User talk:abgar eabe ghu

Recent edits to Breen

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. Your recent edit to Breen appears to have added the name of a non-notable entity. In general, a person or organization added to a list should have a pre-existing article to establish notability. If you wish to create such an article, please confirm that your subject is notable according to Wikipedia's notability guideline. Thank you! Materialscientist (talk) 06:58, 30 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for reverting your recent experiment. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. If you would like to experiment further, please use the sandbox instead, as someone could see your test before you revert it. Thank you. Jim1138 (talk) 07:03, 30 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

March 2014

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Lapis lazuli may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

'''Lapis lazuli''' ({{IPAc-en|ˈ|l|æ|p|ɪ|s|_|ˈ|l|æ|z|uː|l|iː}} or {{IPAc-en|ˈ|l|æ|ʒ|uː|l|aɪ}} (sometimes abbreviated to '

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 05:52, 12 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to The Wikipedia Adventure!

Hi ! We're so happy you wanted to play to learn, as a friendly and fun way to get into our community and mission. I think these links might be helpful to you as you get started.

-- 20:15, Tuesday, December 24, 2024 (UTC)

Mission 1	Mission 2	Mission 3	Mission 4	Mission 5	Mission 6	Mission 7
Say Hello to the World	An Invitation to Earth	Small Changes, Big Impact	The Neutral Point of View	The Veil of Verifiability	The Civility Code	Looking Good Together

Get Help

About The Wikipedia Adventure | Hang out in the Interstellar Lounge

July 2014

Hello, I'm Bilorv. I wanted to let you know that I undid one or more of your recent contributions to In vitro fertilisation because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Bilorv ^(Talk)_(Contribs) 11:05, 10 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

New Zealand English

Hi there. I have reverted your edits to New Zealand because the spelling was already correct - note that in New Zealand English it states "New Zealand English, like Australian English, mainly prefers -ise." Cheers. Daveosaurus (talk) 11:37, 12 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Kiwi

Hi abgar. I reverted your entry in the beak article about the Kiwi "technically" having the shortest beak. You'll need to provide a better source than the New World Encyclopedia or QI, I'm afraid! :) If you find a proper encyclopedia (i.e. with references, and not one that just mirrors Wikipedia without the references), or a scientific journal that says the same thing, then you're welcome to repost it. MeegsC (talk) 19:38, 2 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Here's a book that shows just how much variability there is in "bill length" designations — in the real world of science, anyway. And notice that nowhere does it say that the length is the measurement between the beak's tip and the nostrils. MeegsC (talk) 19:50, 2 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Kiwi Mk 2

I was about to revert your revert to the kiwi article (but see someone else has already done so) and leave a query here. But the query remains, why did you deliberately remove the macron to change the spelling of Māori to Maori. Moriori (talk) 04:00, 3 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Reference Errors on 3 August

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

On the Shitty Watercolour page, your edit caused a broken reference name (help). (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:26, 4 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for November 4

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited New Zealand English, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Maori. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 15:27, 4 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for December 1

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited New Zealand English, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Britain. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:50, 1 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

New Zealand English

Abgar eabe ghu, you and I seem to be getting into an editing war over pronunciations on the above page. You seem to be intent on insisting that 'graph' is often pronounced with the 'a' as in 'father' as is the custom in the UK, whereas I almost always hear it pronounced as in 'bad'. That is the custom on NZ radio and TV channels. You are giving far too much weight to the 'father' version, and I'd like you to justify why you think it is so common. You have also twice changed the Maori pronunciation of Te Kauwhata, despite my note that the 'wh' should be pronounced as an aspirated 'w' as in 'why'. That is why the early missionaries wrote 'wh' and not 'f'. I'm old enough to remember when this 'f' pronunciation came about (in circa 1980) when the NZBC announcers began using it and received permission to do so. It caused controversy at the time as it was perceived as a form of laziness. Please state why the 'f' sound (the current lazy NZ way) is more appropriate for the way Maori pronounce the word, as recorded by the missionaries.

Since we seem to be at odds over very minor differences, I must ask whether you are a New Zealander, or at least resident in NZ with close proximity to NZ speakers. There is a suggestion in a post above that because you used an -ize ending, you may be neither. Akld guy (talk) 11:05, 16 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, hello. I am a New Zealander; I was born in New Zealand and I've lived here all my life.

In my original edit of the ‘graph’ section, I wrote that both pronunciations were used, which is true; I have heard both. If you can find a source saying that the /ɡræf/ pronunciation is commoner, then I'd be happy for the page to state that it is. But until then, I think we should have something neutral that doesn't favour one over the other. The ‘both pronunciations are used’ approach I feel is best.

As for the Maori pronunciation, this is what the Wikipedia page on the Maori language has to say on the matter:

The pronunciation of /wh/ is extremely variable, … but its most common pronunciation (its canonical allophone) is the labiodental fricative, IPA [f] found in English. Another allophone is the bilabial fricative, IPA [ɸ][.]

The /f/ pronunciation is commoner, so it should at least be listed alongside the /hw/ pronunciation—which, strictly speaking, is /ɸ/—if not as the main one.

The ‘-ize’ ending is the Oxford spelling.

abgar eabe (talk) 13:43, 16 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. You originally (before I came on the scene) had provided no reference for your claim that the /ɡrɑːf/ pronunciation is as common as /ɡræf/ but now you are asking for a reference from me that the latter is far more common? Well, I cannot win in a situation like that since it implies that you think you own the page.

I'm aware of the Wikipedia ruling on 'f' for the 'wh' sound, but you have missed the point entirely and so has Wikipedia. The missionaries in the early 19th century specifically transcribed the sound as 'wh', not 'f'. Were they stupid? No. The fact is that until circa 1980, the NZBC announcers took pains to make the 'wh' sound, but around that time they were under pressure to drop their BBC type pronunciation and 'speak as New Zealanders do' and they adopted the lazy 'f' sound that only the laziest New Zealanders were using. They got approval to do so, despite controversy, and soon this became ingrained as the correct pronunciation. Even some young Maori today do not appreciate how this pronunciation was hijacked. Wikipedia is simply repeating the modern version without consideration for what is correct. Disclaimer: I have not a trace of Maori genealogy. Akld guy (talk) 04:06, 17 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't claim that both pronunciations were equally common; I wrote that they were both used:

Like in the UK, the word and combining form graph is pronounced both /ɡrɑːf/ and /ɡræf/ in New Zealand.

Your edits are the only ones that claim one is commoner than the other:

The word graph is usually pronounced /ɡræf/ in New Zealand, in contrast to grass (/ɡrɑːs/).

The page should display the common Maori pronunciation regardless of your or others' view of it.

abgar eabe (talk) 05:14, 17 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

"Both used" implies about equal useage, therefore equally common. Of course both are heard but I am adamant that /ɡræf/ is by far the more often heard and /ɡrɑːf/ is actually quite rare. I'm going to drop this debate and make no further changes because we are both entrenched in our views and nothing will change them. You win by default since you regard the page as your property and insist that the onus is on me to show evidence why your views that were never referenced in the first place are wrong. Akld guy (talk) 05:56, 17 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Fondue

Hi, in your recent edits to fondue, you added some English pronunciations which you mentioned in the edit summary, and you removed some section references and dates from the article. English pronunciation of loanwords varies quite a bit of course, and it might be useful to document it, but I think we need reliable sources (e.g., dictionaries) for that.

As for removing things like the episode number of a radio show, the date of a document, the exact URL of an OED page, you didn't explain this in your edit note, and I don't understand the motivation. --Macrakis (talk) 17:44, 18 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, so I put the pronunciations back in and added a ref.

removing things like the episode number of a radio show, the date of a document, the exact URL of an OED page

This was entirely unintentional.

Re "(/ˈfɒndʒuː/ is yod coalescence.)" -- sure, there are lots of phonetic phenomena in the different varieties of English. The pronunciation guides at the beginnings of articles should be "broad" transcriptions, and not include all variants, especially not predictable ones like this. Should we include the pronunciations /ˈtjuːlɪp/, /ˈtuːlɪp/, /ˈtʃuːlɪp/ in the tulip article? They are all perfectly predictable variants of /t/ + /uː/. --Macrakis (talk) 05:02, 19 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, yes. It seems totally sensible not to include many variants. abgar eabe (talk) 05:59, 19 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Changes to IPA transcription

Hello. I reverted your changes to Sodium fluoride and Sodium chloride:

/ʊər/ has to be in the same field: /ʊər/ and the next field can't contain /r/ - otherwise the /r/ appears twice: /ʊərr/, which is wrong.
In the IPAc-en template, /ɔːr/ is transcribed /ɔːr/, without the length mark (see Help:IPA for English.) — Peter238 (v̥ɪˑzɪʔ mɑˑɪ̯ tˢʰoˑk̚ pʰɛˑɪ̯d̥ʒ̊) 04:22, 15 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Also, the HAPPY vowel phoneme (/i/) can never appear in a stressed syllable, as it belongs to the weak vowel system. This is why I changed the IPA on onomatopoeia. — Peter238 (v̥ɪˑzɪʔ mɑˑɪ̯ tˢʰoˑk̚ pʰɛˑɪ̯d̥ʒ̊) 04:44, 15 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, that's fine.

abgar eabe (talk) 05:47, 15 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:05, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your attention needed at WP:CHU

Hello. A renamer or clerk has responded to your username change request, but requires clarification before moving forward. Please follow up at your username change request entry as soon as possible. Thank you. —k6ka 🍁 (Talk · Contributions) 12:16, 28 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

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

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

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

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

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

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

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