Template talk:User en-us-N

Category:User en-us-N, Category:User en-us, Category:User en-uk-N, Category:User en-uk
I think we should not encourage this sort of hair-splitting in Babel boxes. English is English, if a user has something to say about their particular idiolect, they should probably do it in prose, because I doubt that differences between dialects can be meaningfully captured by pigeonholing them into a simplistic "British or American" dichotomy. I doubt any speaker actually speaks "pure" British or "pure" American dialect. And it does not even cover all "native" varieties of English.

In other words, this is not very useful, it makes browsing categories harder, it is a maintenance burden and a fodder for nationalistic splinters, which we generally tend to discourage. (Well, except in the logo.) — Keφr 13:04, 13 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Also, a stupid typo I see on one of the templates.
 * "These users are native speakers of British English." Ready Steady Yeti (talk) 21:15, 19 June 2014 (UTC)


 * I have changed "these users..." to "this user..." to match the rest. Equinox ◑ 19:59, 24 June 2014 (UTC)


 * Probably delete: I agree that this seems to reflect a them-and-us false dichotomy between UK and US. Equinox ◑ 19:59, 24 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Also, the other templates are bad. They word it incorrectly. "This user speaks English (American)" instead of "This user speaks American English at a native level." Rædi Stædi Yæti  {- skriv til mig -} 20:45, 24 June 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep: So Kephir gets to decide what users get to call themselves now? The only reason a userbox should be deleted is if it is offensive.  This isn't offensive, so keep it. Pur ple back pack 89   03:15, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
 * The very existence of this discussion contradicts your childish personal remark. I would have just speedied it if I thought so. A userbox should be deleted if it is not expressly allowed by WT:USER, so not only because it is offensive. Also, offensive to whom? Nationalism offends me.
 * Is that supposed to anger me or what? It fails. But if you want to spend your time here attempting to aggravate everyone who disagrees with you, as you have been doing pretty much all the time in recent months, we have tools to address that. — Keφr 06:16, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
 * I vehemently disagree with the user guidelines. I think users should be allowed to post whatever they damn well please in their user pages, including non-Babel userboxes.  And just because you don't like that I voted keep on something you want deleted is not reason enough to block me, sorry. Pur ple back pack 89   14:02, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
 * I have no problem with people disagreeing with me. I think your disagreement has little merit, but whatever. You voted "keep", fine. You are bloody entitled to do so. I do have a problem with turning every dispute into "this-and-that user acts purely on their whim and is evil" and a "ha ha ha, you can't block me you stupid admins" attitude. Though frankly, given your track record at w:simple:, I doubt you can understand any of that. End of topic. — Keφr 15:04, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Look, it seems to me that there are some things on this project that are motivated by personal likes and dislikes rather than actually being a good idea. Your silly little block proposal last month was one of those.  Not having userboxes is another.  Is having a bunch of non-language-related user boxes detrimental in any way to Wiktionary?  No!  So let users have all the userboxes they want!  And, even under the present guidelines, there's not really a policy basis for deleting this.  It appears that a significant portion of this nominated was that seeing this template used struck a discordant note with you. Pur ple back <font color="#CC33CC">pack <font color="FFBB00">89   17:17, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
 * (Surprisingly) I agree with Purplebackpack89: keep templates (not necessarily the categories). People should be able to use whatever Babel boxes they want, even if they want to say they speak Serbian rather than Serbo-Croatian. --WikiTiki89 14:23, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep templates, but delete categories. (And have the templates function as duplicates of etc.) The former allow people to identify as they prefer, which should be acceptable as long as it does not delve into obfuscation; the latter are for organizatory purposes such as being able to find people speaking a given language, and should not be fragmented into units smaller than languages. (Something along the lines of w:Template:User_Mixed_English might be handy too.) --Tropylium (talk) 20:04, 27 January 2015 (UTC)


 * Weak keep, unless someone knows a better way to categorise users by dialect (the Serbian/Croatian example WikiTiki89 gives is a good example of one case where it might be useful, and I can also imagine that there are times when it would be helpful to find e.g. Swiss German speakers or Brazilian Portuguese speakers). I can see a degree of value in these templates, even if UK/US is a false dichotomy. A fair few "I've never heard of this" RFVs/RFDs end up being about terms that are simply only used on one side of the Atlantic. However, these templates should automatically categorise people into Category:User en as well as Category:User en-uk, and Category:User en-uk-N, Category:User en-us-N‎ and Category:User en-uk-4 are simply meaningless (what's a "near-native" British English speaker?) and should be deleted. Smurrayinchester (talk) 08:50, 13 February 2015 (UTC)
 * A near-native British English speaker is someone who speaks British English at a near-native level. —CodeCat 12:41, 13 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep templates and categories. Add some more for English varieties like ANZ, Indian, etc. That they would have few members would seem to make them more valuable, not less. DCDuring TALK 13:36, 13 February 2015 (UTC)


 * How much granularity do we want? Should/do we have a template for AAVE? Northeast New South Wales? Lancashire? Weak delete. If kept, these should feed into the standard language categories (e.g. "Serbian" should put users into the "Serbo-Croatian" category, "British English" into the "English" category, etc), regardless of whether or not they also put users into subcategories like Category:User en-uk. - -sche (discuss) 01:57, 21 May 2015 (UTC)


 * Yes, if there are AAVE speakers on Wiktionary, it would be incredibly useful in some situations to be able to find them.--Prosfilaes (talk) 08:29, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
 * No, not Kephir gets to decide what we keep and what we delete. That's why we're discussing it here. We decide by discussing it. I just don't care to be honest. Renard Migrant (talk) 13:55, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
 * I tend to agree with Prosfilaes. If a user wants a userbox that does a particular thing, and that particular thing isn't offensive, we should allow that userbox to be created.  Userboxes are for users to self-identify, and if a particular user's self-identity is a regional dialect, I don't see the harm in them being there.  As for Renard Migrant's comment, it troubled me then (as now) that the initial deletion rationale seemed to be one of dislike for the division, rather than one of actual policy violation. <font face="Verdana"><font color="#3A003A">Pur <font color="#800080">ple <font color="#991C99">back <font color="#CC33CC">pack <font color="FFBB00">89   15:30, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Nonetheless, WT:UBV forbids non-Babel userboxes. That's policy. (Presumably dialects are permitted by that policy, but not any old userbox.) &#x200b;—msh210℠ (talk) 20:01, 9 October 2015 (UTC)
 * It's a silly policy that unnecessarily restricts users and should be dispensed with. Also, why hasn't this been archived?  It was closed as keep four months ago. <font face="Verdana"><font color="#3A003A">Pur <font color="#800080">ple <font color="#991C99">back <font color="#CC33CC">pack <font color="FFBB00">89   22:52, 9 October 2015 (UTC)
 * If you wish to raise a vote to undo UBV, you're of course welcome to (though I strongly recommend you raise the issue in the BP first); but, for now, it's policy. As to this discussion, I think we archive only a week after the last discussion therein, no? The comment I'm now posting pushes that back until a week hence. &#x200b;—msh210℠ (talk) 15:38, 12 October 2015 (UTC)

It's time to close this. It's been nearly a year and there's not enough support to delete it, so it should be closed as no consensus. <font face="Verdana"><font color="#3A003A">Pur <font color="#800080">ple <font color="#991C99">back <font color="#CC33CC">pack <font color="FFBB00">89  14:07, 26 May 2015 (UTC) Nowikified. &#x200b;—msh210℠ (talk) 20:01, 9 October 2015 (UTC)


 * OK, so I call it kept. Let's continue being productive. --Type56op9 (talk) 23:16, 2 June 2015 (UTC)