts.  But the entire GG hierarchy needs a systematic overhaul to organize it, as there are many articles with different names covering similar subject matter.  I don't think I'm going to have the time to invest in it in the near future because of time constraints, but if it hasn't been done when I get some free time, I'll probably dig into it.

Oh, and let me pile on and add some personal peeves:

Homonyms (and near-homonyms): The infamous cite/site/sight, to/too/two, their/there/they're, were/where, which/witch... I see these abused regularly.

Apostrophes: Possessive pronouns like "its" do not have apostrophes.  The word "it's" means either "it[ i]s" or "it[ ha]s".  The non-possessive plural form of a noun does not take an apostrophe preceding the final "s".  When the non-possessive form of a noun already ends in "s", the possessive is formed by adding the apostrophe after that "s" (and in some cases, according to some authorities, adding another "s", but I tend to eschew the "s's".)  I  could go on, but I have to run some errands just now.