User talk:60.240.88.48

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).

Hi, I hope you like the compromise I worked out for the sake of clarity on the American and British English spelling differences page. Best, JackLumber 11:57, 14 April 2006 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] American and British English differences

The article title is "American and British English differences." We don't have enough literature to state that everything we say about British grammar, usage, etc. equally applies to other Commonwealth countries. (It's not the same as the spelling thing, it's more complicated.) We can say something here and there about Canada, Australia, etc. as we see fit, but we cannot boldly generalize.

Nosirree---aside from the Commonwealth thing, why did you boldly delete many of my sourced, verified changes? Please tell me. There's no need for consensus here.--JackLumber 13:07, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

The problem is, you restored only my minor changes, not the major ones.--JackLumber 13:22, 20 April 2006 (UTC)
Yes, but why did you insert "mostly" in place of "mainly" and "more common" instead of "commoner"? If everyone wanted to adjust every article according to his/her personal usage preferences, we would soon wind up in a mess.--JackLumber 13:41, 20 April 2006 (UTC)
Well, if you think that "commoner" is bad grammar, definitely you don't have the authority to monkey with pages on the English language.--JackLumber 13:49, 20 April 2006 (UTC)
"Commoner" is completely standard in both American and British English, that's all. Oh, perhaps it is not in Australian English? All the more reason to keep from generalizing to Commonwealth, then.--JackLumber 13:53, 20 April 2006 (UTC)
Since when? Please explain to me when and why you prefer "more common" over "commoner," I'm curious.--JackLumber 14:03, 20 April 2006 (UTC)
Actually "more common" is "more common" than "commoner," but just because "more common" is "commoner" than "commoner" doesn't mean "commoner" is not acceptable.--JackLumber 14:11, 20 April 2006 (UTC)
The hell it does.--JackLumber 14:22, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Possible violation of 3RR

Please refrain from undoing other people's edits repeatedly. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia under the three-revert rule, which states that nobody may revert an article to a previous version more than three times in 24 hours. (Note: this also means editing the page to reinsert an old edit. If the effect of your actions is to revert back, it qualifies as a revert.) Thank you. --JackLumber 13:14, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

You are in danger of violating the three-revert rule on a page. Please cease further reverts or you may be blocked from further editing. --JackLumber 13:19, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

You broke the 3RR, I didn't. Please refer to Wikipedia:Three-revert rule---you don't seem to know this rule.--JackLumber 14:25, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

Not only you don't know the English language, you can't even do the math. I reverted 3 times, you reverted 4. The rule says, don't revert more than 3 times.--JackLumber 14:30, 20 April 2006 (UTC)
At least I don't brake a rule, I don't seek concensus, and I don't get personnel. Don't tell me that's just Australian (Commonwealth?) spelling, I don't buy it.--JackLumber 14:42, 20 April 2006 (UTC)
Look who's talking.--JackLumber 14:53, 20 April 2006 (UTC)
B'd if ya had, Eye woodn of ben surpriesd.--JackLumber 14:59, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Create an account?

Mark (you've signed yourself as that at least once), please consider creating an account rather than just editing 'anonymously' from an IP address assigned to TPG Internet Pty Ltd. NSW, Australia. Indulging in an 'edit war' is counterproductive, whereas discussing your differences with other contributors on an article's talk page can enlighten many people. Above all, stay calm - the precise wording of any particular article version on Wikipedia just isn't that important. If things get really controversial, the best way forward is to record the fact that a controversy exists, and document both sides, leaving the reader better informed. Thanks for joining Wikipedia. WLD 15:13, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] User notice: temporary 3RR block

====Regarding reversions[1] made on April 20, 2006 to American_and_British_English_differences ====

You have been temporarily blocked for violation of the three-revert rule. Please feel free to return after the block expires, but also please make an effort to discuss your changes further in the future. The duration of the block is 12 hours. William M. Connolley 18:47, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../6/0/2E/User_talk%7E60.240.88.48.html"