User talk:MikeLynch/Archive 3

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

→

Archive 10

National RTI Forum

Hi "Mike" and/or "Swaroop". Please keep a watch on National RTI Forum and its talk. I am concerned that the other editor is developing a proprietary interest iGen this article.RobertRosen (talk) 04:17, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

Gentlemen, RobertRosen and Mike Lynch. My username is Cullen328 and my real first name is Jim. My only proprietary interest is to accurately reflect what the reliable sources say about any given topic. I am 58 years old. I am married and have two young adult sons. I own and operate a small business. I have never been to India but would love to visit there and Nepal too because I have a deep love of the high mountains. I live in the small town of American Canyon, which has a very large percentage of Indian-American residents. Most are Hindu, some are Sikh, and our next door neighbors are Catholics from Goa with Portugese names though they don't appear Portugese at all. I and my immediate family are Jewish, although I come from a Christian background as well. I am a caring person and can be persuaded by reliable information. Engage me, give me reliable sources, and you will find me to be very reasonable. But don't add bad sources, don't add POV language, and don't remove material that the reliable sources support. Cooperation and adherence to policy and guidelines will most assuredly lead to consensus. Please give your opinions on an Indian related article I wrote on a completely different topic: Kalpataru Day. Thank you. Cullen328 (talk) 05:21, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

I must make one remark about the organisation in question. There are not many references available, and it is quite a minor organisation. Hence, I do not see much room for conflict between you two editors. I have not been looking at that article for a month or so, so I am not in touch with recent developments. I do not see much scope for expansion of that article. If anyone of you can add more info to it, please do so, but I doubt you will find sources. TheMike •^{Leave me a message!} 11:00, 26 February 2011 (UTC)

Whitefield, Bangalore

Please take a look at this article. Thanks, —Abhishek ^{Talk to me} 16:35, 21 February 2011 (UTC)

Repaired. TheMike •^{Leave me a message!} 03:58, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

National RTI awards

Hi there, I have developed a new article on RTI - National RTI awards. Would it be possible for you to take the time to look at the article, improve it, give feedback or rate it? I am hoping to bring it up to Wikipedia's high standards.
I truly appreciate your help
regards
abhishek singh (talk) 19:55, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

Hey there! (Wiki Guides)

Hey Mike! I saw your comments at Abhishek's page and liked your thoughts. There are definitely a lot of issues that we need to work on but it's great seeing so many people interested in doing things about it. I know you've poked around the Wiki Guides page a bit but was wondering if you had given any thought into becoming one? I think you'd be a great addition. Jalexander--WMF 22:54, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

Sonia Gandhi

Biographies, contraversies and thier presentation ...^{Let me know your thoughts}

I've reached my 3RR limit on this article/image. I believe I am enforcing Wiki policy by removing that particular image (there are still 3 acceptable images on the page I have left untouched).RobertRosen (talk) 16:06, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

I have asked for Astronaut's opinion. Let us see what he says, and decide based upon that. Have a nice day. TheMike •^{Leave me a message!} 16:36, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

Astronaut may not be an unbiased towards me (I've reverted his reverts). On the "religion", I've got a newspaper RS which claims that both Rajiv and she were Hindu.RobertRosen (talk) 16:39, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

Please let me have a look at that newspaper RS. Regards, TheMike •^{Leave me a message!} 16:53, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

Also, if you feel that there is an issue with the image, please raise it at Commons, where the image is located. If the file is deleted from commons, it will get delinked here. There is no need to remove it from the article as long as the image exists in Commons. TheMike •^{Leave me a message!} 17:19, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

I don't edit /participate at Commons. My only concern is copyvio with this BLP page Sonia Gandhi. Here's one such link [1] concerning their cremation details by Hindu rites "according to our custom". PS: I'm discussing this here (informally) rather than on the articles talk page. Also, IMHO the ref you provided for her being RC would not stand as RS considering it is only a caption to a photo gallery and appears sourced to be off the net. RobertRosen (talk) 00:26, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

BBC is a RS. It is not a wiki or a mirror or anything, so their reports are reliable. It also mentions that she follows the Hindu faith closely, but it need not mean that she has given up her faith. I really appreciate the fact that we are talking this out rather than edit warring :) . As far as the image is concerned, I will contact someone active in Commons regarding that and get back to you. Regards, TheMike •^{Leave me a message!} 05:08, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

Online Ambassador Program

Please take a look at this project page and see if you can be a mentor to one of the many Areas of Study. If you can, please put your name in the "Online Mentor" area of the Area of Study of your choice and then contact the students you will be working with. As the Coordinating Online Ambassador for this project, please let me know if I can be of assistance. Take Care...Neutralhomer • Talk • 04:37, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

Check Your Area of Study

Hello, I have updated the Project Page you are mentoring on with usernames for all the students in your Area of Study. Please send them a message introducing yourself and let them know you are there to help.

As always, please let me know if I can be of assistance. Take Care...Neutralhomer • Talk • 10:16, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

S P Jain Center of Management

hi Mike. Have a look at S P Jain Center of Management. I have marked it with an advert tag; but i wanted to add a db-spam tag too, since it IS written like an advertisement, with no helpful information. Should I go ahead? Please tell me your opinion on this; I am quite new to editing. PratikMallya ^Talk! 19:38, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

I don't suggest you mark it for db-spam. It will probably get declined. The article is poorly written, but it is notable. You can remove all the irrelevant sections like the pics of all those people, which are not needed. You may have to delete most of the article, and retain and rewrite only some lines which are not promotional, but are factual. I will help you do that if needed. Have a good day! Yes Michael? •^Talk 07:11, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

Fiji Hindi

Hi Mike. Thanks for your interest in Fiji Hindi. The diference between Standard Hindi and Fiji Hindi is that wheres Standard Hindi was standardised based on the Khariboli ( A western Hindi dialect), Fiji Hindi is koined from Eastern Hindi dialect, mainly Awadhi and Bhojpuri as the as the incluion of many English and Fijian words. What is more important is that it is spoken with an accent very different from Indian Hindi. See the Wikipedia article on Fiji Hindi)

In Fiji, everyone speka in Fiji Hindi, although they meay oiginate from UP, Bihar, Madras (and later migrants from Punjab and Gujarat). It is the great uniting factor fo Fiji Indians. Most Fiji Indians can also write to a basic level in most Indian scripts, but if we started to use Devanagri in the Wikipedia then we will alienate Muslims who do not understand it as well as the ex Fiji Indians who now live in Australia, New Zealand Canada and the United States.

You are welomr to contribute to h Fiji Hindi Wikipedia.

Girmitya (talk) 00:40, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

Redundancy issues for Konkani language page

Hi there... I'm writing to seek the opinions of seasoned editors. A few days ago, there was an edit war on the Konkani language page, specifically between an editor of Goan descent and an editor of Mangalorean descent. The former didn't appreciate content contributed by the latter and eventually resulted in a massive edit war. The consequence of such an altercation led to the latter creating a whole new page for the non-Goan dialects of Konkani at Kanara (Canara) Konkani. The editor who created this whole new page has contributed significantly and quite productively, I must say. However, I am not convinced whether this is the right way to go.. i.e. having two different pages for essentially the same language. Quite interestingly, I found out that there is already a page for Karnataka Konkani at Karnataka Konkani. This kind of duplication and redundancy is a little unsettling. Your feedback would be appreciated. Signed | Aoghac^2z | 06:20, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

Butting in Since I am a (mangalore) Konkani speaker myself, I would just advise you to be very polite when making any suggestions for change/replacement of the page(s). Konkani people are a very proud lot, and extremely sensitive about their language (which, I think, is because of fear of it gradually dying out).

About this matter, I can say from my personal experience (a mangalorean konkani speaker who did his undergraduate studies in Goa) that goan konkani is almost a completely different language(there is some similarity, but differences are much more); whereas the konkani spoken by those living outside goa can be said to be different dialects (they use the same words for the same meaning, only the pronunciation is different). In this scenario, goan and the other konkani are same only in name; and thus perhaps different pages is justified. However, a page for different dialects is a waste of wikipedia resources, and may also lead to a lot of confusion; it may be advisable to put them under one page only.PratikMallya ^Talk! 08:25, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for your enthusiasm. I'm a native speaker of Mangalorean Konkani myself, so I don't need any cautionary note regarding politeness and sensitivity. :) Getting to the elephant in the room, I'm very sorry to say that your personal experience in Goa or whatsoever is of no relevance here. Linguistic publications and major linguists do NOT treat Mangalorean Konkani to be a separate language at all, rather it is considered a dialect. Be it George Cardona, Manoharray Sardessai or Ayyapannicker... all major linguists consider Mangalorean Konkani to be a dialect, not a separate language. In my opinion, when you maintain two separate pages, one for 'Konkani' and the other for 'Kanara Konkani', it gives the reader an impression that Kanara Konkani is a whole different language and not part of mainstream 'Konkani'. Signed | Aoghac^2z | 14:21, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

But then, I don't think separate articles will be a good idea. Not many people will know that two different widely spoken dialects of Konkani exist. I myself did not know :) . I will have a look at the two (three?) pages and get back to you. Yes Michael? •^Talk 09:13, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

It looks quite messed up. This should be sorted out immediately. The Canara Konkani page is well written, though there are a few issues. User:Aoghac2z, I am not Konkani myself, so I do not know the intricacies of the language. Would a disambiguation page serve any purpose, or will it complicate further? Yes Michael? •^Talk 14:41, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

Well, the situation is messed up, indeed. The author of the new page has done a very commendable job and the content contributed by him is very productive... even though there are issues with the reliability of sources used. As far as my personal opinion goes, I do not believe that a separate page for the Kanara dialects of Konkani is proper. It is also important to take into consideration the fact that the author of the new page created the page out of an edit war... so the motives behind the creation of the new page itself were not legitimate in an academic sense. Like, I said there's already a page for Kanara Konkani at Karnataka Konkani.... so as it stands right now, there are 3 separate pages for essentially the same language. I would say we kickstart the process of merging the content from this new page into the main language article. Signed | Aoghac^2z | 14:55, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

Is there a situation where having two different articles would be better indeed? For example, if the histories of both the Canara and Goan Konkani are different, then it would make more sense to keep it in two different articles. Yes Michael? •^Talk 14:59, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

Well, the evolution of the language and the history is not different at all. Konkani speakers in Karnataka came to Karnataka from Goa in the 15th and 16th centuries. At the time of migration, Konkani was already a very developed language, so there are no differences in history or linguistic evolution. If you look at the new page.. you will notice that the history aspect of it is something that should have been included in the main article... there is nothing unique about Kanara Konkani from a historical standpoint that distinguishes it from Goan Konkani. Signed | Aoghac^2z | 15:31, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

Then all is well I suppose. The Konkani Language article should discuss both dialects, and the differences between them could be laid out neatly. But, if there is a world's difference between the two dialects, then the article will become huge, and could be better off split into two. I believe that one article is the way to go. Also, since both the dialects have separate ISO codes, (or whatever codes), both the infoboxes could be included in the relevant sections. Thoughts? Yes Michael? •^Talk 15:40, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

Hello Gentlemen, couldn't help not peeking into your conversation. As has been mentioned by user Aoghac2z, Canara Konkani indeed evolved of Goan Konkani. That is all there is to it. Their paths went separate ways thereafter. Canara Konkani has undergone tremendous variance from Goan Konkani rendering the dialects mutually unintelligible. The comparison is like Kannada and Telugu. It must be stressed that although the Canarese Konkani dialects have not yet been standardised, they vary dramatically in terms of phonetics, syntax and orthography from the newly promulgated Standard Konkani, the Goan Antruz dialect. Although Canara Konkani phonology-syntax-orthography is not standardised, prevalent rules of speech are popularly employed in writing and this rarely undergoes variation. Canara Konkani has been written in the Kannada script and follows different orthographic rules from Goan Konkani which is predominantly written in the Devanagari or Roman Scripts. e.g. the name of the language in the Kannada script is ಕೊಂಕಣಿ (koṅkaṇi - कॊंकणि) and this pronunciation is prevalent in Karnataka and Kerala. In the Devanagari script, the name of the language is कोंकणी (kōṅkaṇī - ಕೋಂಕಣೀ ) and it is pronounced that way in Goa Omniglot. Let me share some examples:

• "having brought" in Goan Konkani is written/spoken as हाडुन/हाडोन ಹಾಡುನ್/ಹಾಡೋನ್. The same in Canara Konkani is written/spoken as हाड्नु/हाड्न ಹಾಡ್ನು/ಹಾಡ್ನ್.
• Goan Konkani does not undergo vowel rounding:- second person singular imperative is written/spoken as कर ಕರ್ (do!), first person singular optative करू ಕರು (do I?). in Canara Konkani second person singular imperative is written/spoken as करि ಕರಿ (do!), first person singular optative कोरुं ಕೋರುಂ (do i?).
• Canara Konkani shows temporal compensation like Kannada :- देव ದೇವ್ (god) - दॆवालॆं ದೆವಾಲೆಂ (of god), पूत ಪೂತ್ (son)-पुतालॆं ಪುತಾಲೆಂ (of the son). Goan Konkani does not :- देव ದೇವ್ (god) - देवाचॆं ದೇವಾಚೆಂ (of god), पूत ಪೂತ್ (son) - पूताचॆं ಪೂತಾಚೆಂ (of the son)
• Canara Konkani nouns/pronouns, like Kannada end in short vowels :- दोणि ದೋಣಿ (boat), आम्मि/आमि ಆಮ್ಮಿ/ಆಮಿ (we). Goan Konkani ends in Long Vowels :- आमी ಆಮೀ (we), वोडी ವೋಡೀ (boat)
• The verb declinations are different: verb- to do: Canara करचॆं ಕರ್ಚೆಂ Goa करुंक ಕರುಂಕ್

must do Canara करुक ज़ाय ಕರುಕ್ ಜ಼ಾಯ್ Goa करपाक ज़ाय ಕರ್ಪಾಕ್ ಜ಼ಾಯ್

• Goan Konkani pluralisation of words ending in ई are different from Canara Konkani. In Goan Konkani गाडी ಗಾಡೀ (car) - गाड्यॊ ಗಾಡ್ಯೊ (cars). In Canara Konkani गाडि ಗಾಡಿ (car) - गाडियॊ ಗಾಡಿಯೊ (cars).
• The preposition (postposition) "in" shows difference in declination when it follows ई in Goan and Canara Konkani.Goan:- गाडी ಗಾಡೀ (car) - गाडींत ಗಾಡೀಂತ್ (in the car), भुरगी ಭುರ್ಗೀ (girl) - भुरगीक ಭುರ್ಗೀಕ್ (to the girl). Canara:-गाडि ಗಾಡಿ (car) - गाडियेक ಗಾಡಿಯೆಕ್ (to the car), च़लि ಚ಼ಲಿ (girl) - च़लियेक ಚ಼ಲಿಯೆಕ್ (to the girl).
• The continuous tense shows variance: I am doing Goan Konkani हांव करत आसा ಹಾಂವ್ ಕರತ್ ಆಸಾ Canara Konkani हांव करतऽसा/कर्त आसा ಹಾಂವ್ ಕರ್ತ ಆಸಾ
• All these examples are from the book on Goan Konkani grammar written by Fr. Thomas Stevens and the book on Canara Konkani Grammar by Fr. Agnelus Maffei will show the stark difference between the Goan Konkani family and Canara Konkani family. There are many more; listing all would not be humanly possible for one person.
• you may peruse Canara Konkani websites Save My Language, Konkani Mitra, [2] to confirm prevalent orthographic rules, syntax and phonemes.

I would also like to share with you that Canara Konkani has a separate ISO code ISO 639-3 kex Canara Konkani Code

I suggest that Canara Konkani be a separate page because:

• Goan Konkani received state support from 1962 and became the official language of Goa in 1985. Government of Karnataka founded Karnataka Konkani Sahitya Akademi only in 1997. Hence Konkani organisations have to heavily rely on Goan patronage.
• Goan Konkani is being taught from 1962 from pre-school to university level. Canara Konkani has hereto, not received any such support from the Govt. of Karnataka and is being taught on an experimental basis in St. Aloysius College and Canara Saraswat Education Trust's Ganapati High school.
• There is a tendency to maintain status quo in the Konkani linguasphere because littérateurs tend to get into hair splitting arguments on phonology-syntax-orthography. Hence the name of the language is koṅkaṇi in the Kannada script and kōṅkaṇī in the Devanagari and Konkani organisations have done zilch to rectify this anomaly.

Canara Konkani has a long way to go in terms of standardisation; but that does not deny the fact that it stands out separately. What I mean to arrive at is that Canara Konkani only relies on Goa for patronage. Otherwise, to all intents and purposes, the Canara Konkani dialect family and Goan Konkani dialect family are mutually unintelligible. If, for example, German can have separate articles for Hochdeutsch, Plattdeutsch and Schweizerdeutsch, I am certain Canara Konkani can stand separate on the basis of the same convention too.

As far as the Karnataka Konkani article is concerned, it is vociferously guarded by a user from Goa who refuses to allow any contribution other than those in the Standard Antruz Goan Konkani; which is not spoken and is unintelligible to Canaraites (it is unintelligible to the Goans themselves). I have not only tried to contribute to the Konkani Language page but also to the Karnataka Konkani page but in vain. The user and I have had several discussions on our respective user pages. I also requested the said user on several occasions to discuss on the posts before deleting them; that too did not work. The said user perceivably has a Jingoistic agendum; to Hinduise and Goanise the Konkani language and Karnataka Konkani articles. Said user has also censured me on my talk page w.r.t. the Canara Konkani that I write in and holds that only the Goan Antruz dialect is truly Konkani. This is against the conventions followed in Wikipedia which give equal weightage to all dialects of a language.

I am not very sure that justice will be done to Canara Konkani if the article is merged into Karnataka Konkani. I don't mind the merging of the articles if it is deemed fit by mutual consent and as long as the neutrality, stability and the fidelity of the article are vouchsafe.Imperium ^Caelestis 23:38, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

The analysis provided by User:ImperiumCaelestis is indeed correct. However, I'm not sure which source he has picked that up from. I can deem that to be correct based on my own knowledge of my mother tongue. That being said, I have a major concern with the kind of sources User:ImperiumCaelestis is relying on....Sites like Save My Language, Konkani Mitra, Konkani Sansar are sites of private organizations. They are not a linguistic governing body nor an academic body that contributes to the study of Konkani from an academic standpoint. All these three sites seem to constitute self-published content. We have had instances from the past when some people have tried to add content based on sites like SaveMyLanguage.org, only to be questioned about the reliability of such a site by veteran Konkani editors like Deepak D'souza. Anyone can start a site like that, and generate content based on mass user submission. Such sources do not offer any reliability on the orthography rules.

Additionally, I want to come to a bigger point here. There is no such dialect or a sub-family type called 'Kanara Konkani'. There are significant differences even between Mangalorean Catholic Konkani and Mangalorean Saraswat Konkani. Mangalorean Catholic Konkani is related to the Bardesi dialect (a northern Goan dialect) than the Mangalorean Saraswat dialect. Mangalorean Saraswat Konkani on the other hand is related to the southern Goan (Saxxti) dialects. Even simple words like 'your' are enough to demonstrate the difference. In Mangalorean Catholic Konkani, 'your' would be 'tuje' which is the same in most Goan dialects. Whereas, in Mangalorean Saraswat Konkani, it is 'tugele', which is what you will hear even in North Kanara (Karwari) dialects of Konkani... even though Karwar Konkani as a whole is heavily influenced by Goan dialects.

Mangalorean Catholic Konkani and Mangalorean Saraswat Konkani do not share an immediate common history to be clubbed together. All Konkani dialects share a common history.. but my point is... even though both the aforementioned dialects are spoken in the South Kanara area, their evolution and histories are quite distinct.

I would have to beg to differ with the statement "the Canara Konkani dialect family and Goan Konkani dialect family are mutually unintelligible". The dialect of Konkani spoken in Karwar (which also falls under Canara region) is closer to the Goan dialects than the Mangalorean. It would be quite an exaggeration to say they're unintelligible. Speakers of Urdu and Hindi do understand each other even though both speakers are unaware about the intricate details of specific vocabulary used. If Goan and non-Goan dialects of Konkani were 'unintelligible', then linguists would consider them to be separate languages. However, that is NOT the case.

Examples of High German and Low German are fine.. because linguistic bodies do recognize their distinct identities. But which linguistic organization recognizes 'Kanara Konkani' to be a distinct linguistic family?

Lastly, just because User:Nijgoykar was being unaccommodating, it doesn't warrant moving on to a whole new page. There are ways to deal with jingoism. Signed | Aoghac^2z | 00:00, 5 March 2011 (UTC)

1. Canara Catholics and Canara Saraswats use "-jem", "-chem" and "-gelem" interchangably. The Canara Saraswats say "Aan Tuzo!!" (teraa baap!!). The Canara Catholics, though rarely, use "gelem"; please refer to the attachment by Ancy D'souza supporting the voviyo on the Mangalorean_Catholics page.
2. Although Mangalorean Catholics and Mangalorean Saraswats might have arrived during two different timelines, they have mutually interacted with each other for more that three centuries and hence understand each quite well. This is due to the fact that the Mangalorean Catholics have preserved the Sanskrit base of their dialect and that both dialects have a huge corpus of Kannada and Tulu words, e.g. nel-floor, mudi-ring are some of the words common to both dialects. In fact "but" in Goan Konkani translates to "पुण" , whereas in Canara Konkani, both Saraswat and Catholic, to "ज़ाल्ल्यार".
3. the dialect in Karwar have also retained the अ sound hence करता is pronounced as kartaa and not as cortaam or ever cottaam as is in Goan Konkani. Hence I say mutually intelligible. My kuladevataa is Shri Lakshminaray Mahamaya at Ankola, Karwar and hence I can confidently say, as I go there quite often, that I do not find the dialect unintelligible. I have, however, found Goan Konkani, both Hindu and Catholic, Hard to digest and decipher. N.B. the North Canara dialect too used ज़ाल्ल्यार and not पुण. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ImperiumCaelestis (talk • contribs) 00:59, 5 March 2011 (UTC)

Linguists do indeed consider them as separate dialects. It is an accepted fact that ISO-639 deals with languages. I would also like to share with you that Canara Konkani has a separate ISO code. The Konkani language codes are: ISO 639-2 kok (Konkani Macrolanguage) comprising of,

ISO 639-3 knn Konkani (Independent language)

ISO639-3 gom Goan Konkani

ISO639-3 kex Kanara Konkani [3]Imperium ^Caelestis

Sorry fellas. Was sleeping all this time. Anyway, I must get another clarification. As an editor mentioned somewhere above, are the differences so large as Kannada and Telugu? Yes Michael? •^Talk 03:49, 5 March 2011 (UTC)

I still feel that there should be only one article. All the differences mentioned above can be mentioned in the article. I await your comments. Yes Michael? •^Talk 04:02, 5 March 2011 (UTC)

My only concern is that users should not get confused. When they type Konkani in the search box, they should be redirected to one page. If necessary, the page could have broad subsections, and one of the subsections could have another article dedicated to it, like say Differences between Goan and Canara dialects of Konkani Language. What say? Yes Michael? •^Talk 04:18, 5 March 2011 (UTC)

To show you how different the Standard Goan Antruz Konkani is from Canara Konkani, I am sharing an example with you. The following comment was written by User:Nijgoykar on my talk page. I shall translate it into "written as spoken" Canarese Konkani

Goan (1) तुमी कोंकणी देवनागरी लिपयेंत चुकीची बरयतात,आनी हो एकेतरेचो अपप्रचार ! (2) प्रत्येक शब्द अर्धकुटो बरवचो न्हय .. (3) चुकीचे रीतीन बरवचो न्हय... (4) हाचे सारको कोंकणिचो अवमान दुसरो ना .. (5)आनी एक गोश्ट नागरी लिपि आता सद्या पोर्ण्या रुपान अस्तित्वात ना,पूण देवनागरी आसा,असो वेगळचार केल्यार आमीं झगडूंकूच उरतले

Canarese (1) तुमि कॊंकणि देवनागरि लिपियॆंत च़ुकीचॆं बरयतात, आनि हॆं एक रीतिचॆं अपप्रचार!(2) प्रतियॆकळॆ ऊत्र/ऊतर अपुरॆं बरंवचॆं न्हंय..(3) च़ुकीचॆं रीतियेनॆं बरंवचॆं न्हंय...(4) हाजॆ वारिं/म्हणकॆ कॊंकणिलॆं चॅरॆ/अवमान दुसरॆ ना...(5) आनियॆकळॆ विषय नागरि लिपि आयजिकालि पॊरनॆ रूपांत अस्तित्वांत ना, जाल्यार देवनागरि आसा, अश्शि/अशॆं विंगडाय कॆल्यार आमि झगडुकच़ दॆंवलिं N.B. Canarese Konkani has hereto not been standardised and the above is a written "written as spoken" version and is followed by Canara Saraswats and Canara Catholics alike.

Canarese Konkani has a lexicon that is at variance to Goan Konkani and shows tremendous Kannada-Tulu influence. A lot of words, used in Goan Konkani and not used in Canarese Konkani. e.g. to gather in Goan Konkani is एकठाय करुंक whereas in Canara Konkani it is ओट्टु करचॆं, एकठाय is simply not used. This is in addition to the grammatical nuances I stated above.Imperium ^Caelestis 06:00, 5 March 2011 (UTC)

Per my analysis, I don't think there is a sea change between the two dialects. We do not want to confuse Wikipedia users with too much of unnecessary classification do we? I suggest you start off work on merging all the three articles. Let me know if my help is needed in doing that. Yes Michael? •^Talk 06:10, 5 March 2011 (UTC)

please peruse a Goan Catholic's, who married a Mangalorean Catholic, perspective on this topic [4]Imperium ^Caelestis 13:49, 5 March 2011 (UTC)

Stating that Goan Konkani and Konkani spoken in coastal Karnataka are unintelligible is a gross exaggeration. Honestly, your assertion that you do not understand Goan dialects have no relevance to Wikipedia. That is your own personal opinion. If you ask for my personal opinion, I would assure you that I comprehend Goan dialects perfectly... but then again, my personal opinion has no relevance to Wikipedia. Also, I've never heard 'Aan Tuzo' used in Amchigele (Saraswat Konkani).

The differences you are pointing out are obvious for any dialect. That's precisely why they're called dialects. If all words were similar, it would not be a dialect, it would simply be one and the same language. Also, I'd like to point out, that making over-the-top judgments (such as the differences between Kanara Konkani and Goan Konkani being as large as Kannada and Telugu) is purely Original Research. I have no knowledge of Kannada nor Telugu, but linguists recognize Telugu to be a separate language. Linguists do not recognize Konkani spoken in coastal Karnataka to be a whole different language.

Regarding the ISO codes... those codes itself are quite messed up. Look at ISO 639-3 kex.. it says Kukna mainly... its alternate name is given as Kanara Konkani. Now look at ISO 639-3 gom.. it says Goanese.. but 'Mangalore' is listed as one of its dialect names. There is nothing clear and lucid about those codes.

Regarding the link to a Goan catholic (married to a Mangalorean Catholic)'s experience...It is important to understand that those are his personal opinions. They are not of academic nature. Wikipedia does not honor such personal opinions.

Lastly, User:ImperiumCaelestis, you are analyzing a whole lot. I'm sorry to say, but a lot of what you've been saying seems to constitute Original Research. We simply need to record facts on Wikipedia... Original Research has no place here on Wiki. I deeply admire your passion for linguistics and the research you've been doing is fantastic (I personally engage in a lot of linguistic research for Konkani).. but Wikipedia is not a medium to publish it.

I agree with MikeLynch...there really isn't any sea of change between the various dialects of Konkani. User:ImperiumCaelestis, you should kickstart efforts to merge your new page into the main Konkani article. If you have problems with jingoism from Nijgoykar, let us know and we can handle it. Signed | Aoghac^2z | 14:48, 5 March 2011 (UTC)

User:Aoghac2z, I have reiterated time and again that the nuances, of Canara Konkani, I have stated are mere observations and I have made this clear in citations wheresoever applicable; they are neither research, nor propositions, or postulates. I have also submitted observations of other individuals and a factual report of the Language Information Services, Central Institute of Indian Languages , Mysore. I do agree that the ISO 639-3 codes are vague at describing Konkani.

I firmly opine that the Konkani language page should discuss phonology - orthography - syntax of the Goan Antruz dialect which has recently been promulgated as Standard Konkani and Canara Konkani be mentioned as one of the dialects and the Canara Konkani/Karnataka Konkani article be linked to it. Merging the two pages will make one gargantuan article. I agree to Yes Michael?'s proposition that the pages be kept separate. I am, however, for merging Karnataka Konkani and Canara Konkani.Imperium ^Caelestis 16:44, 5 March 2011 (UTC)

I believe MikeLynch's proposition is that all three pages be merged. And I support that proposition too. I realize that you've contibuted significantly to the Canara Konkani article... It's quite verbose for an article on a dialect. There are quite some issues I see at a cursory glance.. specifically this image. The source you have mentioned in there shows no information of such a map. It seems like you have created this map out of your original research. I am a little busy this weekend, but I'll look more into the article later.

Signed | Aoghac^2z | 17:05, 5 March 2011 (UTC)

To the point of being pedantic; I reiterate that the Karnataka Konkani Sahitya Academy and the Kerala Konkani Academy have not standardised Konkani in the concerned states and no available map shows the Konkani speaking areas in Karnataka and Kerala. The base file of the map was taken from [5] and the rendition was from the Census of India, District Census Handbook. You could say it is procedurally incorrect, but original research is not a phrase you should ascribe to it.Imperium ^Caelestis 09:27, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

Forget the map for now. It has to be done by a different procedure. Let us finish this discussion first. Yes Michael? •^Talk 09:35, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

We are sort of digressing from the main issue at hand. Have a look at my proposal.

My Proposal

Wait a minute guys. As the other editor (involved in the 'edit war'), is probably busy in real life, I am asking you guys. Keep in mind one major point. You guys are native to that region, and know a lot about the intricacies of the language. But the rest of the world does not know it. When they search for Konkani Language, they should be directed to one single page, rather than getting confused by two different pages. What you see is not what the other people see.

Let me be very clear on my proposal. My proposal is that there should be only one page for Konkani. Period. Now, if the differences between dialects are too much, then a separate article may be made, which can be titled Differences between Canara and Goan Konkani. Do you agree with this? Yes Michael? •^Talk 18:02, 5 March 2011 (UTC)

I fully support MikeLynch's proposal. That's precisely what I've been trying to say since the very start. Signed | Aoghac^2z | 21:45, 5 March 2011 (UTC)

I feel Nijgoykar should also be privy to this conversation due to his substantial contribution. Only then can a truly consensual decision be arrived at. I have no issues with merging the Karnataka Konkani and Kanara (Canara) Konkani articles. However the proposition of merging those with the Konkani Language page is too courageous a thought and should best be done away with, as it will result in one behemoth of a page. The page resulting from merging Karnataka Konkani and Kanara (Canara) Konkani could be directed to by using a {{See also}} template. Imperium ^Caelestis 09:07, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

We can't wait all day for him can we? :) And what do you mean by too courageous? I am a Kannadiga, and I consider myself fairly well informed, and still I was not aware that there were two dialects which supposedly vary so much. We should not confuse users of Wikipedia. When you say "it will result in one behemoth of a page", I have already proposed a solution that we describe the differences in another page. I believe this is only fair. Yes Michael? •^Talk 09:16, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

Very Well. We shall wait till evening IST. Yes Michael? •^Talk 09:47, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

I have just posted a talkback on his page that will direct him to your page. My experience with Nijgoykar tells me that he normally accesses Wikipedia in the evenings. Imperium ^Caelestis 09:40, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

My opinion is that the two articles (Canara Konkani and Karnataka Konkani) must be merged. It simply doesn't make sense to have two separate articles for the various dialects of Konkani spoken in Karnataka. However, i think that it would be a bad idea to merge the above two articles into the Konkani language article. From my own observation, there are more differences to be found between Goan and Karnataka Konkani, than between American and British English. If the latter two dialects are notable enough to merit articles of their own, then so are the Konkani dialects. Joyson Noel ^{Holla at me!} 10:09, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

Of course there are separate articles for American and British English.. but these articles primarily highlight the differences. They do not necessarily carry the distinction of being a full featured language article. Have a look at either of the two (American English or British English); you'll find that neither of the articles reek of a separatist agenda. You won't find a language family tree, which is the signature identification of a language article. American English and British English articles primarily act as supplementary articles, not as stand alone articles. In my opinion, the way Kanara Konkani article stands right now, it looks more like a separate language article... especially the history part (the inscription at Shravanabelagola etc.) which is shared by Goan dialects too. My proposal resonates with MikeLynch's = to merge significant areas of the article with the main Konkani language article... and have a separate article highlighting the differences. That being said, I have serious doubts about the distinction factor being drawn at the Goan border (ie. Kanara and non-Kanara dialects). People in Karwar, for example, consider themselves to be ethnic Goans (there is even a demand to merge Karwar with Goa). Their language is quite close to the southern Goan dialects. In essence, Karwari Konkani is closer to Goan dialects than Mangalorean dialect. This is precisely why I have serious concerns about where the boundary should be drawn. Additionally, people searching for Konkani language, must be driven to one article.. which is why it is necessary to include significant portions of the content from Kanara Konkani into the main Konkani article. Kanara Konkani must act as a supplementary article, not as an independent article. Signed | Aoghac^2z | 21:43, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

Moving The whole conversation to the MAIN Konkani language article @ Konkani language. Please contribute there. Signed | Aoghac^2z | 21:51, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

HELP

Can you tell me how can we modify the user page {i.e. adding tabs}. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vibhijain (talk • contribs) 13:26, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

THANKS

THANKS FOR YOUR HELP — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vibhijain (talk • contribs) 16:01, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

Hi Mike!

Hi Mike, my name is Laura and I am part of the Wikimedia Public Policy Initiative on Grassroots Lobbying. I'm happy to have you as our mentor and begin working on our project! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Laurnicole17 (talk • contribs) 04:40, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

Also, if I could email you what we have done so far as with begining to create our page that would be great. Seems silly but I'm not quite sure where to locate your email? Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Laurnicole17 (talk • contribs) 04:53, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

Springdales

Hi, Thanks for your earlier help. I think that the wiki page for Springdales School is written like a Advertisment. hen I edited it, I got a message. It as like this:

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to Springdales School, did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and read the welcome page to learn more about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. Thank you! -- 43?9enter (talk) 07:06, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

Can you please explain! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vibhijain (talk • contribs) 11:22, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

NO, NO! This was the earlier content. When I edited it, I got a message that my article needs to be wikified and your content has to be reverted. The text which you read was the earlier content which I edited but still It was not acceptable instead it matched with Wikipedia Standards. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vibhijain (talk • contribs) 12:18, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

You are right. I have notified the mistaken user. Also, please sign your talk page messages using four tildes (~~~~). Yes Michael? •^Talk 12:28, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

sorry for disturbing you again. I want to request a new logo for Wikipedia Hindi http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Requests_for_logos because the current logo contains a word which is basically a Urdu word. I want to know which type of licence i need to choose in commons to protect the logo created by me and how can i Ask for switch to be done by a developer on bugzilla? And this time i will not forget to sign.

--Vaibhav Jain 12:47, 13 March 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vibhijain (talk • contribs)

Looks like you have forgotten to sign again :). Not an issue. I'm sure you'll get the hang of it. About the logo, To be frank, I'm not so sure about the technical part. It would be great if you could contact a person in Hindi Wikipedia for that. You may contact Mayur here. He is one person whom I know on Hindi Wiki. If you still have some queries that he cannot answer satisfactorily, then I will ask another Hindi editor to help you out. Regards, Yes Michael? •^Talk 12:56, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

But i signed this time. Ok, lets leave it. Thanks for your continuous help — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vibhijain (talk • contribs) 13:00, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

You have to sign by typing four tildes (~~~~). :) Yes Michael? •^Talk 13:04, 13 March 2011 (UTC)