Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Wikipedia user edits over 90k uses of “comprised of”

en.wikipedia.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 735 posts

Re: Wikipedia user edits over 90k uses of “comprised of”

#91

Post by ttiurani »

p-e-w wrote: post #10

The justifications given in that essay leave a really bad taste in my mouth: > I believe using "comprised of" is poor writing, because > It's completely unnecessary. There are many other ways to say what the writer means by "comprised of". It adds nothing to the language. That's true for many, many other words. In fact, most instances of definite and indefinite articles "add nothing to the language", since the actual…

> I'm going to impose my preference on everyone else, even though the term has been part of standard contemporary English for a long time.

At least I, as a non-native speaker, find the edited sentences always easier to read. They simply make the text better.

As the entire point od Wikipedia is to make knowledge accessible with co-writing, I find it just wild that people would object to better language.

So who exactly is imposing their preference on the world: the one making the text easier to read, or the one objecting to the edits?

Re: Wikipedia user edits over 90k uses of “comprised of”

#93

Post by pbreit »

p-e-w wrote: post #10

The justifications given in that essay leave a really bad taste in my mouth: > I believe using "comprised of" is poor writing, because > It's completely unnecessary. There are many other ways to say what the writer means by "comprised of". It adds nothing to the language. That's true for many, many other words. In fact, most instances of definite and indefinite articles "add nothing to the language", since the actual…

I read this and googled a bit and don't quite understand what the problem is with "comprised of".

The author says this "The 9th district is comprised of all of Centerville" should be replaced by "The 9th district comprises all of Centerville"? That's it?

Is there some way to see what edits were made?

Re: Wikipedia user edits over 90k uses of “comprised of”

#95

Post by vivegi »

It is ironic that The New York Time Manual of Style and Usage [1] cited by the article as one of the authoritative sources often doesn't follow its own style guide. A Google search for "comprised of" in nytimes.com [2] gives around 4600+ results. A cursory glance at the first page of search results and the snippet text in the results all look fine.

I guess, we could say, much ado about nothing.

[1]: Siegal, Allan (1999). The New York Times Manual of Style and Usage. Three Rivers Press. p. 80.

[2]: Google search query for site:nytimes.com containing "comprised of". URL: https://www.google.com/search?q=%22comprised+of%22+site%3Any...

Re: Wikipedia user edits over 90k uses of “comprised of”

#96

Post by DonHopkins »

alvah wrote: post #47

Not all heroes wear capes. "draws" instead of "drawers", "brought" instead of "bought", "aircrafts", "softwares", and "could care less" can also DIAGF.

Speaking of heroes who I could care less about:

Jarrett Heather presents: Word Crimes (2014) (jarrettheather.com)

Archive:

https://web.archive.org/web/20170420022942/https://jarretthe...

"Weird Al" Yankovic - Word Crimes:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Gv0H-vPoDc

>The Completed Music Video: In November 2013, "Weird Al" Yankovic asked me to direct an animated video for "Word Crimes", a parody of Robin Thicke's "Blurred Lines" about the supposed abuse of proper language.

>The result of 500 hours of work in After Effects, Photoshop, Illustrator and Premiere goes by in 3 minutes, 44 seconds. I hope you find each one of them entertaining.

Word Crimes Animatic:

https://vimeo.com/101810947

>This storyboard-in-motion took about 100 hours. Al signed off on this design on January 25th, 2014, only 3 weeks after he gave me his homemade "demo" for Word Crimes, which you can hear on the animatic soundtrack.

>If you watch very closely, you might notice a gag or two that didn't make it through to final animation or some very subtle changes in the lyrics.

HN Discussion:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22820457

MrHeather on April 9, 2020 | parent | next [–]

When I first met with Al about this project, I was quick to point out that linguists would disagree with about a third of the "advice" he's giving out. His immediate reply was "WELL THEY'RE WRONG"--really loudly in the "Weird Al" character voice.

In my mind the joke is that the song's narrator is a know-it-all character that shouldn't be taken entirely seriously. But on the other hand, a lot of educators have contacted me to tell me they use the song as a learning tool.

DonHopkins on April 9, 2020 | prev | next [–]

Jarrett Heather is the artist behind Weird Al's "Word Crimes" video released in 2014 (at 48.4 million views now).

Word Crimes: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Gv0H-vPoDc

"Word Crimes" is Weird Al's spot-on parody of Robin Thicke's "Blurred Lines" with T.I. and Pharrell Williams. I think Weird Al's version is better and more educational than the original -- smart and catchy like a modern Schoolhouse Rock.

Blurred Lines: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yyDUC1LUXSU

Weird Al contacted Jarrett Heather after being impressed by "Shop Vac", his previous work with kinetic text (typographic animation), which he made using animation tools like AfterEffects.

Shop Vac: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y4sOfO8Ei1g

This page on Jarrett Heather's web site tells the story and shows the art and technology behind the "Word Crimes" video. He's also published the Animatic storyboard-in-motion that took about 100 hours, to Weird Al's original home-made demo of the song! It's fascinating to compare them, and see how their ideas evolved from storyboard to final video.

Jarrett Heather presents: Word Crimes: https://web.archive.org/web/20170420022942/https://jarretthe...

>The Completed Music Video: In November 2013, "Weird Al" Yankovic asked me to direct an animated video for "Word Crimes", a parody of Robin Thicke's "Blurred Lines" about the supposed abuse of proper language.

>The result of 500 hours of work in After Effects, Photoshop, Illustrator and Premiere goes by in 3 minutes, 44 seconds. I hope you find each one of them entertaining.

The Animatic: https://vimeo.com/102959171

>This storyboard-in-motion took about 100 hours. Al signed off on this design on January 25th, 2014, only 3 weeks after he gave me his homemade "demo" for Word Crimes, which you can hear on the animatic soundtrack.

>If you watch very closely, you might notice a gag or two that didn't make it through to final animation or some very subtle changes in the lyrics.

Jarrett originally designed the Live Journal logo back in 2000 or so, and parodied it in the video, with a broken pencil tip.

https://jarrett.livejournal.com/208198.html

Here's a great "Local Boy Makes Good" article and TV interview about Jarrett Heather from around the time the video came out, that was previously posted to HN -- I love his down-to-earth advice:

Elk Grove animator thrives as ‘Weird Al’ Yankovic’s partner in ‘Word Crimes’:

https://web.archive.org/web/20140725043615/https://www.sacbe...

Common Ground - Jarrett Heather “Word Crimes” Music Video Artist

https://vimeo.com/103615214

>"If I did fail, it would have been Al's fault for hiring a software developer to make a cartoon."

>Word Crimes is 244 seconds long. Each second took two hours at the computer. 500 hours work, in all.

>"Yeah, no classes, just, you know. I think people really underestimate the value of just sitting down and reading the manual."

Re: Wikipedia user edits over 90k uses of “comprised of”

#97

Post by tysam_and »

ttiurani wrote: post #91
p-e-w wrote: post #10

The justifications given in that essay leave a really bad taste in my mouth: > I believe using "comprised of" is poor writing, because > It's completely unnecessary. There are many other ways to say what the writer means by "comprised of". It adds nothing to the language. That's true for many, many other words. In fact, most instances of definite and indefinite articles "add nothing to the language", since the actual…

> I'm going to impose my preference on everyone else, even though the term has been part of standard contemporary English for a long time. At least I, as a non-native speaker, find the edited sentences always easier to read. They simply make the text better. As the entire point od Wikipedia is to make knowledge accessible with co-writing, I find it just wild that people would object to better language. So who exactly…

I find this to be a false equivalence.

People can horribly misuse the phrase "comprised of". Bland articles that directly communicate the language can be more or less tasteful depending upon who is reading them. Almost assuredly sentences can be written without "comprised of" that are also definitely not bland.

But classifying something you find easier to read as better language for everyone doesn't make it immediately true for everyone.

Additionally, it's not about a person making text easier to read or not from one (or multiple peoples') perspectives -- this appears to be about someone going on a stylistic crusade en masse. Objecting to the edits being an act of 'imposing their preference on the world' feels similar to the political mirror-projection kind of argument that can happen.

I think there is interesting discussion to be had (is it better? are there good ways to use it? when/where/how? what is the ethicality of editing articles like this? is a disclaimer wiki entry enough? etc etc), and maybe we can focus on that.

Re: Wikipedia user edits over 90k uses of “comprised of”

#98

Post by Bud »

pbreit wrote: post #93
p-e-w wrote: post #10

The justifications given in that essay leave a really bad taste in my mouth: > I believe using "comprised of" is poor writing, because > It's completely unnecessary. There are many other ways to say what the writer means by "comprised of". It adds nothing to the language. That's true for many, many other words. In fact, most instances of definite and indefinite articles "add nothing to the language", since the actual…

I read this and googled a bit and don't quite understand what the problem is with "comprised of". The author says this "The 9th district is comprised of all of Centerville" should be replaced by "The 9th district comprises all of Centerville"? That's it? Is there some way to see what edits were made?

[dead]

Re: Wikipedia user edits over 90k uses of “comprised of”

#99

Post by rootw0rm »

rrrrrrrrrrrryan wrote: post #64
brookst wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I miss being young. Ducks will far outnumber, eventually.

I'm not sure whether you're implying old people curse less or have less sex.

maybe old people are just really into ducks?

Re: Wikipedia user edits over 90k uses of “comprised of”

#100

Post by Bud »

tysam_and wrote: post #58
p-e-w wrote: post #10

The justifications given in that essay leave a really bad taste in my mouth: > I believe using "comprised of" is poor writing, because > It's completely unnecessary. There are many other ways to say what the writer means by "comprised of". It adds nothing to the language. That's true for many, many other words. In fact, most instances of definite and indefinite articles "add nothing to the language", since the actual…

Plus, generally languages are comprised of, among other things, a hodgepodge of colloquialisms that add flavor to the discourse.

[dead]
Post reply on HN