例句與造句

1. If we want to go down that route I could make a case for deleting pretty much anything Machine Elf has said, but I won't, to avoid disrupting Wikipedia to make a WP : POINT . Machine Elf has also now responded to another editor, implying that their extremely polite comments on his lack of civility also amounted to a personal attack ( he linked the editor to WP : NPA ) . [ http : / / en . wikipedia . org / w / index . php ? title = Talk : T % 27ai _ chi _ ch % 27uan & diff = 484302462 & oldid = 484299273 ~ ( talk ) 04 : 57, 29 March 2012 ( UTC)
2. If we want to go down that route I could make a case for deleting pretty much anything Machine Elf has said, but I won't, to avoid disrupting Wikipedia to make a WP : POINT . Machine Elf has also now responded to another editor, implying that their extremely polite comments on his lack of civility also amounted to a personal attack ( he linked the editor to WP : NPA ) . [ http : / / en . wikipedia . org / w / index . php ? title = Talk : T % 27ai _ chi _ ch % 27uan & diff = 484302462 & oldid = 484299273 ~ ( talk ) 04 : 57, 29 March 2012 ( UTC)
3. :That's not my understanding of the dispute; at least, I don't recall to Machine Elf objecting to any one of the four sources I added in particular, and I also don't see that any of the sources provides stronger support for the notion that they are synonymous than the others ( all four support this notion about equally, AFAIK, though none use the " word " synonymous-- that's why, after Machine Elf complained about my " synonymous " edit, I changed it to " also known as ", which is near-identical wording to two of the sources . ) If you think one source supports my claim more strongly than the others, can you specify which of the four you're talking about?
4. :That's not my understanding of the dispute; at least, I don't recall to Machine Elf objecting to any one of the four sources I added in particular, and I also don't see that any of the sources provides stronger support for the notion that they are synonymous than the others ( all four support this notion about equally, AFAIK, though none use the " word " synonymous-- that's why, after Machine Elf complained about my " synonymous " edit, I changed it to " also known as ", which is near-identical wording to two of the sources . ) If you think one source supports my claim more strongly than the others, can you specify which of the four you're talking about?
5. In direct response to " " I'd be satisfied if, " without reference to me, " you would find some points ( privately, not for publication ) that " you believe " you could have done better and that " you want " to do better in the future with regard to WP : NPA " from Machine Elf above, firstly, anything I have to say will go on the public record here; secondly, I am entitled to offer my opinion on the notability or credibility of a "'topic "'which is listed at AfD, which is what I did-I don't think it's notable, I don't think that what I would regard as reliable third party sources refer to it.
6. It's difficult to find machine elf in a sentence. 用machine elf造句挺難的
7. Not sure what you mean when you say I didn't remove it from the lede at first, my initial edit did remove it, ( edit : sorry, now I see what you mean, I notice now that I added the claim that they are synonymous in the footnote while leaving the main text the same; but this would leave no confusion in the mind of readers who read the footnote, whereas if the main text read " sometimes " while the footnote just offered some sources without commenting on the issue of the equivalence of the terms, I think the issue would be a lot less clear to readers ) then after Machine Elf objected to my calling the terms " synonymous " and reverted that, my next edit also removed " sometimes referred to " from the article, which I changed to " Eternalism, defined as the view that there are no ontological differences between past, present and future, is also known as the " "'block universe "'" theory " . talk ) 12 : 48, 2 August 2012 ( UTC)
更多例句：  上一頁