User talk:Evertype - Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 661kts (talk | contribs) at 17:15, 4 December 2008 (→Name of the country of Ireland: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Revision as of 17:15, 4 December 2008 by 661kts (talk | contribs) (→Name of the country of Ireland: new section)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

/Archive 1 2004-04-11 to 2006-06-03 apart from interesting things I thought I'd keep current.
/Archive 2 2004-04-11 to 2006-07-29 weeding.
/Archive 3 2004-04-11 to 2006-09-21 weeding.
/Archive 4 2006-09-22 to 2007-10-07 weeding.
/Archive 5 2007-10-08 to 2008-01-28 weeding.
/Archive 6 2008-01-29 to 2008-10-28 weeding.

Yogh

Thanks for the expert corrections on yogh in English alphabet. I knew it derived from G by an alternate route than modern G, but wasn't 100% sure. Learn something new every day! Jordi·✆ 14:34, 16 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Ç origine

Usted dice:

fr:Cédille is incorrect. The origin is the Visigothic z, which looked like ʒ but had the topber shaped like a small c. As time went on, it got reanalyzed to c + squiggle. That was after the Carolingian z was introduced to Iberia. I do have it on my plate to write this up with examples in due course, but I am busy right now. Evertype 14:08, August 8, 2005

Voy a dirigirme a usted en español visto que mi nivel de inglés no me permite aun redactar lo que deseo preguntarle con la misma destreza. Sin embargo no dude en contestarme en inglés si lo prefiere. Mi pregunta està relacionada con el tema al que ha contestado sobre el origen de la Ç. Si anhelo tanto conocer el origen de este caracter es porque aquí suele estar envuelto en un cierto misterio. En las enciclopedias españolas a las que he tenido en mis manos se menciona tan apenas esta letra visto su ausencia en nuestra ortografía actual, y en los tratados catalanes a los que he tenido acceso hasta ahora no se suele mencionar demasiado el tema. Supongo que es porquè si tiene algún origen español, para un catalán aférrimo es mejor no aludirlo. Además me interesaría saber cuando mencionamos a los visígodos de que lengua estaríamos hablando (¿alguna germánica?) y cuando habla usted de la z carolingia, ¿estaríamos ya hablando de un latín avanzado, o se trataría de textos en español?

Por favor contácteme en la enciclopedia catalana y dirigase en inglés, español o francés, lo que le sea más cómodo. Thanks!

—Ludor (My talk) 22:53, 8 August 2005

Missing a bopomofo character

A bopomofo symbol with a shape like “帀” (an upside-down ㄓ) was once used in Republic of China to denote the vowel “i” for zhi/shi/chi/ri, and have never been encoded in Taiwanese or PRC's encodings. I being a small potato how to request Unicode Consortium to add this character? --Hello World! 14:44, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

E-mail me about this, please. Evertype 14:46, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

The only material I have is a table of simplified Chinese characters (第一批简体字表) issued by the government of the Republic of China in 1935. I have uploaded them on zh:Image:ROC 1935 simplified 01.jpg and zh:Image:ROC 1935 simplified 10.jpg. The two images are scanned from a book called “现行汉字规范问题” (Xianxing Hanzi guifan wenti, ISBN 7-100-03652-6) published in 2002. --Hello World! 03:23, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

Splendid. Any idea what the phonetic values are? -- Evertype·✆ 07:36, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

It's the vowel “-i” as in “zhi”, “chi”, “shi”, and “ri” (see Pinyin#Comparison chart; also used in “zi”, “ci” and “si” but the phonetic value is slightly different). As I've heard, “zhi” was once written as “ㄓ帀” where ㄓ denotes “zh” and 帀 denotes “-i”. The “帀” was then omitted for simplicity. -Hello World! 11:48, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

I have made a draft proposal. Would you like co-author credit? -- Evertype·✆ 10:59, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

How is the proposal? -Hello World! 12:20, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

It is finished and ready for review. Please e-mail me. -- Evertype·✆ 12:59, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

I am surprised, upon seeing the proposal (ISO/IEC JTC1/SC2/WG2 N3179: Proposal to encode one Bopomofo character in the UCS), that this character was not encoded in earlier rounds. Well done. – Kaihsu 09:11, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

You're welcome. -- Evertype·✆ 11:10, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

Middle Welsh w letter

Hi Michael, do you know if Unicode has or is planning to have a character for the letter , the letter found in some Middle Welsh manuscripts corresponding to W? Angr 13:16, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

Yes, it's on the current ballot. See http://std.dkuug.dk/jtc1/sc2/wg2/docs/n3027.pdf -- Evertype·✆ 13:17, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

WS stuff

I'd like to thank you for building the extensive article review page. I knew it was a good idea, but I was so scared of starting it, and I was enthralled to see that you took up the task. Also, there's some discussion at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Writing_systems#Regarding_scope_and_assessments about how reviews should be sorted and managed. The ikiroid (talk·desk·Advise me) 01:42, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

You

But you've spent a large amount of your life dedicated to Writing systems. Don't you think that people such as Ben Franklin, Sam Pollard, and yourself deserve to be included in the scope of the project? The ikiroid (talk·desk·Advise me) 22:50, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

Ben Franklin didn't invent a writing system. He dabbled with orthography reform for English. Is it necessary to invite more attention to the article about me at this time? I'd advise tagging Sequoyah and similar articles and deciding on "importance" criteria first. And then getting those shipshape. Just a thought. Leave the tag if you wish. -- Evertype·✆ 22:54, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

Well, you notability lies in your knowledge of the written word in all shapes and forms, which I guess conforms to the project. It only takes about a minute and a half to rate an article and add a tag. Plus, the tag would probably attract positive attention, since those who are interested in the topic are cleaning up the article. I'll go ahead and tag other articles like Sequoyah, though. The reason I tagged yours was because I was visting your userpage and I ended up at your biography. The ikiroid (talk·desk·Advise me) 23:25, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

Cascajal block & directionality

Hi there Evertype. Noting your interest in the Cascajal block find and your preliminary analysis of its inscription at your website, I thought you might be interested in some ideas on the text's directionality and layout which were recently posted to the AZTLAN mailing list by Lloyd Anderson, now accessible in the AZTLAN archives over at FAMSI here.

In a nutshell, his analysis proposes a structure arranged into three main columns of shorter horizontal text, rather than the series of seven lines provisionally identified by the original researchers. Such an arrangement would be more typical of Mesoamerican writing in general, and once you look at it that way it does rather leap out at you, so there might well be something to it. Anderson also proposes a potential boustrophedon order for some of the lines within these columns, which would yield a little more in the way of parallelism, and also analyses some of the individual glyphs in the light of other iconographic materials known from broadly the same regional (if not temporal) provenance. Cheers, --cjllw | TALK 02:24, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

Orkhon Turkic in unicode

I was told you might be someone to talk to in order to organise a unicode proposal for the Orkhon script. There's one out there that the government of China drew up for playing Mahjong or something, and it's very scary in what it does to the whole concept of unicode. Any interest in getting involved? —Firespeaker 13:06, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

It's also apparently included in the unicode roadmap for the Supplementary Multilingual Plane. There'd just have to be a proposal put together. Knowledge of the script isn't the only thing I need, though; knowledge of the proposal process would really help. —Firespeaker 01:16, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

I'm aware of that proposal, and have plans to do a proper one in 2007. -- Evertype·✆ 20:11, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

This has been done by the way and Old Turkic is now under ballot. -- Evertype·✆ 10:41, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

Ukrainian hryvnia unicode sign

Hi, I've found that you have contributed to Unicode a sign for Ukrainian currency. I would like to say thanks ! But also - can you clarify why it looks like S reversed ? Ends of letter are figured - not simple as in NBU design (btw, I was unable to find this mysterious NBU instruction 89 from 01.03.2004 at official laws archive). --TAG 01:12, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

I am not quite sure what you are asking. Lower-case Cyrillic г, in italic and in handwriting, typically has a reversed-s shape; depending on the font, you may see it here: г. That handwritten shape formed the basis for the HRYVNIA SIGN. -- Evertype·✆ 01:18, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

I'm sorry. I was not clear Image:Hryvnia_symbol.png is this correct picture ? It looks different from pictures cited in PDF proposal and NBU website image --TAG 01:31, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Ah. Yes, the image is the correct one. It is a matter of font design. The "generic" symbol in a Times-like font is a reversed S with two strokes. -- Evertype·✆ 10:18, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Cló Gàidhlig?

Do you know if Gaelic script was ever used for writing Scottish Gaelic? An editor has added the templates {{Scottish Gaelic linguistics}} and {{Manx linguistics}} to Gaelic script, and I removed the latter because I know Manx was never written in it, but I don't know whether to remove the former as well. —An gr 07:01, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

Not traditionally, though often today bad fonts like American Uncial are used "decoratively". -- Evertype·✆ 09:06, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

Then I'll be justified in removing Gaelic script and {{Scottish Gaelic linguistics}} from each other? —An gr 09:07, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

Yes, though you could ask the editor about it. -- Evertype·✆ 09:27, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

Moon type

"A4 and Letter are not that different in size that there would be 200 more on A4 than on Letter." ... but that's not what had been written. I'm not sure whether someone is missing something but it seems that the Moon type glyph has just shrunk. Originally the text had been 900 characters per 10 in × 12 in page. To obtain the 700 charcaters per A4 page figure I just compared the areas of each sheet. 900 / (10 in × 12 in) ≈ 725 / (210 mm × 297 mm) then round to the nearest hundred. Note how US letter (8½ in × 11 in) hadn't been mentioned. What had been stated was that there would be 200 fewer on A4 than on 10 in × 12 in. Yes, letter would be about the same as A4: 900 / (10 in × 12 in) = 701¼ / (8½ in × 11 in). I'll go and edit the page. J i m p 16:29, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

This is pretty lame, I think. How is the calculation made? with what margins? what point size? -- Evertype·✆ 23:15, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

Good questions ... I have no idea what margins, point size, etc. the original calculation used, all I did was to do a rough conversion to A4 based on relative paper sizes. Perhaps we should tag it with a {{fact}}. J i m p 01:13, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

It's not clear to me how tagging it with that will achieve anything. -- Evertype·✆ 10:00, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

It might, at least, notify the reader that the calculation is unsourced ... or should we just remove the sentence altogether? J i m p 01:30, 17 May 2007 (UTC) P.S. Shall we move this discussion to Talk:Moon type? J i m p 04:59, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Love your work, would love to chat

Hi, I love your work! I have to confess I was not aware of it much before just now.

I am interested in chatting with people in Burma/Myanmar, and I see that you have some friends there. I wonder if you could email me about the possibility of an introduction?--Jimbo Wales 16:34, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

I am delighted to hear of your interest in my work, and would love to chat with you about it too. I'll e-mail you to discuss the other matter, as it is obviously sensitive. -- Evertype·✆ 20:33, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

An apology on behalf of the community

After researching Unicode and the IPA (in order to better understand dialects, glottals and the exact pronunciation of examples such as those given in African American Vernacular English, through ebonics) I came across your article and userpage. From the fallout of the Essjay controversy and having seen the treatment you suffered in your two A/VfDs, I'd like to offer an apology on behalf of the community, most reasonable and mature citizens of which I'm sure would support me, for the hostile environment you've experienced here. Seeing that we have a real professional who is enthusiastic about their work and a leader in their field on board makes me feel inspired. The fact that you believe in Misplaced Pages's mission enough to become a member, contribute and stay active here shows me that we're doing something right. I am deeply sorry for how Misplaced Pages policy and guidelines have been misused and misrepresented, up to a case of probable WP:POINT, to generally dishearten you. There are sadly a few extremists in any demographic, and we certainly have them here - beware the over-zealous deletionist. —Vanderdecken∴ ∫ξ φ 11:03, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for your kind words. -- Evertype·✆ 17:03, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Unicode proporsals for obsolete letters of languages of Russia

Hello! First of all, I'm sorry for my poor English. Here Russian wikipedists, interested in languages collect a database of letters, once used in non-Russian languages, but became obsolete. This wikiproject is written in Russian, but the names we plan to given are given in English. Could you help us to compose the proposals? There no Russian wikipedist with such document writing experience. Thank you, --Üñţïf̣ļëŗ (see also:ә? Ә!) 14:15, 20 December 2007 (UTC) (ru:User:Untifler)

Hi again! I see you are interested in our project. May you ask me what kind of information should we provide to compose the proposal. The letters I'm most interested in are those of Janalif, especially N-descender (as it was involved in the project of new Latin Tatar alphabet). Another question are codes, you added to some letters. Are they already used, or only proposals are written for this positions? And the last question I'm interested in, why did Abkhaz P-middle hook is used instead of P-descender now and which form is used now? --Üñţïf̣ļëŗ (see also:ә? Ә!) 14:54, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

Citable source for natural plurals of Euro and cent in non-legislative contexts.

I'm sure you must be bored silly about this by now, but I'm trying to clean up a load of waffle in Euro by simply directing people to the linguistic issues concerning the euro - see talk:Euro#Name and linguistic issues. But as usual there is a barrack room lawyer who wants to stick to the letter of the law and not accept that natural plurals can and should be used in non-legistlative contexts. So I wondered if you have a better cite than your personal letter (Klaus Regling, Director General for Economic and Financial Affairs of the European Commission said to me in a letter dated 2002-04-12: EU legislation is drafted and published by the Council in all linguistic versions. You rightly state in your letter that in EU legislation, the plurals of both "euro" and "cent" are written without an "s" in English, but that the Secretariat General of the Commission has issued a guideline recommending its translators to use the plural with "s" for both terms in documents other than legal texts.) By which I mean a formal reference that can be cited. --Red King (talk) 20:52, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Did you start at http://www.evertype.com/standards/euro/ or do you need more help? -- Evertype·✆ 22:10, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

I didn't think that your personal site would count as a neutral source! But you did give me a clue... Using Google to search for translation euros plural site:europa.eu led me to the English Style Guide and at 20.7, I find the wonderful and unambiguous text:

20.7 The euro.
Like ‘pound’, ‘dollar’ or any other currency name in English, the word ‘euro’ is written in lower case with no initial capital.

The Interinstitutional Style Guide (section 7.3.1) states that the plurals of both ‘euro’ and ‘cent’ are to be written without ‘s’ in English. Do this when amending or referring to legal texts that themselves observe this rule. However, in all other texts, especially documents intended for the general public, use the natural plurals ‘euros’ and ‘cents’.

In documents and tables where monetary amounts figure largely, make maximum use of the € symbol (closed up to the figure) or the abbreviation EUR before the amount.

Quod erat demonstrandum and collapse of stout party! --Red King (talk) 22:10, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

My pleasure. --Red King (talk) 19:51, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

New syle guide (plural of euro)

I don't see a problem with citing the new style guide - it would be suspect to cite the old one. Interestingly, the new one says "use the s for plurals". Full stop. No reference to special cases, for the public, nothing. Just "use the s for plurals". Burial of stout party? --Red King (talk) 21:22, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

I would rather cite both. -- Evertype·✆ 23:38, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Translating names into Irish

The issue over the translation of Irish personal names has cropped up again. It really needs to be sorted out once and for all. If you have a chance, I'd appreciate it greatly if you could take a look at RfC: Verifiability and reliability of sources used to produce Irish-language versions of subjects' names.

This is the second RfC I've submitted in as many days, as a result of two very frustrating encounters with one particular editor. The other was over the validity of using the Oxford Dictionary of National Biography as a reference on Misplaced Pages. Thanks.--Damac (talk) 18:13, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Many thanks for your comments on the RfC: Is the Oxford Dictionary of National Biography a valid reference on Misplaced Pages? Despite the overwhelming consensus that there is nothing wrong with this source or in using it on Misplaced Pages (indeed editors expressed their astonishment that such an issue became an RfC), the two editors, whose behaviour caused me to issue with the RfC, continue to issue questions on its use, accessibility, or question my motives in bringing the RfC. (The RfC was the only route I saw of including information from the 2004 OCNB).

I have tried to deal with these two editors rationally, but no matter what I seem to say to them, they return with more queries and comments. Can anything be done in this case? Can someone please try explaining the situation to them at the RfC.--Damac (talk) 19:49, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Œ/œ ligature

The article Œ referred to this ligature as "œthel". However, I have found no non-trivial references to this name in the OED, Britannica, Google Books, Google Scholar, etc. U+0153 gives the name 'ethel' and claims that it derives from the Old English eðel = æthel, but that means 'noble' and has no connection as far as I can see to a letter name. (æthel is sometimes written/misprinted/misscanned as œthel.) Bringhurst and some other typography references do use the word 'ethel' (not œthel) in glossaries, but nowhere else as far as I can tell. Perhaps it is printer's slang? Do you know anything about this? Thanks, --Macrakis (talk) 21:27, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

I have told the happy story on the page in question. -- Evertype·✆ 10:29, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. Still another quibble... if it derives from ēðel, shouldn't it be called æthel, not œthel? (Yes, OED mentions a 12th century usage of œthel, but æthel seems better.) --Macrakis (talk) 16:40, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Well, æðel with a short vowel is æðele 'noble', modern athel and ǣðel with a long vowel is ēðel 'inheritance', modern ethel, and evidently œ belongs to the latter. -- Evertype·✆ 21:41, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

novel Meiji-era kana

Hi, Don't know if this is notable enough to include in Unicode (or perhaps it's already planned?), but it looks like there were once kana for yi, ye, and wu, presumably for didactic purposes: Misplaced Pages:Reference_desk/Archives/Language/2008_February_26#Stroke_Order. They give a couple on-line refs at the bottom of Katakana#Table of katakana. —kwami (talk) 06:35, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

It was brought up on the Unicode list last December between the 3rd and 5th. It should be available in the archives. Bendono (talk) 07:39, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Rongorongo

Pozdniakov (2007) claims to have reduced the rongorongo inventory down to a basic set of 52 glyphs that cover 99.7% of the corpus (excepting the Staff, which requires a few more), plus two dozen which are too rare for useful analysis. AFAIK no one has reviewed his claims, but I thought you might find them useful for the draft Unicode proposal, in case you haven't seen it yet. He's also developed a font, at least for those 52.

Rapanui Writing and the Rapanui Language: Preliminary Results of a Statistical Analysis

— kwami (talk) 20:32, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

ru:Википедия:Проект:Внесение символов алфавитов народов России в Юникод

Hy, Michael! ru:Википедия:Проект:Внесение символов алфавитов народов России в Юникод was updated, some items were added, notably Georgian-Abkhazian letters and Kurdish-Armenian. You also promised us to compile the proporsal for Janalif letters. ))) Regards, --Üñţïf̣ļëŗ (see also:ә? Ә!) 19:15, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Which ones? Please do remember that I am pretty busy, though I don't want to forget anything... -- Evertype·✆ 10:02, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

Albanian script

Hi. I think the scholarly accepted name for this script is "Albanian". Whether Albanian was Udi or not is a different question. I think it is generally accepted that Udi language was the language of Albania, but most scholars still refer to this language as Albanian. I think we should stick to the generally accepted name of this language (i.e. Albanian language), and the article about the language should explain what language it actually was. What do you think? Grandmaster (talk) 09:16, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

I disagree. The terminology "Albanian" is confusing (Why not "Alvanian"?) in the first place (because of European Albanian), but in the second, the script and the language has been deciphered now and we know it to be Old Udi. When the script is encoded in Unicode, it will be called "Old Udi" too. -- Evertype·✆ 10:01, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

I think it is a little confusing, the country is called Caucasian Albania, and the language Old Udi. I think we need to somehow explain that Albanian language and Old Udi are the same thing. And Alvania is not a correct spelling, Albania is what Romans called this country, and this name is accepted by modern scholars as well. I just want to make it less confusing for the reader. Grandmaster (talk) 11:41, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

Old Udi is what linguists call this language now. Albanian is a language in Europe. I agree that confusion should be lessened, but the term "Albanian" for this language and script should no longer be encouraged. Linguistics has moved on. -- Evertype·✆ 12:11, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

Slavic Scripts ArbCom

Hello Michael. Apropos of nothing in particular, I noticed there is an ArbCom starting on the use of diacritics in Slavic scripts (!) http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Misplaced Pages:Requests_for_arbitration&curid=438960&diff=205988963&oldid=205984034#South_Slavic_Diacritics Just thought I'd mention it on your talk page in case you were interested in participating. Of course, it could be just a load of old balkans...--feline1 (talk) 10:17, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

With my thanks

I appreciate your help in response to my question about writing. As promised, here is a shiny gold coin. Cheers! – Scartol • Tok 13:51, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

Gosh, that's worth €29! :-) -- Evertype·✆ 22:54, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

Cornish language: sorting

Hello Mr Everson. I appreciate a lot your work about Cornish, minority languages and Unicode. I've proposed a new global sorting in the Cornish language article in order to make it more accessible, but without modifying any content as I am not a specialist of this language. Please don't hesitate to enhance this sorting.--Nil Blau (talk) 14:09, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

You didn't "propose" a "sorting". You implemented massive changes to the article without discussion. It is not clear what you have done nor why. -- Evertype·✆ 22:47, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

You're right: after my last message in your talk page, I made further changes. Why I did this is quite simple: I'm a linguist specialized in Occitan language planning and I try to understand the current Cornish standardization process. But I'm not involved in any Cornish activity: I only tried to make the article more accessible. If you disagree with my changes, revert them all, I won't take it personally.--Nil Blau (talk) 20:14, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

Well, I could'nt believe you were so moody...--Nil Blau (talk) 19:26, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

I do not understand this comment. -- Evertype·✆ 09:12, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

Nothing important. Look: I share your vision concerning the development of Cornish (I read your online productions) and I thought you would have appreciated my changes in the article. Your response was a little harsh and disappointing.--Nil Blau (talk) 21:17, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

If you wanted to "propose" a re-arrangement of the article you should have done so. You didn't. You simply re-arranged it, in many incremental edits. I haven't had time to study it to compare it with the original. Maybe what you did was good. I was only pointing out that you didn't "propose" the changes. -- Evertype·✆ 08:31, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

U+02BB

U+02BB (MODIFIER LETTER TURNED COMMA) existed from the start, but the standard did not specify the ʻokina at this codepoint until 5.0. —Werson (talk) 09:29, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

That doesn't mean that the standard didn't include the ʻokina until 5.0. The character in question was always intended for that use. It simply wasn't documented. -- Evertype·✆ 14:30, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

Orthography of Pennsans

What do you think about this change? I suppose that Pennsans (or Pednsans) is the correct SWF and KS spelling.--Nil Blau (talk) 10:24, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

It is Pensans in the SWF and Penzans in KS. -- Evertype·✆ 13:08, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks.--Nil Blau (talk) 13:29, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

Re:Woleai

Hi Evertype,
there's a question for you over at Commons. --Túrelio (talk) 20:31, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Move (Míkmaq)

I left a note for discussion. If that fails (which, considering how Codex has behaved in the past, seems imminent), I'm going to start a page move request, which I think will likely succeed, considering that only Codex has ever expressed dissatisfaction with the move.--Cúchullain /c 16:55, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

Where's the note? -- Evertype·✆ 18:25, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

At Talk:Mi'kmaq. —kwami (talk) 19:05, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

ru:Википедия:Проект:Внесение символов алфавитов народов России в Юникод

Hi, Michael! Could you review our project? Georgian Ossetian letter AEN is obtained in more accurate view, as well as some additional Khutsuri letters. Also, Separated Arabic text was found.

Also, we still have no idea how to write the proposal for the characters we found, end we surely need somebody's help! Another question is new Cyrillic letters appeared for the Minor Siberean and Far East peoples. Some of them could be represented as combined symbols, but I'm sure that it is not good for living languages, spoken among several thousand numbered peoplse, such as Khanty. Some letters are unique and could not be represented even as combined. Thank you for your attention --Üñţïf̣ļëŗ (see also:ә? Ә!) 18:53, 8 October 2008 (UTC) / ru:User:Untifler

Please remind me on 30 October. I am busy until then. Please forgive my busyness. -- Evertype·✆ 21:03, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

Hello, Michael! I've forgotten to remind roughly on 30 October :) However, thanks to Karl Pentzlin (), we've composed our first proporsal to encode letters of Janalif. At the moment, we are preparing another one. Also, could you recommend us someone, who have an experience of writing proposal for the Arabic alphabet extensions? --Üñţïf̣ļëŗ (see also:ә? Ә!) 20:34, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

Leet

Please add Category:Mixed alphabet to Leet, because Leet is protected from anonymous editing, and please make category page itself for pageless Category:Mixed alphabet, that already contains five items, because it is protected from anonymous creating. 91.94.96.245 (talk) 15:25, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

Why? -- Evertype·✆ 22:36, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

To avoid red link in category and because Leet mixes letters and digits treated as alternate letters, as Greeklish does with Omega as 3/w and Theta as 8/q. If Greeklish is mixed script, then Leet too is mixed script, because digits in these contexts are used to sounds, but not to numbers. 91.94.234.202 (talk) 08:36, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

But the category is not useful. Why should I create it because an anonymous editor me to? -- Evertype·✆ 09:08, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

To easily distinguish consistently and non consistently developed scripts. I see that now at least Greeklish and Leet as non-national, but slang orthographies are excluded from this category. But if you insist on not creating this category, I give up. I already deleted this category from Arvanitic alphabet, Coptic alphabet and Faux Cyrillic, because I see that you don't want create this category at all. 91.94.234.202 (talk) 11:01, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

New requested move at Flag of Ireland

You are receiving this message as you took part is a past move request at Flag of Ireland . This message is to inform you that their a new move has been requested GnevinAWB (talk) 23:09, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

image loss on Commons

Hi,

due to a software problem the following image which you uploaded was lost on Wikimedia Commons:

I reset those to a previous version. If you still have your files on your hard disk or if you can recover it from other sources please upload it again. If this image was transferred from a local Misplaced Pages to Wikimedia Commons it can be even recovered by an admin on the local Misplaced Pages.

Best regards, -- Ukko.de (talk) 15:20, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

OR Noticeboard

I have posted a topic at Misplaced Pages:No original research/noticeboard#Typographic terminology. I believe we desperately need additional input, and I believe some basic wikipedia policies are entangled in our dispute. Our previous efforts to solicit additional input seem to have failed. Feel free to respond or describe your side. Thanks.-Andrew c 14:24, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

I answered at some length. -- Evertype·✆ 19:31, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

Image:Scripts in Europe (1901).jpg

It is a very pretty map, but it's got some problems. It implies that Donegal Irish was written only in antiqua, not in cló gaelach, and it implies that German was never written in antiqua, even though the map itself writes German in antiqua. It also doesn't indicate which language is written in which script - so it's got Fraktur marked in isolated locations throughout Austria-Hungary and Russia, without directly admitting that it's only German that was written in Fraktur, and not Hungarian, Romanian, and Russian. No mention is made at all of Yiddish in the Hebrew alphabet. And I never knew that Estonian and Latvian were written in Fraktur at the time; did you? —An gr 11:18, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

Well, those dots are big, and the scale is small, so I don't know how much I'd read into the Donegal material. Of course for "written" you mean "printed". Hebrew is an omission, and a serious one. I have an Estonian book in Fraktur somewhere; Latvian used struck-through Fraktur letters which are now written with comma below. -- Evertype·✆ 14:54, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

I assume Donegal was just an oversight. However, since the issue is printed material, not the spoken language, there's no reason the dots should be restricted to the west coast at all. I imagine most material printed in Irish in 1900 was actually published in Dublin and Belfast, not in Dunquin, Kilronan, Cois Fhairrge, and Tourmakeady. That's cool about Estonian and Latvian; the only language I've seen printed in Fraktur besides German is Sorbian. —An gr 15:08, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

At least they recognized the distinction. Thanks for finding it. By the way I've been bold and changed the template. I don't know if that will be controversial or accepted at this stage. -- Evertype·✆ 15:54, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

You think there was a printing press in Tourmakeady? -- Evertype·✆ 00:30, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

Maybe in someone's cowshed, who knows? Anyway, do you know where I could get a copy of Séadna in the original orthography? I'd like to upload it to Wikisource. What's there now is a (still unproofread) version based on an edition in modern orthography. —An gr 10:24, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

cmap article

I just created a stub on cmaps relying on the cited Microsoft article. Please expand the stub, because I am not really into this kind of technical stuff. Maybe a general article on font tables would be fine too? Regards, — Tirk·ﬂ 12:56, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

Avestan alphabet

Hi, Avestan alphabet#Technical standards has an "this is outdated" tag. Could you please take a look at it when you have a moment? Thanks. -- Fullstop (talk) 00:07, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

Accusation

I would be grateful if you would retract the accusation you made here. These kinds of comments are unproductive. If you have a genuine concern about sockpuppetry, please open a case at Misplaced Pages:Suspected sock puppets. Thanks. --89.101.221.42 (talk) 17:37, 29 November 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, but no. -- Evertype·✆ 17:50, 29 November 2008 (UTC)

Nitpicking

If someone is complaining about something stupid, just ignore them. -Branddobbe (talk) 04:08, 30 November 2008 (UTC)

Ireland page moves

I luv the page moves. However, I'm expecting a huge backlash over it. GoodDay (talk) 18:33, 30 November 2008 (UTC)

I'm expecting to make good edits and improve the articles. I don't see a backlash succeeding. I think the admin made the right choice on the basis of having reviewed the many arguments. He could hardly have avoided seeing them! -- Evertype·✆ 18:38, 30 November 2008 (UTC)

Except he didn't make the choice "on the basis of having reviewed the many arguments". (That comment was since removed from his page.)

The decision was first made in error, and then justified in revision contrary to consensus. A poor day for Misplaced Pages. --89.101.221.42 (talk) 00:30, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

There'll be no backlash, it's just people giving their opinions. The problem with Ireland (state) as I see? What history can it include? From 1920?-on, only! Many problems like that will arise. And there is an Irish nation, which the "Ireland" article did very nicely with, that'll gone now too IMO. Anyway, I'm keeping this brief, and the next few weeks will tell, I guess. PurpleA (talk) 03:02, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

Yes, the old "Ireland" served as an obvious primary article. That primary article has now been effectively removed and a geography-only article Ireland (island) does not sufficiently replace it. This is why we base things on consensus, not the whim of a closing admin. --89.101.221.42 (talk) 09:29, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

Possible poll on Ireland hatnotes

Did you catch my comment in Ireland (island) - it's a couple of sections up. I suggested some options for polling, If you add more we could give it a go. Some people (like the admin jza84 for example) will be really particular about the hatnote, and will revert to their idea - we might be forced into polling for consensus. I need to find out what people feel about NI in (state) too - I'm not certain myself. --Matt Lewis (talk) 11:43, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

I guess a poll will polarize.... Heh. At present, at any rate, the hatnotes on the 2 articles are harmonized. I think at this stage trying to get consensus on what "country" is might be a mistake. Let's see what jza84 has to say about the hatnotes now. -- Evertype·✆ 11:46, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

The thing is I've reverted your version myself - because it just says "state". People then insist it is post 1992 only, and not earlier. Some people are still insisting on that, even with the awkwardness of a Ireland (island) name. I prefer 'sovereign state' (per the intro poll I just set up at Ireland), but people some people might need convincing. I think the hatnote is too fussy now, anyway - the longer it is, the easier it is to ignore. --Matt Lewis (talk) 12:02, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

Which people are insisting that? I take your point, but who's doing the complaining? -- Evertype·✆ 12:05, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

It depends what precisely Matt is claiming people are insisting. I'd never contend that nothing or nobody pre-1922 belongs linked to or on Ireland (state), but *I* will complain if he insists that all historical links from the word "Ireland" are attributable to the state alone. What words are in the hatnote don't matter on this issue. And his statement here that the "awkardness of a Ireland (island) name" has something to do with this is an interesting comment. I pressume his goal was to make it awkward so that he can impose his view that the state is the only real Ireland. Nuclare (talk) 12:56, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

I don't believe that would be his goal. It is certainly not my goal. The idea of "'Real' Ireland" is just silly. -- Evertype·✆ 13:00, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

Here's Matt's words on the matter (from the Ireland (island) talk page): "You say I believe the state alone is the 'real' Ireland - of course I do!" Nuclare (talk) 14:28, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

You mystify me Nulare, you really do. --Matt Lewis (talk) 13:39, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

I wouldn't use the word 'mystify' but a similar feeling is mutual. Nuclare (talk) 14:28, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

License tagging for Image:Island-of-Ireland7.png

Thanks for uploading Image:Island-of-Ireland7.png. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Misplaced Pages uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information; to add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Misplaced Pages.

For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Misplaced Pages:Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 12:05, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

License tagging for Image:Island-of-Ireland8.png

Thanks for uploading Image:Island-of-Ireland8.png. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Misplaced Pages uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information; to add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Misplaced Pages.

License tagging for Image:Island-of-Ireland9.png

Thanks for uploading Image:Island-of-Ireland9.png. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Misplaced Pages uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information; to add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Misplaced Pages.

License tagging for Image:United Kingdom labelled map13.png

Thanks for uploading Image:United Kingdom labelled map13.png. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Misplaced Pages uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information; to add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Misplaced Pages.

Ireland hatnote with sovereign state

The hatnote with "sovereign state" is the one I think is best (as I said on Talk:Ireland (island)), so I made the change - someone reverted the "county and state" option (I think I tried that first). Lets see what happens to this. I'd recommend that poll if it fails, but you never know, it might stick.--Matt Lewis (talk) 13:35, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, I took your point about "country and state" but if people want to revert that I can live with "sovereign state". Ahhh compromise. -- Evertype·✆ 14:16, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

Matt

Hi there. Yes his blocking would prevent him from making a statement for that, to the best of my knowledge. If you need his input then I'll unblock him, but if he continues his personal attacks then he runs the risk of being blocked again. Canterbury Tail talk 19:08, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

It seems to me that (by saying "if he continues") you've confused high emotions and frustration with the kind of personality who is really a personal attacker. Seems to me too that you haven't been all that neutral here. I'm filing that and will hope for his input, but so far he has resigned, which is the worst result of all. -- Evertype·✆

He has been blocked solely on the strength of his personal attacks against other users (myself being only one of them), not for his edits. The project does not condone personal attacks of any nature, not matter the strengths of an editor. Canterbury Tail talk 19:56, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

Involved party

I know you're busy right now so take your time, but what are the criteria for being considered an Involved Party?

Please sign your post, RashersTierney. What I did was go to the Ireland Disambiguation Task Force page and took what I thought to be a fair sampling of vocal participants from either side. I did not count them and did not try to stack the deck. Is that satisfactory? -- Evertype·✆ 19:48, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

Yes, thanks. RashersTierney (talk) 20:10, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

No longer involved party

Hiya Evertype. I hope Arbcom takes this case, I'll be watching. GoodDay (talk) 20:04, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

I'd've nominated you but you said you were no longer involved. -- Evertype·✆ 20:06, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

I've noticed one of the involved parties has 'resigned (again)' from Misplaced Pages. GoodDay (talk) 20:20, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

Yes. The invitation is still open to that person to respond to the request. -- Evertype·✆ 20:32, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

Hey :)

Thanks for the defense on Sarah's page. This is why I'm 99 percent sure that ArbCom cannot and should not take this case: (from WP:RfArb's top section of text)

The committee accepts cases related to editors' conduct (including improper editing) where all other routes to agreement have failed, and makes rulings to address problems in the editorial community. However it will not make editorial statements or decisions about how articles should read ("content decisions"). Please do not ask the committee to make these kinds of decisions, as they will not do so.

Hope you understand (and the one reject already on hand backs this reading up). Thanks again. SirFozzie (talk) 22:37, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

I understand your position, but this dispute is community-wide, and not redressable in the way that one or two rogue editors would be. I think that the dispute on article titles here is a different thing from "content decisions". I stand by my request that someone from outside this dispute arbitrate. When negotiations fail, the hope lies in arbitration. -- Evertype·✆ 13:05, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

Re: Ireland

Is your decision final? I have suggested that this is not content-related. And, in fairness, after so many months and months and indeed years of this problem, could you not wait a few days and look at the comments of all of the interested parties before making such a decision? It took some effort to put forward a request, and it's disheartening to have it denied before the involved parties have all had a chance to say something. Or are the Ireland articles just, well, screwed? Thanks for your consideration. -- Evertype·✆ 22:36, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

You seem to want the Committee to say "this is what the article should be called", and ultimately that is something we cannot do. From the very beginning the Committee has not answered content questions, and that is something that is not going to change. However, as I said, if there are behavioural issues involved in the content dispute - that is, if people are disrupting efforts to achieve and implement a consensus - then that is something we may well be able to address. You seem to imply in your statement that that is what is happening ("though reversed today..."). Are there such issues? If so, what are they, and what efforts, if any, have been made to deal with them? --bainer (talk) 23:58, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

Well, in a sense we do, because we as a community cannot find enough good faith on all sides to come to real consensus. Older editors may find ways forward, but it gets whipped up into frenzy every time efforts are made. Now, this isn't new. This has been going on for FOUR YEARS. Yes, "people" are disrupting efforts, but the solution here in this instance is not to try to censure 5 or 10 or 20 individuals who are doing the disruption. It's to recognize that the community, divided as it is, needs outside arbitration because there's no settling it otherwise—due to lack of good faith. (One may wish to Assume Good Faith but be realistic when it is not there.) These articles are High Profile on the Misplaced Pages, getting many many hits per month. The status quo damages the Misplaced Pages and certainly does no good for these articles. So, yes, we're asking for a ruling on the appropriate names for these articles, based on a whole set of arguments pro and con, because we as a community of editors interested in this topic CANNOT come to consensus. Thanks for your consideration. I respect whatever view you end up having. After all, you're an arbitrator. -- Evertype·✆ 01:34, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

Arbitration case

I think you may have overlooked that Waggers is also an administrator. Thanks for posting the arbitration request: I think Arbcom should be taking this on, as I tried to show in my statement. However, I can see that there are all sorts of ways in which individuals can deny that, which would be a great pity. If they want evidence of conduct problems, then citing almost the entire discussions may be in order, including the continual attribution of motives to others to disparage and denigrate their opinions, and the quiet bizarre way in which people self-report their commitment to consensus, when I see little evidence of them making any concessions that really get at the heart of the matter at all! Oh well... DDStretch (talk) 12:36, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

(errr... so am I, actually. DDStretch (talk) 13:10, 3 December 2008 (UTC))

Your wish is my command. -- Evertype·✆ 13:17, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

WP:RM

Hello, Evertype. You recently requested that Category:Monospace typefaces be moved to Category:Monospaced typefaces; unfortunately, categories cannot be moved like normal pages can. You'll need to go over to WP:CFD and request the category be moved. Since we at WP:RM can't move the category, I'm going to delist it. Regards, Parsecboy (talk) 16:58, 3 December 2008 (UTC) "I've done that, thanks. -- Evertype·✆ 17:10, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

Name of the country of Ireland

I made a comment on the Republic of Ireland talk page yesterday about the naming dispute and noticed that you seemed to be involved in this issue for some time. I think I share a similar opinion as you. What I don't understand is why consensus is needed when something is so verifiable? The constitution names the country Ireland.

Article 4 - "The name of the State is Éire, or, in the English language, Ireland."

It is the President of Ireland , at the UN it is Ireland , in the EU it is Ireland , even the British embassy in Dublin is the "British Embassy in Ireland" (try to find the word Republic of Ireland on that website) So why then is there even a discussion about what name should the country go under?

Basically what people want to do is say even though the country of Ireland is not officially called the Republic of Ireland, we are going to call it that because either there is an island also called Ireland (and it would just be too confusing for people so we will just call the country of Ireland the wrong name) or else they have some bias and it makes them feel better if they somehow are able to separate the island of Ireland and the country of Ireland on wikipedia.

Other encyclopedias, Britanica Encarta

Merriam Webster