User talk:Kwamikagami/Archive 29

Unprotecting Maltese language
Hi, I found that you protected the Maltese language article in 2009 for sockpuppetry. Do you think the article should be unprotected after all these years? Regards, J ACKINTHE  B  OX   • TALK 07:29, 8 July 2018 (UTC)


 * Probably. I can't do it, tho. — kwami (talk) 07:47, 8 July 2018 (UTC)

LWC
Hi,

I kept running into the LWC abbreviation in Ethnologue. I found the LWC disambiguation page here. It didn't include an entry for Language of wider communication, so I added it.

User:GB fan reverted it, saying that Lingua franca doesn't discuss Language of wider communication.

You created the redirect Language of wider communication, so I'm asking you:
 * Does it make sense to mention "Language of wider communication" at the page LWC?
 * Is it right that Language of wider communication redirects to Lingua franca?
 * Should the page Lingua franca mention "Language of wider communication" as a synonym or a related term?

Thanks! --Amir E. Aharoni (talk) 11:59, 18 July 2018 (UTC)

Maybe English is the LF of Anglophone countries, but still a LWC if you're talking about Francophone countries? I have a linguistic dictionary around here somewhere, but can't find it. The Encyclopedia of Language & Linguistics, 2nd ed., doesn't use the phrase LWC often, and when they do I don't always see an obvious difference in meaning from LF. Ilocano, for example, in a LWC in northern Luzon, Amharic is the lingua franca of Ethiopia. "Tagalog, as a LWC and as a spreading lang, is being simplified," when Tagalog is obviously the LF of the Philippines. Similarly w the four LWCs of Congo -- Lingala, Luba, Kongo and Swahili -- those are usually described as LFs. And Nagamese Creole as a LWC. Maybe they mean that it's used at market, but not really as a LF in the communities? But, they do have "the role of English as the most important LWC in the world" -- would "LF" work there? And that East Timor has 15 native languages, 2 colonial langs, and English as a LWC -- in case I'd say Tetun is the LF. And Russian as the LWC in the Eastern Block during the Cold War -- I don't think I'd claim it was the LF of Hungary, for example. So, I conclude that a LF is a second language of a community. LWC can be used with the same meaning, but it can also be used for a language of education, or what you expect to have to use when you travel abroad -- not that enough ppl do that for it to become established an a LF within a country. Say, in the Philippines, Tagalog is the LF within the counttry itself (despite it being called a LWC in the Tagalog article in the ELL2) while English is the LWC. Turkish is the LF of Turkey, but German (or now maybe English) is the LWC.

I'd restore the rd and add a section explaining LF vs LWC, maybe cn-tag it and let your objector fix it up. I doubt LWC justifies a separate article any more than 'cars marketed in rural areas' would. — kwami (talk) 01:55, 19 July 2018 (UTC)

Help pls
Hello Im new here I found u on lgbt pages I posted and created new pages concerning lgbt wikiproject Can u please edit them accept them and link them to other languages and if a table of info is needed can u do it And can u please do the portal and the categories please How can i be part of lgbt wikiproject please I translated new pages hope u see and check them They are these https://en.m.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?preload=Template%3AAfc+preload%2Fdraft&editintro=Template%3AAfC+draft+editintro&title=Draft:LGBT_Føroyar&create=Create+new+article+draft#See%20also AdamPrideTN (talk) 22:10, 14 August 2018 (UTC)

Sorry to bother u Forget the first msg i delete it the draft But when i search for it in google i cant find it :/ This is the real page Can u see to it please https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGBT_Føroyar AdamPrideTN (talk) 00:50, 15 August 2018 (UTC)

--sorry, I'm too retired for all of that. you should check in with WP:LGBT. — kwami (talk) 05:45, 15 August 2018 (UTC)

Category:Data with undue precision has been nominated for discussion
Category:Data with undue precision, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to see if it abides with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. &thinsp;&mdash; Mr. Guye (talk) (contribs)&thinsp; 04:15, 8 September 2018 (UTC)

Update Indian Languages Figure
Hello since you are updating languages figure with updated data. I request you to please update the Indian Languages figure. Here you shall get all the different languages that is spoken in India. Check the infobox their all languages are mentioned.--203.163.242.122 (talk) 05:31, 17 October 2018 (UTC)
 * All these major Indian Languages figure needs update Assamese · Bengali · Bodo · Dogri · Gujarati · Hindi · Kannada · Kashmiri · Konkani · Maithili · Malayalam · Marathi · Meitei · Nepali · Odia · Punjabi · Sanskrit · Santali · Sindhi · Tamil · Telugu · Urdu Thanks--203.212.243.163 (talk) 06:20, 18 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Please update.--116.72.131.51 (talk) 14:52, 19 October 2018 (UTC)

For most of these the 2011 Indian census is the latest info. The main problem is Hindi and the languages recently split off of it, since self-reporting does not reflect the spoken language well. — kwami (talk) 06:18, 20 October 2018 (UTC)
 * If you need help please check this source about Indian language Source here latest census data has been published also subset of Hindi languages are too published. One question is it necessary to explain in the infobox of Bengali language article especially in the "Native speakers" section ?? Another help in the Bengali people article figure "300 million" has been mentioned in the "Total population" and that source has been claimed by a politician you can check. Could you please tell what should be the accurate and updated figure for this ethnic group article because 300 million seems exaggerated.--115.96.108.40 (talk) 15:04, 20 October 2018 (UTC)

The Indian census does not reliably distinguish the various languages of the Hindi belt. That's why they're all lumped together under 'Hindi'. Even Maithili and Dogri -- they're now recognized as official languages, but only 13M out of ca. 40M Maithili speakers reported their language as 'Maithili' rather than as 'Hindi' or 'Bihari', so the census doesn't tell us how many Maithili speakers there are. — kwami (talk) 19:00, 20 October 2018 (UTC)

Check this Source this source does have a breakup of Hindi sub groups. Another problem Punjabi people article does not state any source in the "Total population" section and giving a vague figure. while mentioning the figure please consider the Punjabi diaspora figure too should be taken into account.
 * Now in the Bengali people article you have mentioned 260 million which are L1 speaker only in India and Bangladesh, what about the 20 million L2 speakers and Bengali diaspora across the world there figure too should be taken into account while mentioning the "Total population". So my suggestion is it would be better to give range 260 - 300 million if we don't have an accurate figure about Bengali diaspora.--115.96.140.1 (talk) 04:46, 21 October 2018 (UTC)

If you have a RS for the ethnic population, that's fine. But non-Bengalis don't become Bengali upon learning the language, and whether the diaspora speaks the language or not is irrelevant. The only approximation I have is the number of native speakers. Do you have anything more accurate? — kwami (talk) 05:45, 21 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Got it. Native speakers or L1 speakers are fine for ethnic group articles specially when we don't highly credible source to back ethnic group or diaspora figures. Kindly change the Punjabi people article in the "Total population" section, there figures had been exaggerated without any kind of source. Thanks--203.212.243.222 (talk) 06:10, 21 October 2018 (UTC)
 * I have updated Punjabi people figure with source L1 speakers data has been taken into account.--115.96.107.68 (talk) 08:19, 21 October 2018 (UTC)

Fine. With Punjabi, there's also the question of whether speakers of Siraiki, Hindko etc. are "Punjabi". If they are, the population goes up, but who decides? I don't know if they themselves would have consensus on the issue. — kwami (talk) 17:26, 21 October 2018 (UTC)
 * has made changes to your edit in the Punjabi language article please check. He has again put the old stuff. Leave Siraiki, Hindko as it is, it would make it more complicated and debatable.--115.96.129.136 (talk) 15:04, 22 October 2018 (UTC)

Re: rongorongo
With all due respect, I would like a word with you regarding your recent actions: Talk:Decipherment_of_rongorongo -- Xcalibur (talk) 04:09, 23 September 2018 (UTC)
 * I restored the content, just FYI. Xcalibur (talk) 17:00, 26 September 2018 (UTC)

Sorry, not acceptable. Maybe a mention of BS in the section on BS, as I suggested (though we don't really need another example in addition to Fyoderova), but not a long, dedicated section. It should get no more coverage than the idea that the Earth is flat gets at Earth. — kwami (talk) 17:04, 26 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Perhaps I can clear up these misconceptions. As I said in edit summary, one of the images is under fair use copyright, so if it's not used (aka orphaned), it gets automatically deleted after a certain amount of time. That's the reason I'd like to keep it up until this can be discussed properly. Xcalibur (talk) 17:13, 26 September 2018 (UTC)

We can post that in the talk page while it's being discussed. And you can always upload it again, or get it undeleted. — kwami (talk) 17:22, 26 September 2018 (UTC)
 * moving it to talk page is an acceptable compromise. I'm aware images can be undeleted, but I'd rather avoid the inconvenience if possible. Xcalibur (talk) 17:25, 26 September 2018 (UTC)

I understand that. I assume you're talking about the rising and setting of Antares, since the others would be too simple for (c)? Frankly, even if we were to keep a section on him, that would take up a lot of space for what we get out of it. The final paragraph in the Fanciful section before I deleted everything would be about the maximum a crackpot idea like this would get (and there are plenty of others we don't give that much space to), and that img really doesn't fit there even when I keep the idea. — kwami (talk) 17:33, 26 September 2018 (UTC)
 * In fact I'm referring to the reverse boustrophedon image: . That's the only one licensed under fair use, due to the illustration. The connection there is highly speculative, but it's still of interest, which is why I wanted to keep it. As for space, that can be negotiated. Xcalibur (talk) 17:41, 26 September 2018 (UTC)

Speculative?? The idea that the word for a constellation will depend on which direction you're facing when you write it is ... bizarre, anyway. Maybe if that were the rising-setting distinction. Or if Rapanui had absolute direction in its deictic system, like Australian languages do. But this whole thesis is nothing but unconfirmed speculation, which is what makes it crackpot. There needs to be some demonstration that the translation/reading actually works. — kwami (talk) 18:05, 26 September 2018 (UTC)
 * The orientation doesn't affect meaning. Rather, the idea is that it's an aesthetic choice, meant to represent how constellations appear differently in the northern and southern hemispheres. However, I don't know how much of this is Dietrich and how much is Esen-Baur, and it's a speculative detail in any case (and you've already given valid alternate reasons for reverse-boustrophedon). I wanted to include it because it's an interesting elaboration, that's all. As for the rest, I'll discuss it on the relevant talk page. Xcalibur (talk) 19:24, 26 September 2018 (UTC)
 * I've finally returned, and can give you my full attention. I've responded to your points, and await further discussion. Xcalibur (talk) 06:56, 8 October 2018 (UTC)
 * I'd like you to know that I've added an important point to the discussion. I hope you won't mind giving it your attention. Xcalibur (talk) 11:00, 10 October 2018 (UTC)

Uzbeki Arabic and Tajiki Arabic
Hello Kwamikagami,

I saw that you deleted the two Wikipedia articles "Uzbeki Arabic" and "Tajiki Arabic" in 2013. Now, both articles are linked with the article "Central Asian Arabic". I would like to ask you, why did you delete both articles? I would like to write more and extend both articles. However, before I will start with both articles I wanted to ask you, why these articles don`t exist anymore.

I would be happy if you reply.

Best regards,

Tom --Tom112233 (talk) 15:20, 5 September 2018 (UTC)


 * I suspect it was because there wasn't enough info in them to justify separate articles. People differ in whether they see more value in a bunch of stubs or in a single article that brings together the info in them. Also, it could be (don't remember) that they were defined by modern political boundaries rather than linguistic differences.
 * You're welcome to recreate the articles if you think you have enough to justify them. But, it may be that the varieties of Central Asian Arabic are better organized by dialect (Bukharian, Balkh, Kashkadarian, Khorasani, etc.) than by which country they happen to be in. — kwami (talk) 20:48, 5 September 2018 (UTC)


 * Hello Kwamikagami,


 * Thank you for your reply. I have thought about your words.


 * As "Uzbeki Arabic" and "Tajiki Arabic" are both listed as separate languages ISO 639:a of ISO 639-3 Language code (in addition, both languages can be found in literature as well) it is useful to keep two separate articles for both languages. I will search for books and reliable sources and I will add further information from time to time. Maybe there are also other users who like to extend these two articles.


 * Best regards,


 * Tom --Tom112233 (talk) 16:25, 6 September 2018 (UTC)

Hi Personally, I have a real problem allowing ISO to dictate our language coverage. ISO 639-3 is amateurish and unreliable. Many ISO languages are spurious. Some are arbitrary lumpings of different languages together, some are not even separate dialects, but just some village that said they want their own version of the Bible, some are defined by political boundaries, such as the same dialect of the same language having different ISO codes depending on whether it's on the Nigerian or Cameroonian side of the border, some are different names for the same language, some are different languages lumped together because they have the same name, and some don't exist at all. Remember, ISO is based on Ethnologue, which is not a reliable source. They've been trying to clean it up -- see spurious languages for their progress, but there's a long way to go. That's why Harald started Glottolog, but even then, for areas he's not familiar with, he often just inherits the Ethnologue/ISO definition of a language.

I think we should do better. If reliable sources (not Ethnologue, Glottolog or ISO -- though Glottolog is a great place to look for reliable sources) indicate that Uzbeki and Tadjiki Arabic are distinct languages, then fine. If they indicate that we've got dialects of a single language, than that's what our coverage should reflect. And if they're different languages but do not follow modern political boundaries, then again that's what our articles should reflect, or your work could be undone by someone who *is* following reliable sources. As for covering ISO, we can always add an ISO section to the article(s) explaining how ISO does not reflect reality. In such cases, ISO will probably eventually be adjusted to reflect reliable sources. (And indeed this has happened with several WP language articles, where we explained in a dedicated section that the ISO distinction was spurious, and then deleted that section when ISO fixed the problem.) The other way around is not likely to happen -- linguists don't give a fart what ISO says, they only care what the data says. If ISO reflects reality, it's a convenient way to identify a language, but it seems that's only true half the time, so a lot of linguists don't use ISO at all. — kwami (talk) 18:12, 6 September 2018 (UTC)


 * Hello Kwami,


 * Thank you for your reply.


 * I will search in the library for books about Uzbeki Arabic and Tajiki Arabic. I could also buy books about that. Maybe I will also find reliable sources on the internet. I don`t mind to spend my time and money for that.


 * Maybe there are also other people who like to extend these two articles.


 * Best regards,


 * Tom --Tom112233 (talk) 22:58, 8 September 2018 (UTC)


 * Hello Kwami,


 * I found a lot of reliable sources for the two languages Uzbeki Arabic and Tajiki Arabic. I added the sources on the talk page of the article "Central Asian Arabic". I will restore both Wikipedia articles. I will write more and extend both articles from time to time. I will add the different relevant sources to both articles. However, I will also search for more books about these topics.


 * Best regards,


 * Tom --Tom112233 (talk) 16:23, 3 November 2018 (UTC)

Okay, sounds good. I had my doubts the varieties would just happen to line up with modern political boundaries, but maybe they do. Though I think it might be a good idea to consider the possibility that someone based in Uzbekistan will investigate 'Uzbeki' Arabic, and someone based in Tajikistan will investigate 'Tajiki' Arabic. That in of itself doesn't mean the distinction corresponds to the border, any more than it does in many other cases where a language magically changes when it crosses a political boundary -- I'm thinking ISO East and West Punjabi, which are defined by the Indo-Pakistani border rather than by dialectology, or Karkar, which was thought to be a language isolate until Tim Usher noticed it was just a dialect of a Pauwasi language across the border. Borders get reified, and sources copy each other without bothering to check if they correspond to anything real. IMO it would be nice if you could locate a RS that considers all of the varieties of Central Arabic, and draws genealogical conclusions from the languages themselves. — kwami (talk) 23:56, 3 November 2018 (UTC)


 * Hello Kwami,


 * You are right. I agree with you.


 * You wrote:


 * "IMO it would be nice if you could locate a RS that considers all of the varieties of Central Arabic, and draws genealogical conclusions from the languages themselves."


 * Sorry, what means "RS"?


 * Best regards,


 * Tom --Tom112233 (talk) 16:42, 9 November 2018 (UTC)

Sorry, WP jargon, WP:RS 'reliable source' -- that is, a source that would be acceptable for academic writing. — kwami (talk) 17:09, 9 November 2018 (UTC)


 * Thank you, yes, I will check if I find reliable sources that considers all of the varieties of Central Arabic.


 * Best regards,


 * Tom --Tom112233 (talk) 20:22, 12 November 2018 (UTC)

Hello
WP:DTR. FkpCascais (talk) 08:57, 22 November 2018 (UTC)

How should I know you're a regular, when you don't even know what a RS is? — kwami (talk) 09:04, 22 November 2018 (UTC)

Wallisian and Rennellese languages
Hello ! In 2011, you wrote on Wallisian language that "Wallisian may be closely related to Rennellese". However, I could not find any source to back up that claim, and as such removed this sentence. But maybe you have a source that I could not find ;) Thanks! Skimel (talk) 16:55, 9 December 2018 (UTC)


 * I don't recall what my source was, but the "may" suggests it wasn't very certain. If no-one's said more since then, it's probably best to follow whichever classification you have confidence in. — kwami (talk) 17:00, 9 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your very quick answer! Tsukamoto (1988) claims Niuafo'ou is the closest language and I've put that info instead of Rennellese. Have a nice day! Skimel (talk) 18:06, 9 December 2018 (UTC)

File:Original South Park flag.png listed for discussion
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Original South Park flag.png, has been listed at Files for discussion. Please see the to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Magog the Ogre (t • c) 22:11, 15 December 2018 (UTC)

Shona language
This article needs a lot of work, but I was wondering if you could offer any help or advice with describing the phonology. In particular, I find the way the whistled sibilants are transcribed to be rather odd, but I don't know what the best practice is for them. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 20:57, 22 December 2018 (UTC)

I wish I could help you. I've had the same problem, but I know nothing about this. would be a whistled s per the extIPA, but I don't know if the Shona sounds are much like what that diacritic is used for in speech pathology. I suppose it doesn't matter -- with only the description we have, it's the only symbol available. What we need are native-speaker recordings of the words, esp. minimal pairs so we can hear the difference. — kwami (talk) 21:08, 22 December 2018 (UTC)

Wish
Hello. Help deleted image caption for article Maureen Wroblewitz. Thanks you. Pv sindhu (talk) 03:38, 31 December 2018 (UTC)


 * If you don't want images deleted, then don't upload to Commons. I've taken CC png maps from Commons and customized them, only for them to be deleted as copyvio. Sometimes there's no rhyme or reason for what happens there. — kwami (talk) 03:47, 31 December 2018 (UTC)

Conflict on
It looks like my edits undid some changes you made to the infobox. This wasn't intentional. My apologies, Hadron137 (talk) 05:23, 31 December 2018 (UTC)

No problem. I was in the middle of redoing them anyway. — kwami (talk) 05:25, 31 December 2018 (UTC)

Trans-New Guinea classification POV
I see that Engan, Madang, etc. have been removed from Trans-New Guinea, following Usher. However, this is not universally accepted; we should at least put "Trans-New Guinea (?)" and not follow Usher in every single article. We need to synthesize and look at Wichmann's, Hammarstrom's, Pawley's classifications, etc. and discuss how they are different from Usher's.

Why the preference for Usher's classification? &mdash; Stevey7788 (talk) 19:36, 5 January 2019 (UTC)


 * There was never consensus that Engan etc. were TNG. Usher is the most recent classification, and the one based on the most and most recent data, at least for the areas he's covered. (E.g., not the eastern islands.) And the only one based on reconstruction, which is what any historical linguist should use, apart from Ross's use of PNs, which are tricky because they're so minimal phonologically and the likelihood of chance look-alikes is so high. Hammarstrom is a distillation of Usher and others, not an independent classification, and, I would argue, a bibliographical ref rather than a RS for classification (and more a cautionary statement against unsupported families than support for establishing families). Wichmann is an automated comparison, which is fine for suggesting connections to investigate, but does not establish a relationship. Automated comparisons often do not hold up well when the actual comparative work is done, which is what Usher is doing. Neither Hammarstrom nor Wichmann have dedicated much time to the issue. (Besides, Wichmann excludes Engan and Madang from TNG as well.) As for Pawley, we don't even provide his classification in our TNG article, so I think I would start there before using him for our infobox classifications.
 * Actually, Hammarstrom's inclusion of Engan and Madang is based on Foley 2000, which not only is dated, but is not based on significant comparative work.
 * Usher is the only researcher currently or recently doing significant comparative work at the family level, and has already established several new branches/families (e.g. the Anim languages and Awin–Pa–Kamula). Yes, it would be nice to be able to verify his conclusions with other reconstructions, but for the most part there aren't any! Usher is unfortunately the only thing we've got for a serious classification of Papuan languages. — kwami (talk) 20:11, 5 January 2019 (UTC)


 * Thanks. However, Usher's site still mostly consists of blank pages. For example, Madang languages links to a blank page on NewGuineaWorld https://sites.google.com/site/newguineaworld/families/madang And judging by his website, Usher doesn't seem like the kind of guy who would release his entire collection of spreadsheets and reconstructions right out into the open, so we can't completely verify many of his claims either. &mdash; Stevey7788 (talk) 20:43, 5 January 2019 (UTC)


 * True. He's publishing, but slowly. He is willing to share his data, actually, with people working with him (the papers establishing the two families I mentioned were co-authored), but has been burned by having his db stolen, so he's cautious. It's not an ideal situation. But Papuan languages are so neglected that there isn't much else available. I think he's trying to establish the families of the island as a whole before publishing on individual ones, so he won't need to go back and change published conclusions. I don't know anyone else who's doing this kind of work, though, except at a local level. — kwami (talk) 20:56, 5 January 2019 (UTC)


 * And who exactly is Timothy Usher by the way? I did several Google searches and pretty much nothing showed up, just Santa Fe Institute affiliations. (Contact me by email if you want to discuss this privately.) &mdash; Stevey7788 (talk) 20:47, 5 January 2019 (UTC)


 * AFAICT, he's got the world's largest db of Papuan languages, and the only researcher doing actual historical comparative work at this scale. — kwami (talk) 20:56, 5 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Not this one? http://transnewguinea.org/ &mdash; Stevey7788 (talk) 22:15, 5 January 2019 (UTC)
 * That might be the biggest CC db! — kwami (talk) 23:57, 5 January 2019 (UTC)
 * I'd be surprised if Usher's database is bigger than Simon Greenhill's database. Is it? &mdash; Stevey7788 (talk) 00:11, 6 January 2019 (UTC)
 * I suspect so, but I'm checking. I emailed you, BTW. — kwami (talk) 00:13, 6 January 2019 (UTC)

Same language or not?
Hi,

Could tell if Mungaka and Nga'ka language (that you created under the name Mungaka language) is the same language or not?

Cheers, V IGNERON * discut. 19:32, 6 January 2019 (UTC)

Yeah, sure is. Thanks for catching that. I've started merging,, 'Mungaka' is older than my stub, as well as more informative, so it takes precedence. I've requested a quick delete of the MOS title so we can move it back. — kwami (talk) 19:50, 6 January 2019 (UTC)


 * You need to better explain what you're looking to achieve here. I looked at the CSD for Nga'ka language and instead redirected it to the new, improved & merged, page at Ngaka language, rather than a redirect to a redirect at Munga'ka language. You rolled that back, without explanation. Given all these titles have been used in the past, surely it is correct they should all redirect to where the merged article is now? /wangi (talk) 01:04, 7 January 2019 (UTC)


 * No, the correct spelling of the language, AFAICT, in Nga'ka. I would've merged under that name except that I wanted to preserve the article history under the other. Isn't a deletion request sufficient explanation that I'm asking to have the rd deleted? — kwami (talk) 01:13, 7 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Well, it's clearly not a case for speedy deletion. And please refrain from the reverts too. What i'm trying to say is you, and others, have created articles for a single language multiple times, under different names. It is reasonable to assume these names could all refer to the same language and might be used by others searching for information on this language. As such the obvious course of action is for them all to redirect to the actual language article. /wangi (talk) 01:37, 7 January 2019 (UTC)

Of course they're all supposed to be redirects. But redirects to where the article's been for years. Do you have a RS that it should be moved? — kwami (talk) 01:39, 7 January 2019 (UTC)

There were duplicate articles under names A and B. A is the preferred name, per the MOS, but B has the more important article history. So I merged A into B, moved A out of the way to save its history, then requested the rd left behind at A be deleted so B can be moved to A, so that the more important history appears at the preserved name of the article.
 * I have now deleted. But in the future you really need to be more explicit or take it through another channel. For speedy deletion it should be blatantly obvious for an admin with no prior knowledge of the subject what the request is. /wangi (talk) 01:57, 7 January 2019 (UTC)

Okay, thanks. — kwami (talk) 01:58, 7 January 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for the merge, I merged the items in Wikidata too (which is where I catch this duplicate). Cheers, V IGNERON * discut. 11:24, 8 January 2019 (UTC)

Question about your recent redirect
Hi,

after reviewing your redirects, I saw that i.e. the Pannonian Rusyn dialect article exists, but the Carpathian_Rusyn_dialect has been lost and redirects into the Rusyn language...it was intentional or? What's with the content? Either fix the page or add it to the redirected article; apply in case what happened... Thank You!(KIENGIR (talk) 00:30, 9 January 2019 (UTC))

Thanks. Intentional, yes. We often don't have articles for every dialect, and in this case the Carpathian Rusyn article was a content fork for the main Rusyn article. And for those who claim that Pannonian Rusyn is a separate language, plain ol' "Rusyn" *is* Carpathian, so there's no need for a separate article. So this should work. — kwami (talk) 02:36, 9 January 2019 (UTC)


 * I see, but the content you put to the main article?(KIENGIR (talk) 21:44, 9 January 2019 (UTC))

I didn't see any content that wasn't already in the main article. Did I miss something? — kwami (talk) 22:14, 9 January 2019 (UTC)

I've looked again, and it appears that someone just duplicated the Rusyn article under the name 'Carpathian Rusyn'. So it was quite literally a redundant article. The only additional material was some non-English lit at the bottom, which I didn't bother to copy over. — kwami (talk) 22:31, 9 January 2019 (UTC)
 * I don't know, because I was unable to access the former version thus I was unable to make a comaprison...but if you say you checked and every English content found there is present in the Rusyn language article than it's ok.(KIENGIR (talk) 09:00, 11 January 2019 (UTC))

Oganessian
fix what? Ե րևանցի talk 11:43, 13 January 2019 (UTC)

A draft
Hello I created a dreaft about Draft:Same-sex marriage in South Georgia and the South Sandwich Islands from information that i can only find from the net Its short i know but its a jurisdiction so i think it deserves it's own like other overseas territories Do u know how and Would u help in any way to make it a page and not just a draft Thank you AdamPrideTN (talk) 11:46, 12 January 2019 (UTC)

But no-one lives there! I don't really see the point. I suppose tourists could get married there, but it doesn't look like any have. I don't see that it really needs much work. I made a few minor changes. You can ask at ANI (or wherever) when you're ready and someone should move it for you.

If you want to write articles that we should have, I'd think the Mexican states that will have SSM soon will be important. — kwami (talk) 12:54, 12 January 2019 (UTC)

Hello sir Thx a lot it's done and it's okay if i don't get no credit. It's open for everyone and anyone can easily acceess and read it That's the important thing No need for my name in the history Thx a lot AdamPrideTN (talk) 12:14, 14 January 2019 (UTC)

Ambiguous redirects
When creating redirects, is there any way you could check if there aren't other articles that could be referred to by the term? Take Naman for example: apart from the language, there are several villages and localities with the name. Before the creation of the redirect, if a reader had searched for this they would have seen all these articles in the search results. Once the redirect was created, they are taken straight to the language, without any way of getting to the other articles. – Uanfala (talk) 23:46, 15 January 2019 (UTC)

I'm finished with the list, so I won't be making any more rd's like that. But I don't know how I'd be able to tell that there are other articles that could use a dab page. Can you think of anything, so I could go back and check? I'd think they'd have to be addressed one by one. — kwami (talk) 23:51, 15 January 2019 (UTC)

That dabfix app you used. Can I run my contribution list through it? — kwami (talk) 00:12, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
 * I did have a cheeky look at your contribs page from today, and I came up with this: User:Uanfala/dab/langs. That's all I can do, I'm afraid. I don't have any automated means at my disposal for figuring out which of the redirects might be ambiguous, but maybe somebody else will? – Uanfala (talk) 00:26, 16 January 2019 (UTC)

Wow that is slow! It took a few minutes to run just one of them. That's too big a chunk of my life! If you think it's a problem, I wouldn't object if you requested to have the one-word dab pages deleted. I would think any multi-word ones would be less likely to be an issue. — kwami (talk) 00:31, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Well, I'd normally go for an intitle search first (which is fast) and if there are several articles then I could use dabfix to help with the creation of the dab page if there's more than two or three articles. – Uanfala (talk) 00:39, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
 * I'd rather not rush this: either way, it's going to take some work and it's not a pressing issue. And btw, where did the list come from? Is that from the glottolog names? – Uanfala (talk) 00:43, 16 January 2019 (UTC)

Yeah, that's all it is. Anything that was a red link. I was wondering if I should also do the ISO names, but the ISO webpage links to WP now. Still, people may come across the ISO names elsewhere and it would be useful if they linked to the appropriate article.

Good. 'Intitle' makes it reasonably easy. I probably wouldn't bother w hyphenated or phrasal names, which would cut down the load a bit.

Some of the longer glottolog names are a bit ridiculous as rd's, but since they're the ones least likely to have any other use, I wasn't going to worry over it. — kwami (talk) 00:46, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
 * I wouldn't worry about the longer names either. Except maybe for ones of the type Foo (Country name) where it's conceivable there might be places or ethnic groups in Country that are also named Foo. – Uanfala (talk) 00:55, 16 January 2019 (UTC)


 * Yeah, most of those would at least have an ethnic meaning. But most likely a redlink. 01:13, 16 January 2019 (UTC)

Maram language (Austro-Asiatic)
Just a friendly heads up on Maram language (Austro-Asiatic). I had to decline your speedy deletion request because the reason you gave is not one of the valid speedy reasons for redirects. Your best bet is to list it at WP:RfD. Cheers. Fabrictramp &#124;  talk to me  04:00, 15 January 2019 (UTC)

I'm not going to bother. WP can keep the clutter. — kwami (talk) 04:07, 15 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Maybe we could ask and if they too believe the redirect should be deleted, they could tag it for WP:G7? – Uanfala (talk) 00:29, 16 January 2019 (UTC)

Okay, let's see if a bot takes care of it now. If not, I'll ask Stevey. — kwami (talk) 00:34, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Purposely changing that to redirect to a non-existent page borders on vandalism. Totally not the right way to handle this. Fabrictramp &#124;  talk to me  04:15, 16 January 2019 (UTC)

No, it's not vandalism. It's a way to get a nonsensical rd deleted. — kwami (talk) 04:17, 16 January 2019 (UTC)

Swo
Hi Kwamikagami, you recently created a disambiguation page Swo containing Swo language and SWO. I can't find any other uses in Wikipedia for 'Swo' that are not acronyms, so there is no actual disambiguation needed here. I would suggest redirecting Swo to Swo language or adding Swo language to SWO and redirecting Swo to SWO. What do you think? Leschnei (talk) 13:55, 19 January 2019 (UTC)

Yeah, that's fine, unless you think SWO could be a hatnote from Swo language. Maybe Swo's too uncommon for that, though. — kwami (talk) 20:17, 19 January 2019 (UTC)


 * I changed it to a redirect to Swo language. It seemed the simplest solution. Leschnei (talk) 03:13, 20 January 2019 (UTC)

Noy
Hello Kwamikagami. You recently created a disambiguation page at Noy by moving the article there. However, you left all the incoming links pointing at the disambiguation page. Could you clean this up and point them at Noy instead? Cheers, Number   5  7  19:50, 20 January 2019 (UTC)

Sure. Sorry. — kwami (talk) 19:55, 20 January 2019 (UTC)

Helping a Stanford Student Project on redesigning Wikipedia's edit abuse filter with Machine Learning?
Hi! I'm currently a senior student at Stanford University studying computer science. Recently I'm taking on a design project of rebuilding Wikipedia's edit abuse filter! I'm just wondering if I can pick your brain on some questions regarding the editing process and bounce some ideas with you! Can I ask you some questions and perhaps hop on an interview? My email is zliu19@stanford.edu Thank you so much! 2601:647:4E00:440:601F:F5E4:6519:5186 (talk) 02:56, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

Please rename township back to original name
Why did you rename this township article? Please reanme "Wano Township" back to "Wano Township, Cheyenne County, Kansas" because township articles in Kansas have a similar naming format. • Sbmeirow  •  Talk  • 19:52, 22 January 2019 (UTC)


 * I moved it in keeping with the MOS, which says we shouldn't add unnecessary disambiguation. But I don't mind moving it back. — kwami (talk) 23:12, 22 January 2019 (UTC)


 * Thanks! •  Sbmeirow  •  Talk  • 02:31, 23 January 2019 (UTC)

Question about ayin
Hi, I saw your edits in Taʽizzi-Adeni Arabic I wanted to ask you what are the differences between (')and ( ʽ )? And if they are the same which one is preferred in Wikipedia? Thanks--SharabSalam (talk) 09:43, 24 January 2019 (UTC)


 * Hi SharabSalam. The problem with ASCII <'> and the Unicode curly quotation marks is that those code points are defined by Unicode as punctuation marks, not letters. This can cause problems online. For example, if you double click on a word, you expect it to highlight so you can copy and paste it. But that doesn't happen if it's got punctuation marks in the middle of it. For this and similar reasons, using punctuation marks as letters is deprecated, and Unicode has set up additional code points where what look like the same symbols visually are defined as letters, and behave as letters in an electronic text. They're all in the Spacing Modifier Letters block of Unicode. If you use the modifier apostrophe and commas, the whole word will highlight when you double click on it. That's the easiest test to see if the proper symbols were used.


 * As for which ones to use for Arabic, for hamza it's easy -- U+02BC <ʼ> Modifier Letter Apostrophe. That's used in lots of Latin alphabets for glottal stop, and also for ejective consonants. For the 'ayn there are two choices, U+02BD <ʽ> Modifier Letter Reversed Comma, which is used e.g. in the Wehr dictionary and the Survey of Egypt system, and U+02BB <ʻ> Modifier Letter Turned Comma, which is used by the UN. I don't care for the UN system because the turned comma is how the Hawaiia 'okina is coded, and that's a glottal stop (hamza), not an 'ayn sound.


 * The Encyclopedia of Islam uses the half rings, U+02BE <ʾ> Modifier Letter Right Half Ring for hamza and U+02BF <ʿ> Modifier Letter Left Half Ring for 'ayn, but we don't use them much on Wikipedia. They have poor font support and IMO look ugly. — kwami (talk) 09:57, 24 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Oh I see thanks for replying but doesn't that affect the policy of Wikipedia that says we should be using the most common name? Which I think the purpose of it is because people would usually find and search for... for example the name (Sana'a) not (Sanaʻa) when they they are doing a research.--SharabSalam (talk) 22:31, 31 January 2019 (UTC)
 * That's not a difference of name, but of the formatting of the name. Not much different really than whether the title of a book is capitalized or in italics, or whether we use ASCII hyphens or en dashes. Here the MOS takes over, and we don't do comparisons of Google hits. A spelling difference to be decided by relative frequence would be e.g.  vs , or  vs .
 * We do, of course, need to consider how people will enter the name in the search window. That's why we create redirects for various forms. Sanaa, San'a, San'a', Sana'a -- even Sana, all redirect to Sanaʽa. The real problem would be if entering ASCII "Sanaa" etc. into the search window didn't find Sanaʽa, which would require a fix to how the search engine works. But it looks like that's already been taken care of. When I do an in-title search, (intitle:Sanaʽa), I get hits for Sana'a University, Sanaa Hamri, Sanaa Lathan, SANAA, Baraza la Sanaa la Taifa, etc. In other words, the search engine ignores the difference between <'> and <ʽ> and indeed ignores whether either of them even occurs in the name, just as it ignores the difference in capitalization between  and . — kwami (talk) 01:46, 1 February 2019 (UTC)

Dhanggati language
Re your post at WP:RM/TR, you don't see a move tab on Dhanggati language because the article was indefinitely move-protected on 11 March 2015 by User:Just Chilling. You might want to contact him or just start a WP:RM request. Station1 (talk) 04:03, 3 February 2019 (UTC)

Ngawun etc.
redirects to which is a redirect to  which is a redirect to Ngaun. A bot should be along to redirect the first two directly to Ngaun, but please can you check that this is their intended destination?

Aboriginal peoples of the Northern Territory (139 transclusions) links to disambiguation page Ngewin. Should we just remove this entry? Ngarnka and Alawa are already listed separately, and the Ngaun don't seem to live in NT.

List of Indigenous Australian group names also links to several new dabs and is probably more likely to become correct if you can look at it yourself. I'll leave sorting out the remaining broken links until the dust settles.

Thanks, Certes (talk) 11:02, 4 February 2019 (UTC)


 * Yeah, that should be removed, I think. I've marked half a dozen more for merging. — kwami (talk) 12:45, 4 February 2019 (UTC)

As for the list, I'm still going through the regional templates, and that's going to take a while. I'm trying to link them all to a language article, if their language is identified, and vice versa from the language to the ethnicity articles. Ideally, every ethnicity article would be linked to its AIATSIS (AustLang) page, either as a fn or in a 'External links' section, and the list should have an AIATSIS footnote for every entry that doesn't have its own WP article, but that's a huge amount of work that I probably won't be able to get to.

I did make sure that all 'confirmed' ethnolinguistic groups at AIATSIS have a language article (though often they share, if they're arguably dialects of the same language). We could do the same for 'people' articles, > [X people], many of which would rd's to the base name 'X'. Logically, the people should be the main article at the base name and the language (also culture, music, literature, history etc.) should be secondary articles, but when the language article is well developed and the 'main' article is just a stub, that seems silly and I prefer the base name to be a dab page. A problem when variants of the base name are rd's to the language article rather than to the people page. I've cleaned up some of those, but I'm sure there are many left. Sometimes hard to tell when a name is an alt for the people and when it's specifically the name of the language. — kwami (talk) 21:07, 5 February 2019 (UTC)

Gugumini
Hi. By the way, your editing in this area is much appreciated.

I'm perplexed by what you did at Kokomini, where I would have expected you to simply have retitled the article Gugumini rather than obliterate it by a useless redirect that tells you nothing of a group whom Norman Tindale,William Parry-Okeden, Walter Roth, Robert Hamilton Mathews, Ursula McConnel and others describe as a people with a distinct country and dialect, which is the defining characteristic of aboriginal identity. If Ursula McConnel for one can write {{blockquote|text=It is Yalungur who sends the unborn babies {mulgal-mulgal) to their mothers. She sits on a rock at Kanyar, between Wulbur and Yurgo, the country of the Koko-mini and Kokowara.(Ursula McConnel, A Moon Legend from the Bloomfield River, North Queensland, Oceania, Vol. 2, No. 1 (September 1931 pp. 9-25 p.15. }} then we have to accept that the ethnographic record establishes them as a distinct identity  from say the Gugu-Yalanji and many other tribes with the gugu-root behnd their ethnonym. It is classified by Tindale as an ethnic group, so your es 'it is not an ethnic group' is, to say the least, opaque and question-begging. RegardsNishidani (talk) 23:03, 9 February 2019 (UTC)


 * AFAICT it's not an ethnic group, but a cover term for people who speak well (i.e. like us). It's been applied to various groups, and unlike other cover terms I've seen that are predominantly used for a specific people, I couldn't find a specific ethnicity it correlates to. The ISO code was retired because they couldn't identify it with any particular language or dialect. If you've found one, by all means revert me and fix the article. I'm going through hundreds of these and so can't spend much time on any one of them. My primary interest BTW is to link the ethno articles to the language articles and vice versa. I've been tempted to move the articles to their AIATSIS thesaurus names, for some consistency and ease of searching, and would like to add an AIATSIS-template footnote to each of them, but that would take more time than I have.
 * Also, some are linguistic rather than ethnic groups, or unconfirmed to be anything. For example,
 * ''Breen (1971) says the name Kulumali (L37) was unknown to his informants, who suggested that it might really be Kulumani, the name of a corroboree. The only material which refers to Kulumali is Birdsell (1973), which contains no linguistic information. Based on the information available, Gulumali is unlikely to be a language name.
 * — kwami (talk) 00:01, 10 February 2019 (UTC)

Also, it looks like Wakaman may be a conflation of AIAITSIS Y233: Wakaman (which would link to/from Gugu Yalandji) and Y102: Tjapatja (which would not). And Kokangol (Yuwula) might just be an informant's name, per AIATSIS. — kwami (talk) 00:12, 10 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Tindale simply challenges this conflation, see his separate entries on Ewamin and Wakaman. There is a massive name confusion in the records be they summarized by Glottolog or Aiatsis, a confusion only partially and provisorily clarified if one examines the ethnographic scholoarship which handles details, interpretative difficulties etc in many cases, something one does not get on the web site summaries. Nishidani (talk) 09:12, 10 February 2019 (UTC)
 * I think one has to go by sources, especially when the specific culture and language are to all effects dead, and memories of descendants, often mixed (we have numerous examples of (re-)constituted identities melding groups that had distinct dialects or languages, who speak bits of a mischsprache) such as the Lama Lama, to name but one.
 * I've used the AIATSIS data-base on a goof many articles, but not in Queensland (from memory), and that's fine by me, but their mapping is contemporary not historic, reflecting the vexed issue of land claims by new aggregations. Your premise seems to conflict with the ethnographic datum that language/dialect correlated to land, not ethnicity. So when Tindale hypothesized that
 * "The Kokomini are estimated by Norman Tindale to have had tribal grounds stretching over about 2,300 square miles (6,000 km2) along the middle Palmer and Mitchell rivers, extending westwards to the area where the two meet.[1] Their eastern limits were around Mount Mulgrave and Palmerville,"
 * You create (a) a blank in Tindale's classic mapping and (b) make searches for that ethnonym, often mentioned in the literature, impossible. The only way I imagine this problem can be mnanaged is by restoring that page (Wik-natara, to the contrary, as Wik-Kalkan, was an excellent spotting of my error, and I was happy to see you catch the slip) and adding a secondary source stating that Gugu-mini/Kokomini referred to a dialect group not a 'tribal' unity. As your edit stands, surely original research risks trumping the documentary record? To take the example of Lamalama, do we elide the ethnography because they don't correlate with a specific language but rather a language family with five distinct tongues, (Lamu-lamu)? One cannot rely very much, as a guide to sorting out these difficulties, on the language classification articles on wiki, because they are not infrequently drawn by copying and pasting of web-sites like Glottolog which however are not updated according to the modern ethnolingustic discussions. I found them extremely troublesome for this reason, and wrote each article according to whatever I found in the contemporary scholarship, rather than trusting their generic assertions.Nishidani (talk) 09:00, 10 February 2019 (UTC)

Certainly. Go ahead and restore the article however you think best. If you can catch the alt spelling rd's and point them to the main article, that would be helpful. — kwami (talk) 09:03, 10 February 2019 (UTC)
 * All I know about Wikipedia mechanics is how to open a page, and edit it. Anything beyond that, like changing names or restoring lost pages, is utterly beyond me. I'll ask Neil to fix it. A lot of those pages, lastly, were written to establish a linkable bibliographic base for further page development, and I never had time to use the details in those sources, though most are downloaded and read. So if you spot further suspicious material by all means bell me if you think I can help. Cheers Nishidani (talk) 09:52, 10 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Just to simplify the citational template used on all those pages is, if AIATSIS is to be invoked, for example:
 * requiring onloy that one replace the AIATSIS code and link for each occasion.Nishidani (talk) 11:52, 10 February 2019 (UTC)
 * requiring onloy that one replace the AIATSIS code and link for each occasion.Nishidani (talk) 11:52, 10 February 2019 (UTC)

Your revert worked fine. I fixed the redirects. FYI, if you need to do this again, that's straightforward to do. Just go to the target page (in this case Paman languages). Under 'tools' on the left-hand margin of the page, click on 'what links here'. That gets you everything, so narrow the list down by selecting 'Hide links'. That will leave you with only the redirects. Then edit each of those to link to 'Kokomini' instead. I left one for you, as I wasn't sure what you'd want to do with it. That's 'ISO 639:ggm', the retired ISO code for 'Gugu Mini'. Since that's a language code, perhaps best to leave it as a rd to Paman languages, but up to you. The official ISO page will have a WP link to that rd, and people following it will probably be more interested in the language than in the ethnicity.

But, I turned the words 'Gugu Mini' at 'Paman languages' into a link, so people coming from the ISO code don't hit a dead end there. Sorry, I probably should've left all this stuff for you to do for practice, but maybe you can check the incoming links at Kokomini and play around with them there to familiarize yourself with them.

BTW, you used the spelling 'Gugumini' as the title of this thread. You can see from it being a red link that there's nothing there. That means that you can move the article there if you like. Up by 'article, talk, edit, history, watch' at the top of the Kokomini page, there should be a tab for 'move', so go ahead and move it if you prefer this spelling. If you don't have that option yet, I can move it for you.

As for AIATSIS, it would be better IMO to use the template I created. For the code above, that would be,

The reason that's superior is because, if AIATSIS changes their copyright info or their URL address (breaking all your links), and you have individual citations on all the pages, then you have to find every single instance and update them individually, which not only is time-consuming but you might overlook some. If you use the template, on the other hand, you only have to update that, and all the 'transclusions' of it will update automatically. Even if something needs to be done manually on individual pages, you can do an automated search of which pages use ('transclude') the template, so you won't need to worry about missing any. I did that recently when AIATSIS removed the asterisks from some language codes, breaking those links.

You can modify the template at AIATSIS to format it the way you like.

— kwami (talk) 19:54, 10 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks pal, but you are vastly overestimating my mental abilities, I can memorize long swathes of poetry, but even if I repeat several times anything to do with netpage technicalities, I can't remember any of it, unless there's a play on words. For anything above bubs' level in these things, I scream a geriatric tantrum towards Neil, who with his usual adroit care, invariably sorts things out. As to the templates, my problem is that all pages I edit substantially I try, for aesthetic reasons and economy, to deploy the one format. Still, I can see your point. Thanks for all of your work, not only on these articles. You are one of the few comparative encyclopedic minds around these days. Cheers Nishidani (talk) 20:23, 10 February 2019 (UTC)

No problem. I'm replacing the citation at Kokangol right now with the template, so you can tell me if I should modify it and how. Currently it's little more than a name and a link to the proper AIATSIS web page, but I can fix it up to look more professional.

I really would recommend incorporating the AIATSIS template into your default page format. Otherwise your hard work will be disrupted when they (inevitably) change their site address or format. Ethnologue has done that, Glottolog has done it, and AIATSIS has already changed their code format. It's just a matter of time before all your links to them are broken.

I've converted all your existing citations to the template. If you use it from now on, we should be good as long as they're online. And of course we can modify the format of the citation at any time. — kwami (talk) 20:27, 10 February 2019 (UTC)

Martu Wangka
Following its target change, I've diverted most of 's incoming links to Martu Wangka dialect. I think an expert should look at the one in Western Desert language, where the community and language don't seem to match. Thanks, Certes (talk) 15:26, 11 February 2019 (UTC)

Renminbi
Hi Kwami, I've posted a confusing question on the talk page at Renminbi, but there seems to be very sparse activity there. I wonder if you know of any current editors here who might be fluent in Mandarin (and English!) that I could ping for assistance. Thanks very much. Milkunderwood (talk) 02:43, 12 February 2019 (UTC)

Orthography (? I guess)
Hi again – Since you seem to be up and about, let me ask you a really off the wall question. I pinged User:CapnPrep asking about the use of long s as opposed to round s in a 16th C French excerpt that he had posted, but I'm afraid he's probably long gone. Do you know anyone else who might have any insight on this kind of question? Milkunderwood (talk) 04:47, 12 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Or maybe he just typed it sloppily. Milkunderwood (talk) 04:50, 12 February 2019 (UTC)

This seems like the kind of question that would be profitable to ask at the WP Reference Desk. (If you clarify who "he" is, I might even be able to help.) — kwami (talk) 04:55, 12 February 2019 (UTC)
 * "He" being CapnPrep - sorry. Thanks; I'll try the Ref Desk. Milkunderwood (talk) 05:04, 12 February 2019 (UTC)

Australian items re-adjustment
It would be appreciated if you could leave an explanation at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Indigenous_peoples_of_Australia and linked at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Australian_Wikipedians%27_notice_board

there are quite a few changes going on - and the alignment with the AiTSis conventions - it would be very useful as 2019 is the Australian year of Indigenous languages - and as there has been no discussion (that I know of) about the across the board changes - it would be very good to have a record/explanation as to what you have been doing non stop it seems for the last week. Thank you in advance for an WP:AGF response and good explanation as well. JarrahTree 04:01, 14 February 2019 (UTC)

I've been putting 'per AIATSIS' in the move summaries, though I missed the earlier ones. — kwami (talk) 04:05, 14 February 2019 (UTC)

OK if its ok with you and you are showing lack of interest in posting what is going on - I will sometime at a later stage - relevant to the 2019 Indigenous Language issue - also as many items have had the word 'language' removed in the moves... JarrahTree 04:09, 14 February 2019 (UTC)

Not sure what you're saying/asking. I'm not removing 'language' from any of the language names, just redirecting variants of the bare name to the article on the people if that also uses the bare name. It's not complete, there are still dozens of cases where one spelling directs to the people article and another spelling to the language, but it's a start. — kwami (talk) 04:11, 14 February 2019 (UTC)

My problem with reading edit differences of moves perhaps - I am very interested in the edits - considering the sheer number of edits - and the apparent conversation only on your or nishidani's talk pages is why I would like to move the issue to wider audience - also on unrelated items across australian items there has been in the last year or two - conversations on standardisation of terminology and naming conventions for the australian project. Thanks for all your hard work! JarrahTree 04:18, 14 February 2019 (UTC)

Okay. I've posted there. If people would like to use the AIATSIS reference names, that would require mass move requests to override the existing rd's from those spellings. Of course, AIATSIS changes their ref names fairly frequently, so it's not like we'd need to follow any source 100%. — kwami (talk) 04:35, 14 February 2019 (UTC)


 * OK I understand - really appreciate your posting the explanations - thanks for your reply JarrahTree 05:14, 14 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Looks like you are doing a good cleanup as well - thanks for the effort!  JarrahTree 01:12, 15 February 2019 (UTC)

Very kind of you to explain - personally my understanding of indigenous australian name variants is that give me tibetan or javanese any time... JarrahTree 01:33, 15 February 2019 (UTC)

Poland
Hi Sorry but the law and constitution specefically without doubt ban same sex marriages and uses man wome The law was not striken down by the suoreme or constitutional court of the country The statuoary ban still exist and as u know u doubt that the right conservative parliament and goverment will never change the law nor accept itvesides the same marriage was not recognised so

Is it wise to assume as many did like in marriages ban or recongnition in europe or european union pages that poland no longer still has a constitutional marriage ban I think it does have and will have it So editing wrongly other pages on that is wrong? Should we revert them to point that poland still has the ban it dasnt striken down or changed u know What do u think? Thank u AdamPrideTN (talk) 01:59, 18 February 2019 (UTC)


 * Hi Adam. Not sure which edit you're asking about. If you mean removing the red from Poland in the map, then that would seem to be supported by a GoogleTranslate rendering of the news article. The statutory ban is irrelevant -- the court only ruled that the legislature could provide for SSM if they chose to do so without violating the constitution. — kwami (talk) 02:15, 18 February 2019 (UTC)

Ngalia
Hello. Please can you check my edits to dab Ngalia and fix as appropriate? I've fixed most of the incoming links but Loritja and Wirangu people still link to the dab intending a language. One idea is to link them to R from subtopic redirects Ngaliya language → Warlpiri and Ngalea language → Western Desert language but I'd rather leave that to a specialist. Thanks, Certes (talk) 18:20, 20 February 2019 (UTC)


 * Better to use piped links, I think. The two language rd's should go to Ngalia language, IMO, since the spelling diffs are arbitrary. — kwami (talk) 18:30, 20 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I see you've fixed Wirangu people.  So should Loritja say Aluratji (Ngalia exonym) linking to Warlpiri? On reflection they're probably dialects rather than languages anyway. Certes (talk) 18:35, 20 February 2019 (UTC)


 * I don't know. I figured the ethno articles will probably have greater detail than the broader language articles, and so would make better targets. The Walpiri lang article doesn't even have a dialect or alt name section. — kwami (talk) 18:38, 20 February 2019 (UTC)

I thought an arbitrary division of the alt spellings might work, but this is just too confusing. It's like using "Mexico" for the country and "Mejico" for the state. I moved the ethno articles to 'Ngalia (X)' to make the difference clear. Sorry if that's messed up the work you've done. I'll follow up on some of the links. — kwami (talk) 18:47, 20 February 2019 (UTC)


 * Nothing you've done so far messes up my work. I've diverted most of the incoming links so that they lead to  and, which still work fine as redirects.  If you retarget them to the dab then their incoming links (both those I added and any that already existed) will need to be changed. I'll also leave Loritja to you as I'm unsure how best to fix it.  Certes (talk) 18:57, 20 February 2019 (UTC)
 * I think you're right about Loritja. I got them backwards. — kwami (talk) 19:10, 20 February 2019 (UTC)

Hard links to 'Ngaliya people', which might not all intend the Warlpiri's neighbors - Tjilpa, Warlpiri people, Songline, Pintupi, Ngarti, Yumu. I'll try to fix them up, but some may end up at the dab. — kwami (talk) 19:38, 20 February 2019 (UTC)

Naw, they all look correct. Rd'd both Ngaliya and Ngalea to Ngalia, now that there are no more incoming links.

Sanskrit IPA
Kwami, can you review the tables on this page for accuracy? Some of the changes introduced by an IP last month seem clearly wrong to me, but I suspect there are other errors too. Abecedare (talk) 22:22, 7 March 2019 (UTC)


 * Since Sanskrit is no longer spoken natively, it's a little difficult to say. There is one letter, I think it's ॡ, that's purely theoretical -- it's for a spurious phoneme added to the system to make it symmetrical. I suspect most people pronounce Sanskrit as they do their native language, in which case there is no one correct pronunciation. I'd advise going off a well-respected source, or maybe two to give some idea of the variation.
 * Transcribing अ as [ɔː], though -- that would be a Bangla/Oriya pronunciation, but I don't see how it could be long. Maybe basing it off the closest English equivalent? — kwami (talk) 16:26, 8 March 2019 (UTC)

. How's that? I might've gone too far back with , , though. — kwami (talk) 02:53, 9 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Thank Kwami. I was hesitant to edit the page myself exactly for the reasons you cited (suspicion that I would be influenced by the pronunciation of its modern derivatives) but, with that caveat, to me your changes to the pronunciation of ऐ, औ etc look correct. Also agree that the only way to make any of the versions stick would be to cite some authoritative source(s); will see if I can locate one although, in my prior reading, linguistic scholars rarely oblige us with convenient look-up table and insist on discussing the variations, uncertainties sound-shifts etc. :)
 * (pinging who had revised the Sanskrit article last year and would be more au courant with the literature). Abecedare (talk) 03:15, 9 March 2019 (UTC)
 * We should probably take the discussion to the IPA key talk page. — kwami (talk) 07:00, 9 March 2019 (UTC)

Foo
When you want to move "Foo" to "Bar", instead of first moving "Foo" to "Bar ", then redirecting "Bar" to "Bar " and then tagging "Bar" for G6, wouldn't it be a lot simpler if you skipped the first couple of steps and just tagged "Bar" instead? I imagine you believe that you'd stand a lower chance of getting the speedy declined that way, but you risk leaving the appearance of gaming the system, you create several unnecessary steps in the process that add clutter to watchlists and page histories, the articles get left at bizarre titles until the next admin comes along to clear out the categories, and some of these titles would occasionally get left behind as pointless redirects that somebody will eventually have to deal with. – Uanfala (talk) 04:02, 15 March 2019 (UTC)


 * If the system were functional, sure. But I once spent a month on an uncontroversial move that AFAICT no-one objected to. It just took a month to convince the mover that proper procedure had been followed. At that point, why bother trying to improve WP at all? — kwami (talk) 04:07, 15 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Nowadays they are processed very swiftly. Try WP:RM/TR. Nardog (talk) 04:17, 15 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Okay, thanks. — kwami (talk) 04:21, 15 March 2019 (UTC)
 * You once spent a month on a move? I guess that must have been an RM? I understand why RMs can be frustrating and I generally try to avoid them for issues that are topic-specific. As for G6 tagging, I don't think it ever takes more than a couple of hours until an admin processes them. And yes, RM/TR is usually even faster, but half of the time it's going to be done not by an admin but a page mover who's likely to use an unnecessary page swap (I dislike the results this leaves in the history, but I admit it's not really a big deal). And anyway, if you think any moves are likely to be challenged by people who don't understand the rationale, then it might be more efficient to compile a list and then just ask an admin who's got some familiarity with this area to make the moves? – Uanfala (talk) 04:44, 15 March 2019 (UTC)
 * That makes sense. There are three of them, same rationale ('script' for a distinct writing system that would e.g. get a Unicode block, 'alphabet' for the application of that script (extra letters, diacritics etc.) to a specific language). — kwami (talk) 04:51, 15 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Well, that worked well! If things keep going like this, I might become trusting enough to post on Commons again. (They once deleted a map I posted as copyvio, despite the fact that it was just their generic world map with the countries colored in.) — kwami (talk) 08:03, 16 March 2019 (UTC)

"Altaic people" and "Altaic (disambiguation)"
Currently Altaic people redirects to Altaic languages. That does not seem correct: the Altaic people are not languages, they may not speak "Altaic languages", and most seakers of "Altaic languages" are not "Altaic people". Readers who look up "Altaic people" may be looking for Altay people, or for people who live in the Altai Mountains region, or maybe other things. This seems to be the kind of potential confusion that disambiguation pages were supposed to help resolve. However, "Altaic (disambiguation)" is a redlink with a warning that the page once existed but was deleted by you. Would you care to explain why? Would you object if I create it again? All the best, --Jorge Stolfi (talk) 01:03, 23 March 2019 (UTC)


 * Hi Jorge. I think it would be perfectly fine as a dab page, and a better solution than what I did, given that I never thought about the Altay.
 * As to why, "Altaic people" is a fiction, a reification of a linguistic theory, not an actual ethnicity. If the Altaic languages actually do form a family, there were presumably a proto-Altaic people who spoke the ancestral language, but the only reason for lumping the modern Altaic peoples together to the exclusion of neighboring peoples is the proposed linguistic connection, not anything else they have in common. There were lots of articles like this on WP, mindless reifications of language families, mostly OR and mostly rather dubious, so I deleted those that didn't have significant support in the lit (though I'm doubtful of the value of such constructs even then). — kwami (talk) 01:25, 23 March 2019 (UTC)

Negro-Egyptian languages
What do you think of the recently created article Negro-Egyptian languages? – Uanfala (talk) 17:16, 23 March 2019 (UTC)

Negro-Egyptian languages
We know that Negro-Egyptian languages is pure pseudoscience. But I've dealt with some of these people in real life, and it's like talking to fundamentalist evangelicals. They are 100% convinced that there's nothing wrong with their thinking no matter how hard you try to explain it to them. Hence, I've kept it short and sweet at Talk:Negro-Egyptian languages. Being nice and civil to them and gently telling them to put their "great work" elsewhere usually works better. &mdash; Stevey7788 (talk) 13:32, 25 March 2019 (UTC)

Attitudes map
Hello Sorry to bother you but the colouring and key of this important map is wrong Societal attitudes towards homosexuality 2013.svg 2013: Should homosexuality be accepted in society? Percentage of responders that answered that it should be accepted:

{{legend|#005075|81–90%}} {{legend|#009AE1|71–80%}} {{legend|#72C3ED|61–70%}} {{legend|#A3D7F4|51–60%}} {{legend|#FFB4AF|41–50%}} {{legend|#FF8E86|31–40%}} {{legend|#FF584C|21–30%}} {{legend|#FF1100|11–20%}} {{legend|#AD0C00|1–10%}} {{legend|#E0E0E0|No data}} ]]

It is used in Societal attitudes toward homosexuality and maybe others Hope you or anyone else fix it soon cos i'm unable to do so Thank you

AdamPrideTN (talk) 10:02, 25 March 2019 (UTC)

Sure, Adam. I take it you want the colors of the map to match the key you presented. But it will take some time for me to verify which color corresponds to which (I hope there's a %age table somewhere?), so I don't introduce errors. Not sure I can get to it today, and wont't be able to tomorrow. — kwami (talk) 20:54, 25 March 2019 (UTC)

Looks like someone already did that, and was reverted for no consensus. I agree that your color scheme is much clearer, but there should be some discussion. Also, whoever does this has the responsibility to change the keys in all the different language WPs that use this map. — kwami (talk) 05:07, 27 March 2019 (UTC)

Re. Korean Language
Thank you for your contributions. I am happy with the wording you have chosen for the phrase about the Altaic hypothesis (although I do think that it is perhaps a little too harsh on the Altaic hypothesis, there are still Altaicists around, but as I say I'm happy with what is there at the moment).

I am unfortunately not very knowledgeable about linguistics, and so cannot contribute very much to the "isolate" discussion, but my reasoning was that as there are no other universally accepted extant Koreanic languages, it would be reasonable to refer to it as an isolate. I believe it is still referred to as isolate elsewhere in the article and in other articles and I think this should at least be consistent. Would you mind me suggesting that you open a thread on the Korean Language talk page to discuss this with people more knowledgeable than myself.

Thanks for messaging me rather than just reverting my changes. RobbieM13 (talk) 15:30, 6 April 2019 (UTC)


 * Hi It depends on your definition of 'isolate'. Greek is an isolate, within the IE family. We currently list Jeju as a distinct language. As long as we do that, it would be inconsistent to call Korean an 'isolate'. And consensus seems to be that at least some of the other ancient languages of Korea were related to Silla, the ancestor of Korean and Jeju. But it's not just a matter of counting how many refs call Korean an 'isolate', there's also a matter of consistency among our articles. Also, people do speak of "small isolated families" for ambiguous cases, meaning just that whatever you may or may not include in Koreanic, it's not demonstrably related to anything else. IMO that's a more informative approach than debating whether two varieties are 'languages' or 'dialects' and then characterizing Koreanic by the result, so that languages flip-flop between being being small families and being isolates (which after all are just really small families). — kwami (talk) 21:50, 6 April 2019 (UTC)


 * Right. I understand what you're saying. I agree that it should just be Koreanic in the infobox, and plenty of mention of Koreanic being a small isolated family in the body text. Thanks for making that clear to me. --RobbieM13 (talk) 08:39, 7 April 2019 (UTC)

Goguryeo language
I hope you don't mind my recent additions on the topic. On another note, Vovin doesn't think Han languages were Koreanic. He believes they were Japonic, and was replaced by Koreanic speakers from Goguryeo in the Three Kingdoms of Korea period. According to his theory and some others, Silla and Baekje languages were established by these Goguryeo migrants, and prior to this expansion, people in southern Korea, including Samhan and Jeju, spoke Japonic languages. Koraskadi (talk) 09:55, 7 April 2019 (UTC)

But those weren't Han. The Han languages were Sillan and its closest relatives, and today Korean and Jeju. I'd be interested in reading about Samhan being Japonic. — kwami (talk) 09:58, 7 April 2019 (UTC)

"Recognized"
Do you have any proof that Aruba does not recognize same-sex marriages performed in the metropolitan Netherlands as marriages? Recognition of such marriages was established by the court ruling years before the island enacted registered partnership law. And no, unequal treatment is not a proof, as we are talking about the designation of "marriage" itself. Ron 1987 (talk) 17:55, 15 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Our own article and the footnote to the template both say they do not. If they're wrong, they need to be fixed. — kwami (talk) 20:09, 15 April 2019 (UTC)

LGBT history in Mexico
Hello I was planning to create a Timeline of LGBT history in Mexico (which i did now) u can find it in the history section that is still there I was going to leave the history of precolumbian and moved to the history part that there is now And move the timeline section to a new timeline page (I hope its clear) A pity now that there is some editor who erased all the first history part containing timeline And now its blocked and i cannot find it to move it to the new intended article of timeline of LGBT History in Mexico Any idea how can that valuable content of the first removed history can be found and moved to the new page Any help please Thank you AdamPrideTN (talk) 14:18, 18 April 2019 (UTC)

-- can you narrow down the search for me? Where did the table appear? In LGBT rights in Mexico? And when was it written/deleted? (I just need to know what date range to look for it in.) For example, there's a timeline here. Is that not what you wanted? — kwami (talk) 18:45, 18 April 2019 (UTC)

Hello Yes yes that one thank you It is missing some info of late 2018 and 2019 But yes that one If u see the history of the page today an editor name king of xavier delete it all sating no two histories But when i tried to find it to mive it to a new page timeline I didnt Would u look more for it or can u copy that into the new main page the last edit of me in the page Thank u AdamPrideTN (talk) 18:57, 18 April 2019 (UTC)

Adam, it wasn't King of Xavier. User:Diannaa deleted the history with the edit summary "remove copyright content copied from https://www.hrw.org/news/2018/10/29/mexico-transgender-ruling-beacon-change." Maybe they could explain? A simple timeline shouldn't be a copyright violation, but maybe you took too much of their wording. Also, they might've deleted stuff that didn't violate copyright because the version of the page with those edits of your also included the copy-vio. Maybe Diannaa could clip out the stuff that wasn't copy-vio for you? — kwami (talk) 19:12, 18 April 2019 (UTC)
 * I removed a paragraph of prose that had nothing to do with King of Xavier's edit. I can restore what King of Xavier removed and if there's duplication like he states in his edit summary that can be dealt with once you folks have a chance to assess. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 23:00, 18 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks! — kwami (talk) 00:08, 19 April 2019 (UTC)

Bengali language

 * Please look into the Bengali language article in the infobox "Native speakers" figure has been diluted and more confusing for viewers to read. Please fix it with credible source. Thanks--Priyansh90 (talk) 04:35, 25 March 2019 (UTC)

Not sure what you mean by "diluted". The figures didn't check out, so I reverted, but there's little difference in the display with it being rounded off. — kwami (talk) 21:35, 25 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Try to do like Punjabi language which u did it by yourself. Punjabi language has rounded figure rather giving breakup of east punjab and west punjab.--Priyansh90 (talk) 06:09, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

You mean you don't want it broken down by country after the total? I could put that in the lead. — kwami (talk) 02:29, 29 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi an IP hooper is constantly changing your edits in the Bengali language article. I reverted it but he is still changing it.--Priyansh90 (talk) 05:10, 19 April 2019 (UTC)

Wikipedia Article Questions
Hi Kwamikagami,

Some friends and I are currently working on an article that dives deeper into the lesser known side of how Wikipedia works, focusing on the people who are behind the creation and editing of articles and how this process takes place. One of our main areas of interest are how disputes are resolved when two Wikipedia users disagree on an edit. If you have time available, we would love to ask you some questions about the work you do here on Wikipedia, or if you have had any experiences with these "edit wars". If you are interested or would like some more information, please contact us at WikiSpecUser@gmail.com.

We are looking forward to learning more about your insight! — Preceding unsigned comment added by WikiSpecUser (talk • contribs) 22:33, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

Nuclear MP
Hi kwami. I want to merge Nuclear Malayo-Polynesian languages into the NMP section in Malayo-Polynesian languages. The NMP-hypothesis was proposed in a single publication, and never caught up among Austronesianists. It’s definitely not fringe, but just a “one hit wonder”, so a full article runs a bit against WP:Notability. Before doing a bold and cold merger, I ask specifically you first, as you did most edits to the article–most of them 10yrs ago. But I guess, from your current perspective you will probably agree with the merger. —Austronesier (talk) 15:52, 10 May 2019 (UTC)

Yeah, sure. That's fine. I was trying to bring a little navigatibility rather than just having a comb-like classification with dozens of branches, but if it never caught on, not much sense in keeping it. — kwami (talk) 02:24, 11 May 2019 (UTC)

Group captain/page history listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Group captain/page history. Since you had some involvement with the Group captain/page history redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. Wikiacc (¶) 23:46, 12 May 2019 (UTC)

Scanian dialect listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Scanian dialect. Since you had some involvement with the Scanian dialect  redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. Steel1943 (talk) 17:50, 25 May 2019 (UTC)

Southern Luo language listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Southern Luo language. Since you had some involvement with the Southern Luo language  redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. Steel1943 (talk) 17:50, 25 May 2019 (UTC)

File:Maeneo penye wasemaji wa Kiswahili.png listed for discussion
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Maeneo penye wasemaji wa Kiswahili.png, has been listed at Files for discussion. Please see the to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. ―Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 10:25, 29 May 2019 (UTC)

Acholi/Acoli
Eek, what a pagemove/pagefork mess by Ngunalik: Can you please fix? Thanks. 82.132.215.31 (talk) 02:11, 8 June 2019 (UTC)
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Acholi_people&action=history
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Acoli_people&action=history

I can't, but I made a request at WP:RMT. Let me know if that bogs down, and I'll try s.t. else. — kwami (talk) 05:13, 8 June 2019 (UTC)

File:Maeneo penye wasemaji wa Kiswahili.png listed for discussion
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Maeneo penye wasemaji wa Kiswahili.png, has been listed at Files for discussion. Please see the to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 01:02, 10 June 2019 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Borneo–Philippine languages


The article Borneo–Philippine languages has been proposed for deletion&#32;because of the following concern: "The 'Borneo–Philippine' languages are a spurious subgroup. This grouping (including its name 'Borneo–Philippine') does not exist anywhere in linguistic literature outside of WP and WP-based sites, and is the product of good-faith OR based on a creative interpretation of a tree-diagram in one of the chapters in Fay Wouk and Malcolm Ross (eds.), 2002, The history and typology of western Austronesian voice systems. Merge/redirect is not an option. Keeping the entry as a redirect will create the false impression that 'Borneo–Philippine' is a valid search subject."

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Austronesier (talk) 13:56, 13 June 2019 (UTC)

It's Wouk & Ross. It may not be notable enough for a WP article if it hasn't been adopted elsewhere. — kwami (talk) 17:54, 13 June 2019 (UTC)

About: Draft:Akunsu - ɒv dəklɒɪnd ðə spəɪdɪi hɪiə, mæit
Hi Kwamikagami, I have declined the WP:G13 deletion of that draft. While it does appear to duplicate Akuntsu language, it would appear to me that the draft includes references from scholarly journals. Perhaps this could be WP:MERGE-d to some other article? Your thoughts about this? Pete AU aka --Shirt58 (talk) 10:44, 13 June 2019 (UTC)

I hadn't requested the speedy. Just now I created rd's so we don't end up w duplicate articles. Sure, any good info should be merged. There's a lot of fluff in the draft, though. It looks like a school essay project and doesn't take advantage of the fact that WP has interlinks. E.g., nearly the entire 'Language Family' section is a content fork of the family article. The Overview section belongs in Akuntsu rather than the language article. But the grammar, yeah, there's presumably a lot of good stuff, though irrelevant fluff like the layout of Aragon's grammar would appear to just be essay padding. — kwami (talk) 18:07, 13 June 2019 (UTC)

Zotung people
Hello. Please could you check the recent changes to Zotung People (Tribe), or pass my request on to a suitable expert? Thanks, Certes (talk) 09:25, 14 June 2019 (UTC)

Braille literacy social justice issue
I noticed you added a statement in the Braille page, stating that Braille literacy is a social-justice issue, but you didn't provide a source for the claim. Far be it for me to call to the carpet such an experienced editor as yourself, but could you please provide justification/clarification for that statement? It would seem to me that a direct quote from a policy maker or expert in the field saying it's a "social justice issue" would be best. Thank you in advance for your assistance, and I hope I haven't trod on your toes too much. -Trumblej1986 (talk) 17:50, 15 June 2019 (UTC)

Sure thing. The ref was in the main text. — kwami (talk) 20:24, 15 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Thank you. I missed it the first time, as I thought that the NPR article was only discussing research; I didn't listen all the way through the first time, and missed the statement at the 7:40ish mark. I appreciate your assistance!

-Trumblej1986 (talk) 20:41, 15 June 2019 (UTC)

IPA symbols
Hi, Kwamikagami. I've seen that you've edited in other articles things related to the IPA, something I don't understand much. Could you add the English pronunciation of Onychopterella to its article, please? Thanks! Super  Ψ   Dro  12:39, 23 June 2019 (UTC)

Sure thing. I'm assuming there are not three stressed syllables, so I didn't mark the 3rd (ON-y-cop-te-REL-la rather than ON-y-COP-te-REL-la), but that's a guess. — kwami (talk) 19:23, 23 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Thank you very much! The truth is that I haven't the slightest idea of how many stressed syllables it can have. I suppose I can add the respelling pronunciation you wrote in your message above? Super   Ψ   Dro  19:33, 23 June 2019 (UTC)

I'd regularize it to. — kwami (talk) 20:54, 23 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Okay, done. Thanks again! Super   Ψ   Dro  21:18, 23 June 2019 (UTC)

ILGA 2019 report
https://ilga.org/state-sponsored-homophobia-report

Hi the latest 2019 ilga report is very important and highly big and informative Many lgbt country pages in africa asia and (even americas) need to be updated urhently Take ur time and check and hope u can update the countries Some unapdated even from 2011

There is also the blog erasing 76 Like this just write the name of country and erasing 76 in google like that

Also there is The U.S. Department of State's 2019 Human Rights Report

I would do it happily but i'm focusing much on the translating English LGBT content pages into Arabic all the time and can't much

Thx good luck (no pressure of course, just a suggestion) AdamPrideTN (talk) 08:35, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

LGBT updates
http://www.equalityontrial.com/2019/06/25/625-open-thread/#idc-container

https://mobile.twitter.com/lgbtmarriage

https://m.facebook.com/nelfa.aisbl/

Are one of the best sites woth sources that provides daily updates about lgbt rights (some that go unedited for weeks)

I would advice you to check them from time to time for updates

I would do what i can happily but i'm focusing much on the translating English LGBT content pages into Arabic all the time and can't much

Thx good luck (no pressure of course, just a suggestion) AdamPrideTN (talk) 08:55, 29 June 2019 (UTC)