User talk:Angr/Archive 19

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archive This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Contents

Point of View (HL Mod)

Hi, sorry if this is not the currect place to ask this but some time ago you helped me by giving me the, at the time, recently deleted Azure Sheep article (saved under the snewerl user). Could you do the same for the also recently deleted Point of View (HL Mod) article? Or point me to the currect place so I can ask it there? Also could you give me the last version and the version before the page was remade (that contains more text). Thanks Snewerl 15:39, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

Okay, it's at User:Snewerl/POV. —Angr 15:47, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
Thanks! But any change of getting me also a previous version of that article that contained alot more text? - Snewerl 23:10, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
Can you give me an approximate date? —Angr 05:55, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
Not sure... Maybe 3 months ago -Snewerl 18:59, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
Thanks :) -Snewerl 15:55, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

Halloween article

Hi, would you consider semi-protecting the Halloween article? Addhoc 20:39, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

Not as long as it's still linked to from the Main Page. That's strongly discouraged unless the vandalism is coming so fast and furious that we can't keep on top of it. That doesn't seem to be the case with Halloween yet, though it's still early in the U.S. I'm in Europe, so if it does get worse, it'll be better to ask an admin who's in North America. (I'm going to bed soon!) —Angr 20:42, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
Ok, thanks - I didn't know. Addhoc 20:44, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Colbert Report recurring elements

Being the closing admin of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Colbert Report recurring elements, would you please comment on Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2006 November 1#The Colbert Report recurring elements?--TBCΦtalk? 14:27, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

I've responded to your comment. Feel free to reply.--TBCΦtalk? 14:53, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

User:Just the way

It appears that he's been busy; see Category:Wikipedia sockpuppets of Semlow Jayjg (talk) 18:09, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, I noticed. :-( —Angr 18:20, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

Dryden

So, you post on Dryden, NY, huh? I wasn't aware that anybody even knew that place existed. 128.218.250.139

Well, I used to live in the township (on top of Snyder Hill on Genung Circle), so I'm aware of its existence! —Angr 07:27, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

Highway?

How do you know my name? Highway Grammar Enforcer! 07:56, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

I didn't. Talking about allowing the "old Adam" to die so that the "new Adam" may be born is a common metaphor in Christian theology. (Google for phrases like "old Adam die" to see some examples.) If your real name is Adam, it's just a coincidence. Sorry if I spooked you! —Angr 08:04, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

STICKAM

Why did you delete it?

I didn't. I just prevented it from being re-created after it had been deleted four times for being advertising. I also deleted the various redirect pages that were pointing to the deleted page. —Angr 20:46, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

Munster/Ulster tension

Browsing Google Books it does seem that the tension you mentioned between Ulster Irish and the other dialects is sometimes referred to: [1] Of course this kind of information doesn't really belong in the phonology article except insofar as social status / prestige can be linked to particular phonological characteristics - dialectical differences in morphology and vocabulary being irrelevant here. Using examples from English I was thinking about things like glottalized plosives having low prestige while [ʍ] pronunciation of 'wh' having (in some contexts) high prestige. Of course if Irish doesn't actually have anything like that then I can't very well fault you for not writing about it :) Haukur 11:39, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

I'm not registered with Google Books so I can't see that page, but I suspect that has more to do with morphology and lexicon than phonology anyway. Offhand I can't think of anything phonological that's really stigmatized or really elevated in Irish. —Angr 11:46, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
It's easy enough to register with Google Books and it has often helped me find reliable sources since I don't have easy access to a university library where I currently live. Here's a quote from that book: "The resulting class-to-class mixture from teachers of both spoken and written Irish led to confusion on the part of learners, and within Gaeltacht areas to a perception by native speakers that what was described as 'Dublin Irish' was being foisted upon them. ... learners from outside the Gaeltacht accomodated their pronunciations towards norms representing a common core for each of the three Gaeltacht areas in which they had acquired their Irish" Haukur 12:10, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

Peer review

You answered most of my questions to my satisfaction - including what was going to be my follow-up question about the phonemes in sp st sc. As you probably realized, what I was getting at is that it might be simpler to view the (using broad transcriptions) /b/ + /h/ > /p/ rule as a /p/ + /h/ > /pʰ/ "rule". But of course I don't want you to add original research to the article - this was just idle speculation from an amateur unfamiliar with the language :) Haukur 12:49, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, but the aspiration is really quite weak in word-internal position like scuabfaidh. [skuəphi:] just isn't a reasonable transcription of it. I don't have actual phonetic studies on the question, but I suspect the VOT of the [p] of scuabfaidh (and other similar words) is positive, but rather small. —Angr 12:59, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
Okay, you're the expert. Haukur 15:00, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

A map with isoglosses, akin to this, would be sweet. Haukur 15:00, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

Sure would. It would also be OR since none is already in existence. This is a woefully underresearched field. —Angr 15:01, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

Are you familiar with this work:

  • Wagner, Heinrich (1958-1969). Linguistic atlas and survey of Irish dialects (four volumes). Dublin: Dublin Institute for Advanced Studies.

Four volumes and the word 'atlas' in the title make it sound tasty. Haukur 15:34, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

Yes, I've seen it. I referred to it often when writing my dissertation. No isoglosses in it, though. Just a bunch of dots with the pronunciations of individual words. No analysis, just raw data. —Angr 15:42, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

Well, reality seems to have shot down just about everything I've suggested adding to the article :) The main thing remaining is that I'd be interested in a synchronic comparison with the phonology of related languages. The article says stuff like: "The most interesting aspects of Irish phonotactics revolve around the behavior of consonant clusters." What I'd like to know is whether this is unique to Irish or whether it's present in some form in related languages.

I'd also be interested in what influence Irish phonology has had on the phonology of Irish English. Even if there actually is very little influence (I have no idea) that in itself would be interesting to know. Haukur 16:39, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

Oh, and one thing of very little consequence - should the article be converted to use Irish English spelling (behavior > behaviour etc.)? Haukur

Well, if someone else wants to do it, I won't revert, but since I wrote virtually the entire text of the article myself and I use American spelling, I don't feel any great need to change it. I'll see what I can find in the way of comparison with Scots Gaelic and Manx (I may have to break down and use my own dissertation as a source, something I was diligently avoiding doing up till now). Irish has had an effect on Hiberno-English phonology (Irish substrate effects are the reason Hiberno-English has [t̪ d̪] for [θ ð], for example); I'll see what I can find about that too. —Angr 17:38, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

Nice to see the expansions you're working on. One more thing - if you want to get the article featured (which I'm not sure you do, I seem to remember you not being overly fond of the FA system) you're probably going to have to add some images. Even though no really relevant or illustrative images can logically be found people will still want to have something to break up the text. Here are some ideas if you want to go down that path:

  • If we can't have isoglosses then we can at least show the Gaeltacht and mark the place names mentioned in the article. In contrast with the ideas below this would even be useful - or at least I think it would make the article slightly easier to follow for readers like me who aren't familiar with Irish geography. It's easier to make sense of which dialects are close if you can link them to places on a map which are close.
  • A beauty shot of the Aran Islands with some vapid caption like: "The dialect of the Aran Islands is characterized by lengthened vowels and foo and bar."
  • A picture of John Q. Scholar with a caption about how he was an important early field worker or something.
  • A scan of a page of some important text (I see you've got Finck already scanned in).

Haukur 22:44, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

No, indeed I am philosophically opposed to FAs, but of course I'm not opposed to making articles as good and as interesting as they can be. Commons:Image:Gaeltacht.svg exists already. It doesn't have labels, but they'd be easy enough to add. I don't think I'd have the heart to add a beautiful shot of Irish landscape with a phonology-related caption. A page from Finck is a possibility when I get around to writing the "history of the field" section. And I only wish I had a photo of a relevant scholar, but Irish phonologists seem to be an awfully camera-shy lot. (Well, there is one person listed in the references of whom a free image is available at Commons, but modesty forbids.) There are pictures of O'Rahilly and Ó Cuív here, but there's no info on who the photographer is or anything, so they can't be used. —Angr 22:58, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
Yeah ;) Besides, I liked the one on the beach better and, alas, you seem to have deleted it. I guess the world wasn't ready. Haukur 23:09, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
It would be amusing to have this incredibly arcane subject as Today's Featured Article on the Main Page someday, with that particular photo you remember to go alongside it, but no... —Angr 23:12, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

Saxony

I have reverted your move. I feel it was done without discussion. You should have used WP:RM or at least dicussed the issue at the proper forum. I do not consider Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Germany to be the proper forum, as this is a place for ethnic POW pushing. -- Petri Krohn 16:16, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

As I just said on your talk page, it was your original move that was done without discussion and that should have used WP:RM. There was discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Germany#Saxony, which you linked to from the bottom of Talk:Free State of Saxony so that anyone who wanted to discuss it knew that was the place to go. —Angr 16:19, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
You were the one who continued the discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Germany, and said so at the bottom of Talk:Free State of Saxony. To accuse WikiProject Germany of being a place for ethnic POV pushing is slander and trolling and I strongly suggest you cease and desist. —Angr 16:23, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
Yes, my original move was done without WP:RM, I was bold. There was however no reason for WP:RM, the article Free State of Saxony did not exist, and the move could be done without administrator help. This move has stood uncontested for two months. I feel YOU are abusing your administrator privileges by doing the move without WP:RM or even a proper move proposal & discussion at Free State of Saxony or Saxony. -- Petri Krohn 16:38, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
P.S. I am sorry if I insulted you or our German editors by impling that they are POV pushers. I do not however feel that Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Germany is neutral gounds and I feel very uncomftable discussing controversal issues there. -- Petri Krohn 16:41, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
As I said, doing the original move without WP:RM was okay. But moving it back after I moved it back, which I did after several people had discussed the move and agreed that the article on the modern Bundesland should be at Saxony, was not okay. You didn't have to use WP:RM a month ago, but you should have used it today. As for POV pushing I think it's awfully ironic that back in July you were calling me "anti-German" and now you're calling me a German POV-pusher. —Angr 16:43, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
No, I disagree, I feel it is you who should have used WP:RM. Using administrator privileges to bypass WP:RM to promote your point of view is not right. -- Petri Krohn 17:04, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
It isn't my point of view. It's the consensus of the discussion that arose after your original move. —Angr 17:41, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

Irish phonology peer review

Hi, Angr! While I am incredibly flattered that you considered me as someone who might have useful input in this peer review, I doubt I can add anything of value. After all, I am just a learner, and one without any academic goals at that. At this time, the article answers all my questions, even those I didn't know I had, and those that I won't even think of asking for quite a while. That said, I assure you that if I find any issues with this article, you'll be the first to know. Thank you for the tremendous expansion--I was going to hungrily read the new variant once you are done with editing it, and since it looks that you are, I am printing it out as I type this.--Ag Foghlaim 16:52, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

Mostly what I was hoping for from you was input as to whether it's in fact comprehensible by the interested non-expert. Sometimes I have difficulty judging that sort of thing. —Angr 17:00, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
I am planning on carefully reading this article in the next couple of days on my study time. If I see anything that's unclear, I will let you know, but please bear in mind that some of the fairly trivial things may be unclear to me because I am no linguist.--Ag Foghlaim 18:45, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
That's the point. The article should be understandable by non-linguists. —Angr 19:33, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
Well, it depends on how much slack you are prepared to cut to a said non-linguist. I, on one hand, while not a linguist, having studied the Irish series now know more about linguistics than your average Joe who wants (and can!) learn a language without ever bothering to find out what IPA stands for, let alone try figure out the details. I don't mind it, because I like linguistics in general, enjoy the learning process, and don't have much of a choice of learning materials anyway, but for someone who just wants to learn a language a set of instructions on how to open one's mouth, where to put the tongue, and how to pass air through the throat, all written in layman's terms, could be of a lot more practical use (incidentally, and I kid you not, that's how I learned English--our family simply could not afford a tape recorder, so I was using a lot of library books, most of which were written in that manner). Of course, re-working Irish phonology on such terms would make for a lousy encyclopedic article. I am thus wondering what kind of balance you are looking for in this article and what kind of background you expect from an interested learner such as myself. I might then be able to tailor my comments so as to filter out the most trivial remarks which would not be possible to comply with without making major sacrifices of the article's quality. And sorry for the long rant--I somehow always have trouble expressing my thoughts in just one or two sentences :)--Ag Foghlaim 20:04, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

POV - please inform rather than delete

Moin Angr, I'd appreciate if you could inform people (incl. me :o)) if you believe their additions are POVs--rather than just delete sections. BTW, I've reversed the changes on his genitive... even though as a German speaker you may agree that citing sources for calling Bastian Sick's books "humourous" is just like citing someone for the humour of, say, The Life of Brian, Arsenic and Old Lace, or Die Feuerzangenbowle. Some knowledge is simply cultural knowledge (cf. de:Bastian Sick). Shouldn't a link to the country's WK page be enough then? Just curious... Cheers, --Ibn Battuta 18:41, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

I haven't even read the books, but calling them "humorous" (which incidentally is the correct spelling even in British English) is expressing an opinion, which is not encyclopedic. The claim that the books are humorous doesn't need to be cited; it needs to be removed. And is not common Wikipedia practice to inform other users when one has reverted them. Most people keep the pages they're interested in on their watchlists, and discussion about content is best held on the article's own talk page so that other editors can also participate. —Angr 18:55, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

Dissertation quote

“ A child learning Ulster Irish would have no reason to assign two different underlying representations for the endings in these forms. ... I believe, therefore, that Munster and Ulster (as well as Connacht) have separate underlying representations, as well as separate phonemic and surface sound inventories ”

I find this refreshing. Haukur 21:03, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, so did I. Working with Ó Siadhail 1989 is very frustrating because of his instance on deriving all forms from one single pan-dialectal UR. —Angr 21:16, 7 November 2006 (UTC)


Image talk:Michaeljacksonmugshot.png

Would you kindly delete this? I asked for deletion because of "insulting content (although I concur with the contributors) and inappropriate." And some Funnypedian removed the SDC-tag. Thanks in advance, Sarazyn • TALK • DE 16:02, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

Irish phonology peer review, part two

Hi, Angr! I hope you'll forgive me for posting my feedback here on your talk page instead of on the peer review page. The reasons for this are, first, that I don't want to make a complete ass of myself in public with my ridiculously primitive "insights" (especially considering the quality of the feedback you received so far), and second, more importantly, that I am going to cleverly intermingle my feedback with some questions of, ehh, personal nature (meaning that I have another barrage of learner's questions coming your way).

I devoted a full hour to carefully reading the newly updated article on Irish phonology. I can honestly say that it is an incredibly dense read, but it is very rewarding in that it makes the reader think and pay attention instead of leasurely cruising from start to end and remembering very little afterwards. That said, some of the portions were very hard for me to comprehend, and the meaning of others escaped me altogether. Below is the list of questions/comments that I had as I was reading the article. As I warned before, the answers some of the questions may be of very little benefit to the article, but they would be of big help to me as a learner.

  1. Consonants#Allophones
    1. Why is the first vowel in the IPA transcription of fómhar /uː/ and not /oː/? In general, do you think it would be beneficial to synchronize Irish phonology with Irish orthography? I realize the latter is just a collection of tendencies, and I found most of the ways around that limitation, but full synchronization (which, admittedly, is a lot of work) would be of immense benefit to new learners/readers.
    2. This section states that the labiodental fricatives /fˠ, fʲ, vʲ/... have bilabial allophones in many dialects, yet there are no examples. I, for one, am not even 100% sure what "bilabial allophones" are. Also, what are the dialects in which this phenomenon is the most developed? De Bhaldraithe's statement is that the distribution is dependent partly on environment, partly on the individual speaker's preferences. Is it possible to elaborate on this? How would one know the exact factor for any given observed substitution?
    3. The palatal stops... may be articulated as true palatals... or as palatovelars... What are the factors for the choice between the two? Is this also dependent on environment and/or individual preferences?
    4. Why is the an combination in scanradh transcribed as /au/, as is a in is cam? I don't recall this phenomenon discussed further down in the vowels section. There is a footnote for scanradh, but I don't understand the logic behind the pronunciation of the words listed in the footnotes. Are these exceptions? If so, it might be helpful to mark them as such.
  2. Consonants#Fortis and lenis sonorants
    1. The section goes to great length explaining the fortis and lenis types, but what it misses is a description of how these types are different in real speech. I suppose a sound file would illustrate that the best, but meanwhile may be the difference should be briefly mentioned in the text? By using analogies, perhaps?
  3. Vowels (overall)
    1. One of the peer reviewers mentioned that pictures would need to be added if this article is ever to become featured. While having a shot of Irish scenery would be a feast to a tired eye, you are, of course, right that the benefit of such picture is very questionable. A labeled map of Gaeltachts would be great to have, though. I also have another idea for you, although I don't know if it's feasible. When I was learning English, many of my textbooks included a phonetics section. In it, each sound was often illustrated with a picture of a human head, showing the exact location of the tongue and outlined of the tongue and throat movements. Here is an example of what I mean; I am sure you've seen something like this before. I found those pictures to be the next best thing to being able to hear what the sound sounds like, and even with the sound files they would make a great addition (and would take care of all picture needs!).
  4. Vowels#Vowel backness
    1. Unless otherwise noted, however, they largely hold for other Munster and Connacht accents as well. The word "largely" makes my heart sink, because from this point onward it's impossible to say whether the spellings are the same for all variants, or the variations were deemed by you to be too insignificant to be mentioned. Sorry, but I am that nitpicky. Any way to fix this?
  5. Vowels#Open vowels
    1. Why is sh in a Sheáin transcribed as /ç/? When is sh pronounced as /ç/, and when--as /h/?
  6. Vowels#Nasalized vowels
    1. Is it possible to give other examples instead of an tsneachta and sa tsnámh? I see that this phenomenon is expained further down in the Phonotactics section, but at this point of the article it was rather sudden and confusing. I was not sure whether it was a separate phenomenon, or one somehow related to nasalization.
  7. Phonotactics#Word-initial consonant clusters
    1. Stríoc is explicitly transcribed as /ɕtʲɾʲiːk/. The Irish People Irish course I am using specifically mentions this word as an exception (pronounced with initial /sˠ/, not /ɕ/) in Lesson 72. Is there anything you can add on this?
    2. Is the epethentic vowel present in words cnoc, mná, gnaoi, and tnúth when the coronal nasals are replaced with /ɾˠ, ɾʲ/?
  8. Phonological processes#Vowel-initial words
    1. ...[at abstract level] vowel-initial words... all begin with either a front or back glide that triggers either palatalization or velarization... Is there a way to determine what is being triggered in each particular case?
  9. Phonological processes#Lengthening before fortis sonorants
    1. I could not understand the paragraph based on Ó Sé 2000:40-42, in particular what an "alternation" is and what logic stands behind the table that follows this paragraph.

I hope all this makes sense. Please let me know if any of my questions and suggestions are unclear. Thanks!--Ag Foghlaim 17:33, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

Hi, thanks for your comments, they will definitely be helpful in getting the article to a point where it's appropriate for more general audiences and not just trained linguists. To answer some of your specific questions:
  1. fómhar has [u:] in some dialects because the rule that mid vowels are raised to high vowels before nasals (including the formerly nasal mh) applies to ó in many dialects. This reminds me that I didn't discuss that raising in the article at all, so I'll add a new section about it presently.
  2. F and bh/mh/v are often pronounced with the bilabial fricatives [ɸ, β] instead of the labiodental [f, v]. Unfortunately, the published sources aren't very specific about when which versions are used. The same is true for palatal vs. palatovelar (not that there's a huge difference between the two in the first place -- any individual speaker probably uses both interchangeably without even hearing a difference)
  3. Sometimes the standard orthography does a very poor job of representing a particular dialect's pronunciation of a word. In the dialect I got the info from, scanradh happens to be pronounced as if spelled scamhradh. The pronunciation of cam is /kaum/ per the discussion of lengthening/diphthongization before fortis sonorants.
  4. Exactly how the fortis and lenis sonorants differ changes from dialect to dialect, as I tried to show in the chart. There isn't one unified pronunciation of the two types.
  5. Images of the vocal tract like the one you link to are fine for consonants, but not much use for vowels as the differences between nearby vowels are too slight to be easily seen in them. Also, they belong more on the pages about the sound in question than in this article.
  6. I'm sorry if your heart sinks at the word "largely", but this page really isn't intended to help you get from spelling to pronunciation. (That's what Irish orthography is for.) This page is for describing how Irish is pronounced by native speakers, regardless of the spelling. The realizations of sh are also discussed at Irish orthography, though some discussion of the alternations between [h] and [ç] would probably not be amiss here.
  7. I'll see what I can find about stríoc. There's no epenthesis when cn gn is pronounced cr gr, because epenthesis is found only in Munster, and cr gr for cn gn is found only outside Munster.
  8. "...[at abstract level] vowel-initial words... all begin with either a front or back glide that triggers either palatalization or velarization... Is there a way to determine what is being triggered in each particular case?" Well, from the orthography, yes (if it starts with e or i, palatalization is triggered; if it it starts with a, o, or u, velarization is triggered), but from a purely phonological point of view, no. It has to be included as part of the lexical information of the word.
  9. "Alternation" in the table refers to the fact that some forms of a word (e.g. the nominative case) have one sound (e.g. a long vowel) with other related forms (e.g. the genitive) have another sound (e.g. a short vowel).

—Angr 18:31, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your explanations, Angr. I largely find them to be helpful and to the point :) At least I am glad all that long rant above wasn't for naught--I see it prompted you to add two items to the to-do list. Me happy--it can now be justified that User:Ag Foghlaim isn't just a selfish parasitic account used solely for personal gain--he can contribute something too :)
Just a few follow-up comments, however:
3. Would it be feasible to explicitly mark pronunciations, so the reader would know exactly which dialect they come from?
4. Is there at least one commmon trait for the way fortis and lenis sonorants are pronounced in various dialects? Either way, do you think this deserves mentioning in this section?
5. I understand what you mean. Still, I think that having a picture for each consonant would be helpful. Having those pictures in articles about sounds is great, but since those articles aren't exactly Irish-specific, I see no harm in duplicating them here as well. Plus, you do need pictures, right? These would make for far more useful illustrations than the pictures of beautiful scenery.
6. I cannot believe that I missed something in Irish orthography--I all but pray on that thing! The way my copy of that article printed out, there is a page break right through the second portion of the sh section--one dealing with /h/ vs. /ç/, so I always glanced over it. My fault.
7. Could you add that epenthesis is only found in Munster to Irish orthography? Before I read the phonology article and your comment above, I was under impression that it is common for all dialects.
Again, thanks!--Ag Foghlaim 19:35, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
Epenthesis in words like gorm is common to all dialects. Epenthesis in words like cnoc, however, is found only in Munster. —Angr 19:38, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
Oh, and I don't know what the Irish People are talking about when they say the s in str (as in stríoc) is always broad. They're probably drunk. I've never seen any phonetic description of Irish make that claim. —Angr 19:44, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
They might well be--they are Irish, after all :) All in all, the whole course is pretty pathetic. I find it very convenient in a sense that it provides direction better than anything else available out there, but I have to re-check virtually every claim they make. This could have been a wonderful course had it not been so horribly implemented in practice. They give very simple and easy-to-understand explanations to everything, but the downside is that their explanations are often incorrect and typo-ridden (I am especially fond of their explanation of present habitual via English examples such as "I be sick" in Lesson 46). Well, that's the fate of a student of Irish, I guess.
Anyway, that mistrust was the main reason I decided to check with you about pronunciation of stríoc.--Ag Foghlaim 20:13, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
That's funny about "I be sick", and they almost got it right. In Hiberno-English, there is a contrast between "I am sick" and "I do be sick", while in AAVE there is a contrast between "I sick" and "I be sick"; in both cases the first refers to the current state of affairs, and the second to something habitual. But I don't know of any modern dialect that contrasts "I am sick" with "I be sick". (Old English would have made the contrast as Ic eom sēoc vs. Ic bēo sēoc.) —Angr 20:20, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

Indo-European s-mobile

Hi there. I've done a fair bit on Indo-European s-mobile today and would now value feedback. Thanks. --Doric Loon 20:28, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

Okay, I'll take a look. —Angr 20:33, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Ulritz

This case is now closed and the results have been published at the link above.

Ulritz and Rex Germanus are placed on revert parole. They are limited to one revert per page per week, excepting obvious vandalism. Further, they are required to discuss any content reversions on the page's talk page. Ulritz and Rex Germanus are placed on probation for one year. They may be banned from any page or set of pages for disruptive edits, such as edit warring or incivility. All blocks and bans and are to be logged at Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Ulritz#Log of blocks and bans.

For the Arbitration Committee --Srikeit (Talk | Email) 06:16, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

Book cover image

What's the matter with image:Hearts of Darkness cover.jpg? --Attilios 06:28, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

As I wrote at Image:Heart of darkness cover.jpg, since the book is in public domain, it should be possible to find a public-domain cover from an early edition. Part of Wikipedia's fair use policy is that fair-use images are only allowed when a free equivalent couldn't be found. —Angr 09:14, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

Persistent and unending dispute with Mr Conradi

I am, apparently, a newbie at this kind of dispute resolution. I have no idea what to do, but ask you to please see [2] and advise me what the correct procedure is. I have endeavoured to correct material errors in his edits, as well as to remove inappropriate references to myself, and he simply reverts every time. He is well over the three-reverts rule. I am probably also over the rule, but my reverts have in every case attempted to correct and improve the article, while his have simply been gainsaying. Please help. Thank you. -- Evertype·✆ 13:41, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

I don't understand the topic well enough to comment on the content dispute itself, but the usual path to dispute resolution begins with a request for comment either on the content itself or on an editor's behavior. If that doesn't work, you can request mediation. If that doesn't work either, and you really think he's violating policy, you can request arbitration. —Angr 14:01, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

DYK

Updated DYK query On 11 November 2006, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Theobald Stapleton, which you created. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

--Allen3 talk 22:57, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

Irish phonology improvements

Great work! The map is aesthetically pleasing and makes the dialect information easier to understand. The 'history' section is not only worthwhile in itself but also makes the rest of the article clearer because now we understand better the context of the cited sources. For example it is helpful to know that a particular author worked out of SPE principles. Haukur 12:39, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

Glad you like it! —Angr 13:49, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

Thomas Eller

Thanks. youngamerican (ahoy hoy) 02:43, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

St. Brice's Day massacre

Hi,

looking over your page here I am willing to believe that your edits are not the simple vandalism I originaly mistook them for; for they are performed by an experienced editor and I don't believe someone who had contributed possitivly for so long would start vandalising now. However, the fact remains that this is a suitable article for the project. Mass murder, and war-related acts (e.g. a strike because of threats of invasion) in general are considered to be disasters (See List of wars and disasters by death toll, it includes a "Genocide and democide" section, with a sub-section inluding among others, "Individual massacres". Thus it is proved that the article counts as a disaster, and if you see the project page you will see that the scope of our project includes "individual disasters". Therefore, I am again replacing the tag.

Perhaps if your WikiProject were called "WikiProject Disasters" I could believe it. But it's called "WikiProject Disaster Management"; disaster management is a concept developed in the 20th century and it's completely anachronistic to describe an 11th-century massacre in terms of disaster management. —Angr 09:47, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
Alow me to quote directly from the section marked "scope" on the project page. "It also include individual disastrous events, e.g. hurricane Katrina and the Ethiopian famine in the 1980s." Therefore, I maintain this to be a suitable article for the project since, regardless of it's main focus, the project deals with individual disasters. Also, even if the concept was only developed in the 20th century, it still did happen even in the 11th. They just didn't have a name for it. If you like, take theis dispute to the project's Talk Page, but if you do may I ask that whatever the outcome of such a dispute, the tag stays on at least until we have reached a descion (which I'm sure you will find would be to keep the article) Blood red sandman 17:38, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
I'm not saying individual disasters like Katrina and the 1980s Ethiopian famine are outside your scope. They both involved a certain amount of disaster management during and after. But the St Brice's Day massacre certainly didn't -- not because the term "disaster management" hadn't been invented yet, but because the entire mindset that leads to disaster management didn't exist. If your WikiProject is going to lay claim to St. Brice's Day massacre, why not lay claim to Cretaceous-Tertiary extinction event? Your tag isn't on its talk page yet; why not? —Angr 17:46, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
Hmmmm... thats certainly a tough one to decide - do non-human events count? (they do in my opinion, but in others...) I'll ask the project about this one. However, in general the answer to "why isn't this tagged?" is simply because no-one has gotten round to a major tagging of things in the category of disasters yet. I don't have time, but I do tag anything I happen to come across. Blood red sandman 18:15, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
The Holocaust? Haukur 18:24, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
Without a shadow of a doubt, under the current scope. Feel free to suggest a change on the project talk page should you so desire - there would be a better venue for what is a wider problem then just 3 editors and one article. Blood red sandman 18:30, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

Frankfurt (Oder)

Angr, could you please take a look at Frankfurt (Oder). User:Pmanderson keeps changing the text of the article to read "Frankfurt on Oder" or equivalent, and adding OR guesswork about the city's "former name" and how it is "variously punctuated", etc. The name has already been voted on, but he resorts to the usual canards about "English use". This isn't Rome/Roma. Regards,  ProhibitOnions  (T) 23:45, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

Please warn the users of the images

When you add an {{rfu}} tag to an image, please consider adding these tags to the image caption:

{{speedy-image-c|[[2006-11-22]]}}<br />{{replacethisimage}}

I have found that it stimulates quick action in finding replacements. --Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 12:00, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks very much my dear brother, Angr

My name is Krishna Chaitanya. It was me who wrote the article "An Explanation for thy argument" in the talk page of the artcile Sanskrit. I feel that the talk page should be informative rather than argumentative. I dont know who wrote "It is not the nationwide language dears" in Talk page. I felt appalling about it and wrote an explanation for it. Thanks for reviewing it. -User:Bsskchaitanya 12.48 15 November 2006 (UTC)

Mödlareuth

Hi - I started the Möd' article yesterday and I'm pleased to see that my baby grew up quickly... Just one question: if you (not you personallyexplain to the English readers the letter "ö" why don't you explain or replace the "ß" (like in Reuß) which is a lot more confusing and can be misunderstood (greek Beta) ? Jaypee1 09:03, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

The article on Reuß is already at Reuss, so if anyone clicks on the article they'll soon figure it out. —Angr 09:05, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

Irish phonology yet again

Interesting to have the comparison with Irish English.

It occurs to me that the (very helpful) link to Wikipedia:International Phonetic Alphabet for Irish might be seen as an evil self-reference by some protocol hardasses. I can't think of a better way to convey this information, though. Haukur 20:36, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

Mmmmaybe, but I doubt it. The link is provided in a little box at the top, where meta-information usually goes. It's not really different in intent from {{IPA notice}}, which is standardly included in articles. If the notice including the link were within the main prose of the article, it would be an evil self-reference, but the way it is, I think everyone would agree it's a benign self-reference. —Angr 21:11, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
To be extra sure, I've added the contents of {{selfref}} to {{IPA-ga}} so it's clearly tagged as a self-reference and can be automatically deleted from print versions or versions on other web sites. —Angr 21:18, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

Your edit to MediaWiki:Tog-fancysig

Just curious: where's the policy of not allowing images in sigs? That's a very good idea to disallow these :).

(I'm asking because I'm going through mediawiki messages on another project, and have been peeking at wikipedia's for good ideas). --SB_Johnny|talk|books 22:21, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Sign your posts on talk pages#Images says "Images of any kind should not be used in signatures." Technically that page is a guideline, not a policy, but close enough. —Angr 06:22, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
OK, thanks :). --SB_Johnny|talk|books 13:41, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

Unprotect Berlin

Hi Angr, could you consider to unprotect the Berlin article soon? The attacks leading to protection were probably of short term motivation and the template is a permanent distraction. thanks in advance, all the best Lear 21 15:16, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

Mena Suvari, Alicia Alighatti, Courtney Simpson, Alexis Malone

You had no right to delete the images for these people unless you can find free use alternatives, which you have failed to do. Fair use images are allowed until free use ones of similar quality can replace them. Mactabbed 21:15, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

No, that's not how it works. You have no right to upload copyrighted images of living people, since free images can be made or found for them. Free images need not first be found for them. Under normal circumstances, the pictures would have been kept for a week to give you (or anyone else who cares) a chance to find free images, but since you repeatedly removed the tags (despite the fact that they clearly say "Do not remove this tag"), I decided to go ahead and delete them early rather than revert-war with you. —Angr 21:20, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

Motion passed for Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Ulritz

A motion has been passed for the case linked above.

The anonymous editor who edits from the 194.9.5.0/24 range and was also a part to Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Ulritz shall be subject to the same restrictions as Ulritz and Rex Germanus for edit warring at involved articles. See #Ulritz_placed_on_Probation and #Ulritz_placed_on_revert parole for the applicable restrictions.

For the Arbitration Committee --Srikeit 21:25, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

Mark Ashley

I am unable to find a freely licensed image of this man. I thought that I followed the fair use rules when I created a cropped screenshot from a frame of one of his movies. No freely licensed image of Mark Ashley exists at this time that meets Wikipedia's fair use criteria. I have performed several thorough searches and have yet to find one. I ask that, unless you can locate such an image, that you remove your tag for speedy deletion and allow this pic to remain. Thank you. Solcis 23:39, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

Because he's still alive, a free image could be made of him. Fair-use images are to be used only where a free image could not be found or made, not because it's difficult to find one. —Angr 09:01, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Hey, no problem. You tell me how a free image could be made of Ashley (provided that the solution doesn't involve me traveling thousands of miles away, so I would be able to take a picture of him personally), and I'll accommodate. Then again, you could always point out where I might find an existing free image of him- you know, the one that doesn't exist. I'm all ears. Solcis 08:36, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

You don't have to be the one to take a picture of him. Wikipedia is a collaborative effort. I bet there are several Wikipedians with cameras who don't live too far from wherever Ashley is scheduled to make his next public appearance. Put up a {{reqphoto}} on the talk page and/or list him at Wikipedia:Requested pictures#People. You can also look at Flickr, being sure to use the advanced search and putting a check mark next to each of the boxes saying "Only search within Creative Commons-licensed photos", "Find content to use commercially", and "Find content to modify, adapt, or build upon". —Angr 13:44, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

All done. Flickr came up completely empty, of course, but hopefully these other actions will yield some results- and soon. Solcis 15:05, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

+1 DYK

Updated DYK query Did you know? was updated. On 19 November 2006, a fact from the article Mödlareuth, which you recently nominated, has been featured in that section on the Main Page. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

--GeeJo (t)⁄(c) • 11:46, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

WikiProject Munich

I noticed you're a good German speaker. I'm wondering if you could help out at WikiProject Munich. Maybe you could help out with the project's Translation page. If you're interested, you can sign up here. Kingjeff

unsemi-protecting of Bisexuality

i noticed you went against another admin's decision to semi-protect Bisexuality, claiming that the vndalism was not frequent enough to warrant it. I'd like to know what is considered enough vandalism by anons that would allow this article to receive protection. Once a day an anon attacks the page, on Nov 14 this article was vandalized four seperate times. In fact, nearly all of the near 100 edits so far this month have been either vandalisms or reverts - cutting the constructive edits to around 20. Sprocting would save a lot of time, frustration, and resources - so how much more frequent than every day does it need to be? -ΖαππερΝαππερ BabelAlexandria 19:27, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

From Wikipedia:Semi-protection policy: "Semi-protection should be considered if it is the only reasonable option left to deal with vandalism on a page or to stop a banned or blocked user from editing it." If the worst this article has ever seen is only four vandalisms a day, semi-protection is not the only reasonable option left. Take a look at the page history of Gay for the time (between 03:05 and 15:15 UTC on 2 November 2006) it was most recently unprotected: 17 vandalisms in 12 hours. That's bad enough to warrant semiprotection for an article not linked to from the Main Page. —Angr 19:37, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
There are times when you have to ignore policy and do what you think is best. You and I both know that this is a sensitive and frequently targetted article, which was why I semi-protected the page. If 100% of the IP or newly registered user edits are vandalism, what's the point in keeping the page protected? People will have to constantly watchlist and monitor the page if it is left out in the open. If you semi-protect, even for just a week or two, at least it will deter IP vandalism in the future and also allow people to have some free time to work on other articles instead of patrolling for vandalism. I factored all these things and I concluded that semi-protection would be particularly useful in this type of situation. Half the vandalism on the page is crude, offensive and has potential libel concerns. Protecting seemed like the solution to me, but apparently others disagree. Ideally, you would agree with me, but since this is not the Nishkidistheboss type of world, I'd like to hear your input in this issue, and see if you have a possible re-recommendation regarding the article's protection. Nishkid64 20:47, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
I did do what I think was best; my decision to unprotect came from my convictions about page protection and not from policy. I know malicious vandalism is annoying (I used to have Obesity on my watchlist and witnessed several occurrences a day there too), but if it's really only one or two a day on most days, it can be kept on top of. People, especially admins, should be watchlisting and monitoring all pages they're interested in anyway. —Angr 20:52, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

don´t destroy valuable work !!!!!!!

The nightclub image at the Berlin article was properly tagged. When you have complaints then say so at my talk page. In advance! Lear 21 13:09, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

The Flickr page you gave as the source said "All rights reserved". The tag you put on the photo could only be correct if you yourself were the photographer. Were you? —Angr 13:11, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Ian Thorpe

I uploaded a free image in place of the old IanThorpe.png. Please notify me if the new image also does not comply with the fair use rules. --Anthony5429 20:43, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Please see Image talk:IanThorpe.png. —-Angr 20:48, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
Ah. I see you have found a truly free image to replace it. I will update the one I put up as well with a cropped PNG version of yours. Thanks for your help! --Anthony5429 22:58, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
I don't know if we can really bank on WikiMax's images being free - check'em out and see what you think. [3] Haukur 23:04, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Marjara Slept Here

Hello, old friend! I was trying to upload an image of the former Prime Minister of Tanzania, and a trail led to you as the administrator who deleted a previous image of Sumaye. A happy coincidence - I was planning to get in touch with you to let you know that we are moving to Lausanne in January, and intend to visit you in Berlin at some point in the next couple of years.

You know where to find me - either on my userpages on the English or Swahili Wikipedias, or at the same old emails. And no, you are not forgiven for not coming to my wedding ;) Malangali 23:21, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Well, you didn't come to mine either, so we're even! ;-) As for Marjara, tomorrow is her 19th birthday (observed), and still doing well (unless my sister is hiding something from me). Here in Berlin I have two cats, one of whom may be admired at the right. What on Earth are you going to do in Lausanne? —Angr 06:46, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
Wow, 19. I guess Cottage St. was 15 years ago. My niece who was born that first month is now old enough to drive, and the one who was a year younger than Marjara is now at college. Did you meet Piper and Zen, my 9 year old feline charges, when you stopped by my place on Mansfield St?
Did you get married? Holland, Belgium, Spain, or home in the Bay State? I'll look forward to details!
My wife has a post-doc at EPFL, so I'm looking for UN-type work in Geneva. I was there last week, and have reason to be optimistic that I'll find something to do. Also, I found us an apartment in Lausanne with a guest room. We arrive on January 15, so karibu sana! Malangali 12:44, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
I never stopped by your place on Mansfield Street, so no, I never met your cats. I got married here in Germany, meaning it was technically a registered partnership and the church service was a blessing of the union, but we consider ourselves married and referred to the service as our wedding. —Angr 13:03, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

Hmm, I thought you had popped by on Mansfield. I guess I was extrapolating from a report that you'd been spotted in New Haven... In any case, congratulations on the marriage! I'll look forward to hearing more, and perhaps meeting the lucky betrothed. Meanwhile, I'll be shepherding my dissertating half through the final month before her defense. Malangali 13:34, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

I was in New Haven just after Thanksgiving 1999 I think. I gave you a call but you weren't around. As far as I can remember, we haven't actually seen each other since the year you lived in Ithaca (which was what, 93-94?). I haven't been back to New England since then, and I haven't been back to the U.S. at all since Christmas 2003. My mom and one of my sisters came over for the wedding, and my mom was back for a visit in September. —Angr 13:52, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
Winter of 94 in Ithaca. I have never seen so much snow in my life, and I'm a Vermonter. Now I remember the non-connection in New Haven - that was during a particularly convoluted trip that involved India, Tanzania, several pit-stops in Ethiopia, and an aborted tangent to Yemen and Eritrea that ended with me in all seriousness having to prove to a manager at Yemen Airways that "The rumors of my death have been greatly exaggerated."
I haven't seen J-A in years. Last time I saw him he was dating an announcer at WNPR, and seemed pretty happy.
Happy Thanksgiving to you, and please send my birthday best to Marjara! Malangali 18:41, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

Canadian Gaelic

Im just wondering what your thoughts are with regard to the renaming of the article as "Canadian Gaelic" ? While i think User:Muckapedia has put in some excellent work on the article content im not especially comfortable with the change in title which i think is misleading an innapropriate and ive put forward my thoughts on the talk page. What are your thoughts on the matter? siarach 11:09, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

reply from Template talk:Birth date and age

Howdy. You said: "Matthew, I hope you updated all the pages using the template after you changed it, otherwise it's going to be broken on a whole lot of pages."

Well actually both ways still work so you could call it like: {{Birth date and age|1984|12|25}} or {{Birth date and age|day=12|month=3|year=1990}}
Hope this helps. thanks/Fenton, Matthew Lexic Dark 52278 Alpha 771 14:33, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
Okay, cool. Thanks! (I was trying to do it with {{Birth date and age|1984-12-25}}, which never worked anyway; for some reason I thought it was your edit that broke it, but it wasn't.) —Angr 14:43, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

Image:Heart of darkness cover.jpg

Okay, you may not be aware of this, but I am an admin and have removed that tag because it is placed incorrectly. As an admin that is my call to make, since it is admins who carry out speedy deletions. Please discuss actions before simply reverting, discussion imparts good faith. Hiding Talk 16:51, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

  • I have started a discussion on this at WP:AN#Image:Heart of darkness cover.jpg, the replaceable fair use deletion criteria and how it works
    • FWIW, with respect to such discussion, I should say that the quite wrong locution I employ as regards the removal of non-image speedy tags probably sounds a bit less decorous that it ought; to be sure, I meant not to malign your submission but only to suggest that your sense of how contested speedy deletions ought to be disposed is quite different from mine and that the mandating of the use of {{hangon}} where one thinks a speedy tag to have been wrongly placed (as against the permitting of the removal of the speedy tag) is not, at present, counseled by policy. Apologies, then, should quite wrong sound (as) other-than-civil... Cheers! Joe 17:59, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
      • I think you are talking at cross purposes. I was not acting as an editor, but as an admin. I deemed, as an admin this did not meet the criterion for deletion. I may well have been wrong, but as an admin I am entrusted to make that decision. Hiding Talk 18:26, 22 November 2006 (UTC)


Dubh Artach - Celtic Name

If you have a moment I wonder if you could look at Dubh Artach#Celtic Name and the associated Talk page (or suggest somone who might). Blisco and I have been having a go at this and may be penning howlers. Ben MacDui (Talk) 19:32, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

I took a look, but I don't really know what to add. Etymologies of place names are always iffy under the best of circumstances. The best you can do is just say what the most reliable sources have said. I would go ahead and say "Scottish Gaelic name" rather than the unnecessarily general "Celtic name", though. —Angr 19:44, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
OK - thanks for looking. Ben MacDui (Talk) 19:24, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

happy Turkey Day!!!!!

I wish you a very merry Thanksgiving! Hope you and your family have a magnificent day! So, what are you thankful for? Hooray and happy gormandiziŋ! --Randfan please talk talk to me!
Happy Turkeyday! Cheers! :) —Randfan!!
Happy Turkeyday! Cheers! :) —Randfan!!
Have a great day! Please respond on my talk page (the red "fan" link in my signature). Cheers! :) —Randfan!!

Cheers! :) —Randfan!! has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling to someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Smile at others by adding {{subst:smile}}, {{subst:smile2}} or {{subst:smile3}} to their talk page with a friendly message. Happy editing!

That kinda stinks! How do you say "Happy Thanksgiving!" in German? Could you type how it sounds, too. I don't know German at all but want to. Please respond on my talk page (the red link in my signature). Cheers! :) —Randfan!! 16:49, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

76.214.139.58

One hour for 9 incidents of blatant vandalism as the only edits from that IP? Wow, he's so lucky he was blocked by you... I'm an evil evil man by comparison! lol ;)

Have a great thanksgiving!  Glen  17:42, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

I blocked for one hour because I hadn't actually seen what he had done yet. I just wanted him to stop long enough that I could get the page back to where it should be and then do a damage assessment. —Angr 17:44, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
Ah, makes sense :) Thanks!  Glen  17:49, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

Protecting Thanksgiving

Hi, I unprotected Thanksgiving earlier today because it's linked from the Main Page. In general, pages linked from the Main Page shouldn't be semiprotected unless the vandalism is getting so bad we can't keep on top of it. I don't think it was really that bad; maybe you'll reconsider protecting it. —Angr 19:48, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

I just unprotected it, as you requested. I really only intended it to be for a short period of time due to the Main Page rule (see my comment on Talk:Thanksgiving). -- tariqabjotu 19:51, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

WikiProject Germany

Sorry to see you leave (not that "membership" actually means anything). I'd like to know what parts you find overly bureaucratic, since I don't think there is need for much bureaucracy and most things are going to be as anarcho-democra-dictatorial as always. If you dislike the assessment process (which is pretty random at the moment and certainly not bureaucratic unless you count my personal semi-dictatorial tendencies as bureaucratic) and the silly switches in the template (some of which I added mostly so I can provide a better Todo list) you could just ignore them. Of course, the major shortcoming of the project is that we have had zero impact on actual article writing so far, probably because most of the people working on the project's structure are too busy setting up "bureaucracy" to do something directly useful. I'm pretty confident it won't stay like that, though, and hope to keep things as informal as possible for a project covering so many articles. If I ever start voting for a WikiProject Germany Advisory Council or a WikiProject Germany Charter instead of being WP:BOLD like a normal Wikipedian, just shoot me. Happy editing, Kusma (討論) 15:02, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

Well, the article assessment article is part of it; in general I'm opposed to article assessment since I think all articles could stand improvement and it's just silly instruction creep to start assigning levels of goodness to them. And the number of subpages available on the sidebar template is just getting larger than I can keep track of, and just in general the whole WikiProject seems to be overly organized and controlled and formalized. I much prefer WikiProjects like WP Languages and WP Phonetics, which function more like informal noticeboards for people interested in the topic. —Angr 15:08, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
I see. I agree that all articles should be improved, but I like the GA and FA badges as nice pats on the back for editors (so for a mostly social reason). What I like about the assessment process is the "comments" field that is shown in the overview pages like Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Germany articles by quality/1. And there is of course the silly hope that somebody comes and actually improves one of our stubs rated as "important" on Page 2. It is quite possible that this rating system is about as useful as stub sorting (i.e. not very much). Anyway, I have no evil plans of integrating or abolishing the old noticeboard (and would oppose them), so there will always be a place for completely informal discussion without silly banners or membership lists, and smaller subprojects (like my pet Mainz "task force") will also be less bureaucratic (and potentially more useful). Okay, I have wasted enough of your time now, but I'll always listen if you have suggestions what can be improved or what is so terribly flawed that it should be deleted. Best wishes, Kusma (討論) 15:28, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

Undeleting image

Hi Angr, could you please undelete Image:Sing The Body Electric Promo.jpg? The image can not be recreated under a free license because the band split up last year, and thus the image did/does not fail WP:FUC #1. --Fritz S. (Talk) 11:26, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

According to Fenix*TX, "In September 2005, Fenix*TX announced their reunion", implying that they are no longer broken up. Anyway, there's already a band photo on the page. —Angr 11:29, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
Image:Sing The Body Electric Promo.jpg is a photo of a different band, Sing the Body Electric, that included some of the members of Fenix'TX, and is still split up. --Fritz S. (Talk) 11:32, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
Then the image could be fair use in an article about Sing the Body Electric, if there were one. —Angr 11:35, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
Well, it still illustrates the band, only that the band is discussed in the article on Fenix*TX. As far as I know, there's no policy that says subtopics can't have fair use images... --Fritz S. (Talk) 11:38, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
Okay, it's restored. —Angr 11:40, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
Thanks a lot. --Fritz S. (Talk) 11:42, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Image:SemrowMTUSA02.jpg

Greetings. Thanks for the work you've been doing with WP:RFU images. But I have a nit to pick: it seems to me that Image:SemrowMTUSA02.jpg shouldn't have been deleted. It shows a person in a non-repeatable event, which is mentioned in the article. What are your thoughts on this? All the best, – Quadell (talk) (random) 15:52, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

I don't think there's anything particularly essential conveyed by that image that can't be adequately expressed in the words "she won the Miss Teen USA 2002 title". —Angr 17:48, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Okay. I just found out about an RFC that does not mention you directly, but that still involves you, at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Abu badali. You're welcome to comment. – Quadell (talk) (random) 13:51, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, I already have it watchlisted! —Angr 13:53, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Dental and alveolar

I've started a discussion regarding the merging of dental nasal with alveolar nasal, voiceless dental plosive with voiceless alveolar plosive, etc. If you'd like to give your two cents, it would be much appreciated. Thank you. Ƶ§œš¹ [aɪm ˈfɻɛ̃ⁿdˡi] 07:47, 29 November 2006 (UTC)