This is an archive of past discussions with User:Corinne. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
Hafspajen I left a note for Vsmith on his talk page at User talk:Vsmith#Patience Wright, and he replied, but, before I do any combining, I thought I'd ask you what you thought since Patience Wright was a sculptor. If you want to do the combining and/or adding "citation needed" tags, please feel free to do so. CorinneSD (talk) 22:39, 9 April 2015 (UTC)
Hafspajen I saw your edits and the note you left on Vsmith's page. I looked for the tag you said you placed "at the top" but didn't see it. Where is it? CorinneSD (talk) 23:29, 9 April 2015 (UTC)
New Hampshire
Rwood128 and Rothorpe What do you think of this edit to New Hampshire, and the edit summary? [1] Maybe the statement about same-sex marriage can't be said to be an example of a libertarian spirit, but I think the statement about N.H. being the only state that does not require adults to wear seatbelts while driving is. (I don't know much about libertarianism; I'm just assuming it means a spirit of letting people do what they want to do as much as possible.) If no introductory sentences are included, it can sound just like a list of unrelated facts. What do you think?
We would like to have a group discussion on Skype text chat with everyone on the FC team. In a few days, User:Go Phightins! will contact you privately to coordinate this. Please let him know about your availability if you are willing to participate. Thank you. Gamaliel (talk) 16:14, 10 April 2015 (UTC)
Gamaliel Thank you for telling me about this. I didn't even know I was on the FC team, but I'm glad to learn that I am. I will tell Go Phightins about my availability. I've never used Skype, but I see it is installed on my computer. It sounds like I can use Skype with only text, not using the webcam or microphone. Is that right? CorinneSD (talk) 16:27, 10 April 2015 (UTC)
This is Wikipedia, anyone can be on whatever team they want. Skype allows text only chat; the Signpost editors do it all the time. I don't even have a microphone or webcam on my computer. Gamaliel (talk) 17:06, 10 April 2015 (UTC)
I just finished reading and copy-editing most of the Gian Lorenzo Bernini article. I noticed that there are two pictures of the Fountain of Four Rivers (Fontana dei Quattro Fiume, or something like that) in the article. Do you want both of them? CorinneSD (talk) 00:22, 10 April 2015 (UTC)
Hafspajen (I just realized that I had forgotten to ping you for the comment just above.)
Hafspajen and Rothorpe I have nearly finished reading the article and have made a number of copy-edits. I have come across a sentence that I need to ask you about. It is in the middle of the second paragraph in the section Gian Lorenzo Bernini#First biographies of Bernini. Here it is:
This would mean that first, the commission did not at all originate in Queen Christina who would have merely lent her name as patron (in order to hide the fact that the biography was coming directly from the family) and secondly, that Baldinucci's narrative was largely derived from some pre-publication version of Domenico Bernini's much longer biography of his father, as evidenced by the extremely large amount of text repeated verbatim (there is no other explanation, otherwise, for the massive amount of verbatim repetition, and it is known that Baldinucci routinely copied verbatim material for his artists' biographies supplied by family and friends of his subjects).
(1) I think the sentence is too long.
(2) I question the statement that the second noun clause ("that Baldinucci's narrative...") logically follows the statement in the previous sentence:
...recent research now strongly suggests that it was in fact Bernini's sons...who commissioned the biography from Baldinucci.
In fact, the proof of "that Baldinucci's narrative was largely derived from..." lies in what follows ("as evidenced by..."), not what precedes "This would mean that".
Hafspajen, you know, or can look up, the original text from which this was presumably paraphrased. Once we know what it is supposed to say, together we can come up with a more accurate and more concise sentence (or two). CorinneSD (talk) 21:23, 10 April 2015 (UTC)
In my first set of edits to the article, you will see this:
The St Peter's Baldacchino was the centrepiece of this. Designed as a massive spiralling bronze canopy over the tomb of St Peter, Bernini's four-pillared creation reached nearly 30 m (98 ft) from the ground and cost around 200,000 Roman scudi (about $8m in currency of the early 21st century).[1]
References
^For the conversion of 17th-century Roman scudi to modern American dollars, see Mormando, "Bernini: His Life and His Rome", 2011, pp. xvii-xix, Money, Wages, and Cost of Living in Baroque Rome.
When I was going through the article, I saw this reference in Edit Mode. It had the two separate single quotation marks at the beginning of "Bernini: His Life and His Rome" and double quotation marks at the end of that title. I didn't know whether it was supposed to be in italics or not, so I changed the first separate single quotation marks (for italics) to a pair of double quotation marks. I believe that if it is a book title, it should be in italics, and if it is either a monograph or a chapter in a book, it should be in double quotation marks. Is that right? Could somebody check to see which it is, so we can be sure the title is in the right formatting? In other words, Bernini: His Life and His Rome or "Bernini: His Life and His Rome". (I see a title right after that: "Money, Wages, and Cost of Living in Baroque Rome", but it is in neither italics nor double quotation marks, so I don't know what that is.) CorinneSD (talk) 21:36, 10 April 2015 (UTC)
Sorry, twice
WPPilot I just saw the two photos of your wonderful cat and read what you wrote under the photos about her passing. I don't know when this was, but I just wanted to say how sorry I am. It sounds like you and your cat had a great friendship, and that you took really good care of her. I hope you will get another cat. I am also sorry that you and Hafspajen aren't getting along. I hope it is a temporary thing, and that things will change in the future. Best regards, CorinneSD (talk) 17:05, 10 April 2015 (UTC)
Ya well thank you for the thoughts, she really was the world to me and I can not believe that it has been brought back to the limelight in this manner. She was a sweetheart, and not a day passes that I don't miss her. Your kind to mention it and thank you for the thoughts, I am at a loss as to how to deal with this. I would love it if you would e mail me, WPPilot@Hotmail.com gets to me and your invited to use it. talk→WPPilot23:27, 10 April 2015 (UTC)
Haffen and Garvin
Have you looked at the Louis M. Haffen article? It outlines the scandal lightly referred to in the Bluemner article, caused by Haffen's favouring Garvin over Bluemner who was the real designer of the Haffen Building. Rothorpe (talk) 02:23, 10 April 2015 (UTC)
Thank you. I will read the article shortly. This particular painting is somewhat dark, but I like some of the others that are in the article. His use of color is similar to Robert Delaunay's.
Eiffel Tower, by Robert Delaunay, 1926.Form and Light, by Oscar Bluemner, 1914.
Hafspajen Hafs, I just read the article on Oscar Bluemner and made a few copy-edits. In the two block quotes in the section Oscar Bluemner#Later years, I found a number of typographical (spelling) errors. In the second quote, one of them has "[sic]" after it, indicating, as you know, that that is the way it appeared in the original, but none of the other errors have that. I tried to check the text of the first quote (NYTimes) but couldn't get access to the entire article. Can you find the original text in the source for both quotes? If you can, I'd be glad to point out the errors, here, and you can compare to the original.
Also, there is a table with one image from the Corcoran Gallery in it. I clicked on the link at the painting to see it but it did not lead anywhere, so I couldn't see the painting.
Finally, there is a statement toward the end of the article about one of his paintings that brought a huge price at a sale in 2011, I think it was. It would be nice to show that painting in the article, if possible. CorinneSD (talk) 23:15, 9 April 2015 (UTC)
Can't we put the image of the painting Illusion of a Prairie, New Jersey... right next to the sentence in Oscar Bluemner#Legacy that tells about its sale? It's your call, Hafs. CorinneSD (talk) 21:48, 10 April 2015 (UTC) P.S. Hafs, I have been noticing that, in Edit Mode, there is a red circle (in a small gray box) with a white "X" in the middle of it at the right margin, next to the file names of images in articles. What is that? Is that something new? I never noticed it before. Or have I inadvertently enabled something? CorinneSD (talk) 21:50, 10 April 2015 (UTC)
I see it here in this section, in the Bluemner article, and in the Bernini article. In Edit Mode, near the right margin, next to image files. CorinneSD (talk) 21:57, 10 April 2015 (UTC)
I just realized that here, in this section, in Edit Mode, the image file names are red -- just the file name, not the size details or caption. I checked in an article (Gian Lorenzo Bernini) and went into Edit Mode and saw that all of the image file names are colored. One is red; the others are all blue. I don't remember seeing file names in color before. What color are they for you, in Edit Mode? (I have wikEd enabled, but I have for a long time.) CorinneSD (talk) 19:22, 11 April 2015 (UTC)
I've added the screenshot; it's got to do with WikEd. I guess the red is just a handy took to find the pictures; maybe the red x has got the same function. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk!20:29, 11 April 2015 (UTC)
O.K. It's just that I hadn't seen you use that phrase before (and can't see your expression or hear the tone in your voice). I agree with you, though, about his talent. Really outstanding. CorinneSD (talk) 15:51, 11 April 2015 (UTC)
No, I hadn't seen those before - and I agree utterly fabulous. Altho' I prefer my molluscids and nautiloids fossilized. Vsmith (talk) 17:41, 11 April 2015 (UTC)
KDS4444 If you haven't seen the comments just above this, bask in them now. I asked a kind of rhetorical question, but you could probably answer it (if you want to). I've pinged you, though, because I was just looking at the article Rhombohedron, and I noticed that in the table in Rhombohedron#Special cases, there is no illustration for a General rhombic prism. Also, below the table, there are four bullets, each item expanding on one of the columns in the table. However, there is no bullet for the fifth column, General rhombohedron. Very puzzling. CorinneSD (talk) 22:01, 11 April 2015 (UTC)
His Mannerist influence, however, is not noticeably visible in his work.
This sentence has two instances of "his", and the previous sentence mentions two males: Frans Hals and Karel van Mander. I'd like to clear up any possible confusion as to who each "his" refers to. Am I right in thinking "his" in "His Mannerist influence" means van Mander's Mannerist influence, and that "his" in the phrase "in his work" means Frans Hals' work? If I am right, I would re-word this sentence:
Van Mander's Mannerist influence, however, is not noticeably visible in Hals' work,
or even this more concise version:
Van Mander's Mannerist influence, however, is not noticeable in Hals' work, or
Van Mander's Mannerist influence, however, is barely noticeable in Hals' work.
O.K. Good idea. I'll go ahead and select "is barely noticeable in Hals' work" to finish the sentence, but if Hafs wants to choose another ending, that's fine. CorinneSD (talk) 23:30, 11 April 2015 (UTC)
Sminthopsis84 and Rothorpe I wonder if you would review the latest group of edits to Ginger. [2] While there were perhaps too many instances of "also", I think some adverbs improve sentence flow and make the writing more interesting. With no modifiers, writing can sometimes sound dull. I'm wondering if you want to revert the whole lot, and then make selected edits, or revert a few individually. CorinneSD (talk) 20:45, 10 April 2015 (UTC)
No, that's six small edits, which is fine: any one can easily be reverted without having to put a lot of changes back. Whereas the change you linked to above... Rothorpe (talk) 16:21, 11 April 2015 (UTC)
Ugh, those removals were made without much regard to the meaning. I've changed some back and removed some duplication, but didn't look systematically for duplication. Sminthopsis84 (talk) 13:42, 12 April 2015 (UTC)
Your revert of my removal of unreferenced content
Please be advised that your revert to restore deleted unreferenced content in the lead section of the Gertrude Bell article breaks Wikipedia rules. Content that has been deleted as unreferenced cannot be restored without providing an adequate reference or references. Your edit summary was inaccurate - there is no content in the body of the article that contains the deleted claim. Tiptoethrutheminefield (talk) 01:58, 12 April 2015 (UTC)
User:Tiptoethrutheminefield I disagree with you. In my edit summary [3], I said the information was supported by information contained in the body of the article.
In November 1915, however, she was summoned to Cairo to the nascent Arab Bureau;
Under recommendation by renowned archaeologist and historian Lt. Cmdr. David Hogarth, first Lawrence, then Bell, were assigned to Army Intelligence Headquarters in Cairo in 1915 for war service.
Although the word "spy" is not specifically used, I believe it is understood that when one works for British Intelligence, one is a spy.
Because the lead will usually repeat information that is in the body, editors should balance the desire to avoid redundant citations in the lead with the desire to aid readers in locating sources for challengeable material. Leads are usually written at a greater level of generality than the body, and information in the lead section of non-controversial subjects is less likely to be challenged and less likely to require a source; there is not, however, an exception to citation requirements specific to leads. The necessity for citations in a lead should be determined on a case-by-case basis by editorial consensus. Complex, current, or controversial subjects may require many citations; others, few or none. The presence of citations in the introduction is neither required in every article nor prohibited in any article.
Thus, if a statement in the lead that is not controversial is supported by sourced information in the body of the article, the source does not have to be given in the lead.
I also disagree with you regarding the word "skill". I think a person's skill at most anything can be improved through experience. In addition, a person may possess innate skill at something. Since this statement has to do with policy-making, I think "skill" is the better word here. CorinneSD (talk) 19:20, 12 April 2015 (UTC)
If the word "spy" is not used in any sources, the article cannot use the word "spy" simply because an editor considers something equates to being a spy. BTW, I see nothing in her life that equates to it. And it is a very controversial claim to make - you cannot make it without strong sources to support it. No sources have been presented to support it. A lead, as the advice says, is meant to just summarize what is in the body. There is NO content in the article to support the word spy being inserted in the lead. Tiptoethrutheminefield (talk) 19:38, 12 April 2015 (UTC)
If you don't mind, I am going to put the content issue part of the above onto the article's talk page, and ask that if you want to continue this we take it to the article's talk page. Tiptoethrutheminefield (talk) 19:54, 12 April 2015 (UTC)
Sorry, but can I ask you to revert your recent edit to the GB talk page since you are duplicating my post by reproducing my words and also having off topic things in it like my advice on reverting edits that remove unreferenced content, and the discussion on the skill versus knowledge wording. You could present your reasoning below my reasoning on the talk page. Tiptoethrutheminefield (talk) 20:13, 12 April 2015 (UTC)
Comment at WP Village Pump (technical)
Thanks for pointing out my double negative -- I've edited the passage and added a suitable edit summary. --User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 21:01, 12 April 2015 (UTC)
Archive parameter
Hallo Corinne. I've changed one of the parameters of MiszaBot for the moment, to see if it works. If it does, a lot of threads will be archived one of these days. NB: it is also possible to configure your archives to have an archive for each year, andit's even possible to have a separate archive archive for each month. How about those options? Best regards, Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk!08:49, 12 April 2015 (UTC)
Vsmith I suggested a re-wording of a sentence at Radiocarbon dating to Mike Christie a few days ago – see User talk:Mike Christie#Radiocarbon dating, starting from the short line, "I see the sentence you just added." There were a few permutations of the sentence, with me trying to word the sentence so that it expresses the right thing but is also a well-constructed and concise sentence, and Mike was very nice about my suggestions. Then, before I made the change to my new version, I read the sentence again in context (which I had only done briefly when I first saw it in the edit history), and I thought perhaps the way it was now written was better, even though less concise, and I said so to Mike. He said he "marginally prefers" the way it is now. My question to you is (a) do you also prefer the way it is now, and (b) if so, which word do you think is better, "jointly" or "collectively"? Or do you want to suggest a different wording? By the way, the article was just promoted to FA, and Mike was the editor who did the most work on it. CorinneSD (talk) 23:58, 14 April 2015 (UTC)
I see a lot of pages in which images have captions with the phrase "close-up on". (The latest I noticed was in Asparagus racemosus.) Maybe this is an age thing, or perhaps a trans-Atlantic difference, but it grates on me; I would write "close-up of". I'd be interested in your view. Peter coxhead (talk) 11:14, 16 April 2015 (UTC)
Peter coxhead I agree with you. I have never even heard of (or seen) "close-up on". Is it perhaps Indian English? Is it possible some non-native speakers of English are confusing the noun "a close-up", formed from the adjective "close [to]", with the verb, to close in on? In any case, I would change "on" to "of" whenever you see it. I wonder if it is given as an alternate in some dictionaries (why, I wouldn't know). CorinneSD (talk) 16:14, 16 April 2015 (UTC)
I think they might derive it from "focus on"; the focus of the picture is on the flower, and hence it's a close-up "on" the flower. The caption was added by a French speaker. I wonder if it is given as an alternate ... While we're on the topic of cross-Atlantic differences, see alternate vs. alternative. Alakzi (talk) 19:45, 16 April 2015 (UTC)
Yes, my fingers always itch to correct "alternate" when it doesn't mean "every other one", which is its only meaning in my British English dialect, but I know that Americans use it differently... Peter coxhead (talk) 20:11, 16 April 2015 (UTC)
I can understand An image focusing on X, but not A focus on X as a caption. Here is the Merriam-Webster definition for "alternate". [4] Notice that the fourth definition says, "Alternative, [Definition] 3," and when you look at Definition 3 for "alternative", it is a meaning different from "every other". Here's the full definition for "alternative": [5]. (I often have trouble knowing which to use. I use what sounds right, which is not very academic. CorinneSD (talk) 01:14, 17 April 2015 (UTC)
It looks highly likely. How about linking and making a note on the talk, also on the talk of the German article, asking if he did it. You can do that in English. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:48, 19 April 2015 (UTC)
Joshua Jonathan I just finished reading and copy-editing the article Jacob Cornelisz van Oostsanen (which I read because of a painting at FP). Then I just started reading the article on one of his sons, Dirck Jacobsz. In the section Dirck Jacobsz#Career, I saw his father's name, Jacob Cornelisz van Oostsanen, with a period at the end of "Cornelisz". Since I had just finished reading his article and had not seen his name – or any name – written with a period even once, I thought it was a typo, so I removed the period. Then, right after that, I read,
He married Marritgen Gerritsdr. in 1550, and they had two children, Maria Dircksdr. and Jacob Dircksz.
I see a period after "Gerritsdr." and after "Dircksdr." Then I noticed the period after "Jacobsz" in the title of the article. Now I'm totally confused. Where is the period correct, and needed? What does the period signify? CorinneSD (talk) 16:54, 11 April 2015 (UTC)
Speaking of Dutch, I just discovered (on NL WP) that Dutch for 'War of Independence' is Onafhankelijkheidsoorlog – Sca (talk) 14:37, 19 April 2015 (UTC)
Sca Wow. Sounds difficult to say. Sca, why did you change your mind about your request that I remove my qualifying statement at my "Support" vote on the featured pictures talk page, regarding that statement to encourage editors to explain their votes? You posted a request, then removed it. What made you change your mind? Also, why did you not agree with me there? CorinneSD (talk) 15:32, 19 April 2015 (UTC)
Ohn-ahff-hahn'-kel-ides-oar'-lokhh – nothin' to it, once you learn the Dutch G, which is sort of a cross between gargling and coughing.
Re your question, let's just say I got confused by my own previous rhetoric. I guess "support" isn't nec. And, let the chips fall.... Sca (talk) 17:31, 19 April 2015 (UTC)
I found it interesting that Hull asked Albozagros, or whatever his name is, to explain his statement (which, admittedly, was not clear, but A. is a non-native speaker of English, so we're kind of used to his writing), then posted a statement written in correct English but which made little sense. CorinneSD (talk) 18:08, 19 April 2015 (UTC)
Misplaced comment
Hijiri88 I've been reading the exchanges on John Carter's talk page and on Catflap08's talk page. I don't know what all the disagreements have been about since I haven't looked at the articles being discussed, and I don't want to get involved, but I just want to say that I'm sorry you've been having all this trouble, and I'm sorry John Carter refuses to remove that comment you inadvertently posted on his user page (which, I agree, looks somewhat like a talk page). I read your comment, and it isn't such a terrible comment that you should feel embarrassed about it. If you don't get anywhere with the complaint you're lodging, I wouldn't lose sleep over it. The few people who see it might not even realize that it was posted in error or might think that John himself doesn't care to tidy up his user page. Anyway, he says that he's semi-retired, so probably will retire at some point. In the bigger picture of life, this is a small thing. Turn your attention to happier things, less stressful pages, and more pleasant editors. Your edits, not an occasional error like this, will speak for themselves. Best regards, CorinneSD (talk) 00:04, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
I put in my two cents. I didn't bother to read through the MoS, though. I'm sorry if it doesn't support your preference. You know by now that I'm fairly conservative in my use of the English language, and I prefer that caps be used where they are traditionally used, but now with the internet, I notice that a lot of companies don't capitalize the name of the company. What can you do? CorinneSD (talk) 18:30, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
It's one thing to use lower case for the name of a company in mid-sentence, as that's normal for ordinary nouns; quite another to overrule and insist on dropping the capital at the beginning. It could be justified on the grounds that it is the mirror image of insisting that proper nouns be capitalised mid-sentence, I suppose. Anyway, thanks for commenting there; we'll see if anyone else takes it up. Rothorpe (talk) 19:14, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
Oh, dear. I guess I didn't think it through very well. I wasn't even thinking about the beginning of sentences. I guess a lower-case letter at the beginning of a sentence would look odd. Hmm. I wonder if there were a way to get around it by always using something like "The internet company dab.com," or "the on-line tech company dab.com...," or "The company..." CorinneSD (talk) 03:01, 22 April 2015 (UTC)
No problem!
Yes, I tried that method with one example before I noticed there were two others; that made me inclined just to substitute capitals. As you say, there is already one example where Dabs is capitalised, though it doesn't have the .com attached to it. Rothorpe (talk) 19:39, 22 April 2015 (UTC)
Formatting talk page
Joshua Jonathan Joshua, my talk page looks fine (did you see the box that displays the current phases of the moon that I added?), but I wanted to make the sentence, "You are welcome to continue discussions that have already been archived" a little smaller. I went into edit mode but couldn't see where to change the font size. Also, why do you have the hidden sentences ("Welcome to my talk page", etc.) above that? Couldn't we delete that? CorinneSD (talk) 21:37, 22 April 2015 (UTC)
Joshua Jonathan Sorry to bother you again, Joshua, but I still don't understand how to make the font size smaller. I found "font size" in edit mode (right after the statement); first, I put the equals sign and then 5 and hit preview; it looked the same; then I changed it to "4", hit preview, and it looked the same. Maybe I didn't leave the spaces before and after the equals sign. I'll try it again. CorinneSD (talk) 01:07, 24 April 2015 (UTC) Nope. I made sure to leave the space before and after the equals sign, but I tried a "4", then a "3", and nothing changed. What number should I put, and how? CorinneSD (talk) 01:09, 24 April 2015 (UTC)
If I may intrude, I tried changing it to 1 and then 2 and on the preview it looked much smaller. 1 is tiny; 2 the same size as this text. I suggest you have another go. PS Don't change the equals sign or spaces. Rothorpe (talk) 02:12, 24 April 2015 (UTC)
I first tried "3", and saved. It was the same as before. Then I tried "2", and saved, and it was still the same size. CorinneSD (talk) 02:15, 24 April 2015 (UTC)
Sca What's that "Oh, Vincent!" comment after your "Support" vote for the van Gogh painting at FP? Were you making fun of my comment? I just don't understand your comment. Perhaps some innuendo? CorinneSD (talk) 01:31, 24 April 2015 (UTC)
Yes, I saw the numbers change and wondered what was going on; then I saw your note. OK, I'm going to change it and please tell me if you notice any difference. Rothorpe (talk) 02:20, 24 April 2015 (UTC)
I think I've solved it: you have to change the first number, not the second. I hadn't noticed there were two. Rothorpe (talk) 02:23, 24 April 2015 (UTC)
Yes, there shouldn't be anything at all at the end, so I've removed it. All you have to do now is change the 10 to a 3 or 4 and it should be the size you want. Rothorpe (talk) 02:33, 24 April 2015 (UTC)
Oh... I hadn't even seen the first "font size"! Thank you! I see you had already changed it to "3", which looks about right. Then I finally added the missing period. CorinneSD (talk) 02:51, 24 April 2015 (UTC)
Hafspajen I just read what you wrote on your talk page. It is well-written, and more organized than what you wrote when you were really upset about ten days ago. I could not tell, though, whether it was a "farewell" statement like the one Yngvadottir posted on her talk page or just an organized defense of yourself. I hope it is not a farewell statement. I would be very upset if it were. Please - do - not - leave - Wikipedia. If it is just an organized defense of yourself, I guess I can understand why you wrote it, but I'm wondering if something has happened that I don't know about that made you feel that you had to write it. Have you been banned in some way? Please tell me what has happened.
I know your feelings have been hurt, but perhaps you will be able to get past that. You know you have many friends on Wikipedia. Have any of the friends who did not come to your defense earlier apologized to you for not doing so? I know Xanty did, but I don't know about any others. (You don't have to tell me who.) I don't think you need to defend yourself any more. You've already done that very well, with plenty of links and diffs. Just edit in the way you like to and on the articles you like to work on. I even think you could enjoy working on Signpost again. I look forward to seeing more featured picture nominations and to reading your comments on other nominations. I also look forward to helping you write and improve articles. Best regards, CorinneSD (talk) 16:59, 22 April 2015 (UTC)
Since you asked, yes the last mail I ever read on that e-mail I enabled was I should stay away from the Signpost and the editor I was "criticizing". So, I stay away from Signpost and the editor. That e-mail is dead, possibly because Francesco Forgione born 1887 can't have an email... Anyway it was a temporary e-mail. Skype, - forget Skype. I am not using Skype and I will not start. One of our computer started suddenly updating a Skype program from 2007, out of nowhere and suddenly the computer had a message * there is a new file on your computer, update your camera* - and it came flashes from the camera. Could be a coincidence. Or not. I was not pleased. It was impossible to get rid of the new Skype file and I was trying to get rid of it spending a whole day trying. Until I had to confess about it, the computer security was alerted and got rid of it.
After this ... no Skype. And I am not a troll and I am not a disruptive editor. I am what I am, but none of the above statements fit. I tried for the last time explain the issue, and WP:Copyvio is a serious issue. But I can't and I will not edit somewhere I am accused of such things. I have more self-esteem than that. I am not coming back where people think I am trolling and I am disruptive. And silence ... sometimes is to agree. People think it shouldn't matter. I think it matters. I do have a honor code is that I respected all my life. I tried to respect Wikipedia rules, I tried to behave as a honorable human being, and since I did that I am offended that some people to easily use whatever it came to their mind and then everybody expects to get over it. I don't care much for an apology from that editor who's name starts with P. But I care that the Signpost editorial staff give credit such shit, after all my work there. I don't WANT to edit Wikipedia any more in this way. Hafspajen (talk) 20:01, 22 April 2015 (UTC)
Hafspajen I agree with you. I don't use Skype, and now I never will. I also don't think discussions should go on off-Wikipedia, either. I didn't know anything about the redaction at Signpost. If I had known, I might have said something. Could you give me some links or diffs so I can see what happened there? I'm wondering whether we could start another newsletter, with a different name, and publish it regularly. I'd be willing to work on it with you. I have a suggestion, if you continue to work on WP. It's just a thought. The next time anyone is the least bit difficult, or unpleasant, disengage immediately. By that I mean stop interacting or communicating with that person. Don't even respond. The person will then stop communicating with you, and it can't escalate and you won't be stressed out. Only interact with people who are consistently pleasant, courteous and helpful. You don't have to defend yourself with me, Hafs. I'm on your side. Have a nice Irish coffee and some tiramisu, forget the past, and look forward. Best regards, CorinneSD (talk) 21:21, 22 April 2015 (UTC)
That I can't. It was an e-mail, a temporary e-mail I enabled for the Signpost-editors. It does not working any more. Possible because it was made for an Italian saint, Francesco Forgione born 1887. :) Or maybe he got tired of the supid advertisments offering him girlfriends from Russia and Cavin Klein underweare, and made a miracle, ending the account. You don't think I used my own name, now do you? Hafspajen (talk) 23:46, 22 April 2015 (UTC)
Sorry, the answer is to your question: "I didn't know anything about the redaction at Signpost" is, I meant the editorial staff of Signpost. Hafspajen (talk) 16:48, 23 April 2015 (UTC)
O.K. I understand that you can't supply a diff or link because it was on a now-defunct e-mail account (it probably took the computer a while to figure out who Francesco Forgione was), but I still don't understand what you mean about a redaction. I thought a redaction was simply a removal of material from a publication or draft of a publication. How does that relate to the staff of Signpost? If you're getting tired of explaining, that's all right. Just forget it. CorinneSD (talk) 18:13, 23 April 2015 (UTC)
No, no, I can explain. Sorry, that was Swenglish. I never meant any removal off material at all, sorry. Redaktion in Swedish means http://sv.bab.la/lexikon/svensk-engelsk/redaktioneditorial staff. Sorry to confuse you, I was using a Swedish word instead of using the proper English word. This kind of mistakes happens when words sound alike but mean different things.... I meant nothing else ever but the editorial staff. What I was trying to explain to you, Corinne, is they don't give me any alternative but discussing on Skype. They really should not be demanding anyone communicate off-wiki. Hafspajen (talk) 12:10, 24 April 2015 (UTC)
How are you supposed to discuss things when the only answer is always: please discuss things on Skype.
- But I don't want to use Skype.
- Please discuss things on Skype.
- I don't trust Skype.
- Please discuss things on Skype..
- I don't want to discuss things on Skype..
- Please discuss things on Skype.
-I had some bad experience with Skype and I don't want to use it.
Nothing's happening on Skype, Hafs. I had an email with someone's Skype name, sent a request and haven't heard back- that was about 3 weeks ago. It's supposed to be text-only (I was wondering, as my English is so accented that it would be difficult to understand). So as far as I'm concerned there's no off-Wiki communication. The time zone difference would make things amusing anyway ("I'm sorry I called you a wazzock, but I was asleep at the time") Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 21:06, 24 April 2015 (UTC)
Corinne, User:Cassianto has never upset me at all, actually I think he is an excellent editor... great articles and stuff. :) Well, thank you for trying. I think that maybe Wikipedia is not the place any more for me. I am now definitely agaist off-Wiki comunication, because this concept of only talking with certain editors but not the others, I feel is against the openness of the Wikipedia that anyone may edit. I was thinking long enough now, and I feel that if anyone may edit Wiki, than anyone should be welcomed to discuss things too. I think we are stucked here. We never ever started any discussion, only were discussing where to disscus things. Never mind, I kinda feel that I care less and less every day for the things I cared before. Hafspajen (talk) 01:47, 26 April 2015 (UTC)
Cass, don't be silly. She might have misunderstood something the others said, if it ever was the case. I might have misunderstood it, too. Corinne is one of the nicest editors possible. Corinne, this is Cassianto, Cassianto, this is Corinne, and I like you both, God bless and take care. Hafspajen (talk) 13:52, 26 April 2015 (UTC)
Ay-ay-yay-yay-yay... Cassianto I wasn't referring to you when I wrote, "the editor who upset Hafs". I don't believe I ever said or implied anywhere that you had upset Hafs. I was referring to WPPilot. I just didn't want to upset Hafs any more than s/he was already. That's all. WPPilot, I have never had any problems with you. I have no ill-will toward you. Even on Rothorpe's talk page I wasn't trying to gather support for a move against you, and I don't see how you could see it that way, so I think your post of the meatball page in that discussion was unwarranted. CorinneSD (talk) 18:20, 26 April 2015 (UTC)
Then what is it that you are trying to do? You want others to weigh in on Haf's bi annual meltdown and convince them that the editor should be allowed to participate, no you want someone to invite the user back to editing SP FC and you would like everyone to ignore the rhetoric it has placed upon the users talk page all about me. I have also seen that you would like them to "discipline" me in some manner for not being "nice" to the user when the user was using the FC talk page to broadcast perceived problems to the readers of the SP so I find your claim of "no ill will" with guarded concern. The publication is now a week ahead of publishing times, and not one person, out of the 600,000 readers a month [7] has had a single comment that was not positive about my efforts. @CorinneSD: It seems to me, but I could be wrong as I am not perfect, that you are only contributing to this drama, by reaching out to uninvolved editors and dragging them into this with "poor Haf's please help" bi annual drama. I think the meatball page is a accurate portrayal of this type of conduct. I think if the user removes the overwhelming amount of attack info it has on its talk page, that your efforts might be taken more seriously. Cheers. talk→WPPilot18:42, 26 April 2015 (UTC)
FYI, I would again like to reach out to you to participate in the FC section. I think that you would be a big help. I have been active in it since 2011 and Adam has been after me to contribute since then. The project is open to everyone, and other editors have already included you in the group, please participate, your an honest and clearly good hearted person, and I did not ever mean to offend anyone, but my objective is the creation of a publication that honors this site, and I have been told that my efforts have been successful. Kaizen - talk→WPPilot19:09, 26 April 2015 (UTC)
WPPilot Thank you for your encouragement to participate in the FC section. I don't even know what "the FC section" is. I'm sure you're doing a good job. I am not trying create drama, and I'm sorry you see it that way. When I said to Gamaliel that I thought Hafs was being criticized too strongly in relation to you, in the problems you were having with Hafs, I was not suggesting that you be criticized more. I was only pointing out what I saw as an uneven treatment. I thought Hafs should have been criticized less, not you criticized more. Yes, I guess I am good-hearted. I try to overlook others' failings, difficulties, and weaknesses and try to focus on what is good in them. I'm sure you've seen that people (and I'm not excluding myself) often lash out and say overly critical, exaggerated, or hurtful things when they have been hurt. What Hafs has said may be all true, mostly true, or partly true. It's not important how much. You will find yourself a better person if you overlook all of that, let it wash off like water off a duck's back, and look upon Hafs with kindness. How about apologizing to Hafs and inviting him/her to get started again at Signpost? CorinneSD (talk) 19:39, 26 April 2015 (UTC)
@CorinneSD: I have already tried to make a mends with the user, and the user responded with a series of dedicated sections on the user talk page to try to persuade the community to rebel upon me. So that is not a mistake I will make again and I am not the editor in chief, that is the person that the user needs to convince its ok to bash other editors on the FC (Featured Content Current Draft) section of the Signpost, or on the personal talk pages of everyone that the user can find, in the form of a long goodbye (#2) from the site, give me a break. @Gamaliel: has the final word, not me. As it was mentioned above by Gamaliel, the non stop bashing upon me on the users talk page is bothersome, and could cause me real problems in real life. I make no effort to hide my identity so the user could well have serious implications on my personal life, and that is clearly the users objective with those comments, not ohh please let me come back, its more look how horrible WP is at communication. This all is nothing but a self destructive digital meltdown designed to distract the community and turn other editors on me. --talk→WPPilot19:54, 26 April 2015 (UTC)
Hafspajen I usually have my screen enlarged to 150% (it's a small screen), so when I look at the article on Pali, there is a lot of blank space in the lead. Even when I reduce it to 110%, there is still quite a bit of blank space. Does the layout of the lead, infobox, illustration, etc., look all right to you? CorinneSD (talk) 21:40, 27 April 2015 (UTC)
Lots of edits, no summary, grrr. Incidentally, the first sentence, 'the Druze ... is a religion'---I thought it was a people with a religion, presumably called druzism or something, but I must be wrong, no? Rothorpe (talk) 00:45, 28 April 2015 (UTC)
You are receiving this message because The Wikipedia Library has record of you receiving a one-year subscription to Questia. This is a brief update to remind you about that access:
Make sure that you can still log in to your Questia account; if you are having trouble feel free to get in touch.
When your account expires you can reapply for access at WP:Questia.
Remember, if you find this source useful for your Wikipedia work, make sure to include citations with links on Wikipedia: links to partner resources are one of the few ways we can demonstrate usage and demand for accounts to our partners. The greater the linkage, the greater the likelihood a useful partnership will be renewed.
Write unusual articles using this partner's sources? Did access to this source create new opportunities for you in the Wikipedia community? If you have a unique story to share about your contributions, email us and we can set up an opportunity for you to write a blog post about your work with one of our partner's resources.
Finally, we would greatly appreciate if you filled out this short survey. The survey helps us not only better serve you with facilitating this particular partnership, but also helps us discover what other partnerships and services The Wikipedia Library can offer.
I don't quite understand what is your question regarding Belarusian Baroque. Can you clarify? Thanks, Renata (talk) 13:09, 2 May 2015 (UTC)
Renata Sure. First, let me copy the comment I left on Vsmith's talk page. Then I can see it and will clarify it:
I was looking at the latest edit to Igor Grabar, and I was puzzled by the change. Here is the edit: [10]. I typed "Belarusian Baroque" into the search bar and it said there was no article on that. Then I typed "Belarussian" just to see where it led. It led to a page with a list of articles, and at the top it says, "There is a page named "Belarussian" on Wikipedia." However, there isn't one. It leads to a redirect to "Belarusian", so why would it say that? But even on the disambiguation page for "Belarusian", there is nothing for "Belarusian baroque".
My concerns are small ones:
1) I guess the edit itself was all right, correcting the spelling of "Belarusian", but "Belarusian Baroque" is a red link, and I wonder whether it should stay as a red link. I notice that there is a brief mention of the baroque in architecture in a town in Belarus in the article Nesvizh in the section Nesvizh#Main sights.
Church of Corpus Christi in Nesvizh, Belarus. "The Corpus Christi Church (constructed 1587-1593) is one of the earliest Jesuit churches in the world and one of the first baroque buildings in the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, influencing the later architecture of Belarus, Poland and Lithuania."
Would it make sense to make the link at "Belarusian Baroque" lead to this section of the Nesvizh article? If not, should it be de-linked?
2) If you put "Belarussian" in the search bar, it leads to a page with a list of articles. At the top of the page it says, "There is a page named "Belarussian" on Wikipedia." However, there isn't a page named "Belarussian" on WP. There is one on "Belarusian". Shouldn't that spelling be corrected to "Belarusian"? CorinneSD (talk) 20:34, 2 May 2015 (UTC)
Hafspajen and Gerda Arendt What do you think of starting a new newsletter as an alternative to Signpost? It could have a different focus, a different philosophy, even a different timetable for publication. Perhaps focusing on art and culture. Any ideas? CorinneSD (talk) 01:02, 28 April 2015 (UTC)
Sorry, I am too busy already. How about a Hafspajen review of new content, the one thing that should matter? Not delivered, but to be found a certain space, for people to watchlist? WP:QAI could offer one, to make it a bit more official than user space. I am not a subscriber to the Signpost anyway, too busy already ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 05:54, 28 April 2015 (UTC)
Xanthy When you say, "Just took my name off FP," do you mean the Featured Pictures nominations page, where images are nominated for FP and voted upon? If so, how can you take your name off of that? Or do you mean the featured pictures section of the Signpost?
Gerda Good idea. I would encourage Hafspajen to participate in any way s/he wants to on Wikipedia. Hafs What do you think? If you want to write something, I'd be glad to proofread it, or we could write something together, and it could be presented in an artistic manner. Hafs, don't give up so easily. You have a right to participate on WP. CorinneSD (talk) 17:26, 28 April 2015 (UTC)
Took it off the credit line of the Signpost FC- it got put back on again! Sorry, should have written it out. Did you know readership of the FC section has gone up substantially since WPPilot started editing it? ("You are clearly good at picking apart my contributions, in spite of the fact that the publication readership is overwhelming increased over the last 4 issues"). I was laughing my head off last night, when I realised that I was the only person in the cinema laughing. "We think it's a crime of passion". Still cracks me up. Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 17:54, 28 April 2015 (UTC)
We can start completely informally, just write what you want to be seen on the project talk. Once we have something to share with more people, we can find a good name (WP:QAI/Post?), make a subpage (with its own talk for discussion, as in the Signpost) and advertise. For a sample: look at the top of project opera, short and interesting. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:03, 28 April 2015 (UTC)
Why not "Articles that should be written"- a quick write-up of a subject not yet written about. Advantages- you're not treading on anybody's toes as you would do with a review of new articles, and you don't bother with RS and stuff, as the article is not yet written. "Buffy (ceramic elephant)" for example. Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 21:47, 28 April 2015 (UTC)
Both good ideas. Here are three more ideas:
Interview editors to find out what got them started editing on WP, what WP means to them, things they have learned -- about themselves, about WP, about people (ie., other editors), or life -- since they started editing, what topics interest them, etc.
Here's another one (kind of fun): present a painting, and ask viewers to say what they see in it, what they think of it, what they like and don't like about it, what caption they would add to it, etc., or present two paintings, side by side, and ask viewers to compare them. Maybe we could ask art experts to refrain from saying anything until a certain time period had passed (such as a week or ten days), and then respond to all the comments (in a nice way), and add their own.
In each issue, select two or three interesting articles (on a wide variety of subjects), and give a summary of what's in the article and one or two interesting facts from the article (just enough to get readers interested in reading the entire article). CorinneSD (talk) 01:43, 29 April 2015 (UTC)
Look above: the red link turned blue, you can post on WP:QAI/Post (QAIPOST) and discuss on the talk, everything that has to do with article improvement. You don't need to become a member of the cabal of the outcasts (Hafspajen, did you hear me?) but are very welcome.
Hafspajen You might consider adopting a whole new approach on WP. I'd like to suggest that you leave off seeking support on most things. Instead of asking for anything – support, approval, agreement – instead of frequently defending your point of view, take charge of something, like Signnpost. Assume a leadership role. Behave as if you were the authoritative voice, with the attitude that you know what you are doing. Unless I am mistaken, I don't believe anyone was elected leader on Signpost or anywhere else. Why always ask for support and approval? I encourage you to have a greater, and much-deserved, confidence in your opinions about things. Only ask for help from those you consider reliable and on things you really need help with, such as proofreading or finding a source or image. If you feel confident about your knowledge, opinions, and contributions, you will feel less need to defend yourself. You can completely ignore difficult editors. At the first sign of difficulty, don't even engage in conversation with them. I'm really encouraging you to be more assertive – polite, but confident and assertive. CorinneSD (talk) 17:27, 3 May 2015 (UTC)
Xanthomelanoussprog I don't mind giving it a try (perhaps with a little guidance from you as to what I'm supposed to do), but not right now. In a few weeks, perhaps I can give it my full attention. CorinneSD (talk) 16:44, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
That'll be good. I'm going to withdraw my labour anyway- if they ask I'll say I won't return without some firm style guidelines, e.g. linking. At the moment it's all over the place. I think it should be entertaining and sometimes challenging, Ed17 wants it to reflect the glory of the feature writers and WPPilot wants it to reflect the glory of the sunset as it shines on his intellectual manhood. Adam's on a courageous journey to find his antipodes, so I don't know whether he'll be further contributing. Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 17:23, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
I suppose you mean figuratively. Either getting oneself into more trouble than one was initially, or becoming deeply depressed? Searching for one's identity? CorinneSD (talk) 22:41, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
Maybe the wrong "metaphor". I mean in the sense of deepening an entrenched position. I'm a bit dismayed at his assumption of bad faith on the part of Drmies. But he also has my sympathy- I've seen the damage anxiety does to people. Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 22:51, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
Since I haven't followed all the discussion on all the various talk pages, I don't know what Adam's position was, nor did I see any comment about bad faith on the part of Drmies. I can understand, though, why he might not want to participate any longer in the discussion. CorinneSD (talk) 23:02, 4 May 2015 (UTC) It's too bad, though, because he and Hafs used to work together quite well. Perhaps when this whole thing is settled, they'll start working together again. CorinneSD (talk) 23:04, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
Well, Burges' name is back in. I agree with Adam. I don't understand leaving it out when two sentences later it says two years later Burges was dead. I've never even seen the word "dosh". What does it mean? Is there an article on "High Victorian", with regard to interior design? If so, perhaps that phrase could be linked. CorinneSD (talk) 19:59, 5 May 2015 (UTC)
Dosh is a nickname for money; funny, I put it in, it went and then it came back in. There's a teeny weeny article at High Victorian Gothic which may fit the bill. Hafs is always enthusiastic for these broad articles ("Regency style" was one). The really funny thing is this; the article says that when the Marquis of Bute inherited the property he became "one of the wealthiest men in the world". He was six months old. Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 22:18, 5 May 2015 (UTC)
Is "dosh" British English? I've never heard it before now. Do you want to add that link to High V. G.? Re the Marquis of Bute, maybe the sentence should say, he became "one of the wealthiest individuals (or people) in the world" (unless it's a direct quote), but I'll leave that up to you. Did you see that Hafs posted a "Retired" banner on his/her talk (or is it user) page? CorinneSD (talk) 23:38, 5 May 2015 (UTC)
The answers are yes, British English, no, not sure about it, think I was wrong- I just checked the FA, yes, but it's vanished now. Good. Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 05:08, 6 May 2015 (UTC)
Hafs is talking in one-word replies, but I'll take one-word replies over no words. Baby steps back to WP? How are you these days, Hafs? I hope you're feeling better. Spring is here... CorinneSD (talk) 15:46, 6 May 2015 (UTC)
Pending changes
Vsmith A few months ago I received "pending changes reviewer" rights. I've only used it a few times. When there is an edit that I don't want to accept, I've been clicking on the red "Rollback Vandal" (because the edits I've seen look like vandalism or test edits), and it works, but I'm wondering whether that is the best thing to do. Would it be better to click on "Revert" in the very top line where it gives you the choice to "Accept" or "Revert" the edit? CorinneSD (talk) 15:37, 9 May 2015 (UTC)
If it is unambiguous vandalism "rollback vandal" is OK. I usually use the simple rollback or "restore the previous version" with a short edit summary if there's any doubt. But then the choices you see may be different. Vsmith (talk) 19:47, 9 May 2015 (UTC)
Lake Baikal
Vsmith I thought Lake Baikal was in a rift valley, where two tectonic plates were pulling apart. Then I saw this map in the article on Tannu-Ola Mountains:
Altay-Sayan mountains
.
I thought if two plates are pulling apart, there wouldn't be mountains around the rift. I see the lake itself is in a kind of flat area, but there are a lot of mountains around the lake. Are those very old mountains that will flatten out as the plates continue to pull apart? CorinneSD (talk) 22:47, 9 May 2015 (UTC)
The Baikal Rift Zone is currently a divergent boundary where older Paleozoic mountainous terranes are being pulled apart resulting in the deep down-dropped rifts. I'm not familiar with the mountain ranges adjacent to Baikal and the WP articles on the various ranges don't discuss the mountain geology or age of the ranges. The Kuznetsk Depression does mention Mesozoic volcanic mountains. The Baikal Rift Zone article states that rifting began/resumed in the Oligocene. Sort of analogous to the Rio Grande rift which is splitting the southern Rocky Mountains. Vsmith (talk) 23:27, 9 May 2015 (UTC)
User:Jaqeli is a native speaker. Check Georgian language#Prosody. All languages have prosody (that is, it's true that they're not monotone), but not all have stress to the extent that English does. The fact that people can't agree where the stress is in Georgian suggests that any stress is weak, and that its position is predictable. There's also lexical stress vs prosody. In English and Russian, the position of the stress is determined by the word ("a record" vs "to record", for example). In French and Malay, the stress is determined by the context, and words cannot be distinguished by where the stress is (moving the stress to the first syllable of French "super" just changes the emotional connotation, it doesn't make it a different word). Arguing where the stress is in a language without lexical stress is like arguing where the tone is in a language without lexical tone. Imagine if we were Chinese, and wanted to know the tone system of this funny language English. We could argue all day about it, and when we asked a native speaker, and they said English didn't have tone, we would know they're wrong, because we can hear it: different syllables have different pitches. But that's really only prosody, or incidental to the stress pattern.
I've skimmed over Jun et al (2007), and it seems that in Georgian, words are combined into prosodic phrases, where the first syllable is stressed and has either a high or low tone, and the final pair of syllables have a rising or falling tone. Which tone appears is determined by the prosody. This isn't unlike French, where the final syllable of a prosodic phrase is stressed (excluding "schwa"). When you say words in isolation, then the prosodic phrase is one word long, and it's easy to confuse the prosody of the phrase with the tone or stress of the word. A similar thing happens in English, where dictionaries distinguish primary from secondary stress, despite the fact that English words don't have primary and secondary stress: that's part of the prosody, not the lexicon. As soon as you put another word after it in the phrase, the primary/secondary distinction disappears. — kwami (talk) 18:27, 9 May 2015 (UTC)
Kwami Thanks for such a detailed reply. I will read that article to which you provided a link. I understand what you're saying pretty well, but am still unclear about what prosody is. (I think I read the article a while back and found it difficult to understand completely.) Can you give me a simple definition or explanation of prosody, preferably in relation to English? Forget that. I will read the article on Prosody. CorinneSD (talk) 20:58, 9 May 2015 (UTC)
The last part of what you wrote above I found quite interesting. I didn't know that English words don't really have either primary or secondary stress, and that any stress we hear is "part of the prosody, not the lexicon". I had never heard the last thing you said, that "as soon as you put another word after [a word that by itself has primary and secondary stress, according to the dictionary], the primary/secondary distinction disappears." Are you saying that, for example, with the word "fundamental", with "ment" having the primary and "fun" or "fund" having the secondary (fun da MENT al), those distinctions disappear when it is in a phrase such as "a fundamental distinction"? I notice when I say the phrase, the stress on "fun" or "fund" becomes stronger relative to "ment", compared to when I say the word by itself. Is that what you are referring to? (I never noticed that before.)
Yes. It's actually the "ment" that becomes weaker. 'fun-da-"ment-al --> 'fun-da-'ment-al dis-"tinc-tion. The last stressed syllable in a phrase gets extra stress from the phrase. That is, the stronger stress is part of the prosody, not of the word. It's just that when you say the word in isolation, the last stressed syllable of the word is the last stressed syllable of the phrase as well. — kwami (talk) 06:42, 10 May 2015 (UTC)
Regarding stress/prosody in Georgian, when I was reading your explanation, I was thinking of how, when I first heard and was learning Farsi, I was surprised by the lack of clear distinction in stress in the syllables of many words. Knowing Spanish, at first I pronounced "Ariana", or "Aryana", as "ah ri AN a". Then I realized that that pronunciation was wrong. I realized it was pronounced "ah ri ah nah", with the stress equal on all syllables, with possibly a slight lengthening of the last syllable, but not stress. Before that, I had never heard a language that had no pronounced stress on at least one syllable of words of more than one syllable. Thank you again for your time. - CorinneSD (talk) 20:54, 9 May 2015 (UTC)
I don't know. Just logged on. I saw yesterday she responded with a question on your talk page. Didn't you see that? I haven't seen anything further (yet). CorinneSD (talk) 21:35, 10 May 2015 (UTC)
You are receiving this message because The Wikipedia Library has record of you receiving a one-year subscription to Questia. This is a brief update to remind you about that access:
Make sure that you can still log in to your Questia account; if you are having trouble feel free to get in touch.
When your account expires you can reapply for access at WP:Questia.
Remember, if you find this source useful for your Wikipedia work, make sure to include citations with links on Wikipedia: links to partner resources are one of the few ways we can demonstrate usage and demand for accounts to our partners. The greater the linkage, the greater the likelihood a useful partnership will be renewed.
Write unusual articles using this partner's sources? Did access to this source create new opportunities for you in the Wikipedia community? If you have a unique story to share about your contributions, email us and we can set up an opportunity for you to write a blog post about your work with one of our partner's resources.
Finally, we would greatly appreciate if you filled out this short survey. The survey helps us not only better serve you with facilitating this particular partnership, but also helps us discover what other partnerships and services The Wikipedia Library can offer.
Apokryltaros What do you think of the recent edits to Walleye? [11] While I think some are all right, others I think were better before the edits. I like "at age three or four" better than "between three and four", and I like "the small amount of yolk" better than "a small amount of yolk". I don't know about the others. CorinneSD (talk) 02:40, 12 May 2015 (UTC)
Apokryltaros Of course I respect your judgment since this has to do with biology, but I have to ask you about this:
Here is the sentence and the beginning of the following sentence:
After hatching, the free-swimming embryo spends about a week absorbing the relatively small amount of yolk. Once the yolk has been fully absorbed, the young walleye begins to feed on invertebrates,...
The editor changed "the relatively small amount of yolk" to "a relatively small amount of yolk". The second version, with "a", suggests that the embryo absorbs only a small portion of the yolk and leaves the rest, but the next sentence says, "Once the yolk [sounds like the whole yolk] has been fully absorbed,..." The two seem to contradict each other.
If it reads "absorbing the relatively small amount of yolk", it sounds as if the yolk is small to begin with, but the embryo absorbs all of it. That would be consistent with the next sentence.
Or, perhaps the first sentence is ambiguous and needs to be made unambiguous.
Regarding the sentence about "walleyed", perhaps it could be added later in the article. I don't know if medical terminology belongs in "Cultural aspects". Perhaps a new section at the end of the article? Medicine? CorinneSD (talk) 03:17, 12 May 2015 (UTC)
Rothorpe and Rwood128 I'd like your opinion on this edit to Loren Eiseley: [12] In American English, the "to" is not needed nor used. This may be a case of British vs. American English. However, since Loren Eiseley was American, I think the article should be written in American English. Is there a significant difference, in your eyes, between:
from the 1950s through the 1970s, and
from the 1950s through to the 1970s?
To me, the second one suggests that it is up to 1970, or perhaps the early 1970s, and if you look at his works, he published right up until the year of his death in 1977. "From the 1950s through the 1970s" suggests through all, or most of the 70s, which is correct. Just wanted your thoughts before I revert. CorinneSD (talk) 20:53, 1 May 2015 (UTC)
Rothorpe and Peter coxhead I made this edit because I preferred "discovery" to "colonization". I added "by Europeans" to satisfy the IP editor who felt "discovery" was inappropriate and, clearly, politically incorrect. However, now I wonder whether it would have been all right to leave out "by Europeans" (which sounds silly to me) and then it would have been a simple revert. What do you think? CorinneSD (talk) 04:06, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
Welcome back! I have some sympathy with the IP. Less Eurocentric would be to use the active: after Europeans discovered...; how about that? Rothorpe (talk) 13:52, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for the welcome back! I know what you mean, but to me, the active voice phrase puts too much emphasis on that event, when the point is the time in history when this plant species made its way out of its native Central and South American locations.
I'm going to copy the sentence the way it is now so we can look at it:
First cultivated in the Americas before being brought to Europe after the discovery of the New World by Europeans, plants in the genus Cucurbita are important sources of human food, beverages, and oil.
How about this? -
First cultivated in the Americas before being brought to Europe by returning European explorers after their discovery of the New World, plants in the genus Cucurbita are important sources of human food, beverages, and oil.
Do you think the use of "their discovery" -- which from the European point of view actually occurred -- as opposed to "the discovery" -- which makes it seem as if the European discovery were the only one -- is acceptable? Any other ideas? CorinneSD (talk) 22:20, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
That's excellent. Do we need to insist that the explorers were European? Or just 'by returning explorers'? Rothorpe (talk) 00:22, 30 May 2015 (UTC)
I can offer my help, with all my efforts. Meanwhile, the article "language isolate" and also the term itself is really problematic. People can interpret this, "as a final end to researches and to science" Okurogluselo (talk) 01:52, 3 June 2015 (UTC)
Language Isolate
I can offer my help, with all my efforts. Meanwhile, the article "language isolate" and also the term itself is really problematic. People can interpret this, "as a final end to researches and to science" Okurogluselo (talk) 01:52, 3 June 2015 (UTC)
Summerian Language
I dont agree with the idea of erasing the last contributions or any parts of current content. I think, the article must contain all the dimensions of the issue, we cannot exclude any of the theories, these are all heritage of humanity. However, of course you may make editions for a good writing. I can offer my help, with all my efforts. Meanwhile, the article "language isolate" is much more problematic.Okurogluselo (talk) 01:52, 3 June 2015 (UTC)
Okurogluselo I understand that. Of course you'd like your additions to stay. However, they must be written well. I will wait and see if the other editors (who know more than I do about linguistics) leave it in the article (or revise it). If it stays, I'd be glad to work with you to improve the sentences. If you ever need help formulating a sentence or putting together a paragraph, let me know. Also, when you add a comment on a new topic to a talk page, put it at the end (the bottom of the page), not at the top. CorinneSD (talk) 02:03, 3 June 2015 (UTC)
Sumerian
Could you take a look to the recent contributions about the Sumerian language? I want the essay consist all aspects of the issue. Nobody should exclude one of the theories, in a biased manner. The political side of the arguments was an old issue in 19th and 20th centuries. The current article doesnt include any supportive opinion about old political campaigns, these are only theories of linguistics. I added some reliable references, dated after 1996. However, some people erase them and abandon the article as orphan.Okurogluselo (talk) 02:10, 3 June 2015 (UTC)
Double S
Corinne, do you know what the rule / practice is regarding use of ß on English WP (in articles about German subjects)? This isn't very helpful. Thanks. Sca (talk) 14:18, 3 June 2015 (UTC)
Sca No, I'm sorry, I don't know anything about that. All I know is that that letter is not English. I think -- just my opinion -- that in English it should be expressed as "ss" because "sz" is not really an English combination. Isn't there anything in Mos? You could ask Kwamikagami, Florian Blaschke, or Gerda Arendt. CorinneSD (talk) 17:35, 3 June 2015 (UTC)
Sumerian, extinct languages and Language Isolate Category
Hi Corinne. It is hard to tell something to these self-declared lingusists in wiki, especially to TaivoLinguist and others supporting him. They are irrational. I initiated a discussion in the talk page of Language Isolate. I dont feel comfortable with the language of the article. Just I want the usage of modal "can be" instead of "is". And some minortiy view references. But their reaction is unbeliviable. May I invite you to consider the issue? I think you are the one who could decide reasonably.
Thank you.Okurogluselo : Blah00:47, 6 June 2015 (UTC)
Okurogluselo It's flattering that you would think I could determine the best wording there, but the fact is that I don't know enough about linguistics to express an opinion. The best thing for you to do is to present your views clearly and succinctly on the article talk page, with the exact wording you'd like to see, and where you'd like it to be in the article, and provide at least one, preferably two or three, specific references from reliable sources. (First read WP:RS.) Then just wait for a while. See if you get support from other editors. You've got to get support from several knowledgeable editors in order to achieve consensus before making changes to the article. That's all I can say. CorinneSD (talk) 00:55, 6 June 2015 (UTC)
Just I wanted a change in the language or style of the article. I had already given references, as expressing that these are minority, but he reacted something like touching to sacred. They are irrational.
Just could you take a look to the talk page? You may see their weird reactions. It is not required to be a linguist to do wahat I propose. Just join to the discussion as a wise one or a moderator becuse tension is unbeliviable. If you prefer, of course.
I am pleased to talk to a kind one. It is rare, nowadays. Okurogluselo : Blah01:36, 6 June 2015 (UTC)
A concern
Crisco 1492 Hello, Crisco - I see you have recently begun using "Chris Woodrich" as your signature. If that is your real name, you might want to read [13]. If that is your real name and you want to continue using it, you might want to delete your date of birth from your user page (assuming what I read on your user page is indeed your real date of birth). Then you can e-mail the Oversight team through the link at the top of the page at [14] and request that all revisions from [15] to date be hidden. CorinneSD (talk) 15:56, 7 June 2015 (UTC)
Because the Unitarian Church does not follow one set of rules, most Protestant and Catholic Diocese do not recognize baptisms or marriages performed by the Unitarian Church.
My first thought was that "Diocese" should be plural: Dioceses, and probably should be lower-case. My second thought was that "dioceses" does not normally go with Protestant churches, so shouldn't it read,
Because the Unitarian Church does not follow one set of rules, most Protestant churches (or denominations) and Catholic dioceses do not recognize baptisms or marriages performed by the Unitarian Church.
(I would also be surprised to learn that some Catholic dioceses recognized baptisms or marriages performed by the Unitarian Church and others did not.) Any thoughts? CorinneSD (talk) 22:36, 13 June 2015 (UTC)
Yes, 'Diocese' jumped out at me too, and I agree with your solution, dioceses and denominations (churches being too vague). I don't know about the rest. Rothorpe (talk) 23:49, 13 June 2015 (UTC)
In the article Chavacano language, in the section Chavacano language#Samples, I'm trying to put three versions of a paragraph, representing first Zamboangueño Chavacano, then Spanish, and finally English, using the columns template that I found at Help:Columns. I've succeeded in getting the three columns, but I can't get the three headings the same. I want a space after "Another sample of Zamboangueño Chavacano", and I want "Zamboangueño Chavacano" on its own line, like "Spanish:" and "English:". Can you fix it so I can see how to do this? CorinneSD (talk) 14:45, 14 June 2015 (UTC)
Huon Oh, thank you! Is there any way to put a little more space between the columns? Do you see how close the ends of the lines in the first column are to the left-hand edge of the second column? CorinneSD (talk) 15:21, 14 June 2015 (UTC)
Hi, Corinne, do you agree with any of my edits, now reverted, at Althea Gibson? I didn't write edit summaries as I thought they were obvious enough. I've now left a note about US State abbreviations on the talk page. I think the run-on sentence is an improvement, though perhaps with a semicolon, and the encyclopedia encourages red links. Cheers, Rothorpe (talk) 03:16, 15 June 2015 (UTC)
Karol Fageros
Saving this link for future reference. [16] of which the second paragraph reads:
Mrs. Short won the Canadian and the German national championships and was a finalist at the United States Clay Court Championship and the French Open and a semifinalist at Wimbledon. CorinneSD (talk) 16:25, 15 June 2015 (UTC)
Short's parents had died of cancer, and in the past 17 years, she had raised more than $1.5 million for the American Cancer Society. She was the fifth-ranked female tennis player in the world at one time.
In addition to being the fifth-ranked female tennis player in the world, $1.5 million in 1988 (when this article was written) was a lot of money; even that is somewhat notable. CorinneSD (talk) 16:29, 15 June 2015 (UTC)
In a Miami, Florida, newspaper: Fageros was selected to represent the U.S. on the Wightman Cup team. [18]. (Note the small ad for a butcher to work in Havana, Cuba, at the bottom of the page.) CorinneSD (talk) 16:36, 15 June 2015 (UTC)
Sca See recent edits at Althea Gibson[19] and User:Rothorpe's post just above this one here on my talk page. Also look at links and notes I've just posted here. Do you think that one incident of her wearing gold lame panties under her tennis dress cancels out her accomplishments as a tennis player of world rank and makes her unnotable? I don't, but I thought I'd ask you. Rothorpe, what do you think? (Also, her reason was that she was tired of the all-white look of tennis clothing, so was anticipating, or before her time, because today many, if not most, professional players wear all sorts of colors and outfits. I know that's not a reason to make her notable, but I think it's interesting.) CorinneSD (talk) 16:43, 15 June 2015 (UTC)
The gold lamé surely adds a trifle to the notability she already has as a tennis player (which reminds me that some people seem to think notoriety means the same thing as notability). Rothorpe (talk) 17:00, 15 June 2015 (UTC)
The article is written by Gardnar Mulloy, whom I saw at the Beckenham tournament as well as on television at Wimbledon; he was already a somewhat ancient doubles player at the time; turns out he's still alive at 102. Anyway I continue to think a semifinalist at Wimbledon merits a red link. Rothorpe (talk) 01:04, 16 June 2015 (UTC)
Yes, I do. But if there is a consensus the other way -- as it appears there is -- it doesn't matter what I think. I had some trouble keeping the Althea Gibson article afloat at first, believe it or not. Let's see if this article stands up to AfD scrutiny. I would suggest using her married name (Karol Fageros Short) in the title, which seems to be the WP convention for female players. And I would add more biographical information (birthplace, schooling, marriage, children, death, etc.), which is what the patrollers look for -- and as many references as you can possibly find. Go for it. DoctorJoeEreview transgressions/talk to me!05:16, 16 June 2015 (UTC)
I would also suggest clarifying the "score" in the exhibition matches with Gibson. What does 4-114 mean? Games? Sets? Also, some particulars of her personal life (we know she married a "Mr. Short"), and death (there are obituaries online, so should be easy). DoctorJoeEreview transgressions/talk to me!19:58, 16 June 2015 (UTC)
DoctorJoeE Except for doing some paraphrasing of material for articles on painters which another editor then added to the article, and translating one article from the Portuguese WP, I haven't really added any material to articles. I mainly read articles and correct errors and improve the prose as I read. I'd love to learn how to add material and create the references, if you'll help me. I guess the first step is to find material in reliable sources. The second would be to paraphrase pertinent information. I can add that paraphrased material but I don't know how to create the references that need to go along with it. I'm too tired to start working on it right now, but maybe tomorrow. CorinneSD (talk) 21:11, 16 June 2015 (UTC)
Ssilvers I was looking at your recent edits to P. G. Wodehouse. Most are fine, but I disagree with your addition of a comma in this sentence:
The Wodehouses remained in Germany until September 1943, when Allied bombing led to the couple being allowed to move back to Paris.
When an adverbial clause follows the independent clause, no comma is needed before the adverbial clause. (When an adverbial clause precedes the independent clause, the adverbial clause is followed by a comma.)
Ssilvers I was surprised at your recent edit to P. G. Wodehouse: [21]. The addition of a link to the term "school stories" is fine, but when you changed "had happy teenage years" to "spent his happy teenage years", you went from a grammatically correct, colloquial English sentence to a sentence that is not colloquial. You can't say "his happy teenage years" until after you have already said that his teenage years were happy, and since this is right at the beginning of the article, this cannot have been said.
If you think it is important to say in the lead that his teenage years were happy, then I suggest:
He had (or spent) happy teenage years at Dulwich....".
If you think the characterization of his teenage years can wait until later, then write:
Why on earth are you talking to me about this on your Talk page? Please stop summoning me here. If you want to discuss the P.G. Wodehouse article, use the article's Talk page. I disagree with you, although I have removed the "his", which should satisfy you. If not, discuss it at the article's Talk page so that other contributors can comment. I suspect that the reason that you keep trying to discuss this here is that other editors have not been receptive to your comments. -- Ssilvers (talk) 20:46, 17 June 2015 (UTC)
Ssilvers This is the last time I will "summon you" to my page. In fact, it will probably be the last time I communicate with you. The reason I have left both comments here is to minimize embarrassment to you since both comments were criticisms of your writing, and, as a courtesy, to allow you to make the corrections. CorinneSD (talk) 02:58, 18 June 2015 (UTC)
Categories
Sitush Would you mind reading my comment at User talk:Vsmith#Evenks? I see the discussion on the editor's talk page, and your comments, but that was 14 June 2015, and these edits were made on 16 June 2015, so I don't know if the issue has been dealt with or not. Also, I wonder if you can answer the question I left for Vsmith, whether an article needs two categories, one with "ethnic" and the other with "indigenous". You can answer either here or on Vsmith's talk page. CorinneSD (talk) 20:27, 17 June 2015 (UTC)
I'm not in great shape at the moment, sorry. I'll defer to Kautilya3, who has been teaching me a thing or two about categories of late - some of it rather went over my head but I trust their judgement. - Sitush (talk) 16:11, 18 June 2015 (UTC)
This is not so much a categories issue, but rather whether "indigenous people" means something more than "ethnic group". Obviously, it does. The aborigines of Australia and the "Indians" of North America are the obvious examples. In India, the tribals that live in forests are called adivasis (i.e., the original inhabitants), and they are presumed to be living there from long before the advent of the ethnic groups like Aryans and Dravidians. So, it seems that it does add value to identify such people in categories. Cheers, Kautilya3 (talk) 16:21, 18 June 2015 (UTC)
83.51.145.160 Certainly! I'd be glad to help. But first I'm going to ask a music expert to take a look at it. Jerome Kohl Several times this spring I helped this editor (a non-native speaker of English) improve the prose of parts of the article that s/he has been writing. It's a work in progress. I could jump right in here, but after looking at it I thought I'd ask you to take a look at it first. At several places, I would have to either guess or ask this editor for clarification before I made changes in sentence structure while you might be more certain about what is intended. Or, if you prefer, I could work on it first and then ask you whether what I've done is correct. CorinneSD (talk) 16:34, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
Hi CorinneSD and 83.51.145.160. I have taken a look, as requested, and found only one small "musicological" problem ("antiphonal" should have been "antiphons"). While I was about it, I made a few adjustments to the prose as well. I hope I didn't distort any intended meanings.—Jerome Kohl (talk) 17:26, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
Logical quotes
I just wanted to say how nice it is to see you editing for logical punctuation with quotations. It hadn't entered my awareness that WP:MOSLQ is now entrenched in the Manual of Style. Oh frabjous day! Sminthopsis84 (talk) 19:37, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
Sminthopsis84 Thank you! It's nice that someone notices. Logical quotes was a surprise for me when I started editing on WP. It's different from what I had learned all the way through school and college. But it kind of makes sense to me to put the final quotation marks for sentence fragments inside the final punctuation. But Rothorpe, Anomalocaris and I interpret "sentence fragment" to mean a grammatically incomplete sentence. SchroCat and a few others interpret "sentence fragment" to mean part of the full sentence as it appears in the original text (which requires always reading the original text to determine that). I finally gave up on that discussion. I just stick to grammatically incomplete sentences. CorinneSD (talk) 22:43, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
Your gallery
Quite an impressive and interesting gallery (or galleries) you've got on your user page these days. You seem to have a fondness for blue, as I do. I recognize some familiar scenes from my 'winter' work, and from my old friend Baluschek. Nice! Sca (talk) 13:07, 26 June 2015 (UTC)
I find Baluschek really interesting, artistically and historically. Maybe I'll add a couple of his WWI paintings to a WWI article. (I'm reading Martin Gilbert's WWI history now.) Sca (talk) 20:56, 26 June 2015 (UTC)
Corinne, actually I didn't edit the Ślewiński article at all. My post on Haffy's talk was in response to an email he sent me, in which he simply asked if I knew of "this guy," with links to a couple Ślewiński paintings. (Why he's taken to emailing lately I'm not sure.)
Re your question, I Googled the Ślewiński quote about Gauguin and got repetitions of parts to the existing WP article, which is normal. Then I took a look at the Polish source referenced in the article, Młoda Polska (translates as "Young Poland") and it seems to feature short bio sketches of Polish artists, including Ślewiński – which I ran through translate.com and got (are you ready?) —
Władysław Ślewiński (born June 1, 1854 in Białyninie near Mikołajewa, d. 27 March 1918 in Paris) was a Polish painter, one of the representatives of the Young Polish and Art Nouveau. In 1886 he took over inherited from his mother in a short time what Pilaszkowice pierwsze Fortune leads him to ruin. In 1888, he had to flee from taxes to Paris. In the years 1888-1890 and studied at the Académie Colarossi. He was associated with the school of Pont-Aven, Paul Gauguin. In the years 1908-1910 he was a professor at the Warsaw School of fine arts. In 1910, he returned to France. He died in Paris, and was buried in the cemetery at Bagneux. Painting started late and almost all years creative period he spent in France.
A frequent theme of his work was the sea. He painted many still lifes, landscapes. Painted waves award-landscapes of modest, strict, calm. With Gauguinem and secession brought him the means of expression: the simplification and flattening the search(research) and linearyzm. In the painting he used the delicate line, more felt than seen, what is visible. Woman brushing her hair in the picture, where both the theme of long, flowing lines that perfectly as waves and hair softness and fluidity of forms leads the thought of your favorite style shapes and layouts. From the period when he lived in Krakow comes from dark-Poronina Orphan, pictures in muted range of synthetically included extensive stains.
Sca I'm glad there are a few things where computers cannot replace people. I especially like, "he used the delicate line, more felt than seen". Well, I guess that's that. I don't know what further I can do in that article. CorinneSD (talk) 23:52, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
The Wikipedia Library needs you!
We hope The Wikipedia Library has been a useful resource for your work. TWL is expanding rapidly and we need your help!
With only a couple hours per week, you can make a big difference for sharing knowledge. Please sign up and help us in one of these ways:
Account coordinators: help distribute free research access
Partner coordinators: seek new donations from partners
Communications coordinators: share updates in blogs, social media, newsletters and notices
Technical coordinators: advise on building tools to support the library's work
Outreach coordinators: connect to university libraries, archives, and other GLAMs
(edit conflict) :Rwood128 I'm flattered that you would ask me to edit your writing. Thank you for asking. I don't know the best place to write a few comments and concerns to you since the talk page for your article has not been created, so I'll write them here.
1) I removed a bit from the very beginning. I felt the sentences were too jam-packed with information.
2) I cut a bit from sentences later. I prefer lean sentences. Feel free to put back anything I've deleted anywhere in the article.
3) I'm a bit puzzled by quotes beginning with a capital letter (presumably the beginning of a sentence in the original) following the word "that" and no comma. I don't remember seeing that combination very often. I don't know if it is "correct" or not. I would normally use a verb such as "adds", "states", "claims", "points out", etc., or a participial, "saying", "adding", pointing out," etc., before a quote. If you want to incorporate the quote into your own sentence, and the quote follows "that", I would normally start the quote with a lower-case letter. But I'm not an expert in that, and you probably know more than I do, or could research it, so I'll leave it up to you.
4) Regarding the first sentence of the second paragraph:
Novelist Margaret Drabble describes it as "one of the most eccentric memoirs ever written", and notes that Powys indicates in his earlier autobiographical work, Confessions of Two Brothers, that "he takes Pepys, Casanova and Rousseau as his models, and his autobiography has justly been compared to Rousseau's Confessions of Jean-Jacques Rousseau.
(a) I think it's a little long.
(b) In the last part of the sentence, "his autobiography" is confusing. I think it refers to Autobiography, but you just mentioned "his earlier autobiographical work" (meaning Confessions of Two Brothers). I really did get a little confused as I was reading this paragraph, and I think it was this that threw me off. I wonder if you could leave any reference to Confessions of Two Brothers to later so there is no confusion that the paragraph is all about Autobiography. Even in the next sentence, beginning "Drabble adds, "It rivals them in its frankness," I'm not sure to which work the pronoun "it" refers, since you had just mentioned Confessions. The paragraph seems to go back and forth between the two works, and it's hard to follow.
(5) The third paragraph starts, "It is not a chronological account of his sixty years".
(a) It's not clear who says, or said, this.
(b) I wouldn't start a new paragraph with "it" unless the person who says, or said, it is mentioned pretty quickly.
(6) In the first paragraph, you have a sentence beginning, "Morine Krissdotir, in The Life of Powys, describes the "first chapter" of the Autobiography as...." I wonder whether "first chapter" needs to be in quotes.
(7) I think this short article would benefit by the addition of one or two quotes from the work to illustrate the most interesting aspects of the Autobiography.
(8) Regarding the list of sources, I'm not sure whether it is appropriate or not. It would be appropriate if you could make more of a connection to Autobiography. Right now it just seems to be a list of works that a researcher might use to do further investigation. You might consider deleting it or providing a link to it. (Perhaps it belongs in the article about John Cowper Powys.) Well, that's all. I hope this has been helpful. CorinneSD (talk) 16:23, 19 July 2015 (UTC)
Corinne, many thanks for this very thorough review. What you say is most helpful. I'll take a more thorough look tomorrow and start revising. Rwood128 (talk) 21:41, 19 July 2015 (UTC)
Bicycle kick
Just dropping by to thank you for the copy-edit work. Let me know if there is any part that is unclear. I am particularly worried that the lead section does not adequately summarize the history section (perhaps Barraza's quote should just be in the body text?). Thank you very much!--MarshalN20Talk22:49, 19 July 2015 (UTC)
Thank you
The Copyeditor's Barnstar
CorinneSD, I hereby award you The Copyeditor's Barnstar for your extraordinary copyedits of Flag of West Virginia and John Collins Covell. It was a sincere privilege to have you undertake these copyedits of two my articles, and I'm greatly appreciative of your hard work! Thank you for your continued contributions to ensuring and improving upon the quality of Wikipedia's content. -- West Virginian (talk)04:22, 20 July 2015 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for July 20
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Archaeological Museum of Chora, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Olympia. 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.
Fayenatic london I'm thinking about changing my username to just "Corinne". Would that be possible? I read on WP:Username#Changing your username that normally even if one changes one's username, the signature on discussions continues to display the original username. I wonder if mine could be changed so that my signature even on discussions shows as just "Corinne". CorinneSD (talk) 17:35, 19 July 2015 (UTC)
Hi Corinne, you could edit every talk page that has your old signature, perhaps using WP:AWB, but that sounds like a poor use of your time. The normal thing would be simply to leave redirects from the old user/talk page to the new. – FayenaticLondon20:03, 19 July 2015 (UTC)
Hi Corinne. I think that this is referring to the old discussions where you signed with your username (these won't change automatically). If this does turn out to be a problem, you can always edit how your signature looks in the "preferences" page ([22]); this may also be a suitable alternative to changing your username (if you are interested in changing the signature more than the actual username). Regards.--MarshalN20Talk22:46, 19 July 2015 (UTC)
Right. Your signature can be different from your user name. You could shorten your signature right now to Corinne, while still linking to your existing account name CorinneSD. – FayenaticLondon08:13, 20 July 2015 (UTC)
Thank you both. Fayenatic london, I'd really like to change my user name, not just my signature, if it's not too much trouble. Will it be linked to the previous account/user name? CorinneSD (talk) 15:25, 20 July 2015 (UTC)
Sending my thanks to you for the copyedit, even though I did send one anyway. I'll work on the article for the next couple of days and I will most likely ask you to double check and see if everything has been fixed/clarified. I have decapitalised "meat ant" so that should no longer be an issue. I have also clarified what meat ants are by incorporating its binomial name. Burklemore1 (talk) 03:26, 21 July 2015 (UTC)
CorinneSD, thank you so tremendously much for taking the time to complete two more copyedits of my nominated articles at GOCE. I've clarified all points in both articles. To avoid confusion over the term incorporator, I've linked the first mention in each article to Wiktionary. Really, its any one person charged with the incorporation of a company. As for Flournoy's son, he was given the same name his father but he never used the term junior publicly, so its Wikipedia article is rendered as Samuel Lightfoot Flournoy (West Virginia lawyer). Please take a look and let me know if I have addressed all your points for clarification. Thanks again Corrine! -- West Virginian (talk)15:31, 23 July 2015 (UTC)
Hi
Thank you for your edits on Valentin Wolfenstein and Carola Häggkvist. But could you please add the GOCE tag on each of the articles talk pages. Thanks.--BabbaQ (talk) 17:44, 23 July 2015 (UTC)
BabbaQ You're welcome. I've just added the template to each article's talk page. I assume you've seen the "clarification needed" templates I've added to each article. Let me know if you need any help, feedback, or further review. CorinneSD (talk) 03:11, 24 July 2015 (UTC)
Hafspajen Oh...beautiful! Thank you! I had never seen that painting nor heard of the artist. He really captured the grapes and grape leaves. I like the way the plums are not perfect like the ones in the grocery stores. Also, the flowers right at the center are exquisite. I'm going to add it to my collection on my user page. CorinneSD (talk) 00:41, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
But they look a little bluer than plums I usually see. I wonder if they really looked blue to Snijers or whether he made them blue to contrast with the orange of the other fruit (is that an orange on the left and a peach on the right?) and the rust-colored grape leaves. There's something about this color contrast that makes it look modern. CorinneSD (talk) 00:48, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
Oh... I guess there are a lot of different kinds of plums. Thank you for the other picture! I'm going to look at it now. CorinneSD (talk) 01:00, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
Oh, yes, luxury. It looks like the guests have either finished eating and moved on or are taking a break before continuing to eat. There's still a lot of food there. CorinneSD (talk) 01:03, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
I'm copy-editing Bath, Somerset, and I want to change a number (500 kilograms) into an adjective, so it has to be hyphenated and have no "s" on "kilogram". However, it is now within a conversion template. I have forgotten how to put in the hyphen and make it an adjective (and make the converted result also an adjective with a hyphen). CorinneSD (talk) 01:35, 30 July 2015 (UTC)
Yunshui Thank you for the template. I saw in the meantime that another editor had corrected the template, but wrote "adj=on" instead of "adj=mid". I wanted to see if your version would produce a hyphen between "1,100" and "lb", so I put in "mid" instead of "on" and looked at it in Preview, but it didn't. The result was the same. So I tried to put it back the way it was, but I put "adj" in the wrong place, so had to undo my own edit. I still wonder if there is a way to ensure that a hyphen appears between "1,100" and "lb" (and there should really be a hyphen after "lb" and after "kg" so it ends up looking like this: 500-kilogram- (1,100-lb-)" – as in "it's a hundred-foot-wide field", or "he's a six-foot-tall man" – so that it looks like this: 500-kilogram- (1,100-lb-), but since I haven't seen that in WP articles I guess it's not WP style). But there should at least be a hyphen between "1,100" and "lb" if possible. CorinneSD (talk) 16:49, 30 July 2015 (UTC)
Corinne, |adj=mid is supposed to be used with extra word(s) inside the template, like this:
{{convert|6|ft|m|adj=mid|-tall}} man outputs "6-foot-tall (1.8 m) man"
Without the extra words, it's just the same as |adj=on.
You can always do the conversion yourself – there's no need to use the template – and just write something like "6-foot-tall (1.8-m-tall) man", but I've never seen this written anywhere! Personally I avoid dimensions as compound adjectives where at all possible. "A man who was 6 ft (1.8 m) tall" looks much better! Peter coxhead (talk) 19:16, 30 July 2015 (UTC)
CorinneSD, do you ever participate in Wikipedia:Peer review? I think you would be a natural for it! With that in mind, and this is only if you have a free moment of time, would you be able to engage in a Peer Review of an article I have there at Wikipedia:Peer review/Capon Lake Whipple Truss Bridge/archive1. I needed a peer review of this article so that I could nominate it for Featured Article status. I normally wouldn't ask, but it's been lingering on the vine for a while and I wanted to have it reviewed before it passes without one. I know you're probably busy so please do not feel obligated to do so; you were just the first person I thought of! ;) -- West Virginian (talk)16:09, 2 August 2015 (UTC)
West Virginian I'd be glad to review the Capon Lake Whipple Truss Bridge article. Let me first finish Bath (Somerset), which I took on several days ago. I did about half of the article and then didn't work on it for two days. I have participated in peer reviews before but didn't really know where to look for new ones. I reviewed Epacris impressa, Radiocarbon dating, and Oil shale in Estonia – before the articles got to Peer Review and after. Thank you so much for the Barnstar! It's much appreciated. Any time you have an article that needs reviewing, or even a section or paragraph of an article, I'd be happy to take a look at it. (By the way, I think West Virginia is an under-appreciated state. People don't know much about it, so the work you are doing is valuable.) CorinneSD (talk) 16:54, 2 August 2015 (UTC)
CorinneSD, thank you for your timely response and for assisting me in this endeavor! There is certainly no rush on this, so please take it on at your leisure. You are quite welcome regarding the barnstar. I'm one of the very few active West Virginia editors on Wikipedia, so I have a tall order to write as much about the state as I can. Your copyedits continue to improve West Virginia's visibility to Wikipedia's readers, and perhaps these articles will coax some to visit the Mountain State! -- West Virginian (talk)17:14, 2 August 2015 (UTC)
Bath, Somerset copy-editing
Thanks for all your work so far in copy-editing Bath, Somerset. In relation to Bishops & seats I have tried to clarify "he" in the first instance is John of Tours and I have used "The bishop" on the second occurrence. The term "poor infirm" is used in the sources, to illustrate it was for those who couldn't afford to pay for the "treatment" provided by the hot springs. The term "elderly infirm" is still used in British English (ie by the BBC and newspapers) to refer to those who are weak through age but don't have specific injuries or illnesses. Hope that makes sense?— Rodtalk08:20, 30 July 2015 (UTC)
EEng Thank you for the link. I will certainly read some of them. I was reading the article on Lionel de Jersey Harvard (had never heard of him). I added two commas after Cambridge and Massachusetts, I think, or after Cambridge two times (can't remember now). Then, after I saved my edits I looked at the article and realized that the second one was in a quote. I've been told by another experienced editor that it is all right to correct spelling and punctuation errors in a quote if it is clear that it was an error and not an alternate or earlier spelling, etc. (so done only with the utmost care), but I don't know in this case whether I should have added that comma for the one in the quote. To be correct, there should be a comma, but perhaps you would prefer it to match the original text. I'll leave it up to you whether you want to take out the comma. CorinneSD (talk) 00:19, 9 August 2015 (UTC) Here's the link to my edit: [23]. CorinneSD (talk) 00:22, 9 August 2015 (UTC)
Despite what a lot of people think, the forms City, State can be followed by a comma, or not, depending on stylistic choice. So it's not at all the kind of thing we should be adjusting in quotations, any more than we should be changing Br. vs. Am. spelling. Same goes for X College, Cambridge (though this is not in a quote, so if you want to hunt up what MOS has to say about it, and MOS really wants a comma there, I'm happy for it to go back).
Thanks, Sca, I had read one article by her, but I didn't know she had a regular blog (or is it column?). I didn't even know you could read the New Yorker on-line. I've now bookmarked it. I'll probably read a few of her articles, but since I taught that stuff for over twenty-five years, I don't think I'll be reading a lot of it. Thanks for pointing it out, though. What articles have you been working on lately? I haven't seen many edits from you. I hope you've been enjoying the summer. CorinneSD (talk) 15:35, 7 August 2015 (UTC)
Most of Morris's stuff is rather elementary, being pitched to general audiences, but she makes some good points in an entertaining way.
I edit mainly random history stuff, generally coordinated with my reading, plus keep watch on ITN, WP:ERRORS and FPC – but I could use something substantial to work on. (Horrors, I ended a sentence with a prepostion!) Noticed you've been absent from FPC.
And yes, you can access much of the NYer online for free, but they limit you to 10 articles per month if you're not a subscriber. Sca (talk) 15:49, 7 August 2015 (UTC)
I recently discovered Wikipedia:WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors and Wikipedia:WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors/Requests. The first has about 2,000 articles that need copy-editing, and the second has a constantly changing list of requests for copy-editing, including some that were designed FA in the last six years or so but need reviewing. I haven't participated in FPC, partly because Hafs was no longer participating, partly because I felt others seemed to know so much more than I did, especially with regard to photos, and partly because a few months ago I was preoccupied with other things for a while. I guess I might participate again at FPC, but more on paintings than on photos. How about working on that Ferdinand Rusczyck material (I forget how to spell his name)? Do you remember we worked on putting translations from Polish and Lithuanian articles into standard English? We made some headway, then dropped it. It may still be at Hafspajen's "sadbox". If you can't find it, ask Hafs where it is. There is an article that I saw a few months ago that really needs work. Let me think... CorinneSD (talk) 21:59, 7 August 2015 (UTC)
Sorry, but I'm puzzled by the periodic resurfacing of this topic. I did what little I could with Ferdynand Ruszczyc last year. Remember, I don't speak / read Lithuanian or Polish other than a few words & phrases. Sca (talk) 20:09, 8 August 2015 (UTC)
Very funny; nice tongue-in-cheek. Re F. Ruszczyc, you said you would like a substantial project, so I thought that you, or we, could actually put together a good article on him. We're half-way done. We can use what has already been translated and just put it into good English and organize it. I found some things in my sandbox User:CorinneSD#sandbox. I had forgotten it was there. No more translations needed, or if there is anything we need to check, we can ask a native speaker. CorinneSD (talk) 21:47, 8 August 2015 (UTC)
P.S. How do you make a link to one's sandbox? I've tried two combinations, and it only leads to my user page. Here's an external link to it: [24]CorinneSD (talk) 21:49, 8 August 2015 (UTC)
P.S.#2 - Oh, dear. I just looked at it. I remember now that though I had better results with the Polish, I left a lot of blank spaces because I couldn't figure out what was meant. I guess we do need a native speaker. I'd forget the Lithuanian, unless there is something that looks interesting that is not in the Polish. I don't know any editor who knows Polish. CorinneSD (talk) 21:52, 8 August 2015 (UTC)
I think the only way you could do that would be to make a change to the template itself (thus affecting all uses). However, I came up with a different attempt at a fix. I too was seeing Pancake wrapping to the next line. I reduce the font size in increments until it no longer wrapped and it turned out it only needed a tiny reduction (one that is, I believe, undetectable to the human eye). Is it still wrapping to the next line for you or did this fix your display as well?--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 02:58, 11 August 2015 (UTC)
{{helpme}} I no longer want to be notified in my e-mail inbox that someone has left a comment on my talk page. I went to "Preferences" and saw a small drop-down menu. One choice is, "Do not send any e-mail notifications". I want to know if that is the one I should choose. I do want editors to be able to send me an e-mail message if they want to, so I want that option to be there. I just don't want be told every time someone leaves a comment on my talk page. CorinneSD (talk) 02:41, 13 August 2015 (UTC)
Yes, that is correct. To double check, go to "Preferences". Scroll down to "Email Options" and make sure that "Enable email from other users" is checked. Rotideypoc41352 (talk) 03:46, 13 August 2015 (UTC)
I just wondered if you could tell me what the purpose of {{'s}} is. I saw that added right after a link the title of a newspaper in italics in one article, and then just now I saw a bot added only apostrophe s ('s) right after a link at Cyrus Vance. Is there a difference? Is one more correct than the other? What is the difference between the 's in curley brackets and the regular 's? CorinneSD (talk) 01:41, 14 August 2015 (UTC) (Sorry, I went back to look at the first article and saw that it wasn't after a link; it was after a newspaper title.) CorinneSD (talk) 01:45, 14 August 2015 (UTC)
My understanding is that the template is used after italicized text because of the apostrophes required in wikicode to create italicized text. Since you type ''italicized text'' to produce italicized text, the addition of another apostrophe after that to create a possessive would mess up the double-apostrophe wikicode. So, you'd type ''italicized text''{{'s}} to get around that and successfully produce italicized text's. See Template:'s. Cheers, Nick—Contact/Contribs01:57, 14 August 2015 (UTC)
Cassianto I saw your post at Rothorpe's talk page asking for his opinion regarding the use of "the" or not in preposed appositives, or false titles. I know Rothorpe doesn't mind if I chime in on his talk page, but I didn't know if you would mind, so I'm posting this separately here. I find the issue interesting, and I read the entire page at the link you provided. I also read the article on False title. I don't even know if you're interested in what I have to say since we've disagreed on some things in the past, but if you are, here are some thoughts:
1) I think the choice as to whether to place the descriptive appositive phrase before or after the name of the person being described is a stylistic choice. Whether or not "the" is included, the different placement can have different effects on the overall sound of the sentence.
The usage pundit William Safire stated that the article "the" gives the title excessive emphasis and that it sounds funny to American speakers.
Adding "the" when the appositive is preposed (before the name of the person), puts emphasis on the title and draws some attention away from the name of the person. I think that is one reason why it is often used by Americans. Putting the phrase before the name and leaving out "the" makes the reader quickly skim the phrase to get to the name, thus slightly minimizing the importance of the appositive phrase, putting the focus on the name, and speeding up the flow of the sentence.
Putting the phrase after the name, as a real appositive, enclosed in a pair of commas, is of course perfectly good writing. However, this construction slows down the reader a bit and forces the reader to focus on that phrase.
Just a few minutes I happened to come across an example of the American usage. See the last sentence in the first paragraph in Oliver Sacks#Early life:
Sacks has a large extended family; his first cousins include Israeli statesman Abba Eban, writer and director Jonathan Lynn, and Nobel Laureate Robert Aumann.
This is contrasted with the other pattern in the first sentence of that paragraph.
I'll bet whoever wrote this had no idea that it was considered either American English or journalese.
I suppose I'll have to go along with the American style guides mentioned in False title that say leaving out "the" from a preposed appositive is considered less formal than including it, but I really believe that when not overused, and when the phrase itself is kept short, the word "the" is not always needed. I'd love to hear what you think. CorinneSD (talk) 00:14, 16 August 2015 (UTC)
We may've disagreed in the past, but that is certainly no reason to nurse a grudge and I thank you for your thoughts. Personally, I always think the definite article sounds better, more presise and a lot more professional. Omitting it, in my opinion, turns a good sentence into something which sounds like it has come from a tabloid. I'm led to believe that it was standard English many years ago, but has crept in from America thanks to various mediums including websites. I did provide some links within my comments to Josh, did you see those? CassiantoTalk01:42, 16 August 2015 (UTC)
Cassianto Thanks for your reply. I read the link you gave to Josh called Stack Exchange, and the writers were pretty much right on the mark regarding differences in the use of the definite article between British and American English in phrases such as in hospital/in the hospital, etc. I'm wondering whether there is a difference between something like
The English philosopher George Bernard Shaw...
and
Trial lawyer John Smith....
where George Bernard Shaw is a very well known philosopher that no one can mistake for another George Bernard Shaw and John Smith (a made-up name) is one of many trial lawyers in the country and the preposed appositive is merely providing his occupation. Americans would probably even use, "Noted trial lawyer John Smith...", maybe because there are many well-known trial lawyers, but when the person is really famous and is one of a kind, we would probably use "the":
No, I honestly do think that using the definite article as an introducer sounds more professional. I was once told that that is why our newspapers in England use "the" in their titles ("The Times", "The Express", "The Financial Times"), although how true that is, I don't know. Saying "Writing for The Times, the theatre critic Joe Smith opined that the performance was 'a show-stopper'..." just sounds more correct than "Writing for The Times, theatre critic Joe Smith opined that the performance was 'a show-stopper'..." just seems lazy and tabloidesque. Maybe it's simply a stylistic choice? CassiantoTalk16:22, 16 August 2015 (UTC)
(edit conflict) I think it has become a real difference between American and British English. The sentence the way you wrote it sounds fine to me, and with "the" it sounds odd. CorinneSD (talk) 16:28, 16 August 2015 (UTC)
Well, I think it must be a real difference between US and UK English. To me (being British) it reads like "note" or "tabloid" style rather than an appropriate style for formal writing. Peter coxhead (talk) 17:06, 16 August 2015 (UTC)
(edit conflict) (I'll read this last article in a minute.)
I guess you're right, but I certainly would not put a comma after the initial phrase before the person's name. To me, it isn't really an appositive, which would require commas. To me, this would be wrong:
The English philosopher, George Bernard Shaw, once said...
Would you put a comma after "philosopher" and/or after "Shaw"?
If the phrase comes after the name, then it is an appositive, and would require commas:
George Bernard Shaw, the English philosopher, once said...
Let me ask both of you: if the person were not well known, and you wanted to provide the occupation along with the name, would you write,
The fishmonger Tom Jones arrived later.
or
Tom Jones, the fishmonger, arrived later.
If you write, "The fishmonger, Tom Jones, arrived later", aren't you assuming that most people know who the fishmonger is, and that there is only one fishmonger in the village, and are adding the name almost as an afterthought?
If you write, "The fishmonger Tom Jones arrived later", aren't you just giving Tom Jones's occupation as supplementary information? If it's supplementary information, you're not automatically claiming that there is only one fishmonger, or are you? To American English, adding "the" here makes it sound as if there is only one fishmonger. If there is a good possibility that there are more than one, then we drop "the", making it clear that "fishmonger" is giving only his occupation, nothing more. CorinneSD (talk) 18:35, 16 August 2015 (UTC)
Huon Thank you for the links. I read the instructions at the usurp page. However, I don't know whether to change my user name globally or just on English Wikipedia. I mostly edit on English Wikipedia, but I have occasionally made edits on Commons (the one with all the images) even though I haven't signed up for an account there, and I might someday edit on Simple Wikipedia. CorinneSD (talk) 14:49, 11 August 2015 (UTC)
We're in the process of unifying accounts across Wikimedia projects so that no two accounts of the same name by different users exist on different projects. In fact there was a User:Corinne on the English Wikipedia who was renamed "User:Corinne~enwiki" to prevent a conflict with the Hungarian User:Corinne. See the Single User Login finalisation announcement for details on this unification process. You will not be able to have just the English Wikipedia account renamed, and you will not be able to edit as User:Corinne at all if the conflict with the Hungarian user of that name isn't resolved via usurpation. I'm not familiar enough with usurpation to tell whether that will prove a problem, but since that other user hasn't made any edits in years I would hope usurping the name is possible. Huon (talk) 15:08, 11 August 2015 (UTC)
Huon I put in a request yesterday to usurp the user name Corinne, and just now I saw a reply there telling me to tell the other Corinne about this request, but I don't know how to get to her talk page. I also don't know whether to leave a wiki-link (and, if so, how to formulate it) or an external link to my actual posting of my request. Can you advise me? CorinneSD (talk) 01:18, 14 August 2015 (UTC)
Hi, Corinne. Another attempt to find out how to pronounce this weird word has ended in failure. But perhaps you know. Rothorpe (talk) 01:35, 20 August 2015 (UTC)
I just learned recently that "Leyland", in "Leyland cypress", is pronounced "LAY land". I don't know about "Leylandii", but probably lay LAND i i. Is this just your quest, or is there a discussion going on about it somewhere? Corinne (talk) 02:30, 20 August 2015 (UTC)
Thanks, yes, it's just my quest. Indeed, Lay-LAND-ee-eye seems most likely. I expect someone will come up with a definitive answer eventually. Rothorpe (talk) 02:47, 20 August 2015 (UTC)
It's always a problem to pronounce Latin in English, and just about anything goes. I tell my students to pronounce it however they like but try to make every syllable count, and that they are sure to encounter people from other native languages who pronounce it so differently that flexibility is worth cultivating. For those who want a prescription, there are tables in Latin grammar books, usually with two columns, the classical pronunciation and the ecclesiastical. Those of us who were taught classical pronunciation would pronounce the two i's at the end as ee ee. Many people would say eye eye. For a classicist, eye goes with the "ae" spelling. Either method gets into trouble with some words: Pinus for classicists (apologies for that) and the many -eae endings for others (ay eye, it's easy). In my experience, prescriptions about pronunciation are mostly a US phenomenon; wherever else I've been, most people accept that accents vary. Sminthopsis84 (talk) 13:18, 20 August 2015 (UTC)
Rothorpe In that section to which I provided a link, above, I came across the following sentence:
As a result of Christopher John of inheriting Haggeston, John (or Jack Naylor) became the owner of Leighton Hall and his Brother Roland Naylor the owner of the Brynllyarch Estate in Kerry.
There's something wrong with the first part of the sentence. I wonder if it should be:
As a result of Christopher John's inheriting Haggeston...
Hi Corinne, thanks for your work at the GOCE copy-edit requests page; however you've accepted three GOCE requests at one time; namely Angus McDonald (Virginia militiaman), Mendip Hills and Old Pine Church. We ask copy-editors to only accept one request at a time, so I've struck your other acceptances. Once you've finished one article, please feel free to return and unstrike one of the others. Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 09:24, 5 August 2015 (UTC)
Baffle gab1978 I hope you've seen that I've tried to adhere to this policy since you posted this. I'm writing this because I want you to know that I went through Indian National Congress once, carefully, over a period of a few days about a week ago. I made quite a few edits. Then I started to go through it again, and found a few more things. However, when I got to the Rajiv Ghandi section, I realized that I just couldn't read any more of it. I had already spent hours on the article and had had enough. So I asked Rwood128 and Rothorpe to go through it and posted "Partly done" at the Requests page. Both Rwood128 and Rothorpe made some edits, but I guess they don't have the time or inclination to go through the entire article, at least right now. I want to know if, based on my first review, I should put the "Done" template there, or not. I see other editors are now editing the article. Please see this last edit: [25] I don't know about content, but it seems unsourced, and it contains a grammatical error. I just thought I'd point it out to you. I'm already on to other articles. Corinne (talk) 23:04, 20 August 2015 (UTC)
Sorry
I am so sorry!
I don't know how to make my own pictures on my user page. I happened to see yours, and I really liked it! I'm so sorry! I am really a lame editor.
Could you please tell me how to post on pictures? I really don't know how.
I am so sorry that I copied down your userpage onto mine! I am the worst at making userpages, you are the best! Oh, how can I make it up to you? Gryffindor123 (talk) 00:42, 21 August 2015 (UTC)
W. H. Auden has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. MusicAngels (talk) 19:38, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
Indian National Congress
Baffle gab1978 Many thanks for your cordial and informative reply to my query on your talk page. I want you to know that I do notice (and correct) things like "an inquest was opened into the road accident" (I believe you would say it should be: "an inquest into the road accident was opened", or "an inquest regarding the road accident was opened"; if not, please correct me), and I try to remove unnecessary words and unnecessary exaggeration. I know there is always room for improvement, but I really want you to have confidence in my copyediting skills. If you ever have a few minutes free, would you look at the edits I made to Indian National Congress between 11 and 13 August 2015 and see what I did? I guess I was just skimming the surface then, and working to improve poor sentence structure, word choice and punctuation and trying to make the sentences and paragraphs more concise whereas much more work actually needed to be done, which you are doing now. I think if I don't know the subject matter really well, I refrain from making more substantive edits. Well, I did the best I could. As you probably saw on Rothorpe's talk page, I had started to go through the article a second time but found it too tedious, so I stopped. I don't often stop in the middle of a second or even first run-through of an article; that one was just too long. Corinne (talk) 22:44, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
Paine Ellsworth Hello, Paine – I'm so sorry you've had to go through what you've just had to endure. I just wanted to say that your friends will not be influenced by such negative criticisms. I read only the most recent exchanges, but I gather that it's something like this: since the name "Calumet" comes from only one part of the country, it shouldn't be used to name a pipe that is part of cultures from across the country or even farther. When I saw that argument, I thought that there are many things that have as their name, or part of their name, words that originally pertained only to one area but now are more widespread in use or appearance. I think you tried to make this argument, but if you could find four or five good examples of this, that might bolster your argument (if you want to spend any more time on it). Finally, I'm just curious about something. I noticed that you've changed your signature to Painius. I'm just wondering why. I thought "Paine Ellsworth" was rather distinctive. Corinne (talk) 00:44, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
It's not a big deal, Corinne, and good to hear from you, btw! I've had people twist my words before in order to get what they want, and that is why I try to stay out of such confrontations. Yes, "calumet" (one of my favorite words, I must admit) began as a simple word with simple and limited origin. Now, it has spread all over the NA continent. Look it up in any good encyclopedia, and the best-sourced origin is found. And that will continue to be true about this encyclopedia as well, no matter what results from my work on the talk page. "Painius" is a name I used a long time ago on Usenet. A recent email from an old friend sparked the memory, so I thought I'd start using it again. It has a nice ancient-Greek sound to it, don't you think? Thank you so much for your thoughts, and I truly hope that the lives of you and yours are filled with love and joy! – Painius00:58, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
Paine Ellsworth Thanks for your reply. I don't understand what you mean by "the best-sourced origin". Do you mean the origin of the name (such as "Calumet" in "Calumet pipe") that has the most and best sources to back it up? Regarding "Painius", I didn't think of Greek at all. It made me think of Vilnius, the capital of Lithuania. The last three letters, -ius, is a common ending to many Lithuanian surnames. If you go to the Lithuania article, and using the "Find" tool, put in "ius", and scroll down, you'll see that most of them are "Vilnius" (since it's the capital), but you'll also see some names of people. Also see the names in Lithuanians. Corinne (talk) 01:31, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
To me, the best-sourced origin is the one found in the most reliable sources. Other origins are in this case placed as younger historically than the Norman French word. What happens is that someone will name a street or a ship (A) after something they saw somewhere else (B), so it goes in the annals as B is the origin of A. A digger finds an earlier origin (C) for B, which then means that C is the ultimate origin of A, and so on. Someone years ago who was interested in etymology and the origins of terms demystified "calumet" and who knows what other terms that were shrouded in history and mystery. I was just a boy when I first looked it up in the Britannica, and I've never forgotten it. – Painius01:18, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
I just had my computer updated to Windows 10. When I got the computer back, it was set to Internet Explorer as the browser, so I changed it to Google Chrome, which is what I had before. Now, even though I have selected WikEd in the Gadgets section of "Preferences", WikEd is not displayed at all. Do you have any suggestions? Corinne (talk) 02:03, 5 September 2015 (UTC)
Sca – Thanks for the link, Sca. It's one of my pet peeves, too. It's so simple to distinguish the one regular and two irregular verbs and their forms once you understand the difference in their meanings. The woman did a fairly good job of explaining the difference in meaning and the various forms, but not as good a job as an English or E.S.L. teacher would do. She skipped the present perfect tense entirely, and I think didn't give enough examples of either the transitive verb or the intransitive verb. Well, thanks again. I haven't seen you around lately. Are you still editing? I hope you're enjoying the summer. Corinne (talk) 16:58, 6 September 2015 (UTC)
I liked her example of the Dylan lyric. Dylan's lyrics are full of grammatical mistakes. I think most of them were part of his effort to create a semi-common-man-folk persona by using the vernacular.
Sca Yes, I guess that was a good example. I'm pretty sure Dylan did not even know he used the wrong verb. Using "lay" instead of "lie" is so common. I'm glad you're still editing. Interesting discussions are fun. Corinne (talk) 17:25, 6 September 2015 (UTC)
Not so sure about that. Ol' Bob was pretty crafty. For the first decade or so of his career, he affected a fake Woody Guthrie accent, which I (as a Minn. native) can tell you had nothing to do with his origins.Sca (talk) 17:39, 6 September 2015 (UTC)
Oh. I don't know much about him. I was just looking at the article on North Central U.S. accent, and trying to figure out from the details what the Minnesota accent sounds like, but wasn't getting very far. I am familiar with the Wisconsin midwestern accent. Is the Minn. accent different from that? Corinne (talk) 17:45, 6 September 2015 (UTC)
Somewhat. The intonations – influenced by the lilt of Scandinavian languages – are difficult to describe: Minn' eh soh' da. I think Wisconsin speech is flatter-sounding, due perhaps to the higher proportion of German influences. Sca (talk) 00:28, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Sca Oh. (When I read "flatter-sounding", my initial thought was, "How can speakers sound as if they are flattering someone?", then I realized you mean flatter vowel sounds, right?). I always remember my surprise at hearing "college" pronounced as "callege". Corinne (talk) 03:20, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Sca But the "o" in "college" is not a diphthong. Can you give me an example of a word with a diphthong and tell me how a Minnesotan would pronounce it? (Just use regular vowels. I don't understand IPA.) Corinne (talk) 15:52, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Someone's already done this for us. The classic example is boat, which is pronounced almost as if it had two syllables:
In the Minn' eh soh' da example above, there would be a hint of a diphthong on the third syllable.
In general, there's more of a sing-songish character to stereotypical Minnesota speech. But it varies a lot from person to person, and somewhat from region to region. (The Iron Range accent is different.) And with all the in-migration from other parts of the country, and by refugees, I imagine it's changed since I lived there.
I grew up in Minneapolis, but in my family we never had a real strong Minn. accent. Now that I've been gone for (gulp) 40 years, I find it difficult to imitate unless I'm around someone who speaks that way.
Oddly enough, although I lived in Kentucky for only five years, I still can turn that accent on & off. For example, the largest city in the state is called Luh' uh-vull (Louisville). I (or Ah) used to live in Lex' nun (Lexington). Ha. But in Ky., too, it varies a lot. Sca (talk) 17:26, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Deprecating teachers
Vsmith I feel for you – you are often on the receiving end of unwarranted attacks by passionate, ill-informed people responding to your efforts to undo vandalism, original research or just poor edits. This last one amused me – it seemed the silly phrases negated the criticism – and of course I didn't mean to add to it, so I've deleted my comment. You didn't find it the least bit funny? Corinne (talk) 19:49, 6 September 2015 (UTC)
Hmm... sorry I missed this "ping" somehow. That ip edit was a bit funny - but I deleted it as harassment or whatever. Wasn't aware that you had added anything there - did it get lost in an edit conflict, there's nothing in the history. If I worried much about such attacks, I'd just remove all content from my user page. As such attacks are rather rare, I just ignore 'em and roll on. Vsmith (talk) 19:00, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Oh, I'm glad it's just that you didn't get the ping. No, I didn't comment there. I avoid commenting when the person seems irrational. That's why I commented here. The earlier comment was here. You can see it in the edit history of my talk page, a few edits back. I removed it because I thought you had not been amused by it. Corinne (talk) 19:08, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
,_Illusion_of_a_Prairie,_New_Jersey_(Red_Farm_at_Pochuck),_1915._Christie%27s.jpg)
Sca (talk) 14:37, 19 April 2015 (UTC)
.jpg)
Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 05:06, 6 May 2015 (UTC)
Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:
_-_Google_Cultural_Institute.jpg)
.jpg)
