User talk:Mark Dingemanse/Archive15

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

Confirmation[edit]

I confirm my request to be desysopped. I'm too busy at the moment to be of any help as an admin. What little time I have I'd like to spend on contributing content, and I don't need the sysop bit for that. — mark 11:23, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

You have been desysopped as requested. effeietsanders 12:04, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
Thanks, that was fast. It's a relief! — mark 20:11, 15 February 2007 (UTC)


  • Mark; sorry to see you give up your admin bit but I understand your reasons. Please be aware that since you gave up your admin status under non-controversial circumstances, you do not need to re-apply at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship if you choose to be an admin again. You may simply make a request at Wikipedia:Bureaucrats' noticeboard and you can be re-flagged as an admin. Best of wishes for you, --Durin 17:58, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
Hi Durin, thanks for the note, and I'll remember to do so whenever I feel the admin tools come in handy again. — mark 20:11, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

Speaking as someone who has been here, I think you've made the right choice. Be well, BanyanTree 04:23, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Frankly, I just followed the example of one of the Wikipedians I respect most: you. Thanks, BT, and see you around! — mark 16:46, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
Fine as long as you stick around. Been seeing good editors disappear, which worries me. --Ezeu 04:43, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
Ezeu, that worries me too, and I can't say I'm immune to the, how shall I say it, disentchantment that comes with disinvolvement. But maybe I should just delete my watchlist and see what new stuff I can contribute. It's also plain lack of time, though. — mark 18:33, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

African languages map is really nice, but extremely unrealistic for North Africa.[edit]

I really like the African languages map, but I find the North African distribution questionable. Total absence of Arabic in the Northwest is misleading. Arabic is not only a second language of the majority, but also the first language of the absolute majority in Tunisia, a clear majority in Algeria and Morocco, and a significant pluraity in Mauritania. As it stands, the map seems to suggest that Arabic is spoken in Egypt and parts of Lybia, while Berber is spoken in the rest of North Africa (which is clearly not the reality). Berber is alive, true, but so is Arabic very clearly. One more thing, what tool did you use to create this great map?--Karkaron 04:52, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

I presume you're talking about Image:African language families.png, which is one of a series of maps. The names on the map should only be taken as some examples of languages to be connected to the four families; if I had wanted to mark the distribution of those individual languages, I would have chosen different colours or shades. Of course I agree with your point about the prevalence of Arabic in much of the Sahel (see Image:Afro-Asiatic.png for a map in the same series which deals specifically with Afro-Asiatic).
I made those maps one and a half year ago in CorelDraw 12. — mark 17:08, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

I was wondering...[edit]

Hello, do you by any chance have copies of Maasai language books written by Frans Mol? If you do or know where I can obtain my own copies, please email me syntaxlove@hotmail.com Thanks! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.253.112.164 (talk) 00:26, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Do you have access to JStor.org? Zyxoas (talk to me - I'll listen) 09:59, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Try emailing me. — mark 14:52, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Invitation[edit]

{{WP Africa Invitation}} Belovedfreak 18:07, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Yep, I'm aware of the new WikiProject Africa. However, I won't join; chiefly because I simply lack the time (see above), but also a because I'm afraid Africa is too broad in scope for one overarching Wikiproject. — mark 18:12, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Edit conflict on Nafaanra[edit]

Sorry about that; I'll stop now. Let me know when you want me to have another look. Regards, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 13:58, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

OK; I'll wait for you, and have another look when you're ready. Looks good, though. Too bad it ended up on the list, but it was probably quite a chore to go through over 1,000 articles. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 14:09, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

Mark, I hesitate to work on some of these without your input. For example, I would change:

Delafosse (1904) was the first linguist to mention Nafaanra, calling it 'a much dispersed Senufo tribe'.[10]

to

Delafosse was the first linguist to mention Nafaanra, calling it 'a much dispersed Senufo tribe'.[10]

That is, I would remove the inline reference to the date of the cited source, since it's given in the actual footnote. Is that OK with you? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:05, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

Certainly, that would be fine. — mark 16:07, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
Actually, the way it is now ('Delafosse was the first linguist to mention Nafaanra, calling it 'a much dispersed Senufo tribe' in 1904') is good; it is notable that the first mention of Nafaanra dates back to only 1904. — mark 07:49, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
And I realize only now that I wrote the first version of the article (the first good publicly available source of information on the language) exactly one hundred years after that! — mark 08:06, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
Nice job :-) I usually wait for Marskell to concur before removing items from the list. Regards, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 12:25, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

I keep getting stuck here: not sure if this is a or b. Jordan (1980:D.1.4) I hope I don't do more harm than good. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:15, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

That's a 1980a, because of the funny page numbers. That document doesn't have page numbers, only sections. Sorry, I should've cleared this up before; the problem is that I only got hold of 1980b after I had written the bulk of the article. — mark 17:57, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

Donjunctive[edit]

As usual, you're completely and utterly wrong, marc. Though their verbal complexes are written conjunctively this does not seem to be consistently applied. At least in Kiswahili (iirc) the concords and prefixes (such as conjunctive "na-") are not attached to the rest of the word. I did take your advice and changed the wording from "almost all" to "many." Zyxoas (talk to me - I'll listen) 14:01, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

I guess this simply shows how unnatural and unscientific the word division is, though I did try to explain it (the Sesotho version) a bit in the article. Zyxoas (talk to me - I'll listen) 14:04, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

In Swahili, the conjunctive na isn't a concord (it agrees with nothing) nor a prefix (it associates two noun phrases and can't really be said to be more related to one than to the other, hence not an affix to either of the two). Because na doesn't consistently pattern with nor agree to some other word, it seems quite natural to me to write it as a separate word. In general, Swahili orthography strikes me as natural and neat.
And yes, as mentioned in word (an excellent article by Gareth), it is notoriously difficult to define just what makes a word a word, so it is actually not surprising that difficulties like this arise. I wouldn't rush to call the result unnatural or unscientific though; somewhere, choices have to be made and these will always give rise to disagreements. — mark 17:43, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

I'm taking Doke's side when he says that "na" (Sesotho "le") is a proclitic. How do you indicate possession in Kiswahili, "X wa Y" or "X waY"? I think I'll quickly take a look in the meantime. Zyxoas (talk to me - I'll listen) 19:12, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

The concord is separated from the possessee. I think the neatness comes from the simplicity of the language (it doesn't have a million concords and parts of speech). Remember that Doke based his opinions from comparisons of numerous languages, though his definition of the word (used in the Sesotho articles) may also be utterly arbitrary... Zyxoas (talk to me - I'll listen) 19:24, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

A proclitic it may well be, but that needn't be a reason to not distinguish the word boundary. Words are often phonologically joined in natural speech, but that doesn't necessarily mean that the most useful or meaningful orthography is one where the word boundaries in such cases are not marked. — mark 19:53, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

I read the word article. IMO the most useful analyses for Bantu languages are

  • Pauses. Though they seem to disappeare in multi-verbal conjugations.
  • Minimal free forms. Like the example I provided in Sesotho language.
  • Phonetic boundaries. Vowel harmony and penult stress.
  • Semantic units. Another analysis by Doke.

Basically Sesotho is S (plus elaboration) V (+e) O (+e), in his case every proper word serves a definite syntactic function (thus the 6 major Sesotho parts of speech divisions). I think that since "na" has 0 syntactic function (a conjunctive at the word level, which may be used without the first word) it's a modifying clitic.

Zyxoas (talk to me - I'll listen) 09:02, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

HELL![edit]

Could you please revert my accidental blanking of Talk:Sesotho language? Zyxoas (talk to me - I'll listen) 20:26, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

Frozen over. — mark 19:40, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

:-) Actually, I really don't see how I could've blanked the page since I was adding a section with a blank heading (like this one)... Zyxoas (talk to me - I'll listen) 21:20, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

That was meant to be a smiley :-) not an indentation. Zyxoas (talk to me - I'll listen) 21:22, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

I read the Hamitic article. Apparently it was actually Meinhof who came up with the crazy ideas of connections between "Hamitic," "Hottentot," "Bantu," "San," and "Negro" "races." Do you think 100 years from now people will look back on us and think that WE were a bit not-right in the head?


Zyxoas (talk to me - I'll listen) 21:20, 22 April 2007 (UTC)


Meinhof was not the only one of course. This kind of thinking pervaded nineteenth century scientific thought. The intriguing thing is of course that while one is in it, the Weltanschauung of one's contemporary culture generally doesn't strike one as utterly mistaken. Only hundred years later the stupidities become clear for all to see. — mark 06:23, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

MotsamyaMesong[edit]

You might like to take a look at "DawnTreader"'s "contributions". I really do not have the patience or temper to deal with this incredibly rude and disrespectful know-it-all high school (school ends at 14:00 -- 12:00 on Wikipedia) kid. That is, if you think there's a problem.

Enjoy. Zyxoas (talk to me - I'll listen) 13:30, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

Hey, I got rid of my adminship for a reason! — mark 14:33, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

How about:


"Hey dude. Though you may indeed be 102% correct about your views and it is perfectly acceptable for you to implement any changes you feel necessary to Wikipedia content; going about and harassing other contributors (patronising them, questioning their intelligence and knowledge, and making disparaging and mildly racist comments about them on talk pages) is probably not the absolute best way to go about it.

etc. etc. Blah blah. etc.

"All the best, marc."?

Zyxoas (talk to me - I'll listen) 15:05, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

Ah, the good cop tone of voice. But why not just steer clear of things you don't like? Not every comment merits a reaction. — mark 16:03, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

Okay... If you say so, dude. I just don't have much patience with blatantly retarded people -- as I'm sure you've noticed by now...


What is this, the Great Disjunctivitis Plague of the early 21st century??


Zyxoas (talk to me - I'll listen) 17:01, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

Well, the problem is not the airhead remarks, but the edits. Take a look at his edit history and at that of User:41.208.227.188 -- haven't you noticed that Sesotho language and Sesotho phonology look like crap?


If YOU revert him and show a commitment to protecting the integrity of Wikipedia content (since I find it very difficult to do so) then he might feel inclined to stop trolling and take up some extramural activity (like getting a girlfriend and some real friends).


It would also make me feel less like the people here have very strong views on minor issues like article titles but are disinclined when I need their help to improve content or fight vandals.


Zyxoas (talk to me - I'll listen) 19:33, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

And Sesotho nouns and Sesotho concords. I'm also done reverting his changes to articles which are sourced from the constitution.


Zyxoas (talk to me - I'll listen) 19:41, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

It would also make me feel less like the people here have very strong views on minor issues like article titles but are disinclined when I need their help to improve content... I don't think the current edit war is about improving content; it's much closer to being a minor issue just like you mention. If you think it needs intervention, try asking someone who hasn't been as heavily involved in this dispute as I have been.
Besides, I prefer to stay cool when the editing gets hot; I usually simply turn to something more worthwile to avoid fanning the flames. — mark 20:21, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Well, it's not exactly a "pointless" or "minor" dispute since several perfectly acceptable articles have been converted into useless heaps of redlinks.


I wonder how many people (apart from Angr a few days ago when he checked my edit to Template:Language phonologies, as well as you) have actually bothered to read and learn from this stuff? The articles don't seem to have done any good at all.


Did you look at the "contributions" and histories? Does this not look like trolling, vandalism, and mild harassment? And while he continues to find this entertaining (his 2 weeks aren't up yet) how much further damage will we allow him to do?


Yes, I know that I can ask for someone else's help, but I'm sure you understand why I'd much rather prefer your assistance.


Zyxoas (talk to me - I'll listen) 20:59, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Away[edit]

I will be away for the next two weeks, so I'll not be able to continue any open conversations. See you in May! — mark 18:10, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

MOVE FEST!!!! YAY!!!!! :-D

Only kidding!

Tebello TheWHO!!?? 18:52, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

hey hey[edit]

Just wandering by and thought I'd drop you a line to note that I do occasionally check to see if you've returned. Best, BanyanTree 09:14, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

responded over theremark 18:05, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

hey hey hey[edit]

How nice to see you around again! How are the two-dozen-speaker languages doing? Bishonen | talk 07:58, 17 September 2007 (UTC).

Pick your brain[edit]

Yo! I thought I might just squeeze this in when I could. Do you know of any sound laws that might change the sequence C1V1C2V2 to C1V1V2C2V2?? I found the following in Sesotho:

lerole to lerwele (dust, PB *tudi), lengole to lengwele (knee), lekote to lekwete (clod), kgole to kgwele (rope), lesofe to leswefe (albino). I speak the second way but I know there are people who speak the first way. Basically, the two vowels are the same height and (I guess) the 2 vowel is copied to after the 1, which labialises the 1 consonant. Look familiar?

Tebello TheWHAT!!?? 13:48, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

Shouldn't your formula be (CV1)CV2CV1, as the C's don't seem to matter? I don't know much about sound laws in Bantu, though. But I can always try to tell a story. If you find it only in syllables which have /o/ as V2, that would support the idea that this involves labialisation under influence of the articulatory features (esp. roundedness) of [o]. This labialisation eats away at the syllable peak, which leads to a phonotactic vacuum that must be filled according to the syllable requirements of the language; this leads to an /e/ coming into being (epenthesis, if you will). It would be very nice if /e/ was the unmarked vowel in Sotho, which I don't know. — mark 10:48, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

Well, in the cases I've found the two vowels are at the same height. In most of them it is [o] and [e] but with lerwele it is [U] and [I] (we have the Sesotho orthography to blame for any confusion). You seem to be saying that the vowel is epithentic but based on the data I think that the second vowel is being copied (or sucked by your peak vacuum). Of course, I'll need to find more examples before I know for sure... Your scenario of the first vowel triggering labialisation even though it is not immediately followed by another vowel sounds better the more and more I think about it... Tebello TheWHAT!!?? 20:12, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

Yo[edit]

Did you receive the last email I sent you, on the 22nd of September? Huh?

Tebello TheWHAT!!?? 11:41, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

Let me check...
Yes, and I forgot to reply! I'll look into it. — mark 08:16, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Thank you so very much!! :-D

Tebello TheWHAT!!?? 08:50, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Hello[edit]

Do you speak pedi? if you do please tell me why it is named pedi. Is it really intended to mean "two"? if it really is - then why should it be intended to mean "two"? thank you in advance. Eliko (talk) 23:00, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Hello, Eliko, I hope you're watching this page.
If you would go to the Sesotho article and go down to the section talking about its dialects, you will see that the woman who gave birth to the founders of the wider Basotho peoples named one her sons "Mopedi", and his people adopted his name calling themselves Bapedi, and calling their language Sepedi.
In this way, the name is the name of an ancient hero we talk about in our praise poems, but, like so many legendary names, nobody knows for sure what it meant. It most probably has nothing to do with the number 2 (even though the root is pronounced EXACTLY like the number 2). I imagine that if the name had come from the number, the number root would not have been nasally permuted, thus resulting in the name Mobedi or Mmedi (with assimilation).
Moshoeshoe I's half brother was named Mopedi, in honour of this ancestor, and there is a Charles Mopedi stadium, obviously named after a guy whose family had adopted the name as a surname.
Tebello TheWHAT!!?? 07:58, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for sorting that out, Zyxoas! — mark 18:21, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
Pleasure! Tebello TheWHAT!!?? 22:09, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

Acholi page[edit]

On the Acholi page you inserted the following "... Starting in the late seventeenth century, a new sociopolitical order developed among the Luo of northern Uganda, mainly characterized by the formation of chiefdoms headed by Rwodi (sg. Rwot, 'ruler'). ..." I just want to know what "sg." means. LindaNowakowski (talk) 05:44, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Hi Linda,
It means 'singular', i.e. Rwot is the singular form of Rwodi 'rulers' in the local language. — mark 07:32, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Natural semantic metalanguage[edit]

I've started work on this article (somewhat in parallel with Word grammar, though the links between them are tenuous at best). I'm not a linguist, however, and would appreciate it if you could check in now and then and see how I'm doing. Recently I've added a lot of bibliography. Yakushima (talk) 16:15, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Carlos Cardoso and Arthur C. Clarke?[edit]

Hi, I just posted a query at talk:Carlos Cardoso#Arthur C. Clarke connection? concerning Cardoso, and wondered if you might have any information. Thanks. Wwheaton (talk) 16:37, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

I don't, sorry. — mark 09:27, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

Culture[edit]

Hi, until a few days ago this article was a total trainwreck. I just did a major overhaul, although I believe I was pretty conservative: I cut all the redundancies, any material that was fringe or unrelated, and then tried to reorganize what was left so that distinct points of view or approaches were explicit. It still needs a lot of work (I explain all this in more detail on the article talk page, bottom). I created a section on "American Anthropology" but I am thinking perhaps that should be renamed "cultural anthropology." Because one thing I did not do - but which I believe is important - was to create a new section on "culture and language." But I am not qualified to write such a section. I am hoping you can, or at least make a start of it. I was thinking of a section that says something about how in human evolution culture and language coevolved; in what ways culture and language are related, and in what ways they are not, how linguists think of culture, maybe some basic stuff on ethnolinguistics and sociolinguistics with links to the real articles. Well, I hope you will consider it. Thanks, Slrubenstein | Talk 21:05, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

Wow, you did an amazing job. I'm impressed. I have to confess I have less courage than you when it comes to these things; when I was still active I avoided editing the 'big' overview articles because they attracted too many edits from clueless folks — but now, after your skillful rewrite, I have no such excuse. Unfortunately, I won't be able to do this for sheer lack of time. I'm meant to be writing other things in another life!
I will keep your request in mind, but do not expect anything. — mark 08:53, 24 January 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for your encouragement - if you look at comments on the talk page by Pilcha[1] and ALotToLearn[2] you will see that they really do not like my changes and what they are arguing for is largely a return to the earlier version!! I have been going in cirles with them trying to explain why they are off, and it is weird, they agree the earlier version was bad, but they basically want to return to it. It is frustrating.
I can appreciate that you have other obligations 9so do I!!) but if you have time even to add a paragraph, that could help an awful lot. Aother editor provide a list of quotes on culture and language [3], maybe you can play around a bit with those without having to spend much time (they need a narrative that provides a context especially one that clarifies the different points of view, which I cannot do) ... anyway, any help would be great, it doesn't have to be a lot. Thanks, Slrubenstein | Talk 15:59, 24 January 2009 (UTC)
Perhaps you could also just put it on your watch list. I intend to keep working on it for another week or two, and then sit back, and I am concerned that the process of virtually random edits that wrecked the last good version of the article will begin. Just having knowledgable people keeping an eye on later edits could help a lot. thanks, Slrubenstein | Talk 23:32, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

Could you please ....[edit]

keep an eye on User:AlotToLearn's planned edits to the Culture article? I have put a lot of work into it, responding to points raised in the GA review - well-sourced scholarly coverage of material culture and archeology, primate cultures and the evolution of culture, all the significant views from notable sources. I am very concerned about this comment. Slrubenstein | Talk 14:40, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

Old Nubian language[edit]

Old Nubian language has been nominated for a good article reassessment. Articles are typically reviewed for one week. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to good article quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status will be removed from the article. Reviewers' concerns are here. Hekerui (talk) 12:32, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

GA reassessment of Phla-Pherá languages[edit]

Phla-Pherá languages has been nominated for a good article reassessment. Articles are typically reviewed for one week. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to good article quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status will be removed from the article. Reviewers' concerns are here. G Purevdorj (talk) 09:11, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Pardon?[edit]

I have no idea what you're talking about. What e-mail? I've sent nothing, and I've done nothing. B R U N S W I C K I A N[talk] 23:45, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

And for clarification, I changed my username from United Statesman weeks ago. B R U N S W I C K I A N[talk] 23:45, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

You have been nominated for membership of the Established Editors Association[edit]

The Established editors association will be a kind of union of who have made substantial and enduring contributions to the encyclopedia for a period of time (say, two years or more). The proposed articles of association are here - suggestions welcome.

If you wish to be elected, please notify me here. If you know of someone else who may be eligible, please nominate them here

Please put all discussion here.Peter Damian (talk) 10:20, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

FAR for article Nafaanra language[edit]

I have nominated Nafaanra language for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here.Cirt (talk) 11:03, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

There's a hanger-on with questions over at the FAR with questions about the research situation. I've tried to answer some of the questions, but I think a few more might be needed. Think you could pop off a few answers?
Peter Isotalo 08:16, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

Okay, I've provided some answers. I don't feel very strongly myself about featured status — I have already accepted that systemic bias causes articles on 'marginal' subjects to be pushed out of focus (see GA reassessments above). There is no doubt that as a representation of the language, the article is imperfect, but the current state of sources on the language (and my lack of time) makes it almost impossible to do better.

What gratifies me about this article is that it was useful to a handful of speakers of the language itself. They took considerable pride in discovering that their cultural heritage had a representation even on the 'white man's internet'. That's enough for me. — mark 08:36, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

That at least some Nafaanra-speakers know about the article and are uplifted by its presence here is really positive to hear. I understand if you don't have the time or energy to invest in this, but I think you've done quite a lot already. I share some of your pessimism about certain topics being mistreated due to systemic bias. In this particular case, though, there aren't any convincing arguments to demote the article. The complaints that have been raised have been amended or discussed properly. I intend to do what I can to prevent demotion due to a routine FAR done by over-extended reviewers.
Peter Isotalo 10:20, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

Ubuntu[edit]

You may want to be aware of Talk:Ubuntu#RFC: Where should the redirect point?. Better and quantified arguments are being made in support of the philosophy. Yworo (talk) 19:21, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

Boy, the torrent of inconsequential discussion unleashed on that talk page is one of the reasons that I've grown a bit weary of Wikipedia. So much energy being spent and so little good coming out of it. — mark 07:36, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

Possibly unfree File:Nafaanra literacy class.jpg[edit]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Nafaanra literacy class.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. --Cirt (talk) 14:59, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

Bleh. This was deleted without further notification. If someone wants to help me go through WP:OTRS and whatnot, maybe the image can be reuploaded to survive for a longer time than two months. Have I really been away for too long, or has the bureaucracy increased around here? — mark 20:45, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

You are now a Reviewer[edit]

Redaktor Wikipedia 600px.png

Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, will be commencing a a two-month trial at approximately 23:00, 2010 June 15 (UTC).

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under flagged protection. Flagged protection is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial.

When reviewing, edits should be accepted if they are not obvious vandalism or BLP violations, and not clearly problematic in light of the reason given for protection (see Wikipedia:Reviewing process). More detailed documentation and guidelines can be found here.

If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. Karanacs (talk) 17:33, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

FAR notice[edit]

I have nominated Gbe languages for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here.-- Cirt (talk) 16:07, 31 July 2010 (UTC)

Atlas Berber[edit]

There's a proposal to merge the Atlas lects of Berber, in case you're interested. — kwami (talk) 21:05, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

the Public Policy Initiative Assessment Team wants You![edit]

Hi Mark Dingemanse, I got your name from the Editorial Team participant list, and wanted to tell you that we will be testing out assessment metrics in the Wikiproject: United States Public Policy, your talk page says you are busy, but I was hoping you would be interested in assessing articles with the Public Policy Initiative. There is more info about assessment on the 9/13/2010 Signpost. If you're interested or just curious you can sign up on the project page or just contact me. Thanks! (I love the knowledge beyond knowledge quote) ARoth (Public Policy Initiative) (talk) 21:26, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Mentalist Postulate[edit]

Ambox warning yellow.svg

The article Mentalist Postulate has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Article has been an unsourced stub for six years, no evidence of notability.

While all 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 {{dated prod}} 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 {{dated prod}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Beeblebrox (talk) 16:07, 20 September 2010 (UTC)

Main page appearance[edit]

Hello! This is a note to let the main editors of this article know that it will be appearing as the main page featured article on April 22, 2011. You can view the TFA blurb at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/April 22, 2011. If you think it is necessary to change the main date, you can request it with the featured article director, Raul654 (talk · contribs). If the previous blurb needs tweaking, you might change it—following the instructions of the suggested formatting. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page so Wikipedia doesn't look bad. :D Thanks! Tbhotch* ۩ ۞ 02:38, 19 April 2011 (UTC)


Nice article, Mark, very interesting. SlimVirgin TALK|CONTRIBS 18:23, 22 April 2011 (UTC)

Linguistics section of Countering Systemic Bias[edit]

Would you be willing to take a quick look at the articles on the Linguistics "Request for expansion" part of the CSB Open Tasks list to see if they still need work? Not to fix them, but just to note what their current status is? I'm trying to get that page updated and I'm slowly working my way through the task lists but I know almost nothing about linguistics. Cloveapple (talk) 20:18, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

De arap in Daniel arap Moi[edit]

Beste Mark,

Dat is een hele tijd geleden. In het Taalcafé van de Nederlandse Wikipedia is er een collega die zich afvraagt of de arap in Daniel arap Moi eigenlijk wel in de artikelnaam hoort, omdat het een soort titel lijkt te zijn. Het feit dat de meeste bronnen de arap effectief opnemen in 's mans naam, doet vermoeden dat zoiets inderdaad usance is in de Kalenjintalen i.c. het Tugen, maar er zijn toch ook 77.600 Googlehits voor de naam zonder de arap. Omdat ik wist dat je wel wat afweet van Nilo-Saharaanse talen, vroeg ik me af of jij er niks over te zeggen hebt. Het overleg vindt hier plaats. Groet, Gertjan R 16:21, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

Mail-message-new.svg
Hello, Mark Dingemanse. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

UOJComm (talk) 05:14, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

File:Lake Kyoga (NASA).png listed for deletion[edit]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Lake Kyoga (NASA).png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Bulwersator (talk) 05:26, 4 February 2012 (UTC)

LRA maps[edit]

Hello,

I want to update Image:Ugandan districts affected by Lords Resistance Army.png and Image:IDP's in Northern Uganda.png to include South Sudan. What font did you use with these maps? - Thanks, Hoshie 03:13, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

Hi Hoshie, that's Rockwell. That map needs updating indeed. I hope it's not being used in the Kony 2012 brouhaha because it reflects the 2004 situation and hasn't been updated since. — mark 03:02, 18 March 2012 (UTC)
Oh I see that you've already uploaded an updated version. On second thought I think the update is misleading — the map is based on 2002 and 2004 sources, when there was no South Sudan, and when Kony had not yet fled northern Uganda. So really it is a map of the 2004 situation and this should be indicated clearly if you want to update the name of the country to the north of Uganda. — mark 03:09, 18 March 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for your help. I didn't realize the data was old. I agree with you about having S. Sudan on an older map. I will revert the map. - Thanks, Hoshie 18:06, 20 March 2012 (UTC)