User talk:Karl432

Comment from August 2006
Hi, Karl, I tried email yuor, but something failed... I place here text Isend your:

Jaŋalif - missing characters in Unicode (similar to ŋ, ь) Hello Untifler - as you observed correctly in your recent revision of the Jaŋalif article in Wikipedia, there are two characters missing in Unicode. How about to propose these? The Unicode consortium accepts proposals from everybody, it only requires some formalism and clear evidence (which should be no problem if you have access to original texts printed in Jaŋalif). For the ŋ-like character, it should be clearly pointed out what is the difference to other n-like characters already in Unicode. For the ь-like character, it should be clearly pointed out that it is not a Cyrillic soft sign, it should be given a name like "latin letter dotless i with right bowl". See http://www.unicode.org/pending/proposals.html how to write a proposal. An example for a successful proposal is found at http://std.dkuug.dk/jtc1/sc2/wg2/docs/n3070.pdf Maybe you join the public Unicode mailing list at http://www.unicode.org/consortium/distlist.html#3 - there you will get any further help.

If you don't want to write such a proposal yourself or if you don't have the time, please contact me at karl2 AT gmxpro DOT de. --Karl432 21:46, 6 August 2006 (UTC)Karl432 As for proposing, it would be perfect!!! I have no experience of any proporsals, so I prefer the last variant. I'll contact you this week. There are also some another characters to be proposed, not only Latin, but some Arabic of Yanga imla. Could you help? --Untifler 07:29, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Hi, Karl! First of all sorry for my English, that is far from perfect. I'm also not familiar with the terminology, so I don't exactly know the difference between glyph and character, an so on…

I also have no experience of any proposals, so, your help is welcomed.

Janalif differs not only with additional letters, but also with modifications of already existed Latin letters. Some letters have unsusual capitalization and so on.

The "letters" and "modifications" that should be added to Unicode are listed below:

1.	Capital Latin N With Descender, Small Latin N With Descender:

It combines Latin letter N with Cyrillic-like Descender, as it could be seen in Щ, Ц, Җ and Ң (the last is the most closed variant) Letter could be find in Uniform Turkic Alphabet (and so in many languages used it in 1930s), and all version of Janalif (1924-1940-??) within the Uniform Alphabet. This letter also was used in "recommended fonts" for Latin Tatar alphabet of 2000 at the Unicode position of Ñ. Computer fonts containing this letter also could be provided. 2.	Capital Latin Letter Dotless I With Right Bowl, Small Latin Letter Dotless I With Right Bowl This letter one-to-one looks like Cyrillic soft sign (Ь). The usage is like for 1., but only in 1930s, computer fonts could not be provided. 3.	The digraph of 2. and j. J was never capitalized. (Ьj ьj); excluding cases when all letters in the word were capitalized. The digraph looked simply like two letters. The source research needs.

"Modofocations" Capital y looks like Cyrillic U, (У) in many fonts Little B looks like ʙ (small capital B) always Capital schwa (ə) looks like Cyrillic E (Э) in many fonts

The next group of letters are additional letters, that was used in early modifications of Janalif. Probably, that I couldn't provide original text, as they were used for 1 year at the same time with Arabic. I am also not sure, that they doesn't already exist in Unicode.

1.	Latin letter Cyrillic E (????) Looks like Cyrillic Э э one-to-one. Was used in "Tatar-Bashkir alphabet project"of 1924. Another usage is unclear. 2.	Latin letter Sha One-to-one looks like Cyrillic letter Sha, Ш ш. It was used for one year, 1927-1928 in Janalif, before it was finally reformed.

I hav another request. One letter, Gh(a) is incorerectly named in Unicode: it is Ƣƣ. Latin letter OI. In Janalif this letter had a sense of "Gh", but I really don't know, what was it's real naming. (it may be Gha but may be Ghy or something else)

So, Karl, that's all. Probably that some Arab Letters are ignored in Unicode. Could I count on your help in that case?

Regards, Untifler, Kazan, Tatarstan, Russia. --Wiki 21:14, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

Please correct erroneous deletion
I noticed that you corrected several texts in articles about the sculpture "Spiral of Success" indicating "(The photo shows no similarity to the Flower of Life pattern, a hexagonal pattern of touching circles does not qualify for this)". I think there should be a mistake, because I think that is not vandalism. When the circles are placed tangentially, generating a perfect hexagon as you see in the picture. The other circles in the other sculpture is a visual tool to zoom mode to explain better the concept. I assure you that the use of the concepts of Sacred Geometry and the Flower of Life I are correctly applied. Therefore, with respect to the author of the article and the artist, I appreciate that the texts altered must return to its original state. Regards --Arstempo (talk) 03:00, 2 February 2014 (UTC)
 * I still consider my modifications correct. While it may be interesting what concepts the artist had while creating its artwork, a description of the artwork itself has to describe the outcome. (Of course, the fact of the inspiration may be described additionally as such in articles whose main subject is the special artwork or the artist himself.) The essence of the Flower of Life pattern are the overlapping circles, including of the clear defined special mode in which they overlap. Circles placed tangentially do not overlap, thus they are not a Flower of Life. The fact that any bunch of such circles packed in a hexagonal outline form a perfect hexagon is trivial geometry, and the fact that an individual author calls such geometry "sacred" does not link this trivial geometry to such personal concepts. If I were a painter painting a walrus and call it Mona Lisa, because I was heavily inspired by Mona Lisa when painting, does not support the claim that Mona Lisa is a walrus, and therefore my picture in fact shows Mona Lisa. -- Karl432 (talk) 16:01, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

Flower of Life
Hi, I noticed that you worked a bit on the Flower of Life, especially on the German page. I did a bit of research myself on the subject a year ago, but unfortunately the Italian page is too afraid of political implications to be correctly edited. However, I searched JSTOR for the words "Flower of Life" (I have free access through my university) and the only result that uses the words "Flower of Life" to describe that symbol is a paper from the 2000s, it's written by a musicologist/designer(this guy) and it explicitly cites Drunvalo Melchizedek as the source of the name of the symbol, so I'm pretty sure that it's all just an invention by Drunvalo and that it's impossible to find any source older than 15 years about it. The Assyrian sill of a door from the Louvre Museum is carved to resemble a woven doormat (that's its description at the Louvre), the Chinese lions hold balls covered with a woven net of wool, so it's again a representation of a real woven pattern. If I understood it correctly, the German page says that those graffiti are not listed in Margaret Murray's book, but that's obvious since she never reached the hall of the Osireion, where those carvings are located (it's clear from the book itself, however this page clearly explains the area she uncovered at the time ). As a side note the Osireion was used as a Christian monastery from the late IV century and this photo shows a christogram ( ICXC, the first letters of the bold inscription, completed with the usual ligature like this) just next to the so called "flowers of life" of the Osireion, which are located 3 meters over the ground because in Christian times the temple was filled with debris. The point is there are no connections between all those depictions from different cultures besides what Drunvalo Melchizedek wrote.

There are a few Italian sources mildly relevant to the matter: one is a book by G. Baccolini, a university chemistry professor with a passion for fringe archeology (like this), who wrote "Al fiore che gli esoteristi chiamano fiore della vita sono stati attribuiti molto significati ma..." (transl. "To the flower that the esoteric fans call flower of life were attributed many meanings but..." from the book "La montagna etrusca: simboli e misteri", that is "The Etruscan mountain: symbols and mysteries"). The second one is a bit more authoritative but it's not directly related to the flower of life, it's the page about Drunvalo Melchizedek on the site of the CESNUR, it's a short biography of Drunvalo (real name Bernard Perona, from Sedona, Arizona, USA) which depicts him as a new age guru who founded the "Flower of Life" sect (that's it: "Flower of life" is the name of the sect he founded) around the year 2000. Since that page clearly states that the "Flower of Life" sect teaches meditation techniques (related to the "Flower of Life" esoteric stuff ) for money, I contested the encyclopedic value of the "Flower of Life" (the words used to describe the symbol not the symbol itself). Cheers, Ambaradan (talk) 22:04, 11 May 2014 (UTC)


 * Thank you for the detailed information. If I find time to continue any work on this subject, I will consider this. (In the German Wikipedia, I succeeded in removing the "sacred geometry" stuff as unencyclopedic. In the English one I did not try until now, as I am not really motivated to get involved in edit wars with sectarians.) Do you have a citation for the pattern at the Chinese guardian lions depicting a woven net of wool? -- Karl432 (talk) 07:08, 12 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Please refrain of using "sectarian" to ppl who thinks a bit different. 18th century science is not the last word. Last word of idiocy maybe.--88.26.29.251 (talk) 03:58, 22 October 2017 (UTC)

Nomination of Flower of Life (geometry) for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Flower of Life (geometry) 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/Flower of Life (geometry) until a consensus is reached, and anyone 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. Just Chilling (talk) 19:31, 6 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Thank you, I have voted there ("keep") in the meantime. -- Karl432 (talk) 23:14, 8 November 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:06, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Guilemet and Everson Mono
I think you may need to review your inclusion of Everson Mono at Guilemet. The font article says "Everson forbids any and all derivative works or alterations of the font". it may be that the fair use exemption applies to such a small sample. It would be a real pity if it has to go because it provides the clearest illustration of the point you made. --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 14:08, 6 January 2020 (UTC)

Meaning Guillemet of course. --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 14:11, 6 January 2020 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 19
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Spelling alphabet, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Offenbach and Umlaut. 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) 06:06, 19 May 2022 (UTC)
 * corrected. -- Karl432 (talk) 21:41, 19 May 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:36, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:30, 28 November 2023 (UTC)