::   To Whom It May Concern: (For the record  since others than we two may read this dialogue  the article Marantochloa has never been deleted from en: WP. I did remove from the accompanying article an entry including a link to the Marantochloa article, in cleaning up the supposed Dab Clinogyne and converting it to an article with the same title, and i failed to create a corresponding entry; i have now added such an entry, with a similar link.)•   
 ::   Sminth..., thanks for speaking up about that genus; its omission on this page was a regrettable clerical error on my part, and i hope you'll find my subsequent correction of it suitable.    Two probably indispensible aspects of WP are Linus's Law, and the mistakes that get created by some of those many eyeballs; i think there's general agreement that the light wins out over the darkness in the long run.    It seems i offended you; i did not intend to, and you have my apology for doing so. What i had hoped was that a couple concrete examples of the exception would be simpler than evoking use–mention distinction; i might better have said  
 ::: Dictionaries and encyclopedias identify each of their entries and articles with a word or phrase. A dictionary entry describes the meaning of that word or phrase; with few exceptions (which add little clarity) an encyclopedia article describes in substantial detail whatever thing that word or phrase identifies. So in an encyclopedia article, write about the thing, and trust the reader to understand the convention that the title of article is (obviously, and presumably uninterestingly) a word (or name) for the thing the article describes. 
 ::   As to the Manual of Style, i haven't researched how long we got along without one, but virtually all our decade's growth has taken place under its evolving guidance. Editors' contributions are welcomed even if they are unaware of it or choose to ignore it, and i think errors like my dropping a genus are only an occasional result of efforts to bring contribs into compliance with it.   My attitude toward it is  
 ::# It's probably valuable and Mostly Harmless; 
 ::# If it is as harmful as you suspect, sooner or later someone will install the free Mediawiki software on another site, and populate it by copying the free articles but replacing WP:MoS with 
 ::::: We write in English, so if you can't make yourself understood in English, someone will probably rewrite or discard your contribution, depending on which feels more efficient to them. You probably can't add anything to this page that will improve it. 
 :::: And if you're right, WP will wither away and the new site will take over its role. 
 ::   If it's worth your effort to be more specific about "I don't understand this at all", that may make it practical for me to clarify more directly.   And perhaps it's most important that i say that i hoped my comments would be helpful to you, but you should not feel obliged to make the effort to draw anything from them. You seem to be a good-faith contributor, and i'd like to encourage you to continue, whether or not you can make my responses useful to you.•