User talk:Cehihin

Welcome!

Hello,, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Questions, ask me on, or ask your question and then place  before the question on your talk page. Again, welcome! Shalom (Hello • Peace) 00:30, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * Tutorial
 * How to edit a page
 * How to write a great article
 * Manual of Style

Vietnamese
Do you understand why I keep reverting your edits? — Æµ§œš¹  [aim ˈfɻɛ̃ⁿdˡi] 03:20, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

kinda (^o^) <3
 * Hmm, it doesn't seem like you do. I don't know enough about Vietnamese to have a problem with your examples per se.  In voiceless retroflex fricative for example, you keep removing the information that this phone is specific to Southern/Saigon dialects.  I'm not sure why you keep changing it, actually.  What I'd like to do is find a reliable source with clear examples to source the consonant and vowel pages with.  If you can help with that, it would be much appreciated.  — Æµ§œš¹  [aɪm ˈfɻɛ̃ⁿdˡi]  03:34, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

Removal
Hi, if you remove this text: "Or is it 大句越 or 大御越?", you should at least explain why you removed it. Badagnani (talk) 23:48, 18 August 2008 (UTC)


 * i thought they were wrong. put back if you want but show them so others can improve the article. --Cehihin (talk) 17:45, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

Maybe wrong, but sometimes alternate characters are used in various old sources because they weren't standardized, so it might be good to keep them. I don't know enough about this particular instance. Badagnani (talk) 19:04, 19 August 2008 (UTC)


 * i am still researching for the answer. it is important to have a page for Dai Co Viet because there are etymology behind this confusing usage. Chinese probably use 句 to transcribe co. while Japanese use 御. finally, Viet use 瞿 temporarily to mean ��. just like many other characters. Viet only use them for phonetic purposes, not meaning. here is a discussion about Dai Co Viet. http://www.viethoc.org/phorum/read.php?10,29548,page=1 --Cehihin (talk) 01:27, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

I think it might be best to have a single article that talks about every name of Vietnam, all in one article. You seem knowledgeable about Nom and Han tu, which is very unusual these days. Badagnani (talk) 02:10, 20 August 2008 (UTC)


 * how about creating each articles for each names. and one for all. that is if there are any info. 'Nam has so many names that each one tells a (hi)story or more. actually. nowadays. it is easier to learn if you are able to connect. with the help of Nom foundation. dictionaries. wiki. knowledge is within reach. --Cehihin (talk) 03:38, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

That seems like a very good possibility. Although right now we only have a little information about each name (some of them used for a very short time), my guess is that there's a lot of historical information (maybe written only in Nom) that could eventually be added. So I think your idea is a good one. Badagnani (talk) 03:56, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

One thing to mention: I sometimes find different information between the three sources: Nom Foundation, http://www.petrus-tvk.com/ChuThich.html, and vi:Wiktionary. This causes a lot of confusion, because ostensibly they're all using the same sources (mostly old books) for their information. Badagnani (talk) 03:57, 20 August 2008 (UTC)


 * yes that happens. remember to focus on reliable sources. researching is like puzzling. discuss. compare. add. and eliminate. --Cehihin (talk) 04:12, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

OK, good suggestions. It will be an ongoing process. Badagnani (talk) 04:16, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Virus sites
A tag has been placed on Virus sites requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an article with no content whatsoever, or whose contents consist only of external links, a "See also" section, book references, category tags, template tags, interwiki links, a rephrasing of the title, or an attempt to contact the subject of the article. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content. You may wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles - see the Article Wizard.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding  to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. かんぱい！ Scapler (talk) 02:24, 23 March 2010 (UTC)