User talk:DJ1AM
Welcome to Wikipedia!!!
[edit]
|
Persian Phonology
[edit]Please do not change sourced material. If you have an academic source, then please include it for discussion. Please follow wikipedia policies. Thanks. Azalea pomp (talk) 20:57, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
Same
[edit]Dj1AM, thank you for your efforts to improve wikipedia. If you have reliable sources for your more controversial edits, please include them. We are all trying to make wikipedia the best encyclopedia possible, and while we don't always see eye to eye on some things, we can all agree that reliable sources will help WP align with current scholarship.
Specifically concerning Persian phonology, if you have reliable sources for your edits, this would help ease the slight friction that some of us are feeling. Unfortunately Odden's pedagogical excercise isn't really a reliable source. If there are not reliable sources for these changes, please be understanding why others might prefer a different version.
Thanks again for your efforts, –jonsafari (talk) 05:51, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
- Hi Dj1AM. Yes, this whole issue seems to revolve around reliable sources (either for or against trilled r, in this case). Having dealt with this subject, I've had plenty of difficulty finding reliable sources for many aspects of Persian phonology. Even the IPA handbook is less than perfect in this respect (!). I see David Odden around every once in a while, so I guess I could ask him his opinion, but know that he has never published anything (AFAIK) on Persian phonology specifically (nor does he speak the language), so even he wouldn't be as reliable as we'd like.
- The closest thing to a RS that I've seen is Mahootian (1997:292)'s short discussion on Persian phonology (your local university library might have it). She's not a phonetician or phonologist, but is a native speaker with a PhD in linguistics, and is pretty well-respected in the Persian linguistics field in general, and is quite well-rounded in linguistics -- she'd have to be for Bernard Comrie to want her to write a descriptive grammar of the language. I posted this reference yesterday on the Persian phonology article.
- I'll try to cite this ref more in the relevant articles, so that there's at least some reference out there on this issue.
- I guess the whole point of RS is that nobody needs to (necessarily) believe what another editor is writing, so long as the RS backs up their claim. So you don't need to believe others' unsourced edits, but likewise they don't need to believe you when you say you don't remember your sources, even if they are backed up by your personal encounters with native speakers. RS is the only fallback we have here on WP for disagreements on the veracity of something, and so unfortunately recollections of sources and personal experiences aren't enough.
- So for the time being, until there are some good RS to back up the pervasive trilled r, all we have to rely on as a RS is Mahootian (1997:292), which says otherwise. But I'm more than happy to entertain alternative theories when you come up with RS to back them up.
- Thanks for your williingness to discuss the topic. –jonsafari (talk) 20:08, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
3RR Warning
[edit]
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Iran. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. If necessary, pursue dispute resolution.
Hi,
Please stick to WP's IPA conventions, unless there is a reason to diverge from it. Also, it's generally best to put the slashes and brackets within the IPA template, so the fonts don't clash on our readers' browsers. kwami (talk) 00:05, 26 April 2009 (UTC)
- No, it's not phonetic, so shouldn't use brackets. We're not promoting any one pronunciation, but rather a phonological form to be pronounced according to the reader's dialect. kwami (talk) 05:38, 29 April 2009 (UTC)
Please review template:usage of IPA templates and WP:pronunciation. I'm having to revert or correct nearly every IPA edit you make. It's not appropriate to give a phonemic transcription of a foreign language, as at Susa, without defining what the symbols stand for. ([a] has a meaning defined by the IPA. /a/ does not.) Eventually we'll get an IPA for Persian template set up (which you could certainly help with), and adjust the articles accordingly. Also, English has /r/ on Wikipedia, not "/ɹ/". "/ɹ/" is undefined, and therefore meaningless. Of course, phonetically it is [ɹʷ], not [r], but phonetic transcription is inappropriate because we'd have to choose a standard dialect, either telling Brits that correct English is American, or Yanks that correct English is British. kwami (talk) 22:45, 24 August 2009 (UTC)
- Except that there is no /a/ in English (that would make four low vowels, alongside /æ, ɑː, ɒ/), so if you use it, the transcription is meaningless as English. As for /r/, that's a discussion to take up at WP:IPA for English. It's purely arbitrary: we could transcribe it /♣/ if we liked. /r/ was chosen because it's common, familiar, and practical. kwami (talk) 03:34, 8 September 2009 (UTC)
PRODs
[edit]A proposed deletion tag can be removed by anybody at any time for any reason or no reason. Please don't revert their removal. If a PROD tag is removed and you believe the article should be deleted, please take it to WP:AFD. Thank you, HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 00:34, 29 May 2010 (UTC)
WikiProject Romania
[edit] |
--Codrin.B (talk) 05:26, 21 January 2012 (UTC)
Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:28, 23 November 2015 (UTC)
ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!
[edit]
Hello, DJ1AM. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
ArbCom 2017 election voter message
[edit]Hello, DJ1AM. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for July 23
[edit]Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Channel Umptee-3, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Jim George (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:25, 23 July 2018 (UTC)
ArbCom 2018 election voter message
[edit]Hello, DJ1AM. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
ArbCom 2018 election voter message
[edit]Hello, DJ1AM. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message
[edit]Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:30, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message
[edit]Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:31, 28 November 2023 (UTC)