"

Wow, you're hopeless.  Lets start with the trifles; you spelled ""necessarily"" wrong.  That doesn't give you much credibility.  The answer to your first question is no, whites from Liverpool speak Scouse, and they don't speak the same as whites from South London, of course, but I don't see what that has to do with White South African English.  However, the answer to your second question is mostly yes.  Most blacks from Boston do sound pretty much the same as blacks from New Orleans.  Most blacks from both areas speak what's called African American Vernacular English (of you're into political correctness, which you seem to be), which is an ethnolect and a sociolect that is becoming more and more different from the speech of whites in America.  I'm not exactly sure what you mean by ""Mother Tongue English speakers"".  Do you mean L1 varieties?  
I don't think my final statement is a violation of WP:OWN because I never said I own this article, nor did I ever think that.  I simply temporarily ""took it over"", if you will, to make it a better description of White South African English.  Those just happened to be the words I decided to use.  It says at the top of this article that the article was in need of attention by an expert on this subject, and while I am no expert, I certainly seem to be the closest thing to it that this article has ever seen (with the notable exception of JackLumber).  I think you knew what I meant by that expression, but it's certainly possible that you didn't.
Finally, I will respond to your earlier comment that ""White South African English"" as a title for this article is ""simply racist"".  You really haven't explained to me how that would be a racist title.  I'm going to assume that you meant either: 1.) That title would suggest that only whites in South Africa speak English and absolutely no one else does. 2.) That title would suggest that whites are the most important group in South Africa, they're are better than everyone else, and they are thus the only group in South Africa deserving an article on the type of English they speak.  Both of these choices seem rather absurd to me.  If you thought 1.), then I already proposed a solution for that.  We could give each Indian South African English, Black South African English, and White South African English its own article to show that there are indeed other dialects of English spoken in South Africa besides WSAfE.  If you thought 2.), then you are racist.  Let me explain.  For that title to be racist I would have to be white.  If I were a racist white person I would want that to be the title of the article to show that whites are better and that the way they speak is better.  Since we are both anonymous, however, there is no way you could possibly know my race.  You would have to rely on conjecture.  In this case, your guess was that I was white.  After all, if I were black and I proposed that, I would have to somehow be racist against myself.  What I don't understand for sure is why you assumed I was white.  That's quite a racist assumption.  Anyone in the world can edit Wikipedia; people from all races.  Yet you assumed I was white.  Unless you had statistics to back that assumption up, which you didn't, then that's ""simply racist"".  Even if you did have statistics to back it up, it still could be racist.  To me, what you're saying is that only white people edit Wikipedia, and that people of other races aren't intelligent enough.  Of course, I don't for sure, but that's my conjecture.   "