Talk:Buffalo English

message: This article has no purpose.  The Inland Northern American English article covers this. 208.104.45.20 (talk) 21:04, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Delete This Article 

message: I'm sorry, but "The Guide to Buffalo English" is simply not a reliable source. Thegryseone (talk) 23:25, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I was sort of wondering when someone would say that. I wasn't responsible for adding it as a source; although I added a fair amount of this years ago before we got serious about sourcing. Dan Tasman, a friend of mine who wrote it, is a very observant native Buffalonian and I second many of his insights but I think he'd back away from considering this scholarly. Daniel Case (talk) 04:22, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

text: Please, don't consider it "my" article, not only because of the linked policy but also because this has had so many little things added to it over the last two years that it's really the horse designed by committee. It could really use some genuine academic sourcing. Daniel Case (talk) 14:51, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

text: It doesn't seem like a decent source if that's what you're saying. Thegryseone (talk) 03:59, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: This Article Needs Some Reliable Sources

message: Thegryseone! I really admire you taking the time and effort to remove all the unsourced nonsense from this article. You recently removed this sentence:
The zone in which Buffalonian English is found is a region extending to Buffalo on the west, Rochester on the east, Lake Ontario to the north, and Bradford, Pennsylvania to the south and roughly corresponds to the radio and television broadcast market of Buffalo.
with the comment "Buffalo is in the much larger Inland North region; sorry." This is certainly true, but it doesn't make the removed sentence false; there are other features of Buffalo English apart from the Northern Cities Shift and other Inland North features. For instance, you could define the Buffalo dialect area as the sub-region of the Inland North where pop is used instead of soda (excluding New York east of Rochester) and the word elementary is pronounced with secondary stress on the penultimate syllable (excluding, as far as I know, the Inland North west of Pennsylvania), and you'd arrive at exactly the area described in that sentence.
I'm not saying you were wrong to delete it, as it is unsourced and/or original research; but I think it's true, and it could go back in if we find a proper source; there is a smaller region that shares more linguistic traits with Buffalo than the Inland North as a whole. AJD (talk) 00:18, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I'll accept constructive criticism.  Thanks for explaining yourself.  I respect you for being a bonafide linguist; however, pop is used throughout the Inland North (with the notable exception of the Milwaukee area and other parts of Wisconsin).  I guess what you're saying is that in the other parts of the Inland North where pop is used as the generic name for a soft drink, elementary is pronounced the usual way; thus, the Buffalo dialect area is the only place where both of these features can be found, not just one of them.  Keep in mind, though, that with this new definition, it needs to be made clear that neither one of those features is unique to Buffalo English.  What's unique is that they are found side by side.  That definition is a bit more complex than some. Thegryseone (talk) 01:44, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Another problem with that sentence is that it was implying that TV and radio influence the way people speak, which you and I know is not true. Thegryseone (talk) 01:49, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

text: Wikipedia is about Verifiability, not truth. If you disagree with something you must find reliable sources to back up your claims. --Pwnage8 (talk) 02:49, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Ok, how about that one of the sources is, well, almost 10 years old, written by someone who " left the Niagara Frontier (for a second time) at the end of 1996".  If I post a random web page, does it now become a source just like the "Guide to Buffalo English", which is the only source that mentions personification (the second page, is a pointer to the guide page).  I would say that it's a totally valid arugment that I've lived my life 'near' Buffalo, and not specifically 'in' Buffalo, but in that same vein, something that was last updated almost 10 years ago is not much of a source for something that's as fluid as language.  Doubley so when it's the only source of some of the information. Again, I'm just throwing it out there, as a Wikipedia reader, not as an editor.  Also, if the article for Buffalo NY can't even be bothered to point to this page, what's the point of the page? 69.207.47.45 (talk) 03:46, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

text: It's certainly not that uncommon. During the time I lived there I heard a lot of superfluous "there" in sentences. More common in working-class people. Daniel Case (talk) 03:22, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I believe you, and I have heard some of this stuff in the Midwest as well.  However, Wikipedia is all about reliable sources.  You, I and everyone else have to back up our claims, as Pwner was saying.  I think the most salient features of Buffalo speech aren't unique to Buffalo, but instead they are found throughout the Inland North. Thegryseone (talk) 03:54, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Just so we don't get it twisted, I'm not out to "pwn" other editors ;) I've had two incidents in the last two months where my name has rubbed people the wrong way, one of them with another contributor to this page. I've never had this problem before, and I'll probably have to put a disclaimer on my page like Keeper76, because I don't want any negative perceptions spreading. Now, greysone, I'm sorry if I rubbed you the wrong way at all. I was just looking out for the page, because I don't like it when articles are culled without any content being added. I was just wondering if you have anything else in mind for the page? --Pwnage8 (talk) 04:11, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

text: No, that's all right.  I was just being facetious, Pwnboy.  I didn't take any offense whatsoever.  I wouldn't care if this article disappeared.  Thegryseone (talk) 18:17, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: LOL "Pwnboy". I might just take it upon myself to add to the article then. --Pwnage8 (talk) 23:35, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Recent trimming 

message: Should there be reference to the way Buffalonians refer to freeways?  In Buffalo, people refer to the freeways as "The 290" or "the 33", similar to people in Los Angeles. Jzcrandall (talk) 02:22, 5 November 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: That was in there; I think it was taken out for lack of sourcing. Daniel Case (talk) 14:42, 5 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Referencing Freeways