I have been deliberately not taking part in the current round of this debate because I have up till now had nothing new to add to it and to be frank, I didn't want to spend any more time on it. However since my name is coming up again I suppose I should say something. However Guettarda has already said most of what I would say, so if you've read his comments you already know most of my thoughts on the matter. I'll just comment on Manning's point about the first editor's spelling policy usage. Modern editors should bear in mind that, as Manning says, spelling/naming policy in those days was not quite the ironclad matter that it has now become. In fact the Manual of Style was originally someone's "pet project". Initially following its precepts was optional. Hence many of us only adopted its prescriptions as it became increasingly obvious that not to do so would cause friction with those who took it as gospel. So at that time we did occasionally move articles from one regional variation to another. For instance I moved British "Hoarding" to American "Billboard" where it still remains without any complaint from anyone about "first contributor". So, yes, "first contributor" is an excellent way to solve these types of dispute. However it wasn't always and isn't always applied as the Hoarding/Billboard example demonstrates.   | Talk''