User talk:Redav

Redav (talk) 11:55, 4 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A belated welcome!

Here's wishing you a belated welcome to Wikipedia, Redav. I see that you've already been around a while and wanted to thank you for your contributions. Though you seem to have been successful in finding your way around, you may benefit from following some of the links below, which help editors get the most out of Wikipedia:

Also, when you post on talk pages you should sign your name using four tildes (~~~~); that should automatically produce your username and the date after your post.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! If you have any questions, feel free to leave me a message on my talk page, consult Wikipedia:Questions, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there.

Again, welcome! Tito Dutta (talk) 18:58, 2 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback message from Tito Dutta

Hello, Redav. You have new messages at Wikipedia_talk:Noticeboard_for_India-related_topics#Article_on_Rupak.
Message added 18:59, 2 February 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Tito Dutta (talk) 18:59, 2 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Eurovision Song Contest 2014

I noticed in the Eurovision Song Contest 2014 article, you wrote '(please clarify this unclear sentence)' please do not do this and instead use the template {{Clarify}}, thanks. -- [[ axg ◉ talk ]] 20:24, 21 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

New message from Gareth Griffith-Jones

Hello, Redav. You have new messages at Gareth Griffith-Jones's talk page.
Message added 10:13, 14 May 2014 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

— | Gareth Griffith-Jones |The WelshBuzzard| — 10:13, 14 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:24, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Redav. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Redav. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Redav. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:13, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Italian grammar

Hi! I have seen that you have left a {{Clarify}} tag in Italian grammar § Pronouns, asking the following question:

Why is "glie" not entered as a 3rd person p l u r a l dative clitic while it i s used as such below, and mentioned as such in the en-wiktionary-org/wiki/gli#Italian

The page already explains in a note the reason why gli / glie- does not appear in the table for the third person plural dative: it is used in spoken Italian and only in informal contexts (you will hardly find it in an official document). The standard third person plural dative is loro. As the note explains:

In spoken Italian, gli ("to him") and glie- ("to him/her") are often used as the plural ("to them") instead of classical loro. So: Conosci Luca: gli ho sempre detto di stare lontano dalle cattive compagnie ("You know Luca: I have always told him to stay away from bad companies") and: Conosci Luca e Gino: gli ho sempre detto... ("...I have always told them...") instead of ... ho sempre detto loro di stare.... It also works in the feminine: Conosci Lucia e Gina: gli ho sempre detto... instead of the more classical ... ho detto loro.... However, classical loro is normally never replaced with gli/glie- in written language.

I hope this answers your question. If it does, please remove the {{Clarify}} tag. --Grufo (talk) 02:25, 13 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for September 13

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Kwaza language, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Anthropophagy. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:51, 13 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for pointing out that it I - inadvertently - created a reference disambiguation page. In the original reference I merely changed the spelling from anthropophage to anthropophagy, because anthropophage is most probably not what the original author meant, since it is not a ritual nor an activity (as mentioned in the sentence preceding the one that holds the reference), but a member of a mythical race of cannibals. I could make out that on purely lexical grounds. Since I lack sufficient knowledge about rituals and activities of the Kwaza, I will leave it to someone more knowledgeable to pick the correct reference.Redav (talk) 15:31, 13 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Spanish Pronouns

Hello again, user:Redav. I think you should read your messages a little less hastily, because what I asked for in my talk page wasn't to delete the talk page section, but to delete the talk:Spanish pronouns section; it is there that it could be misunderstood by other editors. Thanks anyway. --Jotamar (talk) 20:24, 10 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Jotamar: You wrote this: "User:Redav, it occurs to me that you could delete the section about this point that you wrote in Talk:Spanish pronouns, so that it doesn't confuse other editors. Regards. --Jotamar (talk) 19:51, 10 October 2020 (UTC)"[reply]

There is ambiguity in there, in the sense that "that you wrote in Talk:Spanish pronouns" could refer to either of:

"the section";
"this point",

I understood "that you wrote in Talk:Spanish pronouns" to refer to and identify the nearest noun phrase it could possibly refer to, i.e. "this point". And - perfectly grammatically, I should think - I further interpreted "the section" as the then current section.

Does that justify writing "you should read your messages a little less hastily", which is in the form of an order? Or may I kindly ask you to write your message as a request that is unambiguous as well? Regards!Redav (talk) 22:45, 10 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. 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 2020 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) 02:29, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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) 00:33, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yanomami

Sorry about reverting your edit. I miss read it. I put it back. Cheers! Masterhatch (talk) 04:21, 18 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

El Niño

Thanks for requesting clarification of a "between September–November" reference, unfortunately the author (Lupe_López22) of that entry has never made any other edit on Wikipedia so your request is unlikely to be answered. However the author's entire entry is misleading as it in effect claims the entire planet's rainfall moves to September to November, which is NOT true and certainly not true on the western side of the Pacific. I would appreciate if a person such as yourself could fix the entry, unfortunately I dare not for fear of the former Wik user resuming a sock puppet edit war. 114.78.6.110 (talk) 01:13, 3 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately my knowledge on El Niño is rather limited, and not developed well enough to hazard an edit on this subject, even though I have been schooled in meteorology. My initial concern in this instance was with the wording. Although I was not struck in the same way as you appear to be, I can see that one interpretation may be as you describe it.Redav (talk) 11:28, 6 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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) 01:10, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Merger discussion for Illustrative model of greenhouse effect on climate change

An article that you have been involved in editing—Illustrative model of greenhouse effect on climate change—has been proposed for merging with another article. If you are interested, please participate in the merger discussion. Thank you. Chidgk1 (talk) 15:11, 8 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. 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 2023 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) 00:35, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Germanic strong verb

Hi! In answer to your question for clarification here, [1], the sentence itself describes the process. I've enumerated the steps to hopefully make it clearer.

1. The old PIE perfect became the Germanic past. 2. Weak verbs were those that already lacked a perfect form (formed with ablaut) in PIE. In PIE terms, they were defective verbs. They could not form a Germanic past based on the PIE perfect form, because they didn't have one. 3. Therefore, they lacked a distinct past tense form in Germanic, meaning that a new form was innovated (origins of the English -ed forms).

I hope this makes it clearer. Ikuzaf (talk) 03:48, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]