Talk:Churchill, Oxfordshire

You'd expect someone called Mel Etitis ( &Mu;&epsilon;&lambda; &Epsilon;&tau;&eta;&tau;&eta;&sigmaf; ) to understand what was wrong with "monolith of stone". Complete the following syllogism: If philosophy depends on precise use of language... Jacquerie27 16:51, 3 Feb 2005 (UTC)


 * Well, the monolith wasn't found in the nearby wood, it's made of stone found in the nearby wood &mdash; hence what I wrote. Most of Jacaquarie27's changes (as with the others he or she has made in his or her mission to discover and edit – with or without snide remarks – my pages, following our disagreement on Votes for deletion/Jewish ethnocentrism) are merely matters of personal preference as to style; some are genuinely useful; some assume that I'm semi-literate, and thus fail to notice that the change distorts my meaning, the original wording having been carefully chosen (as with the monolith example, &quot;the jumble of imitations&quot;, not of different architectural styles), and the windows of the church being based on not copies of Oxford-College windows.  I await with breathless excitement the next instalment of this obsessive Wikistalking. Mel Etitis ( &Mu;&epsilon;&lambda; &Epsilon;&tau;&eta;&tau;&eta;&sigmaf; ) 19:02, 3 Feb 2005 (UTC)


 * ...some are genuinely useful... Thanks. I'm not arguing about any of the rest: you're too verbose and know too little about English usage, so I can only repeat my previous advice: read The Guardian less and George Orwell more. ("...obsessive Wikistalking" is another example of tautology, btw.) Jacquerie27 19:13, 3 Feb 2005 (UTC)