User talk:Surtalnar

Welcome!

Hello, Surtalnar, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place  before the question. Again, welcome! 220  of  Borg 12:57, 12 November 2011 (UTC)
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * Tutorial
 * How to edit a page and How to develop articles
 * How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
 * Manual of Style

Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but your recent edit removed content from Slavic Neopaganism‎. When removing content, please specify a reason in the edit summary and discuss edits that are likely to be controversial on the article's talk page. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the content has been restored, as you can see from the [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Slavic_Neopaganism&action=history page history]. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia, and if you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you.220  of  Borg 12:57, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

January 2013
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a message letting you know that one of your recent edits has been undone by an automated computer program called ClueBot NG.


 * ClueBot NG makes very few mistakes, but it does happen. If you believe the change you made was constructive, please read about it, [ report it here], remove this message from your talk page, and then make the edit again.
 * For help, take a look at the introduction.
 * The following is the log entry regarding this message: Dresden was changed by Surtalnar (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.867488 on 2013-01-16T15:40:39+00:00 . Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 15:40, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

ENGVAR
Hi! I noticed you've been converting some American English words to Commonwealth English in order to ensure a single standard form within an article. I think a few times you've done that in articles that started in American English, like Cologne, which as far as I can see was started in American English. I've been undoing several of your edits, but if you notice a mistake, please don't hesitate to let me know. Red Slash 01:02, 3 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Cologne is a subentity of the European Union, so in the case of dispute the British English spelling should be preferred. (see http://ec.europa.eu/translation/english/guidelines/documents/styleguide_english_dgt_en.pdf for the English spelling guidelines in the European Union) The article wasn't started in American English. The revision shown uses a mixed spelling -- there are words like harbour or humour in it. --Surtalnar (talk) 07:02, 3 June 2013 (UTC)
 * It would make sense for there to be a guideline on this stuff, right? In fact, there is. Give WP:TIES a read for me, tell me what you think. Red Slash 07:08, 3 June 2013 (UTC)
 * If we look at Cologne, at the beginning a mixed spelling was used. Now there is a dispute. We have to decide between U.K. spelling and U.S. spelling. In this case the spelling used in the European Union is preferred, because the city lies in the EU, not in the United States. --Surtalnar (talk) 07:13, 3 June 2013 (UTC)
 * No, that is not a reason that has any basis in policy or guidelines. Now, you could make an argument that the original spelling was indeed (mostly) British spelling. I just took a cursory look through it earlier and saw the word "center" in the first paragraph; you may be right on that one particular one (Cologne). Again, belonging to the European Union means jack squat, read the guideline I linked to and WP:RETAIN. Red Slash 07:27, 3 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Note especially the word "national" in the phrase "national ties". Red Slash 07:27, 3 June 2013 (UTC)
 * (I do however pass on my thanks for that cool document you posted. Fascinating, truly interesting stuff. I don't think it's relevant, but it's a great read for an amateur translator!) Red Slash 07:34, 3 June 2013 (UTC)


 * The true test would be what the very first use of any term spelled differently in different forms of English, but the article is old enough we don't have the history to provide the answer. As such, the predominate one should be used. By the way, there is no such thing as "Commonwealth English". There are things that, for example, Canada and Australia share with the US rather than the UK. And as stated by Red Slash, non-English-speaking countries (EU or not) do not have strong national ties to one version of English or another. Such articles should retain the version used at the article's creation. -Rrius (talk) 07:37, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

Edit warring
You are currently engaged in an edit war across multiple articles that appears to be based on a lack of understanding on your part of the WP:ENGVAR policy. If you do not cease edit warring, you may be blocked. You would be better served to read the policy, then engage in a discussion. -Rrius (talk) 08:08, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

February 2016
Hello, I'm B.Lameira. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Arabic has been undone because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. B.Lameira (talk) 22:24, 18 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Please look at the sources, before you edit. --Surtalnar (talk) 02:33, 19 February 2016 (UTC)