User talk:Cato the Younger

solecism

It is a solecism to append the postnominal, QC, to the name of a retired judge. - Is that so? Perhaps you'd like to enlighten philistines like me as to why that is so? Thanks in advance. Pdfpdf (talk) 12:45, 19 April 2010 (UTC) The one commission submerges the other, i.e., once one is commissioned as a judge. The "understanding" used to be that the knighthood and the pension and, believe it or not, the honour of serving as one of H.M. Judges, was the quid in return for which a barrister, having served upon and retired from the bench, would not return to the Bar. Nowadays, retired judges don't appear to "get" it. Regards, Cato the Younger

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, there is a Manual of Style that should be followed to maintain a consistent, encyclopedic appearance. Using different styles throughout the encyclopedia makes it harder to read. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. – GorillaWarfare ^{talk • contribs} 06:18, 1 May 2011 (UTC) – GorillaWarfare ^{talk • contribs} 06:18, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

3RR

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Catherine, Duchess of Cambridge. Users are expected to collaborate with others and avoid editing disruptively.

In particular, the three-revert rule states that:

1. Making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24-hour period is almost always grounds for an immediate block.
2. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you continue to edit war, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Tvoz/talk 07:36, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

Dear Tvoz, Perhaps you could explain what is appropriate about excising my corrections without explanation: the behaviour, so far, of three or four of your colleagues. Not one has engaged in an argument with me; as I've attempted to explain in a note to Seaphoto, ALL that I have attempted to do is correct mistakes that appear to indicate a remarkable level of ignorance on the part of your contributors.

If I attempted to correct every inaccuracy that I read on Wikipedia, I would have time to be engaged in nothing else.

Very disappointing.

Cato the Younger