User talk:Montacute

Thanks for bringing scholarship to the Shakespeare thing. Innocent Bystander (talk) 12:43, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

Cute, Montacute. I noticed you left a few one-syllable words in the article. My master (talk) 21:10, 22 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Goodness, that sounds rather sniffy. You're welcome to copyedit of course. I'm still not convinced this area is worth any significant effort, so haven't troubled myself about the niceties of prose style. I usually reserve monosyllabic words for expressing my private thoughts on reading crackpot theories. I don't think we can drop too many 'fuck!', 'shit!', 'crap!', 'nuts!', 'balls!' and the like in descriptive prose here. If I'm wrong, drop me a word, and by all means I'll lard the article with a few curt exclamations.Montacute (talk) 10:48, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

Autopatrolled
Welcome to the  of CAPTCHA-free editing. — Unsigned, by: ORavenhurst / talk Do You Believe That? 13:16, 21 September 2012 (UTC)
 * You've lost me, chum. I'm usually good at catching allusions, if the book was written sometime between the sinking of Atlantis and the rise of the internet.Montacute (talk) 13:19, 21 September 2012 (UTC)
 * It's randomly generated adjectives and nouns - there's no allusion, just silliness. — Unsigned, by: ORavenhurst / talk Do You Believe That? 13:39, 21 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Well, you've taught me something- I'm familiar with the phenomenon in a lot of prose that comes my way when I listen to public speeches or read political transcripts, but not the monicker. So the day is not all lost, (unlike humanity). Thanks Montacute (talk) 13:46, 21 September 2012 (UTC)