User talk:HeliosX

Tocharian consonants
You just added several consonants, mostly retroflexes, to Tocharian languages. I suspect that they are restricted to loans from Sanskrit, and if so would like to mark them as such. Do you know if that's the case?

Also, the separate existence of a when no other consonants have a voicing contrast is suspicious. 4pq1injbok (talk) 02:41, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

I just pointed out the Tocharian symbols to how they sound from [that page]. I don't know if that's case what you asked.

Greetings HeliosX (talk) 07:58, 11 October 2012 (UTC)


 * Ah, OK, thanks. But I've just gotten back from the weekend to see that Benwing has completely revamped the whole article, making this a bit moot. 4pq1injbok (talk) 20:19, 15 October 2012 (UTC)

Phoenician language and Punic language
Hi, HeliosX. I was wondering if you could take a look at recent edits to Phoenician language and Punic language by probably one but perhaps two anonymous IP editors. The Phoenician edits in particular are extensive and outside of my areas of expertise. However the new content contains basic errors in that none of the ethnonyms or glossonyms are capitalized--and there are lots! I would be willing to fix these errors but I don't want to bother if the underlying content is wrong or wp:fringe or something (and the errors I do recognize make all of the new content suspect in my view). Could you help me out? Thanks, Dusty |&#x1f4ac;|You can help! 13:18, 19 June 2013 (UTC)


 * Hello,


 * I think that the addings to the table of the Punic phonology might be a bit questionable, because Charles Krahmalkov of the University of Michigan stated, that /ʃ/ was thrown together with /s/ by ca. 400 BC. However in the table Shin is represented as /ʃ/.
 * Farthermore, there is no phonetic sign being /ṣ/, Krahmalkov says Tsade is pronounced /t͡s/ and was merged in the end of Late Punic to /s/.
 * Also he says, that Tet is emphatic: /ʈ/, and that Qof is uvular: /q/. Zayin might be a point to discuss, but the pronounciation seems to have turned to /s/ in Punic.
 * To Phoenician, I think the phonetic table should maybe be reviewed (Qof and Zayin, Zayin might in Phoenician also be /dz/ or /zd/), but the conjugation is quite right, I have the Punic conjugation, which is almost the same. Of course those both are different languages, but the writer seems to also conjugate it in Punic.
 * I think, the text about Phoenician is quite serious, I think it should just be put into tables (most fortunately the colored, cuz the grey ones are a bit boring maybe) and things like "old byblian" should be corrected to "Old Byblian".
 * Also the links should be corrected, but actually, I think the article is really good.


 * Greetings HeliosX (talk) 17:47, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 15
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited La Spezia–Rimini Line, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Rhotacism ([//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dablinks.py/La_Spezia%E2%80%93Rimini_Line check to confirm] | [//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dab_solver.py/La_Spezia%E2%80%93Rimini_Line?client=notify fix with Dab solver]). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar 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) 12:58, 15 February 2020 (UTC)

I have sent you a note about a page you started
Hello, HeliosX

Thank you for creating Insult of officials and the state.

User:Doomsdayer520, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

To reply, leave a comment here and prepend it with. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~.

(Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

---  DOOMSDAYER 520 (Talk&#124;Contribs) 02:24, 6 August 2020 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 2
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Sasanian Empire, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Syriac.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 12:40, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 19
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Insult (legal), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Esteem.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:15, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 7
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Failure to appear, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Release.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:09, 7 February 2021 (UTC)

It sounds like you might not have studied political science at the university level
One of the first things that one learns in political science is that in federalism, sovereignty can be divided. Anyway, I just located relevant authority on this. The U.S. Supreme Court held in 1985 in Heath v. Alabama: "The States are no less sovereign with respect to each other than they are with respect to the Federal Government. Their powers to undertake criminal prosecutions derive from separate and independent sources of power and authority originally belonging to them before admission to the Union and preserved to them by the Tenth Amendment. See Lanza, supra, at 382. The States are equal to each other 'in power, dignity and authority, each competent to exert that residuum of sovereignty not delegated to the United States by the Constitution itself.' Coyle v. Oklahoma, 221 U. S. 559, 567 (1911). See Skiriotes v. Florida, 313 U. S. 69, 77 (1941). Thus, '[e]ach has the power, inherent in any sovereign, independently to determine what shall be an offense against its authority and to punish such offenses, and in doing so each "is exercising its own sovereignty, not that of the other."' Wheeler, supra, at 320 (quoting Lanza, supra, at 382)." So I am going to restore that point to both articles with a citation to Heath.--Coolcaesar (talk) 17:21, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

Nomination of Insult of officials and the state for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Insult of officials and the state is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Insult of officials and the state until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished. Surveyor Mount (talk) 02:33, 19 March 2023 (UTC)