User talk:IvanScrooge98/Archives/2021–2022

Cut-and-paste move from Ro, Emilia–Romagna to Ro, Emilia-Romagna

Hi, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you tried to give a page a different title by copying its content and pasting either the same content, or an edited version of it, into another page with a different name. This is known as a "cut-and-paste move", and it is undesirable because it splits the page history, which is legally required for attribution. Instead, the software used by Wikipedia has a feature that allows pages to be moved to a new title together with their edit history.

In most cases, once your account is four days old and has ten edits, you should be able to move an article yourself using the "Move" tab at the top of the page (the tab may be hidden in a dropdown menu for you). This both preserves the page history intact and automatically creates a redirect from the old title to the new. If you cannot perform a particular page move yourself this way (e.g. because a page already exists at the target title), please follow the instructions at requested moves to have it moved by someone else. Also, if there are any other pages that you moved by copying and pasting, even if it was a long time ago, please list them at Wikipedia:Requests for history merge. Thank you. --Florian Blaschke (talk) 21:24, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

Help:IPA/Piedmontese

The reason for the change is not written down because when I click save change it saves it without asking me for the reason. I don't see why the schematic way I use, in which the local allophone is placed next to its standard counterpart, should be useless. The Help:IPA/ pages for other Romance languages such as Venetian, Emilian, Neapolitan, and Catalan are organised in this way. I understand that this system can be considered messy, but so is putting all allophones in a single note. If you don't like this organisation and prefer to indicate the local variants in the notes then wouldn't it be better to apply a note for each standard phoneme and in that note put all the local variants, but only of the standard sound? Also, why did you only use this for vowels, while for consonants you didn't do the same and indicate the allophones present in the non-standard dialect in a column below? Shack76 (talk) 13:50, 2 April 2021 (UTC)

@Shack76: it is general practice on Wikipedia to try to keep these columns as simple as they can be, since they are used to help readers, and a single column generally refers to one dialect or a precise group thereof (see Help:IPA/Emilian-Romagnol, where it was decided to list every sound in a separate row to avoid confusion, and specify the dialects in the notes); regarding Piedmontese vowels, while every phoneme may be realized very differently from the central dialects, the variation in sound is much less broad and it is enough to list, for example, [i] once instead of having it in two other places when it’s the same symbol and sound; or, there is no need to use two different symbols for [ə] and [ɐ], being those close realizations of the same vowel (it is enough to use [ə] in our help and the notes will clarify that it might be lower for some): this is different from certain consonants that have whole other realizations or even phonemic nature, and as such are worth listing (of course, in separate rows to avoid confusion, as I said before).

Now, if you edit from desktop mode, you should have a field to fill called “edit summary”: that is where you are supposed to specify the details of your changes; if you edit from mobile, it appears right above the preview as you proceed before saving your edits. Hope this was helpful. 〜イヴァンスクルージ九十八［IvanScrooge98］（会話） 12:31, 2 April 2021 (UTC)

IPA pour les Nuls

Scusa ma avevo tolto una parte di "Zitti e buoni" (Italian: [ˈtsitti e bˈbwɔːni, -tj e -], perché non capivo il “tj e”: probabile che anche uno che ha studiato linguistica (come me) non afferi l’alternativa. Pensavo fosse un refuso o vandalismo. Adesso ho imparato una cosa, dunque grazie.--Arorae (talk) 20:01, 24 May 2021 (UTC)

@Arorae: sì, è pratica direi assodata nelle trascrizioni IPA su Wikipedia usare il trattino per indicare l’omissione di una parte già indicata, così da evitare di affollare troppo la sezione iniziale. In effetti però si potrebbe proporre di inserirlo nelle guide a cui puntano i template (Help:IPA/Italian ecc.). E figurati ;) 〜イヴァンスクルージ九十八［IvanScrooge98］（会話） 20:05, 24 May 2021 (UTC)

Requesting some article expansion help

Greetings,

Came across your recent edit to article related to Georgia (country). I was looking for some proactive help in a chronological merging

Coastal and port cities on Black Sea coast (list) (to create an interactive map further for the article) from some one who is acquaint/ interested in Black Sea region. Pl. visit the section list and help out if you find interested.

Thanks and warm regards

I am looking for article expansion volunteers, can you help? (talk) 07:30, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

@Bookku: sorry, I am not really interested, at least not at the moment. I might hop in later on, though. :) 〜イヴァンスクルージ九十八［IvanScrooge98］（会話） 09:38, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

You moved my cite tag

Hello! I do not understand this. What needs a source is the allegation that French songs are to be called chansons in the English language. That's on the talk page. I'm asking you kindly to place the tag again where my intention is clearer. --SergeWoodzing (talk) 09:39, 19 June 2021 (UTC)

@SergeWoodzing: hi, I must have misinterpreted your intentions. Still, I have already provided the article with reference for the pronunciation, the Oxford definition for the term should be enough to say that chanson is at least used in English to refer to French songs. Whether that is the predominant (and title-worthy) denomination or not, I’ll admit that is possibly another question. 〜イヴァンスクルージ九十八［IvanScrooge98］（会話） 09:46, 19 June 2021 (UTC)

OK thanks. We'll leave it for the move request or deletion request which seems inevitable. I am so unused to doing such things that I haven't even learned the spiffy abbreviations yet. Best wishes, --SergeWoodzing (talk) 10:32, 19 June 2021 (UTC)

Berlinguer

Ho chiesto se bastava che ci fosse l'IPA dei nomi e dei cognomi alle relative voci e mi è stato detto di no. Provvedo a ripristinare l'IPA agli altri membri della famiglia.--Carnby (talk) 17:10, 22 June 2021 (UTC)

@Carnby: sì, è decisamente più pratico averlo direttamente in pagina piuttosto che obbligare il lettore a cercarlo altrove. Ancor di più se c’è un file audio, che risulta più facile seguire attraverso una trascrizione. Comunque se non sbaglio ho già provveduto io a ripristinarlo dove ho visto essere stato rimosso. :) 〜イヴァンスクルージ九十八［IvanScrooge98］（会話） 18:00, 22 June 2021 (UTC)

Dutch tense vowels before /r/

Jeugdjournaal features the native /u/, not the non-native /uː/. The latter cannot occur before /r/ as the native /u/ is already lengthened (or, rather, it retains its original "long" length that has since been lost in other positions, same with /i/ and /y/) in that position. Can you read Dutch? If so, I advise you to read this paper. Sol505000 (talk) 11:42, 23 June 2021 (UTC)

@Sol505000: I see your point, even though I don't speak Dutch. But in that case this should be specified in the help, where [iː, uː, yː] are currently reserved to /iː, uː, yː/ in loanwords. 〜イヴァンスクルージ九十八［IvanScrooge98］（会話） 11:54, 23 June 2021 (UTC)

The more often I come back to that guide, the more I want to WP:NUKEIT, to be honest. Sol505000 (talk) 11:56, 23 June 2021 (UTC)

@Sol505000: Btw, I have nothing against that, considering you have a source. But I think it's better to open a discussion just to make sure we actually reach a consensus; I'll be the first to support a change. 〜イヴァンスクルージ九十八［IvanScrooge98］（会話） 12:01, 23 June 2021 (UTC)

Irish language?

Hi, Ivan. I'm just wondering how familiar you are with the Irish language? You've been making a lot of changes to IPA pronunciations of Irish-language names lately, but don't display or mention any particular knowledge of Irish on your user page. Irish orthography and pronunciation are entirely different to English, and I just want to be sure that you're aware of those differences, as the changes you're making are to text that has been present, unchallenged, for quite a while in most cases. Regards, Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 13:04, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

@Bastun: hi! I am simply going through the transcriptions to make sure they match Help:IPA/Irish, the help {{IPA-ga}} links to. I am not a speaker of Irish but I am generally aware of the sound-to-spelling correspondences. Many of the transcriptions I have edited lacked stress marks, slender/broad distinction and such, or were plain wrong. Of course that doesn't mean I won't make any mistakes, but it's no better to leave old and/or unsourced IPAs that don't add up – I try to double-check them as much as possible; if I come across any dubious ones, I'll definitely template them. 〜イヴァンスクルージ九十八［IvanScrooge98］（会話） 13:23, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

Hello Ivan. I'm not sure that all of your changes to those Irish articles/templates are necessarily improvements. Or consistent with convention and WP:IMOS. In terms of:

• Adding "respell" templates to supplement existing "IPA" templates, has exacerbated existing issues. (Like this change which suggest that Páidí is pronounced the same as Paddy. When it is not. Páidí is pronounced "PAW-dee". Not "PAD-ee".)
• Rearranging article leads (to focus more on templates that clarify pronunciation over those that clarify meaning) has exaggerated existing issues changes. (Like this change which changes the text to read/imply that "the red quarter" is the village's official name. When it is not.)

Separately I would note that this edit/request seems to be based on the assumption that the average Wikipedian (reader or editor) is familiar enough with complex phonetical notation to the extent that they can readily read, identify and fix errors in that notation. I don't think most can or do. And, personally I would question the value in adding yet more complex phonetical notation devices to the top of dozens and dozens of articles. That adds MOS:LEADCLUTTER which is not balanced by value/information that is discernible to a high-percentage (if not a majority) of readers.

In short: Personally I would question the cost/risk/benefit of your current project/approach. Guliolopez (talk) 12:21, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

@Guliolopez: Hi! I see your points, but I don't quite agree.

First of all, {{respell}} is specifically designed to provide an easier alternative to English IPA: in the case of Páidí, /ˈpædi/ is exactly the way one pronounces paddy (corresponding to PAD-ee, see Help:IPA/English and Help:Pronunciation respelling key; so if you remove the latter claiming it to be wrong, the same applies to its IPA counterpart. Which means it either needs to be marked as dubious/needing a ref or to be deleted as well.

Second of all, I understand the problem with moving the "official" designation afterwards, I will reword the lead. The thing is it is best to provide the pronunciation of a term or name right after its spelling, considering a phonetic transcription is sort of a different way to write that word down (and, at least in my experience here, the order things are usually arranged is name-[transliteration]-pronunciation-translation, which the {{Irish place name}} template does not allow). 〜イヴァンスクルージ九十八［IvanScrooge98］（会話） 12:38, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

Måneskin

Ho notato che hai annullato la mia modifica alla pronuncia dei Måneskin; dato che quella non è certo la pronuncia italiana più comune, come si può sistemare la faccenda? Io /ˈmɔneskin/ l'ho sentito solo da Gabriele Corsi durante la telecronaca dell'ESC 2021 (e Malgioglio faceva fatica a adeguarsi); tutte le altre volte che sono stati nominati (tante) sono sempre stati /ˈmaneskin/; certo se poi parliamo dell'originale danese è un'altra cosa, ma non è questo il punto.--Carnby (talk) 18:33, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

@Carnby: uhm, in effetti non ci ho pensato molto annullandola – ho la tendenza a essere più prescrittivo che descrittivo. È effettivamente ancora molto comune la pronuncia con /a/, ha senso tenerla, ma personalmente la menzionerei solo dopo quella, pur meno usata, più “standardizzata” in quanto regolare adattamento della pronuncia danese (come nel caso di un qualsiasi forestierismo del tipo déjà-vu, che prevederebbe una /y/ più spesso sostituita da /u/). 〜イヴァンスクルージ九十八［IvanScrooge98］（会話） 18:57, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

 Done--Carnby (talk) 19:17, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

Allungamento vocale dittonghi

Ho notato che hai tolto il crono [ː] da Che vuoi? Canepari trascrive [VˑV] (semicrono), Camilli e Fiorelli [VːV] (ma [VV] nel corpo della parola), senza nessuna distinzione tra quelli che sono tradizionalmente definiti «dittonghi discendenti» (eroi) e «ïati» (eroe). Questo a maggior ragione se si considera la metrica poetica: in fine di verso vuoi sarebbe bisillabo.--Carnby (talk) 19:54, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

@Carnby: interessante. La mia modifica si rifà al fatto che i dittonghi discendenti li abbiamo sempre trascritti brevi per semplicità (in linea con quanto detto alla pagina di aiuto, cioè che le vocali si allungano se toniche in sillabe aperte in corpo di parola). Non so se abbia molto senso tenere conto della metrica poetica, che mi risulti nel parlato regolare (anche standard) vuoi è un monosillabo. 〜イヴァンスクルージ九十八［IvanScrooge98］（会話） 20:01, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

Effettivamente la metrica poetica c'entra il giusto; comunque anche in prosa nei manuali attendibili di fonetica italiana (Canepari, Camilli & Fiorelli) un certo allungamento (semicrono o crono) è sempre presente in quella posizione: [eˈrɔːe] ed [eˈrɔːi] oppure [eˈrɔˑe] ed [eˈrɔˑi] (con possibilità di dieresi o sineresi, più comune).--Carnby (talk) 20:16, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

@Carnby: sì sì, mi rendo conto che la tendenza all’allungamento c’è, però che ciò foneticamente comporti una dieresi oppure no, e che valga la pena di segnalarlo nelle trascrizioni su Wikipedia forse è un altro paio di maniche. Lo riportano proprio come hai fatto tu, cioè equiparando appieno iati come /ɔe/ a dittonghi come /ɔi/? 〜イヴァンスクルージ九十八［IvanScrooge98］（会話） 20:29, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

Certamente, sia Camilli & Fiorelli sia Canepari equiparano (foneticamente) appieno quelli che in grammatica tradizionale sono noti come «ïati» e «dittonghi discendenti» stabilendo che la distinzione tradizionale è puramente teorica (e non vale, come ho detto, neppure in metrica poetica). Domani, con più calma, posso farti degli esempi puntuali tratti dai manuali.--Carnby (talk) 20:39, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

@Carnby: buono a sapersi. Credo allora sia più opportuno discutere (o piuttosto, chiarire) la cosa a Help talk:IPA/Italian, specificando ulteriormente la nota sul prolungamento e modificando i “dittonghi” tonici finali nelle trascrizioni che puntano all’aiuto. 〜イヴァンスクルージ九十八［IvanScrooge98］（会話） 20:46, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

Prima di aprire una discussione su Help talk:IPA/Italian (ho notato che non c'è neppure consenso su /s.C/, il che è notissimo a chi ha un po' di infarinatura fonologica italiana) vorrei sapere su quali testi, se ci sono, ci si basa per stabilire la differenza tra [eˈrɔː.e] (trisillabo) ed [eˈrɔi̯] (bisillabo) sotto l'aspetto puramente fonetico intendo. Poi il mio inglese è un po' arrugginito e dubito di poter riuscire a condurre una discussione in inglese su un tema così spinoso, dato che un po' tutti si sentono in grado di parlare di fonetica e fonologia italiana (con testi assolutamente non attendibili come quello che ho perfino studiato all'univeristà di Marina Nespor, che al massimo può essere considerato l'analisi di una variante settentrionale d'italiano, non certo dell'italiano standard!).--Carnby (talk) 08:42, 10 August 2021 (UTC)

@Carnby: non saprei, quello che so è che appunto i dittonghi li abbiamo convenzionalmente sempre trascritti brevi, in linea con quanto dice la nota sul fatto che le vocali si allungano in sillabe toniche aperte in corpo di parola (intendendo la seconda parte del dittongo come l’elemento che “chiude” la sillaba e quindi la mantiene “breve”, anche se è quella finale). Ti consiglio davvero di chiedere chiarimenti lì in quanto purtroppo non dispongo dei testi citati e perciò non ti sono granché d’aiuto per quanto concerne l’analisi strettamente fonetica dei vari gruppi vocalici. 〜イヴァンスクルージ九十八［IvanScrooge98］（会話） 09:48, 10 August 2021 (UTC)

Forse è meglio per il momento lasciare tutto com'è; dovrei trovare il tempo di trascrivere i testi di Camilli e Fiorelli e Canepari e impostare un discorso strutturato in inglese.--Carnby (talk) 07:22, 15 August 2021 (UTC)

Cecilia

Vorrei solo dirti che la quattordicesima edizione del Jones trascrive Cecilia come [sɪˈsɪljə, səˈs-, -ˈsiː-, -lɪə], mentre Wiktionary la trascrive /sɛˈsiːli.ə/. Suppongo che quella /i/ sia per dire che può essere pronunciato /j/ o /ɪ/, ma la prima sillaba?--Carnby (talk) 08:21, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

@Carnby: la variante in /ɛ/ l’ho tolta perché non sembra attestata (Wiktionary non cita fonti). L’alternanza fra [ə] e [ɪ] atono generalmente la sottintendiamo con /ɪ/ (vedi la nota #33; qualche anno fa la trascrivevamo con lo pseudo-IPA ⟨ᵻ⟩). ;) 〜イヴァンスクルージ九十八［IvanScrooge98］（会話） 08:39, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

Ho corretto la trascrizione di Wiktionary.--Carnby (talk) 07:22, 15 August 2021 (UTC)

Palermo

Ho tolto da Palermo quello strano nome locale Palìaimmu e quell'ancora più strana trascrizione IPA [paˈliːaɪmmʊ] e ho messo le forme che si trovano sul DETI di Tagliavini e Cappello (fonte attendibile): Palièmmu, Palèimmu e Palèrmu. Se ti senti di arrischiare una trascrizione IPA, fai pure (ma non so se convenga).--Carnby (talk) 07:18, 15 August 2021 (UTC)

@Carnby: grazie, hai fatto benissimo. Ho giusto tolto l’accento grafico dove di regola non si usa in siciliano. 〜イヴァンスクルージ九十八［IvanScrooge98］（会話） 08:09, 15 August 2021 (UTC)

Elsa Morante

Hey Ivan,

Following up on this edit, can you complete the IPA for Elsa Morante?

Thanks,

François Robere (talk) 13:33, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

@François Robere: hi! The IPA is actually complete: the hyphen stands for the following part being identical to the one already provided, in an alternative transcription. So instead of having [ˈelsa moˈrante, ˈɛlsa moˈrante] we stick to [ˈelsa moˈrante, ˈɛl-] to avoid cluttering the lead section. Hope I’ve been clear enough! :) 〜イヴァンスクルージ九十八［IvanScrooge98］（会話） 13:45, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

Interesting! I didn't know that, thanks. I find it mildly confusing, but if it's legit then it's legit. Cheers! François Robere (talk) 13:55, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

Stress marks in transcriptions of German phrases

Hello. You tend to put too many stress marks in IPA transcriptions of German phrases. German, like English, deaccents many words in running speech, including unreduced syllables. My understanding is that Sag ihr, ich lass sie grüßen is pronounced SAG ihr, ich lass sie GRÜSSEN, with two primary stresses and reduced forms of ihr and sie. Heute Abend wollen wir tanzen geh'n too seems to have only two primary stresses: heute ABEND wollen wir TANZEN geh'n (again, with a reduced wir). Maybe "wollen" is stressed too, I'm not sure about that. And a neutral rendering of Du hast mich so fasziniert doesn't include a stress on "mich". It's likely on "hast": du HAST mich so FASZINIERT (with a reduced du).

The answer to your question on how to indentify a secondarily stressed syllable in Swedish is here, in case you haven't read my reply already. The short answer is: look for long vowels, gemination and lowered mid front vowels. If those three things are absent, we're talking about an unstressed syllable. Sol505000 (talk) 12:58, 10 September 2021 (UTC)

@Sol505000: thanks a lot regarding Swedish, I had kinda figured that out but I had no source to rely on. :)

I understand German deaccents many words, but I have a question about vowel reduction ([dʊ], [dɪ], etc.): are these realizations considered part of a standard neutral pronunciation or rather something common in everyday speech but lax compared to a standard pronunciation? Because in that case I don’t think we should go that far in regular transcriptions on Wikipedia. 〜イヴァンスクルージ九十八［IvanScrooge98］（会話） 13:19, 10 September 2021 (UTC)

You need to understand that transcriptions found in pronunciation dictionaries of German are pretty much a fabrication. Nobody talks like that, not even politicians or TV personalities. In particular, the schwa-assimilated forms are not the most formal kind of pronunciation, which does include the schwa. The word graben 'to dig' is pronounced [ˈɡʁaːbən] or perhaps [ˈɡʁaːˌbɛn] in most formal German and [ˈɡʁaːbm̩] in normal speech, with the /b/ being nasally released into the syllabic bilabial nasal. The transcription ⟨ˈɡʁaːbn̩⟩ found in dictionaries doesn't correspond to any common pronunciation. If a native speaker attempts to actually say [ˈɡʁaːbn̩], forcing his lips open at the end he'll likely end up saying [ˈɡʁaːbən], with a very short schwa (=oral release of the /b/). In any case, the distinction is non-phonemic and there's probably a certain amount of free variation between [ˈɡʁaːbən] and [ˈɡʁaːbm̩] for all speakers, except those that never use syllabic consonants (as in Luxembourg, areas of Germany close to the border with Luxembourg, Switzerland and maybe some other areas as well). The alleged diphthong ⟨aːɐ̯⟩ is also not a diphthong at all but simply an open central [äː] that stems from earlier /aːr/. The words ja and Jahr are perfect homophones in areas with r-vocalization.

The length mark transcribed in the word-final position in non-compound words (or in originally unstressed syllables of parts of compound words, you know what I mean), found in Krech et al. is at least partially a falsehood. The length may or may not be retained there. This is reflected in transcriptions found in Duden's Das Aussprachewörterbuch. In the case of the weak forms of du, die, sie, etc. you need to remember that there's no tense-lax contrast in this position, as lax vowels are normally only permitted in the word-internal position before consonants. Unstressed function words are an exception to the rule, and they're also not preceded by a glottal stop. See Kohler 1999. The only problem is identifying where the weak forms are used, which something I myself am struggling with. Sol505000 (talk) 14:33, 10 September 2021 (UTC)

@Sol505000: I see where you’re coming from. The thing is we do this with a lot of IPA transcriptions for various languages: we try to keep them as regular as possible for the readers not to be confused with different levels of speech, so we normally stick to a standard (or, in the case of German, three standards) and don’t use colloquial or overly phonetic transcriptions when the article they are used in is not about that. Take for instance Italian: we use the prescribed standard for pronunciation even though only educated people use it regularly among native speakers, and we do that because it would be too complicated to list the various regional and colloquial possibilities; the French transcription is more phonemic than it is phonetic: it doesn’t even use the length mark (except for the /ɛː/ phoneme) when stressed closed syllables are usually elongated in a number of cases; and so on. So I think using transcriptions that step more or less away from a prescribed standard should be proposed beforehand on the dedicated talks, more than anything for the sake of readers. 〜イヴァンスクルージ九十八［IvanScrooge98］（会話） 15:39, 10 September 2021 (UTC)

We're already transcribing the shortening of /iː yː uː eː øː oː aː/ in appropriate contexts, following pronunciation dictionaries. The laxing to [ɪ ʏ ʊ] in unstressed function words is not described by Kohler as colloquial. He says that the recording is in a colloquial style. The accent he describes is Northern Standard German. I cannot imagine a fluent speaker who consistently says [diː ˈzɔnə] (cf. English the sun as [ðiː ˈsʌn] theeee sun). It'd sound ridiculous. We want our readers to sound natural and fluent, not robotic and non-native. And I think you'd be hard-pressed to find someone who'd describe the laxed variants of die, sie and du to be "colloquial", as long as the vowel remains in the general close front/back area and is not reduced all the way to a schwa. Sol505000 (talk) 16:24, 10 September 2021 (UTC)

@Sol505000: I’ll say it in other words: we should find a way of transcribing certain words that we all agree on, to avoid having readers come across [diː] on one page and [dɪ] in another, in identical instances (I have always used [diː] in these cases because that seems to be how the word is always transcribed here). So I totally get your point, but mine still stands: for one standard, we should stick to one kind of transcription all the way across the project, and at the moment, that transcription seems to be different from the one you’re proposing (which yes, I had mistakenly understood as a colloquialism and I apologize). That’s why I’m prompting you to raise the question on Help talk:IPA/Standard German so that we reach a general consensus outside of my talk page. 〜イヴァンスクルージ九十八［IvanScrooge98］（会話） 16:35, 10 September 2021 (UTC)

(Or alternatively, you could change all the various instances that use {{IPA-de}} and leave a notice on the page). 〜イヴァンスクルージ九十八［IvanScrooge98］（会話） 16:38, 10 September 2021 (UTC)

I can do that, but the guide doesn't really tell us whether we should transcribe weak forms or not. I do transcribe them, as not doing so makes German stand out from the rest of Germanic languages, in which unstressed articles almost always have short vowels.

I don't know whether I can reliably distinguish all of the unstressed instances of die etc. and not mistake them for a stressed die, or the other way around. Transcribing weak forms of function words does admittedly add a layer of complexity to the transcription system. Sol505000 (talk) 16:48, 10 September 2021 (UTC)

@Sol505000: again, it’s not about the guide itself, it’s just that it’s the best place to talk about this, simply for consensus reasons, and for coherence among the various transcriptions once it’s clear how we’re supposed to act with certain words. 〜イヴァンスクルージ九十八［IvanScrooge98］（会話） 16:58, 10 September 2021 (UTC)

The weak form of für is [fʏɐ̯], with a vocalized /r/. Nobody says [fʏʁ] in Northern SG. Sol505000 (talk) 11:52, 13 September 2021 (UTC)

@Sol505000: I explained why you shouldn't use that transcription. If you disagree, please take it to the help talk, the reference for both editors and readers. 〜イヴァンスクルージ九十八［IvanScrooge98］（会話） 11:56, 13 September 2021 (UTC)

I'm replying to the edit summary which suggests that [fʏʁ] is a possible weak form in Northern SG. That is false. There's [fyːʁ] (with a long vowel), used in rare circumstances as the strong form. The normal pronunciation is [fyːɐ̯] in the case of the strong form and [fʏɐ̯] in the case of the weak form. Sol505000 (talk) 12:27, 13 September 2021 (UTC)

@Sol505000: I totally understood your point. Still I'm no longer talking about the actual realization, but the transcription. As I already said, a reader would be confused so please if you really want, suggest a change in the guide by opening a discussion. I have nothing else to say in this regard. 〜イヴァンスクルージ九十八［IvanScrooge98］（会話） 12:33, 13 September 2021 (UTC)

Fair enough, it's about time I opened a thread there. Sol505000 (talk) 12:58, 13 September 2021 (UTC)

Maureen Wroblewitz

Hello. Help improve and copy edit. Thanks you. Kolpb (talk) 09:07, 11 September 2021 (UTC)

@Kolpb: there seems to be nothing to copy edit though. I wonder why you went for me specifically, that looks very random (XD). Best, 〜イヴァンスクルージ九十八［IvanScrooge98］（会話） 10:23, 11 September 2021 (UTC)

Never mind, apparently it is random. 〜イヴァンスクルージ九十八［IvanScrooge98］（会話） 10:34, 11 September 2021 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 16

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Rock 'n' Roll Kids, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Paul Harrington.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:59, 16 September 2021 (UTC)

Duden (ancora sui dittonghi discendenti)

Ho controllato per caso il Duden Aussprachewörterbuch (ed. 6) e ho trovato la seguente trascrizione del cognome italiano Mattei: [matˈtɛːi̯]. Basterà per uan discussione in inglese sulla lunghezza dei dittonghi discendenti?--Carnby (talk) 06:44, 16 September 2021 (UTC)

@Carnby: uhm, non saprei. Per quanto fonte essenziale per le pronunce in tedesco, non so possa valere come riferimento anche nelle trascrizioni relative ad altre lingue. Però tu mettici anche quella, tentar non nuoce – quelle italiane le hai se non ricordo male, giusto? 〜イヴァンスクルージ九十八［IvanScrooge98］（会話） 08:40, 16 September 2021 (UTC)

3RR reminder

Hi, I'd just like to remind you that you've hit three reverts on Belarus in the Junior Eurovision Song Contest; I think it's better to sort this out on the talk page instead. ―Jochem van Hees (talk) 21:11, 19 September 2021 (UTC)

Opinion

Hi there! I think the points received and the para about the song's performance in the contest should stay in the Eurovision song articles since they have something to do with the song itself. The points awarded by Romania in the contest, for example, don't have anything to do with the song itself, and that's why they're also not included. Regards, Cartoon network freak (talk) 04:57, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

@Cartoon network freak: I absolutely disagree; otherwise what would be the point of specific “[COUNTRY] in the Eurovision Song Contest [YEAR]” articles when almost every single thing (from the very beginning, the selection process etc.) is repeated in the article about the song? It is enough to summarize the total of points awarded (maybe with a few relevant countries if needed) alongside the resulting position in a sentence.

Also, if we really want to do that, we should do it with every entry in the history of the contest, while currently the minority of these articles don’t list the whole voting results obtained, since they can be found at pages dedicated to that year’s ESC or the country’s contest performance.

Cheers, 〜イヴァンスクルージ九十八［IvanScrooge98］（会話） 07:48, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

IvanScrooge, I appreciate your goal of consistency within these articles, but this authoritative attitude is not very constructive nor does it build a sense of community between us Eurovision editors. I understand that you don't like these tables being in the song articles, but they aren't new editions that you're reverting and your removal was objected to by more than one editor. if we really want to do that, we should do it with every entry in the history of the contest < this is true, but not a reason to not have the tables. Perhaps in the long run it doesn't make sense to have them, but let's discuss that on the project page. I would urge you to discuss these types of things if your bold edit is objected to instead of staging an edit summary argument. We're all volunteers! Let's make sure we value each other and the time people put into this! Grk1011 (talk) 14:09, 25 September 2021 (UTC)

@Grk1011: you are right, sometimes I get a little carried away, especially when I am making bulk edits (you can see I have lately been copyediting the entries one by one). I appreciate that you guys tried to provide a close insight to those songs, but again, they are songs and the article should focus on that rather than the whole history of [Romania] at the contest in that specific year, which one can thoroughly consult at the dedicated page (and if it doesn’t exist, it can be created by separating the appropriate sections). I think we really should focus on the song content, staging, release and such, summarizing the details more closely associated with the competition. If there really is a need for it, I will soon open a discussion. 〜イヴァンスクルージ九十八［IvanScrooge98］（会話） 14:26, 25 September 2021 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 24

An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.

Rimi Rimi Ley

added a link pointing to In My Dreams

Run & Hide (Gracia Baur song)

added a link pointing to Heavy rock

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:00, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

Secondary stress

This edit summary makes no sense. Either there are defined circumstances where the syllable is analyzed as bearing the secondary stress, or there are not. Stormvind is a compound noun, made up of storm and vind, each stressed on the first and only syllable. In compounds, this is converted into secondary stress in the case of the less stressed part. Sol505000 (talk) 13:47, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

@Sol505000: it’s what we conventionally do with Swedish transcriptions (also, I doubt there is any difference in pronunciation between a two-syllable compound and a regular two-syllable noun with toneme 2, but regardless, this should be documented before changing IPAs). No need for a lesson every time, thanks. I’ll revert your edits and again, bring these things up in more appropriate spaces. 〜イヴァンスクルージ九十八［IvanScrooge98］（会話） 13:55, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

There's no consensus to do this, and Riad (2014) transcribes secondary stress(es) (yes, there may be more than one secondary stress) in all types of compounds. The marking is phonological, above all else (AFAICS). Sol505000 (talk) 14:05, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

@Sol505000: I have said countless times my talk page is no place to discuss these things. 〜イヴァンスクルージ九十八［IvanScrooge98］（会話） 14:13, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

Help

Someone reverted the ESC 2022 map to its original version. 212.117.1.186 (talk) 15:05, 25 September 2021 (UTC)

This should be pointed at out at Commons:File talk:ESC 2022 Map.svg. However, I’m sure someone will promptly revert it to its updated version. 〜イヴァンスクルージ九十八［IvanScrooge98］（会話） 15:09, 25 September 2021 (UTC)

I did that, let’s wait and see. 〜イヴァンスクルージ九十八［IvanScrooge98］（会話） 15:14, 25 September 2021 (UTC)

IPA for Lisboa

Hello. Since you added a syllable break to liʒˈβoɐ, would it be correct to add one to βɐ̃jˈfikɐ (βɐ̃jˈfi.kɐ)? SLBedit (talk) 19:41, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

@SLBedit: hi! It would be correct, but it’s not really needed; it is customary in IPA transcriptions on Wikipedia (outside of language-specific articles) to use the syllable break symbol where it is useful for the average reader, i.e. where it makes it clear that two vowels are in hiatus instead of forming a diphthong. In [βɐ̃jˈfi.kɐ], you would unnecessarily remark that [i] and [k] don’t belong in the same syllable. Hope I’ve been clear! ;) 〜イヴァンスクルージ九十八［IvanScrooge98］（会話） 20:12, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

Welcome to the WikiProject!

Hi! I saw you added your name to the members list. Thank you for all the many contributions you've made so far, you're like one of the most active people now. ―Jochem van Hees (talk) 23:35, 16 October 2021 (UTC)

ESC 2022 pages

Stop adding years until we know the full list of participating countries! Thank you. 009988aaabbbccc (talk) 07:22, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

@009988aaabbbccc: as you can see this time we already have a couple of mainspace articles to link (instead of just redirects). I suggest either you or I finally open a discussion somewhere. 〜イヴァンスクルージ九十八［IvanScrooge98］（会話） 07:47, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

Today we will finally get the list, EBU, announced that, so you can keep them. 009988aaabbbccc (talk) 09:37, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Montenegro in the Eurovision Song Contest 2022 (October 31)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Dan arndt was:  The comment the reviewer left was: Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Montenegro in the Eurovision Song Contest 2022 and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Montenegro in the Eurovision Song Contest 2022, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{Db-g7}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
• If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
• If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Dan arndt (talk) 01:10, 31 October 2021 (UTC)

Hello, IvanScrooge98! Having an article declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! Dan arndt (talk) 01:10, 31 October 2021 (UTC)

@Dan arndt: I understand that it may be WP:TOOSOON (that’s probably the main reason why I started it as a draft), but I don’t get why half of your comment is about the need to source the country’s 2022 participation: there are four sources about 2022, out of the seven total. The other three are of course related to the “Background” section, which is usual in this type of articles and which I mimicked from Montenegro in the Eurovision Song Contest 2019. 〜イヴァンスクルージ九十八［IvanScrooge98］（会話） 06:31, 31 October 2021 (UTC)

Help:IPA/Sicilian

Ciao Visti ca sì parranti talianu. Ti dispiacissi mutivàrimi 'n lingua siciliana u picchì dâ rimuzziuni dî migghiurìi ca jìi a jùnciri. Nni ḍḍa pàggina foru scrivuti na para di nisattizzi ca nun ponu siri manutinuti ncapu a na wikipàggina.

Per questo vorrei esortarti a dimostrarmi di saper parlare, scrivere o quanto meno comprendere la lingua siciliana. Altrimenti qualsiasi reverted revision su contenuti di questo tipo risulta ex se arbitraria e priva di fondamento logico.

È per questo che vorrei che tu ripristinassi la mia modifica o che quantomeno adducessi gli argomenti esatti che dimostrino l'inesattezza delle mie affermazioni fonetico-ortografiche sul siciliano. Scorpios90 (talk) 18:05, 3 November 2021 (UTC)

@Scorpios90: allora, chiariamo una cosa prima di tutto: non c’è assolutamente bisogno di essere parlanti madrelingua per conoscere più o meno approfonditamente la fonologia di un idioma; bisogna aver studiato o (come nel mio caso) essere appassionati di linguistica e anzi, è più verosimile che un parlante nativo non sappia assolutamente fare un’analisi del proprio sistema fonologico a meno di non avere gli strumenti per farlo. Nella mia revisione riporto ad esempio che in alcune varietà (es. quelle dell’agrigentino) le consonanti sorde sonorizzano se precedute da nasale (es. muntagna pronunciato con [d] e non [t]) – tu l’hai rimosso o perché non sei della zona oppure perché pur essendolo non percepisci la /t/ di muntagna diversa da quella di tempu (in cui a sua volta sonorizzeresti /p/ – [ˈt(ʰ)ɛmbʊ]). Per quanto riguarda la /r/, al momento non ricordo se avessi usato il simbolo in maniera convenzionale o se mi fossi basato su qualche fonte che effettivamente riportava la pronuncia (anche) alveolare della consonante, ma credo la seconda (visto il link) – vedo di recuperarla non appena riesco. In ogni caso, tieni a mente che questa è una pagina di aiuto verso cui puntano delle trascrizioni: queste devono dunque corrispondere ai simboli che il lettore trova qui. Se cambi arbitrariamente il simbolo da r a ʐ, poi dovresti verificare che {{IPA-scn}} non sia mai usato con il primo simbolo (per questo è opportuno aprire una discussione prima). 〜イヴァンスクルージ九十八［IvanScrooge98］（会話） 18:24, 3 November 2021 (UTC)

@Scorpios90: ah, e per quanto riguarda l’ortografia mi sono basato sulle voci in scn.wiktionary (eccetto per la D retroflessa che ho riportato con il punto come raccomanda la Cadèmia Siciliana). 〜イヴァンスクルージ九十八［IvanScrooge98］（会話） 18:28, 3 November 2021 (UTC)

@IvanScrooge98: sulla tua primissima affermazione devo redarguirti, dato il caso che la lingua siciliana rientra tra quelle lingue parlate, vive e attive, che però non gode di un sistema ortografico accettato o usato, in primis dai propri locutori.

Proprio a tal riguardo, nulla vieta ai non madrelingua siciliani di potersi appassionare o erudirsi nella conoscenza fonologia di una o più varietà siciliane, ciò non toglie che fin quando non verrà divulgata una ampia e completa descrizione grammaticale della lingua siciliana, dubito che tale diffusione di conoscenza sarà così capillare o adeguata, se non appunto andando e vivendo in loco per imparare la lingua sul campo tra i suoi parlanti nativi.

Premesso questo, provo ad entrare nel merito della questione. La pagina di cui si sta dibattendo qui si chiama "Help:IPA/Sicilian" con ciò alludendo al fatto che si tratti di un vademecum afferente alla fonologia della lingua siciliana.

Non penso che ci sia da precisare cosa sia la lingua siciliana e quando si parla invece dei suoi dialetti, ma mi pare giusto il caso di denotare che la fonologia siciliana può variare con estrema facilità tra un comune e l'altro (anche distanti meno di 10 chilometri), con ciò comportando che la fonetica dell'agrigentino non rispecchierà per certo quella di altre località, oppure ne rispecchierà alcune caratteristiche per evoluzioni non strettamente correlate.

Venendo quindi a scn.wiktionary viene da sé - pi cu' si dichiara canuscituri dâ lingua - ca si tratta di nu pruggettu scrivutu chî pedi ca si miritassi, pi prima cosa, na riscrittura tutali dâ ntirfacci utenti ca è rimpinzata di termini italianizzati o dialettalismi della parte occidentale dell'Isola (magari per via del fatto che i locutori orientali vi hanno preso poco o nessuna parte?!). Attendibilità veramente esigua anche nel progetto scn.wikipedia. Tra l'altro anche i template delle coniugazioni su en.wiktionary rappresentano in modo abbastanza impreciso la consistenza della lingua o dei dialetti siciliani.

Se poi quanto fin qui scritto non è sufficiente a corroborare la validità delle mie modifiche, vengo a dire che parole come avvucatu possono essere considerate buone solo se prese all'interno di una fonologia dialettale, laddove il raddoppiamento fonosintattico di -vv- produce nella ordinaria fonetica siciliana un nesso -bb- (cfr. avventum -> abbentu), conseguenzialmente la grafia (e in questo caso la pronuncia) corretta è da individuarsi in abbucatu. Nel dialetto catanese della lingua siciliana, ad esempio, nomi come Sarbaturi diventano (attraverso l'eufonesi data dall'italiano) Sarvaturi, laddove la scarsa pronuncia della r trasforma poi il nome abbreviato in Savvu. Cosa dovremmo riportare allora tra le svariate pronunce/grafie di "Sarbu", "Savvu", "Savvo", "Sarvu"?

È proprio grazie ad un dibattito condotto internamente a Cademia Siciliana (senza e accentata, come successivamente è stato deciso) se ho acquisito una majuri cunzapivulizza dû sicilianu, che mi aiuta nella ricerca quotidiana circa il significato di questa o di quella parola e che mi porta ad acquisire un lessico adeguato alla complessità dei ragionamenti.

Le inesattezze sulla lingua siciliana vengono purtroppo costantemente perpetrate anche per il webbe, a cominciare da siciliani nostalgici della lingua e delle culture "estinguende" che però difficilmente godono di una alfabetizzazione adeguata per poter affrontare certi temi (anche meramente lessicografici).

Ecco perché avrei gradito che le mie modifiche venissero tutt'al più integrate, invece che essere rimosse.

Sempre sulla base della Proposta ortografica di Cademia Siciliana ci sono svariati temi che porterebbero ad infiniti dibattiti, come ad esempio l'espunzione delle d rotacizzate dall'ortografia, cosicché lo standard (proposto) dùcici sia la forma più inclusiva (ed etimologicamengte coerente) tra le tante e permetta di includere anche le varianti dialettali dùrici e rùrici.

Quindi il lavoro e il tempo che si impiega a scrivere di queste cose è sicuramente lodevole, lo diventa un po' meno quando uno si ritrova rimossi dei contenuti senza dei validi e solidi argomenti che legittimino tale revisione. Una cosa è certa, se si vogliono anche includere pronunce come quelle del Dialetto Siciliano Occidentale direi che questa non è la pagina adatta su cui discuterne, né su cui presentare al mondo tali informazioni. E, pi chiùdiri stu discursu, non soltanto in questa pagina non sono presentati altri suoni dialettali inesistenti nella lingua siciliana ma, è proprio la fonologia qui rappresentata che si presentava inadeguata alla sua effettiva portata divulgativa.

Scorpios90 (talk) 21:18, 3 November 2021 (UTC)

@Scorpios90: mi sono un po’ perso in questa risposta lunghissima di cui non colgo sinceramente il punto e che mi sembra deviare parecchio dal discorso che stavo facendo. Ci sono stati fior di glottologi tedeschi che a malapena parlavano l’italiano, e che se non fosse stato per loro gli studi seri sulle lingue d’Italia li avremmo iniziati a vedere molto più tardi. Ciò detto, leggerò il tuo messaggio con calma domattina ma semplicemente il discorso è questo: ho cercato di attenermi alla grafia il più possibile neutrale in quanto non esiste (ancora) uno standard per il siciliano come per l’italiano – che una pronuncia di riferimento ce l’ha. Siccome questa pagina ha lo scopo pratico di spiegare ai lettori le pronunce che hanno trovato trascritte nel progetto (magari una in catanese, una in trapanese e una in siracusano), mi pare ovvio che nei limiti del possibile si debba tentare di essere inclusivi. Salutamu. (E, ripeto, dovresti prima aprire una discussione alla pagina di dovere se vuoi proporre una pronuncia uniformata sulla pagina in questione). 〜イヴァンスクルージ九十八［IvanScrooge98］（会話） 21:51, 3 November 2021 (UTC)

Warning

You have done many edits to change the articles references and structure for the worse. Please be aware, I know what I'm doing cause I'm very familiar with Eurovision-related topics because I wrote many GA articles. Feel free to improve but don't revert my edits and delete important references. If you continue with your disruption, then I will have to search for a third person to mediate this whole situation. Thank you and good day/evening!--Lorik17 (talk) 19:41, 9 November 2021 (UTC)

@Iaof2017: how are they for the worse? You even repeated the lead sentence in the background section and the refs are more than enough like that. And regarding the language syntax, something I recently learned too is that voice synthesis systems will be able to carefully switch to an Albanian pronunciation for impaired readers if left that way. So please revert at least those parts, or I will. Thanks! 〜イヴァンスクルージ九十八［IvanScrooge98］（会話） 20:22, 9 November 2021 (UTC)

Never mind, just did. 〜イヴァンスクルージ九十八［IvanScrooge98］（会話） 20:38, 9 November 2021 (UTC)

@IvanScrooge98: the lead serves as an introduction to the article and a summary of its most important content, in other words the main parts of the article's body are summarized in the lead.--Lorik17 (talk) 21:04, 9 November 2021 (UTC)

The fact that it is going to be the eighteenth participation is not among the most important content of the article if you ask me. 〜イヴァンスクルージ九十八［IvanScrooge98］（会話） 21:25, 9 November 2021 (UTC)

Though it will be changed sooner or later, when I'll nominate the article for GA status. Lorik17 (talk) 21:35, 9 November 2021 (UTC)

Alright, keep taking it personally until then. 〜イヴァンスクルージ九十八［IvanScrooge98］（会話） 21:37, 9 November 2021 (UTC)

If you continue this way I will report you. Lorik17 (talk) 07:35, 10 November 2021 (UTC)

@Iaof2017: you seem to act like you own the articles on Albania in Eurovision, which neither of us does. Please make some constructive argument or criticism instead of threatening a report whenever you get reverted. 〜イヴァンスクルージ九十八［IvanScrooge98］（会話） 07:39, 10 November 2021 (UTC)

Again, feel free to improve in a constructive way. I've never claimed that the mentioned articles are my property and Wikipedia is, however, a free encyclopedia, where everyone can make improvements to increase quality. As I said above, I'm quite familiar with the article's theme and I tend toward to upgrade those article to pass good article status. I advise you to have a look at criteria if you're interested, and please do not replace "quality" and "more" reliable references over social media as you did here [1] and many many other times.--Lorik17 (talk) 12:17, 10 November 2021 (UTC)

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. 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 2021 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) 00:46, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

Cristoforo Majorana

Hello Ivan! I'm wondering if you can help with what appear to be issues with the dating in this article.
The work in the gallery is dated circa 1470 and French, Italian, and Spanish Wikipedia seem to be attributing works to him in the 1470s, possibly meaning he was active earlier than 1480? -- 2A02:C7F:38FC:A300:FCF5:BBA1:D2CD:894F (talk) 20:31, 15 December 2021 (UTC)

Christmas Barnstar

		The Original Barnstar
		I wanted to give you a barnstar, but I wasn't sure for what. You've made a lot of good edits across Wikipedia, from fixing CS1 params to writing all the ESC 2022 participation articles. You totally deserve an award for all of that! Merry Christmas! ―Jochem van Hees (talk) 00:06, 25 December 2021 (UTC)

@Jochem van Hees: thank you so much!! Have a lovely holiday season too! 〜イヴァンスクルージ九十八［IvanScrooge98］（会話） 12:28, 25 December 2021 (UTC)

A barnstar for you

	The Original Barnstar
	I know we didn't agreed on some little things but I still want to award you this order for your tireless and great contributions in articles related to Eurovision. Keep going mate :) Iaof2017 (talk) 12:34, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

Kallsruh

Hi, Ivan. As you suggested, I opened a new discussion in the talk page of the Infobox German place. Let's see if anybody replies. --Caramelize donorz (talk) 22:43, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

@Caramelize donorz: thanks! Sorry if I seemed a bit pigheaded :) 〜イヴァンスクルージ九十八［IvanScrooge98］（会話） 23:20, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

Do not worry, I was the same ;) I replied to you in the main discussion. --Caramelize donorz (talk) 10:43, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 9

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Spain in the Eurovision Song Contest 2022, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page El Periódico.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:57, 9 January 2022 (UTC)

Why 28 January is wrong?

As we know, EMA Freš 2022 is the Slovene national selection for ESC22, and I gave an article which shows that the final will be on Friday, 28 January, this article is newer and probably more precise that the calendar of the official site of the ESC... So please tell me what's wrong? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Adir David (talk • contribs) 17:57, 15 January 2022 (UTC)

@Adir David: EMA Freš is the first phase, dedicated to selecting newcomers for the competition proper, which is EMA plain and simple. The dates for the EMA finals are yet to be known. :) See for yourself at Slovenia in the Eurovision Song Contest 2022. 〜イヴァンスクルージ九十八［IvanScrooge98］（会話） 18:14, 15 January 2022 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Culturebox (January 17)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by S0091 was:  The comment the reviewer left was: Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Culturebox and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Culturebox, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{Db-g7}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
• If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
• If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

S0091 (talk) 20:10, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Editing

Hey, just saw that you reverted my edits on several Eurovision pages (e.g. Ireland in the Eurovision Song Contest 2022 and Slovenia in the Eurovision Song Contest 2022) because I was "removing templates" and "changing tenses to the past", this is something that confused me a bit because I did check several times to make sure every tense complies with the timeline of the events. The reason why I removed some of the templates might be because I tried replacing some of the sentences you wrote with texts taken from previous years' pages for better summarization and consistency, as had always been the case of my editing from day one. Another thing that's confusing is that you thanked my edits in Ukraine in the Eurovision Song Contest 2022 when I was essentially undergoing the same editing procedure for the two aforementioned articles. Just wanted to clarify these issues here because I think this is something that we have to get consensus on in order to prevent any future editing wars. LWL12345 (talk) 15:16, 21 January 2022 (UTC)

@LWL12345: you’re right, I thanked you on the page about Ukraine, because it mostly looked like an expansion. While I reverted you on the other two for the reason you mentioned, i.e. the removal of templates and change of tenses to mimic older articles: pluperfect only makes sense when the rest of the article is in the past tense since the contest is over, while language templates are useful if voice synthesis devices are used to read an article (so they should also be implemented in older articles rather than being removed from here). 〜イヴァンスクルージ九十八［IvanScrooge98］（会話） 16:59, 21 January 2022 (UTC)

@IvanScrooge98: I got what you mean, and in that sense I'm going to do the major cleanups only after a certain event took place. Again, just wanted to make it clear to you to avoid further conflicts. LWL12345 (talk) 03:48, 22 January 2022 (UTC)

@IvanScrooge98: Yeah remember this? If you're going to keep blatantly removing my edits without giving a proper reason I'm going to bring this up on the noticeboard. LWL12345 (talk) 07:40, 5 February 2022 (UTC)

@LWL12345: the reason is you always change the tenses and other stuff by taking it from articles about past editions. Let's keep things consistent anong 2022 Eurovision articles. 〜イヴァンスクルージ九十八［IvanScrooge98］（会話） 07:46, 5 February 2022 (UTC)

@IvanScrooge98: Then what I would suggest is to correct the tenses without having to overwrite everything once again. I'm currently in the process of gradually cleaning up all countries' articles for 2022 in the format of previous years' ones (better to be consistent with Eurovision articles of +20 years instead of just a single year), but it will take some time because I'm just awaiting the appropriate timing to do so. LWL12345 (talk) 08:09, 5 February 2022 (UTC)

@LWL12345: I had already corrected them when I had created the article, that is the point. You shouldn’t blindly overwrite things that have already been adjusted, otherwise don’t be surprised if one bulk-reverts your edits. 〜イヴァンスクルージ九十八［IvanScrooge98］（会話） 08:54, 5 February 2022 (UTC)

@IvanScrooge98: "Blindly overwriting" in this scenario means directly copying and pasting without any amendments to the corresponding event, which clearly isn't the case from an objective view. My emphasis on this discussion isn't even on tense but more on the overall flow of these articles including sentence structures, sub-headers etc. that you've removed. Since you wanted consistency, this goes back to my argument of the bracketed sentence in my previous message. LWL12345 (talk) 09:44, 5 February 2022 (UTC)

@LWL12345: fair enough, we definitely should work on older articles too. 〜イヴァンスクルージ九十八［IvanScrooge98］（会話） 09:53, 5 February 2022 (UTC)

Mello 2022

Hey, can you check the talk page of the article? —Dimsar01 ^Talk ⌚→ 22:39, 5 February 2022 (UTC)

@Dimsar01: I just replied ;) btw, I suggest you leave a note at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Eurovision so that interested users are more likely to chime in. 〜イヴァンスクルージ九十八［IvanScrooge98］（会話） 22:46, 5 February 2022 (UTC)

@IvanScrooge98: Hey again, since I'm not entirely sure, do we have to wait a week before implementing any changes (to let everyone have a chance to tell their opinion)? —Dimsar01 ^Talk ⌚→ 16:21, 8 February 2022 (UTC)

@Dimsar01: hey there! I usually let at least a few days go by just in case, don’t really know if there is a minimum. In this case consensus seems unlikely to change (5/5 agree), so I think we can already start the conversion, you decide. But if you are patient enough and are fine without rushing, I can lend a hand in one of the next days. 〜イヴァンスクルージ九十八［IvanScrooge98］（会話） 16:41, 8 February 2022 (UTC)

@IvanScrooge98: I have time now and if it's okay I can do it now. By the way, there isn't a quick way to increment all the label/data parameter numbers on the infobox by 4 right? 😂 —Dimsar01 ^Talk ⌚→ 16:49, 8 February 2022 (UTC)

@Dimsar01: I don’t think I’m following you in the latter part. 😅 〜イヴァンスクルージ九十八［IvanScrooge98］（会話） 17:40, 8 February 2022 (UTC)

@Dimsar01: oh I got it now hahah. Certain users run bots for repetitive tasks like that, maybe you can ask at Wikipedia:Bot requests. 〜イヴァンスクルージ九十八［IvanScrooge98］（会話） 17:42, 8 February 2022 (UTC)

Karlsruhe

Hi IvanScrooge98,

I'm a bit astonished why you reverted my deletion of Kallsruh here. The name of this city in German is spelled "Karlsruhe". There may exist a dialect South Franconian German. However, as for all dialects, a spoken dialect exists but not a written one. I mean, each sequence of letters is just fancy and imagination – why "Kallsruh", why not "Kallsru", "Kalsru", "Kallsruu" or something else? (Giving the dialect name in IPA is something else...) So "Kallsruh" is not a name, it is a pronunciation presumed by user MinerB40. And I additionally it needs a source. Therefore I removed that.

(An additional problem is that the pronunciation of "Kallsruh" is only understandable for German readers, because in German the "h" is usually employed to prolongate a vocal, but not in English.)

--Cyfal (talk) 11:28, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

@Cyfal: alright, I guess we are mixing two different issues. First off, of course the standard German spelling is Karlsruhe, no doubt about that. As for Kallsruh, we should understand (and we definitely need a source at this point) whether it is simply a rough transcription of the local pronunciation when speaking Standard German (as if one would spell Dublin as Dooblin to mimic the local accent) or the actual name in the local South Franconian dialect, which may or may not have one or more standardized/generalized spelling systems (it’s not accurate at all to say that “all dialects” lack a written form, and even then we would need to clarify what you mean by “dialect”). So if it’s the first case, we should only provide IPA (if any); if it’s the second case, we should keep it since it is the local name, unless of course no systematic spelling rules are followed and/or it’s simply Standard German rules being bent for the purpose (and again opt for another type of transcription, provided we have a source). 〜イヴァンスクルージ九十八［IvanScrooge98］（会話） 11:59, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

Hi IvanScrooge98,

thank you for your quick answer. You are right, for the brevity of my argumentation I said above dialects lack a written form, but that's not true for all of them. However, being a native German (although not an expert for the South Franconian dialect), I'm quite shure that for the South Franconian dialect no "standard" written form exists. For me it's quite obvious that "Kallsruh" is a transcription of the South Franconian pronunciation that uses the Standard German written language rules, thus not appropriate in the English Wikipedia – independent of whether this is is an actual word of the South Franconian language/dialect, or just the South Franconian pronunciation of "Karlsruhe".

In the meantime, I found now per Google search that there are some Karlsruhe dialect poets; e.g. Harald Hurst. Here (click on "Leseprobe") is some text from one of his books – this also uses the Standard German written language rules to give the pronunciation of the Karlsruhe dialect. Of course this is somewhat original research of mine, I can't prove that this is not an existing "standard written form of South Franconian". But I'm shure that this book is the same case as if some poet from Dublin writes "Dooblin".

Unfortunaly I haven't got an answer on User talk:MinerB40.

--Cyfal (talk) 16:06, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

@Cyfal: thanks for your reply, very much on point. I just noticed the Palatine German Wikipedia uses this spelling, so the Franconian name/spelling might not be too far off. Still, in order to be sure we would need a source containing a summary on the orthography, pronunciation or something along those lines. Until we find one I agree it’s best not to include anything. 〜イヴァンスクルージ九十八［IvanScrooge98］（会話） 16:21, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

Thank you, IvanScrooge98. Did I understand you correctly that I can delete the Kallsruh again? Which I just did – otherwise don't hesitate to revert me again, I will not complain! --Cyfal (talk) 16:54, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

@Cyfal: absolutely! 〜イヴァンスクルージ九十八［IvanScrooge98］（会話） 17:30, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

@Cyfal: @IvanScrooge98:Hi, I just became aware of your discussion. One editor mentioned the fact that the Palatine German Wikipedia mentions the South Franconian spelling. One does not even have to go that far, as even the normal German Wikipedia mentions this in the introduction. I surely do not count as a reference, but I was born in Karlsruhe and live here (again) – in the local dialect it is indeed Kallsruh. To be honest though, even as a local, I would not be irritated if the local spelling was missing in the article. To me it’s not an issue worth arguing about.--Catflap08 (talk) 17:49, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

Thank you very much, Catflap08. I have no doubt that when speaking local dialect, you're saying something that sounds like ​IPA: [ˈk​ɐls​ʀuː] and I have no doubt, that if you would spell that in German, you would write "Kallsruh". However, my problem is that "Kallsruh" is not an "official" spelling and that it is not an understandable hint about the pronunciation for English-speaking readers.

Greetings to Karlsruhe (a lovely city, I visited it several times on weekends) --Cyfal (talk) 18:50, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

@Cyfal: that IPA transcription looks great! That could very well replace the spelling if you could find a source to back it up. 〜イヴァンスクルージ九十八［IvanScrooge98］（会話） 18:55, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

@Cyfal: I do not want to drag this on even further, but since German is only the de facto and not de jure official language in Germany, my guess would be that to find an official South Franconian spelling is close to be impossible.--Catflap08 (talk) 21:01, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

@Catflap08: hi! The fact that you testify as a native speaker is actually helpful. As Cyfal said, we would still have to make sure whether that spelling is not (only) merely based on Standard German. 〜イヴァンスクルージ九十八［IvanScrooge98］（会話） 18:54, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

To be honest most English-speaking readers would, if they study the German language, be confronted with the standard German version. Standard German is only spoken on TV and maybe the Hanover area – some would even argue about that though. In most urban areas, such as Karlsruhe, one would at least make an effort to speak standard German – at least when speaking to someone who is not from the area or to whom German is not the first language. As an alternative the local spelling of Karlsruhe could be mentioned somewhere else in the article? But, I agree to the average English-speaking reader whether the spelling is Karlsruhe or Kallsruh does not make that much a difference. In real life some people simply drop the h and the e in Karlsruhe and emphasise the u. But again it’s by no means anything one should argue about.--Catflap08 (talk) 19:42, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

@Catflap08: you’re right, the thing is it’s practice to include local and/or historical names in articles about locations. It’s a matter of completeness, nothing else. 〜イヴァンスクルージ九十八［IvanScrooge98］（会話） 19:50, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

Oaky, yes the dialect spoken in Karlsruhe itself is considered to be South Franconian in which it is Kallsruh … I mean in the end we are talking about a dialect. I do admire though that both of you do want to get it right – a solution might be what the (standard) German Wikipedia mentions? It does mention the dialect.--Catflap08 (talk) 19:59, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

@Catflap08: no, that “in the end we are talking about a dialect” hurts me 😭 in any case, the point is no longer whether that is the local name (which we have basically ascertained with your help), but whether Kallsruh is the “proper” way to spell it. Don’t worry, I’m sure we’ll find a source sooner or later. 〜イヴァンスクルージ九十八［IvanScrooge98］（会話） 20:09, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

@IvanScrooge98: Oh no. I do admire dialects! My father speaks a Sudeten German dialect, my mother is Scottish – so I am familiar with Scots which is more than just a mere dialect, I was brought up in Karlsruhe with more or less standard German and learned the local dialect from my classmates at school. Apart from the German Wikipedia and the Palatine German Wikipedia I cannot think of any other reference. The Alemannic Wikipedia for instance – Alemannic dialects are already spoken a few kilometres south of Karlsruhe - spells it Karlsrueh. There is no South Franconian Wikipedia that I know of. There does exist a local Wikipedia, but it does not enter the dialect territory. Sorry If I cannot be of any more help.--Catflap08 (talk) 20:32, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

@Catflap08: you have been of great help instead! Thank you! 〜イヴァンスクルージ九十八［IvanScrooge98］（会話） 20:44, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

May thanks

May songs

Thank you for having improved Stefania and the band, on the Main page now! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:20, 18 May 2022 (UTC)

I like my talk today (actually mostly from 29 May - I took the title pic), enjoy the music, two related videos worth watching! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:48, 31 May 2022 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 3

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Culurgiones, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Teulada.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 13:10, 3 July 2022 (UTC)

Cockburn

Cockburn has the NURSE vowel according to the ABC. There indeed seems to be variation with lettER but this could be the result of syntactic vowel reduction, and the citation form indeed seems to be the one with NURSE at least when it comes to the Australian place names. The surname seems to vary between NURSE and lettER (CEPD lists NURSE first and LPD lettER), so that should be verified individually. In any case an attempt to impose one variant or the other on all transcriptions of the word strikes me as ill-conceived. Nardog (talk) 18:23, 21 July 2022 (UTC)

@Nardog: uhm, I wonder how much of the fact that the vowel is described differently depends on actual case-by-case phonemic variation or simply on the description itself. After all, we know a number of dialects do not distinguish the two. 〜イヴァンスクルージ九十八［IvanScrooge98］（会話） 22:53, 21 July 2022 (UTC)

I know of no British or Australian accent that merges foreword and forward, so I doubt it. Just leave the existing variation alone and don't impose anything. Nardog (talk) 23:05, 21 July 2022 (UTC)

I see. I will go through my edits again then. 〜イヴァンスクルージ九十八［IvanScrooge98］（会話） 09:55, 23 July 2022 (UTC)

BLP discretionary sanctions alert

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in articles about living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

To opt out of receiving messages like this one, place {{Ds/aware}} on your user talk page and specify in the template the topic areas that you would like to opt out of alerts about. For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 04:13, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

Preview, consolidate, summarize

Hello- Below are a few editing suggestions to make it easier for you and others to collaborate on the encyclopedia. Please preview, consolidate, and summarize your edits:

• Try to consolidate your edits, at least at the section level, to avoid cluttering the page's edit history; this makes it easier for your fellow editors to understand your intentions, and makes it easier for those monitoring activity on the article.
  • The show preview button (beside the "publish changes" button) is helpful for this; use it to view your changes incrementally before finally saving the page once you're satisfied with your edits.
• Please remember to explain each edit with an edit summary (box above the "publish changes" button).

Thanks in advance for considering these suggestions. Eric ^talk 11:47, 17 September 2022 (UTC)

@Eric: you’re absolutely right, when I don’t do this it’s usually because I’m hurrying. Or sometimes I originally mean to make one edit and only after I notice there is something else that I want to change and I end up adding up my edits one after the other. Thanks for pointing this out, I’ll try to be more consistent. 〜イヴァンスクルージ九十八［IvanScrooge98］（会話） 11:54, 17 September 2022 (UTC)

Hello Ivan- Just reminding you that it really is a help to your collaborators here if you can make the effort to follow the above suggestions. Thanks. Eric ^talk 12:33, 22 April 2023 (UTC)

"Whitlam" pronunciation

Hi Ivan. In the name "Gough Whitlam", the surname is pronounced without an "h". See his article, Archive 4(9). It's a matter just of fact, not of linguistic principle. Errantios (talk) Errantios (talk) 11:30, 1 November 2022 (UTC)

@Errantios: oh thanks, I went along with the ⟨wh⟩ spelling convinced there would be no archiphonemic difference. 〜イヴァンスクルージ九十八［IvanScrooge98］（会話） 17:31, 1 November 2022 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 24

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Swami Bhaskarananda Saraswati, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Kanpur district.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:01, 24 November 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. 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 2022 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) 01:24, 29 November 2022 (UTC)