Jump to content

User talk:Jmabel/Archive 25

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 20←Archive 23Archive 24Archive 25Archive 26Archive 27→Archive 30

Saint-Just entry

I noticed you have done some work on the entry for Louis Saint-Just-- thanks for your comments in favor of fair representation :D I was thinking of undertaking a major revision and/or large additions to his entry and wondered if you had any suggestions. I'm fairly new to Wiki and so am a bit nervous about doing any great amount of editing to an existing article, but I think this is one that could be much further developed. Thanks for your time! --Togemon 04:43, 15 November 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for the advice! --Togemon 14:12, 15 November 2005 (UTC)


Dede Korkut and other Turkic destans

I have collected these articles on Dede Korkut, Alpamysh and other Destans. Paksoy has done most of the writing. I believe these writings will be most valuable in categorizing early Turkic peoples into great federations like Gokturk, Oghuz, Qarluq etc. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bestlyriccollection (talk • contribs) 15 Nov 2005

Fascism

The article is twice as long as is recommended and is always going to be a magnet for POV-warriors. I'm not sure what is going on with Wikipedia:WikiProject Fascism, but what is needed here is an expert in the field re-writing the whole thing adhering strictly to Wikipedia policy, and then people willing to "rv unsourced addition" mercilessly forever after. I'd hate to think that some good, WP:NPOV, referenced article is sitting somewhere in the article history, but that is another possibility. I put up an RfC on it, by the way. Jkelly 04:29, 16 November 2005 (UTC)

Massive editing just happened. Please review. Jkelly 04:24, 18 November 2005 (UTC)

User:Marsden is back

User:Marsden is back, using his IP address, 69.138.215.194 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log), and apparently spending most of his time reverting those he doesn't like, or who he has been asked to revert. Now he's being even more disruptive; in order to avoid going over the 3RR, he's added a link to a bogus hate site at Self-hating Jew instead, and posting trolling text to a bunch of talk pages about "nigger lovers". I'm considering a 1 week block for disruption at this point, unless you think you or someone else should do it first. Jayjg (talk) 17:13, 16 November 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for responding. My faith in RFCs is not high; partisans on both sides tend to line up, and little gets done. Disruptive editors are generally dealt with in a more direct fashion. That said, I have posted to WP:AN, in the Marsden section (which is now quite lengthy). Jayjg (talk) 18:02, 16 November 2005 (UTC)

Objections to PWDS

Feel free to ignore this if you wish. I've updated the PWDS Common objections and responses section, to reply to the concerns you expressed in your objection. Specifically, the objections you raised are now answered as follows:

  • It would be hard to tell legitimate blanking from vandalism.
    • It would be no more difficult than telling legitimate removal of text from vandalism today; i.e. there would be gray areas, but most edits would be obvious. Also, blanking without any edit summary would be as likely to be vandalism as removal of a paragraph without any edit summary is today.
  • The PWDS does not remove slanderous pages from the history. Someone could even link to them and make them look like part of Wikipedia.
    • If someone vandalizes an existing page to post slander, and gets reverted, their slanderous version is in the history and can be linked to. This is inherent in the Wiki system, not in the PWDS. However, slanderous versions could still be listed at AfD, and, after 7 days, removed from view. For any historical versions which seem to be widely linked, this would be a available option.

If you have some further thoughts on this, or questions or concerns with either of these answers, I would appreciate hearing them. Thanks for all your work on Wikipedia! JesseW, the juggling janitor 23:22, 16 November 2005 (UTC)

Talk:Bugeac Post

If it's not on your Watchlist, check out my response to your comment on Talk:Bugeac and tell me (there) what you think. Thanks.

LuiKhuntek 03:26, 17 November 2005 (UTC)

Territorial authonomy

The main article of UDMR statute is that UDMR wants territorial authonomy. Peter Eckstein Kovacs an imporatan leader of UDMR addmited that in a tv show called "Nasul" on B1 tv. What do you say about that?--Dacodava

I say "of course they want autonomy." That was never in question. Our disagreement is over your characterization of this as a "terrorist" position, which has no relation to any known definition of terrorist and which would, as I've remarked, characterize (for example) the present governments of Catalonia and Scotland as terrorist, not to mention every single Native American tribe in the United States. -- Jmabel | Talk 17:48, 17 November 2005 (UTC)

So, in your opinion to be a terrorist, someone must bombing something? It will be the time when they will do it! A terrorist do not means only to bombing something in my opinion. They are terrorists because they broke Romanian laws and they want to destroy Romania as country! They want a new stae in middle of Romania. That is the truth! And that means terrorism! But generraly speaking, people like to sleep at these hungarian threats, just like "11 september"!--Dacodava

To be a terrorist, at a bare minimum, one must advocate violence. -- Jmabel | Talk 18:44, 19 November 2005 (UTC)

RfA for Halibutt

Salutations, Joe! In case you are unaware, Halibutt is going through the administrator vote process. I believe that any input you could provide would be valued. Olessi 19:27, 17 November 2005 (UTC)

Off the top of my head, I am not aware of any topics that you and he might have discussed opinions over. I have seen your contributions on various pages, and you are someone who has proven his worth to WP many times over. Because Halibutt's nomination has been controversial so far, I desired that a broad spectrum of contributors be involved in his case. If you feel that you are not familiar enough with his style of contribution to judge his case with certainty, that is absolutely understandable. Since you have been around for a while, I just wanted to let you know that he is currently under review. Have a great Friday! Olessi 09:09, 18 November 2005 (UTC)
Sorry for the belated response; I've been frequently away lately and haven't had a lot of WP time. Your raised some god points on my talk page; have you given any thought about mentioning them at Wikipedia talk:Requests for adminship (I assume that would be the relevant page)? Olessi 19:49, 1 December 2005 (UTC)

Wikipediology

I'd like to ask those fellows who have not indicated whether or not they grant permission for a wikibio on them to please do so soon. I'd also appreciate it everyone could expand or create the wikibios for which permission has been granted. The wikibio project simply won't be useful unless fellows actively participate; so I'd like to issue a challenge that each fellow contribute at least one sentence to two wikibios. I'll be on wikibreak for the next week and when I get back there will be prizes in store for the fellows who have the three highest edit counts on wikibios. Thanks. -JCarriker 22:46, 17 November 2005 (UTC)

Day of Reconing for a mutual "friend"

We recently met on the labor union page, as you recall.

LOL, I was just adding some comments to a talk page, and ran into your name, in fact I quoted you on the talk page--best quote of the bunch I thought.[1] I reported our mutual friend to arbitration, BTW.[2] 02:40, 18 November 2005 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Travb (talk • contribs)

Sig

Thanks for the tip. Now let's see if it works ;) Aecis praatpaal 20:05, 19 November 2005 (UTC)

WikiMeet

Hi, thanks for contacting me about the WikiMeet. I would love to go, but considering how paranoid my parents are about this sort of thing, I seriously doubt I'd be able to. If anything changes on that front, however, I'll definitely try to come. ♠PMC♠ 23:43, 19 November 2005 (UTC)

Martín Fierro (magazine)

It might be of your interest. Regards, User:Ejrrjs says What? 10:47, 20 November 2005 (UTC)

Thnx, User:Ejrrjs says What? 23:03, 20 November 2005 (UTC)

About the Llull's images

Hello. I'm user of the catalan wikipedia. I've seen you put a question in the Llull's discussion. The fact is that Llull is an inactive user (we don't know why), and he is being asked about the images he did without being the questions answered. Surely Llull did all the images by himself, but he had no time of putting the images description for some reason, and they remain without license. I believe it would be sufficient writing in the license that user:Llull drawn it and the license is GFDL ca:usuari:Arturo Reina

Cover Art

Hello, we had some discussion on the fair use of magazine covers at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Fair_use#Keira_Knightley. It seems that people are using magazine covers with a certain person on to illustrate the article about that person without any real commentary on the image. I argued that appearances on fashion magazine covers are not particularly significant so cannot justify critical commentary which is one of the requirements for fair use. Admittedly this argument only applies to magazine covers not album covers so maybe they should be listed separately on the Fair use page. Regards Arniep 21:57, 20 November 2005 (UTC)

Fascism and ideology

Don't make comments like this, such disrespect makes communication useless. Sam Spade 00:06, 21 November 2005 (UTC)

Sam, no insult intended. Are you saying that you are an expert on the Republic of Fiume (or, I suppose more properly, the Italian Regency of Carnaro)? I don't think I've seen you write three sentences on the subject. If you have, please, direct me to them, and I will stand corrected. We don't have an article on the topic, just a few remarks in passing in our article on Gabriele D'Annunzio (where your contributions are minimal, and don't touch on this subject) and stubs at Constitution of Fiume and Alceste de Ambris (to which you did not contribute). Am I missing something? I would have presumed, perhaps incorrectly, that if this was an area of expertise for you that you would have written on it in Wikipedia. -- Jmabel | Talk 00:35, 21 November 2005 (UTC)

I am not an expert, lacking citable credentials, but I know a great deal about the incident, yes. I have written extensively based on my knowledge of the subject on several pages regarding the socialist or syndacalist underpinnings of fascism, and the close relationship between fascism and anarchism. When in doubt, assume good faith, rather than that another is lying. If your interested in giving fascism a thorough and balanced, non-partisan examination, you have alot to learn. I'd be glad to help :) Sam Spade 00:59, 21 November 2005 (UTC)

Jedisan/Edisan/Yedisan, Talk:Bugeac Post, Ottoman Bessarabia Merge

I have posted a another comment at Talk:Bugeac in favor of a re-naming. I will wait for objections and move if none.

Since you seemed to be well-involved in the region:

1. I suggested merging The Province of Bessarabia into Ottoman Bessarabia since they both deal with the same area at the same time. I'm not suggesting a merge with Bessarabia as one post at Talk:Ottoman Bessarabia stated. Any thoughts?

2. I'm writing a stub for the area between Transnistria and Crimea (roughly Mykolaiv Oblast) and wanted your input on a name. The most common English form is Jedisan (e.g. Historical Atlas of Central Europe. 2nd ed. Paul Robert Magocsi. 2002) and I would go with that but Edisan and Yedisan better reflect local pronounciation. Any preference?

Here are some other language forms for reference:

Ukrainian: Эдисан [Jedysan], Russian: Едисан [Edisan], Romanian and Crimean Tatar: Edisan, Turkish: Yedisan, German: Jedisan, Polish: Jedysan, Hungarian: Jediszán —Preceding unsigned comment added by LuiKhuntek (talk • contribs) 21 Nov 2005

Web archive

Jmabel, thanks for your comments about Xul Solar. I did try to find replacement live links, but I was unaware of web archive. Nice to learn something unexpected on Wikipedia. Thanks again. AppleMacD 02:37, 21 November 2005 (UTC)

Sanhedrin (tractate)

Thanks for catching the typos! Much appreciated. Joaquin Murietta 19:05, 21 November 2005 (UTC)

Jacobin, Jacobin Club

Some thoughts about the page name of "Jacobin" at the page Talk:Jacobin. Since you had supported (correctly IMO) two articles, let me know what you think about a disambig page. Kaisershatner 01:04, 22 November 2005 (UTC)

Merging Ethnic Jew into Jew

Hi Joe: I have recently come across the article Ethnic Jew composed by User:Zestauferov once upon a time because he felt "This page is created in response to the lack of NPOV on the Jew page...11 May 2004". After all this time, the article is basically redundant because all the "base lines" are indeed discussed and covered in the main Jew article (as well as in the Judaism article). I have therefore inserted a merge template on the Ethnic Jew page. Can you please look into this. Thanks. IZAK 02:42, 22 November 2005 (UTC)

Template:Rating and WP:POINT

Thanks for the pointer to this interesting proposal. Point well taken. Tom Haws 04:13, 22 November 2005 (UTC)

Moldovan language

It only a mater of politeness to wait until the consensus at Talk:Moldovan language reached. Average English reader may click the link and read, if he wants to know. But the main issue here is that an infobox is for listing basic data, (kind of table of contents), not to explain them. Either you keep it clean and plain, or you are opening the door to various "explanations" and notes and comments, and who will decide which notices are important to "average English reader" and which are not. mikka (t) 06:09, 22 November 2005 (UTC)

I am well aware that the languages are the same. You missed my another point I labelled as major in my opinion: and infobox is not a place for details and explanations. When Moldova decides that their language is called Romanian, then "average readers" will be out of trouble. Besides, I don't see much logic in your explanation: if a person does not know what the heck Moldavian is, then he will click the link. If he does not care, then why would we? In the realm of hyperlinks "inline" explanations of terms are reasonable only when their absence impairs comprehension. Ours is not the case IMO. mikka (t) 07:08, 22 November 2005 (UTC)

Jan. Seattle meetup

hey there - I can actually do pretty much any of the last three weekends of Jan. The 21st was just a preference, because it's my birthday weekend :) I'm just coming up for a social trip and haven't made any real plans yet. Will clarify accordingly on the meetup page. Brassratgirl 22:16, 22 November 2005 (UTC)

Neofascism and religion

Hi Joe: Are you aware of this abomination: Neofascism and religion#Judaism? What's your opinion? I have tried to add some "rational info" for whatever it's worth. Take a look. Maybe the whole article should be nominated for deletion? IZAK 11:38, 23 November 2005 (UTC)

IDESCAT

I removed that link from Alt Camp because the link was bad for over a month (Oct 21 database dump) Once I realized that the server wasn't working, I realized I erred in my ways. You are welcome to revert my changes. --Adam 14:08, 23 November 2005 (UTC)

Your vandalism

JMabel - I'm not sure you intended it this way, but your recent reversion of Right-wing politics at least bordered on vandalism by committing a wholesale reversion around one point (see Wikipedia:Vandalism); in fact it was worse, because you didn't even argue with a single point - you just reverted because you didn't like it. If you think the restructuring was a bad idea, explain in the Talk page why the previous structure was better; if you think content was lost, figure out a way to reintroduce it. The version I redid was a useless, trashy article, and I made a good-faith effort to improve it, boldly. Try to be constructive. --Leifern 12:39, 24 November 2005 (UTC)

Moldovan language

Hi Joe (do you prefer Joe or Jmabel?),

While I certainly agree that the official language of Moldova is, save a few insignificant differences, the same as the official language of Romania, I think it's quite reasonable to say that colloquial Moldovan is a different language from Romanian because it has a very different grammar and vocabulary.

The most basic example I can think of:

In Iasi they would say "Mashina mia'i noua" ("Mashina mea este noua"). In Chisinau though it would probably be "La mine mashina'i noua". Anybody who said that in Iasi would be laughed out of the country.

But in the official language, you absolutely can't say that. It'd have to be "Mashina mea este noua". --Node 02:33, 25 November 2005 (UTC)

  • What he said is false. I am sure he does not have any clue about what he's talking about. Read what Ronline told him. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bonaparte (talk • contribs) 25 Nov 2005
    • I'm very suspicious on "La mine maşina'i noua", since "la mine" would mean something more like "at my house." "La" as an article, to the best of my knowledge, does not exist in any form of Daco-Romanian, it's strictly a preposition. However, even if this is true, it is at most a small dialectic difference. Exactly this difference can be found regionally within Spanish—"Mi coche" vs. "La mía coche"—(as can vocabulary differences amounting to as much as 10% of the vocabulary) but, to the best of my knowledge no competent linguist considers Mexican Spanish vs. Andaluz vs. Castilian to be anything other than dialects of a single language. -- Jmabel | Talk 18:47, 25 November 2005 (UTC)
      • In Iasi it would mean "at my (house)". "La" here is not an article, it's a preposition. "La mine mashina" means "At mine the car". In Iasi people would laugh at this, but people actually say it that way in Moldova. Also, "La mine fratele'i in armata" is a good example -- "at mine brother"..., or "la noi mama'i chizdeal" -- "at our mother"... Of course for obvious reasons you'll most likely not hear the last sentence there ;p. Perhaps "la tine mama'i chizdeal", though. --Node 20:43, 26 November 2005 (UTC)
        "Chizdeal" is not familiar to me, and Google does not find even one instance of it, so I assume that this is an idiosyncratic spelling or usage. Also, trying to get a clarification: are you saying that in Moldova "La mine fratele'i in armata" would be the normal way to say "Fratele meu e(şte) în armata"? If so, that would be a dialectic difference worth noting but, again, hardly a difference that would be characterized as a different language.
        • "Chizdeal" is usually written as "pizdeal". Sometimes people use "chizdeal" on SMS and such, because that's how it's actually pronounced. Now, what I'm saying is that "La mine fratele'i în armata" is the colloquial way of saying it in urban Moldova. This certainly isn't the only difference, only an example. There are hundreds of words and grammatical features that are unique to the colloquial Moldovan speech. Now, usually the standard for languages vs. dialects is mutual intelligibility. Well, quite often, colloquial Moldovan makes 0 sense to Romanian ears. How would you translate "mashina buxuieshte"? Or for that matter, how would a Romanian from Iashi translate it? He'd probably say something like "the car is buxing". Or "sclad"... do you have an inkling of what that might mean? Separate languages have been recognised with far fewer differences than these --Node 03:05, 27 November 2005 (UTC)
        I can find plenty of such differences within the U.S. English. Consider a construct like "Now you be making sense" [3] (vs. "Now you're making sense" ) an African American construct. Or "Y'all" as a plural form of "you", common among African Americans and white Southerners, unknown among Whites elsewhere in the country. Or the Yiddish-derived "Fine by me" (meaning "Fine with me"), common in New York or among Jewish Americans, but not common elsewhere among Gentiles. These regionalisms can rise to the level of dialect, but certainly not distinct languages. -- Jmabel | Talk 21:12, 26 November 2005 (UTC)
        • Ahh, but you don't seem to recognise the fact that some experts actually consider AAVE to be a separate language from (Standard) English. "Y'all" isn't "unknown" among whites *anywhere* in the US -- everybody knows very clearly what it means. And we're not talking about phrases here, or individual words, we're talking about morphosyntactical differences as well as deep splits in the vocabulary base of the languages which cannot be found among dialects of US English. --Node 03:05, 27 November 2005 (UTC)

Also, you're saying things like "that doesn't make it a separate language" (not exactly what you said, but it's the essence). Well, I had previously thought you had some formal training in linguistics, but now it's quite obvious that you don't, as practically every linguist realises that "dialect" vs "language" is always a political or sociolinguistic distinction, rather than one based on any real scientific principles. The speech of Belgrade has only a couple of dozen real differences with that of Sarajevo, and yet they're different languages now, and few people really dispute this (!). On the other hand, Kurdish "dialects" are often so wildly different as to be completely mutually incomprehensible. Few self-respecting linguists will make a judgement as to what is a language and what is not, and if they do it's usually with some sort of qualification beforehand, like "Well, there isn't really a definite distinction between dialect and language, but"... For example, in one article, Donald Dyer calls the colloquial speech of urban Moldova "Moldovan (language)", and yet refers to it at other points in the same article as "Moldovan Romanian" or "Moldovan (dialect)", and yet he's referring to the same variety. What most linguists have found is the best compromise in disputed cases is to use the term "language variety" or "linguistic modality". "Language variety" still implies some sort of subservient position, thus "linguistic modality". It's pointless to argue for hours on end about whether or not Moldovan and Romanian are different languages, or whether one is just a dialect of the other. Two different people can look at the same set of facts on the situation and come to opposite conclusions. So long as we both recognise the true extent of the differences between the two, if we still disagree as to whether or not they should be considered dialects or languages, there's one glaring reason why that might be: what is to me a language may be to you a dialect, because our internal definitions may vary. At the end of the day, Moldovan and Romanian are neither "languages" nor "dialects", but rather "linguistic modalities". --Node 03:22, 27 November 2005 (UTC)

(side note) Of course other Americans understand y'all, but they would be very unlikely to use it other than as a joke or imitation, probably in a cliched phrase like "Y'all come visit".
FWIW, I totally dispute the claim that Bosnian, Croatian, and Serbian are different languages. They are different, politically chosen names for a single language. Yes, certainly there are gray zones, and the line is often drawn politically—I'm the one who insisted on getting "A shprakh iz a diyalekt mit an armey un a flot" into Wikipedia—but that doesn't mean that there is no real distinction. One can reasonably argue over whether Andaluz or Mexican Spanish should be considered a separate language from Castillian Spanish, rather than merely a different dialect, but it's silly to claim that French is merely a dialect. Scots English is a pretty darn thick dialect in terms of vocabulary and pronunciation (consider "I havenae seen it wi' me ain e'es" or "he was a bonny wee bairn") and I guess a case could be made for calling it a language (weaker, probably, because I don't think there are any significant grammatical differences).
Well, I agree with your dispute, but apparently most people nowadays, including authoritative sources, consider them to be separate languages. "Scots English" vs "Scots" is a difference you've missed. Please see Scots language -- almost all authoritative sources nowadays consider it to be a separate language, and there are indeed many grammatical differences (nobody in English says "the now", for example). --Node 19:44, 27 November 2005 (UTC)
I don't doubt that there are some regionalisms in the speech of Chişinau, but I sincerely doubt that there is the kind of shift at the River Prut that amounts to people speaking one language on one side of the river and another on the other. -- Jmabel | Talk 06:11, 27 November 2005 (UTC)
I never said there was a shift at the Prut. I said in _urban_ Moldova. The shift isn't at the Prut, but rather at the outer limits of the major urban centres of Moldova (especially Chisinau). People in some tiny village just east of the Prut aren't going to be saying "La mine fratele'i...", you have to go into the cities for that. --Node 19:44, 27 November 2005 (UTC)

Ronline for Admin

http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_adminship/Ronline and http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_adminship#Ronline . I have nominated Ronline to be Administrator for English Wikipedia. Let's vote for him! Bonaparte  talk & contribs

Bonaparte and Mikkalai

Dear Joe! First of all I would like to thank you one more time for your help. It was very good to make direct contact with you while I was blocked illegal by Mr. Mikka. He used against me his rights of Admin in an abusive approach. I've send you also today an email with all the aspects concerning his abusive manner and I'm glad that you helped me and now I can defend myself. I really hope that this was his last abusive approach and he will stop doing illegal measures like he did to me and others. Bonaparte  talk & contribs
As I said in response to that email, if you want to make complaints about Mikkalai, start an RfC, don't send me email. -- Jmabel | Talk 19:52, 26 November 2005 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Jmabel/Archive_25&oldid=1140485794"