Talk:Preston Ware

British English v's American English

Wikipedia:ENGVAR "Edit warring over optional styles is unacceptable. If an article has been stable in a given style, it should not be converted without a reason that goes beyond mere choice of style. When it is unclear whether an article has been stable, defer to the style used by the first major contributor." The first major contributor in this case made it in British English. ChessCreator (talk) 18:25, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

• I would normally agree with you but in this case, as Ware was American, I think that's a valid reason to convert. It's just unfortunate that chess has two very common words (defence and centre) which are spelt differently! Pawnkingthree (talk) 10:02, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

If you agree that American article should have the American 'Defense' then please agree that an English article has the English 'Defence'. While it remains unclear then this article will defer to the style used by the first major contributor as given above. ChessCreator (talk) 13:53, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Of course. Pawnkingthree (talk) 14:10, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

• ChessCreator, I am asking you to stop. You are the one doing the edit warring. WP:ENGVAR says that subjects with strong national ties should use the appropriate variety of English. American bio, American English. If we were talking about the Sicilian Defence it wouldn't matter much, but the Ware Defense is named for Preston Ware Jr, an American. You moved St. George Defense to St. George Defence and changed the spelling in that article saying it was "insulting". Do you apply your own standards to yourself? The St. George move was good for the same reason that this article should use American spellings. Your unilateral decision to change the established spelling in the stable articles Open Game, Closed Game, etc. betrays your agenda. Quale (talk) 18:05, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

I think your comments are well wide of the mark and lacking in understanding of the situation but in the interests of peace I will leave it for now and attempt to reply to in full tomorrow and hopefully make things more understandable. ChessCreator (talk) 00:24, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

I decided against answering the above here because most of it is off topic, it is in part a personal insult and because of this ChessCreator (talk) 14:08, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

• Regarding the on topic discussion all I can do it try and clarify again, I did after all create this section to explain.

WP:ENGVAR says about topics with strong national ties, saying use the appropriate variety of English for that nation. In this case change it to American spelling.

In conflict with that we have WP:MOS and WP:ENGLISH#Include_alternatives, which have both been used by others here to maintain then the either spelling is acceptable and don't change it. So in this case leave it as British English spelling.

However to add final clarity WP:ENGVAR also says 'when it is unclear whether an article has been stable, defer to the style used by the first major contributor.' In this case the original spelling was in British English spelling.

Which is why I opened this talk with the sentence. WP:ENGVAR "Edit warring over optional styles is unacceptable. If an article has been stable in a given style, it should not be converted without a reason that goes beyond mere choice of style. When it is unclear whether an article has been stable, defer to the style used by the first major contributor." The first major contributor in this case is made in British English.

So that's what the article should be in. I hope that clears things up. ChessCreator (talk) 14:08, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Wow, you really are a stubborn, quarrelsome editor. Your unilateral attempt to change "Notes" sections to "Footnotes" is another example of this. I'm sorry that English Defense wasn't moved to use UK spelling as I and most other people who commented think it should be, but trying to retaliate here is a WP:POINT violation on your part. It's a shame, because you are smart and have a lot to contribute, but edits like [1], [2], [3], [4], [5], [6], [7], [8], don't reflect well on you. You'll notice above that the only other person to comment here agreed that American English spellings are appropriate for the biography of an American. For the same reason I would expect that Howard Staunton would use British English and Bobby Fischer would use American English regardless of what the creator of those articles used. If not, then deviations in those articles should be fixed. Quale (talk) 15:29, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Repeating again:I decided against answering the above here because most of it is off topic, it is in part a personal insult and because of this. ChessCreator (talk) 18:12, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Year of Death

Some articles have 1891, however this one has 1890 ChessCreator (talk) 23:26, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

• I haven't seen any references that give 1891. (The three I added to the article say 1890.) Which refs give 1891? Quale (talk) 18:07, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
• The Ware Opening and Corn Stalk Defence previously had (1821–1891) as does this external link, although it appears it originated from wikipedia anyway. From a history search the earliest wikipedia reference is here from May 2005. If that was a typo or an error, then good. ChessCreator (talk) 20:26, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Hmm, the dreaded external link that originally used wikipedia as a reference. Thanks for checking this out. It seems safe to leave it at 1890 for now. Gaige lists Ware's death certificate as a reference. Quale (talk) 20:40, 22 February 2008 (UTC)