User talk:DavidCrosbie

Welcome

Hello, DavidCrosbie! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions to this free encyclopedia. If you decide that you need help, check out Getting Help below, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking

or using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your username and the date. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some useful links to facilitate your involvement. Happy editing! Polly (Parrot) 18:28, 29 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Getting started
A tutorial • Our five pillars • Getting mentored How to: edit a page • upload and use images
Getting help
Frequently asked questions • Tips Where to ask questions or make comments Request administrator attention
Policies and guidelines
Neutral point of view • No original research Verifiability • Reliable sources • Citing sources What Wikipedia is not • Biographies of living persons Manual of Style • Three-revert rule • Sock puppetry Copyrights • Policy for non-free content • Image use policy External links • Spam • Vandalism Deletion policy • Conflict of interest • Notability

The community
Build consensus • Resolve disputes Assume good faith • Civility • Etiquette No personal attacks • No legal threats Community Portal • Village pump Signpost • IRC channels • Mailing lists
Writing articles
Be bold in editing • Develop an article The perfect article • Manual of style Stubs • Categories • Disambiguation Pages needing attention • Peer review
Miscellaneous
User name • User pages • Talk pages Clean up: General - Spam - Vandalism Join a WikiProject • Translation Useful templates • Tools • User scripts

March 2008

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. Regarding your edit(s) to Robert Johnson (musician), it is recommended that you use the preview button before you save; this helps you find any errors you have made, and prevents clogging up recent changes and the page history. Thank you. Special-T (talk) 22:53, 29 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Walkin' Blues

Hi DavidCrosbie, I've redirected your new article Walkin' Blues to Sweet Home Chicago per Wikipedia:Notability (music)#Songs. D0762 (talk) 13:33, 4 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again DavidCrosbie, I see you undid the redirect. For it to remain an article you'll need to add some context, like a paragraph or two about the single and some sources that assert that the single is notable. D0762 (talk) 13:50, 4 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for September 22

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Cumulative song, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Chorus (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 15:28, 22 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for September 29

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.

Captain Wedderburn's Courtship (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Willie Clancy

The Trees They Grow So High (folk song) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Fred Jordan

Walkin' Blues (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Willie Brown

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:49, 29 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Bell Bottom Trousers disambiguation

A tag has been placed on Bell Bottom Trousers disambiguation requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G6 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an orphaned disambiguation page which either

disambiguates two or fewer extant Wikipedia pages and whose title ends in "(disambiguation)" (i.e., there is a primary topic); or
disambiguates no (zero) extant Wikipedia pages, regardless of its title.

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such pages may be deleted at any time. Please see the disambiguation page guidelines for more information.

If you think that the page was nominated in error, contest the nomination by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion" in the speedy deletion tag. Doing so will take you to the talk page where you can explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but do not hesitate to add information that is consistent with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. MacAddct1984 ^{(talk  contribs)} 02:09, 4 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for November 25

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited James "Iron Head" Baker and Moses "Clear Rock" Platt, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Penitentiary (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:25, 25 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for December 12

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Bayless Rose, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Dick Justice (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:59, 12 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for November 17

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.

T–V distinction (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to English, French, German, Italian, Spanish, Ben Johnson, Racine and Roger Brown

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:01, 17 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Dutch pronouns

"Die" is often used as a substitute for "ie" when the preceding word ends with a vowel. So the "d" could be interpreted as a linking consonant. You also hear "n" as the linking consonant instead, so "ondekte-n-ie". But "die" is also a pronoun and can mean "he", "she" or generally "that (one)". For example "zag die dat niet?" (did they/that one not see that?) could refer to a woman as well as a man. So it's not clear whether the two could be separated. "ie" is not found often in written language anyway (certainly not as regularly as "je" or "ze"), and the forms with linking consonant are virtually nonexistant in writing, so that's why I changed it to "hij". CodeCat (talk) 03:11, 8 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yes but Zwart's argument rests on the pronoun being clitic and definitely not "hij". The fact that these forms are not common in the written language is irrelevant to the syntax under discussion. Of course, if they were not found at all, that would be another matter.DavidCrosbie (talk) 03:24, 8 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure what's syntactically different about the clitic forms though. They're just unstressed forms of the regular pronouns and are placed in the same place in the sentence. They're generally interchangeable too. It's not like in some Romance languages, where they really attach to other words and can appear before the verb instead of after it. So if there is a good reason for treating the unstressed forms as specifically different from the stressed forms in V2 syntax, then that should be elaborated on. As it stands now in the article, it only makes me wonder why it's there. CodeCat (talk) 14:18, 8 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It's a step in Zwart's argument in favour of seeing V2 as somehow Spec CP — an argument that doesn't belong here, but might be taken up later in the article. Here, it puts down a marker and establishes a Wkipedia link with Specifier. As Zwart sees it, the unbreakable link with the clitic makes the V2-to-conjuction equivalence more obvious.DavidCrosbie (talk) 23:14, 8 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

While were' in contact, can you advise me on an assertion in 'The Germanic Languages' (Routledge) that the order of verb forms at the end of a subordinate clause is fixed in Afrikaans but free (or free-er) in Dutch? The examples offered are not full enough for quoting. Obviously, I have no native-speaker feeling, but the writer (Bruce Donaldson of Melbourne University) appears to be qualified to judge. He claims: Dutch dat ... zal doen/doen zal vs Afrikaans dat ... sal doen only. Also Dutch dat ...gedaan heft/heeft gedaan vs Afrikaans dat ... gedoen het only. There's a place here for the observation, assuming that it's not a very marginal feature. If it is included, these examples won't do. Could you suggest better ones?DavidCrosbie (talk) 23:14, 8 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Usually, in a series of verbs, they're placed in main-to-subordinate order in Dutch. So the inflected verb normally comes first. The reverse order (like in German) can be used but it sounds formal and somewhat archaic. CodeCat (talk) 23:18, 8 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for that. You gave me the encouragement to look for examples. DavidCrosbie (talk) 12:52, 9 March 2014 (UTC)Right now I don't see an advantage in explaining the stylistic nuance.[reply]

The degree of stylistic difference depends on what construction is being used. In combinations of an auxiliary verb with a past participle, the difference is not big and putting the inflected verb first is just more usual and neutral. So both gedaan heeft and heeft gedaan are possible, the latter more neutral. For example it would be fine to say ik weet niet of hij dat gedaan heeft, maar.... But putting other auxiliaries last does sound archaic, like doen zal. I'm not sure if it's a general rule but I think infinitives almost always come after inflected verbs, while participles don't necessarily. CodeCat (talk) 14:55, 9 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Something that may also be useful to consider is that subordinate clauses can "break outside" of the verb-final order even when they are syntactically the object of the verb. For example Ik heb toch gezegd wat ik niet had moeten zeggen. "I have said anyway what I should not have said.". The verb-final order is possible too, but sounds a bit less stylistically neutral and might have different nuances: Ik heb wat ik niet had moeten zeggen toch gezegd. I think the latter is avoided generally because it has stronger nesting of clauses; so there's a tendency to "close" the verbal part of the main sentence and keep it more unified, before starting a subordinate clause. The word "toch" is a bit free here, and can be placed after the inflected verb too: Ik heb toch wat ik niet had moeten zeggen gezegd..

Things get even stranger when the subordinate clause modifies the direct object instead of representing it fully. For example: Ik zag iets dat rood was in de schaduw bewegen. "I saw something that was red move in the shadow.". Here, "dat rood was" modifies "iets" as an adjectival clause. But you could put it at the end of the sentence too, splitting it off from the thing it modifies: Ik zag iets in de schaduw bewegen dat rood was.. This kind of construction is valid but it's sometimes avoided because it can leads to strange sentences that might be ambiguous as to what the subordinate clause actually refers to. Like: Ik zag iemand in de schaduw bewegen die zwart was. "I saw someone move in the shadow that/who was black.". In the original sentence the gender kept them apart: schaduw is feminine, iets is neuter, so they use different relative pronouns die and dat. But here, both words use the common-gender pronoun die so it's not clear whether zwart describes the shadow or the person. CodeCat (talk) 15:14, 9 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

March 2014

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Come On in My Kitchen 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:

]); 1930 "[[Sitting On Top Of The World]]: ([[Mississippi Sheiks]]); 1934 "Six Feet In The Ground" ([[St. Louis Jimmy Oden]]. Former neighbours report that Johnson learned "How Long" from Carr's

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 19:52, 30 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Come On in My Kitchen 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:

from James or indirectly through [[Johnny Temple]].<ref>Komara (2007) p. 29 </ref><ref>Wald ((2004) p. 142</ref>

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 12:32, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for March 1

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Laryngeal theory, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Abingdon. 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.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:56, 1 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for March 30

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Laryngeal theory, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Conjugations and Hiatus. 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.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:56, 30 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for April 6

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Laryngeal theory, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Gothic. 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.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:13, 6 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

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) 13:49, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for December 15

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Gerund, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Subject and Object. 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.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:02, 15 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Cuje Bertram

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Cuje Bertram requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not credibly indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. Specto73 (talk) 12:29, 10 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for August 12

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Cumberland Gap (folk song), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Dick Burnett. 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.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:12, 12 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for August 19

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Leonard Rutherford, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Brunswick. 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.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:24, 19 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, DavidCrosbie. 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)[reply]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, DavidCrosbie. 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)[reply]

A page you started (Clause element) has been reviewed!

Thanks for creating Clause element.

I have just reviewed the page, as a part of our page curation process and note that:

The section titles should be rewritten for clarity; right now the first one in particular could lead some readers to think that what follows is a comprehensive grammar of the English language. In general the article could use some copy-editing to read more like an encyclopedia and less like a linguistics textbook.

To reply, leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|Rosguill}}. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ .

Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

_signed,Rosguill ^talk 20:40, 25 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed 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 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:10, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]