Talk:SR1

Not
Firstly if we're talking Aussie English, why instead of ? But, that issue aside, what's going on here?


 * The vowel represented by "ae" in "aesthetic" is not but
 * The vowel represented by "ea" in "early" is not but
 * The vowel represented by "oe" in "foetus" is not but

J IM ptalk·cont 06:44, 13 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Thanks for pointing that out. They'v been removed. ~Asarlaí 16:30, 13 October 2011 (UTC)

enuff
While most spelling reforms drop the double letters, the alt spelling is often with them. Thus, enuff is often found and is a good step away from enough. BTW, thoro is another that is alreddy found. --AnWulf ... Wes þu hal! (talk) 15:55, 2 September 2012 (UTC)

misleading article
A quick internet search reveals this reform was actually never widely used in Australia. http://english.stackexchange.com/questions/33176/australians-and-sr1 Charizardpal (talk) 09:00, 16 November 2012 (UTC) I agree with this statement, an editor has tried to use a partisan English writers' 30 year old statement that the system was widely used in Australia. Apart from this single source, there is no evidence of use beyond perhaps a fringe publications. I have removed the poorly supported statement.Brunswicknic (talk) 10:26, 13 January 2015 (UTC)