Talk:Tasha Schwikert

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.
Biography Portal
Start This article has been rated as start-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ]

Contents

[edit] Alternate, alternative, or reserve

Googling "Tasha Schwikert" and the three above words shows "alternate" by far the more common term. "Alternate" is standard terminology in American sports. WAS 4.250 19:53, 18 March 2006 (UTC)h

[edit] Unwarranted Assumption

If you'd asked, we could have provided you with a bigger spoon to stir with. Still, you seem to be doing fine with the one you have. --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 23:06, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
Kind of Nasty Mel. Your assumption is User:WAS 4.250 is some ally of the parties filing the RFC. Good Faith and commonsense both suggest that there are other people out here that may share their slant on the word choice in question.
No, I was suggesting that he was stirring — that usually means that the person is associated with neither party. --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 22:06, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
Well, you know I'm not, holding any kind of grudge agin ya, so take it heart when I say 'Reserve' on this side of the big pond reads very strange indeed and like the whilest>while edit that has followed since, the WP:MOS guidelines quoted by MS are close enough to clear to go on with, (and without blatantly disrespecting other's time input). Simple really: Alternate (current <G>) is the better term on this side of the pond. Isn't this a bit trivial no matter how you cut it? It's worth exactly zero more time from anyone... I was going to change the word, once the RFC cleared. Now I'm getting emails complaining about you. Enough! Please fix the text commesurate with the last two substansial edits. i.e. rv to user:WAS_4.250's followed with the tiny intervening edit on whilst to while.
Thanks, well all appreciate your demonstration of how to be a big person.
Cordially, FrankB 21:12, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

The person who created the page wanted "alternate", I wanted "alternative", and we compromised on "reserve". I don't really see the problem (OK, setting aside the silliness that ensued, but that didn't affect the initial case).

"Alternate" is just wrong in British and many other varieties of English; it's a confusion for "alternative". An "alternate" is someone who does something turn and turn about (as when I do something on alternate Tuesdays, alternating with someone); an "alternative" is a possible replacement or other choice, as when I offer a student a choie between two different essay questions — two alternatives (I don't want her to do first one, then the other, then the first, but to choose between them).

For some reason the U.S. has almost lost the former meaning, using both words to mean the same, "alternative". That measn, of course, that "alternative" means the same on both sides of the Atlantic, and is therefore to be preferred if there's a disagreement. "Reserve" captures the menaing of "alternative" in this context, and is a common term in sports, so is a fine alternative...

Similarly, U.S. English is well on the way to losing the distinction between "disinterested" and "uninterested", so that the latter would be preferable (if that's what's meant) in similar circumstances. --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 22:06, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Never Mind, Mel

Pardon my last line, Mel, that I now see can be taken as nasty when I was trying to be diplomatic.
I decided to just do it! (Thanks Nike!) With expansion. Someone into gymnastics needs to add footnotes, and tabulate the honors, medals, etc.
Another suggestion is to contact UCLA PR (Athletic Dept.) and get a released picture or two.

{{clean}}

I'm placing a clean template herein as the section is set up w/o contents need filled in. I'll ask Madamoiselle Sabrina to look into that. She's the expert into this field. This is my normal practice when I am devolunteering to further an otherwise nice looking arty. When you've fixed the ommisions, you have my good faith cheers to remove it on your judgement.

I leave it in your (collective) hands. FrankB 22:14, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

Mel, we just crossed posting...

On hitting an edit conflict - blame the US Newspapers. I can't make them change. I can get you addresses if you want to write letters to the numerous editors though.<g> I think the battle's been lost - back in 1900 or so. (See: Spelling reform) FrankB 22:14, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

But it's nothing to do with spelling. Moreover, I know many educated Americans who use "alternative" and "alternate" correctly — I've even seen correct usage on U.S. jazz album covers and in U.S. novels. --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 22:34, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

FrankB Replys to above:

Sorry I couldn't actually address this in my prior note, but was late to play taxi-Dad, stranding two kids, as it was, I got there nearly 25 minutes after the normal time.
No, not on spelling, precisely but it has everything to do with language drift. When we were younger, wicked always meant the evil witch, not 'Neat!', or 'Cool', et. al. and the number of other such changes boggles the mind. It annoys me as well, frankly. But then look at netspeak impact drifting into everyday language. Over here we have referenced to an 'Easy Button' cropping up over and over because of a chainstores Ads (Staples). If I ponder it a while, I can come up with a few dozen others.
It'd be nice if there was one authoritative source that everyone agreed to follow like your own OED. But much of the OED is weird sounding over here, like this word sounds to our ear now. I cited the spelling arty because, on spelling reform, most of the 'committee' attempts got no where, whereas the editorial guidelines by big papers had a big impact. So drift and change are loosed from Pandora's Box. Yawn. Not news anymore... I'm not going to try stoping the tide from flowing in with a fork, and I'd advise you to emmulate my acton. Somethings just aren't worth a fuss.
I'm rushed now to get dinner on, etc. and no more WikiNow. The point is language drifts, or we simply wouldn't have so damn many of them. Maybe it's better in a phonetic alphabet like Russian and Polish. I don't know, but as cultures cross contaminate, how can one stop it? Stop all forms of intercourse outside sex? I'd be willing to try that, but others would argue. One of your degrees is in language, or comparative culture or something like that (I believe I recollect), so who better to know that than you? I'll get the disclaimer in as per my email later at a new WikiTime. But same WikiPlace. (Hell, drifting the language is EASY! I just did it three times in one message.)
The key herein, is what style governs, and MOS has the stuff about... (nag) This kind of reminds me of the Glyphs arguments between the Japanese and Korean Nationists back when! Who cares. Life is too short, let's get some new stuff written or give it up and have a beer, or whatever.
FrankB

[edit] Prescription and description

From Prescription and description

For example, a descriptive linguist (descriptivist) working in English would describe the word "ain't" in terms of usage, distribution, and history rather than correctness; while acknowledging it a nonstandard form, the descriptivist would accept the broad principle that as a language evolves it often incorporates such items and thus would not didactically reject the term as never appropriate. A prescriptivist, on the other hand, would rule on whether "ain't" met some criterion of rationality, historical grammatical usage, or conformity to a contemporary standard dialect. Frequently this standard dialect is associated with the upper class (e.g., Great Britain's Received Pronunciation). When a form does not conform — as is the case for "ain't" — the prescriptivist will condemn it as a solecism or barbarism, prescribing that it not be used. In short, the door is absolutely barred to nonstandard forms. WAS 4.250 22:38, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Technical terminology

From Technical terminology:

Technical terminology is the specialised vocabulary of a profession or of some other activity to which a group of people dedicate significant parts of their lives (for instance, hobbies or a particular segment of industry). Sometimes technical terminology is termed jargon or, particularly in law, terms of art or words of art. WAS 4.250 22:38, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Additionally

alternate :

  • (n): one that substitutes for or alternates with another.

Merriam-Webster Dictionary

  • (n): A person acting in the place of another; a substitute. Dictionary.com
  • (n): US (UK alternative) An alternate plan or method is one that you can use if you do not want to use another one.

Cambridge Dictionaries online

I'm not wading into this discussion again, I am only providing supporting evidence for use of the word. Mademoiselle Sabina 23:22, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

Edited to add: I think one of the other important points here is that in the context of this article, alternate is a SPECIFIC sports term, not a general word. It is a recognized sports term used by both the media and the governing bodies of the sports themselves. It seems to me that to remove the term used by the sport's governing body and to replace it with an alternative "gramatically correct" term that is never used in the sport is incorrect. Mademoiselle Sabina 21:32, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Long-awaited reply

I'm told that my response was long-awaited; I hadn't realised that any was needed. None of the recent posts has really touched what I said originally. Many, perhaps most, Americans now use "alternate" to mean "alternative", but still use "alternative" to mean "alternative"; most other varieties of English preserve the distinction. As "alternative" means the same in all varieties, while "alternate" means different things in different varieties, we should prefer "alternative". In this case the original editor and I compromised on "reserve", and ignoring the irrelevant silliness that followed, I don't really see what more needs to be ssaid. "Substitute", as FrankB has suggested, would probably be just as good.

Incidentally, it's worth pointing out that I have no problem with U.S. English; I didn't change other U.S. spellings in the article, and I've often reverted attempt to change U.S. to U.K. English in articles where the former was more appropriate. However, to insist on using a term that means something different to millions of potential readers seems perverse when there are perfectly good alternatives (sorry) that involve no ambiguity.--Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 21:01, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

I thought the replies to you were clear that to people who speak the language known as "American English" as opposed to that other language called "British English"; that "alternate" is used as a sporting term of art in American sports and "perfectly good alternative" words for the "British English" are not "perfectly good alternative" words for the "American English" in this American sporting context, as made evident by the quote I provided that you deleted as if it were vandalism. There, I got that off my chest. I feel better now. Cheers. WAS 4.250 22:50, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
In an attempt to actually say something useful, instead of merely satisfying my need to vent; I would like to add that I have long perceived that Mel believes (as he stated above) that he has "no problem with U.S. English"; while I believe he speaks British English and doesn't understand that he is not fluent in American English, often mistaking correct American English for bad English, when it is just bad British English. That said, Mel's copy-editing skills are legendary and deservedly so. I would be honored for Mel to clean up after my god-awful spelling/style/etc mistakes that I make all the time. Cheers, again. WAS 4.250 22:59, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] References

I'm reformatting references in gymnastics-related articles now and introduced here a reference style, used in featured articles (see, e.g., today's FA Electrical engineering).

To use this style, first descriptions of templates Cite news (includes examples) and Cite web (less clear description) should be read.

This style is not compulsory, however. One is free to use the style he/she prefers. And feel free to revert my edit. Cmapm 11:56, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] *Advanced vs. Went

Merriam-Webster: Advance: (v) To go or move forward or onward.

Oxford UK: Advance: (v) 1 move forwards. 2 make or cause to make progress.

American Heritage: Advance: (v): 1. To go or move forward or onward. 3. To rise in rank, position, or value

Cambridge: Advance (v): to go or move something forward, or to develop or improve something:

Acceptable use of term, as evidenced by UK source: http://sport.independent.co.uk/tennis/article255201.ece "Top Three Advance to semis"

Aceeptable use of term, as evidenced by US source: http://www.billiardsdigest.com/mainevent/wpba/wups/wu61853.htm "Top seeds advance"

Acceptable use of term in non-sporting, University-level context: http://www.csun.edu/~hfdss006/conf/2001/proceedings/0149rea.htm After pressing the "B", the overlay group will automatically advance to the next level

Part of editing is looking at context. The sentence reads that the team did not qualify for the competition but Schwikert advanced there--ie, she qualified on her own. "Went" implies that she just showed up at the meet. "Advanced" is an acceptable and grammaticially correct verb in both UK and US English. Mademoiselle Sabina 21:39, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Photo

It's great, I like it! In general, namely such competitive images are the most appropriate in bio articles on sportspeople, in my opinion. Cmapm 14:22, 16 May 2006 (UTC)