nsTeam2RO, nsTeam2RW, nsTeam2_talkRO, nsTeam2_talkRW
13,254
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 195:
Line 195: + + + + + +
→To "Sir" or not to "Sir": I'm not English
:::: This confusion is just more evidence that the title is meaningless to most people. Philip claims to be outside England, but he is obviously some sort of anglophile who wants to draw attention to the British monarchy. He even uses British spellings. Newton's accomplishments stand on their own merit, and do need a sign of approval from some long-dead queen. [[User:RSchlafly|RSchlafly]] 00:00, 9 July 2007 (EDT)
:::: This confusion is just more evidence that the title is meaningless to most people. Philip claims to be outside England, but he is obviously some sort of anglophile who wants to draw attention to the British monarchy. He even uses British spellings. Newton's accomplishments stand on their own merit, and do need a sign of approval from some long-dead queen. [[User:RSchlafly|RSchlafly]] 00:00, 9 July 2007 (EDT)
:::::On the contrary, this is more evidence of your apparently-blinkered US-centric views. As can easily be seen from my user page, I am Australian, and I use ''Australian'' spelling. I don't just "claim" to be outside England, I '''am''' outside England, I've never been to England, and I have to go back about six generations to find ancestors (at least on the paternal line) who emigrated from England.
::::: Americans are not "most people"; just because it is meaningless to you and to who knows how many other Americans (but clearly not all; most others debating this point are American) doesn't mean that it is meaningless to "most people".
::::: If you are at liberty to claim that I am some sort of Anglophile, then I guess that I am at liberty to claim that you are an Anglophobe who wants to denigrate the British monarchy.
::::: Now, the majority of editors debating this are clearly on the side of including the title, and you have not advanced much in the way of a reason to oppose it, other than subjective claims such as it being "meaningless", so can we just let this issue go and accept that the majority have spoken?
::::: [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 02:17, 9 July 2007 (EDT)
==Changed Leibniz calculus dispute statement==
==Changed Leibniz calculus dispute statement==