User talk:BabelStone/Archive 2011

How do you like {{Unicode navigation}}?

Hi, I changed the {{Unicode navigation}} box seriously. Essentially, I added the lists of Scripts & Symbols in a collapsible part, and moved existing wikilinks there. This is my question: I would like to read your comments about this concept & implementation (e.g. at this talk here).

These are most of my rationals, on the script-aspects.
Adding all scripts (copied from well founded {{Scripts in Unicode}} & its Ancients brother). Distinction made common&inherited/modern/ancient. Adding links to: CJK/Han; Hebrew "H in Unicode..." not Hebr alphabet; Arabic & Herbrew diacritics (because they each have article). Re Common/Inherited: a bit stretching & smuggling by me: "Space" is "Punctuation" too, but I added it because of the good Unicode-space-table there. Other potential lists in this "Symbols" group do not have an Unicode-table yet, such as Currency sign, but should be there imo.

Intended usage: Each article that links Unicode with a script is good for the Unicode navbox. I still skip script articles that do not address Unicode by (say) a table. Example: the Hiragana script is in Unicode, but that article has no Unicode section. So no Unicode navbox there (there is no {{scripts in Unicode}} template either). About 10 out of 100 script-links (articles) have the Unicode template. -DePiep (talk) 18:40, 13 January 2011 (UTC)

Invited User:Evertype to join here. -DePiep (talk) 19:07, 13 January 2011 (UTC)

hi

thanks for your help with Amy Chua. i agree with all of the changes youve made so far, you did a great job. but it looks like someone, maybe the same person, undid them all! MrsSunDoesntShine (talk) 22:20, 19 January 2011 (UTC)

Yes, almost certainly the same person (both IPs are from North Carolina, the latest one from Durham, where Chua taught at Duke Law School). It looks like they are intent on removing anything negative, and stressing positive reaction. I have tried to be neutral in my editing, and I have removed many unsourced or unnotable negative reactions from the article, as well as adding positive reaction such as Sophia Chua's reaction, so it is ridiculous for the IP to accuse me of "repeatedly add[ing] items that trash her". I certainly have no intention of trashing Chua, but nor do I want the article to ignore the massive negative reaction to the WSJ article. It is a pity that there are so few editors that are watching this page, so it is hard to defend the article against this sort of attack. BabelStone (talk) 22:36, 19 January 2011 (UTC)

if you need me to support you somewhere to get the page protected then tell me what to do, i dont really know how to do it. MrsSunDoesntShine (talk) 17:49, 20 January 2011 (UTC)

I'm sorry, I've taken this page off my watch list, and won't be editing it while it is such a hot topic. BabelStone (talk) 21:51, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

DYK for International Dunhuang Project

—HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 06:05, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Testament of Ba

—HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 18:03, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia Ambassador Program is looking for new Online Ambassadors

Hi! Since you've been identified as an Awesome Wikipedian, I wanted to let you know about the Wikipedia Ambassador Program, and specifically the role of Online Ambassador. We're looking for friendly Wikipedians who are good at reviewing articles and giving feedback to serve as mentors for students who are assigned to write for Wikipedia in their classes.

If that sounds like you and you're interested, I encourage you to take a look at the Online Ambassador guidelines; the "mentorship process" describes roughly what will be expected of mentors during the current term, which started in January and goes through early May. If that's something you want to do, please apply!

You can find instructions for applying at WP:ONLINE. The main things we're looking for in Online Ambassadors are friendliness, regular activity (since mentorship is a commitment that spans several months), and the ability to give detailed, substantive feedback on articles (both short new articles, and longer, more mature ones).

I hope to hear from you soon.--Sage Ross - Online Facilitator, Wikimedia Foundation (talk) 01:54, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Dunhuang Go Manual

—HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 12:03, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

International Dunhuang Project review

Hi,

I think the article is ready for GA review. It might be a good target for the IDP professionals to lend a hand with some expert peer-reviews after it has achieved GA status as part of getting the article up to FA (which I believe is an achievable target for this topic). It would be a great bonus to have the article on the main page within a few months, possibly with the help of a later edit-a-thon or IDP wiki-week. Fæ (talk) 22:34, 6 February 2011 (UTC)

I hadn't considered going FA, but I suppose it is possible. BabelStone (talk) 23:22, 6 February 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Menggu Ziyun

—HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 06:03, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Irk Bitig

Materialscientist (talk) 18:02, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

DOI in Phaistos revision incorrectly expanded to Journal of Paleontology article

Hello BabelStone,

About your revision of 18 February 2011 of the Phaistos_Disc page: the DOI was expanded incorrectly by Wikipedia! As you can see easily by a click on the DOI link. So I will replace the text, with the proper reference.

I intend also to replace the phrase "Note that the signs are shown here in mirror image", which you removed as well. Please tell me, do you think that this is not true? Or do you think it is not relevant?

Arie ten Cate (talk) 18:00, 19 February 2011 (UTC)

I will repair the DOI problem but not yet replace the mirror image phrase. (I notified the Unicode staff about this mirror image problem, but I got no reply.)

Arie ten Cate (talk) 09:29, 20 February 2011 (UTC)

I saw your report to Unicode, but as the mirroring of the glyphs was a deliberate decision so that the characters are correctly oriented in a left-to-right context (following modern practice), I think it unlikely that the representative glyphs in the Unicode code chart will be changed. However, a clarification to the text of the Unicode Standard would be useful. This conversation should best be carried out on the article talk page, so I have replied more fully there. BabelStone (talk) 12:57, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

International Dunhuang Project GA review

The article is indeed well written, good in both scope and focus but has a suffieciant amount of work needed to fail GA at this time. It is suggested that seek assistance through a participating project.--Amadscientist (talk) 12:18, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

Age of Go

Your last edit of the Go (game) page your comment states "no evidence go is more than 4000 years old". I assume that you meant to say 2000 from your edit!

The age of games is tricky as I tried to start a talk on the board game page a while back about this topic. I suspect the problem comes from the official UK version from the 1970s says on the box the 4000 year old oriental game. I agree that the age of the game should be what can be 100% established but this is not a clear cut decision. It might be worth starting a talk point on the Go talk page where you put your points.Tetron76 (talk) 18:07, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

It has been discussed many times already on the talk page, and my edit reflects consensus ("more than 4,000 years ago" was an unsourced change from the original "more than 2,000 years ago" in the article made a few days ago by an IP). The oldest archeological evidence is a fragment of a Go board found at a Western Han mausoleum (but not from the burial chamber itself, and so suspect date wise); the next oldest is a complete stone Go board from an Eastern Han tomb. This would put the age of Go back to at least 2,000 years, but earlier than this there is no concrete evidence, only mentions of a game called yi in various sources (such as the Analects of Confucius). yi is glossed as weiqi (go) in later sources, but it is not clear from the brief mentions of yi in these sources that it really did refer to the game of Go. 4,000 years ago puts us way back into the legendary Xia Dynasty, and cannot possibly be considered a reliable date. BabelStone (talk) 21:46, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

I wasn't object to your edit at all and it wasn't me who had changed the page. The issue which arises is that many other games such as backgammon are aged according to any linked earlier game and is currently attributed an age older than dice.Tetron76 (talk) 15:49, 5 March 2011 (UTC)

Nimrud ivories

FYI, I've nominated this at DYK. Nyttend (talk) 22:14, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, I was going to do that in a day or two, but doing it now is fine by me. BabelStone (talk) 22:31, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

Safaqqucus son of Qicus

In this case the source is wrong, but I'm not sure what we can do about it... genitives in -i are o-stem masculine nouns which in Primitive Irish has an ending in -as, not -us. If it were a u-stem noun with an ending -us the gentive would be -o(s). See O'Connell's Grammar of Old Irish and other attested forms like Vergoso (MONAT/4/1) and Cunagussos (GLLOG/1/1) with masculine u-stems. I note the translator is an expert in Anglo-Saxon and not Celtic. Paul S (talk) 01:07, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

I did search Google Books for evidence for your corrected forms before I reverted, but I couldn't find any corroborating evidence. Probably the best solution is to give the names in the genitive. BabelStone (talk) 01:12, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

GA review

We have both been on the receiving end of strange GA reviews by Amadscientist. I propose that you renominate International Dunhuang Project and I have already renominated Getty Villa, and that we each review the other's articles so as to avoid the long wait in queue. Racepacket (talk) 12:57, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

In the past I have been an advocate of GA reviews. After my poor experience last week with a GA review, I suspect (and hope) this is a temporary situation with reviewers being over-focused on the current backlog drive and suffering with a touch of countitus as a result. If a reviewer is focused on closing down a review as quickly as possible there is far more likelihood that it will simply fail rather than encourage collaboration to resolve any issues. Fæ (talk) 13:01, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

Strange review indeed ... vague complaints about NPOV but no specific examples of anything that needs to be changed, and giving me no opportunity to address any of his nebulous concerns; and when I query his comments and his refusal to put on hold he accuses me (elsewhere) of bad faith editing. However, it is true that the article is too reliant on a single source, so I will try to find some more sources, and wait for a few weeks before renominating. Either way, I think it would be inappropriate for us to agree to review each others nominations. BabelStone (talk) 13:21, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

I'm not totally against some cross-GLAM reviews but we should probably take care that we stay unambiguously independent to apply a similar principle to INVOLVED and avoid any accusation similar to Walled garden. --Fæ (talk) 13:53, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

I am not proposing anything less than a full, honest objective review. The frustrating experience would leave anyone feeling that his time in queue has been wasted, and my museum GA nominations have sat for up to 3 months at times waiting for a reviewer. Is there any way that Fae, BabelStone and I could work out an arrangement where three reviews are accelerated but without two people reviewing each other's articles? Racepacket (talk) 01:58, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Nimrud Ivories

Materialscientist (talk) 08:02, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

Unicode chart template idea

Hi BabelStone. I noticed you created many of the Unicode chart templates so I'm asking your opinion of an idea I have to include more detail in them. I'd like to add a title attribute to the table cells to include the Unicode name as shown in the UCD file. That way people would see the name as a tooltip/hint when they hovered over each character. For example, the cell for Batak character 1BC0 would show something like "U+1BC0: BATAK LETTER A" for the title/tooltip. Do you think this is useful? And should I proceed? Thanks, DRMcCreedy (talk) 06:31, 2 April 2011 (UTC)

Yes, I do think that would be very useful, so go ahead. I'm busy in real life this weekend, but I'll help out if I can next week. BabelStone (talk) 07:58, 2 April 2011 (UTC)

I've made a start, and have completed all the "A" charts, but even though I can semi-automate the task, it will take a few days to go through all 195 charts. BabelStone (talk) 23:31, 2 April 2011 (UTC)

Before you go through that... I noticed two things updating the Batak template: First, I forgot the U+xxxx: part of the title, so it's "BATAK LETTER A" instead of the desired "U+1BC0: BATAK LETTER A". I think adding the codepoint is important for readability. Easy to fix my script but I feel bad you've already put the work into the "A" charts. Second, I realized that the Wikipedia charts are rotated on a different axis than the Unicode charts, which makes them hard to compare. I'd like to fix that too. I did a test Batak chart at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Drmccreedy/sandbox3 and would like your input. It's a bigger change than just adding titles but I think it's an improvement. What do you think? DRMcCreedy (talk) 03:13, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

Sorry for jumping the gun. I'm not sure how necessary it is to prepend the code point to the character name, but I don't really mind one way or the other, so add in the code point if you like. I don't think rotating the charts to match the Unicode chart layout is a good idea as large charts would have too many columns to fit in the screen, so you would have to break them into multiple tables (on print/pdf media like the Unicode Standard this makes sense, but not for a web page). On the other hand, the current formatting means that however large a chart is it will always fit in a single table. But if you want to convince me, try sandboxing one of the large blocks like Yi syllables. BabelStone (talk) 11:41, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

Yi syllables is a good test to decide which way to go. I'll give it a shot, probably on Tuesday. Thanks. DRMcCreedy (talk) 12:52, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

The Yi Syllables chart is at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Drmccreedy/sandbox2 for review. Let me know if the new orientation matching the Unicode PDFs is OK or if you want to stay with the current Wikipedia orientation. I can live with either but prefer it to match the Unicode orientation. Before tackling the new templates I have two other questions that are independent of orientation: First, unassigned codepoints are currently shown as a non-breaking space instead of the actual codepoint. I left it that way and gave them a title of "reserved/unassigned" (in lower case with no "U+xxxx: " prefix). Do you agree with that approach? Second, and this might just be my naivete with Wikipedia, I was thinking about use of these templates on non-English pages. Taking Buginese script for example, the English page uses a template but the Malay and Swedish pages code the chart right into the page. The only reason I don't see for using the English template on those pages is footnotes. And the only footnote I see is the Unicode version of the chart. For that reason, I propose removing the footnote and putting the chart version right on the table caption, like "Batak (Unicode 6.0)". How does that sit with you? That should be the last of my questions. Thanks. DRMcCreedy (talk) 19:51, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

I'm not yet convinced (would this change adversely affect pages that transclude these templates?), but the chart does look quite good in this orientation. However, I don't like the idea of exactly copying the layout of the Unicode chart tables (i.e. the number of columns for each table) which is often arbitrary and uneven -- I think it would be better to always have 16 columns for the non-final tables so that they look the same and start at the same column offset. Keeping the original orientation has the advantage of not needing to worry about how best to divide the charts into subtables.

"reserved/unassigned" is tautological, and is best simplified to "reserved" (with no U+xxxx prefix) which is the standard terminology. Best to leave the nbsp rather than the actual reserved character as (as I'm sure know) some fonts map glyphs to reserved characters, and seeing characters in reserved cells would confuse most readers (square boxes also would not be very helpful).

I'll think about the footnote question, and reply later. Can other language versions of wikipedia use templates directly from en:wp or would they need to import the templates anyway? And surely the block titles would need translation in many cases? BabelStone (talk) 23:10, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

I like using just "reserved" for the reasons you gave. I've created http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Drmccreedy/sandbox3 for Yi Syllables with 16 columns per table for non-final tables so you can compare against the Unicode.org's proportions at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Drmccreedy/sandbox2. For what it's worth I think Unicode.org's choice of columns is based on an algorithm vs arbitrary: If a range has more than 16 columns they try to break it up into pages of equal columns. If it's not evenly divisible by 16 they appear to add an extra column to each page as necessary starting with the first page. For Yi it's 15, 15, 15, 14, 14 instead of 4 at 16 and the leftover 9. I think they wanted to avoid 16 on one page and just 1 column on the last for something like a 17 column range. Don't know that that helps with a decision or if it's just the computer programmer in me trying to see a pattern. For the multilingual/reuse/footnote questions I don't really have answers... I find pages that say you can't transclude between wikis, so if the different languages are different wikis it's a moot point. Interestingly it appears that many Unicode charts on non-English pages use the English Unicode range name and not the local script name. Except for Thai which seems to use the Thai script name consistently. So in the end I don't think the footnote matters. I was probably just over-thinking it. DRMcCreedy (talk) 05:32, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

Sorry for taking so long to reply, but I am rather busy in real life at present. My opinions on your three points:

1) Add character name as title in form "U+1234: UNICODE CHARACTER BLAH", or simply "reserved" or "not a character" for reserved and noncharacter codepoints respectively. But is it worth doing for CJK unified ideographs which have trivial algorithmic names?

2) I prefer the current horizontal orientation, but won't object if you change to vertical orientation, so do what you think best.

3) For the present keep the note about Unicode version (and update all tables to give the note as all tables are now, I believe, up to date for Unicode 6.0).

BabelStone (talk) 23:17, 10 April 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for taking the time to bounce ideas back and forth...

1) I'll add the titles as you described. An additional category is legacy control characters (like U+0000 - U+001F). I'll add titles for those of simply "control". I'll leave the titles off the CJK characters with the trivial algorithmic names since that doesn't seem useful.

2) I'll switch the tables to vertical orientation to match the linked Unicode charts.

3) I'll make sure the tables are current to Unicode 6.0 and add the footnote.

DRMcCreedy (talk) 02:50, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

Revision for #2 above: After changing a score of templates I decided to go with your preference of horizontal orientation. I've reoriented the templates I previously updated back to horizontal.

Addition to #3 above: I've updated the "as of" footnote link after noticing a conflict on pages that include more than one template, like http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bopomofo#Unicode It is now unique per table.

DRMcCreedy (talk) 00:37, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

OK, thanks for letting me know. BabelStone (talk) 01:00, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

FYI: I've finished updating all of the Unicode chart templates. DRMcCreedy (talk) 20:20, 16 April 2011 (UTC)

Thanks ... great job! I've just changed the capitalization of "Alias" to "alias" as it is not the start of a new sentence, but nothing else strikes me as needing to be changed. BTW, just produced my own Unicode charts that might interest you. BabelStone (talk) 22:38, 16 April 2011 (UTC)

I like your Unicode chart video... I hope you didn't stare at the screen the full 3 hours to test it! DRMcCreedy (talk) 00:01, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

The Hobbit

As a literary term, a titular protagonist, or a titular character is one where the book title is that of the character. ie for Bilbo to be the titular protagonist, the title of the book would be "Bilbo Baggins" and not "The Hobbit". See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Title_role . I'm not going to revert - but I think you should, since as a literary term "titular protagonist is incorrect. Also, for The Hobbit to refer simply to Bilbo negates the possibility that the title refers to Hobbits as a race, or a type of character, or metaphor for an underdog, or all of these. This point is debatable, but I think it is narrow to assume the title singularly refers to Bilbo. isfutile:P (talk) 14:24, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

Replied on the article talk page, where this discussion should take place. BabelStone (talk) 15:35, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

My browser aesplode

Regarding this edit of yours, I'm quite confused, what did you actually do in regards to the unicode glyph? I'm running Mozilla Firefox 4.0.1 at the moment, and now my watchlist (I have the page watched), the article history and the article itself are refusing to load/display properly... It seems this is only a browser issue as this doesn't happen in IE 9.0.8 or Chrome 12.0.742 (they display a 囗 instead), however in Firefox a large black bar fills the page, and whilst the ordinary format of the Wikipedia site is still there and the "table" is still visible, all the text is replaced with white emptiness. I am only able to read text by highlighting it blue with my cursor... quite strange if you ask me. -- 李博杰  | —Talk contribs email 14:38, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

Very strange. All I did was remove the footnote and replace the original, invalid code point (U+6344C) with the correct Unicode character (U+2A76C). I can understand why some browsers might malfunction if they encounter U+6344C (not even in an assigned plane), but U+2A76C is in CJK-C which Firefox should be able to handle you would think (I don't use Firefox so I don't know for sure). How does your browser handle List of CJK Unified Ideographs, Extension C (2A700-2B73F) ? BabelStone (talk) 15:09, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

80% are readable Chinese characters, 20% are blank whites, with the odd black bar spanning from the left to the right of my entire screen, every now and then. I'll upload a screenshot somewhere in a second. -- 李博杰  | —Talk contribs email 17:33, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

image 1, image 2, image 3. Each image is a PNG full-screen screenshot of about 200KB each. To clarify, the entire line of text that contains the glyph (separated by enter breaks) becomes whited out, and as I scroll down, black bars flash around every now and then, and sometimes the black bars do not disappear. -- 李博杰  | —Talk contribs email 17:41, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

I've just installed Firefox 5.0 under Windows 7, and the Sino-Xenic page displays just fine, and as I have CJK-C fonts installed the character U+2A76C is shown correctly. I suggest you update your version of firefox. BabelStone (talk) 21:50, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

It's the same result with FF5. Perhaps the problem lies with my installed fonts, there might be an issue with the one I have installed. Where did you get your CJK-C fonts from? -- 李博杰  | —Talk contribs email 08:58, 23 June 2011 (UTC)

Have you got HAN NOM B installed? HAN NOM B puts 106 characters in the what-used-to-be-reserved code points after the CJK-B block, i.e. 2A700 through 2A769, so Firefox may be selecting HAN NOM B, but as U+2A76C is three beyond the end of HAN NOM B's coverage, it may be causing some sort of index out of bounds error when it tries to display U+2A76C with HAN NOM B. Try installing HanaMin (covers all of CJK-C but has Japanese style glyphs) and/or BabelStone Han (has PRC-style glyphs, but only has partial coverage of CJK-C -- but it does include U+2A76C). BabelStone (talk) 11:55, 23 June 2011 (UTC)

Yes, I have HAN NOM A and B installed, along with a whole plethora of other CJK fonts. I'll try out the two that you mentioned. -- 李博杰  | —Talk contribs email 12:19, 23 June 2011 (UTC)

Well, whadd'ya know. Problem solved, just like that. Cheers for the help. -- 李博杰  | —Talk contribs email 12:22, 23 June 2011 (UTC)

Improving the article Rovas Script Family

I tried to improve the article Rovas Script Family. If there is any imperfection in this article, please, let me know. Thanks for reviewing this article. Rovasscript (talk) 08:04, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

There's no evidence for any such family. There is no Khazarian script and there is no Carpathian Basin script. -- Evertype·✆ 09:58, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

A hamster for you!

	The Hamster Award for Good Work
	Keep up the good editing, Babelstone! Augustus the Pony (talk) 16:42, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

Wow, thanks! BabelStone (talk) 16:45, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

A beer for you!

Well done for all your Wiki-editing! No Raisin At All (talk) 12:11, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

Wow, thanks! Hope you have some more pictures to upload. BabelStone (talk) 12:38, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

Request for Advice

Hey BabelStone!

You may remember we had worked together and discussed some points about the Andriy Slyusarchuk article. I see from your user page here that you have knowledge of many writing systems and are familiar with the topic of archeology. I'd like to ask for your kind advice. I got a few samples of an allegedly undeciphered hieroglyphic script from a friend of mine. He claims the script was received through automatic writing by a woman who tuned to a channeling stream of information. I'd like some expert to kindly give opinion on whether this seems to be a hoax, maybe imitation of some of the existing hieroglyphic scripts, or it might really be something new. I uploaded 2 of the images of the manually recorded script here: [1] ,[2]. Could you also possibly direct me to someone or some forum, or group, where I could ask for an expert advice on this topic? Would Wikipedia:WikiProject_Archaeology be the right place? Much appreciate your kind prompt reply. -- Nazar (talk) 08:26, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

Hi Nazar, Thank you for showing me the pictures of the alleged scripts. I am afraid that I do not recognise the writing in the pictures, and suspect that it is hoax. You might try asking at Wikipedia:WikiProject Writing systems. BabelStone (talk) 22:26, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply. Posted a request here. A possibility of a hoax should be regarded as one of the options by all means... But it's interesting, I've already asked a few knowledgeable people, and none of them recognizes any similarity to existing scripts... It would take really quite a lot of artistic imagination to invent something like that... -- Nazar (talk) 08:27, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

Nomination of Sawgoek for deletion

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 14:00, 6 September 2011 (UTC)

Your triple DYK nomination

Hi BabelStone, I've reviewed your nomination at Template:Did you know nominations/Jin Guangping, Jin Qizong, Aisin-Gioro Ulhicun and there are some issues with referencing. Could you please fix up the references and then reply at the nomination page? Thanks. Crisco 1492 (talk) 12:33, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the review -- I have tried to improve the references as best I can. BabelStone (talk) 15:35, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Jin Qizong

Materialscientist (talk) 08:03, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Aisin-Gioro Ulhicun

Materialscientist (talk) 08:04, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Jin Guangping

Materialscientist (talk) 08:03, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

DYK for List of Chinese cultural relics forbidden to be exhibited abroad

Materialscientist (talk) 00:01, 22 September 2011 (UTC)

Very interesting! Incidentally, I've mentioned this at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject China/NNU Class Project (a group of 167 English language students at a Chinese university) as a possible source of suitable topics to write articles on. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 01:03, 22 September 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Baisigou Square Pagoda

Materialscientist (talk) 08:18, 23 September 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Auspicious Tantra of All-Reaching Union

Materialscientist (talk) 08:18, 23 September 2011 (UTC)

Unicode and glyph images

Hi, thanks for helping with Archaic Greek alphabets. Unfortunately, I think I'm not quite convinced about this [3] edit. The character we need here, U+03D8 GREEK LETTER ARCHAIC KOPPA (Ϙ), is unfortunately still not reliably supported (it's been around only since version 3.2); see e.g. recent discussion at Template talk:Greek Alphabet). What is reliably supported is U+03DE GREEK LETTER KOPPA (Ϟ), but that's the one with the inconsistent glyph implementation (older fonts displaying either an epigraphic Koppa or a modern numeral Koppa, and newer fonts displaying mostly some ugly concocted pseudo-uppercase version of numeral Koppa). Epigraphic Sampi is of course even worse, having been around only since 5.1; there are only a handful of fonts out there that have it. Fut.Perf. ☼ 22:47, 24 September 2011 (UTC)

There are ten fonts on my machine that support archaic sampi (Aegean, Akkadian, Analecta, Antinoou, Code2000, Everson Mono, Gentium Plus, New Athena Unicode, Quivira, Symbola), and 25 fonts that support archaic koppa (including 15 fonts that ship with Windows 7), but feel free to revert my changes if you think that images are best for these letters. But in that case, I suggest using an image for ΜΕͲΑ, to be consistent. BabelStone (talk) 22:56, 24 September 2011 (UTC)

One good turn deserves another...

... but I had a question about your rhinoceroses; please check the DYK nom. Cheers, – Fut.Perf. ☼ 18:53, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

Good question -- I've answered on the nom page, and will try to clarify the issue in the article. Thanks. BabelStone (talk) 21:59, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Rhinoceroses in ancient China

Orlady (talk) 12:04, 29 September 2011 (UTC)

Mr.West,

Could you give me your email address?I am a scholar from China,and my research field is Tangut charachter.My email is xxxxxxx@xx.xxx.xx many thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nxlcq (talk • contribs) 19:16, 3 October 2011 (UTC)

I have sent an email to you. Thanks. BabelStone (talk) 20:25, 3 October 2011 (UTC)

Swallow Rock

I wish more editors would leave such helpful edit summaries as this. I dabbed the China link. Could you help me find the commons images you mentioned? Many thanks. :) Anna Frodesiak (talk) 09:24, 8 October 2011 (UTC)

There is a gallery on the Chinese Wikipedia article. BabelStone (talk) 09:31, 8 October 2011 (UTC)

Ah. Thanks. :) Anna Frodesiak (talk) 09:38, 8 October 2011 (UTC)

BTW, as People's Republic of China now redirects to China, using [[People's Republic of China|China]] is redundant. BabelStone (talk) 09:53, 8 October 2011 (UTC)

Help needed for a student class project

Please see Wikipedia:WikiProject Classroom coordination/SFSU Class Project and consider adding your name.

The scope of the Wikipedia:WikiProject Classroom coordination/SFSU Class Project is mainly concerned with new articles.

According to the teacher's instructions, this group of students may not create a lot of new articles, but may instead focus more on improving existing articles.

So, there may be little for us to do in the way the Wikipedia:WikiProject China/NNU Class Project required. The students may, however, still call on us for guidance in other areas. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 09:15, 14 October 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Stele of Sulaiman

Orlady (talk) 00:03, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Special Barnstar
	For your work on Stele of Sulaiman and Yongning Temple Stele which helps direct wikipedia to an increasingly valuable resource covering time and place. ♦ Dr. Blofeld 00:03, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

Wow, many thanks! Glad you appreciated the articles. BabelStone (talk) 00:51, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Yongning Temple Stele

Orlady (talk) 00:03, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Shite-hawk

Thank you for supporting the DYK project Victuallers (talk) 12:02, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Barnstar of Good Humor
	For making me smile and conjuring bizarre images in my head of pigeons after too many vindaloos. ♦ Dr. Blofeld 19:36, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

Glad you liked it ... not quite my usual type of article, but I think WP needs a few articles like this! BabelStone (talk) 19:53, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

Well done

		The 25 DYK Creation and Expansion Medal
		Well you have created much more than 25. I see you are well on your way to 50. I see your DYK's and note that they are as so interesting.... and I see that the hoard articles continue to grow. I just got 3 questions right on university challenge because they were pictures of hoards. Keep up the good work. Thanks from me and the wiki. Victuallers (talk) 20:40, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

Many thanks! I can't believe I missed UC. Despite all the heckling and jeering from the DYK detractors I still think that DYK is one of the finest Wikipedia institutions, and I think that you and all the other DYK regulars are doing a great job in the face of unremitting and unreasonable criticism. I am still sadenned by the loss of Rlevse (has a year gone by already?), and hope that the rottweilers don't hound any more good editors off the project. As for me, I'll just keep my head down, and keep working at hoards and stuff when I have the time. At the current rate I reckon I'll hit 50 DYKs next year sometime. BabelStone (talk) 22:01, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Bredon Hill Hoard

The DYK project (nominate) 00:01, 3 November 2011 (UTC)

More on "dynasty" vs. "Dynasty"

Hi BabelStone. I'm contacting all the editors who have commented on whether we should un-capitalize "dynasty" in wiki titles. I have just proposed a new and simple way to make a final decision on this issue. Could you go to this new section to say whether you support my proposal? Thank you! Cheers, Madalibi (talk) 01:30, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

CE vs AD

Hi, you might be interested in the discussion at Talk:Pictish language. Catfish Jim and the soapdish 11:28, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

Poll to determine support for move from Shishapangma to Xixabangma

You have been involved in the recent naming discussion at Talk:Xixabangma. There is a new poll to determine support for the move from Shishapangma to Xixabangma. If you are interested, please provide your opinion here.--Wikimedes (talk) 00:53, 26 November 2011 (UTC)

Silverdale Hoard

I can't let you hoard all the hoards, now, can I? :-) Glad you liked the article! Prioryman (talk) 21:36, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

Late back from work today :-( I'll beat you next time! But seriously, well done for a very well-written article. BabelStone (talk) 21:47, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

List of monarchs of East Anglia

Hi BabelStone, List of monarchs of East Anglia is a list-class article that I have nominated for featured list status. Would you mind taking a look at it for me, and either supporting or opposing it, as it's not been commented on much? Thanks. Hel-hama (talk) 11:35, 18 December 2011 (UTC)

Code2000

Please check again and re-download here: sourceforge.net/projects/code2000/files/

Now all TTFs internally are admitting following things:

"Notice: Code2000 is freeware, users are not required to register. US$0.00 (James Kass, 2807 Erskine Creek Road Space 93,Lake Isabella, California 93240 U.S.A.)[e-mail: jameskass@code2000.net]<Web site: http://www.code2000.net/index.htm>"

"Code2000 is freeware. Users are not required to register the font after any reasonable evaluation period by sending $0.00 (US) or equivalent to: James Kass 2807 Erskine Creek Road, Space 93 Lake Isabella, California 93240 U.S.A."

"Notice: Code2001 may be freely distributed, but even if you don't own it, you may alter it in any manner whatsoever."

"Code2001 may be freely distributed. All rights reserved."

"Notice: Code2002 may be freely distributed, but even if you don't own it, you may alter it in any manner whatsoever."

"Code2002 may be freely distributed. All rights reserved."

As you see, author finally confirmed free status of his fonts. So please correct all errors present in Wikipedia in regard to these fonts. 212.227.18.8 (talk) 19:13, 24 December 2011 (UTC)

The person who uploaded the files to SourceForge has modified the files as you have indicated above, but we have no way of knowing whether the person who calls himself James Kass is the real James Kass. I am doubtful that the James Kass who I used to know would write such an ungrammatical sentence as "As Christmas Eve gift I updated all Code2000 fonts to freeware status internally, so all embedded notices now reflects freeware status entirely". In short, without reliable evidence that the "James Kass" on SourceForge is the real James Kass there is nothing to be corrected in the Code2000 article. BabelStone (talk) 19:29, 24 December 2011 (UTC)

Original link as in de:Code2000

Please add to Code2000 following link:

http://web.archive.org/web/20110108105420/http://code2000.net/

It is WEB-ARCHIVE copy of original James Kass website, CONTRARY to sourceforge fake. And it is already added in de:Code2000. So canyou add it as reference to Code2000? It is needed as reference. 93.114.46.192 (talk) 09:49, 26 December 2011 (UTC)

Y Done. BabelStone (talk) 11:45, 26 December 2011 (UTC)

Saeson's Greetings

	Nadolig llawen and best wishes for 2012!
	All the best, BabelStone, for the New Year. Martinevans123 (talk) 17:41, 26 December 2011 (UTC)

Diolch! BabelStone (talk) 18:07, 26 December 2011 (UTC)