This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | ← | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 | Archive 6 | Archive 7 | → | Archive 10 |
Sections dormant by 31 December 2015
Editathon Invitation Celebrating
Charlie Chaplin's film
The Tramp at
London's Cinema Museum, Kennington This is a free event, one of a series of editathons which Wikimedia UK organises in conjunction with a variety of host organisations.. When? Saturday, 7 March 2014, 11am-4pm Where? 2 Dugard Way (off Renfrew Road) London SE11 4TH. Point of contact: Fabian Tompsett (fabian.tompsettwikimedia.org.uk) for Wikimedia UK. Further details and Registration: Education Program:Wikimedia UK/Cinema Museum 2015 (Spring 2015) |
Meetup Invitation Hi LynwoodF, You are cordially invited to an opportunity to meet active Wikimedians in and around London face-to-face. Description: Informal afternoon in a pub, children welcome. When? Sunday, 8th March from 1 pm. Where? Penderel's Oak, 283-288 High Holborn, London, WC1V 7HP.
Further details and check in:
London 91 Hope to see you there, Fabian Tompsett (WMUK) ( talk) 16:46, 3 March 2015 (UTC) |
I am not disagreeing with your edit, but it does duplicate a wikilink in the first paragraph of the same 'Later' section and the text now reads: " in an ornate Decorated style with flowing tracery " which, grammatically, should be one of the following:
Emerald ( talk) 18:01, 10 March 2015 (UTC)
Okay, if you can live with inconsistencies within the same section over the word Decorated then I can! Emerald ( talk) 19:33, 10 March 2015 (UTC)
I'm just curious, why are you so condescending in your messages on wiki edits? Maybe you should stop coming across as some grandeur individual. We're not all perfect and neither are you my friend. You make the wiki experience so bitter and depressing for others. -- Attractel ( talk) 20:39, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
Anonymous editor 156.61.250.250 continues to revert the founding date of Savannah, and is even resorting to insults (see recent edits under "Savannah"). As he/she has pretty much broken every rule of Wikipedia decorum, this will probably go to a Wikipedia administrator for resolution. You are free to weigh in if you like. Thanks. Mason.Jones ( talk) 15:16, 13 May 2015 (UTC)
Appreciate your reply. Thanks, Mason.Jones ( talk) 02:10, 14 May 2015 (UTC)
Discussion below copied from Talk:Strasbourg#Etymology:
An anonymous edit without an edit summary was claiming a Greek origin for the element -bourg or -burg. It is certainly cognate with English borough and may well also be cognate with a similar Greek word, but I have no evidence that it is derived from Greek. I have undone what is no doubt a good-faith, but naïve edit. LynwoodF ( talk) 19:27, 17 November 2011 (UTC)
Le plus surprenant en regardant ton profil c'est que tu es probablement francophile (on n'apprend pas le francais, et on n'affiche pas les armoiries du Dauphiné par hasard). Aussi j'imagine que ma contribution à été perdue dans la traduction. Mon intervention était liée uniquement au mot bourg, sans lien direct avec la ville dont est liée la page de discussion. Bonne continuation -- Gabriel Haute Maurienne ( talk) 13:06, 21 June 2015 (UTC)
Re LynwoodF étant donné que cette partie de la discussion n'est pas liée à l'article, permet moi de te répondre en francais puisque tu le maîtrise sans doute mieux que moi l'anglais. Pour l'origine grecque, je pense, mais je n'ai pas de certitude ni de source, que c'est probablement lié à la version qui soutient l'origine latine du terme. Partant de là, il est techniquement possible d'arguer de la réflexion suivante: étant donné que de nombreux mots latins viennent du grec, il est probable que bourg en provienne également toujours selon cette théorie. A croire les hellénophones, toutes les langues viennent du grec 😜. Enfin pour le déclin de certaines langues régionales frontalières, si beaucoup ne faisait pas le raccourci entre racine du dialecte parlé = nationalité je suis sûr que leur statut se porterait bien mieux. Ce n'est pas un hasard si de nombreux dialectes germaniques ont drastiquement régressé après les deux guerres mondiales, ou certains ont justifié leurs annexions territoriale unilatérales forcées sur ce simple critère. Enfin si tu jettes un œil sur les deux discussions que j'ai en ce moment, tu constateras que certains semblent mélanger réalité et fantasmes de grandeurs, quitte à inventer des sources qui s'autoalimentent. Amicalement -- Gabriel Haute Maurienne ( talk) 15:27, 21 June 2015 (UTC)
Hello yet again, Gabriel Haute Maurienne. I hope you found this easily.
I lived in Strasbourg about 15 years after the end of World War II and I recall that people were proud of their French nationality and objected to their language being referred to as German. They insisted that it was "Alsacien". I met only one Alsatian who advocated the incorporation of Alsace into Germany. Most people I knew were totally bilingual, but I did know one older man who, although a French citizen, spoke no French and so communicated with me through his bilingual wife. I only ever acquired a smattering of Alsatian dialect, useful for shopping.
The year 1860 is firmly fixed in my mind as the year when France acquired more or less its present shape, although you would probably remind me of several adjustments to the border with Italy during the 1940s. So I appreciate that the history of Savoy is very different from that of the Dauphiné.
A few words about me. Having lived in two other places in England, one in Scotland and four in France, I came to live in Kingston upon Thames in the south-west of Greater London and have lived in the same street, although not at the same address, for nearly 50 years. I earned my living as an accountant for some years, but at heart I am a historical linguist (or linguistic historian – I have never been sure which expression is preferable). At university I specialized in the linguistics of the Iberian peninsula.
Best wishes, LynwoodF ( talk) 22:53, 23 June 2015 (UTC)
Hi, you did well to change the location of the discussion. For the territories changes after 1947, Savoie was in front line. The former duchy recovered several part of her territory that were ceded to Italy during the 1860 annexion because of a lack of knowledge of the border by the French back then.. The traité de Paris allowed us to take back those historical Savoyard lands. I'm particularly concerned since the change of border directly modified the shape of my commune, with the regain of the Mont-Cenis plateau. (My county regained its original size). The plateau was dangerous for us since the Italian army was able to concentrate large amounts of men and guns just above our villages. During the Second World War, the Germans destroyed and burnt all our villages to the ground. As for Alsace after the war it was a mess, and the population was traumatised by the incorporation de force. It is kind of pathetic, Germany attacked 3 times, it seems that their government was always asking for more. And now the country has lost all of her eastern provinces. They could have been satisfied with the 1871 gains, but since then they kept increase their military power and updating each year their war plans towards France [ https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plan_Schlieffen]. Their main goal was to gain more French territory (see the septemberprogramm [1] that was already prepared in September 1914). Some major historians especially Germans affirm that their country tried to attack France well before 1914. [2] The different crisis that appeared before, like in 1875, of after the coup d'Agadir or the Saverne Affaire were attempts to enter in conflict before the fully militarisation of Russia, the new French allié. We will be forever very grateful for the British help. For the French all that really counted during WWI was the reintegration of the lost provinces in the Republic. since the creation of Modern France, Alsatian politicians and military were always on the front scene (Kléber, Kellerman Schoelcher etc), The history is sometimes very funny, the regain of the region was greatly boosted by a letter written by Bismark and Willem in 1871 in answer to the begging of the French government not to take Alsace Moselle away from France. [3]. Imperatrice Eugenie gave to Clemenceau the missive in 1917. The letter dated from 1871 still in the national archives, and signed by the two German politicians stipulates that they did not considered Alsace as a German territory, but was only used as glacis militaire in order to prevent a rapid attack from the French to the Rhine. :) Anyway, we are French for more than 3 centuries now (net after in annexion of 48 years by Germany), and we are upset with the reflexions of some people that don't know us well and saying: because they have a German dialect, then they are not French. But all of that is ancient history, during our first exchange you told me about the French point of view. It is always interesting to see both side of the story, I hope that they are some details that you did'nt know, since you are interested by the local history. Sometime we learn only one version. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gabriel Haute Maurienne ( talk • contribs) 00:23, 24 June 2015 (UTC)
Wow, LynwoodF! thanks for dropping Paul Nash's name, whom I knew nothing about, very interesting ! I wish my late dad, a German surrealist painter, had seen this. maybe he knew about him. the article you wrote about your neighborhood too, nice one. you and I have definitely have something to talk about. i feel a kindred spirit, history languages and language maps, yeah. even though this may not be evident from the articles I edit and create, which are on the hard science and economic-political side. cant continue now, just wanted to drop this note of, whatever, call it wikiloving. have been named an "involved party" at arbcom, and i never wanted to get involved in such stuff, as a content writer! need to draft a statement. cheers,-- Wuerzele ( talk) 19:43, 10 September 2015 (UTC)
What is it? It's not an article, not a disambig or redirect. I believ ethat the article should be written. Xx236 ( talk) 07:41, 27 October 2015 (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) 14:23, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
Re this edit - despite the name of the office of "deputy First Minister", Martin McGuinness was not Ian Paisley's deputy in the latter's role as First Minster. The two offices are a diarchy with equal power. -- Kwekubo ( talk) 14:36, 30 November 2015 (UTC)
This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | ← | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 | Archive 6 | Archive 7 | → | Archive 10 |
Sections dormant by 31 December 2015
Editathon Invitation Celebrating
Charlie Chaplin's film
The Tramp at
London's Cinema Museum, Kennington This is a free event, one of a series of editathons which Wikimedia UK organises in conjunction with a variety of host organisations.. When? Saturday, 7 March 2014, 11am-4pm Where? 2 Dugard Way (off Renfrew Road) London SE11 4TH. Point of contact: Fabian Tompsett (fabian.tompsettwikimedia.org.uk) for Wikimedia UK. Further details and Registration: Education Program:Wikimedia UK/Cinema Museum 2015 (Spring 2015) |
Meetup Invitation Hi LynwoodF, You are cordially invited to an opportunity to meet active Wikimedians in and around London face-to-face. Description: Informal afternoon in a pub, children welcome. When? Sunday, 8th March from 1 pm. Where? Penderel's Oak, 283-288 High Holborn, London, WC1V 7HP.
Further details and check in:
London 91 Hope to see you there, Fabian Tompsett (WMUK) ( talk) 16:46, 3 March 2015 (UTC) |
I am not disagreeing with your edit, but it does duplicate a wikilink in the first paragraph of the same 'Later' section and the text now reads: " in an ornate Decorated style with flowing tracery " which, grammatically, should be one of the following:
Emerald ( talk) 18:01, 10 March 2015 (UTC)
Okay, if you can live with inconsistencies within the same section over the word Decorated then I can! Emerald ( talk) 19:33, 10 March 2015 (UTC)
I'm just curious, why are you so condescending in your messages on wiki edits? Maybe you should stop coming across as some grandeur individual. We're not all perfect and neither are you my friend. You make the wiki experience so bitter and depressing for others. -- Attractel ( talk) 20:39, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
Anonymous editor 156.61.250.250 continues to revert the founding date of Savannah, and is even resorting to insults (see recent edits under "Savannah"). As he/she has pretty much broken every rule of Wikipedia decorum, this will probably go to a Wikipedia administrator for resolution. You are free to weigh in if you like. Thanks. Mason.Jones ( talk) 15:16, 13 May 2015 (UTC)
Appreciate your reply. Thanks, Mason.Jones ( talk) 02:10, 14 May 2015 (UTC)
Discussion below copied from Talk:Strasbourg#Etymology:
An anonymous edit without an edit summary was claiming a Greek origin for the element -bourg or -burg. It is certainly cognate with English borough and may well also be cognate with a similar Greek word, but I have no evidence that it is derived from Greek. I have undone what is no doubt a good-faith, but naïve edit. LynwoodF ( talk) 19:27, 17 November 2011 (UTC)
Le plus surprenant en regardant ton profil c'est que tu es probablement francophile (on n'apprend pas le francais, et on n'affiche pas les armoiries du Dauphiné par hasard). Aussi j'imagine que ma contribution à été perdue dans la traduction. Mon intervention était liée uniquement au mot bourg, sans lien direct avec la ville dont est liée la page de discussion. Bonne continuation -- Gabriel Haute Maurienne ( talk) 13:06, 21 June 2015 (UTC)
Re LynwoodF étant donné que cette partie de la discussion n'est pas liée à l'article, permet moi de te répondre en francais puisque tu le maîtrise sans doute mieux que moi l'anglais. Pour l'origine grecque, je pense, mais je n'ai pas de certitude ni de source, que c'est probablement lié à la version qui soutient l'origine latine du terme. Partant de là, il est techniquement possible d'arguer de la réflexion suivante: étant donné que de nombreux mots latins viennent du grec, il est probable que bourg en provienne également toujours selon cette théorie. A croire les hellénophones, toutes les langues viennent du grec 😜. Enfin pour le déclin de certaines langues régionales frontalières, si beaucoup ne faisait pas le raccourci entre racine du dialecte parlé = nationalité je suis sûr que leur statut se porterait bien mieux. Ce n'est pas un hasard si de nombreux dialectes germaniques ont drastiquement régressé après les deux guerres mondiales, ou certains ont justifié leurs annexions territoriale unilatérales forcées sur ce simple critère. Enfin si tu jettes un œil sur les deux discussions que j'ai en ce moment, tu constateras que certains semblent mélanger réalité et fantasmes de grandeurs, quitte à inventer des sources qui s'autoalimentent. Amicalement -- Gabriel Haute Maurienne ( talk) 15:27, 21 June 2015 (UTC)
Hello yet again, Gabriel Haute Maurienne. I hope you found this easily.
I lived in Strasbourg about 15 years after the end of World War II and I recall that people were proud of their French nationality and objected to their language being referred to as German. They insisted that it was "Alsacien". I met only one Alsatian who advocated the incorporation of Alsace into Germany. Most people I knew were totally bilingual, but I did know one older man who, although a French citizen, spoke no French and so communicated with me through his bilingual wife. I only ever acquired a smattering of Alsatian dialect, useful for shopping.
The year 1860 is firmly fixed in my mind as the year when France acquired more or less its present shape, although you would probably remind me of several adjustments to the border with Italy during the 1940s. So I appreciate that the history of Savoy is very different from that of the Dauphiné.
A few words about me. Having lived in two other places in England, one in Scotland and four in France, I came to live in Kingston upon Thames in the south-west of Greater London and have lived in the same street, although not at the same address, for nearly 50 years. I earned my living as an accountant for some years, but at heart I am a historical linguist (or linguistic historian – I have never been sure which expression is preferable). At university I specialized in the linguistics of the Iberian peninsula.
Best wishes, LynwoodF ( talk) 22:53, 23 June 2015 (UTC)
Hi, you did well to change the location of the discussion. For the territories changes after 1947, Savoie was in front line. The former duchy recovered several part of her territory that were ceded to Italy during the 1860 annexion because of a lack of knowledge of the border by the French back then.. The traité de Paris allowed us to take back those historical Savoyard lands. I'm particularly concerned since the change of border directly modified the shape of my commune, with the regain of the Mont-Cenis plateau. (My county regained its original size). The plateau was dangerous for us since the Italian army was able to concentrate large amounts of men and guns just above our villages. During the Second World War, the Germans destroyed and burnt all our villages to the ground. As for Alsace after the war it was a mess, and the population was traumatised by the incorporation de force. It is kind of pathetic, Germany attacked 3 times, it seems that their government was always asking for more. And now the country has lost all of her eastern provinces. They could have been satisfied with the 1871 gains, but since then they kept increase their military power and updating each year their war plans towards France [ https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plan_Schlieffen]. Their main goal was to gain more French territory (see the septemberprogramm [1] that was already prepared in September 1914). Some major historians especially Germans affirm that their country tried to attack France well before 1914. [2] The different crisis that appeared before, like in 1875, of after the coup d'Agadir or the Saverne Affaire were attempts to enter in conflict before the fully militarisation of Russia, the new French allié. We will be forever very grateful for the British help. For the French all that really counted during WWI was the reintegration of the lost provinces in the Republic. since the creation of Modern France, Alsatian politicians and military were always on the front scene (Kléber, Kellerman Schoelcher etc), The history is sometimes very funny, the regain of the region was greatly boosted by a letter written by Bismark and Willem in 1871 in answer to the begging of the French government not to take Alsace Moselle away from France. [3]. Imperatrice Eugenie gave to Clemenceau the missive in 1917. The letter dated from 1871 still in the national archives, and signed by the two German politicians stipulates that they did not considered Alsace as a German territory, but was only used as glacis militaire in order to prevent a rapid attack from the French to the Rhine. :) Anyway, we are French for more than 3 centuries now (net after in annexion of 48 years by Germany), and we are upset with the reflexions of some people that don't know us well and saying: because they have a German dialect, then they are not French. But all of that is ancient history, during our first exchange you told me about the French point of view. It is always interesting to see both side of the story, I hope that they are some details that you did'nt know, since you are interested by the local history. Sometime we learn only one version. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gabriel Haute Maurienne ( talk • contribs) 00:23, 24 June 2015 (UTC)
Wow, LynwoodF! thanks for dropping Paul Nash's name, whom I knew nothing about, very interesting ! I wish my late dad, a German surrealist painter, had seen this. maybe he knew about him. the article you wrote about your neighborhood too, nice one. you and I have definitely have something to talk about. i feel a kindred spirit, history languages and language maps, yeah. even though this may not be evident from the articles I edit and create, which are on the hard science and economic-political side. cant continue now, just wanted to drop this note of, whatever, call it wikiloving. have been named an "involved party" at arbcom, and i never wanted to get involved in such stuff, as a content writer! need to draft a statement. cheers,-- Wuerzele ( talk) 19:43, 10 September 2015 (UTC)
What is it? It's not an article, not a disambig or redirect. I believ ethat the article should be written. Xx236 ( talk) 07:41, 27 October 2015 (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) 14:23, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
Re this edit - despite the name of the office of "deputy First Minister", Martin McGuinness was not Ian Paisley's deputy in the latter's role as First Minster. The two offices are a diarchy with equal power. -- Kwekubo ( talk) 14:36, 30 November 2015 (UTC)