Contents

User talk:Killscreens

Happy editing! Peaceray (talk) 02:57, 31 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm ThaddeusSholto. I noticed that you recently removed content from Worcestershire sauce without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the removed content has been restored. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. ThaddeusSholto (talk) 23:56, 31 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I removed it. Why are we indulging American mispronunciations of an English sauce. There is literally no need, it's braindead. It would been far more useful to include other regional pronunciations, not waisting time including American. Killscreens (talk) 01:10, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. In a recent edit to the page Charmstone, you changed one or more words or styles from one national variety of English to another. Because Wikipedia has readers from all over the world, our policy is to respect national varieties of English in Wikipedia articles.

For a subject exclusively related to the United Kingdom (for example, a famous British person), use British English. For something related to the United States in the same way, use American English. For something related to another English-speaking country, such as Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Ireland, India, or Pakistan, use the variety of English used there. For an international topic, use the form of English that the first author of the article used.

In view of that, please don't change articles from one version of English to another, even if you don't normally use the version in which the article is written. Respect other people's versions of English. They, in turn, should respect yours. Other general guidelines on how Wikipedia articles are written can be found in the Manual of Style. If you have any questions about this, you can ask me on my talk page or visit the help desk. Thank you. Belbury (talk) 16:45, 20 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I see by your edit summaries that you're aware of WP:ENGVAR. Brooch, Charmstone, and Talisman are not specifically British-related topics, so as long as the article consistently uses one English variation, spellings should not be changed to a version you prefer. Schazjmd (talk) 16:51, 20 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

this is literally the ENGLISH LANGUAGE. you're braindead. none of these things have anything to do with America (???) Killscreens (talk) 17:07, 20 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Charmstones are associated with various traditional cultures, including those of Scotland and the native cultures of California and the American southwest. The other two seem generic enough not to have any strong national ties.

So all three fall to MOS:RETAIN, which may end up being the US spelling if the article happened to be first written that way. Belbury (talk) 17:11, 20 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think you'll find consensus that every article about a word in English should use British English spelling. Unless an article topic has WP:STRONGTIES, you should WP:RETAIN the version the article creator established. Schazjmd (talk) 17:12, 20 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for fixing up the articles that needed it - as linked above, Wikipedia has a policy at WP:ENGVAR to pre-empt the inevitable disagreements on which spellings to use. Articles about British history should very obviously be written in British English, so thanks for noticing and correcting where they're not!

It'd be in everyone's interests if you used clearer edit summaries, though. Calling the changes "spelling mistakes" is just setting your work up to be possibly reverted (in outrage or in genuine confusion) by an American to whom they are not spelling mistakes. An edit summary of "WP:ENGVAR" of "British English" would get the message across. Belbury (talk) 17:04, 20 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]