Language desk
< December 2	<< Nov \| December \| Jan >>	December 4 >

Welcome to the Wikipedia Language Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages.

December 3

Battle of creativities

Is it acceptable to use "battle of creativities" in the same way one would use "battle of intellects" or "battle of wills," or does creativity have to remain singular? Neon Merlin 02:15, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What is the context of the statement where the phrase appears? Is this a comparison of two artists or other creative people? -Fsotrain⁰⁹ 03:02, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see what difference it makes, but the context is my own, "In general, I think the potential for ... a battle of creativities between DM and players is one of the great things about RPGs." [1] I don't doubt that it is acceptable in the neologism factory that is Usenet, but my question is whether it would be acceptable in more formal writing. Neon Merlin 06:31, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

While this [2] argues there are multiple types of creativity (and even uses the word "creativities"), unless you're talking about a clash between radically different kinds, e.g. a painter vs. a scientist, IMO the meaning is better captured by "battle of creativity" in your example. DM's and their victims are thinking too much along the same lines. (So sayeth my +2 sword of grammar.) Clarityfiend 09:25, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think the problem with this is that creative people are not as interested in doing battle (which infers destruction) as are intellectual people and willful people, so it is something of a mixed metaphor.--Shantavira 13:28, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Then how do we get freestyle battles, laptop battles or battles of the bands? These are definitely contests of creativity. The word I have a question about isn't battle but creativities. Neon Merlin 22:37, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not certain that "battle of creativities" is a coherent expression. Creativity is generally viewed as something being universally positive, good, helpful, and not at all antagonistic or competitive. That said, if you're a college student, this kind of phrasing is perfectly commmonplace, and 'battle of the creativities' would indeed be the preferred form, rather than the singular 'creativity'. Theavatar3 18:15, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

'South-South cooperation'

What does South-South cooperation[3] mean? [The word appears on page 3 of 7 in the penultimate paragraph.] I am especially baffled as the Saint Lucia delegate's country is in the Northern hemisphere.--Patchouli 03:25, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Could it mean "cooperation between those nations south of the United States" ? This would distinguish such cooperation from US or Canadian help. (From Mexico on South, most of the Caribbean, North American, and South American nations have more in common with each other, culturally, politically, and economically, than they do with the US or Canada, and this might be a way to lump all those nations together.) StuRat 11:25, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, and don't take the Northern / Southern hemispheres split to be along the equator. The general idea is less-developed nations helping each other rather than receiving aid from the U.S., etc. -THB 15:10, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you.--Patchouli 10:01, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Translate to Japanese

Can someone translate this to Japanese for me please:

Log-in problems

When I try to log into your site the "login form" appears again (So I can't login). I have tried both Firefox 2 and Internet Explorer 7. Thanks.

Thanks, 159.134.99.194 05:31, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If the site is the Japanese Wikipedia, you can post in English to ja:Wikipedia:Chatsubo_for_Non-Japanese_Speakers. Neon Merlin 06:42, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

In most login processes, the form just comes again because you supplied a wrong pair (username+password.) Try to check it. Beware upper/lowercase (especially in Japanese ???) -- DLL ^{.. T} 16:30, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

...although Japanese writing lacks cases. (On the other hand, it has two alphabets with about 50 characters each, and a couple of thousand characters borrowed from Chinese to mix up, so it's of little avail.) 惑乱分からん 18:24, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Just a simple translation will do fine, thanks. 159.134.99.194 03:27, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Here it is. --Kusunose 05:59, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

ログイン障害

あなたのサイトにログインしようとするとログインフォームが再び表示されます（つまり、ログインできません）。Firefox 2とInternet Explorer 7の両方で試しました。よろしくお願いします。

tr" and "str" letter combos

I recently noticed that, contrary to their spellings, I seem to always pronounce "tr" and "str" as [tʃɹ] and [ʃtɹ], respectively. I am pretty sure that people I know pronounce them this way, also. Is this true for most english speakers, or is it only common in my area or something?

It's common for a number of speakers. I can't recall if it's only common in America or not, though, and I think the pronunciation of /tɹ/ as [tʃɹ] is more common than the pronunciation of /stɹ/ with initial [ʃ] (personally, I have [tʃɹ] but [stʃɹ]). --Miskwito 22:40, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I recall my phonology professor explaining that [tʃɹ] is a simple spreading of the postalveolar nature of American /r/ to /t/. Not all speakers in the class did it and it's not going to be reflected in the spelling because it's noncontrastive. I'm not sure about [ʃtɹ]. I remember meeting someone from... Nebraska(?) who seemed to convert /s/ into [ʃ] if the same word had /r/ in it. Æµ§œš¹ _{[aɪm ˈfɻɛ̃ⁿdˡi]} 23:07, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I once heard [ʃtɹ] was standard in Hawaii. --Kjoonlee 03:17, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm in Australia, and I have it — and what's more, I don't think my /r/ is postalveolar. I'm not sure that it's exactly articulated as [tʃ] though, but it's some affricate.

In any case, it's pretty widespread. --Ptcamn 09:09, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This is common in the Carolinas. tgies 09:48, 6 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

integrity of data

Please highlight somewhere on your page what are the means at your disposal to verify, correct, maintain the integrity of the various pages, so that each entry is true, accurate, neutral to political bias and refelcts verifiable, authenticated knowledge.

THis mystery is the one big question I allways had. In today's NYT Magazine they speak about how the U.S Intel Community needs to emulate Wikepidia. To share intel to protect. One of their issues is the possibility that certain elements with access to the data or those with the right to edit, change, bend the direction or the integrity of the data (I.E: a disgruntled employee who does not agree with certain policy could cleverly enter misleading data that over a period of time becomes part of the accepted version of certain entry, thus causing enormous harm to everyone) which also applies to all of your users, when controversial data is entered, redited, manipulated, and possibly by some with malicious intentions.

It would be great if you has a link that takes the vistors directly to a page explaining how you keep vigilant of your data collection.

Sincerely,

TJBarker (email removed to prevent spam)

You asked this on the Help Desk as well. Please see replies there. --Wo o ty Woot? contribs 23:42, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]