User talk:Mahagaja/Archive 36

A reply

You Wrote the following as a message :Welcome to Wikipedia. We invite everyone to contribute constructively to our encyclopedia. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing. However, unconstructive edits, such as those you made to American English, are considered vandalism and are immediately reverted. If you continue in this manner you may be blocked from editing without further warning. Please stop, and consider improving rather than damaging the work of others. Thank you. —Angr

Reply. Some clarifications for you. I did consider improving rather than damaging the wiork of others which is why I decided to correct the incorrect item. To this end I corrected numberous spelling errors, some grammatical errors and some factual errors. Simply deleting my comments and corrections does not make the original piece correct it simply reinforces the errors that have already been made. The web [sic] is full of errors already. My understanding of this web site was to try and provide accurate information. If this is the case, then grammar, spelling and fact based information should not be deleted nor subverted. If you don't like the corrections that are made, do not particiapte. If you are going to participate, open yourself to some learning. It will be beneficial. I will probably return to this site in the next 24 hours or so, and I will be expecting to see my corrections returned. Also, there is no such word as 'reverted'. The sentence you are looking for would read ""....will revert to a previous state."" Moreover, there is no need for the comma after 'please stop' if the next word is 'and', which it is.

Best Regards. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Piloti001 (talk • contribs) 15:37, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

OK. Then you should perhaps read the article you are criticising. American Englisdh, as you call it IS a collection of misspelt words. It is not a topic on an American subject, as you suggest, it is a critique and comparative summary between English and American and is therefore perfectly acceptible to be corrected. It is not exclusively for Americans. The removal of links is a valid point as this is due to typing errors on my part, however all other points were corrections.

Your 'colleague' previously 'talked' about the poor reputation of this site and so far it is entirely justified. I have seen nothing on this site to convince me that it is nothing but a collection of poorly written and badly edited soapbox articles.

So, please do not remove my corrections again and I will refrain from correcting your spelling as well. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Piloti001 (talk • contribs) 06:29, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

hmm. a quick check of Webster's Collegiate finds examples using the word "reverted". A quick google search shows over 5 million hits on the term. I think that means it's a word. AndrewCarnie (talk) 05:41, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

Qualifications

So good of you to respond to me. Your friend Ƶ§œš¹ claims you are a "trained linguist". As you are being, effectively, asserted as an authority, I feel justified in checking your qualifications. Where did you study, under whom, and what was your degree in? RandomCritic (talk) 13:12, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

I have a Ph.D. in linguistics (specialty in phonology) from Cornell University; my thesis advisor was Draga Zec. And you? —Angr ^{If you've written a quality article...} 13:25, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Undo undiscussed page move?

See Talk:Judgement. The history files have been lost (though not permanently, I assume), so I don't want to make things worse. Can you fix this? Thanks. Samuel Webster (talk) 18:04, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the very quick reply! Samuel Webster (talk) 01:00, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Words in the English Language

Im not sure I understand your change in this edit. I directly quoted the website, so I believe the dates and times should remain the same. Please respond on my talk page. Thanks--Omnipotence407 (talk) 14:33, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Wow, they must have updated it right after I copied and pasted. Thanks for checking it! --Omnipotence407 (talk) 22:14, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Image:Perils of Superman Steve Mitchell Michael Fox.JPG

The man is dead. There is no free replacement possible. What is the proper wording to satisfy the F.U. complaint? Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 22:35, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

No wording can change the fact that it's a screenshot. Those can only be used in discussions of the TV show or movie they're taken from. The way to show what dead actors looked like is with publicity shots. —Angr 04:26, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Once again, the rules of wikipedia short-change the users of wikipedia. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 04:55, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

La traviata 1982 movie

Perhaps if you looked at Selected recordings properly, the DVD has been added in there from long ago - that is to answer to your REMARK "I did so because I thought there was no reference to the Zeffirelli film at all on this page". Why do we have to have a redundant infomation? FYI, the film was made in 1982. Thanks - Jay (talk) 04:56, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

Secondly, I undid your changes for adding "Audio" in the "Selected recordings" with remark "We discussed before making changes". It is because (1) the header is our standard header for all the opera articles (2)Because we have DVD and VHS listed in there too. So you cant call it "AUDIO" only. Ps- I used "we" to refer to Wikipedia:WikiProject_Opera - Jay (talk) 05:02, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

If you're so opposed to redundant information, why are you posting the same thing to my talk page you posted at Talk:La traviata? —Angr 14:40, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

Image:Edificios.jpg

I'm not sure about the copyright for Image:Edificios.jpg. If you have the time, please take a look. Thanks. GregManninLB (talk) 16:15, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

Seems to be others here beginning with "FS", generally used in Colegio Cesar Chavez. GregManninLB (talk) 16:19, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

Definitely not {{PD-ineligible}}. I'd say take it to WP:IFD or WP:PUI. —Angr 16:38, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

NFCC 8

I believe you may be interested in this discussion: Wikipedia:NFCC Criterion 8 debate. howcheng {chat} 18:25, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

Image Silk Smitha

I understand that you tagged Image:Silk Smitha.jpg for a reduction in resolution in response to a request from User:NAHID. Currently the image is "430px X 599px" in size. How far it needs to be reduced? I don't think this reduction would take much time, once I know how much will be agreeable. Aditya^{(talk • contribs)} 08:58, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Usually nonfree images should be no more than 300 px on their longest side, so this should be reduced by about 50%. —Angr 11:19, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Done. Aditya^{(talk • contribs)} 12:05, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

• Let's ifd--NAHID 19:02, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Kpatchen.jpg

Hi Angr, Thanks for the notification. Best, -- twelsht (talk) 19:06, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Parable on your userpage

Hello Angr! I had a look at your userpage and want to thank you for the very insightful parable on it. Being a vegetarian (and a nearly-vegan) myself, it's easy to follow your arguments and the parallel is definitely clear. I never really felt very strongly about the use of non-free images on Wikipedia on one way or the other, but your essay really made me reconsider my position. A great text! :-) --Church of emacs (Talk | Stalk) 19:41, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Danke! Schön, dass es dir gefallen – und dich angesprochen – hat! —Angr 21:34, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

A with cedilla

Can you help me here. Do you have any idea where one can get an "a with cedilla" e.g.. I'm about to start writing articles about a people where this letter is used, but can't for the life of me find it. Thanks in advance. Regards, Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 18:47, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

You might double-check with Evertype, but I don't think it's a precomposed Unicode point. You'll have to use "a" followed by the combining cedilla U+0327. —Angr 20:27, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. Annoying, but appears to work (e.g. Ya̧nomamö). I'll hope they eventually get around to adding it. The explanation Napoleon Chagnon gave was that using it indicated that the word was to be "nasalized through its entire length". This to me seemed to indicate use of the ogonek rather than cedilla, but it is the latter he uses. Confusing for me! Regards, Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 21:33, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

A̧ might have been created because most manual typewriters don't have Ą , but sometimes have a combining cedilla. It could be related to the shift from I to Ö. It is possible that "Yąnomamö" would also be acceptable, and it would be easier to type. kwami (talk) 21:55, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

You don't think Chagnon's made a mistake here? The fifth edition came out in 1997. It'd be good to clear up, as I'm about to create some short myth articles many of which (following Chagnon) will make use of a̧. But following WP:NOR I'm gonna stick with it for now. Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 21:59, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

I seriously doubt he'd make such a mistake. Much more likely it was a practical compromise. Such practical workarounds are one reason there are so many alternate phonetic symbols around. kwami (talk) 22:15, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Christianity

You are cordially invited to participate in WikiProject Christianity The goal of WikiProject Christianity is to improve the quality and quantity of information about Christianity available on Wikipedia. WP:X as a group does not prefer any particular tradition or denominination of Christianity, but prefers that all Christian traditions are fairly and accurately represented.

- Tinucherian (talk) 05:17, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Image:Kirby seal.jpg

Why did you delete this image when it is the official seal for a city? Why was I not notified of this? Why did you say the fair-use was invalid when the fair use was for the seal of a city just as was specified?--Uga Man (talk) UGA MAN FOR PRESIDENT 2008 22:00, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

I deleted it because it had been tagged "disputed fair use rationale" for more than seven days. Hammersoft tagged it at 15:45, 14 April 2008, saying, "The purpose is that it's a seal? That's not a purpose. What does display of the seal bring to the article that the lack of it would be detrimental to the user's understanding of Kirby, Texas? See WP:NFCC #8". You'll have to ask him why he didn't notify you, which he should have done, although I'd have thought you'd notice it on your watchlist anyway. —Angr 05:03, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

I'm going to upload it again. There is a place on the city infobox for a seal be placed and most city articles have them. Why should this city be any different? From this exchange I now see that Wikipedia is about not being "detrimental to a user's understanding of a topic", I was previously under the impression that this was an encyclopedia, which was to advance a user's understanding of a topic.--Uga Man (talk) UGA MAN FOR PRESIDENT 2008 21:18, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Of course the point of Wikipedia is to increase users' understanding of a topic, but non-free content is allowed only if its omission would be detrimental to that understanding. The question is not, why should Kirby's article not have a non-free seal image when most city articles have them, the question is, why do most city articles have these non-free seal images in the first place? —Angr 05:33, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

• I don't see much point to them. Very few people even know what the seal of the town they live in looks like, much less care. A flag, now that could be useful. A seal? Who cares? Do I care what the seal of Kirby looks like? It's just a blue circle with "City of Kirby", "Texas" and a five pointed star on it. How in heck does that improve my understanding of Kirby, Texas? It doesn't. My objection to this image before was that the purpose of use was simply "the seal". Now, the purpose is "Display the city's official seal", as if that is any better? How does displaying a fair use image constitute adherence to fair use law? Hey great! I'll start making logo products and making millions off them because it's all fair use! I used the images under the perfectly legal fair use claim of "I used it to display it!" No worries here! The copyright lawyers will never get me! --Hammersoft (talk) 17:04, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Irish Language Wiki

Hi Angr,

I've been snooping around the Irish language and Scottish Gaelic language wikipedia sites. The linguistics sections are a bit of a mess. I'm a little terrified by the prospect, but I thought it might be fun to go in an put in some substantive content in there. Right now my Gàidhlig is better than my Gaeilge but still fairly intimidating. You up for a challenge? I was thinking that Irish Phonology and Irish Orthography were perhaps easy translations we could get up quickly. AndrewCarnie (talk) 05:37, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

Writing in Irish is a long and laborious process for me even when I'm not writing texts that are full of linguistic technical terms. And right now I've got a lot on my plate with adding Irish words to Wiktionary and texts about Irish to Wikisource. But have fun! —Angr 06:56, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Idea-smoothing is NOT original research

I'm pasting here my comment that I added to the "idea-smoothing" page, to let you know that it's not original research:

Just so that you know, I have been watching a lot of American television, and I can guarantee that many Americans DO in fact have idea-smoothing in their speech. The first and last episodes of Deep Space Nine have Odo (Rene Auberjonois or whatever) and Jake Sisko (Cirroc Lofton) respectively, both saying "idea" with /I@/ at the end, not /i:@/. Jonathan Kent (John Schneider) in Smallville also says it the same way.

I don't know how to cite a television programme as a source, but there you go. If anyone else sees a programme with idea-smoothing in it, American or not, it might be worth mentioning it here [on the idea-smoothing page], just so that people know it most certainly DOES exist in American English and many other forms of English. Avengah (talk) 02:50, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

(Answered at Talk:Phonological history of English high front vowels#Idea-smoothing is NOT original research) —Angr 04:23, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

Further, the “original research” in this case seems to be founded on confusing the accent of an American with an American accent — which two things are different when the American (René Murat Auberjonois) was in fact raised outside of America. —SlamDiego_←T 12:46, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

English language

I want to be sure you have noticed that the revert war on English language appears to be resolved. See this edit by the person who wanted to add the reference. —teb728 t c 05:54, 29 April 2008 (UTC)