User talk:M. Dingemanse/Archive5

My talk archives

Archive 1 (back to August 2004)
Archive 2 (October - December 2004)
Archive 3 (January - February 2005)
Archive 4 (March 2005)
Archive 5 (April - May 2005)
Archive 6 (June 2005)
Archive 7 (July - August 2005)
Archive 8 (September - October 2005)
Archive 9 (November - December 2005)
Archive 10 (January - February 2006)
Archive 11 (March - April 2006)
Archive 12 (May - August 2006)
Archive 13 (September - October 2006)
Archive 14 (November 2006 - January 2007)
Archive 15 (February 2007 - onward)

Glory, glory, glory

I'm a huge fan of your language work. The lang map, first time I saw it, looked as though it were out of a book... I wondered what kind of license we had it under!

Also, I hope we can work out something reasonable and fun tomorrow :-) To brush away all this extraneous gloom.

Wow, thank you, Sj, for your kind words! It's great to hear that people appreciate my work. — mark ✎ 12:20, 3 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Removing entries on users talk page

Please do not remove comments left on other peoples user page. The page is theirs and if they want it removed let them remove it themselves. What you are doing is considered vandalism

[Posted by 66.193.230.226 (talk · contribs) after my removal of insulting language at TBSDY's talk.]

Sprelling and Chinese

Ha! You show your true nature just in time! Instead of the Distinguished Order of the TPH that I was about to confer on you, for bravery in the Great April Fool's War, I'm vindictively designing a special "Sprelling Nazi Barnstar" just for you...! ;-) Mark, only if you have the time to spare, do you think you could see your way to commenting on Chinese language on peer review? Listed by Karmosin, a pretty new user. I've noted down some superficial impressions, but that's after all not a lot like getting informed commentary. --Bishonen|Talk 07:37, 3 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Yes, sure, thanks for notifying me — it's my practice indeed to comment on all articles linguistic at PR! I believe I've met Karmosin at some other linguistic articles. As for the Sprelling Branstar, I'm looking froward to it (although my share in the Great April Fool's War was somewhat limited as I was out, spending a sunny day of spring with my fiancée...) (I might as well admit that my addiction to Wikipedia has attracted her attention...) — mark ✎ 12:13, 3 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Thanks!

Hi Mark, Thank you for support and very kind words in my nomination and my talk page. All those extra tabs are sort of intimidating. On a separate note, I've been vaguely following your exchange with Trilobite, but am uncertain where things now stand with Xed's DRC culture page... Thanks again! Banyan Tree 04:10, 4 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Well, Xed has assured me that it is not lost, though it might take some time before we can use it. It is deleted from Wikipedia now, as all of Xed's pages have been deleted, then recreated and subsequently redirected (though admins can view deleted edits, try at User:Xed/draft5). It will come back eventually. — mark ✎ 07:24, 4 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Stop removing other users comments on other users talk page

Feel free to remove anything you would like on YOUR talk page, but do not remove comments from other users talk page. If that user wants it removed, they can remove it themselves. If you continue doing this you will be blocked

[posted by 72.29.74.163 (talk · contribs)]

You are posting insulting language on the Talk page of a user that has left Wikipedia. Please don't be a hypocrite. — mark ✎ 14:28, 6 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Images and media for deletion

I am contacting people who previously helped to vote to delete a generally objectionable photograph by a vote of 88 to 21, and who might be unaware that immediately after that image was voted to be deleted someone posted another which was very similar in content. My objections to this, and the previous image that was voted to be deleted might be based upon reasons far different from any that you have, but I do object to it, and consider the posting of such images to be acts of asinine stupidity, which burdens the project and its major educational aims in ways that they should not be burdened, and can be extremely detrimental to the acceptance and growth of WIkipedia's use and influence. Thus far those who I believe to be in the extreme minority of Wikipedians who would like to include these images, many who have been channeled to the voting page from the article with which it is associated have dominated the voting, 23 to 12 (as of the time that I composed this message). I would like to be somewhat instrumental in shedding a bit more light upon the issue, and if possible, helping to turn the tide against its inclusion. It might also be necessary to begin making an effort to establish an explicit Wikipedia policy against explicite photographic depictions of humans engaged in erotic, auto-erotic, or quasi-erotic activities. To my limited knowledge such images have not been accepted as appropriate anywhere else within this project, and frankly I can agree with those who are casually labeled prudes for opposing their inclusion, that they should not be. Vitally important information that might be unwelcome by some is one thing that should never be deleted, but un-needed images that can eventually prevent or impede many thousands or millions of people from gaining access to the great mass of truly important information that Wikipedia provides is quite another matter. There are vitally important distinctions to be made. Whatever your reasons, or final decisions upon the matter, I am appealing for more input on the voting that is occurring at Wikipedia:Images_and_media_for_deletion. ~ Achilles † 04:05, 7 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Chinese language

Hi Mark,

I noticed you gave quite a few very constructive comments at Wikipedia:Peer review/Chinese language/archive1, two of which were:

Phonology — strictly speaking, talk about syllables belongs to morphology rather than phonology. (I suspect you don't feel like writing a 'Morphology' section — it might be better to place this bit into 'Grammar' then, but I'm not sure).
Regardless of the placement, if I read that "Chinese phonology is strictly bound to a set number of syllables with a fairly rigid construction", I wonder why that 'set number of syllables' isn't disclosed and why that 'fairly rigid construction' is not outlined; in other words, I would expect a little something about canonical word and syllable structure (I believe Chinese lects have a preference for open syllables).

I recently went ahead and totally rewrote the Phonology section, splitting it up into Morphology and Phonology, and explaining in greater detail the structure of words and syllables. Do you think you can take a look at it and give me your comments on what you think about the new revision? [Start here]

Thanks! --Umofomia 08:55, 7 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Sure! I just read it, and it looks great! I have a few comments, which I will post on the Peer review request page. — mark ✎ 10:09, 7 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for taking the time to review my revisions, Mark. I replied to some of your comments on the peer review page, so feel free to reply to them if necessary. Anyway, it's way past time for me to go to bed now, so I will see you tomorrow. :) --Umofomia 11:07, 7 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Thanks!

Thanks for rv'ing the "Wikipedia is communism" stuff on my user page yesterday. FreplySpang (talk) 12:07, 9 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Not at all! The vandal hit me, too (incidentally, the first time that my user page was vandalized). — mark ✎ 12:11, 9 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Thanks from me too. Guess that guy was mad at me for asking him to stop before. — Knowledge Seeker দ 19:46, 9 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Incidentally, out of curiosity, why do you have the <nowiki> </nowiki> in your signature? — Knowledge Seeker দ 19:47, 9 Apr 2005 (UTC)

The em-dash is part of my sig but I don't want it to be wikilinked. So I cancel the first wikilinkage by using a space between nowiki tags, then follows the em-dash, and then the rest. There might be a better way to do this... :) — mark ✎ 12:51, 10 Apr 2005 (UTC)

My signature is the same way; I had the same problem. When MediaWiki got upgraded recently, it became easier to do it. Go to your preferences, and click "Raw signature"—that way, you can type exactly what you want to appear as your signature; the software won't add any extra characters or links. I have — [[User:Knowledge Seeker|Knowledge Seeker]] [[User talk:Knowledge Seeker|দ]] for mine. Hope this helps! — Knowledge Seeker দ 17:59, 10 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Testing... — mark ✎ 18:34, 10 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Ah, great — thanks for the tip!

Thanks for removing the WP:PR references on WP:AD

That had been thoroughly confusing me, and a number of others (novice users and WP:PR long-timers surprised at the WP:AD referrals they were getting alike!). Well done and thank you :) VivaEmilyDavies 15:52, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Not at all! I think the many accuracy disputes that ended up on PR got me thinking; when I did a 'what links here' from WP:PR, I was led to WP:AD (which I never had come across before...). — mark ✎ 17:09, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)

VfD Hiplife

You probably know more about Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Hiplife than I do... - Mustafaa 06:57, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for alerting me, I put in a vote. The debate seems to have died down, but I think Hip Life will make it. It's a shame that people put these things on VfD so fast and reckless. — mark ✎ 21:58, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Thank you!

Thank you for your vote of confidence on my RfA. It particularly means a lot coming from someone whose work I respect so much, both in and out of the article space. I shall attempt to put the shiny new buttons to good use! Mindspillage (spill yours?) 20:51, 18 Apr 2005 (UTC)

For bravery and being there -> the WikiMedal for Janitorial Services

You've had a long day of reverting vandalism and general tidying-up in Aramaic language. Your edit summary, "What is it with Aramaic, I thought. And then I found out that it's on the Main Page today", seemed particularly poignant. Please accept this medal given in gratitude for your vigilance with the wikimop. --Gareth Hughes 23:22, 18 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Thank you for the medal! That's very kind of you. I'm afraid it also shows that I'm a Wikiholic... — mark ✎ 12:32, 20 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Mende mended

Happy to keep an eye out. What would the polite term be - pseudohistory? You might be interested in The Languages of Africa, by the way. - Mustafaa 19:40, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for looking into it. The Languages of Africa is a very nice article (don't forget to add references tho) :). — mark ✎ 21:18, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)

My conversation with Roylee

Since Roylee doesn't want my questions on his talk page, I'm preserving my conversation with him here on my own talk page. — mark ✎ 07:22, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Mende

Would you care to elaborate on you recent additions to Mende language? I'm not sure what you were trying to say there. I've pulled them out pending citation, if you don't mind — let's talk about it first on Talk:Mende language. Regards, — mark ✎ 14:19, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)

The same holds for your additions to Mende tribe, which were full of so-called weasel words. Please remember that Wikipedia's job is only to report facts, not to 'reshape the views of scholars', to borrow a part of your text at Mende tribe. Also, you really might want to check your sources. Not every website can be treated as a reputable source (see Wikipedia:Reliable sources). Kind regards, — mark ✎ 14:56, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I note that you were using a misleading edit summary at Mende language. You described your recent edit as 'adding external academic references' whereas in fact you reverted to your own version of the article, furthermore adding a misinformed statement about English and Mende. Why not discuss this on Talk:Mende language first, like I asked you? I believe I clearly explained my position and my actions. Kind regards, — mark ✎ 15:22, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Worries

Hi, Roylee. After reviewing some of your contributions more closely I'm starting to feel worried. It appears that you have been trying to lend your arguments credibility by citing phrases of articles that you have added yourself before. Two examples:

You edited the history section of West Africa to include a statement about shipbuilding, referring to the article shipbuilding. Turning to that article, we find that you yourself added a tidbit about seafaring Saharans, perhaps not surprisingly referring to West Africa. This is an obvious (and profoundly worrying) circularity.
You have posted a lengthy essay at Talk:Timeline of motor and engine technology. In it, you refer to the articles Shipbuilding (yet again) and West Africa (...). You also cite Maritime archeology, which, not surprisingly, also refers to the statements you yourself added to the history section of West Africa.

Please review the No original research, Cite sources, Wikipedia:Verifiability and Wikipedia:Check your facts policies and refrain from doing this in the future.

I note furthermore that several other editors have tried to make this clear to you. What are your own thoughts about this policies and about the above examples of your editing pattern? — mark ✎ 17:11, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Roylee's answer to this was, apart from deleting my comments:

Users: Mende/tree

You reference the above ... my debut on Wiki. However, as you may find, the above finds modern research support.
I'm allowing the edits to stand. So let's leave it at that. However I sense and suspect underlying hostility and deception in your writing styles. Therefore, I don't want your words here. Maybe my personal feelings are to blame. Either way, please don't revert my Talk page. Sincerely, Roylee

After this, some other editors also posted question and comments to Roylee's talk, followed by blanking. The last exchange Roylee and I had before he blanked his talk page again:

Mende etc.

Hi, Roylee. I will not push it and revert your deletion of my (and other's) comments again. I just want to say that deleting comments you disagree with is frowned upon by many people here, because it makes it difficult to talk in honesty and clarity. Please keep in mind that it might even make it look like you're trying to hide something. If you don't want to talk, then don't; but please refrain from reverting changes of other editors who take the time to explain what they did and why. Kind regards, — mark ✎ 15:04, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Sorry, but you are a con artist mixing disguise, deception and truth. All my personal and prior experiences guide me away from attempting to engage in any intelligent discussion. Apparently you have problems with memory, because as I said before, I don't want your words here. How many times must I say this? Begone. --Roy Lee

Suez Canal

Thanks for your note about Roylee's Suez Canal edits. Perhaps he will get his hypotheses peer-reviewed elsewhere before bringing them back again. logologist 22:12, 23 Apr 2005 (UTC)

User:Evertype

Thanks for the explanation on user pages. I'll read it. 2004-12-29T22:45Z 07:26, 28 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Kayla/Kaïliña article/s

I move we merge both to Kaïliña, and copy/paste the Talk from Kayla to Talk:Kaïliña. Notifying you since you've participated on the Talk page at either or both of the articles. Tomer ^TALK 03:20, Apr 29, 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for notifying me! — mark ✎ 16:59, 1 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

J/R/T RfC

I've filed a joint RfC concerning the behavior of the users Johan Magnus, Ruhrjung and Tuomas at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Johan Magnus, Ruhrjung, Tuomas. I would very much appreciate comments from experienced users like yourself in this matter. Peter Isotalo 21:35, May 2, 2005 (UTC)

nl.wikipedia

Afrikaanse talen

Hi Mark, Ik zag dat je wat ervaring hebt met Afrikaanse talen. Ik spreek alleen een beetje isiXhosa en ben begonnen daarover wat in de nl wiktionary neer te zetten. Ik heb wat bladzijden met uitleg over het klasse-systeem neergepend. Ik weet alleen niet hoe algemeen bruikbaar dat is voor andere Bantoe-talen. Weet jij daar wat meer van. Overigens pas op met Yuba, ik heb wel eens wat vraagtekens achter zijn 'kennis' gezet en ontzettend ruzie gekregen (over Sheshonq I en zo) nl:Gebruiker:Jcwf

Je spreekt isiXhosa, wat gaaf! Heb je dat in Zuid Afrika geleerd? Wat betreft het klasse-systeem: het systeem 'werkt' in heel Bantu ongeveer hetzelfde; de verschillen zijn vooral te vinden in de precieze vorm van de prefixen (Swahili mu-/m- komt bijvoorbeeld overeen met u- in isiZulu/isiXhosa voor klasse 1), en in het aantal klassen per taal (Sotho heeft er bijvoorbeeld ongeveer 20, Swahili ongeveer 15 en Ngumba nog maar 8). Maar hoe het in de zin werkt, bijvoorbeeld dat de klasse-prefix verschijnt voor het werkwoord en voor het bijvoeglijk naamwoord, dat is in grote lijnen hetzelfde in heel Bantu.

Wat betreft Yuba: ik weet het, daarom pak ik het zo omzichtig aan en ben ik zo duidelijk over mijn veranderingen en voorstellen op nl:Berbertalen. Hij is ooit hier op de Engelse Wikipedia (zonder succes) bezig geweest om een nogal chauvinistische visie in de Berber-gerelateerde artikelen te krijgen. Helaas lijkt dat op de Nederlandse Wikipedia wel gelukt te zijn, en dat is één van de redenen waarom ik er nog maar zo weinig gedaan heb. (Een andere reden is dat ik het handiger vind om mijn aandacht en tijd maar aan één versie te wijden). — mark ✎ 22:01, 1 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Enkosi kakhulu, mhlobo wam. Ik heb dus bladzijden aangemaakt als [[WikiWoordenboek:Bantoe/Elfde klasse]] met daarop een samenvatting van hoe het in het isiXhosa gaat. Als ik je goed begrijp kan dezelfde bladzijde ook voor andere Bantoe talen gebruikt worden evt. en dat wilde ik even weten. Dingemanse? Hm, die naam hoorde ik wel vaker toen ik in Terneuzen woonde... En ja daarna heb ik 3 jaar in de vroegere Ciskei gezeten en nu dus in de VS. Ik verblijf wat wiki betreft vnl. op nl.wiki (sinds er zon 400 bladzijden waren), maar tegenwoordig zit ik meer op af. en sinds kort wat op wiktionary. Groeten nl:Gebruiker:Jcwf PS We kunnen je hulp tav Yuba goed gebruiken. Hij is een onopgelost probleem. PPS Ik heb een jaar of zo geleden wel eens een emailtje naar Harry Stroomer gestuurd hij is prof in dit soort talen aan een Ned. universiteit (Leiden geloof ik). Hij verklaarde zich bereid om korte stukjes in te leveren over berbertalen en zo. Ik ben er verder niet meer op in gegaan maar wellicht is het een goede bron om gerichte vragen aan te stellen?

Yuba

Ik heb geen zin me weer met hem te bemoeien, maar achter de schermen steun ik je van harte wat betreft Yuba. Zijn edits zijn vaak eenzijdig qua POV, en door de meesten van ons moeilijk te verbeteren omdat we van de betreffende onderwerpen geen verstand hebben. - Andre Engels 11:52, 3 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Dank voor je steun, Andre. Het zou al veel helpen als er veel mensen op nl:Overleg:Berbertalen kwamen zeggen dat ze academische publicaties van gerenommeerde Berber-taalkundigen meer vertrouwen dan Yuba's Arabische websites, en dat de wijzigingen en toevoegingen die ik heb aangebracht het artikel significant verbeteren (als dat zo is). Ik probeer het zo te spelen dat het accent niet op Yuba komt te liggen maar op wat hier heet Wikipedia:Reliable sources. — mark ✎ 12:19, 3 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hallo Mark, er zijn eigenlijk niet zoveel mensen die mij Michael noemen, ik was zelfs vergeten dat ik die naam op mijn gebruikerspagina gezet heb :-) Ja wat Yuba betreft ... wat kan ik over hem zeggen. Vorig jaar nog had ik hem nog geprobeerd wat bij te brengen in de taalkunde. Deze gebruiker is behoorlijk irritant en heel koppig. Ik wil niet oneerbiedig of onvriendelijk zijn, maar dat is vaak een kenmerk van onwetende mensen. Zoals André hierboven gezegd heeft, heb ik eigenlijk ook niet zoveel zin om met hem te bemoeien. Aan de andere kant ligt hier een taak voor ons om mensen te 'onderwijzen'. Wij zijn immers bezig om een complete encyclopedie op poten te zetten en niet om mensen te 'hersensspoelen' of om onze meningen door te laten drukken oid. Zoals je zelf geschreven hebt in je gebruikerspagina: Laat u niet overwinnen door het kwade, maar overwin het kwade door het goede hehehe ... Maar goed ik zal in elk geval wat erover zeggen in de pagina Overleg:Berbertalen. Ik ben overigens ook voor de term Berbertalen. Deze overkoepelende term is algemener dan Amazight of iets wat erop lijkt. Meursault2004 23:52, 3 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Zulu

Mark, I didn't really have a problem with User:212.139.198.229's edits to that page, and, mindful of don't bite the newbies, I am just asking what your issue was that deserved a revert. Wizzy…☎ 12:37, May 6, 2005 (UTC)

You're right, especially about not biting the newcomers. It looked to me (and still looks to me) like a sort word game, trying to change as many words as possible without altering the flow of the article, and that's why I didn't like it. I shouldn't have reverted though — I should've asked. — mark ✎ 21:15, 6 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

It looks to me like a word game - indeed, there is no substance change. I am leaving it alone. Wizzy…☎ 08:08, May 7, 2005 (UTC)

Lovely map at Bantu languages, thank you. Wizzy…☎ 10:09, May 8, 2005 (UTC)

It's my job :). Glad you like it! — mark ✎ 10:30, 8 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you!

Mark, what a lovely comment on the RFA page, thank you very much! As immodest as I've become, it made me blush with undeserving. Bishonen | talk 11:11, 7 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Sunflower of thanks

I noticed you left a sunflower of thanks in my talk page. Thank you. :-D --Chris 00:04, 8 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Not at all, glad you like it! — mark ✎ 00:12, 8 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Somali language

Mark, I wrote this response on the other two threads, my talk and talk:Somali language. So, basically let me paste it for you once more.

I edited and wrote 'occupied Somali region of Ethiopia" because there was/is no official and clarified agreement the former or current goverments of Somalia and Ethiopia. This dispute resulted one major war, plus another two minor unofficial wars regarding that region called "Soomaali Galbeed" (Western Somalia) by Somalis. It is still in official dispute, which most Somalis regard unsolved. So this justifies my reasoning of it being 'occupied.' Mind you the "border" between Somalia and Ethiopia isn't internationally recognized, and no body has an official agreement where to draw the line. Even the colonial powers who divided the Somali people let that "boundary" be vague, as it is today. It isn't a border per se as other international known boundaries are.

PS1, I know wikipedia for about two years now and, believe me, read all its rules and regulations. Even though I hardly used edite and that I am very familiar the so-called 'edit wars.' Honestly, It isn't my cup of tea to have a dispute on online, even in real life....it isn't just me!

PS2, where did you learn that phrase, "nabadeey," from? I am presuming you aren't Somali, are you?

[posted by Somaali (Talk) 06:05, 8 May 2005]

Thanks for explaining. I'll respond on Talk:Somali language. — mark ✎ 08:30, 8 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to the Fact and Reference Check WikiProject

Dear new member,

Welcome to the Fact and Reference Check WikiProject!

No doubt you're familiar with what our noble (and somewhat lofty!) goal is, and I'm really glad you've decided to help to try and make it a reality. Especially at this point, it's important that articles make good use of references so people know that it is now a requirement that we reference all added material for high-quality articles. Thank you so much for helping out in our noble cause :)

You might find the biweekly special article interesting. Every fortnight, an otherwise good article that lacks any sources is chosen, and the Fact and Reference Check team works collaboratively to add references to the article. We typically follow the guidelines suggested at Wikipedia:Footnote3; however, we have used {{an}} and {{anb}} rather than {{ref}} and {{note}} in the past. {{ref}} and {{note}} were created solely because they thought it was a better name, and has no other advantages over {{an}} and {{anb}}.

If you have any questions, feel free to leave a message on the project's talk page. You can also contact me personally.

— Frazzydee|✍ 00:00, 11 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the nice welcome, Frazzydee! — mark ✎ 00:04, 11 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

ISBNs

I understand and agree about purchasers of books based on ISBN; who's going to go out and buy a book just because it's referenced in an encyclopaedia? But being linked into all my local major libraries means it's very easy for me to check for an old, out of print, expensive book that I can read, as a reference. And without ISBNs it's too much work doing a Library of Congress / Amazon lookup (I've done several, to supply ISBNs, I know what a pain in the butt it can be, especially in languages other than my own). With ISBN links, only one person needs to do the work - once. ISBN lookups is something I've done for wikipedia in the past, and expect to do in the future; having all the pages needing the attention in one place eliminates the hunt for articles missing ISBNs. Josh Parris ✉ 07:29, 11 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Javanese Wikipedia

Hé Mark, ik begrijp dat je een moderator bent. Kan je misschien iets voor ons doen en dat is om het Javaans op de hoofdpagina te zetten bij de wikipedia's die al meer dan 1.000 artikelen tellen. Wij hebben op dit moment al ruim 1.400! Ok alvast bedankt hé :-) Meursault2004 16:40, 11 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Mark, as an administrator can you please do us a favour? Please put the Javanese wikipedia on the Main Page as it already reached 1,000 articles. At this moment we already have more than 1,400 articles. Thanx! Meursault2004 16:40, 11 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Just did it/net gedaan. Gegroet, — mark ✎ 16:58, 11 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks/Bedankt! Meursault2004 15:04, 12 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Cough on ice

Oh, no, you put cough on ice, really? How awful, I blame myself, yet can't but be gratified by your insinuating compliment, "Bishonen, nobody is truly ignorant the way you are!" I'll be charmed to take a look at Gbe languages tomorrow. Mark, if you have any time to spare, do you think you could see your way to commenting on Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Johan Magnus, Ruhrjung, Tuomas? It's an RFC that's moving rather slowly, and, hmm, oh yeah, it's about events at some articles on Swedish, probably an interest of yours as, uh, cough, one of the less-known African languages. --Bishonen | talk 01:16, 12 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I'm looking forward to it! As for the RfC, I'll look into it; Peter Isotalo pointed me to it before. In fact, I've already read huge parts of it, but I can't seem to grasp what it is all about, and don't know where to start commenting. — mark ✎ 12:54, 12 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Bantoid languages

Great job on turning the redirect at Bantoid languages into an article! Should the genetic language details for 'Bantoid language' in articles like Luganda language and Kiswahili point to Bantoid languages or Bantu language? TreveX^talk 19:58, 12 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Well, those two are both Bantu languages, in the sense that they belong to the 'Bantu' language family, and therefore that is where they should point. To obscure the matter, this family is called 'Narrow' Bantu in the language tables at Swahili and Luganda which is because in the past linguists didn't always agree on the exact make-up of the Bantu family (see Narrow Bantu languages for the details). This family in turn is a branching of the 'Bantoid'-grouping, which next to Bantu includes languages somewhat more distantly related to the Bantu languages. I'm not sure if I answered your question — it might help to take a look at this overview at the Ethnologue, which shows Bantoid and its branches. — mark ✎ 20:44, 12 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Imagism

Thanks for the missing "as" and the very positive vote. Filiocht | Blarneyman 11:31, May 13, 2005 (UTC)

It's simply worth it. Thanks for giving Wikipedia such articles. — mark ✎ 22:22, 16 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Dorobo

Hi, came across your to-do list item on the Dorobo; a few months ago I created a (inaccurate, I belive) sub-stub based on what my parents had told me — while Googling I quickly realised that I didn't know enough even to write a decent stub. I, for one, would be very happy to read a decent Wikipedia article on this topic, if you find time to write one. (I've also heard the term "Okiek" applied to (N)Dorobo). — Matt Crypto 21:30, 16 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! I gathered some references at User:Mark_Dingemanse/draft4 but I couldn't get around yet to actually writing a decent article — it's a very complicated (but equally intriguing) subject; your help would be appreciated! As for (N)Dorobo being used to refer to the Okiek, I noted a similar thing in Okiek language. I didn't know of the Ndorobo stub. I came across a few of your articles on Tanzanian subjects lately — it's nice and somehow strange to see you working in this corner of Wikipedia, because I associate you first of all with cryptography :). But now I come to think about it, I remember I saw you at the Swahili Wikipedia also — kwa heri! — mark ✎ 21:50, 16 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

What happen?

Mark, the template on the Gbe languages talk page is doing some weird stuff. I put in a bit more about references a while ago, at the end of the edit fied, but on the page, it appears kinda in the middle. If I look at the text via peer review, otoh, that post doesn't appear at all. wtf? --Bishonen | talk 23:59, 16 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I suspect it's merely a caching problem. Try flushing — mark ✎ 00:05, 17 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Bah, the man thinks I don't know from flushing. No, I've figgered it. I used a three-deep heading on the Talk page, and that produced a separate subpage on peer review. Stupid of me... still, using the template kind of invites it, and I noticed Karmosin had done the same thing. I deleted both the separate pages and pasted Karmosin's part back into the template, minus the heading (my own was just a stopgap note to you from earlier today)—I think that's fixed it.--Bishonen | talk 00:45, 17 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Adminship

Thanks Mark. I have noticed your work with appreciation. Perhaps we should do some work on the cognitive linguistics part together.--Wiglaf 19:06, 25 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds good! -- mark ✎ 20:36, 25 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

There was someone leaving a comment here Talk:Prototype (linguistics) that stereotype and Prototype (linguistics) were nowhere near. In my experience prototypical has a very similar meaning to stereotypical, in cognitive semantics. Please correct me if I wrong. If you have the time, the article is in sore need of an expansion.--Wiglaf 21:24, 25 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Limitedgeographicscope

I have already discussed it on the tfd page. And I note that my edit was reverted without explanation. Rick K 22:59, May 26, 2005 (UTC)

(replied over there)

And I saw YOUR comment on the Talk page, which was basically, "yeah, whatever, I don't see any bias, so just go ahead and revert it." That's certainly dialogue. Rick K 23:06, May 26, 2005 (UTC)

No, it was basically "Yeah, whatever, RickK in my opinion has failed to explain why anything was POV or offensive about it." And please note that I deliberately did not edit the template — I was only leaving a comment there to start a dialogue. But you're right, my comment was toned rather impatiently. I'm really sorry for that, and I hope we can cool down and settle this thing in a sensible way. — mark ✎ 23:24, 26 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Concerning explaining your reasoning: the closest you came to an explanation was the following comment:

"I wouldn't have listed it, if the "limited worldview" POV weren't attached to it. This is a deliberate slap in the face to those editors who don't kowtow to the idea that everything American and/or Western is inherently bad."

Several editors have expressed their surprise as to why one would want to interpret the text of the template this way. Remember what it said: "the general perspective and/or the specific examples represent a limited worldview" — I would think that's not a matter of POV but just a matter of fact.

I feel that you're maybe taking this too much as an assessment of the editor instead of the article. There's no talk anywhere of any editor having a limited worldview (which would be a slap in the face indeed); the only thing that is said it that the perspective or the examples of the article are limited in scope.

Let's take Sociology of clothing for a clear example. Don't you agree that its general perspective is limited in scope? And don't you think that the specific examples at present, too, are limited in scope? Well, that's all that this template intends to point out, to make more editors aware of the fact that they are writing for a global audience. — mark ✎ 23:24, 26 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

All I see is that "limited worldview" is a dig at an editor, not even implying, but baldly stating, that, as I said, they're either biased or ignorant. Rick K 23:28, May 26, 2005 (UTC)

OK. But you do see at the same time that the text of the template in fact only talks about the contents of the article? Really Rick, I'm not anti-Western or something, (actually I think you're the very first to suggest anything like that, though I don't take offense) and I loathe personal attacks as much as you do. I suggest we cool down before we talk further. — mark ✎ 23:33, 26 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Although I'm very interested in what you think about Sociology of clothing. — mark ✎ 23:46, 26 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Roylee

hi Mark -- I agree that (as far as I can see) all the stuff added by Roylee is utter g^weuskor. Unfortunately, I cannot support you as energetically as I would like, just now, but I'll be happy to sign any rfc, request to "cite your sources", etc. "stating the basis" of this. best regards, keep protecting the wiki, dab (ᛏ) 09:59, 30 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

rogue admin? Well, what did you expect, on a rogue encyclopedia project! cheers, — dab (ᛏ) 12:41, 31 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Signpost featured articles

Hi Mark, sorry those last ones didn't get in the Signpost. It doesn't look like they were featured until late Sunday, and unfortunately, I finished up the article on Sunday morning and didn't get a chance to check if other articles were featured later. They'll be in next week's issue. --Spangineer ∞ 11:02, May 31, 2005 (UTC)