User talk:60.240.88.11

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Please stop it.

You are accusing other editors of being racist, when in fact we are doing our best to try not to compartmentalize the English language, while you are going all the way the opposite direction. "Commonwealth English" is a phrase probably coined by the Linux Community to distinguish between American spelling and non-American spelling, but is indeed a very poor one when it comes to language (not spelling). It has no support from linguists or authoritative publications, and it has been long abused on Wikipedia. (Please do not show us the results of your Google search for "Commonwealth English.") How can you say that cookie is used in the U.S. and Canada, and biscuit is used in "Commonwealth English"? Canada is part of the Commonwealth as far as I know. And many other "biscuit" English-speaking nations (e.g. Ireland) are not. Additionally, many Commonwealth countries do not even have English as their first language, nor are they required to. We are trying very hard to avoid phrases such as "this" English, "that" English, when they are not necessary, because they actually tend to build barriers between speakers of English around the world—that would indeed be racist. Please stop it. JackLumber 18:47, 9 April 2006 (UTC) And I am perfectly aware of the meaning of the word "Commonwealth" in Australia, as in "Commonwealth style," but I am assuming you are in good faith.

Don't be mislead by the name, it refers to *general* Commonwealth English, Canadian English is an exception, but since there are indeed many "biscuit" English speaking countries outside the Commonwealth, it might seem that a better way the pharse it as it being called 'cookie' or 'cracker' in North America, and 'biscuit' in English speaking countries *outside* North America, but there are also many non-English speaking "biscuit" countries, for example, the word biscuit, itself is a French loanword, and the German word is Biskuit (from the same source and pronounced roughly the same), note the capital letter (it's a German noun), and also note the 'k' in place of the 'c,' as German often does with loanwords containg a 'c' pronuced as in an English word like 'biscuit.' So was 'cookie' the original English word, which the British replaced with the French word? Myrtone

[edit] Please stop it.

And try to come up with a reason for what you are doing, instead of blindly wasting your and our time like this.--JackLumber 13:48, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

I feel it is a perfectly acceptable term to use, it is a good term to sum up all the nations who use a similar language, style, grammar and spelling, without just referring to just the UK, which is unfair to the rest of us, saying we are all subjected to their type of English. The Commonwealth is a community and is inclusive whereas British English as a term is not. Hence Commonwealth English seems a very reasonable compromise, which Wikipedia is partially about. I know there will be anomolies such as Ireland, Canada (under certain circumstances), but nothing is perfect.
No. The article American and British English spelling differences is part of a series on American and British English differences, so it would break the symmetry. But, on other pages, if you really pay attention, I never ever say "in Britain" only, but I try to factor in the rest of the English-speaking world. Please read again my post above for further details, as you cannot apparently challenge the standpoint therein expressed. And please keep from insulting other editors. Thank you.--JackLumber 14:08, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
That's why I bracketed "Commonwealth English" after "British English" instead of replacing it. That factoring you use is a bit convoluted, and confusing.

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 13:59, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

Thankyou Mr Hypocrite. You are undoing my perfectly good edits.

[edit] Last Warning

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 14:11, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

So are you. You are threating me, because you don't agree with my position, that's very civil of you

This is your last warning. The next time you vandalize a page, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. --LifeStar 14:20, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

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. JackLumber has also been blocked. --Sam Blanning(talk) 14:22, 10 April 2006 (UTC)