User talk:Cygnature
Welcome
[edit]Welcome!
Hello, Cygnature, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:
- The five pillars of Wikipedia
- Tutorial
- How to edit a page and How to develop articles
- How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
- Manual of Style
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{help me}} before the question. Again, welcome!
⋙–Berean–Hunter—► 14:39, 16 November 2011 (UTC)
June 2013
[edit]
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Sherlockian game may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.
- List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
- .<ref>Conan Doyle, Sir Arthur, ''Memories and Adventures''. London: Hodder & Stoughton, 1924.</ref>) Siger Holmes' name is derived from "[[The Adventure of the Empty House]]", in which Sherlock tells
Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 11:18, 16 June 2013 (UTC)
Purves
[edit]I see nothing that suggests he is an expert on the history or anthropology of Okinawa Prefecture. Your bold edits have been reverted. Please use the article talk page to suggest further drastic changes.—Ryūlóng (琉竜) 16:02, 16 March 2014 (UTC)
Also you can't just link to the Unesco endangered languages atlas. And the lede of the article on languages should not have such undue weight paid to the peopling of the region where they are spoken.—Ryūlóng (琉竜) 16:05, 16 March 2014 (UTC)
- Stop quit reverting my changes. You do NOT own the article. There were virtually no sources to the article prior to my edits and the sources that I included, with the possible inclusion of Purves, are without exception first rate. This suggests to me that you have a personal problem with Purves. His qualifications are sound:
- B.A. in Modern History and Japanese Studies from the University of Sheffield
- M.A., International Relations, Japanese history and Japanese-U.S. relations (thesis: Island of Military Bases: A Contemporary Political History of Okinawa)
- PhD, University of Nagoya, Graduate School of International Development
- Teaches Ryukyu-Okinawa history, University of the Ryukyus. "Three 15-week courses in Ryukyuan-Okinawan history covering the full gamut through from ancient to contemporary."
- And if you don't like the link to the UNESCO atlas, then find the specific page. Make useful edits, not destructive ones. That will help the article along instead of undoing things. Cygnature (talk) 16:17, 16 March 2014 (UTC)
- First of all, don't post this to my user page, post it to my user talk.
- Second, if you went to my user talk you would see that I would prefer to keep the conversation in one location, which is your talk page.
- Now onto your actual arguments. I have never heard of Purves until you added his research to the article as the IP address so here is no feasible way that I can have a personal problem with him. I have no way of knowing that he is an actual expert on the subject otherwise he would have all this research of his peer reviewed. When someone challenges the content and reverts you, you do not revert them back because you think you are right and they are wrong. You should bring up a discussion on the article's talk page and then other people will weigh in on your proposed changes.
- I've incorporated some of the content you intended to add in a proper way, actually linking to scientific databases that have the publications hosted instead of expecting people to google that kind of stuff on their own.
- And finally, please do not fill the article on the language family with extensive essays on the peopling of the islands and whether or not they are related to the Yamato Japanese or another Asian people. It doesn't belong on an article on linguistics.—Ryūlóng (琉竜) 16:28, 16 March 2014 (UTC)
- Your preferences in terms of where you want discussion is not my priority. Reverting things just because you don't like them is highly inappropriate behavior. You would be welcome to open discussion with me, but the sources I used were unimpeachable -- and they were added to an article which had insufficient sources. Thus there was no reason to revert. Your personal issues with the conclusions seem to be the problem, not my addition of highly qualified sources. Claiming that I've put unreliable sources when they clearer do NOT violate Wiki rules and when you didn't even bother to look up the qualifications of one you object to (at your own university no less) suggests you are concerned here more with power than with the content. And the origins of the people are critical to the origins of the language -- to claim otherwise is to truly misunderstand. Try being a bit more tentative in your tone if you wish any sort of discussion and understand that you don't get to have the articles read just the way you want them to be.Cygnature (talk) 16:46, 16 March 2014 (UTC)
- You still completely botched sending the message the first time around. And I have never said that I do not like them. Stop putting words in my mouth. It is not my job to investigate a single person's credentials when the citations are posted on his personal website that is completely unaffiliated to any university or research group. I thought the additions were questionable and reverted them. It is now your prerogative to begin a discussion on Talk:Ryukyuan languages on the merits of your proposed additions rather than insist that other people do the research to believe you.—Ryūlóng (琉竜) 17:03, 16 March 2014 (UTC)
- Your preferences in terms of where you want discussion is not my priority. Reverting things just because you don't like them is highly inappropriate behavior. You would be welcome to open discussion with me, but the sources I used were unimpeachable -- and they were added to an article which had insufficient sources. Thus there was no reason to revert. Your personal issues with the conclusions seem to be the problem, not my addition of highly qualified sources. Claiming that I've put unreliable sources when they clearer do NOT violate Wiki rules and when you didn't even bother to look up the qualifications of one you object to (at your own university no less) suggests you are concerned here more with power than with the content. And the origins of the people are critical to the origins of the language -- to claim otherwise is to truly misunderstand. Try being a bit more tentative in your tone if you wish any sort of discussion and understand that you don't get to have the articles read just the way you want them to be.Cygnature (talk) 16:46, 16 March 2014 (UTC)
Explanation of change to Pather Panchali article
[edit]You deleted text that I added to the article Pather Panchali, which is to be TFA on August 26. The text was within the Truffaut quote in which he said, apropos of Ray's film, "I don't want to see a movie of peasants eating with their hands." I put the word "sic" in brackets after the word "peasants" in the quote, but you deleted this.
Just to clarify: the family depicted in Ray's film are not peasants, but Brahmin, a high Indian caste. The father, Harihar, is a priest of this caste. Therefore, I believe it would not have been considered honorable for him to do manual labor (such as farming). So Truffaut's reference to the characters as "peasants" was, I believe, an error on his part, which, I think, ought to be pointed out. Thank you. Dylanexpert (talk) 16:15, 16 August 2015 (UTC)
@ Dylanexpert -- I can see why you made the choice to include the "sic." I don't think though that its use here indicates what you think it does though. In fact, I went looking to double check the spelling of "peasant" and to double-check the accuracy of Truffaut's quotation, trying to figure out whether the "sic" was in the original quotation or what was in error. It would be surprising if common/general readers would have any idea to what the "sic" refers. It may well be that the family is Brahmin, but there is nothing in the film to suggest that they are of high social standing (which generally means having money -- they don't even look like the "genteel" poverty that would fit in a European sense of possessing higher social class but having lost the money that went with it). They look like peasants and they act like peasants. The social structures are indeed different in Europe than in India, but his use of the word peasant is unlikely to be the choice of a technical economic term and more a general term to indicate people in grinding poverty. Also in Old French (one of the origins of the word), it means "country dweller" with an implication of "poverty." This looks exactly to me like what Apu's family is. And Truffaut's audience would likely see them that way. So I would still argue to leave out the "sic" as not especially useful or meaningful -- a reader has to mind read to figure out why the "sic" might be there. If the goal is to introduce the common difficulty in how someone from India and someone from the West might read the film (a quick look at film literature suggests this gap is a common one--Robinson mentions this in his book on the Apu Trilogy, although he takes aim at Rushdie rather than Truffaut), then perhaps a new paragraph under reception presenting that analysis would be preferred to an ambiguous use of "sic". Cygnature (talk) 21:10, 16 August 2015 (UTC)
Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:53, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!
[edit]
Hello, Cygnature. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
ArbCom 2017 election voter message
[edit]Hello, Cygnature. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
ArbCom 2018 election voter message
[edit]Hello, Cygnature. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
ArbCom 2018 election voter message
[edit]Hello, Cygnature. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)