User talk:Ed1974LT

Templates

Hello Ed, I replied to your question at User_talk:SebastianHelm#Template_of_the_table. Greetings, — Sebastian 00:44, 19 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: sandbox (August 7)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Josve05a was:

We're sorry, but we cannot accept blank submissions. Please consider submitting to Wikipedia:Requested articles instead. If in fact you did include text within the article, but it isn't showing, please make sure that any extra text above your entry is removed, as it may be causing it to hide and not be shown to the reviewer.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to User:Ed1974LT/sandbox and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

(t) Josve05a (c) 20:25, 7 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Ed1974LT, I noticed your article was declined at Articles for Creation, and that can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! (t) Josve05a (c) 20:25, 7 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Raising of stressed o to u in a final syllable

Hello Ed, I'm sorry that my third opinion was not what you might have hoped for. Here's what I would do in your place: I would contact a scholar of historical linguistics who might have a view different from that proposed by Dr. Hill, ideally Professor Zinkevičius himself, and ask him whether he agrees with Dr. Hill, and if not, if he's aware of any published criticism of Dr. Hill's Two Laws. If he points you to something, you can then add it to Wikipedia. If there's nothing, then you might inspire him to publish something, which also will ultimately solve the problem. Kind regards, — Sebastian 08:24, 11 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, Sebastian.--Ed1974LT (talk) 15:27, 11 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed 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 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:08, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed 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 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:40, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Reconstructions of Proto-Baltic in the Wiktionary

Hi, we are talking about whether or not to put Proto-Baltic reconstructions in Wiktionary.en, the discussion is here:https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Wiktionary:Information_desk/2024/August#Proto-Baltic Cicognac (talk) 12:00, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. There are many points of view on PBS and PB, and I don't want to get involved in the endless discussion about this, which has been going on since the 19th century. Besides, my English is weak.--Ed1974LT (talk) 12:50, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I know there are many points. But would you add PB entries in Wiktionary? I would, my main interest is that they are quoted/have a source; then, the majority of scholars agree about the existence of PB as far as I know. I think nobody will partecipate in the discussion -.- Cicognac (talk) 19:47, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

As I said, my English is weak and I can't write in Wiktionary by myself. But please contact me and I will help you as much as I can.--Ed1974LT (talk) 20:06, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It was just a question aimed at you, "Would you ever/hypotetically do something?". Personally, I would hypotetically add entries using sources by linguists, but I am told right now that PB has a problematic status, so my colleagues want users to avoid publishing pages about PB. I'll follow their rules until the status of PB is less problematic. Cicognac (talk) 20:49, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I see.--Ed1974LT (talk) 21:22, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

By the way, AshFox suggested me to use *j and *w for PB transcription. I could employ this kind of transcription linked to PBS since it's easier to understand and digit on a keyboard. At first, I decided not to update transcription since Balticists do not use *w and *j. Should I update PB transcription here on Wikipedia? AshFox already updated it in Wiktionary (until now, I only added etymologies of numbers from 1 to 10 so that users can avoid copying down a partial etymology). Cicognac (talk) 09:19, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think it would be worth writing in the Wikipedia article about PB with j, w. As you noticed, in Baltistics it is customary to write i̯, ṷ. It would be as strange as if someone in an article about Proto-Germanic replaced all the j, w with i̯, ṷ. We are dealing with a linguistic tradition.--Ed1974LT (talk) 13:30, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

So I could/should only use j, w in the Wiktionary? Cicognac (talk) 15:36, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No. For PB forms, i̯, ṷ should be used.--Ed1974LT (talk) 16:02, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I'll try to convince AshFox. But I must admit that traditional transcription is really hard to type :( Cicognac (talk) 18:14, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]