This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Magical alphabet article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
On 11 July 2023, it was proposed that this article be moved to Magical alphabets. The result of the discussion was not moved. |
@ .Raven I am concerned about this articles overreliance on Omniglot, which consensus suggests is NOT a reliable source. See here, here, and here. Additionally, in order to make the claim that people think an alphabet is magic, we need reliable sources saying so, not just a reference to the alphabet itself. LegalSmeagolian ( talk) 14:28, 20 April 2023 (UTC)
@ 35.139.154.158: On 17 April 2023 you added tags for 'Multiple issues', 'Original research', 'Essay', and 'Tone'. Looking at the article about three weeks later – with additional refs to document details – do you still think any of it is 'OR'? If so, what? Likewise for 'Essay' and 'Tone': would you please be specific about where these problems (still) occur? Or, if any or all of these have cleared up, would you please remove the relevant tags? I don't want to presume, and won't... unless this goes unanswered for a week. – .Raven .talk 02:35, 12 May 2023 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: not moved. The arguments of User:.Raven are rejected based on consensus as established in this discussion. ( closed by non-admin page mover) EggRoll97 ( talk) 18:14, 18 July 2023 (UTC)
Magical alphabet → Magical alphabets – The user .Raven ( talk · contribs) has started to post comments to my talk page at User talk:LaundryPizza03#Magical alphabet[s] to convince me that the article Magical alphabet, which I moved from the plural on April 23, should be moved back to the plural title. Their argument is that WP:PLURAL applies beause most of the notable examples are derived from a descendant of the Phoenician alphabet. I don't believe their argument, but I have brought this to RM to settle this dispute in a civil and decisive manner. – LaundryPizza03 ( d c̄) 15:48, 11 July 2023 (UTC)
Their argument is that WP:PLURAL applies beause most of the notable examples are derived from a descendant of the Phoenician alphabet" — Not quite. From the full discussion at User talk:LaundryPizza03#Magical alphabet[s]:
... that WP:PLURAL applies beause most of the notable examples are derived from a descendant of the Phoenician alphabet"; the point came up only because LP called them "
several unrelated things".Also, kindly note that this article's original title was Magical alphabets; I suggest that should be restored. (No move-warring here.) – .Raven .talk 19:01, 11 July 2023 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Magical alphabet article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
On 11 July 2023, it was proposed that this article be moved to Magical alphabets. The result of the discussion was not moved. |
@ .Raven I am concerned about this articles overreliance on Omniglot, which consensus suggests is NOT a reliable source. See here, here, and here. Additionally, in order to make the claim that people think an alphabet is magic, we need reliable sources saying so, not just a reference to the alphabet itself. LegalSmeagolian ( talk) 14:28, 20 April 2023 (UTC)
@ 35.139.154.158: On 17 April 2023 you added tags for 'Multiple issues', 'Original research', 'Essay', and 'Tone'. Looking at the article about three weeks later – with additional refs to document details – do you still think any of it is 'OR'? If so, what? Likewise for 'Essay' and 'Tone': would you please be specific about where these problems (still) occur? Or, if any or all of these have cleared up, would you please remove the relevant tags? I don't want to presume, and won't... unless this goes unanswered for a week. – .Raven .talk 02:35, 12 May 2023 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: not moved. The arguments of User:.Raven are rejected based on consensus as established in this discussion. ( closed by non-admin page mover) EggRoll97 ( talk) 18:14, 18 July 2023 (UTC)
Magical alphabet → Magical alphabets – The user .Raven ( talk · contribs) has started to post comments to my talk page at User talk:LaundryPizza03#Magical alphabet[s] to convince me that the article Magical alphabet, which I moved from the plural on April 23, should be moved back to the plural title. Their argument is that WP:PLURAL applies beause most of the notable examples are derived from a descendant of the Phoenician alphabet. I don't believe their argument, but I have brought this to RM to settle this dispute in a civil and decisive manner. – LaundryPizza03 ( d c̄) 15:48, 11 July 2023 (UTC)
Their argument is that WP:PLURAL applies beause most of the notable examples are derived from a descendant of the Phoenician alphabet" — Not quite. From the full discussion at User talk:LaundryPizza03#Magical alphabet[s]:
... that WP:PLURAL applies beause most of the notable examples are derived from a descendant of the Phoenician alphabet"; the point came up only because LP called them "
several unrelated things".Also, kindly note that this article's original title was Magical alphabets; I suggest that should be restored. (No move-warring here.) – .Raven .talk 19:01, 11 July 2023 (UTC)