User talk:Evertype

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

New Ireland Wikimedia email list[edit]

Hi Evertype:

I'm pleased to announce that we've started a new Ireland Wikimedian email list, that you can join, at mail:WikimediaIE. For Wikimedians in Ireland and Wikimedians interested in events in Ireland and efforts in Ireland. It's there to to discuss meetups, partnerships with Museums and National Archives, and anything else where Wikipedia and real life intersect :) --Bastique demandez

Merry Newtonmas[edit]

Your feedback is requested[edit]

書.svg


WikiProject Writing Systems is conducting a poll regarding its future goals, and we have identified you as a person with a vested interest in the future of that project. Whether you are a member of the WikiProject, a frequent contributor, or a passerby with an interest in the subject, we want your input as to the future emphasis that the Writing Systems project will take. Please take a moment to peruse the entries and add your comments where you have an opinion. You can visit the poll by clicking here, or on the project image, 書, on the right.

Recorders[edit]

Hi Michael. I've added the more common English (and I believe Scottish) names of "descant" and "treble" to your references to the soprano and alto recorders. I'm not disagreeing with the American names, but not including the alternatives could lead to confusion. I've also combined your "Types of recorder" section with the existing "Types of recorder" section in recorder (musical instrument). I can see what you're planning (oh and BTW, you've missed out the descant/soprano) from the list). Perhaps it might be better to either:

  • Create a template {{recorders}} and use in it place of {{woodwinds}} near the top of the articles, but how will that run with project music?
  • Add a sub section to {{flutes}} as has already happened for side-blown flutes.
  • Create a new template for recorders which can be stacked upon {{flutes}}, just as that is stacked upon {{Renaissance music}}.

Any preferences? Regards, Martin of Sheffield (talk) 23:26, 15 November 2014 (UTC)

I added Recorders as a subsection to {{flutes}}. I am not sure what you mean by "stacked". -- Evertype· 15:13, 16 November 2014 (UTC)
That's fine. I was only asking for a preference, I'd have done it myself this evening, so thank you. By "stacked" I simply meant plced above flutes, just as flutes are placed above Renaissance music. Martin of Sheffield (talk) 15:57, 16 November 2014 (UTC)

Navbox[edit]

There is a discussion about a navbox for recorders here. As a major current contributor your input would be particularly valued. Regards, Martin of Sheffield (talk) 23:47, 22 November 2014 (UTC)

Thanks. -- Evertype· 15:23, 23 November 2014 (UTC)

Tyvan symbol Y ү, which changes its shape in manuscript form[edit]

Hi! In Tyvan language we have a simbol "Y ү" (cyrilic simbol, not greece "wye"). We write it in another way by pen - "У у", but with reverse tail. I can proove it by screenshots and photos from our study books for initial grades. Also we used to write this simbol by the same way. Can I talk with you by email? Thx. --Agilight (talk) 16:57, 23 November 2014 (UTC)

For example, here Тос-Булак аржаан.jpg: "Чүге суг бажы дагыырыл?", "...үзүлбезин...", "...сүзүглеливис..."... --Agilight (talk) 17:54, 23 November 2014 (UTC)

There isn't an encoding issue here, it is just a glyph variant in italic fonts and/or handwriting. -- Evertype· 18:27, 23 November 2014 (UTC)

Category:Recorders[edit]

Category:Recorders, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. PamD 14:04, 24 November 2014 (UTC)

Category:Neo (constructed language)[edit]

Category:Neo (constructed language), which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. —Justin (koavf)TCM 10:01, 9 January 2015 (UTC)

Your administrator status on the Volapük Wikipedia[edit]

Hello. A policy regarding the removal of "advanced rights" (administrator, bureaucrat, etc.) was adopted by community consensus in 2013. According to this policy, the stewards are reviewing activity on wikis with no inactivity policy.   You meet the inactivity criteria (no edits and no log actions for 2 years) on the wiki listed above. Since that wiki does not have its own rights review process, the global one applies.   If you want to keep your rights, you should inform the community of the wiki about the fact that the stewards have sent you this information about your inactivity. If the community has a discussion about it and then wants you to keep your rights, please contact the stewards at m:Stewards' noticeboard, and link to the discussion of the local community, where they express their wish to continue to maintain the rights.   If you wish to resign your rights, you can reply here or request removal of your rights on Meta.   If there is no response at all after approximately one month, stewards will proceed to remove your administrator and/or bureaucrat rights. In ambiguous cases, stewards will evaluate the responses and will refer a decision back to the local community for their comment and review. If you have any questions, please contact the stewards. Rschen7754 04:04, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

Notice of Conflict of interest noticeboard discussion[edit]

Information icon This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard regarding a possible conflict of interest incident in which you may be involved. Thank you. Shervinafshar (talk) 21:28, 4 April 2015 (UTC)

I did not see this until today, but evidently the accusation of COI is unwarranted. The Wikipedia rules (WP:AB, WP:BLP) DO PERMIT subjects of articles to edit articles about themselves—advisedly with care and openness—and there is always a history retained for checking. So long as edits are informative and verifiable, there seems no reason to consider COI. COI would apply to unnecessarily self-serving edits. In the Real World, COI is invoked when e.g. politicians do work which benefits companies in which they have a financial interest (either benefitting from public funding or insider-trading). I don't see much of an analogy here. -- Evertype· 11:56, 24 April 2015 (UTC)
Ah, you logged in! I have been working at the COIN board for a while now, and have been waiting for you to pop up. The COIN filing is so old it has been archived now - see Wikipedia:Conflict_of_interest/Noticeboard/Archive_82#Andrew_West_.28linguist.29 and just below it, Wikipedia:Conflict_of_interest/Noticeboard/Archive_82#Michael_Everson. It emerged in those discussions that Shervinafshar actually had a real world beef with Babelstone and possibly with you.. and that was more of an issue. That happens. Nonetheless, your reading of WP:COI is not accurate. There is a whole section in the guideline on using WP for self-promotion, which, I am sad to say, happens a lot with people citing their own work, for example. (and i can give you plenty of diffs with examples, if you don't believe me) There are many ways that the integrity of WP can be compromised due to COI, in ways that are somewhat unique to this place. But your edits and those of babelstone were reviewed and nobody found any big problems. Do keep Wikipedia:Conflict_of_interest#Writing_about_yourself_and_your_work in mind, though. Thanks! Jytdog (talk) 12:16, 24 April 2015 (UTC)
@Jytdog: You are going to burn out if you try to police every tiny potential problem. I don't recall anyone showing an edit that was problematic, so banging on about COI is in this case is missing several points. I think it would be reasonable to assume that Evertype is quite a smart person and doesn't need a lecture on such basics. As you note, the only issue turned out to be that the person making the report was up to his neck in off-wiki disputes and was trying to use Wikipedia to punish opponents—giving oxygen to that is not helpful. Johnuniq (talk) 00:29, 25 April 2015 (UTC)
and policing the police is going to burn you out?  :) but really. i agreed with 98% of what you wrote there; shervinafshar had a tiny, tiny good point but was wrong in a big way. (things are almost never black and white) my main goal was just to chill things out. Jytdog (talk) 00:34, 25 April 2015 (UTC)
The Wikipedia rules (WP:AB, WP:BLP) DO PERMIT subjects of articles to edit articles about themselves—advisedly with care and openness—and there is always a history retained for checking. So long as edits are informative and verifiable, there seems no reason to consider COI. COI would apply to unnecessarily self-serving edits. In the Real World, COI is invoked when e.g. politicians do work which benefits companies in which they have a financial interest (either benefitting from public funding or insider-trading). I don't see much of an analogy here. Thank both of you for your courtesy. These witch-hunts do a lot to encourage efforts from not spending time and energy on the Wikipedia. -- Evertype· 14:09, 25 April 2015 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Andrew West (linguist)[edit]

Ambox warning yellow.svg

The article Andrew West (linguist) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

The self-declared account of the subject of this article has said on several occasions that he would like this article deleted. Most recently:

I would be even happier if the article disappeared but I cannot take it to AfD myself, and no-one else seems willing to do so. BabelStone (talk) 08:02, 7 April 2015

The article has attracted conflict, including Wikipedia:Conflict_of_interest/Noticeboard#Andrew_West_.28linguist.29. Although West may or may not be a notable academic on account of a significant contribution to his field, I believe that because he is a low profile individual, it would be prudent and polite to honor this request. --Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 15:21, 8 April 2015 (UTC)

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 15:25, 8 April 2015 (UTC)

Nomination of Andrew West (linguist) for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Andrew West (linguist) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Andrew West (linguist) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. – Fayenatic London 15:37, 14 April 2015 (UTC)