User talk:Flibjib8

Welcome!

Hello,, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~&#126;); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place  on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! --Telex 19:56, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Manual of Style

Croats Article
My apologies again about removing the etymology text (see the talk page). That was not my intention and I don't have any problem with what you added, nor was I intending to remove it. Also from your comments on the Croats talk page it seems you have some concerns about other parts of the article and the accuracy/appropriateness of what is included. There are currently two other Wikipedians in a dispute about certain parts of the article. If you would like to weigh in on the mediation proceedings that would be welcomed here. Eberhart 18:44, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

Croatia Article
Hi, can you help me on Croatia article? There is Anonymous user reverting and putting back "Origin of Croatian" section all the time. THX--€ro 18:01, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

October 2007
Welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia. However, adding content without citing a reliable source is not consistent with our policy of verifiability. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. If you are already familiar with Citing sources please take this opportunity to add your original reference to the article. Anastrophe 22:14, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

please use edit summaries
they assist other editors in determining the scope of the changes you make. thank you. Anastrophe 17:28, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Verifiability
Thanks for adding new info to the List of Dacian plant names. Could you also please add the source(s) for those claims? As you might already know, all information in the articles must be verifiable. Cheers. — Adi Japan   ☎  09:54, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Please do not add content without citing reliable sources. Before making potentially controversial edits, it is recommended that you discuss them first on the article's talk page. If you are familiar with Citing sources please take this opportunity to add your original reference to the article. Contact me if you need assistance adding references. Anastrophe 16:12, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Exemplified copy
Please do not introduce definitions that contradict the law in some jurisdictions. Please discuss further at Talk: Exemplified copy. --Gerry Ashton (talk) 15:49, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

DISCUSS NOTARY PUBLIC EDITS
DO NOT MAKE FURTHER CLAIMS ABOUT WHAT ALL STATES SUPPOSEDLY REQUIRE BY LAW WITHOUT DISCUSSING ON THE NOTARY PUBLIC TALK PAGE. --Gerry Ashton (talk) 21:10, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Albanian language
It seems that you have contributed in articles related to Albanian language. But in the last edited version you have removed a reference. Can you please explain why? Regards Aigest (talk) 20:30, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

It's a pitty because the page do need all possible contributions. Hope you change your mind. Bests Aigest (talk) 06:50, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

If you are still interested here related to Albanian-Illyrian-Latin-Greek connections from Norbert Jokl. I am also preparing an article for the Greek loans in Albanian. Regards Aigest (talk) 12:12, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

Legal instrument
Please discuss your sources of informaton for the Types section you created in the Legal instrument article. I have deleted this section pending suitable sources. --Jc3s5h (talk) 13:37, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Source for etymology of Scenobardos
Hi FlibJib, you may not remember but in late 2007 you added a lot of data & etymologies to the Illyrian languages article. Most of it is still there,and I am working on tidying it up. Do you remember what source you used for your etymologies there, including the etymology of an Illyrian name, Scenobardos? Alex (talk) 03:01, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

Feudalism
"Feudalism is a decentralized sociopolitical structure in which a weak monarchy attempts to control the lands of the realm through reciprocal agreements with regional leaders." That sounds lovely, but what is your source for this definition? Fences &amp;  Windows  18:08, 6 September 2009 (UTC)


 * I don't remember. It's a definition I've been sitting on for years.  I know that's source degradation, but I couldn't tell you without some research. Flibjib8 (talk) 09:07, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (File:Scrivener notaries logo.gif)
 Thanks for uploading File:Scrivener notaries logo.gif. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you.  Zoo Fari  04:42, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

Celtic loans into Germanic
I noticed your recent additons to the article Proto-Germanic regarding Celtic loans into Germanic. It would be appreciated if you would also provide sourcing for these in the way of a reliable source, as well as any relevant discussion on them, perhaps in footnote format. Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.75.174.90 (talk) 18:46, 14 February 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Worshipful company of scriveners crest.jpg
 Thanks for uploading File:Worshipful company of scriveners crest.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 23:44, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

French Prison Service
Hi! I noticed this change

I reversed it. If the English name is known, have that first. The French name is second. The translation of the French name is third. WhisperToMe (talk) 20:56, 12 January 2011 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification
Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. For more information, see the FAQ or drop a line at the DPL WikiProject.


 * Tocharian languages (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link to Khotanese


 * Transliteration of Ancient Egyptian (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link to Numeral

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:13, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification
Hi. In Tocharian languages, you recently added a link to the disambiguation page Yanqi (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. For more information, see the FAQ or drop a line at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:23, 8 December 2011 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification
Hi. In Transliteration of Ancient Egyptian, you recently added a link to the disambiguation page Ayn (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:49, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification
Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.


 * Seneschal (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added links pointing to Steward and Warband


 * Bailiff (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Manager

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:54, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification
Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.


 * Bailment (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added links pointing to Agency and Pledge


 * Allodial title (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Rent


 * Mortgage law (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Attorney


 * Pledge (law) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Conveyance

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:34, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification
Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.


 * Encumbrance (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added links pointing to Liability and Servitude


 * Antichresis (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Pledge


 * Mortgage law (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Personal

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:22, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for Mar 2
Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.


 * Anglo-Saxon law (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Scandinavians


 * Churl (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to West Frisian


 * Early Germanic law (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Burgundian language

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:54, 2 March 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 9
Hi. When you recently edited Roman Dutch law, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Codification (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:20, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 18
Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.


 * Salland (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added links pointing to Vecht and Worms


 * IJ (bay) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to West Frisian

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:22, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 7
Hi. When you recently edited Venetian language, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Romansch (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:48, 7 April 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 24
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited List of Romanian words of possible Dacian origin, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Rusyn (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:14, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 28
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Fox, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page West Frisian (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:37, 28 April 2013 (UTC)

Your changes to History of Latin
Hello. Just noticed that you changed a whole lot of things in History of Latin. I appreciate you taking the time to work on and help clean up this rather technical page.

However, I'm not convinced that all of your changes are for the better; some of them seem to make things worse. Also, some of them are stylistic, and generally Wikipedia does not favor changing the existing style of a page without discussion and agreement. So I'm wondering if you can justify why you changed them. Some issues in particular:
 * Changes to the comparative example words. Many of these changes seem for the worse:
 * You deleted "Vedic" and "Rig-Vedic". The forms cited are not accurate as just "Sanskrit" normally refers to the classical language.
 * You deleted many of the Gothic examples. I also see Old Irish deleted and sometimes others. Sometimes modern Irish or English is substituted, which doesn't help because of the increased distance.
 * You changed proto-notation. Formerly there was consistent use of *y and *w in both PIE and Proto-Italic. Now there's inconsistent use variously of i̯/i/j/y and u̯/u/w. It appears you were trying to use i̯ and u̯ for PIE and j and w for Proto-Italic, but I don't really see the point, and it leads to weird things like *PIE *su̯éḱuros > *swekuros which is as much about change of notation as anything else. My use of *y and *w is consistent with Sihler (1995), which is where most of the examples come from.
 * You also changed some of the proto-forms in ways that may not be correct. E.g. kaikos, koselinos, oinos are the forms in Sihler, not kh₂ei-kos, kosolinos, h₁oi-nos. Most researchers today are not willing to arbitrarily add laryngeals simply to fit a theory demanding no *a and no vowel-initial words (contra Beekes); rather, they want actual evidence of the laryngeals. I think we need to follow this. (Other problematic cases: your *ǵʰh₂ens, *louk-s-neh₂, disagreeing with Sihler's *ǵʰans, *leuk-s-neh₂. There may be others.)
 * Change of cf to vs: Not all of the vs examples actually make sense because some aren't contrasting anything (e.g. congerō vs. gerō).

An example with many issues:

Old:

PIE *bher- "to carry" > ferō (cf. Greek pherō, English bear < Old English beran, Vedic Sanskrit bhárati)

New:

PIE *bʰére "carry" > ferō (cf. Old Irish beirim "I bear", English bear, Sanskrit bhárati)


 * *bʰére > ferō doesn't make sense; the first is imperative, the second 1st sing pres indic. I think your purpose here was to indicate the accent, although for verbal forms that varies depending on the particular present-tense form, so it should be indicated explicitly e.g. *bʰéroh₂ and/or *bʰéreti.
 * Why delete Greek and Old English? Modern English "bear" makes the original vowel much less clear. Old Irish is more obscure than Greek (and doesn't indicate b vs. bh).
 * "Sanskrit bhárati" doesn't make sense because Classical Sanskrit didn't have phonemic accent. That's why "Vedic" is there.

Another example:

Old:


 * PIE gʷʰen- "to strike, kill" > dē-fendō (cf. English bane < Old English bana "murderer", Greek theínō "I kill", Vedic Sanskrit hánti "(he) strikes, kills")

New:


 * PIE *gʷʰen-dʰ- "to strike, kill" > *χʷ(e)nð- > fendō (cf. Welsh gwanu "to stab", Old High German gundo "battle", Sanskrit hánti "(he) strikes, kills")


 * fendō is not a word in Latin.
 * Sihler believes that the -nd- in Latin comes from PIE *-ny-, not -ndʰ-.
 * You seem to have more or less randomly deleted Greek and English and substituted Welsh and OHG, both more obscure languages from a comparative standpoint. Note also that Old High German gundo is from Proto-Germanic *gunþō (Old English gūþ) and hence cannot reflect -dʰ-.
 * Same issue as above with (Vedic) Sanskrit.

Benwing (talk) 00:40, 26 May 2013 (UTC)


 * There's quite a bit to respond to, so brevity is out.
 * 1st, it sounds like you're focusing on 1 nearly 20-yr-old source and aren't abreast of certain conventions. For starters I suggest consulting Michiel de Vaan's Etymological Dict. of Latin & the Other Italian Lang.s (2008). The laryngeal theory is now fully accepted by scholars, and I can't think of a single IE-related book from the last decade that doesn't make use of it.
 * The use of i̯/u̯, which are IPA symbols, are used in PIE lit. for sounds that can't be unambiguously reconstructed as either i/u or the cons. w/j, and which have split outcomes in the IE langs. /j/ (also IPA) is far more commonly used in linguistic lit. for [j] than /y/. In any event, the PIE symbols and the PItal. symbols should be different so it's clear the PItal sounds are full consonants.
 * Sanskrit is uncontroversial; it's not a separate lang.; instead, it's a cover-all term used in virtually all the comparative lit. Just check out the Wiki page, where it makes clear that "Vedic" (and not Rig-Vedic) is a qualification of Skt. Further, I don't think all the Skt comparanda listed were strictly "Vedic".
 * For comparison purposes, Gk is actually a poor choice, since in many cases it's undergone its own consonantal sound changes which obscure the change its supposed to exemplify. Celtic, being the closest relative to Italic, and Eng. (or other Gmc) which is relevant for an Eng-speaking readership, make better comparanda. Further, Goth. is the least relevant of the Gmc langs.; its lexicon is limited and any other Gmc lang. shows the same developments (in most cases); also, the distance btw. Goth. (4th c.) and, say, OEng (7th c.) is negligible.
 * gerō - here I think the better question is: Why is the parenthetical here at all? The section's examples are included to show phonetic contrast, but there's none here. Elsewhere, though, I don't find any mistakes.
 * I don't follow your points about deleting Gk/OE. Gk, because of its ph-, is more distant here from the IE root. As for Eng bear, I suppose if you don't actually speak Eng, you might think -ea- is more obscure, but otherwise the vowels are identical. I deleted OE because it serves no purpose to list both mod.Eng & OE; I chose by relevancy. And Irish is self-evident, given Irish is the heritage lang. of many Eng. spkrs (relevancy to readers), and is the closest relative to Lat. among the cited comparanda (relevancy to lang. being compared).
 * Further about ferro, bʰére is the usual citation form for the root; no more, no less. If you want to adjust for tense to match the Lat. form, by all means do so. Although I note that you propose a laryngeal form... Contradiction with above?
 * Despite Sihler, the -d- can't be explained by -nj- (> **nn). See de Vaan, pp. 210-1. Otherwise, you're right: the de- should be re-inserted.
 * Hope I didn't miss anything. Flibjib8 (talk) 02:03, 31 May 2013 (UTC)


 * OK, some comments here.


 * 1) You seem to think you know a fair amount about IE studies, and that I don't. Please take a look at the contributions I've made (go to my user page and click the "User contributions" link under "toolbox" on the left), and you will see the extent to which I've authored the pages on Old Irish, Proto-Slavic, History of the Slavic languages, Proto-Greek language, Tocharian languages, Germanic languages, Old English, Old English phonology, Gothic language, Phonological history of the English language, Proto-Indo-European nominals, Proto-Indo-European verbs, Indo-European vocabulary, Romance languages, etc. etc.
 * 2) You seem to have based your knowledge of IE studies largely on a small number of books written by authors from Leiden University. They have a very large IE studies department but their views are somewhat out of the mainstream w.r.t. the laryngeal theory; in particular they refuse to reconstruct either *a or any vowel-initial words in PIE.
 * 3) You seem to have a number of confusions about old IE languages. Your statement beginning with "For comparison purposes, Gk is actually a poor choice ..." is particularly problematic:
 * 4) Old Irish is radically transformed from Proto-Celtic. Its forms are not helpful in general. Furthermore it is far more obscure than Greek or Old English.
 * 5) Gothic is not the least relevant of the Germanic languages but the most relevant, because it is the most archaic. All major IE authors cite Gothic in favor of all others.
 * 6) Your comment about Greek consonant changes is simply wrong. Greek ph directly reflects PIE *bh (or sometimes *kʷh, but that's irrelevant here). The mere graphic change from bh to ph doesn't obscure the connection. Greek still distinguishes all three PIE voicing distinctions (ph p b = PIE *bh p b) whereas Celtic merges *bh and *b, which makes it generally much less useful.
 * 7) Old English is not 7th century but 9th-10th century, and the distance between Gothic and Old English is not at all negligible.
 * 8) Modern English is much farther from Old English. The point of citing archaic sources is to justify the reconstructions. You have to assume that people who care about this at all have some knowledge of older languages, at least how their sounds relate to PIE (and if not there's a helpful chart farther up in the History of Latin article).
 * 9) Your views on Sihler (1995) are wrong. Sihler does not deny the laryngeal theory, simply the more extreme reconstructions of the Leiden school. His book is the most important modern reference on the history of Latin, far more so than the Leiden etymological dictionary you've referenced.
 * 10) You introduced a lot of inconsistencies that weren't present, e.g. in your i̯/u̯ changes. BTW *y not *j is the normal consonant in PIE reconstructions.
 * 11) Also, more basically, you made a lot of unilateral style-related changes without discussing them, which is generally contrary to Wikipedia principles (leave stylistic matters alone).


 * I was hoping you'd actually correct the issues I mentioned, not merely defend your changes. I still hope you will do that; otherwise I will revert.

Benwing (talk) 23:37, 2 June 2013 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:58, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

List of Justice Ministers of France
Hi! I changed List of Justice Ministers of France to be about the modern ministry as that is what people expect here.

Thanks WhisperToMe (talk) 09:35, 18 September 2019 (UTC)