Category talk:Human behavior

message: The title of this category should be changed to "Human behaviour" as we're supposed to use English spellings on Wikipedia. --Jupiter Optimus Maximus (talk) 19:28, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: See WP:ENGVAR. Wikipedia recognizes all national varieties of English and does not prefer one over the other. Since this category has evolved using predominantly one variety, it should remain in that variety. The only reason to change it would be your personal preference. --IllaZilla (talk) 22:20, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: All the same, it is dissatisfying. --Jupiter Optimus Maximus (talk) 16:13, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: It is only dissatisfying to you because you are British and prefer that everything use British spelling variants. Please don't try to impose your linguistic prejudices on the encyclopedia. The difference is, after all, purely superficial and has no bearing on the quality of the information. --IllaZilla (talk) 22:11, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not imposing my so-called "linguistic prejudices", I'm merely expressing personal dissatisfaction and when I last checked, there wasn't a policy against stating opinions. --Jupiter Optimus Maximus (talk) 00:51, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I never said that there was, but your opinion on the matter is irrelevant. You clearly aren't happy with the fact that Wikipedia recognizes all national varieties of English (having previously elsewhere accused Americans of having a "morbid phobia of the letter 'u). Therefore when you say that "we're supposed to use English spellings on Wikipedia", it's clear that what you really mean is "we're supposed to use British spellings on Wikipedia", which, in fact, we are not. As for your personal dissatisfaction, you did not make it clear that was the intent of your comment. I read it as being dissatisfying in general (ie. to readers & other editors, not just yourself). Regardless, saying that non-British spellings are "dissatisfying" is not exactly an example of good faith, and surely you can see how others such as myself would object to such a comment. In the future it would perhaps be better to keep these types of opinions to yourself. --IllaZilla (talk) 08:13, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Utterly absurd. --Jupiter Optimus Maximus (talk) 11:47, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Coming back 3 weeks later and changing your comment from "perhaps" to "utterly absurd" isn't good faith either. --IllaZilla (talk) 02:52, 31 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Your point being? --Jupiter Optimus Maximus (talk) 14:15, 31 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: That it's not "utterly absurd" to think that comments like this would offend some people, particularly given the previous jabs you've made towards Americans concerning spelling. Also, that your continued insistence at having the last word (and even when you've had the last word, coming back weeks later to change it from something civil to something snarky) smacks of bad faith and reflects your confrontational editing patterns. Wikipedia is not some battle of wits or egos, and your attitude in that regard simply gets in the way of building a better encyclopedia. --IllaZilla (talk) 18:57, 31 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Perhaps. --Jupiter Optimus Maximus (talk) 00:50, 2 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: "Behavior" vs. "Behaviour"

message: because behavior animal is a behavior's category and cause human nature prevent the loops caused by humans Zipodu (talk) 17:21, 26 July 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  I remove behavior animal category and change human by human nature