User talk:Rolando 1208

Welcome![edit]

Hello, Rolando 1208, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

You may also want to complete the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit the Teahouse to ask questions or seek help.

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! Libertybison (talk) 21:02, 21 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Discretionary sanctions alert[edit]

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in Eastern Europe or the Balkans. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

--Ymblanter (talk) 15:45, 7 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

April 2020[edit]

Hello. Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia.

When editing Wikipedia, there is a field labeled "Edit summary" below the main edit box. It looks like this:

Edit summary (Briefly describe your changes)

Please be sure to provide a summary of every edit you make, even if you write only the briefest of summaries. The summaries are very helpful to people browsing an article's history.

Edit summary content is visible in:

Please use the edit summary to explain your reasoning for the edit, or a summary of what the edit changes. With a Wikipedia account you can give yourself a reminder to add an edit summary by setting Preferences → Editing → Prompt me when entering a blank edit summary. Thanks! Abbyjjjj96 (talk) 20:20, 8 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Do I have to write a summary even if I only change one word or two? Rolando 1208 (talk) 02:49, 9 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"It is considered good practice to provide a summary for every edit [...] Summaries are less important for minor changes (which means generally unchallengeable changes, such as spelling or grammar corrections), but a brief note like "fixed spelling" is helpful even then." (per H:FIES) —Abbyjjjj96 (talk) 03:12, 9 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message[edit]

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. 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 2020 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) 03:00, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ugaritic alphabet[edit]

It's very unproductive and unconstructive of you to unilaterally change the article title of "Ugaritic alphabet", when you must be aware that there's no consensus for that change on the article talk page, and there has been no formal process or procedure of any kind. (Not to mention that the main motivation for the change, the so-called "abjad"[sic] neologism, is completely bogus and worthless!) AnonMoos (talk) 19:07, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I moved it to Ugaritic script, not abjad. A compromise between the two positions. But not good enough for you.

Have it your way, but this issue keeps coming up, and it probably will continue. Both from IPs and registered users.

I have to ask you, why do neologisms bother you so much? You never use the word "computer" or "phone"?? Are these words bogus and worthless? Who are you to decide what words are useful anyways? Rolando 1208 (talk) 21:46, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The issue came up, and it was rejected in discussions on "Talk:Arabic alphabet", and of the half-a-dozen or so renames proposed by User:AleksiB_1945, only one went through (the one on the most obscure writing system). Just from perusing the "Talk:Ugaritic alphabet" talk page and/or revision history, you should have known that the issue was controversial and contested, yet you chose to act unilaterally anyway, which throws a negative light on your actions.

For the record, one problem with "abjad" is that it has a perfectly useful synonym which has been in use for centuries, "consonantal alphabet". That was not true of the word "telephone" before telephones existed. However, the most obnoxious feature of the Peter Daniels terminology spree is actually not the word "abjad", but redefining the word "alphabet" to have a much more narrow meaning than it traditionally had. And it's not up to me to decide -- I merely point out the fact that Danielsisms have not replaced traditional usage among scholars (certainly not in the Semitic realm which is most relevant to "alphabet" vs. "abjad"). AnonMoos (talk) 01:12, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting, I didn't know it was Peter Daniels who coined the term, and he also coined "abugida"! How do you even explain the concept without such word? "alphabet with vowels on the top and bottom"? Imagine having to constantly repeat that in a peer-reviewed linguistics paper!!

Perhaps my move and the three previous moves were simply too early. What are you going to do when most Semiticists agree that the word abjad is just more useful? Will you keep being this stubborn or will you finally let it go? Rolando 1208 (talk) 12:32, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

All indications are that it's too early by a number of years. AnonMoos (talk)

P.S. It's not standard terminology, but the Ethiopian alphabet could be called a "false" syllabary, since there are many commonalities in appearance as you go down the columns of different consonants combined with the same vowel, and also many commonalities when you look across the rows of the same consonant combined with different vowels. In very strong contrast, in "true" syllabaries such as Japanese hiragana and katakana, there is no commonality across any row or column (signs which write the same beginning consonant or the same ending vowel have no significant similarity in appearance). That's why Ethiopean was formerly often called an "alphabet" (don't know if it still is), while the Japanese scripts were never called alphabets by any linguistically-informed person. AnonMoos (talk) 23:24, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

At least with Japanese you acknowledge it's not an alphabet! We agree on that at least.

Korean is an interesting one, it "looks" like a syllabary but it's actually an alphabet. Rolando 1208 (talk) 23:31, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If each consonant is written with a single visual shape, or with various shapes that have similarities in appearance or are contextually-defined "allographs", then that's a minimum necessary condition for a writing system to be called an alphabet, and traditionally also a sufficient condition. To puzzle your mind over the difference between alphabets and syllabaries, look at the Iberian scripts or "semi-syllabaries"... AnonMoos (talk) 23:50, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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) 01:41, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

November 2022[edit]

Hello. Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. I noticed a recent edit you made does not have an edit summary. You can use the edit summary field to explain your reasoning for an edit, or to provide a description of what the edit changes. Summaries save time for other editors and reduce the chances your edit will be misunderstood. For some edits a summary may be quite brief.

The edit summary field looks like this:

Edit summary (Briefly describe your changes)

Please provide an edit summary for every edit you make. With a Wikipedia account you can give yourself a reminder to add an edit summary by setting Preferences → Editing → Prompt me when entering a blank edit summary, and then click the "Save" button. Thanks! Dāsānudāsa (talk) 08:47, 30 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Which recent edit? Rolando 1208 (talk) 07:30, 1 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

"Western cultural norms" = "modernity"?[edit]

Seriously, on Child marriage that is literally what your edit is saying, how can you not see that? And please stop just edit warring your change back in. That's not how BRD works. Mako001 (C) (T) 🇺🇦 08:36, 16 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It's the opposite, we should stop overusing the word "western". Saying "western values, western medicine, etc." is definitely Eurocentric. Rolando 1208 (talk) 08:49, 16 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Define "modernity". What is "modern"? That is a subjective term.

I might say that a car with an internal combustion engine is "modern". Certainly when compared to a horse and cart it might be, but compared to an electric vehicle, it isn't. Or is it? Electric cars predate internal combustion engines. Now what's modern?

See the issue with calling something "modern" or "modernity"? Mako001 (C) (T) 🇺🇦 12:51, 17 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Indic script[edit]

- Please do not add any Indic script, to any of our India related articles, as you did at Marwari people, as this contravenes WP:NOINDICSCRIPT - Thank you - Arjayay (talk) 10:27, 31 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

As I mentioned, the wiki article for Tamil people uses the script. Clearly an exception exists for linguistic groups as per the WP. It's what set Marwaris apart too, their language. How can you not see that? Rolando 1208 (talk) 23:36, 31 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

No, as it clearly states "Exceptions are articles on the script itself, articles on a language that uses the script, and articles on texts originally written in a particular script." Marwari people, are an ethnic group not a "script", not a "language" and not a "text originally written in a particular script."
With regard to Tamils, there are very significant populations in Sri Lanka, Malaysia, and Singapore, so they fall under the exclusion for "any of India's neighbouring countries".

Please stop. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Marwari people, you may be blocked from editing.
It was clearly explained, above, that you should not add Indic script to our articles, but have continued to do so, please stop. - Arjayay (talk) 09:22, 1 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Well I strongly disagree @Arjayay: since we're talking about an ethno-linguistic group specifically. This group is identified after their language. It's uncontroversial that their mother tongue is Marwari.

I also disagree regarding the Tamils considering that an overwhelmingly majority of them are from India.

You thinking I'm doing vandalism is simply your opinion, I'm doing constructive edits that improve Wikipedia. Please stop edit warring.

Also, there's Marathi people which also uses their script. There's clearly a precedent here.

Rolando 1208 (talk) 04:12, 8 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Rolando 1208 - I'm not going to edit-war on this, although I will probably seek clarification from MOS:INDIA about WP:NOINDICSCRIPT, when I have some spare time. As for your argument that Tamils and Marathi people provide precedents, that is NOT the way Wikipedia works - as explained at WP:OTHERCONTENT "The nature of Wikipedia means that you cannot make a convincing argument based solely on whether or not the same or similar content exists or is formatted similarly in some other page" - Arjayay (talk) 09:10, 8 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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) 00:51, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Article movement[edit]

Hello! In this diff: Special:Diff/1188199756, which article were you hoping to move? Cheers, Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 23:10, 3 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The one that it redirects to. It lacks the article "the". I guess if I wanted to move it there I'd have to delete the redirect page? I assumed blanking it would do the trick. Rolando 1208 (talk) 20:05, 4 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

December 2023[edit]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Hindi. This means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be although other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Points to note:

Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. —SpacemanSpiff 16:36, 5 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Rolando 1208, regarding your proposed addition to Hindi, please note that the onus to obtain a consensus for inclusion is on you, and you'd need to do so instead of continuing to restore the material. I see a first small discussion attempt at Talk:Hindi § Arabic loanwords, but not the required consensus yet, so please wait instead of reverting, and have a look at WP:DISCFAIL for a helpful essay in case Word0151 ignores this. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 20:13, 5 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It was the stable version before November 30, when Word decided to remove it.

But sure thing, I don't wanna edit war, I'll wait. Rolando 1208 (talk) 21:51, 5 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]