User talk:Jackrickenbacker

why?
Can you please explain why you reverted my edit? -- GB fan 17:54, 22 December 2014 (UTC)

I wasn't 100% sure why you changed my edit from dialog to dialogue. I think dialogue is a better version of the word because it is more common. Is there a specific reason you undid mine? Jackrickenbacker (talk) 17:57, 22 December 2014 (UTC)Jackrickenbacker
 * Dialogue is more common in British English and dialog is more common in American English. Since this is an article about an American subject we should be using the American spelling of words.  If you click on the link I left in my edit summary, WP:ENGVAR, you will see what the Manual of style says about variations of English.  -- GB fan 18:05, 22 December 2014 (UTC)

I understand that dialog is an American variant of the word dialogue, but I've seen nothing in my search that indicates it is more common or proper. I think until it is established to the degree that color and colour are, it should stay as dialogue. Jackrickenbacker (talk) 18:09, 22 December 2014 (UTC)Jackrickebacker

In the wiki manual of style it shows "dialogue" first, then dialog. Also, it has (conversation) after dialogue and (text) after dialog, and I think the former is more appropriate here. Jackrickenbacker (talk) 18:12, 22 December 2014 (UTC)Jackrickenbacker

Here's a link to the chart: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Spelling


 * Actually, according to Merriam-Webster, Jack's edit seems to bes correct: dialogue is preferred (dialog isn't even listed, but redirects to dialogue.) "Dialog box" is listed, in the context of computer applications. I take MW to be representative of American English, and it generally notes British variants. It says absolutely nothing about British variant, so it seems to contradict the idea that dialogue is British. So when we Americans write "dialog", we're not being American, but just lazy (or computer nerds.) Does the OED say different? JustinTime55 (talk) 19:54, 22 December 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 27
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Jessica Lynch, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Patrick Miller. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:15, 27 February 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
Hi, You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:05, 24 November 2015 (UTC)