RWBY VI: This thread is also a tribute to Monty Oum

[Reddish Mage]

While I agree that that can be a legitimate distinction, it doesn't seem to exist in APA. Consider this reference, for example:



I bet Glynda's a grammar nazi.

There's other places to look: try Chicago style.

[Math_Mage]

There's other places to look: try Chicago style.

I'm sure there are; I was engaged with the specific claim about APA style.

However, Chicago style would be a strange format to adopt here, as title pages are given in allcaps. On the other hand, headers in Chicago style appear similar in capitalization pattern to first/second headers in APA style, regardless of whether they're arranged in title-subtitle syntax. If there's a style that supports writing subtitles in sentence case, it's not APA or Chicago.

[Hawkflight]

Oof. I'd prefer either the current sentence capitalization or all-caps to that.
APA what are you doing
APA stahp

Meh, I agree. I do feel like all the words should be capitalized, but I'm willing to settle for grammatically correct.

Yes it does. The very page you linked says there are two methods. Title case is used for things such as inline discussion, while sentence case is used for referencing, etc. Another link to a better page which was linked from that very page.

Yes, and in this case we're talking about title case, not sentence case. The thread title pretty clearly qualifies as either a "heading at Level 1 or 2", or a "title of [a] periodical".

Also, I'm pretty sure it doesn't count as a "reference list".

EDIT: Besides, the article you linked just proves my point. Note how under "More on Capitalization: Title Case Versus Sentence Case", subsection "Text Examples", it shows through example that article titles should use title case, not sentence case. And I don't know about you, but I'm pretty sure an 'article title' is the closest we're going to get to a 'thread title'.

[Rawhide]

Formatting guidelines are contextual; showing that the status quo is represented somewhere in the APA style guide is insufficient to determine whether the APA approves that style for the given use case. Neither use case presented in the article you linked is similar to the one under discussion, so this citation doesn't lead to a useful conclusion. As such, we return to Hawkflight's reference for a discussion of use cases, and find...

First and foremost, I was specifically talking about APA referencing guidelines, making everything you said completely moot. I recognise that I didn't specify it in the original statement, which could lead to confusion, so I am clarifying that now.

However, even if I did not intend to specify referencing guidelines, what you have said is still incorrect. Specifically this bit: "showing that the status quo is represented somewhere in the APA style guide is insufficient"

I was merely stating that I had used a system which follows APA guidelines for capitalisation of words in a title. The APA guidelines for capitalisation of words in a title for reference lists matches the capitalisation of words in a title I had used. Showing that the status quo is represented somewhere in the APA style guide is perfectly sufficient.

It appears to me that thread title matches the use cases for title case, rather than the ones for sentence case.

The thread title does not match any use cases to do with APA guidelines, this is just a random forum thread. I merely said that I had used a system of capitalisation which matches APA [referencing] guidelines, not that it matches a use case or that it specifically should or must follow the guidelines.

Of course, since thread titles are not subject to APA formatting rules, all this is moot.

As above, I merely said that it did follow the guidelines, not that it should or must.

For the record, I tried both sentence case (as per APA referencing guidelines) and title case before making the thread. Sentence case looked far better.

Yes, and in this case we're talking about title case, not sentence case. The thread title pretty clearly qualifies as either a "heading at Level 1 or 2", or a "title of [a] periodical".

No, that is completely incorrect. We are not talking about title case or sentence case. We are talking about how the title is capitalised (i.e. title case vs. sentence case). You will see that all titles of all books, movies, websites, periodicals, whatever in a reference list use sentence case (even though they are titles) as per APA referencing guidelines.

Title case and sentence case are a type of sentence formatting, they do not relate to whether something is a title or not.

Also, I'm pretty sure it doesn't count as a "reference list".

EDIT: Besides, the article you linked just proves my point. Note how under "More on Capitalization: Title Case Versus Sentence Case", subsection "Text Examples", it shows through example that article titles should use title case, not sentence case. And I don't know about you, but I'm pretty sure an 'article title' is the closest we're going to get to a 'thread title'.

Proves what point? I merely stated that it followed APA guidelines for capitalisation of titles. I specifically meant APA referencing guidelines, however I have acknowledged the potential confusion in my earlier statement and have clarified. I will not make that mistake again.

Furthermore, as I also stated earlier in this post, it just looks and reads much better in sentence case.

Essentially, title case is not the only correct way to format a title and, increasingly, it is not always the best way. Email subjects, for example, often look completely wrong in title case, as did this thread. APA referencing guidelines specifically call for sentence case in the titles of works referenced. That there is more than one way to craft a title correctly, and this way is definitely one of the correct ways, was entirely my point.

[Shyftir]

When I opened the RWBY thread, I never expected the English (grammar) Inquisition.

[Math_Mage]

{scrubbed}

[Reddish Mage]

When I opened the RWBY thread, I never expected the English (grammar) Inquisition.

Nobody expects the English Inquisition!

Why didn't I think of RWBY VI: The Return of the Grammar Nazis?

Ah well, there's always RWBY VII: The Grammar Nazis Awaken.

Btw, did we ever figure out who Raven was and perhaps more importantly, what role is she going to play?

[LaZodiac]

Btw, did we ever figure out who Raven was and perhaps more importantly, what role is she going to play?

Nope. She knows Yang and said "we need to talk" but that's it. We think she's Yang's Mom right now. I do anyway.

[CarpeGuitarrem]

Nope. She knows Yang and said "we need to talk" but that's it. We think she's Yang's Mom right now. I do anyway.

My genre-savviness says so. Otherwise, the reveal of her eye color wouldn't have been a big deal.

[Dasgovernator]

Haha, that's perfect.

The guy did another one with Oobleck
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3fQDlcPAImk

I'm also faintly holding out hope that we'll see a Team FTRS at some point :).

[Zolem]

Nope. She knows Yang and said "we need to talk" but that's it. We think she's Yang's Mom right now. I do anyway.

Current runners include the following:

• Yang's Mother
• Yang's Twin Sister She Never Knew
• Yang's Cousin (Qurow's kid, they have the same last name)
• Time Travel Kid of Yang and Blake
• Evil Future Yang
• Future Yang trying to prevent something bad back in time.

I've listed them in order that I think is from most probable to wtf.

[Reddish Mage]

Current runners include the following:

• Yang's Mother
• Yang's Twin Sister She Never Knew
• Yang's Cousin (Qurow's kid, they have the same last name)
• Time Travel Kid of Yang and Blake
• Evil Future Yang
• Future Yang trying to prevent something bad back in time.

I've listed them in order that I think is from most probable to wtf.

I think it should go:
[*]Yang's Twin Sister She Never Knew
Yang's half-sister
[*]Yang's Cousin (Qrow's granddaughter, they have the same last name)
Yang's alter ego
AURA
[*]Yang's Mother
Yang's Aunt (Qrow's daughter, which is why they have the same last name)
[*]Evil Future Yang (or any alternate version of Yang, not a manifestation of her subconscious or aura)
[*]Future Ruby Yang trying to prevent something bad back in time.
[*]Time Travel Kid of Yang and Blake (this is clearly the big WTF, emphasis on the F)


EDIT: How do you do the thing with the picture and the big blocky white captioning? I totally want to get the pic of the guy from the Ancient Aliens show with the caption "AURA" here.

[Math_Mage]

I'm in the mom camp. It'd be easier to tell if appearances weren't quite as abstracted, of course. Apart from the shopkeeper in v1e1, and maybe Junior, age differentiation isn't all that...visible...in this show.

EDIT: How do you do the thing with the picture and the big blocky white captioning? I totally want to get the pic of the guy from the Ancient Aliens show with the caption "AURA" here.

Use this.

[Sith_Happens]

EDIT: How do you do the thing with the picture and the big blocky white captioning? I totally want to get the pic of the guy from the Ancient Aliens show with the caption "AURA" here.

Beat you to it by ten months, though it looks like I never got around to switching it from Imageshack to TinyPic.

Spoiler: Fixed

Show

Tag for easier Googling: "RWBY Aura Guy"

[Zolem]

[*]Yang's Cousin (Qrow's granddaughter, they have the same last name)

No, that would be daughter. Qurow is Ruby and Yang's uncle, and was on a team with their father and both of their mothers, so they are all roughly the same age. If Qurow had a kid, they would be roughly the same age as Yang and Ruby.

[Reddish Mage]

I'm in the mom camp. It'd be easier to tell if appearances weren't quite as abstracted, of course. Apart from the shopkeeper in v1e1, and maybe Junior, age differentiation isn't all that...visible...in this show.

I don't know about that. We have: Ironwood, Ozpin, Professor Port, Doctor Oobleck, Glynda, all of these characters show their age. Also Cinder appears to us as somewhat older and she is, apparently somewhere between 21-29 (Monty has said she "isn't that much older," and that she "could pass as a hot senior" in response to questions about what she is doing at Beacon). Torchwick also seems older, so there's quite a few characters that show age in addition to Junior and the poor cabbage dust Asian stall shopkeeper.

Anyway, Yang's mom should be at least 40 years old or so, that's more than a decade on Cinder, I think she shouldn't appear as if she was Yang's twin.

No, that would be daughter. Qurow is Ruby and Yang's uncle, and was on a team with their father and both of their mothers, so they are all roughly the same age. If Qurow had a kid, they would be roughly the same age as Yang and Ruby.

Qrow is referred to by Ozpin as a "withered-old crow," I suspect Ozpin in old enough to be a teacher for team QSMM (Qrow, Shao Long, Yang's Mom, Ruby's Mom) and wouldn't refer to a guy whose two decades younger as "withered" and old (barring mystical aura pre-aging or something). Qrow may have been like Oobleck on SMMs team (perhaps there was another missing member) or may have been the senior on a graduated-team, and/or (and this theory works with all the evidence presented), Yang and Ruby's mom and dad had their children later in life and are up there in age as well.

I do take the age references seriously and expect the characters to show some indication of age. I think at the very least we should assume that people look and are referred to according to their real ages until we have evidence to the contrary. We don't have proof that teams are always made up of same aged-people (or that Ruby and Yang's dad and mom aren't the same age as Ozpin!?)


Oh yes and:

[GPuzzle]

Might not be literal. There is a case of a guy in Brazil who was tortured during the first dictatorship we had here, and despite not being that old, he looked, felt and spoke like he was much younger than he was.

So perhaps not literal but more psychological.

[Reddish Mage]

Might not be literal. There is a case of a guy in Brazil who was tortured during the first dictatorship we had here, and despite not being that old, he looked, felt and spoke like he was much younger than he was.

So perhaps not literal but more psychological.

*Aheem* in the absence of specific evidence to the contrary.

Another way of looking at it: Which do we have more evidence for, that Qrow is old or that Qrow is young?

---

The evidence that Qrow is old: He is specifically referred to as being "withered" and "old"

The evidence that Qrow is young: He was on a team of people who are most likely between 40-60 years of age.

---

Of the two I'd say the evidence that Qrow is old is stronger.

[Gespenst Ritter]

Chances are that Aura slows the effects of aging, so I can buy that Yang's mom can look just like Yang but a bit taller.

Or it could be that the animators didn't want to/didn't have time to make a more detailed rig for Raven.

[Rawhide]

He is specifically referred to as being "withered" and "old"

Pretty sure the words were "a dusty old Qrow".

Chances are that Aura slows the effects of aging, so I can buy that Yang's mom can look just like Yang but a bit taller.

Or it could be that the animators didn't want to/didn't have time to make a more detailed rig for Raven.

Or it could be the fact that this is a dream or dreamscape, and Yang (having never seen the woman's face) is projecting, or the woman has chosen that face in the dreamscape.

[shadow_archmagi]

Yang's eyes are normally purple verging on pink. They're red in the weird dream-sequence thing.

Not sure what that's all about.

[Gespenst Ritter]

Or it could be the fact that this is a dream or dreamscape, and Yang (having never seen the woman's face) is projecting, or the woman has chosen that face in the dreamscape.

I'm not at the point where I'm willing to believe that Aura can drag people into dreams.

[Hiro Protagonest]

Yang's eyes are normally purple verging on pink. They're red in the weird dream-sequence thing.

Not sure what that's all about.

Her eyes turn red sometimes. If you'll look again, it'll show very similar shots of Yang twice in that last scene as Raven removes her mask. The first time, they're purple, the second time, red.

[Rawhide]

I'm not at the point where I'm willing to believe that Aura can drag people into dreams.

The whole scene has a filter applied to it which implies "dream" (as even LaZodiac highlighted), be this an actual dream, an hallucinogenic or otherwise modified state, or someone able to communicate through telepathy (perhaps shared dreaming). The filter might mean nothing, or it might mean that what we saw was not strictly reality.

[Reddish Mage]

Chances are that Aura slows the effects of aging, so I can buy that Yang's mom can look just like Yang but a bit taller.

Or it could be that the animators didn't want to/didn't have time to make a more detailed rig for Raven.

Chances are? We haven't heard any such thing about Aura, and it seems the "like a forcefield!" of Jaune's statement was pretty accurate, I don't believe "aura" in the explanation for everything. Also, 17 is an odd age to be stuck at for more than 20-years.

At the very least I'd think Yang's mom should have a dimple or a mole or smaller eyes (notice eye-size to head decrease as characters age) or something instead of just being Yang-in-heels with a different color scheme.

Why all this rationalization to attempt to justify Raven is Yang's mom? Because Yang's mom was mentioned (once) it must be her? I understand the importance of the preservation of characters, but so far all the evidence we've seen is that Monty is not trying to preserve the number characters, not by a longshot. That, and everything surrounding this girl is suggesting Raven is meant to be a curveball out of left-field (and yes that doesn't make sense! neither should Raven!).

I'm not at the point where I'm willing to believe that Aura can drag people into dreams.

How about dust? Maybe Raven has a telepathic semblance or knows someone who does, that seems quite possible. Telepathy doesn't seem any less plausible as a semblance than magnetism or shadow clones (and a lot more than magic snowflakes). Also, we knew Yang was going to sleep.

Pretty sure the words were "a dusty old Qrow".

Revised:

---

The evidence that Qrow is old: He is specifically referred to as being "dusty" and "old"

The evidence that Qrow is young: He was on a team of people who are most likely between 40-60 years of age.

---

Of the two I'd say the evidence that Qrow is old is stronger.

[Hawkflight]

Spoiler: Stuff

Show

First and foremost, I was specifically talking about APA referencing guidelines, making everything you said completely moot. I recognise that I didn't specify it in the original statement, which could lead to confusion, so I am clarifying that now.

However, even if I did not intend to specify referencing guidelines, what you have said is still incorrect. Specifically this bit: "showing that the status quo is represented somewhere in the APA style guide is insufficient"

I was merely stating that I had used a system which follows APA guidelines for capitalisation of words in a title. The APA guidelines for capitalisation of words in a title for reference lists matches the capitalisation of words in a title I had used. Showing that the status quo is represented somewhere in the APA style guide is perfectly sufficient.



The thread title does not match any use cases to do with APA guidelines, this is just a random forum thread. I merely said that I had used a system of capitalisation which matches APA [referencing] guidelines, not that it matches a use case or that it specifically should or must follow the guidelines.



As above, I merely said that it did follow the guidelines, not that it should or must.

For the record, I tried both sentence case (as per APA referencing guidelines) and title case before making the thread. Sentence case looked far better.



No, that is completely incorrect. We are not talking about title case or sentence case. We are talking about how the title is capitalised (i.e. title case vs. sentence case). You will see that all titles of all books, movies, websites, periodicals, whatever in a reference list use sentence case (even though they are titles) as per APA referencing guidelines.

Title case and sentence case are a type of sentence formatting, they do not relate to whether something is a title or not.



Proves what point? I merely stated that it followed APA guidelines for capitalisation of titles. I specifically meant APA referencing guidelines, however I have acknowledged the potential confusion in my earlier statement and have clarified. I will not make that mistake again.

Furthermore, as I also stated earlier in this post, it just looks and reads much better in sentence case.

Essentially, title case is not the only correct way to format a title and, increasingly, it is not always the best way. Email subjects, for example, often look completely wrong in title case, as did this thread. APA referencing guidelines specifically call for sentence case in the titles of works referenced. That there is more than one way to craft a title correctly, and this way is definitely one of the correct ways, was entirely my point.

Alright. It seems we're at an impasse. You believe the current thread title looks better, whereas I believe proper title case capitalization would look better. So, how about we leave it up to the thread?

People of the RWBY thread, it's time to do your duty and vote on which type of capitalization this thread deserves.

1. RWBY VI: This thread is also a gun (1 votes)
2. RWBY VI: This Thread Is Also a Gun (0 votes)
3. RWBY VI: This Thread Is Also A Gun (1 votes)
4. RWBY VI: This Thread is Also a Gun (2 votes)

Nobody expects the English Inquisition!

Why didn't I think of RWBY VI: The Return of the Grammar Nazis?

Ah well, there's always RWBY VII: The Grammar Nazis Awaken.

Btw, did we ever figure out who Raven was and perhaps more importantly, what role is she going to play?

I wonder if there's some way to work a Hellsing reference in there somewhere?

[Rawhide]

1. RWBY VI: This thread is also a gun
2. RWBY VI: This Thread Is Also a Gun
3. RWBY VI: This Thread Is Also A Gun

Don't forget the way I was taught: This Thread is Also a Gun

[Landis963]

Don't forget the way I was taught: This Thread is Also a Gun

I like the look of that one the best, tbh.

[Rawhide]

I like the look of that one the best, tbh.

As a book title, I'd tend to agree, and the original decision was really between that one and the one we currently have. I would never have capitalised the "a" or "is".

However, what we have isn't even really a subtitle. I mean, it is but it isn't. "RWBY VI" is the title, while "This thread is also a gun" is a fun phrase we're saying along with it, rather than a subtitle, and part of the decision revolved around wanting to show this. We also have precedent from a previous thread, especially in the case of a direct quote (which this almost is, but was slightly paraphrased). If the name of the show was the colours, the thread title would look similar to "Red White Black Yellow VI: This thread is also a gun", further distinguishing the title from the fun phrase.

[Gespenst Ritter]

Chances are? We haven't heard any such thing about Aura, and it seems the "like a forcefield!" of Jaune's statement was pretty accurate, I don't believe "aura" in the explanation for everything. Also, 17 is an odd age to be stuck at for more than 20-years.

If Aura is able to be used to heal injuries, then it stands to reason that it can be used to slow down the deteriorating effects from aging. We've already got several older people participating in Huntsman action without looking worse for wear.

Why all this rationalization to attempt to justify Raven is Yang's mom? Because Yang's mom was mentioned (once) it must be her? I understand the importance of the preservation of characters, but so far all the evidence we've seen is that Monty is not trying to preserve the number characters, not by a longshot. That, and everything surrounding this girl is suggesting Raven is meant to be a curveball out of left-field (and yes that doesn't make sense! neither should Raven!).

Because it makes more sense than "daughter from the future" or "clone" or "long-lost identical cousin" or whatever other oddball theories are out there with no preceding evidence to support them. It wouldn't be the first time that the writers set up the groundwork for a "twist" only to reveal the twist very quickly afterwards.

How about dust? Maybe Raven has a telepathic semblance or knows someone who does, that seems quite possible. Telepathy doesn't seem any less plausible as a semblance than magnetism or shadow clones (and a lot more than magic snowflakes). Also, we knew Yang was going to sleep.

Dust as we know it is just used as a superconductor and as a way to blow things up. Maybe you'll get some sort of hallucinogenic dreamlike effects from it if you snort the powder or something, but it's more likely that you'd just blow up.

Telepathy would be the odd one out of all the known Semblances, because the rest produce some kind of physical effect. (All of the known techniques can be mapped to a Nen category, but telepathy would have to be placed in Specialization.) Thinking about it some more, I guess telepathy could be plausible with some sort of soul-merging mumbo-jumbo, since Aura is powered by souls and all that. But I still doubt it's her Semblance, because she already has the portals.