User talk:Mahagaja/Archive 7

Gaeilge anon

Thanks, Angr, but I already have an account. I am even an admin :) The only reason I do anonymous edits is because I want to keep my Gaeilge-related endeavors separate from my main personality (although, perhaps, it would be a good idea to create an account just for that). If possible, please delete the talk page with the welcome message after you are done reading it. This IP is not my private one. Thanks again for your willingness to answer my questions--you've been immensely helpful.--204.193.71.8 21:55, 2 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Well, all right, but the advantages remain the same. You're easier to keep track of with a user name. I can't imagine why you want to keep your Irish-related endeavors separate. I assume you have your reasons, but it seems like you're somehow ashamed of being interested in Irish. Are you known for being a vehement Unionist under your usual name? ;-) --Angr/_{tɔk tə mi} 22:22, 2 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

No, there is nothing policital to it :) Being a non-Irish person and having never visited that country, I also have nothing to be ashamed of. The reason is strictly personal; plus, the language fascinates me. If there is one thing I should be ashamed of, it's that less than three months ago I believed that Irish was a dialect of English; one that's different from English, but not much, really. That's the level of ignorance one should be shot for :)

Anyway, if I could ask you for another favor. Would you be able to create a {{User ga-0}} template for me, please? While I am slowly learning Irish, my knowledge is definitely not enough to compile that template myself; nor, having studied the language only for a very short time, do I feel I deserve a ga-1 template. Again, danke sehr!--Ag Foghlaim 04:07, 3 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, but...

Well, Angr, you moved those injected remarks one notch down, but they still break the thread of the conversation I had had with you. It seems to me that thread should not be broken, because the back-and-forth between you and me is precisely where my reasons for a keep vote (and a censure vote -- not censorship, as the page's attacker erroneously understood) were developed. Those injected remarks are just flames and can be placed at the end of the thread of the discussion between you and me. Pasquale 22:46, 2 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

My RfA

Success!!! Thanks for your support! --Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 08:04, 3 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Björn J:son Lindh

Hi Ang. I'm not sure if you're watching the Björn J:son Lindh talk page, but in case not, I've added some evidence to the article which I hope will convince you! Regards, CLW 08:32, 4 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I'm quite sure it's derived Johanson/Johansson, but don't know for sure. I can't vouch for the pronunciation - my Swedish skills are primarily written - you'd have to ask a Swede! Rgds, CLW 09:29, 4 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

When I was young, he was quite popular in the Danish radio, where his middle name was pronounced as "yeeson". "Yee" is the Swedish, not the Danish, name of the letter J. --Palnatoke 22:10, 6 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re: That 3RR

Well, thanks. I was going to myself, but having done a similar thing earlier today (blocked both parties with the argument "it takes two to tango") and been bollocked off for it, I was reluctant to do so. Rob Church ^Talk 21:00, 4 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Cultural appropriation

I don't have any specific references for you, but... If the issue with your addition is that fashion is trivial, you might use Roland Barthes or Jean Baudrillard, or any number of feminist thinkers, or film theorists, to back up your assertion that fashion is, in fact, not trivial and worth consideration. If the issue is that sexuality and sexuality-based cultures are trivial, that's a bias that pervades wikipedia, and no number of references is going to help you. -Seth Mahoney 21:53, 4 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

US regions-South

Thanks for you input about Image:US regions-South.jpg, but I believe the consensus among wikiTexans is for the state to remain red. WikiProject US regions is constantly looking for better ways to portray the interpretive nature of regions. There is also an collaborative "article of the month" like effort of Texans, but I can't remember it's exact name right now. The "Southern" issue can also be a sensitive issue for East Texans (such as myself) given the way Texas has been stereotyped over the last few decades. Again thanks for your input and please feel free to join US regions project or review more maps. -JCarriker 03:29, 5 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I'd be happy to make a Cental Texas map. It would need signifigant input for you though. -JCarriker 08:29, 6 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I hope this meets with your approval. -JCarriker 20:23, 6 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome. Would you mind reading over Hatshepsut and see if you can support her FAC. Last time one negative and (first) vote killed the nomination, although more a majority was gained too late after it was archived. I'm concerned this might happen again. Thanks. -JCarriker 20:35, 6 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Koo

Oops. I'm glad someone was paying attention. I remembered editing the same article earlier, but forgot that it was just a rvv, and not a speedy on a new article. I'll be more careful in the future. Neier 23:12, 5 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hatshepsut

There is nothing I can do about the fuzziness. The dust jacket pic is from the 60s and the statue of Hatshepsut happens to be toppless, as such I suspect gauze was stretched across the lense to hide her nipples (which are clearly visible on the statue in other pics [1]) I expect Carnhildo may object again, but I find his objections unreasonable for reasons pointed out by myself and others during the original nomination. -JCarriker 06:33, 7 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Cædmon private-use character mystery solved

See Talk:Cædmon for an update. -- Curps 01:13, 8 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Cleanup-verifiy

You've added a cleanup-verifiy tag to the Celtici article. Why was that? Was~it because of the "True Celts" thing? see the talk of that article. -Pedro 15:41, 9 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

- that wasn't its original source. But that isn't needed because it is widely known. There are various articles without sources. You can go to that region and see the ruins for yourself, that's the best source one can get. ;) Ppl use in here (Portugal/Spain) True Celts to diferenciate in relation to the older (proto-)Celtic origin tribes (there were various ones). It doesnt mean they were the only and true Celts, but among the various Celtic tribes in iberia, they had the Celtic culture variant than one usually attributes to Celts, that is why the Romans knew them as simply Celts while other Celtic tribes were known as Calaeci, for instance. Hugs. -Pedro 16:34, 10 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Still on Celtic

Hi Angr, I wrote you a message in User talk:Angr/Archive 5 because I didn't want to break that "Gallo-Brittonic" thread. (As you know, I don't like to break existing threads...) Pasquale 17:54, 10 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Phonemic analysis of Icelandic

Your expert opinion would be appreciated on Talk:Icelandic language. - Haukur Þorgeirsson 00:49, 11 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Icelandic language

I would be most grateful if you could express an opinion on the issue I have been discussing at Icelandic language. There were some additions made to the phonology section, see [2]. I am especially concerned about the paragraph on the sounds c and k. I have been trying to get some discussion going, see Talk:Icelandic_language#Phonology but it hasn't gathered much pace and I would have to put my bias into the same category as Haukur does. Also, I am no expert on linguistics although I find the subject very interesting. Stefán Ingi (talk) 00:53, 11 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

OH MY LORD

So I'm browsing wikipedia, and what do I see? A naked Angr. Thanks a lot. R e dwolf24 (talk) 10:02, 11 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I was tempted to add it to MediaWiki's bad image list, where it would live among such favorites as Circpn and Autofellatio2. R e dwolf24 (talk) 10:09, 11 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I rather hate censorship, but I think the policy is to censor if possible when in non-sexual articles. The non-bowdlerized image is at Chubby culture and a couple of BJAODN pages. GFDL pr0n, hmmm... R e dwolf24 (talk) 10:14, 11 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Heh, I'll talk to him about that next time I get on IRC. Vanity and non-notability? It's an image! How else do you put a GFDL image here? We'd be 100% Fair Use if that was a reason for image deletion o.O How can you restore an image? Image deletion is permanent, don't you have to reupload it? R e dwolf24 (talk) 10:23, 11 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Then allow me to clarify! When you delete an image (replacing 'you' with 'Marudubshinki') all pages that it's used on instead of showing you the picture, show you a blue link to the image, which you can't see. Image deletions are permanent in MediaWiki as it's a huge server overload to keep every image, whereas deleting text really just hides it from all non-admins (we admins can still read it, so it takes no less space on the server). I assume you'll still have the image on your computer though, and the only way to really restore it is to re-upload it, and to tell Maru to not do that again. R e dwolf24 (talk) 10:28, 11 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Before you hit restore, I saw a blue link to the image. After you hit restore, I saw a frame try to show the image, then realize there is no image, and convert back to the blue link... Reupload R e dwolf24 (talk) 10:38, 11 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Schools

I'd say separate inclusion. I am keen on the idea of portmanteau articles which discuss groups of schools. My major beef with the schools arrticles as they are is that they are mostly either hopeless vanity or stubs, neither of which is actually useful. - Just zis Guy, you know? ^[T]/_[C] :: AfD? 10:51, 12 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Schwer

Check out these google results and you will find many articles that refer to this sound as the schwer http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&c2coff=1&q=schwer+vowel&btnG=Search . Foosher 15:37, 12 November 2005 (UTC) Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Schwer"

On flowers in general

Could you please help me with my confusion about this issue, originally posted to WP:RD/L#What does وُرُود mean in Arabic?:

The worldist I linked to gives wardah as "rose", both ward and wurūd as "roses", then ward again as "flower" (it's singular here!) and wurūd again as "flowers". I assume that the reason is "rose" being feminine, "flower" being masculine, and they both having a common genderless plural — or am I making all this up? --tyomitch 20:03, 14 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Tairus rewritten

User:Anetode has rewritten the article on the artificial gemstone company. Please revisit the article and consider changing your vote. - Mgm|^(talk) 11:40, 16 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Learning IPA

Thanks for those links Angr! They are going to be so helpful to me. My interest in languages has increased dramatically since I found out about Wikipedia. Have you looked at my question regarding "Cantonese and Aspiration (phonetics)" on WP:RD/L? I cannot identify the difference between b and p^h? Is there an actual difference?

I hereby awared you this voiceless palatal fricative ç - that elusive sound that I cannot make, but am determined to if I am to learn German!! --HappyCamper 01:40, 18 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Dentals in PIE decades

Your latest entry in the Talk:Proto-Indo-European_language debate brings the discussion back to the relevant point. But it seems to me that you misinterpret Beekes. See the draft of my entry to the debate. Do I misread Beekes? (I don't want to encourage Rex and Nixer if I am wrong.) --teb728 08:14, 18 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

SP image

I found the image on the official site in the episode's section. I also found it weird that Kenny was in the picture, but not in the episode probably a production error. Sfufan2005 21:06, 18 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Norse mythology naming convention vote notice

A new proposal on the representation of Norse mythology names is now up for a vote. Some people object to it on the grounds that it would use non-English characters in some article titles. It would be interesting to hear your view - not least because you actually, you know, know stuff :) - Haukur Þorgeirsson 00:51, 19 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the Welcome

Hi, Angr. Thanks for the warm welcome over in my talk page. Actually, I do have a question: How the heck would I have made a normal reply to it? Looking in Wikipedia:Talk_page#User_talk_pages gets me:

To leave a message for another user on their talk page, click the discuss this page link on your sidebar when you view the user page (which you can do by clicking on a user's nickname).

However, I can't find any link with the text "discuss this page" anywhere. Which means I can't find any sidebar. (I presume, then, that "sidebar" does not mean the nav bars that say "navigation" and "toolbox"?) As a long-time Internet user, web developer, etc., I can only think that either:

I'm having a total dumbass attack (always a possibility); or
The instructions on replying to user talk-page messages could stand to be a bit more clear.

Some of the links you sent me, I'd already seen. Others, I'm reading through now. I trust I haven't already done anything wrong, stupid, or impolite, and these references are just a way of saying "Hi", right?

Thanks for your help. Kai MacTane 06:54, 19 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Japanese language

From WP:CG: An article with the same name as a category should usually belong only to that category, for instance, Deism belongs only in Category:Deism. Do you have a reason why not? The supercategories are all in the "Japanese language" category. --DannyWilde 06:48, 20 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Cunninglinguist? :)

Greetings! I hope you're well. Thanks for weighing in regarding this issue and this one; I'm in complete agreement regarding the former. Didn't I say the same thing over there, though differently? ;) In any event: thanks for telling us what we should all know, instead of merely quoting things. :) E Pluribus Anthony 19:17, 20 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

More west scandinavian troubles

Hi, thanks again for all your help with the Icelandic language article. The troubles are currently moving south east, specifically some IP number has added very inaccurate tables of sounds to the Faroese language article. I removed it, but feel guilty about it as I am not in a position to produce a better table. I guess these languages are outside your main interest, but if you had the time and were able to find the resources to give good tables that would be great. The Faroese version of the article doesn't really bother to give the IPA values of the sounds and neither does the Danish version although that article is very detailed, and makes me feel I should do a lot more work on the Icelandic article. Stefán Ingi 14:15, 21 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

OK, thanks anyway. Actually I suspected that information about Faroese would be difficult to find. Perhaps Haukur could ask for the book for christmas and then we would have something to go by. :) Stefán Ingi 16:10, 23 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

ablaut, apophony, & IE

hi. i am wondering if you can give your opinion at Talk:Ablaut. There is a difference of opinion between me and 2 other editors.

User:Doric Loon claims that the term ablaut refers to primarily only Indo-European langs and that the term apophony refers to base alternation generallly including non-IE langs.

I claim that ablaut is a more general term that refers to alternation in any language (not solely IE langs) and is therefore synonymous with apophony (for the most part).

Doric Loon wants Ablaut to redirect to Indo-European ablaut. I think it would make more sense to redirect to Apophony (but perhaps Ablaut should be a separate article?).

Doric Loon is unhappy that I moved the information in Indo-European ablaut from its original location at Ablaut (which is now a redirect). User:teb728 agrees with Doric Loon & disagrees with me.

Thank you. – ishwar (speak) 15:34, 23 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Categorisation

Hi! I've been trying to make the categorisations of Linguistics more organised. Please advise if I'm not doing the right thing! At Wikipedia:Categorization#When_to_use_categories it says that "An article should not be in both a category and its subcategory" which is why I was using "Grammar" and not "Linguistics". Do you think that shouldn't apply in some cases? Thanks. Gailtb 07:55, 25 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! I'm likely to be wrong about some of the specific categorisations I made, but am happy as long as the general principle was ok. My knowledge of the possibilities across all languages is not broad enough to definitively assign many articles to either morphology or syntax so I tended to put them in grammar as a safe option. If productivity can also be used in phonology (my lack of knowledge), then for me it can be categorised as linguistics or as syntax, morphology & phonology. My thinking is that it's ok to put articles in categories where they should be, even if the relevant text isn't yet written. (There may be a policy which says otherwise.)

It was me that added the specification of "grammar" to mean only syntax and morphology - but I was following the existing usage. I have wondered whether the category should be renamed to clarify - "Syntax and morphology" /"Morphology and syntax" /any better idea. What's your opinion?

I further question is about deleting categories. Category:Expletives seems redundant (cf Category:Profanity). Also Category:Traditional grammar isn't serving much purpose, although it might have a use in respect of the above discussion. Gailtb 17:30, 25 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Bhili language

I see in this edit that you updated the language infobox like it says in your edsum, but I note also that you removed this link (to the ethnologue Bhili page). Was this an accident or intentional? If intentional, why? Tom e r^TALK 20:49, 27 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

uf. what a chore. Any ideas which articles the ethnologue links might have been infoboxized in and subsequently dropped? Tom e r^TALK 20:54, 27 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Níðhöggr > Nidhogg?

There is currently a vote underway at Talk:Níðhöggr to move the page to a form without the diacritics and nominative case marker. As always your opinion would be appreciated. I'm sorry Stefán and I keep badgering you with West-Norse things... - Haukur Þorgeirsson 19:30, 28 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Nidhogg

Hmm... I hesitate to contradict you but I don't have a single book which uses the spelling "Nidhogg" and none of the three English translations quoted in the article uses that spelling. - Haukur Þorgeirsson 21:09, 28 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Edith Hamilton uses the spelling Nidhogg in the index to Mythology, and it's the spelling I remember from my high school mythology class. That's why I thought it was fairly well established in English. --Angr (t·c) 21:13, 28 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

It may well be the most common spelling in popularizations. At any rate it has made its way into some popular computer games which probably accounts for many of the Google hits. The Anglicizations "Nidhoggr" and "Nithhogg" are also reasonably represented on Google. John Lindow uses "Nídhögg", Dronke uses the Old Norse spelling (complete with o-ogonek as usual), Thorpe uses "Nidhögg", Brodeur uses "Nidhöggr", Bellows uses "Nithhogg". I still think "Nidhogg" is probably most common overall which is why I bolded it in the article lead. - Haukur Þorgeirsson 21:19, 28 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Regardless of your vote - could you look into whether you find Ed Poor's move and move-protection of the page during a WP:RM debate appropriate? - Haukur Þorgeirsson 21:34, 28 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I've been using the "Níðhöggr" spelling for quite some time in the article. The only reason I didn't move it earlier was that people asked me to refrain from page moves while a naming convention was under consideration. Before I started editing this article it was so inaccurate that in my opinion it would have been better to have no article at all. Thus I feel as if I created the article and the onus should be on other people to request a move on it. I know that's not strictly true, though, so I can understand the view that I'm the one who "wants to make a move".

This is just such a horrible waste of time, now I've spent more time trying to defend against people who have never edited the article moving it than I spent writing the article in the first place. If every single page location has to be debated it's very difficult to make progress. Some naming convention that people agree on the interpretaion of is needed. I could accept a lot of things but I have seen no coherent proposals other than my own. "Redirect to WP:UE" is absurd and solves nothing since that guideline is very vague (and disputed). I just don't know how to proceed. Maybe I should just fork the project. Maybe I need a break. Keep up the good work, anyhow. - Haukur Þorgeirsson 22:24, 28 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

In 12 hours or so the N**h*gg* vote will have run for the required 5 days. As it is somewhat poisonous I would like it to end as soon as possible so we will move on to something more productive.

Since you are an administrator and I think people generally trust your judgment I would like to ask you to close the vote when it has run long enough. You would of course take any procedural as well as material issues into account.

I would be grateful if you looked into this though I can understand if you don't have the time. The debate has grown very long by now (and I am most guilty there, having argued the matter at great length) and I could understand if you would like to avoid wading through it all. But if you will assume the task you could perhaps look into the contribution logs of the three most recent voters. Those have 25 edits between them in the last month and almost all of them have to do with voting. I don't think they are sockpuppets or bad faith users and I don't want to make any accusations. I just wonder if their votes should count as much as any other.

Thank you, either way. - Haukur Þorgeirsson 10:33, 2 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, thanks for your confidence, but since I voted on the Nidhogg question it would be inappropriate for me to be a closing admin. Do you know another admin who didn't vote? --Angr (t·c) 10:43, 2 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

It was precisely because you're voting for another option than I did that I wanted you to do this. If I contact almost anyone else I could be accused of hand-picking an admin that I knew would be favorable to my position or me personally. And I do want this closed as soon as possible or it could fester for weeks.

But of course your position is completely reasonable. Commendable, even. Oh, well. We'll try to find some other solution, then.

I posted most of my reasoning for "Níðhöggr" in favor of "Nidhogg" after you had cast your vote, starting here. I'm sort of curious if you read that and what you found the weak points in it to be.

On a somewhat general note I think that the more general a work is the more likely it is to use ultra-Anglicized forms. Thus a general encyclopedia which only has a brief treatment of, in this example, Norse mythology, may tend towards more Anglicized forms (though Britannica is very inconsistent and sometimes uses even full-blown Old Norse forms). A work which goes into Norse mythology in more detail is more likely to use diacritics.

Wikipedia already treats Norse mythology in much greater detail than one would expect in a general encyclopedia. This is one reason I feel that more accurate spellings should be used in its article titles. On the other hand I don't mind that Anglicized spellings are used in articles outside the main subject. For example I think that referring to Iðunn as "Idunn" or "Ithunn" would be quite alright in the Apple article. - Haukur Þorgeirsson 11:47, 2 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Re: United Methodist Church

You are quite correct; I misunderstood your previous edit. Sorry about my mistake! KHM03 22:04, 28 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Query

Sorry to bother you, but the IP under which I'm working in the German wikipedia has been blocked by Jergen. I left a note on his English user talk-page, but I fear that he won't notice it in the near future; as I've got no e-mail, I can't reach him otherwise. Would you just be so nice and drop him a note on his german userpage to have a look at his english account. Thanks in advance. Lectonar 12:29, 29 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Danke, hat sich erledigt. Cheers. Lectonar 12:59, 29 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

..for the heads-up; as you may have guessed, it isn't me! Mindspillage (spill yours?) 16:32, 29 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

High Icelandic

Yet another North-Germanic topic I'm pestering you with! :D No, okay, this time I'm not asking you to do anything. I just thought I'd draw your attention to the High Icelandic article. I know you've participated in conlang-notability discussions in the past so I thought you might be interested. We're having a spot of trouble on how to classify this. It's not so much a conlang as it is a project to create neologisms for Icelandic. It has achieved some notoriety in Iceland and I'd vote to keep it if it were up for AfD (though I may have inclusionist tendencies). Again, I'm not asking you to do anything, just sending you a note. - Haukur Þorgeirsson 22:16, 29 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]