Cannabis Ruderalis


For any version listed below, click on its date to view it. For more help, see Help:Page history and Help:Edit summary. (cur) = difference from current version, (prev) = difference from preceding version, m = minor edit, → = section edit, ← = automatic edit summary

(newest | oldest) View (newer 775 | ) (20 | 50 | 100 | 250 | 500)

6 June 2024

26 May 2024

25 May 2024

23 May 2024

20 May 2024

30 April 2024

29 April 2024

28 April 2024

24 April 2024

20 March 2024

9 March 2024

14 February 2024

24 January 2024

23 January 2024

13 January 2024

11 January 2024

4 December 2023

2 December 2023

4 November 2023

28 October 2023

27 October 2023

25 October 2023

  • curprev 20:0420:04, 25 October 2023IMakeSuggestionsInTheTalkPage talk contribs 98,784 bytes −2,018 The section "In other languages" featured only one other language, German. The section is based on questionable sources and is written as if "dey/dem" was acceptable to use in the standard variation of the language, and it fails to clarify that. undo Tag: section blanking

23 October 2023

  • curprev 02:0802:08, 23 October 2023Whyiseverythingalreadyused talk contribs 100,802 bytes +12 Non-binary people are not always neither male nor female, e.g. demiboys partially identify as male, but not completely and vice versa for demigirls, they can also identify as both male and female, e.g. bigender and pangender people undo Tags: Visual edit Mobile edit Mobile web edit

22 October 2023

20 September 2023

19 September 2023

10 September 2023

8 September 2023

5 September 2023

31 August 2023

29 August 2023

27 August 2023

20 August 2023

18 August 2023

10 August 2023

3 August 2023

30 July 2023

28 July 2023

  • curprev 14:0014:00, 28 July 2023Woodroar talk contribs 99,642 bytes 0 updating to 2016 source undo
  • curprev 10:3910:39, 28 July 202392.236.249.33 talk 99,642 bytes +15 Changed every 'A/a' in the table to 'My/my'. It being unusual for sentences in the table to start using 'a' rather than 'my' when it reaches the row for singular they, generic he and it. undo

27 July 2023

26 July 2023

25 July 2023

23 July 2023

15 June 2023

1 June 2023

23 May 2023

21 May 2023

10 May 2023

9 May 2023

4 May 2023

27 April 2023

26 April 2023

17 April 2023

15 April 2023

13 April 2023

4 April 2023

2 April 2023

28 March 2023

25 March 2023

18 March 2023

16 March 2023

11 March 2023

24 February 2023

13 February 2023

  • curprev 15:5215:52, 13 February 2023CapnZapp talk contribs 97,144 bytes +62 →‎See also: if you're going to link, please use the link that causes the least surprise to the reader. You gave no clue that "S/he" would lead to this article. (Please note: this edit does not mean I endorse the inclusion; only that if we are to include it, we don't link to a possibly surprising redirect) undo
  • curprev 11:0611:06, 13 February 2023Robertm25 talk contribsm 97,082 bytes +10 →‎See also: Add link to S/he - should there be a reference in the article? undo Tags: Mobile edit Mobile app edit Android app edit

9 February 2023

7 February 2023

1 February 2023

31 January 2023

25 January 2023

15 January 2023

14 January 2023

12 January 2023

1 January 2023

27 December 2022

  • curprev 01:4901:49, 27 December 2022Kent Dominic talk contribs 96,804 bytes +704 Restoring edit 1106999640 by Crossroads for the rationale previously given, i.e.: "Not a valid reason to remove completely. Per WP:NPOV, we include competing points of view". That rationale resists labeling the cited material as reflecting so-called "marginal points of view" since the cited source was recently published and representative of a traditional (albeit waning) POV that needs inclusion if for no other reason than to chronicle change over time. undo
  • curprev 01:2501:25, 27 December 2022Kent Dominic talk contribs 96,100 bytes +24 Limiting the link to language use rather than the overall movement. undo

26 December 2022

22 December 2022

20 December 2022

13 December 2022

11 November 2022

2 November 2022

29 October 2022

20 October 2022

15 October 2022

8 October 2022

3 October 2022

29 September 2022

24 September 2022

21 September 2022

18 September 2022

9 September 2022

30 August 2022

27 August 2022

26 August 2022

14 August 2022

13 August 2022

12 August 2022

8 August 2022

5 August 2022

4 August 2022

30 July 2022

21 July 2022

  • curprev 04:2004:20, 21 July 2022MusikBot II talk contribsm 96,720 bytes +17 Adding missing protection template (more info) undo Tag: Reverted
  • curprev 04:0904:09, 21 July 2022Ohnoitsjamie talk contribsm 96,703 bytes 0 Protected "Singular they": Persistent block evasion ([Edit=Require autoconfirmed or confirmed access] (expires 04:09, 28 July 2022 (UTC)) [Move=Require autoconfirmed or confirmed access] (expires 04:09, 28 July 2022 (UTC))) undo
  • curprev 04:0904:09, 21 July 2022Ohnoitsjamie talk contribsm 96,703 bytes −110 Reverted edits by 103.105.28.161 (talk) to last version by Ohnoitsjamie Tag: Rollback
  • curprev 04:0804:08, 21 July 2022103.105.28.161 talk 96,813 bytes +110 (edit summary removed) Tags: Reverted Possible vandalism
  • curprev 04:0604:06, 21 July 2022Ohnoitsjamie talk contribsm 96,703 bytes +332 Reverted edits by 36.71.80.162 (talk) to last version by Ohnoitsjamie Tag: Rollback
  • curprev 04:0504:05, 21 July 202236.71.80.162 talk 96,371 bytes −332 (edit summary removed) Tags: Reverted Possible vandalism
  • curprev 04:0204:02, 21 July 2022Ohnoitsjamie talk contribsm 96,703 bytes −163 Reverted edits by 125.167.50.136 (talk) to last version by Ohnoitsjamie Tag: Rollback
  • curprev 04:0004:00, 21 July 2022125.167.50.136 talk 96,866 bytes +163 (edit summary removed) Tags: Undo Reverted Possible vandalism
  • curprev 03:5903:59, 21 July 2022Ohnoitsjamie talk contribsm 96,703 bytes −163 Reverted edits by 180.244.136.55 (talk) to last version by Ohnoitsjamie Tags: Rollback Reverted
  • curprev 03:5803:58, 21 July 2022180.244.136.55 talk 96,866 bytes +163 (edit summary removed) Tag: Reverted
  • curprev 03:5303:53, 21 July 2022Ohnoitsjamie talk contribsm 96,703 bytes −172 Reverted edits by 112.215.240.16 (talk) to last version by Ohnoitsjamie Tag: Rollback
  • curprev 03:5003:50, 21 July 2022112.215.240.16 talk 96,875 bytes +172 (edit summary removed) Tag: Reverted
  • curprev 03:4703:47, 21 July 2022Ohnoitsjamie talk contribsm 96,703 bytes −171 Reverted edits by 180.214.233.14 (talk) to last version by Ohnoitsjamie Tag: Rollback
  • curprev 03:4403:44, 21 July 2022180.214.233.14 talk 96,874 bytes +171 (edit summary removed) Tags: Undo Reverted
  • curprev 03:4003:40, 21 July 2022Ohnoitsjamie talk contribsm 96,703 bytes −171 Reverted edits by 103.105.27.78 (talk) to last version by InvadingInvader Tags: Rollback Reverted
  • curprev 03:3303:33, 21 July 2022103.105.27.78 talk 96,874 bytes +171 (edit summary removed) Tag: Reverted
  • curprev 03:3103:31, 21 July 2022InvadingInvader talk contribs 96,703 bytes −75 Reverting edit(s) by 103.105.27.78 (talk) to rev. 1099500654 by InvadingInvader: Disruptive editing (RW 16.1) Tags: RW Undo
  • curprev 03:3103:31, 21 July 2022103.105.27.78 talk 96,778 bytes +75 (edit summary removed) Tags: Undo Reverted
  • curprev 03:2703:27, 21 July 2022InvadingInvader talk contribs 96,703 bytes −75 Reverting edit(s) by 103.105.27.78 (talk) to rev. 1099407407 by Mvqr: Disruptive editing (RW 16.1) Tags: RW Undo Reverted
  • curprev 03:2503:25, 21 July 2022103.105.27.78 talk 96,778 bytes +75 (edit summary removed) Tag: Reverted

20 July 2022

16 July 2022

12 July 2022

4 July 2022

1 July 2022

26 June 2022

24 June 2022

9 June 2022

6 June 2022

21 May 2022

19 May 2022

15 May 2022

14 May 2022

13 May 2022

30 April 2022

23 April 2022

22 April 2022

7 April 2022

8 March 2022

17 February 2022

16 February 2022

14 February 2022

12 February 2022

9 February 2022

  • curprev 07:3207:32, 9 February 2022-sche talk contribs 96,061 bytes −516 drop, this is only marginally relevant to singular they, it's most about Thon (pronoun), and it's never mentioned in the body, so per WP:LEAD it shouldn't be in (and is WP:UNDUE and off-topic in) the lead. could be moved to the body if reworded to focus more on the connection to / relevance of singular they, perhaps. undo Tag: Manual revert

6 February 2022

5 February 2022

4 February 2022

3 February 2022

31 January 2022

26 January 2022

  • curprev 21:0121:01, 26 January 2022Woodroar talk contribs 96,090 bytes −872 restoring status quo undo Tag: Manual revert
  • curprev 20:5720:57, 26 January 2022Kent Dominic talk contribs 96,962 bytes −1 Removed stray parenthesis. Note: The lead is by no means my idea of a finished product. Please discuss on the talk page before making changes. undo Tag: Reverted
  • curprev 20:4120:41, 26 January 2022Kent Dominic talk contribs 96,963 bytes +596 Undid revision 1068116994 by talk) C Talk Page B43RR Notice: It should be clear that, absent this edit, the article doesn't immediately distinguish singular versus plural sense of "they". Moreover, the article hadn't previously defined "plural" to give a proper frame of reference. As for the "sense" of plural versus singular, Bjorkman calls it "pronominal binding and coreference." Tha idiomatic equivalent of "sense" is unfit for the article. undo Tag: Reverted
  • curprev 18:4118:41, 26 January 2022Newimpartial talk contribs 96,367 bytes −540 Undid revision 1068115174 by Kent Dominic (talk)The stable text here also correlates "use" with "they". Please don't edit war: your reading of Bjorkman here seems like textbook WP:OR undo Tags: Undo Reverted
  • curprev 18:2718:27, 26 January 2022Kent Dominic talk contribs 96,907 bytes +540 Undid revision 1068108123 by (talk) The article's title properly includes "they" in italics as the salient pronoun under discussion. "Singular" and "plural" are universally understood sense] of pronominal number. Bjorkman correlates "use" to the word "they," not to "singular they," as a phrase atypical of linguistic parlance. Bjorkman indeed refers to the lexical item as the "so-called singular they in Modern English" and italicizes "they" for emphasis. undo Tags: Undo Reverted
  • curprev 17:4217:42, 26 January 2022Newimpartial talk contribs 96,367 bytes −540 Restored revision 1068004717 by -sche (talk): Subsequent edits seem to represent OR nitpicking; they are not obviously supported by sources in the article, and are opposed e.g. by Bjorkman (who uses "use", not "sense") undo Tags: Twinkle Undo Reverted
  • curprev 16:5916:59, 26 January 2022Mx. Granger talk contribs 96,907 bytes −11 not clear what the word "recognized" adds here - though to be honest I prefer User:-sche's version of the sentence undo Tag: Reverted
  • curprev 14:3614:36, 26 January 2022Kent Dominic talk contribsm 96,918 bytes 0 Spelling remedy. undo Tag: Reverted
  • curprev 14:3514:35, 26 January 2022Kent Dominic talk contribs 96,918 bytes +4 Remedied a cut&paste snafu and reworded for concision. undo Tag: Reverted
  • curprev 14:2914:29, 26 January 2022Kent Dominic talk contribs 96,914 bytes +547 About: "pronominal sense;" i.e., "singular they" isn't a "pronoun" as the previous edit implies. It's a lexical item whose singular sense is sociolinguistically distinguishable from the plural sense of "they." In collquial usage of the "singular they" item, it's used simply as "they - rarely if ever "singular they" in day-to-day speech. I.e., in colloquial speech, no one says, "This is my friend, Jay. I met SINGULAR them at work." undo Tag: Reverted
  • curprev 06:0306:03, 26 January 2022-sche talk contribs 96,367 bytes −19 re last 4 edits / 2 editors: what about this? undo Tag: Reverted

25 January 2022

  • curprev 18:1418:14, 25 January 2022Kent Dominic talk contribs 96,386 bytes +18 "Colloquial use" was a ham-handed reference to the term itself, not to colloquial register. WP:MOS recommends against defining a lexical item as a "term," so I avoided that route. Yet, linguistically, no phrase can be properly construed as a "use," but "singular they" indeed is a lexical item in any case. undo Tag: Reverted
  • curprev 17:0517:05, 25 January 2022Mx. Granger talk contribs 96,368 bytes −28 partial revert - not limited to colloquial speech undo Tag: Reverted
  • curprev 15:3915:39, 25 January 2022Kent Dominic talk contribs 96,396 bytes +19 Grammar and precision: Remedied agglomeration of adjectives (i.e., "epicene singular") relating to "pronoun;" changed to "epicene pronoun for a singular referent." Whether usage in the manner discussed is singular per se versus contextually singular (i.e., by colloquial usage) is a matter of yet-unaddressed linguistic debate. undo Tag: Reverted
  • curprev 15:1915:19, 25 January 2022Kent Dominic talk contribs 96,377 bytes +287 Clarification: Adding linguistic parlance (with citation) to the lead definition. undo Tag: Reverted

12 January 2022

10 January 2022

7 January 2022

2 January 2022

11 December 2021

2 December 2021

27 November 2021

26 November 2021

  • curprev 09:1709:17, 26 November 2021CapnZapp talk contribs 95,266 bytes −637 →‎Regional preferences: the notability of these exceptions (or errors) smacks of OR. The mere fact the government hasn't been successfully consistent is not shown to be notable by these primary sources. Please find a reliable secondary source pointing them out if you want to reinstate them undo

17 November 2021

16 November 2021

15 November 2021

10 November 2021

25 October 2021

24 October 2021

14 October 2021

12 October 2021

7 October 2021

6 October 2021

29 September 2021

28 September 2021

20 September 2021

31 August 2021

30 August 2021

26 August 2021

24 August 2021

19 August 2021

14 August 2021

27 July 2021

20 July 2021

14 July 2021

30 June 2021

24 June 2021

23 June 2021

22 June 2021

18 June 2021

17 June 2021

16 June 2021

31 May 2021

24 May 2021

19 May 2021

13 May 2021

11 May 2021

9 May 2021

6 May 2021

4 May 2021

3 May 2021

30 April 2021

  • curprev 23:0723:07, 30 April 2021RSW 75 talk contribs 96,378 bytes +137 Possibly found a citation for "It is uncommon to use singular they instead of it for something other than a life form.". Possibly I would consider this a minor change.... undo Tag: Visual edit

27 April 2021

23 April 2021

18 April 2021

14 April 2021

6 April 2021

5 April 2021

31 March 2021

29 March 2021

28 March 2021

7 March 2021

6 February 2021

19 January 2021

16 January 2021

14 January 2021

11 January 2021

1 January 2021

27 December 2020

26 December 2020

  • curprev 23:5923:59, 26 December 2020Firejuggler86 talk contribs 97,546 bytes +238 No edit summary undo Tags: Reverted Mobile edit Mobile web edit Advanced mobile edit
  • curprev 23:5323:53, 26 December 2020Firejuggler86 talk contribs 97,308 bytes −157 1.) To say that a usage is largely colloquial and less appropriate for *formal* usage is not a 'controversial statement'. 2.) 2014 is more than sufficiently up-to-date regarding the subject matter of *grammar*; considering the usage being discussed has existed in English for SEVEN HUNDRED YEARS, calling a 6 year old source 'outdated' is preposterous undo Tags: Reverted Mobile edit Mobile web edit Advanced mobile edit
  • curprev 21:3321:33, 26 December 2020Monkbot talk contribsm 97,465 bytes +3 Task 18 (cosmetic): eval 116 templates: hyphenate params (3×); undo Tag: AWB

25 December 2020

  • curprev 03:2303:23, 25 December 2020Thepotatoman23 talk contribs 97,462 bytes −304 The 7th edition APA guidelines are more relevant than the 6th edition's. If the 6th edition's advise still needs to be included, it should be after saying what's in the 7th's. undo

19 December 2020

15 December 2020

10 December 2020

9 December 2020

1 December 2020

30 November 2020

23 November 2020

13 November 2020

12 November 2020

11 November 2020

23 October 2020

19 October 2020

7 October 2020

6 October 2020

  • curprev 23:5923:59, 6 October 2020BanyanClimber talk contribs 98,435 bytes +281 some changes undo Tags: Reverted Visual edit
  • curprev 23:3423:34, 6 October 2020BanyanClimber talk contribs 98,154 bytes −559 Undid revision 982229756 by CapnZapp (talk) Reverting on principle - Anyone can revert an edit that wasn't properly explained. Reverting an edit solely because someone accidentally tagged it "minor" not only doesn't explain your point, it also doesn't assume good faith. undo Tags: Undo Reverted Mobile edit Mobile web edit Advanced mobile edit
  • curprev 22:0222:02, 6 October 2020CapnZapp talk contribs 98,713 bytes +559 Undid revision 982224019 by Daveout (talk): reverting on principle - since your edit was undone your correct move is to start a talk page discussion, not edit war. Plus, your first edit was marked as a minor edit - it is inappropriate to mark significant or potentially controversial edits as minor, and I support BilCat's reversion on that ground alone undo Tags: Undo Reverted
  • curprev 21:1921:19, 6 October 2020BanyanClimber talk contribs 98,154 bytes −559 Undid revision 982210213 by BilCat (talk) Being accepted in "official contexts", and in "formal" "standard english" are basically the same thing; as for the popular usage, already covered by: "It has been employed in everyday English", for example. undo Tags: Undo Reverted Mobile edit Mobile web edit Advanced mobile edit
  • curprev 19:4919:49, 6 October 2020BilCat talk contribs 98,713 bytes +559 Undid revision 982204742 by Daveout (talk) first. mention is about common (informal) usage, and the second about standard (formal) usage undo Tags: Undo Reverted
  • curprev 19:1319:13, 6 October 2020BanyanClimber talk contribsm 98,154 bytes −559 removing redundancies. (it said 2 times that it is becoming more formally accepted, and 2 times that it receives criticism since its conception) undo Tags: Reverted Visual edit
  • curprev 03:1303:13, 6 October 2020Paul Erik talk contribsm 98,713 bytes +4,246 Reverted edits by 47.42.225.145 (talk) to last version by BilCat undo Tag: Rollback
  • curprev 03:0903:09, 6 October 202047.42.225.145 talk 94,467 bytes −4,246 It will further inform students and also future educators on the properties of the singular word “they” undo Tags: Reverted Mobile edit Mobile web edit

2 October 2020

1 October 2020

26 September 2020

23 September 2020

11 September 2020

8 September 2020

1 September 2020

31 August 2020

  • curprev 16:1016:10, 31 August 2020BilCat talk contribsm 98,539 bytes +618 Reverted - the lead is.a.summary of the article, and this is an important aspect of the debate undo Tag: Rollback
  • curprev 11:1611:16, 31 August 2020158.181.72.144 talk 97,921 bytes 0 No edit summary undo
  • curprev 11:1611:16, 31 August 2020158.181.72.144 talk 97,921 bytes −618 Removed the sentence "though many style guides continue to describe it as colloquial and less appropriate in formal writing" in the beginning, this may be discussed in the article below, but this is clearly outdated today and discussing peoples opinion and not neutral. undo Tag: references removed

29 August 2020

28 August 2020

21 August 2020

16 August 2020

29 July 2020

  • curprev 14:3814:38, 29 July 20202804:7f4:c782:115:c45b:c592:88d5:e2ea talk 98,166 bytes −5 changed father/mother examples to son/daughter examples for consistency with children/child examples. undo

27 July 2020

26 July 2020

23 July 2020

13 July 2020

29 June 2020

14 June 2020

4 June 2020

3 June 2020

28 May 2020

19 May 2020

8 May 2020

6 May 2020

  • curprev 01:2001:20, 6 May 2020Funcrunch talk contribs 97,205 bytes +1 Undid revision 955086062 by 2600:1012:B044:2FDA:13:DD59:3EA3:F1B5 (talk) No, "They are" is just as grammatical correct as "You are" which works for both singular and plural. undo Tag: Undo

5 May 2020

23 April 2020

21 April 2020

13 March 2020

8 March 2020

1 March 2020

29 February 2020

20 February 2020

14 February 2020

13 February 2020

12 February 2020

5 February 2020

30 January 2020

25 January 2020

24 January 2020

4 January 2020

24 December 2019

10 December 2019

8 December 2019

3 December 2019

2 December 2019

1 December 2019

30 November 2019

28 November 2019

27 November 2019

20 November 2019

14 November 2019

  • curprev 22:3522:35, 14 November 2019Born2cycle talk contribs 95,331 bytes +6 Reverting self, per Sic: "exactly as found in the source text, complete with any erroneous, archaic, or otherwise nonstandard ..." "to inform the reader that any errors or apparent errors in quoted material do not arise from errors in the course of the transcription" undo Tag: Undo
  • curprev 22:2522:25, 14 November 2019Born2cycle talk contribs 95,325 bytes −6 Undid revision 926104861 by CapnZapp (talk) I'm only aware of using [sic] when there is an actual error in the quoted text. I don't think out-of-date grammar qualifies as an error, nor does it justify use of "[sic]". Otherwise, every quote of a certain age would be riddled with sics. undo Tag: Undo
  • curprev 07:5607:56, 14 November 2019CapnZapp talk contribs 95,331 bytes +6 Undid revision 926096633 by 96.252.89.6 (talk): we use [sic] when we feel it helps the reader to differentiate between accurately quoting somebody and us making a mistake in reproducing said quote. The sic tells the reader the "of" was really meant to be there. If you want to argue this isn't necessary in this instance, feel free to reinstate, but for the right reasons: we're not using [sic] to judge undo Tag: Undo
  • curprev 06:2206:22, 14 November 2019AmbivalentUnequivocality talk contribs 95,325 bytes −2 If we are going by the earliest specific date it references, Kirby (1746) is the earliest "attack on singular 'they'" which is directly referenced, which would be mid 18th century. undo
  • curprev 06:0906:09, 14 November 201996.252.89.6 talk 95,327 bytes −6 Removed [sic] when discussing grammar from 1823. This article is about grammar, from Middle English until today. Why include "[sic]" for using "judge of" but not "[sic]" for many other items on this page? Should we start saying [sic] to things we know to be wrong by today's standards only after some certain date? What would that date be? Since this piece is about trying to change the perception of grammar, why say that there is ANY specific grammar that is wrong? It strikes me as hypocritical. undo
  • curprev 06:0706:07, 14 November 2019Johnuniq talk contribs 95,333 bytes −49 Undid revision 926096008 by 2601:18D:4500:2DF0:44C3:76F4:DB34:E79D (talk) please explain where that conclusion is present in the reference on the talk page undo Tag: Undo
  • curprev 05:5805:58, 14 November 20192601:18d:4500:2df0:44c3:76f4:db34:e79d talk 95,382 bytes +49 →‎Strunk & White's The Elements of Style undo
  • curprev 05:4105:41, 14 November 2019El C talk contribs 95,333 bytes +160 sourced content replaced with unsourced undo
  • curprev 05:4005:40, 14 November 20192601:18d:4500:2df0:44c3:76f4:db34:e79d talk 95,173 bytes −160 No edit summary undo Tag: references removed
  • curprev 04:3404:34, 14 November 2019-sche talk contribs 95,333 bytes +3 →‎Distribution: consistency in dash usage undo
  • curprev 04:2304:23, 14 November 2019-sche talk contribs 95,330 bytes −2 revise https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Singular_they&type=revision&diff=924015107&oldid=923746497 since afaict Bodine finds the earliest criticism in 1795, which is the late, not the early, 18th century - the change to "early" was based on guesstimating a date from a rough figure of time passed, but a look at the specific date is more helpful... undo
  • curprev 04:0904:09, 14 November 2019-sche talk contribs 95,332 bytes +1 Undid revision 925901175 by 2601:18D:4500:2DF0:5A8:8D24:1EA:370B (talk) - per the latter part of this section, and the references it cites, the original wording here was better undo Tag: Undo

13 November 2019

10 November 2019

6 November 2019

5 November 2019

4 November 2019

2 November 2019

1 November 2019

  • curprev 07:1007:10, 1 November 2019AmbivalentUnequivocality talk contribs 94,737 bytes +2 Changing lead per body of article and cited sources. Also changing "late" to "early", since "late 18th century" is not correct per source which, in 1975, describes "the two and a half centuries of its 'official' proscription", which would be beginning in c. 1725. Quite possible, or even probable, that "late" was an error due to calculating from current date rather than the 1975 date of the paper. undo

30 October 2019

14 October 2019

8 October 2019

4 October 2019

  • curprev 20:3820:38, 4 October 2019WanderingWanda talk contribs 94,740 bytes −15 "most style guides continue to discourage it" -> "many style guides continue to describe it as colloquial and less appropriate in formal writing". Closer to the sources. undo
  • curprev 19:0019:00, 4 October 2019128.197.111.63 talk 94,755 bytes +9 Created a more neutral article by separating the criticism from the actual usage of singular they. The previous version stating "....and has gained currency in official context, but criticism..." diminishes the value of the preceeding context (that 'they' is becoming used in official context). By separating these sentences, a much more neutral article is created. undo Tag: Visual edit

3 October 2019

1 October 2019

28 September 2019

25 September 2019

24 September 2019

21 September 2019

20 September 2019

19 September 2019

17 September 2019

  • curprev 23:1823:18, 17 September 2019Mx. Granger talk contribs 94,739 bytes −456 adjusting - the source doesn't say singular they is caused by discussion of gender identity; 20th century is already implied by the word "since"; the Washington Post article doesn't say it became more common in 2015, only that they changed their style guide in 2015 undo
  • curprev 23:0023:00, 17 September 2019DStorm420 talk contribs 95,195 bytes −3 Specified the people who made the criticisms. Commentators may be too general, so let's clarify it with respect to the link provided. undo
  • curprev 13:0713:07, 17 September 20192a01:11bf:610:8b00:7905:afa8:b68f:fc6d talk 95,198 bytes −6 No edit summary undo
  • curprev 13:0713:07, 17 September 20192a01:11bf:610:8b00:7905:afa8:b68f:fc6d talk 95,204 bytes +453 source added undo
  • curprev 13:0013:00, 17 September 20192a01:11bf:610:8b00:7905:afa8:b68f:fc6d talk 94,751 bytes +38 clarification undo
  • curprev 12:2512:25, 17 September 2019DStorm420 talk contribs 94,713 bytes −11 It's actually said in the article provided. Please see: https://www.pbs.org/newshour/education/column-he-she-they-grammar-rule for proof. Undid revision 916169224 by 2A01:11BF:610:8B00:8574:61DB:2004:95AE (talk) undo Tag: Undo
  • curprev 12:1012:10, 17 September 20192a01:11bf:610:8b00:8574:61db:2004:95ae talk 94,724 bytes +11 clarified – "language experts" might be taken to mean "linguists" undo
  • curprev 11:4111:41, 17 September 2019DStorm420 talk contribs 94,713 bytes +782 Agreed! I'll remove the changes done to remove a source. Also, take notes that my changes are on-point with regards to the added sources that I have appended. Please don't just remove it. Read the sources, and I can assure you that these are from credible platforms from PBS and Washington Post, respectively. undo Tag: Visual edit
  • curprev 09:1809:18, 17 September 2019CapnZapp talk contribs 93,931 bytes −465 Undid revision 916126316 by DStorm420 (talk): please stop edit warring - it is time to discuss on talk and achieve consensus before further editing undo Tag: Undo
  • curprev 05:0405:04, 17 September 2019DStorm420 talk contribs 94,396 bytes +465 You missed out that this has not been accepted since the 20th century, and I added my source as per clarification to prove its authenticity. I don't want to lie by omission, so I'm laying out the facts as truthfully as possible. Undid revision 916125323 by Mx. Granger (talk) undo Tag: Undo
  • curprev 04:5504:55, 17 September 2019Mx. Granger talk contribs 93,931 bytes −465 Undid revision 916115975 by DStorm420 (talk) - previous version was clearer and more accurate - paywalled sources are not prohibited or useless, just less convenient to verify - "he or she" has still been considered acceptable post-2015 undo Tag: Undo
  • curprev 03:1403:14, 17 September 2019DStorm420 talk contribsm 94,396 bytes +465 Undid revision 916115897 by DStorm420 (talk) undo Tag: Undo
  • curprev 03:1403:14, 17 September 2019DStorm420 talk contribs 93,931 bytes −465 No edit summary undo Tag: references removed
  • curprev 03:1303:13, 17 September 2019DStorm420 talk contribs 94,396 bytes +465 Added some clarification on the use of singular they. Added sources to prove that, the use of singular they was deemed unacceptable beyond the 19th century. Removed Kamm's source as it requires payment to read the whole article, so the source seems useless for this. undo Tag: Visual edit

13 September 2019

3 September 2019

1 September 2019

26 August 2019

7 August 2019

1 August 2019

30 July 2019

3 July 2019

25 June 2019

23 June 2019

22 June 2019

20 June 2019

19 June 2019

18 June 2019

17 June 2019

16 June 2019

15 June 2019

14 June 2019

13 June 2019

12 June 2019

11 June 2019

10 June 2019

4 June 2019

3 June 2019

27 May 2019

20 May 2019

12 May 2019

9 May 2019

5 May 2019

4 May 2019

1 May 2019

14 April 2019

9 April 2019

4 April 2019

31 March 2019

27 March 2019

26 March 2019

(newest | oldest) View (newer 775 | ) (20 | 50 | 100 | 250 | 500)

Leave a Reply