Talk:Red rain in Kerala/Archive 2

message: *Challenging someone's sexuality is an insult.
*Saying that what someone has done is completely without sense is an insult when it's true and it's an insult when it's false.
*Wikifying dates not only creates a hyperlink, it also affects how dates are rendered for users who set date preferences.
12.72.69.52 08:01, 9 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Interesting. Does wikipedia have a policy on this issue? I mean, if the dates are changed for everyone then I'd heartily agree for hyperlinking, but the majority of people probably don't have a wikipedia account. 72.140.134.165 00:17, 15 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I told you that there was a policy and how to find it.  But, since you were reading my “wikifying isn't just hyperlinking” as “hyperlinking isn't just hyperlinking” (even when explicitly told that this was a misreading), you just butt-wiggled instead. —Gamahucheur 02:42, 15 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Let's End this Flame War

message: Both American and British spellings have been used in this article.  The word "color" has been spelled with and without a "u".  I've tried to make things more consistent.  I've used mostly American spellings, simpl because I'm American.  If someone made the spellings consistently British that would be fine with me. 71.154.215.168 00:42, 6 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I also prefer American spellings, but in India they use British spellings, so so I standardized them to be British.Cameron Nedland 17:08, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: In India, they also use a slightly different grammar.  Unless you are going to use that as well, rendering everything with different orthography is inappropriate. —12.72.68.76 11:01, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

text: Stop reverting to your preferred spellings, anonymous user.  The earliest version of this article used British spelling, so that's what it will remain as.  There is no good reason to change it to US spelling.  Worldtraveller 11:52, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It's not just one person doing the reversion, so you need to refer to “users”.  The fact that you originally wrote it in British English gives you no ownership.  As I noted, this article was a mix or British and American when 71.154.215.168 made it consistent, and he made it consistently American.  Changing just orthography just to impose your prejudices — and especially just to impose your ethnic prejudices — is quite inappropriate, and will be resisted. —12.72.71.49 12:17, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Users?  Curious that two IPs (12.72.... and 71.154...) apparently used by entirely independent people would choose to use exactly the same comment when butting in and imposing their preferences, don't you think?  ,  Worldtraveller 01:35, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

text: Stop imposing US spelling inappropriately.  There is no reason that this article should use US spelling.  If you continue to revert to your preferred version you're likely to be blocked.  Don't take everyone for fools by reverting from two different IP addresses.  Worldtraveller 13:11, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The only violator of the 3RR here is you.  Don't insist that your opponents must be one devil with sock-puppets. —12.72.71.161 13:28, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

text: There is nothing inappropriate about US spelling, and there would be nothing inappropriate with British spelling either, except that the article was already fine with American spelling.  Again, spelling had become very inconsistent until 71.154.215.168 made it consistent.  American spelling was then established simply in the act of making it consistent.  Now you are trying to make the spelling British out of pure prejudice and spite.  Each is inappropriate. —12.72.71.161 13:35, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: According to the conventions followed throughout wikipedia, all India-related articles are to use Indian English. Please see Wikipedia:Notice_board_for_India-related_topics#Conventions. Also, I would like to point you to this policy -- thunderboltza.k.a.Deepu Joseph |TALK14:32, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I have more than once earlier noted that Indian English is not being used by anyone here; if it were, then I would be fine with it exactly because of policy.  Instead, there is a struggle between British English and American English. —12.72.71.1 01:07, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

text: “In the absence of a good reason, go with the original.” Prior to clean-up in early April, it was a mish-mash; at clean-up, it was American.  In the absence of a good reason, stick with the last convention consistently used.  “India is more UK spelling than US.” The rule favoring Indian English does not order other dialects based on approximations. —12.72.71.1 01:07, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

text: The article's spelling was perfectly consistent right at the very beginning, anonymous editor.  Why would you think you need to revert to enforce someone else's subsequent conversion to US spellings?  You might note that that editor said if British was preferred he had no problem with that.  It's very strange to me to suddenly see lots of IPs with no other contributions than changing spellings to this article.  What is your motivation?  What has made you pick out this one article in particular as worth attacking to impose US spellings?  Worldtraveller 22:21, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It would be rather unlikley for the spelling of an article not to be consistent at its very beginning.  The spelling of this article, however, was allowed to become a mish-mash.  71.154.215.168 cleaned it up in early April, at which point it was not a mish-mash; it was also not British.  The point here is not that 71.154.215.168 somehow came to own the article with that cleaning any more than that you came to own the article by beginning it.  I am not imposing American spelligns per se; I am unimposing British spellings.  I would have had exactly the complementary reaction had 71.154.215.168 made the spellings all British and someone made no changes other than to Americanize them all.  I don't bother to sign in to Wikipedia unless I have good reason (and providing a target is not what I regard as a good reason), so I just take the IP that AT&T assigns to me at dial-up. —12.72.71.1 01:07, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

text: It's incredibly annoying to see someone who's made no substantive contributions to the article at all blathering on about rules they obviously don't understand and imposing their preferred spelling against all good sense.  I don't really give a toss if people introduced US spellings into an article which I originally wrote using UK spellings.  I don't mind the anonymous editor making it all US, although according to the conventions he should have made it all UK.  What I do mind is someone suddenly deciding to take it upon themselves to determine what spellings should be used.  Who do you think you are, really, to emerge from nowhere and act in this way?  I can't think of any good reason at all why someone would choose not to log in but to make disruptive and unhelpful changes anonymously.  I do not think you're acting in good faith.  Worldtraveller 01:30, 8 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I totally endorse Worldtraveller. In India, we use British spellings, and as such it should be left as colour and not color. And like I said before, please do not disrupt wikipedia to prove a point. We are not interested in feeding trolls. Regards,  thunderboltza.k.a.Deepu Joseph |TALK10:33, 8 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Orthography

message: There is, of course, a very great difference between
:Diatoms use silicon.
and
:Few microörganisms use silicon.
Rainsman had linked to an article that supports the former, as-if it supports the latter; it does not.  I have removed the superfluous parenthetical citing of Diatom, and reïnserted a “”.  I hope to see Rainsman provide an appropriate citation promptly. —Gamahucheur 14:20, 15 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Silicon Rarity