Talk:High Icelandic

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).
Articles for deletion This article was nominated for deletion on 2-24-2006. The result of the discussion was keep.

Contents

[edit] Sources

Some sources? --feydey 00:25, 1 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] NPOV/Category

This whole edifice is basically the construct of one man: Jozef Van Tongerloo. It has received some attention in Iceland and is sort of interesting in its own right and as a sort of reductio ad absurdum of language purism. I would vote to keep it on AfD but it needs to be rewritten to make clear what it really is. I'm slapping an NPOV tag on it for the time being. - Haukur Þorgeirsson 15:42, 20 November 2005 (UTC)

The new version doesn't really deserve a NPOV, since it now incorporates additions from the author in a surprisingly moderate language. I'd say let the article be as is, unless someone objects to the somewhat excessive use of pictures. Readers may have their own opinion, and this reader certainly has, but as the article stands, it is a relatively fair description of Braekmans' creation, and I agree with Haukur that the phenomenon has a certain interest in itself. That High Icelandic will never catch on is, I think, beyond question. Cheers Io 19:47, 25 November 2005 (UTC)
Agreed that we don't need the NPOV tag anymore (it has already been removed) and the use of pictures is excessive but that is not terrible at all. Also, I removed it from the category Languages of Iceland as it is not spoken by a single person there. Category:Languages of Belgium would be much better suited although I am certainly not going to make that change :) Stefán Ingi 21:01, 25 November 2005 (UTC)
AFAIK, the author doesn't speak it himself, so Languages of Belgium would also be inappropriate. :) Io 16:25, 26 November 2005 (UTC)
I think it probably does fit under the rubric of a conlang... TomerTALK 02:14, 30 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Vanity page

I'm putting the NPOV tag back on this page, mainly because it is a vanity page. It is about a creation of its sole contributor. The text also plays up the subject as more relevant than it really is. Frankly I also disagree with removing it in the first place, the page was far from neutral at the time the tag was removed. --Sindri 12:02, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

I disagree that the text of the article is not neutral, it describes the project and does not hide the fact that it, and its creator, is unpopular with many people. I would like to see that NPOV tag removed. If anybody thinks its a vanity article then it should be nominated for deletion. I, for one, would oppose its deletion. Stefán Ingi 16:46, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Wikification

I went through and wikified about half the article. I may get back to it some more later. Meanwhile, someone else might ought could take a look at doing the oder haff? TomerTALK 02:14, 30 November 2005 (UTC)


[edit] Article balance

Apart from WP:CITE -- if this is notable then presumably others are interested too. Who are they? I don;t know icelandic, but I am going to attempt to address the two concerns that are apparent -- it is a pet project (although perhaps notable?) and a linguistic exercise, and it contains enough material to by itself change the shape of the debate, a breach of NPOV.

Someone else will have to add details on dissenting views and criticisms, majority views and the place this holds in the debate; I'm not qualified. FT2 01:02, 6 December 2005 (UTC)


Update - I have balanced much of the article as best I can. Three things bother me still:
  • The number of examples. That's unnecessary. Is there not an external link of examples we can point people to, and keep a half dozen of neologisms and places?
  • The number of images that when all said and done are just promotional imagery used. They could have a dozen or a hundred of these; they simply aren't notable. Pick one, or at most two.
  • The lack of authoritative views, critical view or simply opposing views, citations and the like. Who thinks what about it? Who accepts or rejects or has a formal opinion on it? Where has it been formally and authoritatively discussed? How much attebntion and agreement does it have? The article needs this balance.
FT2 01:27, 6 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Usenet

This article really needs to cite some Usenet posts, this language is largely a Usenet phenomena, when was it first mentioned on Usenet, some highlights from the posts at is.islenska etc. —Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason 08:18, 6 December 2005 (UTC)

Dear Ævar, Yes you're right. I added the following to the article: Braekmans first made mention of the name on november 23, 2004 on the newsgroup is.islenska. Before that date he used to refer to it as 'frónska' or 'Hypericelandic'. So there's no need for a neutrality tag anymore.

[edit] Vanity Page

This article IS indeed a vanity. It is translated to all wikipedia's, by a few IP's in Belgium in a few days time, or by registered users (sockpuppets).

On de dutch wiki, the article is nominated for deletion, and indeed, two users tried to convince us of the importance of the article, by claiming the popularity of the subject... It are however newly registered sockpuppet users, which does indeed make it seems like manipulation and vanity... If you read Dutch, here the article is nominated for Deletion nl:Wikipedia:Te_verwijderen_pagina's/Toegevoegd_20060223#Toegevoegd_23.2F02:_Deel_1, nl:Gebruiker:Maximiliaan en nl:Gebruiker:Deruyterm are two sockpuppets as you can see by their edits [1] and [2] .

If fear this is just manipulation of a marginal subject and hobby project on different wiki's on the same time --LimoWreck 00:03, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

This is an one-man project vanity page. This man is trying the same thig at different wiki's referring to other wiki's. on the dutch wiki we had him to. He's using unfair methods, such as sockpuppets and media attention that is at least unclear. My advice? Remove. Migdejong 00:32, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] NPOV again

While the vote for deletion went keep, in the dissucssion dissucssion on deleting this page there was a clear consensus on this article needing a more neutral point of view.

FYI, the same discussion had place on the Dutch Wikipedia. At some point, the article was rewritten into something which was both NPOV and acceptable to a majority. In my opinion, wikipedia.nl has an excellent article right now. It might serve as an inspiration for the English version. Because I agree, it is pretty much the same as the propagandistic original version... —IJzeren Jan In mij legge alle fogultjes een ij 20:02, 4 March 2006 (UTC)
I agree with Jan. The rewritten version is very much to be called an encyclopedic article, in contrast with earlier versions. Migdejong 23:57, 4 March 2006 (UTC)
If anyone who speaks Dutch can be bothered with it could you make a translation of the rewritten article and place it here as a suggestion for a rewrite? --Sindri 13:54, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

I disagree. High Icelandic is also an artform and has its own symbolism which is a logical extrapolation of Icelandic symbolism. It's is true that the pictures make it look like a vanity page, but it isn't: High Icelandic isn't but a variant of Icelandic, It is also an artform and a subculture, with its own fashion, like the nýyrðaskáldshúfa. There's nothing wrong with the pictures. I regret that on the Dutch wikipedia people obliterated the part about High Icelandic symbolism and even the link with the Fjallbarn-page (containing the Fjallbarnssaga written by Albert Bergsteinsson, Pétur Þorsteinsson and Sigurður Hreiðar, where the whole symbolism is explained). The symbolism is the core of High Icelandic. It's like making an article about Paris without mentioning the Seine and the Eiffeltower.

"It is also true that the pictures make it look like a vanity page", thats because it is a vanity page. "There's nothing wrong with the pictures.", maybe not, but that does not mean they should be on Wikipedia. --Sindri 14:07, 5 March 2006 (UTC)
Enough of this crap!!! Sindri Traustason is as biased as can be. He is the one who started the insults on me and my work in 2003 on USenet and would do everything that lies in his power that gets the webpage deleted and the High Icelandic project destroyed. Take a look on Usenet and see for yourself. HE hasn't the slightest respect for the sincere efforts of the neologists poets of the High Icelandic language movement and tried to discredit me in all kind of ways, even with cheap tricks like calling me a neonazi. He even calls a respectable man like Bobby Fisher a nazi, obviously without any good reason. He hates the policy of linguistic purism in his country and everything that has to do with it. HE was almost the only Icelander who voted for deletion. If you want to harm Icelandic as much as you can, please make him president of the Icelandic language commission. He will be astonished to hear that many Icelandic scholars like and encourage our neologistic endeavours.
Speaking of insults... the usenet history of our anonymous friend who posted above aka Braekmans aka Hermanson aka the author of this icelandic thing and this article [3] [4] etc...
Anyway, @Jan: i agree this article should be edited, many people voted a conditional "keep": if the article was edited to meet wiki conventions... maybe the dutch article can indeed be used as a starting point. Perhaps we could translate some of it --LimoWreck 02:15, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
I think the almost unanimous majority of the Icelanders who voted for keeping this page (most of them unconditional) have a decisive say about this, and not sindri, the only one of them who voted for deletion (only for the sake of revenge for the fights on the newsgroups, let this be clear). My immeasurable love for the Icelandic language and culture seems to have found its way to the hearts of many Icelanders, to sindri's great dissatisfaction. Icelanders, who feel the same way about it, something that does not apply to mr sindri traustason. I'm a jerk, yes, but that's only due to the fact that I have run too often into incredibly disrespectful and bullyish people like sindri in my life. He undoubtedly doesn't give jack sxxx whether Icelandic is pumped up unto explosion with foreignisms or not, not a single very single neutrino. And this is a very small particle, as he hopefully knows. But I do care, Mr sindri traustason. The care for Icelandic is a quite serious matter, not a silly PLASTIC MODEL HOBBY in the hands of linguisticly unempathic people like you. Migdejong and Limowreck are GANDHI and MARTIN LUTHER KING compared to you. Timbur-Helgi Hermannsson

You know what true love is, sindri? Believe me, I know: "The lady of the mountains".

She does exist whether you believe it or not. She speaks to me and I understand her. True love is like feeling a knive running your chest when one of her tears impact on icelandic soil, tears from the sorrow she has to go through because the effects of modern age slowly starts to make her feel estranged from her people. She is my everlasting muze, my undying source of inspiration. She was in the mind of all those people who cherished her. Also in those of the great poets like Jónas Hallgrímsson. He did write his 'ég bið að heilsa' for her, that is simply unquestionable. Bjarni Thorarensen saw her in a vision when he wrote 'Eldgamla Ísafold'.

I may look like a hot-tempered lunatic, but that's not how she knows me. She will always support me, watch over me like a caring mother and the neologisms I coin are my ode to her. Timbur-Helgi Hermannsson

Recently, I have succeeded in impregnating the mind of a very talented naturally born Icelandic poet with my unearthly enthusiasm for coining Icelandic neologisms. Before this decade is over I'm sure he will make the neologistic work of the 20th century in Iceland look like a game of scrabble. Timbur-Helgi Hermannsson


This is unacceptable. Most Icelanders chose for an unconditional keep. The part about the symbolism is an inextricable part of High Icelandic. THE CHOICE WAS KEEP, NOT BEHEAD THE ARTICLE.


1/ This wiki isn't should about Icelanders, and even they didn't vote unconditionnal keep. I quote from the discussion.:
  • "That Braekmans seems to behave irrationally at times and not corteously shouldn't deter from the actual content of the articles, once it has been cleaned up to remove obvious bias" User:Stalfur
  • "be to make the article as NPOV as we can, possibly removing crufty details such as some of the examples or the large pictures." User:DenisMoskowitz
  • "I dó believe the most propagandistic elements need to be removed from the article." User:IJzeren Jan
  • "Weak keep per majority of local Icelanders . Delete the stupid pictures please." USer:Pavel Vozenilek
  • "There is no reason to delete this. However, I suggest that Jozef Braekmans be barred from further editing of this page, whereas he is unable of taking a neutral stance with regards to this page - he will continue to edit and improve on this page indefinatly if allowed to do so. Likewise, this page should be cleaned up and made more verifiable. In this case verifiability is tough since the entire language was created by one man, however lengthy Usenet discussions on is.islenska should provide some level of verification," User:Spm
  • "Cut down to appropriate size and rewrite to reflect that this project is basically a word game played by a small group. Otherwise, weak delete." User:Palnatoke
Clear ? Now be so polite to register and edit and discuss as a registered user instead of anonymous POV edits --LimoWreck 09:46, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

I say the paragraph about High Icelandic symbolism is NO vanity. It is almost as important as the language itself. Also the following; Not a single neologism is mentioned. Even in the article about Icelandic neologisms are mentioned. What's the reaon of this. High Icelandic is both a language varinat and concept art on the subject of linguistic purism, and the symbols are an inextricable part of that. Your crusade against the subject already damaged enough Limowreck: the French, German and Swedish articles are deleted. It was a disappointment for you and migdejong that High Icelandic was known and discussed in the media, isn't it? The only reason of your crusade was rancune against my person and disapproval of the subject. Don't you think I'm a moron. Ik weet hoe de vork in de steel zit hoor vriendje!! Denk maar niet dat ik dit vergeet!

Sigh, again. I have no crusade at all against the subject; however, as far as I know, Wikipedia as an Encyclopedia, not a free webspace. It's not a platform to promote local football clubs, musical bands, or similarly, personnal projects. However, it IS a platform to give a neutral, balanced, encyclopedic, concise, objective overview of those clubs, bands or projects. Therefore, High Icelandic DOES deserve it's own article know, but it should still be a neutral view of the subject, not a one-sided story by it's creaters. You CAN however write a whole text on High Icelandic on WikiBooks] however, a sister project of Wikipedia, you are even encouraged to try creating a text or book over there. However WikiPedia should have some encyclopedic article ... --LimoWreck 13:25, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
@Sokpop Gast, je bent gestoord. Je geeft het zelfs toe. Honderd keer iets roepen maakt het niet waar! Randdebiel. Migdejong 23:25, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Shifting

Ahoy. I think a few things have to be said regarding the conservative nature of this article after "NPOV" modifications by LimoWreck and others. That is to say, instead of modifying towards a neutral point of view from an overly positive one, the article has been shifted over to the other side of the spectrum leaving it decisively negative towards the language, viz. sentances in the liking to "[...] most of which have failed to gain acceptance by the general public and were in danger of being lost." I believe that the mission of Wikipedia is to report the truth in a neutral way, but that is not being done at the moment. Twice the article states that the language has no official standing, and downplays the media attention it has recieved. I shall make the appropriate changes, moving towards a less political and opinionated and more scientific view on the subject matter. I'm glad those ghastly pictures are gone though. Furthermore, I have been in e-mail contact with Jef Braekmans, and he agreed to discontinue all further editing of the article, which I expect him to comply with. Furthermore, Jef, please note that this is the English Wikipedia, not the Dutch one. Making empty threats in Dutch is not any better tolerated than threats of any nature in any language. Please be civil! --Smári McCarthy 12:02, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

Hmm, that "most of which have failed to gain acceptance by the general public and were in danger of being lost." sentence was added in before, before I made any edits.... should check the history how it got in there. I just re-added that unofficial part before I saw your comment here, sorry, it was just a section in the "history" of the language, showing it's current status, attention and activities... let's see how that could be reworded --LimoWreck 13:30, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
It seems that we're getting there. I noticed that the bit about media attention is repeated; I recommend removing it from the "one man project" section and moving it to the "praise" section entirely. I got an e-mail from Jef just a moment ago in which he said: Dear Smári, I'm very happy. It is OK like this. Best Regards, Jef. Although keeping Jef happy is in no way our purpose, it can't be a bad side effect. --Smári McCarthy 13:43, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
Oh, d*mn, I hadn't even noticed that new "praise" section either... well "praise" is a bit a strange word... perhaps "media" or so would cover it better. And agree, the details about media attention (including the ref's / notes I tried to add) should be moved over there... In the section about the evolution of project, one sentence mentioning the media attention should suffice indeed) --LimoWreck 13:48, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] symbolism

Omitting the part about High Icelanidic symbolism is beheading the article. The symbolism is as important as the language. High Icelandic is a both a language variant and concepta art on the subject of linguistic purism. This artform is based upon these four symbols. It's like writing an article about Paris without mentioning the eiffeltower. That's no neutrality! If that important paragraph about the symbolism is rejected I can't keep my promise to stop further editing. This is inacceptable!! Sindri Traustason is enjoying this extremely much. If he can hurt me he is all ears! He has certainly been having some intresting conversations with the crusaders Limowreck and Migdejong. Sindri Traustason is luitenant in the anti-icelandic forces of General Algjör Bjáni: a.bjani@complex.is , the prime mother-tongue hater of Iceland.

Jef. Stop it. You're not making any sense. Look at the revised version, in which I aimed at neutrality. And stop posting anonymously. Sign your edits by typing --~~~~ at the end. Edit your preferences (the "my preferences" button at the top right when you're logged in) and put your right name in the appropriate field. --Smári McCarthy 12:32, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

Dear Smári. That's OK! Very good! But I think the crusaders Limowreck, Migdejong and Luitenant Sindri Traustason will remove it soon. Timbur-Helgi --~~~~

Haha. You weren't supposed to include the "nowiki" tags. Just two dashes and four tildes. You can also click the third button from the right on the button bar at the top of the editor. --Smári McCarthy 12:52, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

Dear Smári, I'm a user now. And I'm on a new drug. My dopamine level was extremely low and then I get all kinds delusions. I've go the best of both worlds: The intelligence of my father and the nuttishness of my grand-mother. --Fronkrakki 13:56, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Neutrality

Isn't it time to remove the "Neutrality disputed" tag from this article? The article has shrunk to proper proportions, and the original fanaticism of the author has visibly softented. Do we need an admin to remove the tag? If so, please do. Cheers Io 20:34, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Removed NPOV tag

As it happens, regular users can remove tags. I removed the NPOV tag from this article. Shoot me or reinsert it if you must. :) And, to make it clear I am Io 20:38, 11 March 2006 (UTC), not Jozef Braekmans. Cheers Io 20:38, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

I doubt anyone will object to removing the tag now. The article has been totally rewritten. --Sindri 20:45, 11 March 2006 (UTC)
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../h/i/g/Talk%7EHigh_Icelandic_426b.html"