User talk:114.160.218.95

Ha ha! Why don't you just make a change without snarky comments about "poor English." Actually, given that there is a fair amount of controversy about just what constitutes "Khao Lak", I thought the construction was a fair attempt at accuracy. You been here?(WT-en) seligne 21:51, 24 June 2012 (EDT)Seligne
 * The use of a word as "snarky" is another example of poor English. [Unsigned 114.160.218.95]
 * Your sentence doesn't really make literal sense, as the phrase "a word" isn't being "use[d] as `snarky'." As for whether the word "snarky" is "poor English," consult the dictionary: . And then, drop it and do something more useful with your time, like making good edits. (WT-en) Ikan Kekek 01:22, 25 June 2012 (EDT)
 * "Snarky" is not good English, at best it is American slang. Now stop joining discussions which do not involve you, and do something useful such as improving your own standard of English or learning to be polite by not, to use another Americanism, butting into other people's conversations.
 * According to the first entry in the dictionary I linked above, the word is "Chiefly British Slang," and slang is not "poor English." And your user talk page is not a private page. No further comment; be a pedant on your own time. (WT-en) Ikan Kekek 17:32, 25 June 2012 (EDT)
 * Further to my previous comment, do something useful such as improving your own standard of English rather than relying on unauthoritarian sources of (mis) information just because they are easy to access. What a bizarre claim that slang is not poor English. Regarding "no further" comment ... good as your contributions to other people's discussions were both unwelcome and unhelpful: be an oaf somewhere else.