Jump to content

User talk:Ran

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 202.61.116.130 (talk) at 22:22, 26 January 2005. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Archive: 2004

consensus

indeed. but you were invited to voice your objections on the Talk page. I don't know a better way to get people to comment on it than trying it out for some time. btw, it has already been translated into German during the short time it was online. I would ask you to either state why you think it should be scrapped, or put it back so other people can comment on it. dab () 19:41, 2 Jan 2005 (UTC)

I see. have you seen the 'math' on Talk:Main? Maybe you could answer with a short comment that you think it is wrong. I do not argue word count is 'correct', obviously, just that the margin of error is overall smaller than for article count. What does it tell you that Chinese comes up as 4.1% of en: (or in the tier 8th-21st) in article count, and as 3.1% of en: (or 12th) in word count? total inaccuracy? dab () 19:57, 2 Jan 2005 (UTC)
ah, sorry, I had not noticed you had put it back on the Main Page, otherwise I would have waited for you to react before reverting. Shall I revert to your footnote? dab () 20:08, 2 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Wikistats

Hi Ran, answer on my talk page. Erik Zachte 00:58, 3 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Vandalism on Japanese language

Hey Ran, thanks for reverting. I'd noticed the vandalism, but you beat me to the actual reversion. Thanks again! --Marnen Laibow-Koser (talk) 21:29, 7 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Re: Brussels as the "capital" of the European Union

I was under the impression that Brussels is actually the capital rather than just "regarded as", since it is the seat of the executive body (the European Commission). I think it's just that the capital is only a smaller part of the larger "headquarters" of the EU.  — Saxifrage |  22:49, Jan 11, 2005 (UTC)

Re transliteration of Chinese names:

Who is in charge of the naming committee? Are you suggesting that the pinyin transcription be used for all languages with latin alphabets or only English? This raises the issue of Chinese transliterations of non-Han names. There are some very bad examples, such as "old gold mountain" for San Francisco, Haishenwai for Vladivostok, etc. If you want to enforce this policy then you should insist that non Han names be transliterated faithfully with the popular mistranlations in parentheses if necessary.

Dimitry

I've replied at User talk:24.250.113.200. -- ran (talk) 01:29, Jan 12, 2005 (UTC)

Egyptian Arabic

You are absolutely right. There's no relation between the writing system and the existance of phonemes. The use of the word "alphabet" was improper.

However, the sentence you removed did not suggest a relation of this kind.

It was referring to the phonemes g and ʒ regardless of their representaion in writing. In the case of Arabic, there's only one letter ج that represents either one of them, depending on the speakers accent.

While the phoneme ʒ did not exist in the Egyptian language, g existed, so maybe replacing ʒ with g was the way Egyptians learned to pronounce Arabic, since it would not cause confusion anyway.

Maybe the new phrasing will be more accurate.

--Alif 20:49, 22 Jan 2005 (UTC)

中華民國全圖

Hi Ran, thanks for uploading the most recent version of Image:&-20013;&-33775;&-27665;&-22283;&-20840;&-22294;.jpg. It's currently the focus of an ongoing image sleuthing effort, whose goal is to determine the source and copyright status of images lacking such information. Do you have a source URL for this map, or any other information about it? If so, could you post it on the image description page or on Image talk:&-20013;&-33775;&-27665;&-22283;&-20840;&-22294;.jpg? Thank you very much. --MarkSweep 06:45, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Whoa, speedy reply! The original uploader has been contacted. Thanks again, --MarkSweep 06:50, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)

On romanisation

Thank you. I did enjoy discussing and exploring the issue with you. And that's the real meaning of the art of dicussions over Wikipedia. -- 22:22, January 26, 2005, UTC