From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
This article has been mentioned by a media organization:

Non-English palindromes[edit]

section is very poor: only "saippuakauppias" is mentioned. I've tried to add more information of Finnish palindromes, but they've been removed. Finnish is the language that rules the palindrome-world. The books of Risto Rekola (Ikävää, väki? and Naaraan) include 15 000 palindromes (Finnish, English, German, Swedish, Dutch, Estonian etc.). "Naaraan" is at the moment the most popular in poetry at eKirjasto (library) in Finland. Finnish palindromes are acoustic palindromes as well, not only written (like "eye" in English).

I hope some native English speaker would write in Wikipedia about this, so well it would be accepted. Risto hot sir (talk) 12:47, 17 June 2016 (UTC)

This is the English Wikipedia. There are links to 62 other Wikipedias under "Languages" in the left pane. Many non-English palindromes have been removed here in the past.[1][2][3][4][5] There are some posts supporting such removals earlier on this talk page. PrimeHunter (talk) 13:17, 17 June 2016 (UTC)
Agreed. I've just removed the foreign examples of palindromic stories. There's no need ot mention jsut a few, and they were not even as long as the English example. Meters (talk) 16:45, 17 June 2016 (UTC)
OK, Kierkegaard, Hesse and Tolstoi didn't write English, so learn Danish, German and Russian and go to local Wikipedia! The true fans of palindromes have the right to know the best palindrome books in the world! Foreign single examples are not so important. (talk) 20:21, 17 June 2016 (UTC)
Kierkegaard, Hesse and Tolstoi have been translated to English. Palindromes don't translate. PrimeHunter (talk) 20:56, 17 June 2016 (UTC)
The popular rock band Eppu Normaali sings only Finnish, so why does it have an article in English Wikipedia? And it has a lot of information of many writers who haven't been translated into English. So where's the logic? Could You tell me where a palindrome book has become the most popular in poetry? In fact, one might say, all non-palindromic poetry is unformed, because it's not symmetric! (talk) 11:35, 18 June 2016 (UTC)

Finnusertop asked for more text to non-English palindromes, and Anagram16 and me followed the suggestion. Meters removed the texts. If You look at the pageview statistics, You'll see that during the last 4-5 days the article has been read much more often than before (about 2000 a day). So people seem to be interested. The articles's name is Palindrome, not English palindrome. If You want to understand Your own language, You have to know something about other languages, too! "Saippuakivikauppias" and ancient palindromes are not enough. It's clear that only carefully chosen and popular palindromes can be shown in this article. Anagram16's examples are good. The Finnish palindrome "Tom ohitti homot" ("Tom passed the gays") is about the best known Finn, Tom of Finland. There are one billion English speakers, so can You show me a decent neverending English palindrome like "Anna ajatella, talleta ja anna ajatella, talleta ja anna...". You should not think that if there's much fog on the Channel, Europe is isolated! --Risto hot sir (talk) 10:36, 2 October 2016 (UTC)

I think that in the article named Palindrome can be and should be examples from different languages. If native English editors do not want anything that is not originally written in English, let us turn the section into another article Non-English palindromes. There was lately a similar discussion about alexandrine (rewritten by Phil wink, who is an experienced author) that led to creating new articles about French, Polish and Czech alexandrines. As there is category Palindromes, a new article would fit in well. (Anagram16 (talk) 11:21, 2 October 2016 (UTC))
Where exactly did User:Finnusertop ask "for more text to non-English palindromes" in this article? Risto hot sir discussed the issue with him or her here [[6]] but that does not appear to a request for more non-English examples, but rather merely a comment that limited Finnish examples have been tolerated in this article. Even if there were a definite request for more foreign language content elsewhere, a conversation between Risto hot sir and another editor does not supersede consensus on this article. Foreign language examples have repeatedly been removed from this article, by multiple editors. It appears there is consensus that detailed foreign language material is not appropriate for this article. Meters (talk) 18:12, 2 October 2016 (UTC)
@Meters: What I did say was that Risto hot sir could make any improvements he sees fit to the section in this article. I also said I agreed that the section could mention a few Finnish palindromists by name (provided that it's reliably sourced). And, as noted above, that the section has previously incorporated foreign-language quotations. In addition to that (which, I agree, does not superseded consensus on this article, which I hope we can form right now) I'd like to say that a middle-ground approach here is preferable: this article is not about English-language palindromes but palindromes in general. On the other hand, this is the English Wikipedia, so it is only natural that the language has more weight than others. In any case, all information should be sourced to reliable third-party sources, and discussing whether original research material should stay or go is not very helpful. – Finnusertop (talkcontribs) 19:08, 2 October 2016 (UTC)
What does the mention of OR refer to? No-one has mentioned OR in this thread except you. Meters (talk) 19:44, 2 October 2016 (UTC)
It's OR to characterize the palindromes when no such characterizations are made in cited reliable sources. For instance, the article used to say that Finnish palindromes are phonemic. Translations of foreign-language palindromes into English is another OR issue and should be approached conservatively. I'd assume that reliable sources give translations for some of the most noteworthy foreign-languge ones, and if so, we don't need to come up with our own. – Finnusertop (talkcontribs) 20:03, 2 October 2016 (UTC)
Let's compare the article Palindrome to another international subject: football. Football is still loved in England - thanks to foreign players. Football is an English innovation, palindrome not. Following the logic of article Palindrome, only year 1966 would be notable. In the end there would be a short chapter where would be mentioned that football is very popular in Latin America and Iceland. Is that kind of article OK? Why to hide information that many people want to read? Risto hot sir (talk) 07:37, 3 October 2016 (UTC)
Your argument is incomprehensible. Meters (talk) 19:08, 3 October 2016 (UTC)
Oh, really? So the new examples weren't good? Brexit-talk without answers! This time take a look on the famous "English" palindromes: "Adam" and "Eden" were words before there was English language. "Panama"-sentence was good 100 years ago. Elba is in Italy, etc. (Latin). In fact "Football" is an article in Wikipedia, "English football" another. So why not "Palindrome" and a new article "English palindrome"? Even the biggest city in English world, New York, is of Scandinavian origin (Jorvik). Longer than 4-word arguments, please!
And I challenged one billion English brains to form a neverending palindrome, but haven't seen that yet. Then we can forget the "longest palindrome sentence" in the world, 'cause the "Anna ajatella..." is possible to repeat 'till Doomsday. Risto hot sir (talk) 19:50, 3 October 2016 (UTC)
My four words were not an argument. They were simply a comment that your previous posting made no sense. Gibberish about about football and 1966 has nothing to do with whether this article should discuss Finnish palindromes. There appears to have been a consistent removal of foreign material form this article by multiple editors. I believe it is up to you to convince us that the material should be included. I'll ping all of the named accounts that have edited this article this year for input. Meters (talk) 20:46, 3 October 2016 (UTC)
Done. I believe I have notified every non-indeffed named account who has been active on this article or talk page since 1 January 2016. I skipped the IPs. My apologies if any of the IPs are long term editors with static IP numbers (none of the ones I checked were). Meters (talk) 21:23, 3 October 2016 (UTC)
My opinion is that in the article named just Palindrome should be examples from different languages, and may be different alphabets (Hebrew, Greek, Russian, Armenian and Georgian), not many - one example from a language will be enough - because Wikipedia is World Encyclopaedia more than any other encyclopaedia printed on paper. In the Wiktionary no one questions placing words from any language, even when it is a historical or artificial language. One thing more, in English Wikipedia should be examples from all the British languages, I mean in the first place Welsh. (Anagram16 (talk) 21:20, 3 October 2016 (UTC))
I agree! English is a new language having huge amount of words from Latin, Celtic and German languages, French... Even the Royal Family's name was Sachsen-Coburg und Gotha untill 1915. You have to know Your roots! Like written before, 100 000 palindromes can be formed in Finnish, so it's impossible to find the best ones out of lists. One example is not enough, I think, but every chosen palindrome must be argued well: why just this one should be in the article. And I've noticed that all the changes can be seen in a minute at least in the Spanish Wikipedia. Risto hot sir (talk) 08:09, 4 October 2016 (UTC)
This is the English language wiki. Mentioning that palindromes exist in other languages is important, but for examples, go to that language's wiki. We dont want to flood the english language palindrome page with hundreds of examples from dozens of languages (where would we draw the line?) Masterhatch (talk) 05:36, 8 October 2016 (UTC)
At notable, well-sourced examples, just like in every other article in the encyclopedia? — LlywelynII 15:38, 26 February 2017 (UTC)
The Spanish Palindromo is in my opinion the best one: many (but not too many) examples of other languages after the Spanish ones. One hundred might be enough. Only the best ones would be chosen, those that make people think or laugh (or both) like Alivaltiosihteeri's "Syy hyökätä: köyhyys" ("Reason to attack: poverty"). And yesterday the Spanish article was more visited than the English one, probably the first time. Risto hot sir (talk) 09:01, 8 October 2016 (UTC)
The Finnish example seems worth mentioning for being "world's longest palindromic word in everyday use", and a short, sourced section on non-English palindromes would be useful (perhaps mentioning any languages where palindromes are particularly common or rare compared to English), but a hundred examples would be far too many. --McGeddon (talk) 09:12, 8 October 2016 (UTC)
If the non-English palindromes would be in the end nobody is forced to read them, but the people interested in linguistics could have a chance to study them. Going to other languages' wiki? - they are seldom translated to English. Risto hot sir (talk) 11:58, 8 October 2016 (UTC)
They grind diamonds symmetric, don't they? So why not to grind words and sentences to shining or crazy diamonds? The best ones in different languages should be presented, like this Alivaltiosihteeri's masterpiece: "Aivot avaavat ovia" ("Brains open doors"). Isn't that aphoristic poetry! Risto hot sir (talk) 19:54, 16 October 2016 (UTC)
No comments? Take a look at the Danish article! There You can find foreign examples - but only one per language. Risto hot sir (talk) 17:33, 24 October 2016 (UTC)
The Danish article lists foreign examples because you put them there earlier today. Writing about significant foreign palindromes (such as the longest-single-word Finnish one) seems the best approach to take here - I can't see that it would add much to list a couple of other arbitrary languages that also have palindromes. Are there any particuarly unusual palindromes in other languages? Or any foreign palindromes that were used in significant ways? --McGeddon (talk) 22:10, 24 October 2016 (UTC)
Thank You for making this article better! I tried the same in the Danish article, 'cause there were a couple of examples of other languages; I just added some more. You must admit that those palindromes are much better than the English ones. It's interesting that there are palindromes that include only consonants ("Krk", "vrv") and never-ending palindromes in Finnish. --Risto hot sir (talk) 10:29, 25 October 2016 (UTC)
I don't know if you're planning this to be a real RfC, or just a chat among the in-crowd, but in mine opinion there is no fault in including one or two foreign non-English palindromes (that's one or two total, not per language), it's a form of further information; anything further, however, doesn't belong here, as this article (on the English WP) can be assumed to be about palindromes in this language. Happy days, LindsayHello 17:48, 30 October 2016 (UTC)
No, it's not a formal RFC. I'm hoping to see a general consensus on whether the repeated removal of extensive discussions of non-English palindromes is appropriate. Multiple editors have removed such material but an SPA is still arguing to include it. The discussion to date seems to support the removals. There is also some support for minor additions in other languages. I don't see any point in giving examples of palindromes in other languages (incomprehensible to most readers) unless there is something notable about them. The long Finnish example is notable, and is still in the article. There are about 7000 languages, about half with a written form. We don't want examples for all of them. Note that Finnish (being pushed by the SPA) isn't even on the list of top 100 languages List of languages by number of native speakers. It would be interesting to note if there are written languages in which it is impossible to create meaningful palindromes. Meters (talk) 18:46, 30 October 2016 (UTC)
In that case, my contribution to consensus is, No, it is not inappropriate for extensive material/discussion/examples of non-English palindromes to be removed. And, once it has been removed, it is inappropriate for it to be replaced without a clear consensus that its presence is required. My reading of this talk page discussion does not come close to giving that consensus. Happy days, LindsayHello 10:16, 1 November 2016 (UTC)
These are my final arguments:
- The Spanish and French articles include many examples of other languages. Are English speaking people less interested in those, although the words in English are mostly German and French origin?
- In the United States people might to know their roots better, including languages their grandparents spoke. I see many cities that are named after places behind the Atlantic ocean: New York (Ny Jorvik), New Orleans, Memphis, Bismarck, Harlem, St. Louis etc.
- Finnish is the world champion in palindromes. I've created and collected 50 000 of these to my Excel, and 2/3 are Finnish. It's interesting that in Estonian, the closest language to Finnish, palindromes are very hard to make.
- The phonemic aspect should be explained much better. "Madam", "did" and "Bob" are palindromes spoken, too, but most English ones not. "Do geese see God?" is pronounced something like this: "Duu giis sii Gad?". The unphonemic writing took place in England after the battle of Hastings (under French influence). Risto hot sir (talk) 09:01, 31 October 2016 (UTC)

Continuing the conversation above, Meters is completely wrong and Risto Hot Sir was completely right. The article should include (sourced & notable) foreign palindromes. No edit warring should take place; 100+ foreign examples is clearly ludicrously UNDUE; but consensus and discussion really have nothing to do with whether the topic should be banned. The SCOPE of the article is "Palindrome" and not "English palindromes". Of course foreign palindromes are within that scope, provided they are well sourced & sufficiently notable. — LlywelynII 15:23, 26 February 2017 (UTC)

The axioms of "include all notable foreign palindromes" and "100+ is clearly ludicrous" quickly collide, though. There are lots of languages out there, and many will have a few famous palindromes which we can confirm with local sources. Even listing one per language would overwhelm the reader. It seems more useful to write a paragraph or two about foreign palindromes (focusing on any particularly interesting cases - languages where they are common, languages where they are impossible, languages where a palindrome is very prominent in society for some reason, languages that lend themselves to odd patterns), than to give a flat list of funny sentences. --McGeddon (talk) 21:28, 26 February 2017 (UTC)

Palindrome speech[edit]

A couple of times I've tried to write about phonemic palindromes, but the text has been undone. Palindrome music chapter contains very much information, so why not palindrome speech is not noted? The difference between written and spoken palindromes is vast in English. Roman languages Latin, Spanish and Italian are much more phonetic than English. "Sator Arepo Tenet Opera Rotas" is a palindrome spoken, too, and that's an essential part of the sentence's magic. The most phonetic languages are Finnish and Estonian. "Phonemic" means that when You hear a new word, You already know how it should be written. In English this doesn't work: if an Englishman says "ai", You must think is it "I" or "eye". This unlogical writing developed under French influence. Richard the Lionheart, for example, spoke French, not English. It's impossible to change the writing system anymore, but everyone should be aware of the problem: a lot of brain capacity is needed only to remember how the words are written. That's why English children never ever will be on top in the PISA-test in reading and writing, I guess. I hope an English expert of linguistics would write about this subject crystal clear.--Risto hot sir (talk) 18:13, 31 July 2016 (UTC)

Finnish names[edit]

The Finnish names chapter should be undone: I live in Finland, but have never heard surnames Lamme and Rannas, and the first names are not of Finnish origin (except Asko).--Risto hot sir (talk) 18:13, 31 July 2016 (UTC)

Is the unsourced claim that "Palindromic names are very common in Finland" true, in your experience? --McGeddon (talk) 13:01, 4 August 2016 (UTC)
It's true, because more than 100 000 palindromes can be written in Finnish, many of them are names.Risto hot sir (talk) 13:46, 4 August 2016 (UTC)

A phonemic English palindrome[edit]

"Net foo often" is a palindrome both written and spoken. "Foo" is pronounced "fuu", but in the middle of the sentence it doesn't disturb.--Risto hot sir (talk) 09:43, 8 August 2016 (UTC)

Well,it's not phonemic, but "net: fog often" is.--Risto hot sir (talk) 14:56, 8 August 2016 (UTC)

error between english and hebrew version[edit]

In the current english version it says

credited to Abraham ibn Ezra in 1924,[1] and referring to the halachic question as to whether a fly landing in honey makes the honey treif (non-kosher).

However on the hebrew version it credits R Yonnassan Ibishitz for saying this sentance17:18, 12 December 2016 (UTC) (talk)

cat example[edit]

An editor is insisting on truncating "Was it a car or a cat I saw?" to "Was it a cat I saw?" [7] I don't see a problem with the longer sentence. It's a grammatical palindrome, and makes more sense than many other palindromes. Meters (talk) 07:50, 6 February 2017 (UTC)

I agree that the longer version is grammatically correct and I also understand that one needs to be flexible when interpreting the meaning of some of these. However, I do agree with the editor (but not with his actions) who wanted the shorter version. In my mind it is a better palindrome because it is a more meaningful statement. Artificially pumping up the length of a palindrome may appeal to some, but we are not trying to set records here. Since we must be selective in the examples we choose for the article, I would, in general, opt for the more meaningful ones. --Bill Cherowitzo (talk) 19:12, 6 February 2017 (UTC)
"Artificially pumping it up"? The car version is a fairly well-known palindrome. I see no reason to shorten it. If we want to be selective about what we include I'd much rather get rid of complete nonsense such as "Go hang a salami, I'm a lasagna hog." Meters (talk) 20:07, 6 February 2017 (UTC)
"Was it a cat I saw?" is actually a Sam Loyd puzzle, but they're both relatively well-known, either seems fine here. Leaning slightly towards "was it a car or a cat" because that's the one I've heard cited more often as an example of a palindrome. --McGeddon (talk) 20:15, 6 February 2017 (UTC)
To me, the "car or a cat" version was fine, if a little bit silly. But if we're cutting out silly, the lasagna hog example is indefensible, I'd have reservations about a metal worm being eaten by an anthropomorphic owl, the Panama thing is inaccurate (multiple men and plans over many years) and the Nixon one would have to go as well (the X in Nixon makes it a palindrome). Rather than taking the ax to anything playful, I hope we can agree that literal meaning is not what makes for a particularly nifty palindrome. Currently we're hedging our bets, with the "car or a cat" example in the lead and the cat-only example in the body.
Note that while I support the "car or a cat" example, I would draw a hard line at any yahoo who tried to expand "A man, a plan, a canal - Panama" to "A man, a plan, a cat, a ham, a yak, a yam, a hat, a canal, Panama." :) EricEnfermero (Talk) 02:31, 7 February 2017 (UTC)
The sentence with car and cat is grammatically correct, but does anyone really use it in real life? Everybody sees the vast difference between a car and a cat. That's why I support the shorter version. Risto hot sir (talk) 11:51, 7 February 2017 (UTC)
I don't know that I've ever used either of those phrases in my life... but I know that I've never said lasagna hog, metal worm or anything resembling the Panama phrase. It seems that the cat/car example is inviting us to apply a unique standard to it, and I can't determine why. EricEnfermero (Talk) 03:22, 8 February 2017 (UTC)
The hedging does seem unneccesarily confusing to the reader, to quote one palindrome in the lede and then a very slightly different version of it later on. I'm not sure Palindrome#Sentences_and_phrases even needs more than one example to explain to the reader what a "sentence or phrase" is. We get onto "Famous English palindromes" in a later section. --McGeddon (talk) 09:31, 8 February 2017 (UTC)
The palindrome is "Was it a cat I saw?" I corrected what you wrote. Böri (talk) 08:08, 10 February 2017 (UTC)
"A man, a plan, a canal - Panama" is not meaningless... (It was about the man who planned The Panama Canal.) But "A man, a plan, a cat, a ham, a yak, a yam, a hat, a canal, Panama." is meaningless. / I didn't see that you were already talking about this. Böri (talk) 08:24, 10 February 2017 (UTC)
What do you mean by "The palindrome is..."? Both versions of the sentence are palindromes. --McGeddon (talk) 10:11, 10 February 2017 (UTC)
Böri, your sentence is meaningless, and your actions are reprehensible. Please stop edit warring to make sure your version (no one owns this ~ have you read about ownership?) stays.
As far as the car/cat question in general, i would say that i have generally heard/seen it in the longer version, though my anecdotal evidence isn't worth much when it comes to our practice; does anyone have references one way or the other? Happy days, LindsayHello 16:06, 10 February 2017 (UTC)
@McGeddon: I don't think we were intentionally hedging our bets by using the longer version in one place and the shorter version in another. The editor who was removing the long version was only doing it in the one place (at least until the second occurrence was mentioned here). It happened to have been out when the editor was blocked for edit warring, and I left it as was pending consensus on this page. My assumption was that we would make both occurrences the same, either short or long, once this discussion concluded, but your observation that we don't need multiple examples to demonstrate what a sentence palindrome is is spot on. Pick one and be done with it. Parts of this article seem to be becoming simply a place for editors to document their favourite palindromes, rather than an article about palindromes.
And I have to agree with EricEnfermero's observation that editors seem to be attempting to apply a unique restriction to this particular palindrome. No-one has ever used "Able was I ere I saw Elba." except as an example of a palindrome (Napoleon Bonaparte, to whom it is apocryphally attributed, died almost three decades before this palindrome was invented in 1848). We are not going to throw out one of the first, and arguably the best ever, English palindromes because no-one (other than perhaps a few literary-minded Englishmen who may have sprained something while visiting Elba) has ever had occasion to use it in real life. And what about the Guinness world record Finnish word "saippuakivikauppias" (a soapstone vendor)? We list it as the world's longest palindromic word in everyday use, but then we jump through hoops to get "saippuakalasalakauppias" (a soapfish bootlegger) and "saippuakuppinippukauppias" (a soap dish wholesale vendor, but literally a soap dish bundle vendor). That seems even more contrived and less likely to be used than "... car or a cat ...". Meters (talk) 19:35, 10 February 2017 (UTC)
Yes, we've spent too much time discussing about cats and cars. In Finland only "saippuakauppias" is widely accepted, 'cause it has a meaning. Actually the Panama-sentence is not wholly English: "Panama" is a Spanish (or Indian language perhaps) word. In the Spanish Palindrome-article You can read really good and used ones! Risto hot sir (talk) 21:08, 10 February 2017 (UTC) The palindromes should be so natural that the could be in a novel, and people wouldn't notice they're palindomes. What do You think of this one?: Dr! Ale? Lard? Risto hot sir (talk) 21:21, 10 February 2017 (UTC)
Above Risto said: "Everybody sees the vast difference between a car and a cat. That's why I support the shorter version." Risto was right. Others are all wrong! You can't write meaningless things in an encyclopedia! Böri (talk) 06:54, 11 February 2017 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── But people have written meaningless things (lasagna hog and the others I mentioned above) or historically inaccurate things (the Panama example I pointed out above), apparently for quite some time, and we seem to be only concerned about one example. Everyone sees the difference between cats and cars, but why would anyone be questioning whether they had just seen a cat? A cat is among the simplest animals to identify. That example doesn't make literal sense, but it's commonly cited as an English-language palindrome, just like the longer version is. EricEnfermero (Talk) 07:49, 11 February 2017 (UTC)

In a dark forest it could be a meaningful question, when You are not sure if it was a cat or a fox or a rabbit, for example. Risto hot sir (talk) 10:20, 11 February 2017 (UTC)
"Was it a car or a cat I saw?" = unacceptable! It looks silly! Böri (talk) 06:34, 13 February 2017 (UTC)
Risto, a memory game or test comes to mind, in which a person must match or recall images of certain objects. It would be easy for a person to get a little confused about recalling the next item (car, cat or otherwise) in a series of memorized images. For some of us, that's at least as plausible as being in a dark forest. We still haven't fully addressed the issue of eliminating implausible palindromes from the rest of the entry. EricEnfermero (Talk) 06:47, 13 February 2017 (UTC)

I'm not sure exactly what constitutes a reliable source for a palindrome discussion, but here are a few references in which the longer car/cat example is cited as a palindrome. Some of these include the shorter sentence as well. [8], [9], [10], [11], [12]. EricEnfermero (Talk) 07:06, 13 February 2017 (UTC)

Yes, the first link puts both of them. Böri (talk) 07:14, 13 February 2017 (UTC)
"Was it a cat I saw?" could be a sentence in Kipling's Jungle Book. It's not an artificial palindrome like the most are. Everybody accepts this sentence, so why to fight for three letters ("car")? Risto hot sir (talk) 10:14, 13 February 2017 (UTC) Imagine a fairytale in which a mouse wonders if there's a cat or a squirrel. It's the matter of life and death! - Long ago, before there was writing, the poets used alliteration and rhymes to prevent the story from changing. If they or the Mighty God would have used palindromes the story wouldn't have changed at all, 'cause the sentences would not have been palindromes anymore. - I miss really good palindromes in English language, therefore the very best ones of other languages should be presented in this site. Examples: Danish "Du er Freud?" ("Are You Freud?"; a very sarcastic question), Finnish "Aivot avaavat ovia" ("Brains open doors"; a good aphorism), "Irak: Koraania lainaa rokkari" ("Iraq: the rocker quotes the Quran"; that's what happens in the Middle East), "Allas nakukansalla" ("Naked people in the pool"), "Neulo, saat niin taas oluen!" ("Knit, so You'll get a beer again!")...Risto hot sir (talk) 12:35, 13 February 2017 (UTC)
Risto hot sir, forgive me, but your last point (foreign language examples) is well out of place. This question has been argued previously; i seem to recall that consensus was formed, not to include vast numbers of palindromes from non-English languages; if you are questioning that consensus, i suggest you start a new section on this page.
As far as i can tell, the current issue is not the "fight for three letters" so much as the bull-headed, inappropriate and contrary to policy way that another editor has been trying to ensure that his chosen version is that seen. There is discussion about the "three letters" (it's actually six, "a car or"), and consensus seems to be that the longer version should be used, though that may, just may, be open to interpretation. The point is that there has been edit warring to get rid of those six letters, and that is never right; now, i believe, the page has been protected so that no one can edit it ~ a poor result, which is why we don't permit edit warring. You will want to be careful that you don't give Böri the idea that his methods are acceptable, in your argument for the shorter sentence.
For the larger point, which sentence we use, if i wasn't clear above let me be so here: The longer version is to be preferred on the grounds that:
  1. Longer is generally better with palindromes;
  2. It does, indeed, make sense, both grammatically and in reality;
  3. There are references which list it, as shown by EricEnfermero above; and
  4. It is a palindrome.
Happy days, LindsayHello 16:46, 13 February 2017 (UTC)
This is Your site, so You can do whatever You decide. I'm only suggesting, that the English speaking people should have the right to know about the best palindromes in the world (what's already the case in Spanish, French, Finnish, Danish, Estonian etc. articles). There's no question to include vast numbers of foreign palindromes, only the VERY BEST ones, which You can choose. The longer one is usually not the better one - like it's also not with poems and novels. Risto hot sir (talk) 18:43, 13 February 2017 (UTC)
As User:LindsayH pointed out, this thread is not about foreign palindromes. That issue has already been discussed and concluded. WP:DROP THE STICK. Meters (talk) 18:54, 13 February 2017 (UTC)
In fact (alternative?) no consensus has been reached, my "final arguments" on 31.10. have been unanswered. Risto hot sir (talk) 21:10, 13 February 2017 (UTC) Someone tried to add French palindromes. Can't You see that about half of the English words are based of French language. I admire English, but Your palindromes are lousy compared to many other languages. Risto hot sir (talk) 01:09, 14 February 2017 (UTC) "There is a world elsewhere" (William Shakespeare). Risto hot sir (talk) 22:10, 20 February 2017 (UTC)

Added votes in brackets to clarify what was going on here and who was just repeating themselves or talking about something else. — LlywelynII 15:45, 26 February 2017 (UTC)

I've removed these as inappropriate, per comments in the next section. For reference, the count made by Llywelyn was 2 Longer (Meters, EricEnfermero), 1 for Weak longer (McGeddon), 3 for Shorter (Bill Cherowitzo, Risto hot sir, Böri), 1 Ambivalent (Lindsay). Note that Lindsay actually went on to say "The longer version is to be preferred". --McGeddon (talk) 21:05, 26 February 2017 (UTC)

I'll note that the shorter version is better and that's a decent consensus of editors even apart from the obnoxious one. For all of his rudeness, he's completely correct that confusion between a car and a cat makes no sense at all and turns the actual palindrome (linguistic oddity) into an nonsemantic/mathematical example of letter symmetry instead, along the lines of calling "Aaaa aa aaaa aa aaa" a palindrome because screams can be transcribed that way. (On the other hand, "lasagna hog" may not be a common expression but it is a perfectly straightforward one: a person who hogs the lasagna.)

That said, I won't edit the article or claim this consensus is binding until someone runs the numbers on which is actually the more COMMON ENGLISH version. We've just had anecdotes and biased sampling so far. If they're both about equally common, though, we should go with the one that's a better sentence on its own. — LlywelynII 15:23, 26 February 2017 (UTC)

Talk page formatting[edit]

Is it normally considered good practice to add wording (like shorter, longer, weak longer, ambivalent) next to user comments on a talk page? If so, is "cleanup of formatting" really the most helpful edit summary? EricEnfermero (Talk) 15:16, 26 February 2017 (UTC)

You shouldn't format it to make it appear as though others said something they didn't, but that's what the brackets are for. Yes, it absolutely clarifies the separate votes versus the people just repeating themselves or going off-topic. The cleanup of formatting is most of what actually occurred and, yes, clarifying the voting on each side of the issue is covered by that edit summary.
On the other hand, going completely off-topic like this isn't actually helpful and should be placed into a new section. [Fixed.] — LlywelynII 15:23, 26 February 2017 (UTC)
You're right that I should make it even clearer where those comments came from, though. [Fixed.] — LlywelynII 15:46, 26 February 2017 (UTC)
This is still very inappropriate WP:TALKO, as it looks like the editors stated these as their definitive !votes on the subject, when they're really one editor's attempt at a summary. (Particularly problematically, you've overlooked Lindsay's followup comment which explicitly says "The longer version is to be preferred on the grounds that:" and put them down as "ambivalent".) If you want to give your own subjective summary of other people's comments, that's fine, but you should post it as a summary in your own words - I'll go ahead and do that with attribution.
I've also restored the original comment threading. From the way you've refactored it (putting everything into a big diagonal line except for a single @-response), I think you've missed how WP:INDENTing works - the comments that didn't line up with the diagonal weren't mistakes, they were additional responses to the comment one level in. --McGeddon (talk) 21:04, 26 February 2017 (UTC)
Bundling up old talks threads into a single, subheaded new one is also a bit confusing. If an old conversation is being continued, the original conversation should stay where it is. I've removed the subheadings (which seemed meaningless) and put everything back at the top of the talk page. --McGeddon (talk) 21:19, 26 February 2017 (UTC)


The next problem are the references. Tried to add some Finnish (and one Swedish) palindromes, but they were removed. In my opinion no references are necessary: everyone can see that the word or sentence is a palindrome - and consider if it's a good one. On other languages' palindrome sites there aren't many references. Nobody knows who has invented that "saippuakauppias" is a palindrome, still it has to be on this site. Otherwise every word in Wikipedia should have a reference - and that would destroy the project! Risto hot sir (talk) 22:33, 1 March 2017 (UTC)

The Finnish and Swedish palindromes you added were removed because consensus is against including excessive lists of foreign-language examples.
If you are the Finnish author Risto Rekola (and you appear to have finally clarified that this is the case on your talk page) it's also inappropriate to cite your own book as a source as you did here. --McGeddon (talk) 08:31, 2 March 2017 (UTC)
I didn't want to write sources at all, it was Your idea - and 4-5 palindromes is not an excessive list. Check the Danish, Estonian and Finnish sites, there are not too many foreign-language palindromes! Perhaps You should consultate Llywelyn. Risto hot sir (talk) 10:03, 2 March 2017 (UTC)
Forgive my frustration, but how many times do you want to hear the same message? This is not the Danish, Estonian, or Finnish Wikipedia. Nor is it Arabic, Japanese, nor Klingon. We are writing the English Wikipedia, and thus we must respect and abide by the policies and practices of the English Wikipedia. What happens on the Estonian site is irrelevant. Worse than irrelevant, it is a distraction which you seem to have been caught by, Risto hot sir. That being said, what are those policies and practices?
  1. References are required. Doesn't matter that your opinion is that they're not. They are.
  2. Your own book is likely not a good place for you to cite a reference.
  3. Your definition of excessive is apparently not that of consensus; we will go with the latter, thank you.
I'm honestly trying to be nice here, and not allow the apparent necessity of repetition to bleed annoyance into my writing, so i apologise if my tone is not what you might expect; you have to understand, however, that when a long-term skilled user like McGeddon gives you advice, it is best to take it on board and not continue to try and hammer your own way through.
I have not linked to the appropriate policies and guidelines, as i'm sure you know them by now. If you would like, i will be happy to do so. Happy days, LindsayHello 12:45, 6 March 2017 (UTC)
Please read what Llywelyn wrote! Risto hot sir (talk) 12:54, 6 March 2017 (UTC) Don't be so egoistic! Those foreign sites include English palindromes, too. I just put 15 000 bytes palindromes of nature (Palindromeja luonnosta) to fi-Wikiquote, so it's funny to see how You quarrel whether "car" should be in a cat sentence. And You've removed good English palindromes - like the Simpsons' one - and kept those in which are foreign words (Panama, lasagna, Elba, Eden...). Risto hot sir (talk) 14:42, 6 March 2017 (UTC)

Rise to vote, sir[edit]

Please don't drop "Rise to vote, sir" - it's an excellent one: all the words are English and that sentence could be heard in the Parlament! Risto hot sir (talk) 19:19, 2 March 2017 (UTC)

I cut it from the "famous palindromes" section as it does not appear to be a "famous palindrome", just one that was "featured in an episode of The Simpsons". --McGeddon (talk) 12:49, 3 March 2017 (UTC)
It's the most famous English palindrome in northern Europe, at least. Risto hot sir (talk) 18:58, 6 March 2017 (UTC)
If you've got a source to back up "the most famous English palindrome in northern Europe", by all means add it back, with that context. --McGeddon (talk) 20:33, 6 March 2017 (UTC)
The Simpsons is a notable and wellknown animation all over the world, and it's palindrome is much better and more logic than the "lasagna hog". I thought this is an encyclopedia, not an "I feel like" -site. Risto hot sir (talk) 21:29, 6 March 2017 (UTC)

More Finnish palindromes[edit]

Meters deleted two Finnish palindromes. Obviously he/she has not read carefully what Llywelyn wrote. Now there were these ones: "Syy hyökätä, köyhyys" ("Reason to attack: poverty") and "Aivot avaavat ovia" ("Brains open doors"). Aren't they much better than the "lasagna hog"? These palindromes are not mine, and the references were there, too. So what's the problem? This article's name is Palindrome, not English palindrome - like there's Football and English football, two different sites. Risto hot sir (talk) 20:09, 6 March 2017 (UTC)

As I said in my edit summary, nothing particularly notable about these examples, and the issue of multiple Finnish examples has already been discussed on the talk page Meters (talk) 20:37, 6 March 2017 (UTC)
I think You're not the one who can judge whether these are notable, because You were "completely wrong" - that can be read above. Llywelyn made clear, that good examples of foreign palindromes (with references) are welcome. Do You regard two Finnish palindromes as "multiple"? Risto hot sir (talk) 21:29, 6 March 2017 (UTC)
Llywelyn has an opinion, just as I do, and just as you do, and just as all of the other editors who have commented on the talkpage do, and just as any editors who have added foreign palindromes to the article do, and just as all the editors who have removed foreign palindromes do. Llywelyn's opinion is no more binding that anyone else's. We edit by consensus. The foreign palindromes were removed from this article in 2015. When the issue was raised on the talk page many months later I informed every named account that had edited the article in the last year of the discussion. Several editors agreed that in general the foreign palindromes should stay out. There was certainly no consensus that they should go back in. There was some support for mentioning particularly notable foreign palindromes or palindromists, and the Guinness World Record longest commonly used palindromic (Finnish) word and several foreign palindromists (including at least 2 Finns) are still in the article. That is not carte blanche for you to start adding Finnish palindromes again, and it is not a reason for you to canvass another editor to add foreign palindromes as you did [13]. If you have other foreign palindromes that you believe are particularly notable please suggest them on this talk page so other editors can evaluate them.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Meters (talkcontribs) 00:42, 7 March 2017 (UTC)
What a bullshit! Only the editors who have some kind of understanding about palindromes should participate. Palindromes are the most perfect forms of artistry of words. The rhymes only work at the right side, and alliteration at the left side. Llywelyn surely sees best the whole picture. If You want to make a site of English palindromes only, it will be as short as icehockey in Brazil. Risto hot sir (talk) 02:08, 7 March 2017 (UTC)
The phrase is "What bullshit!"; and it isn't especially polite, so please refrain. It is nonsense for you to say Only the editors who have some kind of understanding about palindromes should participate because that is not how this place works, as i suspect you know only too well. Being an expert ~ and i note that you have written a book and are a palindromist (right word?) with a COI which you apparently decline to admit ~ does not give you (or anyone) special rights. We edit by consensus; we discuss and eventually come to some agreement about the content, and that agreement stands until it is changed by further discussion. There are occasions, certainly, when the views and, more particularly, the skills of an expert are required ~ i wouldn't want a beginner to write some of our mathematical articles, for example, though the views of non-experts are still to be taken into consideration. Secondly, though it is merely your opinion, i disagree that Palindromes are the most perfect forms of artistry of words, as i find perfect artistry in other forms; in fact, in mine opinion, which is to be valued no more than yours, and neither has any place in our article, palindromes are a facile and rather less artistic form of wordplay. Finally, i think your last sentence illustrates the misapprehension you are labouring under: We do not want to make a site of English palindromes only, we don't want to make a site of palindromes at all; this is an encyclopaedia, and as such is about the form, not a list of them. Happy days, LindsayHello 14:59, 7 March 2017 (UTC)
Sorry! Now I think I've written enough arguments and good examples. Maybe after 10 years You can understand the point. There are so many other subjects I want to concentrate in. We have a term "pilkunparittaja" ("comma pimp") - and no consensus can be found with bureaucrats at the moment. Risto hot sir (talk) 15:41, 7 March 2017 (UTC) "Aito idiotia" ("true idiotism"). Risto hot sir (talk) 20:38, 7 March 2017 (UTC)

The longest examples of a semordnilap[edit]

The article currently states that "the longest examples of a semordnilap contain eight letters". Well surely "semordnilap" is itself a semordnilap and that contains eleven letters. Also, according to Wiktionary, a semordnilap can be a phrase as well as a single word (just like palindromes) and undoubtedly much longer ones can be found. [World Wide Words offers "deliver no evil". SpinningSpark 14:33, 3 April 2017 (UTC)

Very true. The unsourced claim that the longest semordnilap is eight letters is clearly incorrect. I suggest removing any mention of the longest, pointing out that semordnilap is itself an example, and pointing out that, as with palindromes, sentences can be considered. Meters (talk) 18:05, 3 April 2017 (UTC)