User talk:Mahagaja/Archive 56

larger woman examples

I liked your examples and explanation at The larger woman. Jay (talk) 10:47, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

Me too. Thanks, Angr. -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 11:00, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

Classical Greek

Sure. Redirect the page as I'm earning points for the disam project by disamming it. Sure. :-D You are correct though. It's a rather pointless disam page when almost all of the links should go to the language page. --User:Woohookitty ^{Disamming fool!} 11:26, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

Sorry. That's what you get for disamming pages on my watchlist, though. ;-) +Angr 11:28, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

Articles for deletion nomination of List of people who died in their thirties

I have nominated List of people who died in their thirties, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of people who died in their thirties. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. ThemFromSpace 20:30, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

Re: Welcome

Thanks for your welcome. By the way, in order to keep the discussion on the velar ach-laut alive, could you give me some resource or citation for clarification? I'm no linguist, so I might simply be poorly informed. --Zahnradzacken (talk) 14:58, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

What specifically are you looking for? +Angr 15:01, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

First, if I get it right, saying "According to Klaus J. Kohler, cited in German Phonology by Richard Wiese" you referred to some source that is mentioned in Wiese's book but is actually another publication. Which one? Or is the cite in German Phonolgy sufficient to get the message? Then what is said precisely? Second, since I'm no expert, I'd like to know more about the specific sounds, especially in how force/tenseness (whatever the right term is) depends on place or whether it is an own feature. I curiously read John Well's blog post "aw, shucks", which you linked to, so I started to doubt the feasibility of discussing in such discrete categories. But then it's the experts who split the continuous world into categories. So what is their answer to the confusion, which I suppose is not new. --Zahnradzacken (talk) 14:33, 11 April 2010 (UTC)

Unfortunately I'm in the middle of a move and all my books are packed (or if they're unpacked, they're all out of order and I can't find anything), so I can't tell you exactly what either Wiese or Kohler said at the moment, but hopefully I'll have my office sorted out in a few weeks (or months) and will be able to tell you then. +Angr 05:53, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

Hatnote

Actually, several phonology articles have such hatnotes as I added to the SG phonology page. I figured such a note would be good at the top. — Ƶ§œš¹ _{[aɪm ˈfɹ̠ˤʷɛ̃ɾ̃ˡi]} 08:01, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

I don't think anyone is likely to wind up at Scottish Gaelic phonology when they were looking for WP:IPA for Scottish Gaelic; but if we do use such notes, at least use {{selfref}} so the notes get stripped from Wikipedia mirrors, where they won't make sense. +Angr 08:45, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

Relics

Why did you revert my edit about the relics in Dubrovnik? I have now put a Croatian source - a scientific article written by a renowned Croatian historian, published by the Institute of Croatian history, Faculty of Philosophy Zagreb- http://hrcak.srce.hr/file/76971 In the beginning (first paragraph) of page 78 you can read it in Croatian - use a translation service like Google and voila. Please inform yourself, be correct and don't change it anymore. Greetings. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.132.122.101 (talk) 07:51, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

I'm sure they have something in Dubrovnik, and they might like to believe it's Jesus' original swaddling clothes, but good luck to them proving it. +Angr 07:56, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

You're missing the point of my edit. I was talking about what is said according to an ancient tradition. Whether or not someone believes it is entirely a matter of faith - nothing else. Greetings. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.132.122.101 (talk) 08:05, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

In your first edit, you didn't say it was a matter of tradition, you stated it as a bald fact. +Angr 08:11, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

Having clarified my edit, I'd like to add that it also depends on one's point of view. Let's say: for me, for the inhabitants of Dubrovnik, for a number of Catholics, Christians etc. it is a fact. Greetings. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.132.104.85 (talk) 08:28, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

Edo script

If you're interested, I'm trying to verify Edo script rather than simply deleting it. It sounds more like a personal project that fooled Cornell, but who knows. It would be cool if it's real. kwami (talk) 21:08, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

File:SnowballGeography.gif listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:SnowballGeography.gif, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. FASTILY ^(TALK) 00:57, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

Saor/daor

Thank you for the information you provided on Ref. Desk.--67.159.84.81 (talk) 17:18, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

deponents

Curious to hear your thoughts on the Italo-Celtic talk page. Cheers. --Ioscius ^∞ 13:17, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

No thoughts? --Ioscius ^∞ 16:19, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

Not really. +Angr 16:24, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

Too bad. Given your edit history, I thought you might have something interesting to say on the subject. --Ioscius ^∞ 16:42, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

Yue

Hi again,

You move of Yue Chinese was reverted by an admin who it would seem did not read the archives or your decision. I'm waiting for him to respond. kwami (talk) 07:24, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

RegentsPark says that he reverted because there was inadequate time for uninvolved editors to respond to the move request. I suggested that one of us reopen the request, that you "wait an appropriate amount of time, and then to decide whether any new arguments have been brought to bear that affect the situation", and asked what would be an appropriate length of time. He said he didn't have any strong opinion. Would you be willing to do that? I, or perhaps better you, could reopen with the instruction that it is for editors who have not had a say, not for the rest of us to rehash our arguments. kwami (talk) 12:02, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

I think RegentsPark should do that. I'm already fed up with this issue, and I haven't been following it near as long as you have. +Angr 20:57, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

Okay, I put it to him. And I was so relieved to finally get this over with! kwami (talk) 22:31, 24 April 2010 (UTC)