Misplaced Pages

User talk:Roux

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Keystoneridin (talk | contribs) at 21:47, 7 July 2012 (→Okay, I get it.: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Revision as of 21:47, 7 July 2012 by Keystoneridin (talk | contribs) (→Okay, I get it.: new section)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)


roux

main • talk • dashboard • sandbox • edits • email • refresh
archiving performed by cluebot every five days // online


talk archives
2008 / apr-aug / a / s / o / n / d
2009 / j / f / m / a / m / j / j / a / s / o / n / d
2010 / j / f / m / a / m / j / j / a / s / o / n / d
2011 / j / f / m / a / m / j / j / a / s / o / n / d
2012 / j / f / m / a / m / j / j / a / s / o / n / d

Which/that

I am pleased that you reverted from 'that' to 'which' on the Battle of Waterloo article. The spurious convention, often slavishly applied in the USA, insisting that 'which' is only used in conjuction with a comma is stifling good expression in English. I particularly despise journal editors/proofreaders who change my use of 'which' to 'that'. Urselius (talk) 07:10, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

Okay, I get it.

Enough is enough. I realize you are angry about the article, fine. But posting to intervene on other communications which do not concern you IS harassment. Please do stop. This is getting ridiculous.Keystoneridin (speak) 21:47, 7 July 2012 (UTC)