User talk:Tofoo

This user may have left Wikipedia. Tofoo has not edited Wikipedia since 3 November 2015. As a result, any requests made here may not receive a response. If you are seeking assistance, you may need to approach someone else.

Welcome!

Hello, Tofoo, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! Please take a look at Talk:Universities Allied for Essential Medicine; I had some questions for you there. Jonathunder 01:07, 26 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A question about your work on the literary technique article

I love how you cleaned up the literary technique article in december last year. In fact I love it so much, I am about to do the same on the article about Figure of speech. Is there any obstacles I should know of before undergoing this project? --Spannerjam (talk) 12:28, 9 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, Spannerjam. Appreciate the compliment and your willingness to work on this.

I've given this some thought, and I think a more unified definition of what a figure of speech is (the introduction) would be really helpful in this endeavor. What is meant by a figure of speech? We use the expression itself quite a bit, but in reality we use them in many different ways.

In the article currently, figure of speech is defined as words or phrases used in a nonliteral sense, which is the dictionary definition. I challenge this definition of denotata vs conotata, however.

Yoda from Star Wars has a figure of speech which is distinctly different from others and by his speech Yoda is made identifiable. This figure of speech is defined by the syntactic rules of Yoda's mother language, which would most likely have been OSV (Strong in him the Force is) as opposed to SVO in English (The Force is strong in him).

I used to know a funny surgeon who would say stuff like, "A day without pus is like a day without sunshine" and "Tell him to hit the Bible because I can't do nothing for him." The figure of speech in this case is use of unusual metaphors or similes.

One can say a person has a poetic figures of speech, like V in Vandetta with alliteration.

The above three are examples of different figures of speech, but with varying focii on the issue of language that have little to do with how a literal meaning and its connotation differs. In the case of Yoda, the figure of speech is very literal and there is not an ulterior meaning. In the case of the surgeon, the figure of speech can be literal or figurative. In the case of V, the speech has more of a focus on the sound itself and less to do with meanings, literal or otherwise. What they all have in common, however, is the way it builds familiarity with the speaker - the issue of identification. A figure of speech often times will identify the person - just as the shape of a person's face might.

At this point, there seems to be two major definitions of figure of speech. One is the use of a language such that a thing that is said refers to another thing altogether, sarcasm for example. A more reclusive definition is the use of language such that an expression that is unique or distinctive from the normal use and by that distinctiveness, renders the originator - speaker - identifiable. The word "style" comes to mind.

A figure of speech looses its distinctiveness when everyone uses it. Cliches are hardly figures of speech, unless its use is ironically applied within a novel context, where it would no longer be a cliche.

So I think that would be the starting point. Once the foundation is laid down, the overall structure for the rest of article would arise from that. It would be

Introduction. A unified definition.
Various types of figures of speech.
Examples within various types; this could be multiple sections.
Figure of speech in relation to the domains it belongs to. Rhetoric would be one. Speech would be another.

Hope that is helpful.

Tofoo (talk) 05:54, 11 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Tofoo. Thank you for your swift and comprehensive answer. Unfortunately, I don't understand this section of your text:

"Various types of figures of speech.
Examples within various types; this could be multiple sections.
Figure of speech in relation to the domains it belongs to. Rhetoric would be one. Speech would be another."

What do you mean with types?

What do you mean with examples within various types?

What do you mean with domain? --Spannerjam (talk) 09:26, 12 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Clarification about sections in figure of speech

By types, I mean that there is more than one kind of figure of speech like there is more than one kind of irony. There are different types of figure of speech.

What these are I am not exactly sure. I think one kind is the type of figure of speech that identifies the speaker. Another is the type that people most commonly talk about : saying one thing and meaning something else.

By examples, I mean that for each of type of figure of speech, separate examples can be found.

The identifying type: grammar, poetic sound devices, etc.
The not-so-literal type: metaphors, verbal irony, etc.

By domain, I am talking about to what does figure of speech belong to? Like a "See also" section.

Does it belong to language? I think the answer is yes.
Does it belong to literature? I am not so sure, maybe partially.
Does it belong to interpersonal communication? Yes.
Does it belong to figurative language? no....

Tofoo (talk) 09:58, 12 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Here's how I think would have written the introduction for Figure of Speech

"A figure of speech is the use of words and phrase that is unique or distinctive from the usual expectations of its target audience. Though this distinctiveness most commonly arises from the separation of intended meaning from the literal one, a figure of speech is not necessarily bound to the emphasis on connotations."

"Classically, figure of speech was defined by the rhetorical operations..." -> Here, the focus would be on the issue of literal versus figurative meaning. Deals with semantics.

"Figure of speech, today, refers to the effect that a distinctive use of words and phrases the speaker has on a listener. In order to create the this intended effect, a speaker employs spoken ."

Tofoo (talk) 06:57, 11 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Draft:Busan Brothers Bokjiwon Incident (부산 형제복지원 사건) (May 25)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time.
Please read the comments left by the reviewer on your submission. 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, you can find it at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Busan Brothers Bokjiwon Incident (부산 형제복지원 사건).
To edit the submission, 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.

Thank you for your
contributions to Wikipedia!

Please remember to link to the submission!

You can also get real-time chat help from experienced editors.

j⚛e decker ^talk 19:32, 25 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Busan Brothers Bokjiwon Incident (부산 형제복지원 사건)

Hello Tofoo. It has been over six months since you last edited your WP:AFC draft article submission, entitled "Busan Brothers Bokjiwon Incident".

The page will shortly be deleted. If you plan on editing the page to address the issues raised when it was declined and resubmit it, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}} or {{db-g13}} code. Please note that Articles for Creation is not for indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you want to retrieve it, copy this code: {{subst:Refund/G13|Draft:Busan Brothers Bokjiwon Incident (부산 형제복지원 사건)}}, paste it in the edit box at this link, click "Save page", and an administrator will in most cases undelete the submission.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. JMHamo (talk) 02:46, 30 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Busan Brothers Bokjiwon Incident (부산 형제복지원 사건) concern

Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Draft:Busan Brothers Bokjiwon Incident (부산 형제복지원 사건), a page you created, has not been edited in 6 months. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it.

You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13.

Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 01:30, 26 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Busan Brothers Bokjiwon Incident (부산 형제복지원 사건)

Hello, Tofoo. It has been over six months since you last edited your Articles for Creation draft article submission, "Busan Brothers Bokjiwon Incident".

In accordance with our policy that Articles for Creation is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}} or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. JMHamo (talk) 18:20, 22 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Baek Nam-gi (September 26)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by David.moreno72 was:

This submission's references do not adequately show the subject's notability. Wikipedia requires significant coverage about the subject in reliable sources that are independent of the subject—see the guidelines on the notability of people and the golden rule. Please improve the submission's referencing (see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners), so that the information is verifiable, and there is clear evidence of why the subject is notable and worthy of inclusion in an encyclopedia. If additional reliable sources cannot be found for the subject, then it may not be suitable for Wikipedia at this time.

The comment the reviewer left was:

References and categories are broken. That is what the red lettering means.

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 Draft:Baek Nam-gi 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.

David.moreno72 06:20, 26 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Tofoo, 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! David.moreno72 06:20, 26 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

AfC notification: Draft:Baek Nam-gi has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Baek Nam-gi. Thanks! Robert McClenon (talk) 14:47, 5 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

AfC notification: Draft:Baek Nam-gi has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Baek Nam-gi. Thanks! ~Kvng (talk) 19:53, 5 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Baek Nam-gi (November 6)

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

This submission's references do not adequately show the subject's notability. Wikipedia requires significant coverage about the subject in reliable sources that are independent of the subject—see the guidelines on the notability of people and the golden rule. Please improve the submission's referencing (see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners), so that the information is verifiable, and there is clear evidence of why the subject is notable and worthy of inclusion in an encyclopedia. If additional reliable sources cannot be found for the subject, then it may not be suitable for Wikipedia at this time.

The comment the reviewer left was:

Declining this based on what is in the draft at this time. The individual may be notable, but the draft primarily refers to a demonstration which isn't properly linked, and I can't read any of the references to see whether they provide notability. While English sources are not required, in this case the lack of an English source and the failure to link to a key event do not establish notability.

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 Draft:Baek Nam-gi 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.

Robert McClenon (talk) 01:18, 6 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Baek Nam-gi

Hello, Tofoo. It has been over six months since you last edited your Articles for Creation draft article submission, "Baek Nam-gi".

In accordance with our policy that Articles for Creation is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}} or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. 1989 17:38, 23 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Paik, Namgi concern

Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Draft:Paik, Namgi, a page you created, has not been edited in 5 months. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it.

You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13.

Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 01:32, 28 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Paik, Namgi

Hello, Tofoo. It has been over six months since you last edited your Articles for Creation draft article submission, "Paik".

In accordance with our policy that Articles for Creation is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}} or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Legacypac (talk) 18:30, 19 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]