User talk:Johnkn63

I welcome all comments Johnkn63 04:56, 8 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re:[edit]

Hi, Johnkn63, I knew these three characters from this, and I made a PNG image by recombining modern Chinese characters such as "孫", "六", "鴨", "袐", then I rendered the image into a SVG file by inkscape. luuva (talk) 13:26, 29 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This is from the book《壮族民歌古籍集成·情歌(一)·嘹歌》, and the gif file can be found by following the links of http://iea.cass.cn/mzwz/42.htm which is an external link for the article. The use of a common phrase like "lwg roegbit" is certainly not a copyright issue. It is interesting that you choose three two of which are unencoded characters. Are you planning to make more Zhuang characters?Johnkn63 (talk) 03:08, 31 October 2008 (UTC)Johnkn63 (talk) 16:50, 30 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Zhuang[edit]

I noticed you are a frequent contributor to Zhuang language. How many people in Guangxi actually speak Zhuang? Is the language on the verge of extinction? Colipon+(Talk) 17:51, 20 March 2010 (UTC) With over 10 million speakers Zhuang is in no immediate danger of extinction.Why do you ask?Johnkn63 (talk) 14:41, 24 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

re:[edit]

Sorry about that. I should have assumed better faith regarding your edits; hope there's no hard feelings. -- 李博杰 | —Talk contribs email 09:18, 26 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No problems. It is good to see more people taking an interest in Zhuang.Johnkn63 (talk) 15:11, 27 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sawgoek[edit]

John, could you take a look at the Sawgoek article that Benlisquare created recently. I have strong doubts about whether sawgoek is a genuine writing system or just a Cangjie type legend, but you know a lot more then me about Zhuang writing so I may be completely wrong. I have raised these issues on the talk page. BabelStone (talk) 12:09, 29 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sawgoek is a theory and your comments on the talk page ask very good questions about that theory. The article certainly needs to be more balanced, and as do mentions of Sawgoek elsewhere. Trickiest is what to do with the Zhuang logogram page. It will take a little time to find some reliable sources on the subject. I will place further comments on the talk page Johnkn63 (talk) 08:55, 1 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback[edit]

-- 李博杰 | —Talk contribs email 12:36, 8 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Sawgoek for deletion[edit]

I have nominated Sawgoek, an article on which you have commented, for deletion. You may wish to contribute to the discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sawgoek. Kanguole 14:01, 6 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

CJK Extension F[edit]

I have moved (copied) our Talk to a major talkpage Talk:CJK_Unified_Ideographs#CJK_Extension_F. Please note the BabelStone contribution. I take this as an incident only, I hope you keep contributing. -DePiep (talk) 21:16, 10 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Zhuang[edit]

First of all, the four languages Yei Zhuang, Nong Zhuang, Dai Zhuang, and Min Zhuang have been shown by Eric C. Johnson of SIL International to be fairly distinct from each other. Each one also has enough internal similarities for a writing system to be able to apply to all the dialects. Thus, Johnson recommends four different writing systems.

Since I do not trust either Ethnologue or the mid-1900's Chinese surveys to be entirely accurate, I always consult more recent resources and findings as much as possible, such as those by Jerold A. Edmondson.

Yang Zhuang is still under debate. See https://mail.link77.net/~emily_jackson@sil.org/20110629DRAFT-English-Dejing_survey_report-ESR.pdf — Stevey7788 (talk) 07:36, 3 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for a very quick reply. Yes I am aware that a number of issues a very much under debate. In such cases wikipedia should reflect that debate accurately not take sides, any edits you can make in this respect. Would be much appreciated. Johnkn63 (talk) 08:03, 3 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Also I did not make Yang Zhuang and Dejing Zhuang the same. User:Kwamikagami added Dejing to it after I created the Yang Zhuang article (apparently sourced from Ethnologue, which is never reliable to begin with), and this may not be correct. Jackson (2011) describes a lot of divergent dialects in the Dejing dialect area (southwestern Guangxi) such as Zong, Min, Langhua, and many others. It's very likely that they can't all be stuffed under "Yang Zhuang." I'll mention this issue in the talk page. — Stevey7788 (talk) 07:43, 3 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

My apologies for attributing the changes to you - I misunderstood the edits. Again my apologies. Johnkn63 (talk) 08:03, 3 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

We currently link Hsi-lin & Ling-yun to Yei Zhuang, based on E17 comments under [zgn]. However, Klose (1987) said they were Youjiang. Dated? — kwami (talk) 00:12, 14 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Xilin and Lingyun are clearly in [zgn], or Guibian, and what they speak is different to Youjiang, so I guess Klose had a very different idea of what is Youjiang Zhuang. Yei Zhuang is spoken just a part of Guibian Zhuang not all of it and so there should not be a redirect from Guibian Zhuang to Yei Zhuang . I will double check over the weekend as to whether or not Yei Zhuang is spoken in Xilin and Lingyun. Johnkn63 (talk) 04:53, 14 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I haven't been following ISO very closely, as I don't know where Ethn. gets their definitions from. Several of the ISO languages seem to be polyphyletic. That's the main reason I didn't bother to create articles for all the Zhuang languages in Ethn. But if you all are comfortable with them, I have no problem to switching over to s.t. closer to ISO. — kwami (talk) 17:34, 14 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Anyone to the best of my knowledge can make a submission to ISO 639. The entries for Zhuang languags, are largely based on the results of official surveys over the last 60 years, and therefore fits in quite will with China based research. Redirects in this case can will not work currently both Guibian Zhuang and Qiubei Zhuang redirect to Yei Zhuang which is a definite problem.Johnkn63 (talk) 01:23, 18 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

If you can give an outline of the articles we should have, that would be helpful, even if it's a simple copy of Ethnologue. I've been trying to include Pittayaporn in our language definitions.

Yes even a simple rewording of Ethnologue would be useful in that the names and ISO codes are unique and often referenced by others. I have been in contact with Pittayaporn who says that some of the groupings are at best tentative, which he says in his thesis, and that he should not be quoted as saying these are necessarily his current view.Johnkn63 (talk) 10:39, 21 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

BTW, I made Lui language a redirect to Sak, as it seems to be an alternative name for that language – unless in the case of ISO it's supposed to refer to one of the undescribed varieties reported in the 19th century? Also, do you have any idea what "Southern Luhupa" refers to? I know it belongs in with close to Hrangkhol, Biate, & Halam, but I can't tell if it's a synonym for one of them. I would assume so, or I'd think it wouldn't have been dropped from Ethnologue. — kwami (talk) 16:52, 20 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding the Lui language the link as it stands will cuase problems, sooner or later. At best it is an extinct dialect of Sak, in which case the redirect could be to a section of the Sak page, and at worst it is different but related to Sak. Redirects only work well if the match to equivalents not redirecting the subsets to the whole. Sorry no clear idea on "Southern Luhupa", Ethnologue tries not to have overlap in laguages, indeed any known overlap would be grounds for change. Johnkn63 (talk) 10:39, 21 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Translation of some articles[edit]

Could you help me to translate some articles for me, please ? I need somebody to do it. You can write me a message on my discussion page.

Articles to translate:

fr:Confédération brésilienne de judo (Brazilian Judo Confederation)
fr:Confédération brésilienne d'escrime (Brazilian Fencing Confederation)
fr:Matières utilisées pour fabriquer un film (Materials used to make a film)

92.134.19.172 (talk) 15:57, 5 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

ee — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.134.19.172 (talk) 16:05, 5 October 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vitani Nuka Kovu (talk • contribs) [reply]

Antoher articles to translate[edit]

fr:Fédération autrichienne de judo (Austrian Judo Federation)

90.45.10.124 (talk) 10:17, 7 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for October 23[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited The Legend of Wenlong, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Nanxi (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:20, 23 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

rollback[edit]

Sorry, I had an accident with this touchscreen. It was not intended. 22:46, 31 October 2013 (UTC)

Understood. No problem.Johnkn63 (talk) 23:17, 31 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Cite web[edit]

Hi, you seem to be adding the current date as the date that sources were published (i.e. |date=1 July 2018). You should be putting the current date in |access-date= and the date that the source was published in |date=. Jc86035 (talk) 17:23, 1 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much for pointing out my mistake. I do not have time to correct things now, but will do so over the next few days.Johnkn63 (talk) 19:00, 1 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message[edit]

Hello, Johnkn63. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2019 election voter message[edit]

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:08, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]