Thread:Octofan/@comment-4698889-20161008042148/@comment-6986530-20161009164126

Honestly, you were closer in your first draft of the history section. I did not want you did merely cut out parts of the conversation you thought were unnecessary to shorten paragraphs. I wanted you to paraphrase what was being said in a little less words. As you have it now, you're still writing everything like a play-by-play of the summary (i.e. "he said this" and "X replied that," which you are going to have some of anyway, but it doesn't have to be for everything) and making it look like you're quoting the characters almost directly, but now you've obscured parts of the conversation and made it look like certain characters said things that they never actually said. This is even worse than writing in too much detail.

I do hope that I'm making sense. As I said before, we're going to discuss and vote on new writing standards in a bit, so my suggestion is you try to put the history section back the way it was, for now. I'll be able to better explain what I'm looking for when I propose the new standard.