User talk:Ajd

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Hello, welcome to Wikipedia. Here are some useful links in case you haven't already found them:

If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my talk page. I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian!

Tip: you can sign your name with ~~~~

Dori 06:03, Nov 20, 2003 (UTC)

It's not vandalism if it's true, you know. Only Americans use American English: All Americans are idiots. There you go, logical! Or are you American and that's too intelligent for you? Poor you. I'll send you over a dictionary.

I appreciate the time and effort you put into making this great site what it is today. In reference to your edit in regards to Milton MA. I would have to respectfully disagree. The town of milton is divided into two sections East and West. Anyone who has lived or spent time in Milton even if it was for a week can make the claim that west Milton's residents are primarily minorty and jewish residents. While the majority of East Milton residents come from Irish decent. If you need furhter proof you can look at data that sites demographics of the local elemntary schools in their respective east milton and west Milton neghborhoods. If you would like to visit milton and discuss this over a cup of coffee I would be happy too. If you have any questions regadring this matter you can contact me @ 617-529-1161. Thank you for being understanding in regards to this matter. I admire all the time and effort you put into repairing wikipedia. I especially admire the corrections you made to Cape Cod and the Barnstable villages. I also have a summer cottage in a Barnstable village. Thanks again

Thanks a lot for your kind words, anon. I don't need to visit Milton and discuss it with you; all you need to do is post a clear reference to some reliable source to back you up (such as the elementary-school data you refer to) when you post strong claims about the demographics of Milton; "anyone who lives there knows it" isn't a helpful enough reference. Thanks! AJD (talk) 16:36, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

Sorry about that! Thanks for the repair! -- BCorr ? Брайен 17:59, 15 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Hi again -- I don't think that you follwed the links I added. They did not go back to the Villages of Barnstable article. Go back to this version [[ http://en.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=Villages_of_Barnstable%2C_Massachusetts&oldid=1967626]] and you'll see that. Thanks, BCorr ? Брайен 20:59, 15 Dec 2003 (UTC)


I take it back -- I didn't realize that you had made redirects -- I'll do some more figuring out -- I had only checked Centerville, and I guess I just lucked out... -- BCorr ? Брайен 21:03, 15 Dec 2003 (UTC)


OK, here's what I'm thinking for the future: rather than redirecting all of the villages to an article that talks about the villages collectively, it would be much better to leave them uncreated, so that people will add information to them, rather than having redirects. People like to create those links to encourage articles to be written, and generally that won't even happen if a redirect is already living there (a lot of people don't know how to edit the redirect, since even that redirects you to the page that's pointed to.) Also, Hyannis, for example, will probably get it's own article sooner or later if there isn't a redirect. Also, you should visit WikiProject Cities for more info, as well as User:Rambot. Please let me know what you think. Thanks again, BCorr ? Брайен 21:13, 15 Dec 2003 (UTC)

I get it now, I think you're probably right. Sorry for the confusion! - Hephaestos 02:57, 19 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Your analysis was correct -- I ought to stop editing when I'm sleepy :-) -- BCorr ? Брайен 00:04, 22 Dec 2003 (UTC)

There I go again with Massachusetts. Let me know if you think Shirley, Massachusetts should be moved back. My personal feeling is that there should be at least one unambiguous article about each town, with the other census anomalies linked to it? - Hephaestos 05:39, 24 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Regarding your edit to Boston, Massachusetts: a close study of the maps proved instructive. There is no question that Newbury Street, the defining locale of the Back Bay, is west of Tremont Street, although it forms an acute angle to Columbus Ave. The dividing line can be taken to be Huntington Ave. these days, which runs roughly northeast-southwest. Evidently you consider the north-south axis to be more significant. From my perspective, the South End having largely been filled prior to the filling of the Back Bay, its important north-south relationships are with the original Boston landmass (relative to which it is named) and Roxbury (from which parts of the South End were annexed before the rest of the town). The Back Bay fill properly includes the land west of the Southwest Corridor (ex-Boston & Providence RR) and north of the Boston & Albany. East of the B&P and south of the B&A is the South End.

In general, I appriciate the work linking the CDP and town articles. But, I have a question about Amesbury, Massachusetts. Why did you change 'town' to 'city' in the article. AFIK Amesbury is a town, and Amesbury (CDP) is the central villlage in the town. Thanks .... Lou I 17:55, 4 Apr 2004 (UTC)

  • It's a city (though its official style is "the Town of Amesbury", much as Massachusetts is a state officially styled "the Commonwealth of..."). See e.g. the Mass. city-and-town map.

Thanks. I've updated the article with some details. I've also changed the description of your links to the (CDP) page, and shifted article titles. I've got a list of CDP articles that I plan to shift the same way, but I'd appreciate it if you would look at my changes to see if you agree before I adjust any other articles. Thanks, Lou I 09:04, 6 Apr 2004 (UTC)

  • I'm a little leery about "central urban area"; "urban" doesn't seem the right word to apply to Amesbury or most of these CDPs. Maybe "central developed area"? Or "original center of population"? Other than that, your description seems fine, though I don't know how easily it will carry over to other corresponding articles: is it the case, in all towns with a CDP of the same name, that the CDP contains the central developed area, such as it is, of the town? The only thing I can think of is Barnstable, where the central developed area is Hyannis, not the village of Barnstable; but I think the village of Barnstable isn't a CDP so we're okay on that particular case.

I chose 'urban' as the description since Amesbury had become a 'city'. The coupole of these entrires I've handled before I used 'village', or sometimes 'neighborhood'. Essex County is clean, I'll put further discussion of that subject on the talk page for CDP's. Thank's for looking. I'll shift the rest of Essex County articles before I go back to history. (FYI, I got here in the first place while researching Josiah Bartlett). See you around the Wiki! ... Lou I 09:07, 8 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] boston meetup?

Hi there, we're planning a Boston meetup on Nov 20 or 21. Leave a note on that page if you think you could make it. :) +sj+ 06:54, 10 Nov 2004 (UTC)

[edit] rambot

When the rambot first created those articles, it labeled the CDPs as towns, even though they were not necessarily towns. Because in many states the term "town" has a specific legal meaning, it could not be used as a generic term. So we had no choice after many complaints to have the rambot change every article that SHOULD have said CDP. That meant replacing "town" with "CDP". In the case of Wakefield, Massachusetts, you were incorrect to change it back to town, at least in part. The demographic census data refers to the CDP of Wakefield, even if such a town really does exist in its legal form as a town. Because of this, it is factually incorrect to use the term "town" within the statistics, unless one can first prove that the CDP that the census bureau uses and the legal town limits are exactly the same thing, however, this is often not the case. I don't know if in Massachusetts the term "town" has a specific legal meaning and whether or not it can be applied to this particular CDP. We must be very careful not to reintroduce the same factual errors in the articles that were there before just because someone doesn't like the term CDP out of personal preference. Maintaining the integrity of the articles is far more important. Since you apparently know more about Massachusetts than I do, maybe you specifically know the answers to some of my questions above, but it is only fair that you know exactly why the CDP term has been restored to some 5,500 articles. If you changed it back to "town" in error, please restore the "CDP" term. Also the term "community" has been proposed as a better generic term than "town", although it is possible that "community" also has a specific legal meaning in some states. -- Ram-Man (comment| talk) 13:27, Dec 6, 2004 (UTC)

Hi, sorry to butt in here, but I had noticed Ajd's edits and the comment on Ram-Man's talk page. I've just been reading up about CDPs (and have updated the census-designated place article. Anyhow, I've learned some interesting tidbits (well, maybe only interesting to census geeks). First, the Census Bureau considers New England Towns to be minor civil divisions (MCDs), even though they are incorporated municipalities with strong government. Many of these NE towns (and most MCDs elsewhere) encompass both rural and urban areas (and historically they all were simply a means of providing a default government to geographic subdivisions of a county). However, many such MCDs are now heavily urbanized and have strong municipal governments, thus resembling cities, villages and other incorporated places. However, the data for MCDs appear in a separate category from places. So for MCDs which consist largely of urban area and have a strong form of government, the Census Bureau has defined CDPs that are coterminous with the MCD. This is to allow users of Census data to find the locality in either category. So Ram-man is correct, that these places are BOTH Towns and CDPs (and with a uniquely New England wrinkle, some Towns that have adopted city forms of government are still considered MCDs by the Census Bureau and so are also defined as CDPs). In such cases, I think it would be appropriate to simply note in the demographics section that the town (or city) has also been defined as a CDP. Any other references to the place can use the town (or city) as appropriate. older≠wiser 17:46, Dec 6, 2004 (UTC)
This is exactly the solution I would take, with the slight exception that in the demographics section I would make clear that the statistics are for the CDP, not merely that it has also been defined as a CDP. Of course this is a minor change in semantics. It is unfortunate that the rambot had to change all of the valid town entries back into CDP, but it had no way of knowing which "town" references were correct and which ones were wrong. They all had to be changed and thus we'd have to clean up the mess afterwards, but at least we'd have validity and data integrity at the (temporary) expense of article usability and clarity. The reason more Massachusetts cities have not been labeled as CDPs is because the census bureau does not consider those other places to be CDPs. In the case of Ashby, Massachusetts, the census bureau has labelled it as a town. The rambot knew which towns should have orginally been labeled as towns and which should have been labeled as CDPs (based on what the census bureau thinks they were), so that it only modified the potentially incorrect entries. Its probably a pain, but verifying the town status is the best solution to maintain accuracy. -- Ram-Man (comment| talk) 18:11, Dec 6, 2004 (UTC)
I might add, that I think in MA, even though some Towns have adopted city-forms of government, they may still be considered as Towns by the Census (or also by MA state government). For example, Weymouth, Massachusetts is a town that has adopted a city form of government, but it still called a town, is listed by MA government as a town [1], and considered by the Census Bureau as a town. And there is also a CDP that is equivalent to the Town. older≠wiser 19:25, Dec 6, 2004 (UTC)
Another note concerning using CDP to describe the statistics: actually in these specific cases there were (or should have been) articles for both the town and CDP with identical statistics. So in these specific cases, I would simply note that the Census Bureau has also defined the town as a CDP, but leave all the references as town. In cases where the CDP is not equivalent to the town, these should remain in separate articles and the CDP data identified as being the CDP (and not "community" as that may be understood somewhat different in local usage). older≠wiser 21:17, Dec 6, 2004 (UTC)
I agree about not using "community"; apparently in Mass. municipal government jargon, "community" is equivalent to "city or town", and so using it for 'CDP' would be counterproductive. Also, the Mass. government seems to be unsure about how to regard towns that have adopted city status with "Town of" names. The page you cite lists them as towns, but the official pdf map [2] marks them as cities; and mass.gov refers passim to the state as having 301 towns and 50 cities, which count includes the "Town of" cities as cities. I think nothing is gained by referring to the towns with equivalent CDPs as CDPs. The joint town-CDP status is essentially a Census Bureau–internal bookkeeping trick for making the data easier to sort; and whether or not a town is categorized by the Census Bureau as a CDP has no relevance to anyone who lives there, or to anyone who is trying to interpret the statistics. Of course it makes sense to refer to regular CDPs as CDPs, since that's the only way the boundaries of the area are defined. But we have no need to be echoing one of the Census Bureau's errors (i.e., failing to categorize Massachusetts cities and Massachusetts towns as equivalent levels of organization) just because that's the way the Census Bureau did it. Oh, and it might be worth checking in with someone who knows something about towns in Connecticut and other states whose incorporated towns the Census Bureau treats incorrectly, to make sure rambot didn't mislabel any of those around the same time.

[edit] Article Licensing

Hi, I've started a drive to get users to multi-license all of their contributions that they've made to either (1) all U.S. state, county, and city articles or (2) all articles, using the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike (CC-by-sa) v1.0 and v2.0 Licenses or into the public domain if they prefer. The CC-by-sa license is a true free documentation license that is similar to Wikipedia's license, the GFDL, but it allows other projects, such as WikiTravel, to use our articles. Since you are among the top 1000 Wikipedians by edits, I was wondering if you would be willing to multi-license all of your contributions or at minimum those on the geographic articles. Over 90% of people asked have agreed. For More Information:

To allow us to track those users who muli-license their contributions, many users copy and paste the "{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}" template into their user page, but there are other options at Template messages/User namespace. The following examples could also copied and pasted into your user page:

Option 1
I agree to [[Wikipedia:Multi-licensing|multi-license]] all my contributions, with the exception of my user pages, as described below:
{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}

OR

Option 2
I agree to [[Wikipedia:Multi-licensing|multi-license]] all my contributions to any [[U.S. state]], county, or city article as described below:
{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}

Or if you wanted to place your work into the public domain, you could replace "{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}" with "{{MultiLicensePD}}". If you only prefer using the GFDL, I would like to know that too. Please let me know what you think at my talk page. It's important to know either way so no one keeps asking. -- Ram-Man (comment| talk)


[edit] IE box

yeah, sorry, I just reverted your changes. I am not sure about the syntax myeslf, but when I created the box, I just copied it from another box, so I suppose if this one was broken, others are, too. I have overlapping effects sometimes too, but I assumed this was due to rendering problems of the browser, and not because the html was incorrect. But I don't know. I reverted you because your change broke the box for me (it leaked somehow, affecting the ToC). But maybe I should ont interfere, sorry. dab (ᛏ) 19:26, 24 Dec 2004 (UTC)

right. that's ugly. what browser are you using? I think we'd best take this to the pump, where people will be more knowledgeable than me concerning wikisyntax. dab (ᛏ) 20:42, 10 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Good idea. I'll do that. AJD 01:17, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Southern g-dropping

Why do you think that dropping the terminal 'g' is not southern? Do you mean that it is not specific to the South, or that it doesn't happen in the South? Dropping the 'r' and 'g' is often considered the classic indication of a Southern accent. Huntin' camp, shootin' range, etc. Mauvila 05:08, 4 Jan 2005 (UTC)

[edit] The Newbie from Kingston

Thanks for setting me straight on the Kingston CDP article. I now understand the difference between CDP and TOWN. (I thought the population listed for Kingston was terribly low...). In a bonehead newbie maneuver I left a comment on your actual user page instead of here on your talk page. I have since deleted it. Please accept my apologies - I am learning. Thanks again.

So, Mr. Massachusetts Geography... Where are you from?! --AStanhope 20:07, 29 Jan 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Merge

Perhaps the page titled merge could benefit from your attention. Michael Hardy 02:51, 2 Feb 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Question about the origin of Yiddish word schmuck

Doesn't the word actually come from the word for jewel, and is used as a euphemism? Jayjg (talk) 19:27, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)

No, it doesn't. One, Schmuck is German for 'jewel', but not Yiddish. Two, if an English word had come from a Yiddish equivalent of the German word Schmuck, it would have been spelled and pronounced shmook in English, not shmuck (compare the English word shnook). The Yiddish word that the English schmuck comes from is shmok, not shmuk. AJD 23:50, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Hello,

I don't understand what the problem with using the name "Commonwealth of Massachusetts" is. On this page, and Boston article people keep changing the name from the full and common name to just Massachusetts. As one born and bred here, I find shorting the name distasteful and uncalled for. This was the Commonwealth of Massachusetts before there was an United States of America.

And quite frankly the essay on The Commonwealth is more important than a list of universities.

-Tomás

[edit] Æ-tensing

Thanks for you help on this! I think it's a really good article now! --Angr/comhrá 04:50, 17 Apr 2005 (UTC)

It's my pleasure. And thanks for your help, and for your work on all the English dialectology articles. AJD 05:13, 17 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I restored my edit on æ-tensing. Please give me a little time to back it up. Also, when Angr marked it as "citation needed" that prompts other users to help with that task. If you completely wipe it away, then it can't be brought to question. If I (or anybody else) can't find a citation after a reasonable time, then I will be happy to remove it myself. Statements that are not verifiable should be deleted, but I strongly believe that this is verifiable. ANAE isn't the only source available.LiuLanDi 07:23, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] baltic

thanks for negotiating with the balts on IE languages. Your statement

It is an unquestioned fact that Baltic is the most archaic of the living Indo-European families

is a bit strong though. It's "unquestioned" among Baltic students of Baltic, maybe, but that's as far as it goes. It is also undisputed that Baltic has a few very archaic features, certainly surprising for a language attested as late as the 2nd millennium AD, but that doesn't make the entire language "unquestionedly archaic". The Tacitus attestation may be debatable, but only if there is an unquestionably Baltic word (of which I haven't heard), not just because he mentions a Baltic tribe. dab (ᛏ) 13:22, 15 May 2005 (UTC)

Well, I was trying to give his as much of the benefit of the doubt as I could. And anyway, those two or three archaic features are rather more than other typical living IE languages have. I'm only a grad student and by no means an expert; but several of my professors have described Lithuanian to me as the most archaic living IE language, so it's not an out-of-the-mainstream claim. AJD 14:18, 15 May 2005 (UTC)
by all means, some features are incredibly archaic, especially if you only consider living languages. Other features aren't archaic at all, otoh. I have no problem with celebrating the archaic ones, as long as we don't imply the language is "practically PIE", or more archaic than (admittedly extinct as first languages, although there are fluent speakers) Ancient Greek or Sanskrit). dab (ᛏ) 14:35, 15 May 2005 (UTC)

[edit] RfC re Zivinbudas

I have started an RfC against Zivinbudas for his behavior on Indo-European languages. Please feel free to comment! --Angr/comhrá 22:36, 18 May 2005 (UTC)

Hi, thanks for signing! But if I understand RfC correctly, you have to show evidence of yourslef trying and failing to resolve the dispute with Z in order to sign under "Users certifying the basis for this dispute". Otherwise you sign under "Other users who endorse this summary". --Angr/comhrá 23:32, 18 May 2005 (UTC)
Do I put the evidence with my signature, or should I add it to the list labeled "Evidence of trying and failing to resolve the dispute"? AJD 00:07, 19 May 2005 (UTC)

[edit] ½

When you edited The Lion King, it seems that you have changed the link to The Lion King 1½ to read "11/2", thereby breaking the link. I have fixed those links, and I have also set up a redirect at 11/2, but for obvious reasons, we shouldn't link to 11/2. — Timwi 11:02, 24 May 2005 (UTC)

[edit] User:Zivinbudas

I've now officially requested an Arbitration against Zivinbudas. As one of the people who were involved in previous attempts at compromise with him, you might be interested in the case. Also, feel free to list yourself as one of the parties involved here. Halibutt 04:05, May 30, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Fake Ivy

You forgot to sign your vote here. Cheers! --Nohat 21:14, 7 Jun 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Gelt and mensch

It has been brought to my attention that "gelt" and "mensch" can be found on both the List of English words of Yiddish origin and Yiddish words and phrases used by English speakers. As I recall, you were quite careful to keep these lists separate, so I thought you might want to take care of this. Cheers. Jayjg (talk) 16:25, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Gelt I'm not worried about; it has different meanings as an English word ('chocolate coins') and as a Yiddish word used in English ('money'). Mensch I should fix. AJD 20:10, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Don't forget "gelt"

But shouldn't its used and original meaning be in one place? Grika 20:32, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I'm not sure what you mean here. The List of English words of Yiddish origin page says it means 'chocolate coins' in English and comes from the Yiddish word for 'money'. AJD 22:56, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Bricks

Just what is "not notable" supposed to mean? I went back and checked my DVD again before entering this item. There are TWO brick roads emanating from the same point, one yellow and one red. I don't get why you have a problem with pointing out this bit of trivia, which might be of interest to someone even if it's not of interest to you. Wahkeenah 30 June 2005 12:00 (UTC)

As Jerzy wrote in Talk:The Wizard of Oz (1939 movie),

"Non-notable" means in this context "not among the article-sized collection of most valuable aspects of the topic". The article is about as big as it should get, and specialized articles on notable sub-topics need to be created if WP is to have more detail on this film. (As to notability of articles, participating in WP:VfD discussions is probably the best way to develop a feel for the concept.) As to the RBR specifically, it is not the sort of thing that most viewers remember, nor is it important to understanding the film.

In other words, the red-brick road doesn't have any significance; it is never even referred to in the film! It is merely a background design element, less important than "Some Munchkins sleep in a large nest in a tree," which is not part of the Munchkin article because it is non-notable. It is not even certain that what appears to be a red-brick road is actually a road at all—since nobody refers to it or follows it, it could merely be a decorative brick path that doesn't lead anywhere. We don't know, and it's not salient enough to mention. AJD 1 July 2005 13:24 (UTC)

At least I'm not the only one to have noticed it and commented about it. I was thinking the complaints had something to do with "original research", which I take to mean that if I am the only one in the history of the universe that has observed something and/or it has not been published by someone else, then it "doesn't count". The original research concept is good, mostly for protection... if I cite a source that ultimately proves inaccurate, I have someone to blame ("I was led on by the treachery of others!" -- Alex, in "A Clockwork Orange"). However, according to the blurb you see when you edit the movie article, the article is overly long anyway. Maybe the article should be confined to the bare bones of the plot and there should be a separate page for much of the minutia that appears in the current article? Wahkeenah 2 July 2005 09:04 (UTC)

Revelation: The Red Brick Road is "referred to" by inference. Why does Glinda say "Follow the Yellow Brick Road"? So that Dorothy won't follow the Red Brick Road! If there was only one brick road, she wouldn't have to say "Follow the Yellow Brick Roard", but just "Follow the Brick Road", or maybe even just "Follow the Road". Yes??? That would change the song, of course. They wouldn't be singing "Follow the Yellow Brick Road". Maybe just, "Ease on down, ease on down the Road"! Wahkeenah 2 July 2005 09:15 (UTC)

[edit] Folk etymology

Thank you for steering the merge discussion on Folk etymology towards maintaining it as a technical linguistics term! I'd sort of drifted away from wikipedia for a while and just noticed the discussion now, and having cleaned up Folk etymology the first time through I would've been a sad mendel had it all been lumped together again. — mendel ☎ 17:03, July 13, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Philadelphia Request

Hi,

I would appreciate you looking at this page and making some comments in favor of the merger.

Category talk:Philadelphia, Pennsylvania

Thanks! evrik 17:02, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

  • I'm going to second that request! South Philly 01:43, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Cream soda

Oops. Wrong revision... Ignore this warning ;) Xinit 21:17, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] comment mistakenly left on user page

I'm the guy who wrote the sections on Yiddish genders and case endings, which you fixed up. I now have a username. I must admit that you know English and Yiddish better than I do. However, I think we should add genitive to the case endings chart. In some sentences it is very clear that genitive is the same as dative. For example: Dos iz di Hoyz fun der froy. Because the word froy preceded by a prepostion, just like (most) dative phrases. However in the following sentance, on might use nominative by mistake: Der man's hoyz is veyt. because hoyz is the subject (nominative), and "Der Man" is part of the complete subject, one might say "der Man" instead of "Dem Man". Please write to me what you think. Eliezerke 05:07, 9 August 2005 (UTC)

P.S. Thanks for fixing up what I wrote. p.p.s. I hope you can read the Yiddish words I wrote. I am not used to transliterating Yiddish ;

[edit] corrections to origins of Salem trials

I'm the person who inserted the paragraph on Cotton Mather and did not sign my name correctly by accident.Thanks AJD for proof reading it and correcting the syntax.Natalieduerinckx 22:19, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Indo-European languages and "Out of India"

Yeah, if you notice, both Proto-Indo-European language and Indo-European languages (and, unsurprisingly, Indo-Aryan migration) have been modified to present the"Out of India theory" as one of the "three main candidates," even though equating Vedic with PIE is trivially wrong. The problem is that there needs to be some sort of referenced source that shows the breakdown of relevant researchers on the topic in order to not give undue weight to OIT on the pages, but I haven't been able to find one after some superficial searching. Any ideas? --Xiaopo ℑ 15:30, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

I don't, off the top of my head, know of any such specific resource, sorry. AJD 17:37, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Inaccurate dialectology?

I noticed you deleted my distinction between upper-class and working-class Boston accents on the Harvard Yard page. Do you have a source that demonstrates they have the same accent? Ever listen to Raymond Flynn as compared with any of the Kennedys? Bruxism 04:03, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

Are you referring to this edit? Basically my objection was to drawing some kind of distinction between "pahk the cah in hahvud yahd" and "pak the caa in havid yad"—this kind of ad-hoc pronunciation spelling is basically meaningless, in that it doesn't indicate in a way that can be clearly understood what pronunciations you're actually referring to. Moreover, pronunciation spellings like "pak" are actively misleading—no one with a Boston accent pronounces the word "park" the same as "pack", which is what the spelling "pak" seems to suggest; at least "pahk" is correct within the accent. (That is, someone with a non-rhotic Boston accent would pronounce "park" the same as the hypothetical word "pahk".) No one, to my knowledge, has ever documented geographic dialect variation within a large city unconnected with social class and ethnicity—e.g., there's no "South Boston accent" different from a "Charlestown accent". There are effects of socioeconomic class, of course, but in the cities in which they've been studied in detail, the different socioeconomic classes exhibit the same phonological variables and processes, merely carried out to a greater or lesser degree. AJD 06:03, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] re: shire town

I think you'll find this conversataion of interest. User_talk:Yellowdesk#Shire town Yellowdesk 19:40, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Article in need of cleanup - please assist if you can

The article American English, to which you have helped contribute, has been flagged as requiring cleanup.

If possible, we would appreciate your assistance in cleaning up this article to bring it up to Wikipedia's quality standards. If you are unsure what the nature of the problem is, please discuss this on the article's talk page.
If you do not want to receive bot-generated messages on your talk page, please consider using the nobots template on your user talk page

[edit] Re>

Hello. Naming conventions for American geographical issues is Blahblah, State - for populated place like village or town, and Blahblah (State) for geographical landforms like rivers, bays, mountains etc. This convention also applies when a different features with the same name appear in the same state. - Darwinek 20:39, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Well, it is real mess there, I can't find it neither. But you can trust me. Ask at WP:NC talk page or ask specific user e.g. from Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (settlements)/U.S. convention change (August 2006). At NC talk page you usually get the answer. - Darwinek 21:10, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] MIlton

Hey man, I appreciate you trying to help out the typos and fix the mistakes on the towns ans cities of Ma. But the majority of the milton Irish do live in the neighborhood of east Milton. If you are familiar with the area you would now that west milton is wealthy and more diverse. Thanks again. (posted by 67.105.229.162 in User:Ajd instead of here)

[edit] Hal Gill

Thanks for removing that erroneous Hal Gill factoid from the Concord, Massachusetts page. As far as I can tell, Gill was born at Emerson Hospital (the regional hospital located in Concord) but actually grew up elsewhere, like a lot of other notable personalities from the western suburbs of Boston (Steve Carell and Tom Glavine come to mind). Venicemenace 16:52, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Quincy

Hey, thanks a bunch for clarifying the pronunciation issue in the Quincy article - I was about to do the same thing myself! We Qwinky folks can get our Irish fairly well up over that bit. :-) Take care! --Mary quite contrary (hai?) 22:47, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Census Designated Place

Please clarify that particular sentence. I still don't get it. Are you referencing to New England CDPs? Thanks. --Moreau36 23:32, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for clarifying, but next time be a little more clear so that it's understood eariler. Because according to census guidelines, a CDP can NOT be in a municipality, however, a community (who was paritally annexed by the neighboring city) can. Thus, only the unincorporated portion is counted as a CDP. Thanks. --Moreau36 23:39, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Merge proposal: incorporated place and census designated place into place (United States Census Bureau)

While caught up in the argument about whether we should use the term "census designated place" as the primary term to refer to unincorporated towns and villages I did a bit of research. I think what I found was interesting and useful. However I found it awkward to incorporate the information into the census designated place article, partly because the material also belongs in the incorporated place article. Also, a lot of the CDP article explains how a CDP resembles, but is not, an incorporated place where the incorporated place article is practically empty. I don't think there is enough unique material for three separate articles so I'm proposing a merger into one article named "place (United States Census Bureau)". I have already written the article that explains the terms in a logical order. I am asking for opinions, edits, etc. from other people who have written on the issue. See Talk:Place (United States Census Bureau) for more information. Rsduhamel 00:59, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Buses WikiProject

I notice that you have edited lists of bus routes recently. You might be interested in helping with the new WikiProject buses, especially the proposed Bus route list guide. We are also working out when a bus route should have its own article and other issues. --NE2 15:27, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Notable Residents

Hello, you recently removed John A. Bailey from the notable residents of Waltham, MA. Mr. Bailey is known worldwide for his lid designs and plastic innovations which are used by millions of people every day. Please revert your modification.

http://www.google.com/patents?id=Kz42AAAAEBAJ&dq=john+bailey+lid

[edit] Dual Senate elections precedent

Thanks for clearing that up, I was moving a little too fast to remember those Kansas elections. --JMurphy 06:23, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] The Eleventh Hour (book)

I did NOT copy the solution to that cypher from a website!

It took me one-and-a-half hours to come up with that solution!

But I still kinda knew it would be deleted…oh, well…


66.31.126.225 15:47, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Taskforce

You are being recruited by the Salem Witch Trials Task Force, a collaborative project committed to improving Wikipedia's coverage of the Salem Witch Trials. Join us! 
Psdubow 16:04, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] "Detournement"

The word "detourn" is not vandalism. It's a word coined by the Situationists to describe precisely what this organization does to billboards. SmashTheState 21:35, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Northern American English

I am glad you provided a source, but here is where there is some disagreement in wikipedia articles: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_American claims the standard developed from another area of the Midwest and used Labov as a source. So, now I am confused is it the North Midwest or the Mid Midwest... Azalea pomp 04:48, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] More American English

The General American and Northern American English articles need more sources. For example, the shaded area map in the General American article is not sourced and does not reflect one dialect or an area with similar pronunciations. I have looked at the map in the book American English by Walt Wolfram and Natalie Schilling-Estes (page 105, 1998). Well, if Labov says G. American was based on Northern American, who am I to argue...although I have never read that anywhere else except in that article. Interesting how the Standard was based on one dialect (Northern) yet now sounds more like another (Midland) although Northern and Midland do not share the same origins... Azalea pomp 23:59, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Newton

Thanks for your recent reverts for lack of notability in the Notable people section in Newton, Massachusetts. Perhaps you can look at People from Newton, Massachusetts which was recently spun off from the main Newton article. Edits which were previously deleted on notability issues several times in the main article have reappeared in the the spinoff article. clariosophic 11:59, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Suspected Copyvios

On 13 September you suspected a copyright violation at Clinton, Massachusetts, but left only a talk page note. Next time you have such a suspicion, please act, don't just talk. An IP editor asked for the entire page to be deleted today, and a faster moving admin might have deleted the entire page instead of patching and repairing as I did. Incidentally, the history section of that page now needs to be written again, which is within your scope of interest. GRBerry 16:44, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] New England town center CDPs

Hi. You have edited New England town articles in the past and I would like your opinion on a prooposal of mine. I have suggested merging town center CDPs articles into the town article. Please see Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Vermont#Merging town center CDP articles into town articles and Talk:St. Johnsbury, Vermont#CDP change for details. I'd like to hear your comments about whether the town center and the town should be treated as two different places or is my merger acceptable. Please see St. Johnsbury, Vermont (my most recent version) for an example of my proposal. Thanks. --Polaron | Talk 20:15, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Commonwealth School: Jay Featherstone

You reverted my listing of Jay Featherstone as Joseph "Jay" Featherstone. He was always referred to as "Jay Featherstone" or "Mr. Featherstone" when I was a student there, and I frankly found it quite strange to see him listed as "Joseph Featherstone", although that was indeed the name that was embossed on the school stationery.

I had added the often-used nicknames of the other headmasters who had commonly used ones, because I didn't want the article to be inconsistent. However, I don't want to get into an edit war. So, User:Ajd, would you find it acceptable if only Mr. Featherstone was listed with the nickname? I'd put in:

Joseph "Jay" Featherstone
Please let me know if you still consider the nickname to be frivolous.  I believe I have explained above why I don't think it is frivolous, at least in his case.  I've also a comment about this on the talk page for Commonwealth School, soliciting feedback; feel free to reply there or on my talk page.  Thanks.  Saugart (talk) 03:08, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Philadelphia Accent

This is about my edits that you continue to revert in this article. I am from the Midwest (if that's what you mean by "Midland") and no one in my town pronounces the vowel sound in words like "row" the same way a southerner would. A person who pronounced it that way in my town would be made fun of terribly. Also, "Don", "dawn" and "on" all rhyme with each other. They are merged as [ɑ]. Many people speak this way across the United States. As much as I respect Labov, sometimes I question how he gets his information. What possible method could he use to find out how every single person in this great country speaks? I would rather do my own research and make my own conclusions. 208.104.45.20 (talk) 05:47, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

"Midland" specifically refers to the southern part of the Midwest, south of the area subject to the Northern Cities Vowel Shift; it includes Columbus, Cincinnati, Indianapolis, and St. Louis, but not Cleveland or Chicago. The merger of the vowels of Don and dawn is in progress in the Midland, but by no means complete. Doing your own research and making your own conclusions is fine, but not for Wikipedia. What Wikipedia (ideally) uses is information available in independent, verifiable, and hopefully scholarly sources. So I'll take the published scientific research of America's preeminent dialectologist as the source we should use for articles of American dialectology. He doesn't have to find out "how every single person in this great country speaks"; he merely has to take samples and describe his research methodology. AJD (talk) 06:21, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

The merger of the vowels in "Don" and "Dawn" is complete. I'm from there and you are not. I pronounce them both exactly alike just like millions of others across the country. I would still rather do my own research, thanks. If Labov doesn't know how everyone in the United States speaks, then how does he now for sure what is going on linguistically? Stop being a snobby, arrogant douchebag please. You follow me around on every dialect article on Wikipedia, and argue with everything I say. You're such a fucking asshole. Suck my cock please sir and then leave me the fuck alone and go masturbate to the Phonological Atlas of North America. Thanks. 208.104.45.20 (talk) 21:02, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Your recent edit to Sweeney Todd

Hi, the recent edit you made to Sweeney Todd: The Demon Barber of Fleet Street appeared to be unconstructive and was reverted. The edit preceeding yours did not need to be reverted, as it was perfectly accurate. In the future, please do not revert changes without a just reason specified in the edit summary. Thanks, Mizu onna sango15/水女珊瑚15 06:24, 11 February 2008 (UTC).

[edit] conceit

Check out my note to User talk:Twir... "Notion" is closer to "concept" than "conceit". Robert K S (talk) 03:48, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

"Notion" is closer to "concept" than it is to "conceit", it's true. But since people inexplicably don't want to use "conceit"—well, "notion" is closer to "conceit" than "concept" is. AJD (talk) 05:15, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Milton, MA

Ajd, I was pleased to notice that you reverted an anonymous edit on the article for Milton, MA that included unverifiable information about the "irishness" of East Milton. The article has been afflicted by IP and single-use accounts that are intent on including this info for at least a year now, and I'm not sure how to go about curbing the trend beyond constantly reverting. A major difficulty here is that the editors frequently are unfamiliar with Wikipedia's policy or culture, and don't know how to engage in discussion at the talk page. I myself am relatively new to Wikipedia, so I'd be very interested in any ideas you might have to keep this problem from persisting. Take care, SaintCyprian Talk 20:24, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Speculation

Could you explain how my yesterday's edit was a speculation? I mean you can't deny it that that award was introduced when the movie Shrek got it, so what's the speculation in my edit? 82.148.70.2 (talk) 09:06, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

The speculation is that the reason no other animated film has been nominated for Best Picture is because the award for Best Animated Film was introduced. Animated films are still eligible for Best Picture, after all. AJD (talk) 15:01, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] English words of Hebrew origin

Thank you for your edits to this page. I've been using the Online Etymological Dictionary to make some improvements on the page (although I'm editing from an Internet cafe so I can't add the original Hebrew at the moment, only a transliteration). Anyway, this dictionary lists several words such as cider and balm as having Hebrew, and not related Semitic, origin, so do you have a source that they're not from Hebrew? I'm putting words of disputed Hebrew/Phoenician origin, such as rhotacism and alphabet, in the Hebrew section, since it's almost impossible to tell which of two mutually intelligible languages these words come from, and ultimately, it doesn't matter much. And since this is a list of words of possible Hebrew origin, words like brouhaha, copacetic and gun moll merit inclusion on the page, and listing them as "possibly of Hebrew origin" is redundant.--Yolgnu (talk) 00:43, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

I'm referring to the American Heritage Dictionary and the Oxford English Dictionary for my etymological information. I take these as more authoritative than a web site by a non-linguist with no citations. The dictionaries say things like "from a Semitic source akin to Hebrew...". I don't regard "copacetic" as being "possibly of Hebrew origin" just because some guy with a web site says it might be, when no reputable dictionary offers this as a possibility. AJD (talk) 04:13, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
The Online Etymology Dictionary is the most accessible etymology source available on the net, so I wouldn't knock it too hard. Now, several words, such as cider, gun moll, hyssop and abacus are given as being of definite Hebrew origin by most dictionaries, and I don't think one dictionary can simply override all the rest. A Hebrew origin of brouhaha is also quite a popular theory, so I think we should leave it there (the world's not going to end if one word is incorrectly there, is it?). On another note, I don't think words deserve to be included here just because Hebrew is the only surviving Semitic language to have a cognate. If they're not of Canaanite (ie. Phoenician) origin, I think it's misleading to have them here.--Yolgnu (talk) 09:16, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
Moving the discussion to Talk:List of English words of Hebrew origin. AJD (talk) 14:36, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Congrats

Wishing you all the best on your birthday! From the Wikipedia Birthday Committee.
Not my birthday, friend. AJD (talk) 12:15, 21 May 2008 (UTC)